Doesn't matter. Longjohn/Jameshird/DragonPope/Wayney will simply create yet another account and keep on doing what he always does.

rod03801: I don't understand what are you trying to imply...does it mean Fencer should leave it the way it is? I don't get the point of your post.

It was just me being cynical. I wish there was a way for that disease to be kept off this site forever

Longjohn/Jameshird/DragonPope/Wayney????
WOW! I didn't know that.... I suspected to be the QWERTYGirl (OldDear now) but Wayney too?
That's why he accused me of intentionally playing slow in a Backgammon game and did it a big matter.........And now that i think about it, the behaviour was exactly the same as with QWERTYGirl(OldDear).........He is the same!

Pedro Martínez:
Where can anyone find this list you gave:
http://brainking.com/en/ArchivedGameList?u=11991&op=14225&tp=66
I mean from where on the main page i can go there.......? I can't find a link........?!?!?!?!?

Chessmaster1000: Find any game between certain players (in a profile of one of them or in a tournament table) and under the gameboard, you will see this for instance:

Score of finished games (Chessmaster1000 - Pedro Martínez, Dark Chess): 0 : 1 (= 0) (show games)

And when you click on "show games", you'll get the list.:)

Hmmmmm, OK thanks.......

Are no longer with us. Thanks Fencer!

ArtfulDodger: I presume you mean "wayney" rather than "Wayne". How are they no longer here (password changed, account locked out?) Any idea what happens to the games that they're playing?

The reason I ask is that I'm playing against him at the moment ... The hypergammon game that he brought to this board about him having taken advantage of a bug to make an illegal move, and me not appreciating it .... the game that I wanted to call a draw but he refused .... the game that, as a result of a conversation in which he made it clear that sportsmanship was not a priority, I'm playing in protest one move at a time but only towards the end of the timeout period.

I wonder if Fencer has any "tricks" that would find all those with multiple ID's........?!?!?!? A good clearance is necessary........

playBunny: yes, Wayney. They were clearly cheating and the rules say you can get banned for that. They were banned. So your games with them will time out.

What is the bug in hyper that allows for an illegal move?

Chessmaster1000: The simple pattern seems to be a pair who play together with a very unbalanced win/lose ratio brought about by a suspicious amount of resigning and with one or both having high ratings. As more nicks are brought into the scam, detection would become increasingly difficult but a significant level of resignations would still be a good indicator. It would ease the server burden if checking were restricted to the top X% of players.

Hmmm, yes this is a way too, but i was thinking about detecting the internet connection of a player....
Detecting different users that have "something" in their connection with Brainking the same, such thing that they should not have the same, then this would be an indication of multiple ID's....
Only an indication because of cource members of a family could use a computer and this is perfectly normal. But then, games of these users will easily show if they are actually cheaters or different persons........

ArtfulDodger: The maximise-dice-usage rule hasn't been implemented (but this is acknowledged to be a bug).

In our game wayney was able to move a single man with a single dice value which allowed him to stack all three men safely on one point. Further movement off the stack, using the other dice value, was blocked by my men. He should have been required to use both dice values which would have meant splitting the two that were already stacked, leaving me a spread of blots to hit. Subsequent dice rolls showed that I would have hit two of those blots but as a result of his illegal move he was able to make a game winning block on his ace point.

The rule is also part of standard backgammon and is probably needs to be addressed there as well. I expect that it's on Fencer's plate as he says on the Features requests board that "Pro backgammon (with doubling cube)" is in development.

playBunny: It's a serious bug, but until it's fixed I think many players concider it a "house rule".

Chessmaster1000: That´s is not entirely true. Sometimes I share the computer with my family (weekends, hollidays). It means that Nuno Miguel, ramones, David and I can sometimes have the same IP. And if I can remember it was I who created one of my cousin´s subscription in my PC, if I remember well.

Most of the times I use one or two PC´s at my office. I have 2 friends there who also plays in brainking.

One of my cousin´s plays at work, and he have somefriends from his office who plays on BK.

Some other portuguese players from the site also share the computer with their family (Aissi-Aissi´s brother, El Cid-PauloAguia, Ferjo-Alfer). Most of these guys came from the same university and they may use the same PC.

By these examples you can see how hard is to detect the real from the false ID´s...

I think the better way to detect these cases is to analyse games between players...

