Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Naming Suspected Computer Cheats could be considered slanderous

Author: KarinsDad

Date: 21:07:19 03/23/99

Go up one level in this thread


On March 23, 1999 at 22:46:22, odell hall wrote:

[snip]
>
>
>Sorry Michael
>
>
>
>  But unlike yourself I do not rely on a Server to make judgments and decisions
>for me, which my common sense finds to be obvious. You are giving ICC way to
>much power.  You are saying that only ICC can say if a person is cheating or
>Not.  This whole question can be resolved with some very basic logic, I don't
>need to be an adminstrator, to see that a person rated 752 cannot beat a 2500
>rated computer.

How do you know that he has a 752 rating? If he is a cheat, he may be a liar as
well. He may have given you the name of a putzer at his local club. However,
this "villian" who may have no knowledge that you are slamming him here is being
tried and convicted by you within this forum. And not only his guilt, but facts
about his guilt such as his rating are "obvious" to you to the point that you
ignore his rights.

If someone accused you of cheating here and went around posting your handle, I
would defend your rights as well. You have stated repeatedly that your facts are
100%. Prove it. You cannot. I use your own words against you. Why can you not
prove that a 752 rated player is playing Fritz like moves? Because you cannot
tell that he is 752 rated from his handle. He may be a 2400 level IM who may be
using a computer to test some theories and is pulling your leg. You do not know
for a fact what the entire situation is. You are making assumptions based on
some small set of investigations that you made. He may have led you astray.

The entire issue that Michael and I are contending (not trying to put words in
your mouth Michael, so if you disagree, just let me know) is that it is neither
fair nor proper to accuse people here. We have no problem with you posting the
games here and asking for opinions and help. We have a problem with this "I am
the great Lone Ranger protecting the masses from the cheaters of the world" type
of syndrome where your right to inform others of this great "social injustice"
impinges on the rights of another, regardless of whether that person is a member
of this forum or not. No more, no less.

KarinsDad :) :)

PS. This stance is not based on just this incident. There have been other
cheaters "named" within this forum and some of us feel that this is neither
proper nor necessary. We are not against you, we are against your position.
Maybe an opinion poll is needed.

> Nor does it require much thought , when one see's that a
>person's moves are matching 100% with a given computer program. I don't know
>about you, but this is enough to convince me of Cheating.  You continue to say
>that I have not proved anything. Well if you believe that to be correct, then
>refute the evidence that I have given.  You claim that I am the only way saying
>that this person is guilty. Obviously you have not read the post of Paul sores,
>and bruce moreland.  To be frank I do not understand your motivation here,
>Certainly you can see for yourself that this person used a computer.



This page took 0 seconds to execute

Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700

Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.