What you wrote is quite professional but the the text scale is too large...A blog will be much better :)
@for_cryingout_loud said in #8:
> but lichess has more like 1 cheater per 10 000 games
> source: absolutely nothing
>
> All these cheating post are a blind person leading the other blind person saying that he can see how many cheaters there are.
> (its a metaphor saying you all say there is x amount of cheaters but if i ask for a source you say your opinion which is not a valid source for data and means we cant improve if we dont know where we are)
The 58000 a month is taken from Chess.com's own website. (I'm not making that up) If that is true... then the broader theory does indeed come into play as is a valid hypothesis.
A) just how many real active users are on these sites?
B) do these cites ban URLs (are the ban's kept active) 58000 a month (let's assume LIchess is similar, 696,000 people get kicked off these site a year ... that's 3,480,000 every 5 years just for Chess.com alone... those stats alone say these site are not keeping up on their URL bans (if they are doing it)
C) from the above stats 1 out of 10 on these site are cheating.
Conclusion to the hypothesis:
I. Internet chess elo's are not valid.
II. Don't assume someone with a high internet ELO is real. (i.e. that their internet ELO represents their actual abilities)
Chess.com ... ( I don't think LIChess cares...) doesn't like anyone posting about cheating ... the raw truth obviously cut's down paid subscribers.
That staed... IMO if you play long enough you find out the real numbers ... through experience. By then you have a practical opinion about Internet Chess. (and still play/subscribe etc )
> but lichess has more like 1 cheater per 10 000 games
> source: absolutely nothing
>
> All these cheating post are a blind person leading the other blind person saying that he can see how many cheaters there are.
> (its a metaphor saying you all say there is x amount of cheaters but if i ask for a source you say your opinion which is not a valid source for data and means we cant improve if we dont know where we are)
The 58000 a month is taken from Chess.com's own website. (I'm not making that up) If that is true... then the broader theory does indeed come into play as is a valid hypothesis.
A) just how many real active users are on these sites?
B) do these cites ban URLs (are the ban's kept active) 58000 a month (let's assume LIchess is similar, 696,000 people get kicked off these site a year ... that's 3,480,000 every 5 years just for Chess.com alone... those stats alone say these site are not keeping up on their URL bans (if they are doing it)
C) from the above stats 1 out of 10 on these site are cheating.
Conclusion to the hypothesis:
I. Internet chess elo's are not valid.
II. Don't assume someone with a high internet ELO is real. (i.e. that their internet ELO represents their actual abilities)
Chess.com ... ( I don't think LIChess cares...) doesn't like anyone posting about cheating ... the raw truth obviously cut's down paid subscribers.
That staed... IMO if you play long enough you find out the real numbers ... through experience. By then you have a practical opinion about Internet Chess. (and still play/subscribe etc )
I learned to play chess when I was very young. I never took the game seriously, never read a book or took instructions and therefore didn't improve very much. My education is experience and if you look at my ratings you can see experience alone is not very helpful.
As I grew older and discovered the tavern scene, I started hanging around a tavern where a lot of chess was played. We usually played for a beer which cost about sixty cents at the time or a dollar. There were always people looking over your shoulder and offering advice, some good-some not so good. I don't ever remember anybody being accused of cheating or anybody refusing to pay because they thought the winner was getting an assist from a spectator.
If you're aspiring to be a top notch, highly rated, respected chess player, then I think ethics takes a larger role, not so much that ethics takes a larger role, but what comprises a chess player is determined largely by chess ethics.
Anyway, I think there is room for all kinds of players at all types of levels.
As I grew older and discovered the tavern scene, I started hanging around a tavern where a lot of chess was played. We usually played for a beer which cost about sixty cents at the time or a dollar. There were always people looking over your shoulder and offering advice, some good-some not so good. I don't ever remember anybody being accused of cheating or anybody refusing to pay because they thought the winner was getting an assist from a spectator.
If you're aspiring to be a top notch, highly rated, respected chess player, then I think ethics takes a larger role, not so much that ethics takes a larger role, but what comprises a chess player is determined largely by chess ethics.
Anyway, I think there is room for all kinds of players at all types of levels.
Great but you missed one category: The ones who are sound minded but immature about things!
- pathology is a medical term, cheating, although it is a filthy and horrible thing, is not a disease strictly speaking. Using such a term for cheating is not accurate.
- cheating is often motivated by the lure of quick gain and the feeling of superiority. It's not an illness, everyone sometimes feels or want to feels like a champion or strong, but not everyone cheats (fortunately!).
- so it's a question of controlling one's emotions. such values can be inculcated in the learning process of the child or person.
- a person can be educated or intelligent but also be dishonest. a crooked banker can be a crook and know how to admire Monet's paintings. the same goes for cheating. a great player is not immune to being attracted to cheating.
- therefore, I would say that the action called cheating is the result of several factors, sometimes coming from the person's education, sometimes from their personal values and morals, sometimes from their environment. It is undoubtedly possible to get off this bad path for those who have taken it, but I think it is very complicated.
- cheating is often motivated by the lure of quick gain and the feeling of superiority. It's not an illness, everyone sometimes feels or want to feels like a champion or strong, but not everyone cheats (fortunately!).
- so it's a question of controlling one's emotions. such values can be inculcated in the learning process of the child or person.
- a person can be educated or intelligent but also be dishonest. a crooked banker can be a crook and know how to admire Monet's paintings. the same goes for cheating. a great player is not immune to being attracted to cheating.
- therefore, I would say that the action called cheating is the result of several factors, sometimes coming from the person's education, sometimes from their personal values and morals, sometimes from their environment. It is undoubtedly possible to get off this bad path for those who have taken it, but I think it is very complicated.
The cheaters speak for itself
Maybe it's just as simple as having fun and seeing how long they can get away with it for, the youthful generation like cheating at computer games and on line chess , maybe, is just another computer game to them. That they can try and win ,maybe to a certain generation it's just a laugh and has nothing to do about being good or bad, psychology or pathology , it's their entertainment , trying to beat the system and for how long ...........maybe it's as simple as that??
Edit catch me if you can ? Maybe that's their game that they enjoy?
Edit 2 : and seeing all the chess geeks get up in arms about it while they're smoking whatever in their dorm rooms , laughing ,comparing them to murderers , rapists and peados ha ha ha ha, where did they go wrong in their lives , more giggling xxx
Edit catch me if you can ? Maybe that's their game that they enjoy?
Edit 2 : and seeing all the chess geeks get up in arms about it while they're smoking whatever in their dorm rooms , laughing ,comparing them to murderers , rapists and peados ha ha ha ha, where did they go wrong in their lives , more giggling xxx
@HowardXue said in #11:
> What you wrote is quite professional but the the text scale is too large...A blog will be much better :)
I agree
> What you wrote is quite professional but the the text scale is too large...A blog will be much better :)
I agree
@A_Dragon_Riding_King
@MatDaBat204
@itsreyansh28
Thank you all very much for your suggestions.
I'll make this into 3 blogs.
If people can accidentally use these forums to exacerbate the problem, then I can hotlink the blogs in order to show exactly why it's a very bad idea to even say the word "cheat", much less to have hundreds of people read it.
@MatDaBat204
@itsreyansh28
Thank you all very much for your suggestions.
I'll make this into 3 blogs.
If people can accidentally use these forums to exacerbate the problem, then I can hotlink the blogs in order to show exactly why it's a very bad idea to even say the word "cheat", much less to have hundreds of people read it.