Chessmaster1000: Aye, the IP address can be used to help in these matters. At one forum site that I enjoyed for a while there was a self-appointed "IP Police" who took it upon herself to detect multiple nicks by collecting posters' IP addresses. It's fine when the user has a static IP address but there are many ISPs which assign a new IP address at the start of each session. (Very common with dialup and is still pretty common with broadband.) Even so, there will be a commonality. For instance my IP address is never the same but does always start with the same two numbers.

Andre Faria: I didn't said that users who will be identified using the same computer would be immediately declared as cheaters, but that this would be just an indication and that these user's games should be observed to find any clues........

Chessmaster1000: yep, you can compare IP´s with the games between those players with the same IP...

Me and my mum both play from the same computer, although it'd be silly to say we cheat as we play pretty much opposite games form each other lol

If your games against your mother, would consist of many early resignations or with really stupid moves that would be away from common logic, then this would be cheating.......But i'm sure this is not the case with you of cource........

Of course its not. In fact we only play against each other if we get paired in tournements, i never invite her to a game at all lol.

And you can suspect of those guys who just got very high rantings too quickly...

Andre Faria: Many people have high rantings very early on. It's the ratings I'm worried about

grenv: ........

Andre Faria: That's not a good method. There's a new guy at #2 - el diabolique, rating 2587 - who's got there by winning his first 4 games. This was in a tournament against 4 different opponents so fair play is to be assumed. There are three other players in the top 20 who have had early and legitimate success. Such gains are to be expected from any expert player who joins BrainKing.

playBunny: Aye, the IP address can be used to help in these matters.

No, it can't. An IP address is not a good indicator for personality. There are large ISPs out there with millions of customers (like AOL) that funnel most of the outgoing HTTP traffic through a relatively low number of proxies. And since it's the proxy that makes the connection to Brainking, it's the proxy's IP address that shows up. And if it's not web proxies, it can be NAT boxes. Ever used a laptop with a wireless connection? Chances are, you're behind a NAT box which means that anyone on the same wireless network will show up with the same IP for the outside world.

AbigailII: Yes it can help.

Pedro: Thanks. :-)

AbigailII: While this site has a small clientele the overlap of IP addresses is reasonably unlikely to occur (eg. 600 UK registrations, a mere 70 for Italy). Agreed, when we have hordes of people all from the same source then IP address distinctiveness becomes more tenuous.

IP address as an indicator of personality? Lol. I usually use behaviour for that ... sometimes foot size ... maybe house number . . . but never IP address. ;-p

tournament games are less likely to be between nicks .. so the check could be applied to normal games alone ..

i am not sure if someone would have a 2 paying nicks .. so maybe the check could be done on pawn games most of the time ?

Is there anyone who knows hypergammon well enough to explain why they choose their moves and would enjoy doing so?

playBunny: yah, me. ;)

ArtfulDodger: and the explanation is... ?

WhiteTower: I move to win ;)

http://brainking.com/en/ShowGame?g=913674
Move number 19. This site allows me to do an illegal move. Black can move 4 at home and leave 5 unmoved. Is it fare play to do that? I'll wait a couple of days before continuing...

Wil: That's how it plays on this site. There's been an ongoing debate about it too. You either make whatever move you decide or you make the move as allowed by the rules that you and your opponent agree to play by. Since you called it an illegal move, I'll assume that you're used to playing that if only one die can be used the higher must be used, and that you also play that if both dice can be used then you must use them both and a player isn't allowed to play one die in such a way that the other die cannot be played if it is possible to play both dice by making a different move.

Wil: It's against the rules and not being forced to move using both dice values is a known bug. Until implemented properly it's either a question for your own conscience and sportingmindedness (to play by the rule), or it's a decision that both players should agree to (to take advantage of the bug). both of those are fair ways to deal with it. I know it's a tourney loser but I'd make the correct move 24/20/15 (but then, I was on the wrong side of this same situation and wasn't pleased that the guy took the illegal route without hesitation. He's just been banned for cheating - multiple nicks and rate fixing - but that's a different story, lol).

You could put the question to Sharon - ask her is she's willing to take the gamble. Your chance of winning would be about 1/40. ;-)

If you want to see what thoughts there were last time, stick bug into the search box on this page. It's the same rule but in hypergammon.

playBunny: It's against the rules

It's not against the rules as presented on the rules page.

AbigailII: I use the following logic: It's acknowledged as a bug. If it were within the rules then it wouldn't be a bug. Therefore it's illegal.

playBunny: I use the following logic: if I do a move that is allowed by the rules, it's not an illegal move. The rules allow you to use the die in any order, without restrictions. That's good enough for me. Sure, it's different from the rules from the international backgammon federation, but there's no doubling cube here either.

