I played this game 3 days ago. I immediately reported the opponent after the game. I was not provisionally rated, and I've played no rapid games since then. He is now banned for cheating. I didn't get any refund. Is this a bug?
Can anyone remember what number we at for not reading the faq?
@theBigHig
(lichess.org/faq#rating-refund)
@theBigHig
(lichess.org/faq#rating-refund)
I played the game in the last 3 days. Whether the game was within 72 hours I'm not sure, but the timestamp says 3 days ago. Even if it were more than 3 days ago, I reported the game immediately. If the mods take too long to read a report, I guess we just get screwed? Good system
There's more than just the 3 days window. For example, your rating progress after the game.
(edit: mb for misreading)
(edit: mb for misreading)
Yet as I wrote, I have played no rated rapid games since that game.
@theBigHig said in #3:
> Whether the game was within 72 hours I'm not sure
October 3 2023; 9:46 PM EDT.
... so, about 3 days, 16 hours from when you opened this thread.
@theBigHig said in #3:
> If the mods take too long to read a report, I guess we just get screwed?
Losing a few rating points is not "getting screwed". Having to play a cheater is. And if you delayed playing this time control to hunt down these points, I'd say you screwed yourself.
> Whether the game was within 72 hours I'm not sure
October 3 2023; 9:46 PM EDT.
... so, about 3 days, 16 hours from when you opened this thread.
@theBigHig said in #3:
> If the mods take too long to read a report, I guess we just get screwed?
Losing a few rating points is not "getting screwed". Having to play a cheater is. And if you delayed playing this time control to hunt down these points, I'd say you screwed yourself.
"3 days ago" means "between 3 and 4 days ago", so it's probably the 72 hours.
If the mod queue can get longer than 80 hours, then it seems to me that the 3 day rule doesn't make much sense anymore. It has historically been under 48 hours and in that case, sure. If you can report a cheater instantly and still be ineligible for a refund without playing more, that doesn't seem like the system is working as intended.
Many would argue that "the system as intended" doesn't include rating refunds at all, and that it was then adjusted to placate crybabies.
@mcgoves said in #9:
> Many would argue that "the system as intended" doesn't include rating refunds at all, and that it was then adjusted to placate crybabies.
I find your misplaced hostility disturbing
> Many would argue that "the system as intended" doesn't include rating refunds at all, and that it was then adjusted to placate crybabies.
I find your misplaced hostility disturbing
This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.