I didn't compare you to a murderer. I just gave you an example!

if you get this idea that I'm comparing you to a murderer, while I really don't have this in mind, I appologize formally from you on this board, am willing to delete my post and never post anything in favour of you or against you.

reza: comparing me to a murderer?

Pafl: there is a big difference, if one is using a self written program, which is slightly comparable to the use of own game notations or entering those into a data base system, and the usage of a program created by others. The situation could be cleared by showing the existence of such an own engine. Thus SMIRF could be downloaded as a somehow shrinked beta from my website: http://www.chessbox.de/beta.html at Project Chronicle 2004-Dec-10.

In Farsi, we have a saying that says:

Everyone is good unless the opposite has been proved.

Here the word good doesn't mean anything Mr. Sumerian. I really say that. It's just a famous proverb in my language.

I think I can use that to say here on BK everyone is playing by themselves unless the fact that they're getting help is proved.

I never vanished your honesty Sumerian. But I think there's a proper place for honesty. To finish ALL my ideas about this matter, I just give you an example and will never again post a message on this subject:

One admits that he is killing people. He puts it on the local newspaper. Is his work O.K just because he is "honest" and is admitting it?

**** editted to correct the spellings of UNLESS and MATTER****

Caissus: Following from what you've said, the use of programs is no longer a matter of rules but one of honesty. We cannot tell whether a certain player uses computer assistance or not but the idea that everyone should use the programs is ridiculous, as it is the best way to kill all the fun the game brings. Rather, it would be honest and fair, if the players admitted that they use CA ... which is exactly what Sumerian does.

I have written a small 48K engine named SMIRF. Nobody would have noticed, because it plays very similar to a weak humans. I am astonished how much fear seems to be connected with this unfinished small beta of my first chess programming trial since 25 years. Smirf does not use table bases or huge opening libraries. And it has been created all by myself, not patchworking of any foreign sources. Thus there is no outside help or assistance. Smirf is the target into which I organize my experiences.

Analysing what has been written here, the root of this discusson is not that I am using a self written program, but that I have confessed frankly to that situation. I am very sure, that Smirf would not have been recognized as a program, if I would not have published that fact on my profile.

So, to what this discussion would lead us? It will fight against the reasons of this quarrel, and that is, that poeple have been honest. Therefore think it over, what you might earn from that discussion: simply a vanishing of honesty.

Good luck, Oldhamgirl.

Dont know where to leave this message so I will try here, anyone who has a game against me I just want you to know I am going in hospital this afternoon for an operation on my shoulder tomorrow hopefully wont be in long. I have put myself on vacation

Caissus: Sounds like you and I agree on the use of computers and outside help.

I hadn't addressed the losing games on purpose, just the using of outside help. Losing games on purpose seems rather stupid to me. Just how can that boost one's rating? Create accounts and have these accounts do the losing to specific players in certain games? Yes, that might work, but what's the point? In a two player game, it is the winner that advances. The rating itself doesn't mean squat. I have a 2300 rating in Dark Chess, but I lost the other week to someone with a 1500 rating. It doesn't mean much that I can see, except that he won the game. I sure didn't lose it on purpose and the loss lowered my rating, but so what? As far as I can see the ratings themselves are just a guidline for seeding tournaments or to help someone find suitable opponents to invite to play a game with. People that play just to get a high rating and not care about playing the game itself are people that need to look at why they are playing a game in the first place. Don't get me wrong, I like having the highest rating I can in every game that I play, but that is not why I play games. I dislike the rating when people hold my low rating against me and won't play me because of it. Or won't play me because my rating is a lot higher than theirs is. In some games, Chess especially, if the opponents aren't fairly close in playing strength the games usually aren't very fun games for either player. This is one thing that I do like about having ratings, but it shouldn't be a hard and fast thing applied indiscriminately in every case. That's why some tournaments are opens and others are invitationals.
In a multiplayer game, losing games on purpose can directly help other players in the game. Just as can playing poorly. There's been a lot of discussion about this in the "Run Around the Pond" discussion board. Almost every game involving more than two sides has this problem, and that's just how it goes. I suppose about the only way you can do anything about it is to not play with those people that one thinks are employing such tactics.

reza: It's up to the tournament creator whether he wants to remove some players from the tournament or not.

