Please move the program/cheating conversation to a more appropriate board..
Thanks, all..
:-)

rod03801: Which board do you exactly mean Rod? tell me and I'll post my answer to Sumerian there :-)

How about General Chat?

MidnightMcMedic: Not General Chat. Perhaps the BrainKing.com board? This certainly is a subject that affects a lot of the games played here. I hadn't even thought it possible to have Backgammon included in it as I thought it was the one game that could not have computer help. Hacking is possible, but luck of the dice is just the breaks and explains a lot of things in it. Dark Chess is about the only Chess type game that computers don't play good or aren't used. All the rest of them could have computer or other people's help and there's really not much that can be done about it. Sumerian is open about it, plus his program is different. It plays like a person and makes up its moves and wings it, instead like a lot of programs that have vast data bases and tables and check the moves before thinking up a move on their own.
This board is also not a bad place to discuss, since dealing with the "problem" could lead to a feature request to solve it.

Walter Montego: But other requests would be lost, so please take it to Brainking.cm board then. Thank you

MidnightMcMedic: Lost? Yeah, right.

I will follow reza to the BrainKing.com discussion board if the subject is picked up there. It would seem to be the more matching board for the subject. Aside from playing games where a computer can't help, I doubt anything can be done to resolve the problem of people using outside help to make their moves, especially on a turn based site where one can let the computer run for days before spitting out a move to make. But you never know, someone might have some ideas for it and the requests will be made.

One possible solution is to embrace it, instead of fighting and rejecting it. Allow it completely and then it is no longer a problem at all. Since you can then just assume all opponents are doing it, it won't matter to you if you choose not to use a program or get someone to help with your moves. This can be thought of as a request to change the user agreement to not say it isn't allowed. Since it can't be enforced, why not just allow it and be done with it? Tournament creators could still put in the titles that they would like or not like computers to help and we wouldn't have to hear people complain about "cheating" of this type any more.
A policy like this would also incourage tournaments made for programs to compete against each other and this would strengthen this site amoungst those that are into programs and computers. I personally don't mind playing against machines if I know in advance that my opponent will be a machine or that my opponent will have a machine help with his moves. I'm not the strongest Janus Chess player on this site, but I have defeated Sumerian's Smirf program 5 times in the 19 games that we've played. Since it is a machine, it doesn't mind playing the game out past where most people would have resigned and this has helped me learn to play the game better without tiring, boring, or insulting a human opponent.

for an Electronics Discussion Board, like
"Video HiFi Console" - share your experiences with
home/car/trek equipment, or look out for tips on it ... . ~*~

Walter Montego:
Why not General Chat? General Chat means just that, General Chat. It is silly if you can,t talk in general about programs, games and cheating, a case of over moderating on the moderators part? Oh! Forgive me you are not a moderater then what is the problem?

Mousetrap: Huh? :) Your post confuses me and we all went to a different board 11 hours ago.

Walter Montego:
Well forgive me but I was,nt here hours ago!

Mousetrap: I can forgive and forget. It is hard to follow the stream of conversation on a site such as this. Even if one notices the time stamps, it doesn't mean that a reponse is out of line if it comes weeks later. The subject itself is not an easy one to solve, and using examples in some of the arguments has made a casual reader or two think the discussion should be held in various different discussion boards. Where it's at now seems to be a good place (BrainKing.com) and it appears that it's dwindling down as we've all had a say or two about it and will just have to move on without being able to do much about it except understand each other's point of view concerning it.

This conversation doesn't belong here anymore! All further posts on this will be deleted. Thank you for cooperating!

JennyElizabeth: thanks jenny,its nice to know about jamble.the problem is,there are 3 user profiles on this computer.
one of them has a login name on www.itsyourturn.com allready,
so I cant create an account there.that site has an inflexible rule about only allowing one login account per IP address.I know several people who hav run into this problem.thanks again anyway.

chupacabraVS2: I believe rod's comment about the conversation that does not belong here is about using a program in games - not the scrabble/jamble conversation.

Due this mess with program and cheating I repost my request for Dark Screen Chess and the Crazy Dark Screen Chess. The first one is a combination of Dark Chess and Screen Chess. The later of Dark and Crazy Screen Chess.

BTW: These games would completely making any program cheating impossible!

Seravajan: I know Fencer does not really like making variants of variants, but I would second a Crazy Dark Screen Chees variant. (Don't think we need both Screen & Crazy Screen dark variants - and since regular screen chess is the least popular game on the site, don't think we need a dark variant of the regular screen chess.)

Just thinking about the game, I would think white would have a good advantage - giving a lot more importance of placing the bishops & rooks to be able to view as much of the opponents opening as possible.

Anyway, I know Fencer is some-what against making variants of variants, but this would be fun - plus should not be too hard to program.

