Author: Mike Byrne
Date: 16:02:11 11/18/04
Go up one level in this thread
On November 18, 2004 at 14:03:04, Evgeny Shaposhnikov wrote: >Cheating is a form of abuse directed at (some) chess servers. We agree! >It is not directed >at chess or chessplayers in general, nor is it directed at CCC in particular. >Here is the FIDE site admin point of view: We disagree - anybody who has unknowingly and unwillingly played a cheater has been abused. >"And other point - Chess as PC game - you are free to cheat and do it as >professionally as you can (like everybody does in CS, WarCraft etc. online >games) - this is the problem of game server developers, and not the problem of >Chess as professional sport. " FIDE website admin >http://forum.fide.com/viewtopic.php?>t=247&highlight=cheat&sid=ca0652b5ca5686fd44f831ce3feb6ff7 I don not know who this "FIDE website admin" But I'm not impressed and I disagree. Saying that "this is the problem of game server developers" is akin to saying that the gun violence is the problem of the gun manufacturers. In both games is the one (human) who cheats or the one who uses gun violence who is the problem. >Therefore I fail to see how posts promoting cheating are considered abusive, >especially if they are made in a non-abusive manner. Another point, if a person >that cheats on a game server does not wish to promote or encourage cheating, but >wants to simply discuss the ethical and philosophical issues about cheating in a >tolerant manner, how is that abuse then? If I only made a simple sentence like >"I like to (C)heat on FICS, and I do it as often as I can" without providing any >further promotional or instructional material, then I am simply making a >statement that I adhere to computer cheating and find it amusing or even >ethical, without promoting this activity or encouraging others to do likewise. >How is that abusive then? As I said, you can think that Kazinski is unethical, >and do tell him that, but that shouldn't affect your decisions as a moderator - >it wouldn't be professional to say the least. One more thing - I notice in >another thread ( http://www.talkchess.com/forums/1/message.html?396531 ) some >people are discussing how to cheat on ICC. Clearly these people are not cheaters >and they only wish to acquire a better understanding of cheating in order to >actively fight it. If a cheater made a few posts with the same content as those >non-cheating people, it seems you would behave differently as a moderator - >another fallacious argumentum ad hominem. You are now talking about hypotheticals - let's stick to the events that have happened. Perhaps somebody more creative Kazinski can make posts that gets your view across without being abusive in nature and without being deleted. By the way -- legitmate advanced chess posts are allowed. If somebody want to run an advanced chess tournament and solicit players from here - that is ok in my book. >See this thread >http://www.talkchess.com/forums/1/message.html?396374 and notice how this guy is >calling me names - that is the real abuse, but you seem to have double standards >regarding this issues. Moderators do not read every post. At the top of this page , there is a Moderator -email button. Feel free to complain about a post that is abusive. Due to the nature of moderating - we all have full time jobs and we are not incline to read even half the posts, let alone every post. I might read 25% of the posts that are current. I generally do not go back in time to read any posts that I may have missed. I may check my posts that I have made to see if there is a response. We generally do remove posts unless somebody complains about it through the official Moderator e-mail channel. We discourage memebers to make posts that say "Please delete this post" . It clutters up the board and the moderators are not in a position to view what is posted 24x7. But we do generally have acces to email even at work and we can respond quciker and more effectively if the members use propeer Moderator email channel that is linked above posts that are considered abusive. > >>Please - don't go down that "ethical cheating" >>path - we heard that one before and it sank like a lead ballon. >> > >You seem to have a pretty narrow view on this issue, focusing only on normative >ethics, and a single system of it particularly. It would depend upon what we >decide to base our normative ethics system. If, for example, we decided to base >our normative ethics system upon the metaethical doctrine of ethical nihilism, >and base our applied ethical system and etiquette on that (newly) formed >normative ethics system, we'd end up concluding that cheating is not unethical - >it's not ethical either, it is simply an activity that doesn't have an ethical >quality of being "good" or "bad". Even then, we could not make a dogmatic >assumption that it is generally accepted as being the case, end we would have to >accept that (C)heating is viewed differently as either unethical or not having >ethical value, depending upon which system we decide to use, which is a highly >subjective matter - there is no one generally accepted or "right" system, and >there is no way we could define one, as it is a recursive matter, since the >notion of "right" itself is a subject of metaethical study. I guess I do have a narrow of cheating. I don't see it as being a gray area. I see it as black and white and as cheating being wrong. So you are correct, I do have a narrow view of cheating. Nothing you say or post will persuade me to think otherwise. > >>If you disagree - feel free to run as Moderator. >> > >What do you mean? You are offering me to be a moderator? All members are allow to run as moderators if nominated and to serve if elected. So you are free, just like everyone else to run as moderator in the next election. There are some restrictions , e.g., you must be a member in good standing with a certain lenghth of membership. I believe it may be 6 months, but don't hold me to it. > >>Regards, >> >>Michael
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.