|
|
|
Author
| Message |
|---|
|
|
@equus
that is not convincing! You need to look for patterns. This particular one could very easily be a friend "assisting" a new player to the advanced level so they can play in the same tournament. I'm sure there are many other possibilities.
Yes, technically even two friends doing this is wrong but then so is anytime one player lets another player win when they could have beat them. We need to keep an eye out for the serious cheats and leave the insignificant stuff alone.
No pattern ... no cheating!
@Phys
you are asking for a major change that has many implications, potential pitfalls and lots of overhead. Especially automated processes will cause lots of confusion. You'll have things happen like entering a tournament, getting dropped out when one of your "no mas" players enters, then automatically being entered again when that player drops out. Half the time you won't know what's going on and worst of all, you'll be potentially entered in tournaments when you did not want to be (perhaps put in an Open when you would have preferred a Master if you selected both).
Think about the logistical nightmare of organizing tournaments between thousands of players that have significant no play lists!
Think about what happens when the player you have on your list has you on theirs!
Now think of all the other possibilities! 
|
|
|
I want to remind everyone that I have not acused anyone of cheating. In the paast I have defended several players when they were acused of cheating. I have not commented on any of the players acused of cheating in this topic.
|
|
|
Blutigeroo,
My proposal has 2 parts. The idea that if you are deregistered from a tournament becuase someone on your no play list registers you would be automatically registered in the next event was motivated by the 50 game rule. I have always claimed that the 50 game rule needs to be modified. Maybe we should discuss my no play list without automatically reentered in the next tournament. That would mean that if you were deregisgtered you would have to register in the regular way for the next tournament.
This version of the no play list would be simple to implement. When 20 players registered for a tournament the website would look at the noplay list of those 20 players and delete anyone who objected to antoher player. If I think that a player with username iCheat cheats I should not have to play in the same tournament as him. If I list to many players on my noplay list I dont get to play in any events.
another approach is to allow players to withdraw from a tournament before they start any game.
At present players could simply resign all there games without moving. That would distort ratings. A player who resigns 6 games could qualify an advance tournament instead of master tournament. That would be unfair to the other players in the advance tournament.
|
|
|
Okay, well that is progress already. By making the wished for feature as simple as possible, you avoid many potential problems, some of which typically are difficult to envision until it's too late.
No question that players will be annoyed if they are constantly withdrawn from tournaments because of their NoPlay list. They might even complain. However, they don't have to use the list so that is their own issue to resolve.
Can anyone see any problems with this simpler system IF used only for tournaments? I will not mention any right away to give others a chance to express their concerns.
However, look at your open game suggestions which are similar, Phys. What happens if someone creates many open games but puts most of the active open game players on their NoPlay list?
Often when thinking of new features intended to make the playing experience enjoyable for the many, one must think of how things could go wrong. Especially one needs to entertain the notion that in this case, the first players to test and use the new feature are the very folks that it was designed to protect against (i.e. the cheaters).
I considered an approach where no one would know who they were going to play against and even that there would be a tournament pool so you never knew which of the next five tournaments in a class you would be entered in. The intention ... to make it even that much harder for a cheat with many accounts to enter the same tournament. It is another idea that is too complex and not transparent enough to be workable.
Phys, you mentioned being allowed to withdraw from a tournament once the players are decided which sounds good until you realize that it delays the commencement of the tournament and is pointless anyhow as you will often accept a tournament without actually knowing who the final players will be ... if some drop out they will be filled by others. Surely you would not suggest repeated confirmations of acceptance?
|
|
|
Please forgive my simple way of looking at life Blutigeroo. How you can say that nuage is only assisting a friend beggars belief. OK, so after lots of 'help' they get in the same tournament, which they now have (Auto Adv 2500) we only have luck to thank that they are not in the same group. You help someone by playing a good game and pointing out their errors (if that's what they want). You don't help them by resigning on the third move! If you play outside the rules it is dishonest and I certainly won't wait for a pattern before exposing someone. I can't think of any other game or sport in which one player deliberately losing to benefit their opponent isn't called cheating. Can you?
|
| Previous 1 ... 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next |
|
|
|