I totally agree with allowing ALL players to use any kind of help. Still, Mr. Montego I think Sumerian shouldn't have been allowed to play in that tourny. Or to put it better, he himself shouldn't have entered the tourny. I wouldn't hav eever "pick him up" if he hadn't entered that tourny with the big prize. I had noticed his profile a while ago but had nothing against it. In fact I admired his braveness for admitting his 'secret.' But I never think it was any good of him to enter that tourny while he knew many of the players will lose to his program and he may win the prize for nothing.

Walter Montego: Sounds reasonable.

" NO CHEATING. This includes using outside programs to help play and losing on purpose for the goal of boosting ratings. Your account may be banned, and ratings will be removed."

These rules,which can be found at similar pages also are not well considered.

Which programs are forbidden? All? Some have databases only! Forbidden? And what is the difference between an electronical database and a database in bookform?
Or are are books then forbidden too? In correspondence chess most players play this kind of chess because of this reason! That means not the program plays but the player analysis with these helps to decide about a move.

I think such rules are pointless too,because you have no instruments to enforce them for all players.
Many players will use the programs even so and you cannot prove this.Better would be to allow all these helps and the chances then are for all players equal again.Or else you have again two groups of players :some with and some without programs.Moreover you have two other things on the site: suspicions and imputations: "You are a cheater because you are playing with programs! "No,I am not a cheater! Prove it" and so on.

To analyze with programs (own or not own without difference) should be allowed,because nobody knows what the players uses in his livingroom.
And rules make only sense if they can enforced.In live-games it is another thing,but in "turn-based" games with breaks of several days there is no other rational choice.

I think better would be a guidlinerule like this :
"Because we cannot control it,we dont forbid using any helps and the player can use these helps with his own choice,so we think we have equal chances for all players then" or something.

reza: I think you are not being reasonable about how you define playing fair, your definition of cheating, or the reality of playing games on the internet. Just how will you police people from not using outside help and computers? The only way that I can see is to play them face to face. That is not how it works on the internet. I hope you read my last two posts before we were told to bring the discussion here. Since there's no way to stop people from using computers and outside help, I think a more realistic policy is to just allow it to be done and not restrict it. I didn't say to encourage it, just not forbid it. What good is a law if it can't be inforced? All's it does it make for disrespect of the law in general and make people more likely to cheat in other ways. Picking on the one person that freely admits using a program will just make the others keep it secret. This type of action will encourage more cheating and secretiveness. You cite Ed Trice's program. What stops him or someone else from using it in the very tournament that you're talking about? Just play your best and beat your opponents if you. If you don't want to use outside help, then don't. Complaining about it is not going to help in this instance. Least ways, I don't see how it will help. You've gotten you feelings off your chest, but there's really nothing you can do about it. Or have you come up with some ideas?

Bernice: The expression around here is "passing the buck" or "buck passing". It also has an opposite when someone sees it going on and puts a stop to it, it is said that "The buck stops here." I believe this comes from hunting years ago and has something to do with deer. The expression is very old. Our money has five units, but the one called dollar also has the name buck. As in $5 could be called five bucks instead of five dollars. I also once heard that a president in the early 1900's had a sign on his desk that read, "The buck stops here" and that is how that expression got started.

I know and it is waht we call here is Australia "DUCK SHOVING" **sorry MMM**

as in "i dont want to have to deal with this, let some one else do it" HAHAHAHA

It is a sign of weakness, but then to be fair about the whole thing your subject is "very touchy" so that could come into it :)

Let Fencer decide


**edited to say sorry to MMM**

BerniceC: not my fault! the moderators on that board said here is the place!