AbigailII: That's fine. Remind me not to play you until the bug's fixed. ;-p

ps. "Pro backgammon" is on its way. The doubling cube has been mentioned. Presumably it includes gammons and backgammons. Hopefully it includes this bug.

AbigailII: International Backgammon Federation?

Pedro Martínez: It's the International BOXING Federation in their less combative moods...

Well, there are points that supports both moves:

1) The game is named 'backgammon'. According to 'official' bg rules, they wouldn't allow me to make the better move for me. So I should move both dice. If I was playing on the 'real' board, I would move both dice without asking.
2. This site rules doesn't deny me moving only one piece. See http://brainking.com/en/GameRules?tp=23 The rules are the same for both players.

Since game rules are allways an agreement of a community, I'll do the move players here agrees. Let's make a vote. Give your vote here ('move both' or 'do what you can') and I'll make the vote winning move. You have one day to vote. I'll make the move ~24 hours from this moment. My or Sharon's vote doesn't count.

Wil: I abstain from this vote. It's yours and Sharon's game; it should be your decision. (Is she aware of this debate?)

If this were a vote for us all to play according to the standard rule then of course I would vote for the rule. As Wil says, if he were playing on a physical board he would do the right thing. To me a player who needs a web page to tell them that ... pah!

It would be different if the web page were to explicitly state that either or both dice may be used (though I expect there'd be much concern among the players), but someone who uses an omission as a loophole is skimming close to cheating as far as I'm concerned.

Wil: you should ask sharon about it and how she feels ... if she doesnt even know about the rule .. then do whatever you like :) .. if she does know and has played according to that rule in your game .. then play both dice

playBunny: It would be different if the web page were to explicitly state that either or both dice may be used

Well, it does. At the bottom of the rules pages, under the heading Other important rules:

• If a player wants to use the second die first, he/she must click on "Swap dice" link below the game board. There are several situations when the link is not shown:
  • Both dice show the same value.
  • The player could not make a legal move with the second die.

And further up the page, when discussing movement of the pieces: If two different numbers are rolled, the player can make two moves at this turn. He/she takes the first (left-most) die value and moves one piece the same number of spaces. Then he/she does the same for the second die.

To me, there's no question about it. Moving off any die first, even if that blocks movement off the second die is allowed. If it were illegal, you wouldn't be able to swap the dice.

As Wil says, if he were playing on a physical board he would do the right thing.

I've never played backgammon on a physical board. Of all the games that you can play here, I've only played a few on a physical board, and backgammon isn't one of them. (Chess, Anti-Chess, Checkers, Halma, Line4, Reversi, Battleboats, Battleboats Plus, that's about it).

AbigailII: swapping of the dice is still legal even if you have to move both dice and the highest dice when you can only make a move with 1 die ...

for example you are 3 steps away from a piece of me .. i roll 4+3 ... do i have to move the 4 first and thereby miss you ? no i am allowed to move 3, sending you to the bar, and then 4 with the same piece

so also on sites where the rule is applied you are still allowed to swap your dice

AbigailII: I don't care about any other argument i'll see, i just say that anyone who wants to play Backgammon on this site should use both dice-numbers when he can or the higher when he can use only 1 of the 2.
Every other behaviour will result to a game that is not Backgammon........
I will accept the "illegal" move, if my opponent does it, but the game then will not be Backgammon. I don't care if the Brainking rules are wrong(they are), i just would play Backgammon without care if my opponent does not......

The point: Since Brainking allows you to choose according to your personal advantage, the players who don't care if they are playing Backgammon they should do it. The players that want to play Backgammon they should not............!

Imagine a Chess bug that allows Castle when King is threatened. Then if someone would make this castle and convert the position to a good one for him, in contrast of what would happen if he wouldn't castle, then a decent Chess player would feel completely disgusted by this.........
The fact that Brainking rules are wrong and refering to a well-known game, should not mean that we should follow them forgeting what we know about this well-known game.........

Wil: to thy own self be true

Hrqls: Are you trying to make a point? If so, what is it? I think we're all aware of the reasons why dice can be swapped. My point is that the rules say that if moving first with the second die is illegal, the game prevents you from swapping the dice. Ergo, if you can swap the dice, moving with the second die first isn't illegal. Note that if you roll 4 + 3, and you cannot move the 3, for instance you're on the bar and the 3-point is occupied, you cannot swap the dice.