Ok, I'm beginning to have enough of the cheaters on this site. I faced a cheater in a tournament on this site about two weeks ago. I reported him and he was banned like 3 days afterwards. I got informed that the person I reported was banned but I did not get any refund for the elo lost because I won back my rating in the meantime, so yeah, you win three honest games and lose to a verified cheater= back to square one, you deserved it anyways, thanks for playing well and fair. I published a very polite post that was deleted because of "shaming" although I did not insult the person, nor even mention the name, only the game so that everyone could see I was not throwing blind accusations. Still, I'm the one who got punished, the cheater just opened a new account on the same computer and he's free to do his business once again, we all thank him for the wonderful games his cybernetic intellect provides us. Now I'm really not in the mood of being polite anymore since even more recently, like very very recently (no name dropping, no game mention, truly anonymous person) I got cheated once again. It's completely obvious he cheated, it's not even debatable, spending the same number of time for each move whether it's move 2 or a very double edged middlegame position, making 0 mistakes in his last 20 games. I obviously reported this truly anonymous person, which privacy and honor we must all respect. I lost more classical points in the last days because of cheaters than when facing better opponents, which means I'm forced to plateau and more importantly I can't have fun. From there, either you try to make some more games and if you win honest games, you do not get a refund, or the mods take to much time to take action because hey, it's the weekend, there are the candidates so the cheater has the time to play 40 more games and you do not get your points back anyways. And once the person eventually gets banned, he'll just repeat the process again and again by creating a new account since that's the only sanction cheaters seem to get on this site. And you can't even criticize them even when their account is blocked, wonderful. I truly love the way the cheaters are treated.
@Cyranolmighty said in #1:
> I published a very polite post that was deleted because of "shaming" although I did not insult the person, nor even mention the name, only the game so that everyone could see I was not throwing blind accusations.
Well, it's obvious that everyone can see the opponent name from the game. Even if you just published the pgn, someone could still search the game up in the opening explorer.
> I published a very polite post that was deleted because of "shaming" although I did not insult the person, nor even mention the name, only the game so that everyone could see I was not throwing blind accusations.
Well, it's obvious that everyone can see the opponent name from the game. Even if you just published the pgn, someone could still search the game up in the opening explorer.
Insulting and shaming is not the same thing. The first is when you call someone names or throw curses at them, the second is when you accuse them of being a cheater or if they are already marked you announce it publicly.
I'm very curious about how you know that the person who cheated against you two weeks ago is the same that you think has cheated the second time. Besides, how you do know they're using the same computer (like it changes something) and even more how do you know they're using a computer and not a phone?
Even though it sucks not to receive a refund after facing a cheater you have to understand that the rating is not a prize for you. It is there only for the purpose of matching you with players of similar skill.
Which means that if you earn the rating back yourself by playing other games and received the refund afterwards that would lead to inflation of the rating system.
I'm very curious about how you know that the person who cheated against you two weeks ago is the same that you think has cheated the second time. Besides, how you do know they're using the same computer (like it changes something) and even more how do you know they're using a computer and not a phone?
Even though it sucks not to receive a refund after facing a cheater you have to understand that the rating is not a prize for you. It is there only for the purpose of matching you with players of similar skill.
Which means that if you earn the rating back yourself by playing other games and received the refund afterwards that would lead to inflation of the rating system.
>
> I'm very curious about how you know that the person who cheated against you two weeks ago is the same that you think has cheated the second time. Besides, how you do know they're using the same computer (like it changes something) and even more how do you know they're using a computer and not a phone?
>
> Even though it sucks not to receive a refund after facing a cheater you have to understand that the rating is not a prize for you. It is there only for the purpose of matching you with players of similar skill.
> Which means that if you earn the rating back yourself by playing other games and received the refund afterwards that would lead to inflation of the rating system.
I never said it was the same person, just that the person will continue because when a cheater gets banned, he only has to open a new account, so it basically has no use. Thanks for having concern towards the inflation of the rating system but condoning cheating as it is now by not refunding incites a lot of people to do so, thus leading to reverse-sandbox and deflating the rating system significantly.
> I'm very curious about how you know that the person who cheated against you two weeks ago is the same that you think has cheated the second time. Besides, how you do know they're using the same computer (like it changes something) and even more how do you know they're using a computer and not a phone?
>
> Even though it sucks not to receive a refund after facing a cheater you have to understand that the rating is not a prize for you. It is there only for the purpose of matching you with players of similar skill.
> Which means that if you earn the rating back yourself by playing other games and received the refund afterwards that would lead to inflation of the rating system.
I never said it was the same person, just that the person will continue because when a cheater gets banned, he only has to open a new account, so it basically has no use. Thanks for having concern towards the inflation of the rating system but condoning cheating as it is now by not refunding incites a lot of people to do so, thus leading to reverse-sandbox and deflating the rating system significantly.
I mean, frankly, refunding should have no restrictions at all if it is proven that the player cheated against you in a game, FIDE does that, other chess sites does that, I love lichess but frankly this is not acceptable to me.
I agree that it feels bad, I was also cheated in atomic yesterday and missed the refund cuz I kept going in the arena.
However, there's some truth in saying that after 100 or 200 more rated games, you won't notice anymore that you've been "robbed" some points in the past. As your rating was "artificially" decreased by a bit, you will marginally gain more points from later wins (by like some hundreths of decimals) so the deduction will diminish over time.
Full refunds lead to inflation indeed, but the refund could be capped less still. Say, you lose 8 points to a cheater, and get them back within 10 more games. If you had played these games with your original rating, you'd still be like roughly 6 points ahead.
However, there's some truth in saying that after 100 or 200 more rated games, you won't notice anymore that you've been "robbed" some points in the past. As your rating was "artificially" decreased by a bit, you will marginally gain more points from later wins (by like some hundreths of decimals) so the deduction will diminish over time.
Full refunds lead to inflation indeed, but the refund could be capped less still. Say, you lose 8 points to a cheater, and get them back within 10 more games. If you had played these games with your original rating, you'd still be like roughly 6 points ahead.
@Cyranolmighty said in #4:
> I never said it was the same person, just that the person will continue because when a cheater gets banned, he only has to open a new account, so it basically has no use. Thanks for having concern towards the inflation of the rating system but condoning cheating as it is now by not refunding incites a lot of people to do so, thus leading to reverse-sandbox and deflating the rating system significantly.
Well actually, lichess can check where u logged in from and where, so detecting alts ain't much of a problem
> I never said it was the same person, just that the person will continue because when a cheater gets banned, he only has to open a new account, so it basically has no use. Thanks for having concern towards the inflation of the rating system but condoning cheating as it is now by not refunding incites a lot of people to do so, thus leading to reverse-sandbox and deflating the rating system significantly.
Well actually, lichess can check where u logged in from and where, so detecting alts ain't much of a problem
<Comment deleted by user>
Update: incident solved. Had to stop playing for 2 days in order to get the points back but happily lichess mods are still doing a great job. Thanks guys.
@Cyranolmighty said in #9:
> Update: incident solved. Had to stop playing for 2 days in order to get the points back but happily lichess mods are still doing a great job. Thanks guys.
Are you sure you got the points back from the guy you played two weeks ago though? And not the guy you played say 40 hours ago whom has now closed his account?
> Update: incident solved. Had to stop playing for 2 days in order to get the points back but happily lichess mods are still doing a great job. Thanks guys.
Are you sure you got the points back from the guy you played two weeks ago though? And not the guy you played say 40 hours ago whom has now closed his account?
This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.