Im surprised to see that you were directed here for this discussion :(

This is my answer to the following thoughts of Sumerian which were put on feature request board but we were asked to discuss it here:

"to reza: I am surprised finding me being a subject of a cheating discussion here. Why not simply ask me directly?

a) Before participating in a tournament I am asking its creator under which conditions I would be welcomed or not. If not accepted I am simply not participating. Concerning the most actual GC tournament I have been explicitly invited.
b) If I would use the assistance of my unready and still error containing growing Smirf engine, it is merely a form of organizing my own experiences. Others will use databases of their commented game notations, books or take help from third persons or use unmentioned bought programs. But instead I am relying simply only on MY OWN means.
c) It is no secret what I am doing. I have it openly documented in my profile, that I will mostly be testing a self written engine.
d) Moreover I am mostly waiting to be invited for to play a game, thinking the invitor will have seen and read my profile.

What more can I do than to make those details open and clear for everybody instead of preferring a secret use?"

Dear Sumerian,

First of all, I really don't know what I should have asked you directly. Perhaps why you use a computer to help you?

You have been explicitly invited by Mr. Trice?
Well then I personally don't think he has acted fairly enough. He has offered a big prize and I think it is fair that all the participants of the tournament are in the same situation and use their own abilities alone.

What I giv eyou as my answer to part b of your comments is that using "others" is not the best choice. What I get from that word is that you mean all other people here while it's not true. many of those others do not use notations or help from a third person. Yes, you are using your own means but that Gothic chess tournament isn't the proper place for it. You can use your own means bu putting tens of invitaions on the waiting games page mentioning that those who pick up the invitation are going to play with your "unready and still error containing growing Smirf engine."

Let me put it this way. You are the biggest brain and most qualified person in the world of computers, just pretending. You have with help from no one else created a program that can play gothic and janus chess. Still if you use it to challenge others, I think you are cheating. You can challenge others to make a better program than yours but you cannot challenge them to win your program. That has been a gothic chess tournament and the object is to play gothic chess with no help and to finally determine the one who is able to play gothic chess the best of all not the one who is able to make a program that playes Githic chess better than humans.

Yes, it's no secret what you are doing. You have honestly put your secret on your profile but in this particular case, others have no choice but to play with you. many of those who have lost to you in the tournament and many others who WILL lose to you later, may not choose to play you if you put invitations on the site. But here, they simply have to. I myself will never play you a game of Gothic chess fo two reasons. I am not that much interested in that game since regular chess is still quite challenging for me and second for the "assisstence" you are using. In the tournament it is different. If I can manage to win all in my group, I'll have to play you finally and test my abilities against a machine assissted person. I think you see how different these are. To choose to play you willingly and to be forced to play you by the system controling the tournament.

Finally, yes I admit that putting your secret on your profile is still a lot better than those who have the same secret but never reveal it. But I think you yourself must decide when to join a tournament and when not to. This very tournament, you shouldn't have taken a part in.

Stevie: How can you think so?!!!..behave!!

Last call for interview questions!!

You have about 24 hours to send me any last minute questions for BRY!!

Don't hold back! It could be your last chance to grill him!

Stevie: They don't. End of subject.

do Globmods have special privaledges in fellowships also?

aparently English is hard to learn.
And when you think about it..due to regional dialects etc etc etc all languages have multiple words for one meaning.
Im glad I aint a translator LOL

you can bring any language in you like...I still say that Czech is one of the MOST DIFFICULT to learn...and if it isnt.....who will teach me please....I have heard that there can be dozens of words for the same thing and it depends on how, where, when, if, and why, you use them LOLOL as to what they mean :(

Will you be having Chinese as a language....I bet not LOLOLOL....even a man a Clever as yourself wouldnt be able to have all the dialects required....Czech is the same I think....Give me a good translator please :)

it obviously hasnt Rod

Fencer has the limit of 5 autovactions in any game been implemented yet? (I think that's the number that was said...)