It would be nice if the tournament standing pages (the ones on
http: //brainking.com/game/Tournaments?trg={NUMBER}&
;tri={NUMBER} page)
mentioned the date the tournament started. I know that you can go to one of the games and see when the game started, but it would be nice to have it along the other tournament info.

I also would like to have the option to list the tournaments mentioned on the profile page to be listed by starting date/time. Listing them by ID means they are listed in the order the tournaments were created, which, IMO, is less useful.

Fencer,

PLEASE allow pawns to finish ponds they signed up for while being paying members. It spoils the game otherwise.

alternative: All pawns autobid zero, that way they are out of the way.

I don't mind which solution, but it should be one or the other.

Thanks.

grenv: but when its done .. please inform us ;)

i often try out a move (in froglet and anti-froglet) to see the results, and then click on 'cancel this move' if the results are not what i expected

occassionally i click on 'move and go to' by accident though :(

could please there be a way to disable this button ? (maybe via settings) ?

Hrqls: Why do you use the cancel button anyway? Clicking on browser's back button is much faster and safer, in this particular case.

Fencer: lol .. blame it on me being blonde :) i didnt think of the back button *slap forehead* i sometimes even go via the main page to make sure i dont hit the wrong button

plaintiger also just mentioned to me i could use the back button :)

thanks .. i will from now on :)

BIG BAD WOLF: Dark crazy screen chess is a lot unfair and quite to white's advantage. I bring up my idea of DARK CYLINDER CHESS :-)

reza: Dark crazy gothic three-checks fortress Fisher random anti extinction cylinder loop marahadja screen chess? With a doubling cube. Supersized.

AbigailII: ... on a 20X20 board with equal number of moves as to pieces your opponent has left!

LOL

you both forgot the cherry on top

how about double 4 in a line? the object being getting 4 in a line twice to win?

Serious request.

Atomic Chess has the slight drawback that white gains an early advantage due to how quickly the king can be attacked. I propose an 8x10 board, 8 wide as normal, with normal pieces, but 10 deep. This should make for a more circumspect game.

hmm ... 3 in a line is on a small board ... 4 in a line on a big board with a limitation .. 5 in a line on a big board without limitation .. what about 6 in a line on a 3 dimensional board without limitations ? ;)

grenv: Atomic chess seems to have no advantage... White or Black... Play a few good moves on either side and the game is over...

Daniel Snyder: But you appear not to have played any games!!! I have played 250 and have a reasonable rating. I can guarantee that white has an advantage very early in the game. Black is on the defensive from move 1.

It may not be enough to force a win, but it is much easier to make a mistake as black.

..I would like to know how many people enjoy a game with more than one opponent.there are many examples,even in chess.

nobleheart: the first multiplayer game was introduced about 2 months age, but you have to be a paying member to play it

Fencer...I know this was brought up before...but when a person is compelled to put someone on hide...can it elliminate the red numbers from that person?

bwildman: It will be implemented later.

Fencer,

PLEASE allow pawns to finish ponds they signed up for while being paying members. It spoils the game otherwise.

alternative: All pawns autobid zero, that way they are out of the way.

I don't mind which solution, but it should be one or the other.

Thanks.

grenv: No.

Fencer: Just curious. I don't really play ponds, but what does happen when a paying member reverts back to pawn status while they have a ponds game going?

Summertop: He can do only automatic generated moves.

Summertop: they will keep bidding their last bid (which they made as a paying member) and then fall in when they are the lowest bid

Unlike all other games on Brainking :o(...ones already started can be played off in full

Fencer: Why not? It spoils the game? Is it just time to code? Surely they should just be forced to bid zero or something. How hard could it be?

grenv: Because it's the rule.

Fencer: LOL

Fencer: I guess you can be circular if you like, but saying you won't change a rule because it's a rule doesn't actually answer the question.

Summertop: I know, I know, Since I don't often play ponds why am I even talking about it...because I can. If a player times out, they don't automatically fall into the pond. They just keep using their last bid. Since the (now) Pawn can't access the game, shouldn't they just timeout like everyone else?

Summertop: There's no such thing as timeout, if you don't move you get last turn's move.

Problem is that in the first run there is a pawn bidding 10 each turn. Therefore 90% of players just bid 11. Each turn someone bids 0 in an effort to drop out of the game, which prolongs the agony. If we didn't have the perpetual 10 bid it would be more interesting (even though the zeros would still usually mess us up).

grenv: Ah, I get it. Just look at the list of players. If there is a pawn, just bid one more. That goes on until the pawn FINALLY drops into the pond. But, in theory, doing that would force the pawn to drop in the pond the very next round...What would be nice, then, is a way to resign from a ponds game.

My god summertop has got it LOL
We have been asking for a while now mate..but Fencer wont budge an inch :o(

Stevie, you're complaining the BK.com board is off topic, then participate in an off topic conversation here!

This is one for the ponds board, please.