Author: Robert Pawlak
Date: 04:50:36 04/03/04
Go up one level in this thread
On April 02, 2004 at 23:07:11, margolies,marc wrote: >I think that the focus of bob's article is excellent. >It addresses that cheating exists-- that could make cheating harder and servers >more responsive to exposure of this. Marc, thanks for all the kind words. I agree with both of you and am hoping the chess community starts talking about this problem. Speaking from a personal standpoint, I have felt somewhat powerless at times to combat cheating. And I would guess that others feel the same way. So I reasoned that a toolset/methodology that the average player could use would be the first step to addressing the problem. Frankly, the only constructive thing someone can do at the moment is to report these guys to the proper authorities. >consider to create an internet chess server 'hall of shame,' yet at the same >time there is I know, a 14-year old somewhere who thinks it will be cool to be >listed there anyway. > I think this would be a great idea, but it would require a fair amount of work to police it. You'd also have a group of people that would put someone in there for spite. >> >>i guess i was just dissappointed in the focus of the article >>i am anxious to finally read in print ,someone admit the ugly truth that >>internet rating's are meaningless due to the rampant cheating,and that the >>incidence of cheating is very high >> > I wish I knew what the incidence was. If I had to guess (among rated games between registered players): ICC Lightning: 2% Blitz/5min: 5-10% Standard: 15% FICS Lightning: 5% Blitz: 10-15% Standard: 20% Chessbase Lightning: 5% Blitz: 20% Standard: 40% USCL Lightning: 5% Blitz: 20% Standard: 30% >the title on the cover page of the magazine"IS YOUR OPPONENT CHEATING?" sort of >>implied that this was finally going to be a long-awaited "expose" >>i apologize for my rude comments and i throughly enjoyed your Software >>Sourcebook >> Well, certain decisions are made about the graphical layout and design which I have no input to. That's not to say that I think the cover was bad, just that the title could have been better matched to the article. However, I have no doubt that the cover will sell a few extra copies. Considering the deep kimchi that the USCF is currently in, it might not be a bad thing. Steve, thanks for the apology. Bob
This page took 0.01 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.