Summertop: lol - Master Yoda trained him well....

Luke Skywalker: Use the "Force", you should be able to Sense the number of days left.

Since you don't seem to make a secret out of it, could you show the number of vacation days a user has on the profile?

yep...and my first bg tourny win LOL

Stevie: Does that mean the party has been cancelled?

okie dokie

Five.

OK
Ive had thoughts though..maybe he had a gap between his vacation days and when the autovac days were activated.

So as you suggest.....FENCER, how many vacation days does Madmonkey have left?

i think vacation days are only used up when a game needs them

a game only needs it when the normal time of the game is over (the 5 days in pauloaguia example)

i wonder though .. if i have 2 games running .. 1 games times out monday .. the other game times out on tuesday

suppose i wont be online on monday .. the first game will use 1 vacation day and time out on tuesday ... my question is if the other game will also be awarded the vacation day (and time out on wednessday) or if the vacation day which is used only counts for the first game and i will use another vacation day if i only move in the first game on tuesday and dont play in the second game

But this is autovacation: it only kicks in on timeouts, so you only start spending vacation days on your first timeout...
At least that's how I understood it when it was first explained in this board a few months ago. And it will still be how I see it working until Fencer corrects me (after all, he was the one who implemented the system, so who better to clear any doubts about it?)

nope..it doesnt work like that..I knew what you meant.
Vacation days pass no matter what is supposed to happen on each day or not ( except weekend days) the end of a 30 day period is 30 days + weekends..not 30 days + weekends + extra's.

Maybe I didn't explain right:
Imagine he has only one game, and that he last moved on 6-Jan. If that is a 5-days-per-move game then he would timeout on 13-Jan (because of weekend). Now, he times out on 13-Jan the first time, so that will be his first vacation day. He is given an extra day, so he timed out again on 14-Jan, being his second vacation day. and so on (excluding weekends) till he times out for the 31st time, on 24-Feb, this time for good.
So, to know exactly when his vacation days are over, you need to find out the fastest game he has and start calculating the number of vacationed days from there...

Of course, it's easier to just wait another week

nope..the five days for example would not be on top of that

Stevie: Don't forget to include the days he had to move in the first place. For instance, if all his games were 5-day-to-move games then you need to had 5 days to those numbers...

All I know is that yesterday I finally got rid of my opponent that was autovacationing since the begining of this year :)
You'll get your turn soon as well ;)

Can someone else work out when his games should start timing out?
He hasnt been online since 6th January and gets 30 days holiday. weekends are sat and sun.

I worked out that he should be timing out today as 30 days not online ran out yesterday....but his games are still renewing.
Have I misscalculated?

NTL Oxfordshire here so only 45 miles in it. so maybe NTL at its best then

It's slow for me (NTL - London).

Is the site slow..or is it my end?

MagicDragon: the idea as i understood it was for everyone to reset their password before the change takes place.

mrloupcity: Have a safe trip

On the main page, you mentioned that we have to update our profile/password. I had to change my password because I cleared out my cookies in my browser. Would I have to do that again in a couple of weeks (or longer) or just have to reset my password when I can't into the site when this change as occurred? Thanks!

harley: I know is , but just want people to know I'm not slow playing on all my games. I'm out of town tell Sunday night. TYVM all for waiting.
:o{P

boy, this issue has been raised a few times. I promise you the computer dice are completely random. I've had that happen to me in backgammon, and I've also rolled the same dice myself. It happens. If you want to continue the discussion, please move it to the backgammon board, thank you.

harley:
not mpossible harley, i swear to you, few months ago he got 3 double 6,s on the trot to win, again now, 3 double 6,s ,now he still needs at least a double 3 to win, well see if he gets it, i know he,s cheating somehow