How Much Accuracy Means Cheating

@odoaker2015 said in #29:
> You can have it translated into Dutch for you. That's not a problem nowadays.

I'm not going to. I don't want to have a debate with you about whether or not any misunderstanding you believe exists is on my part or on the part of google translate. It's probably neither.

@Molurus said in #31:
> I'm not going to. I don't want to have a debate with you about whether or not any misunderstanding you believe exists is on my part or on the part of google translate. It's probably neither.

But it's a pity that you evade a legitimate objection. That doesn't speak well for you. It also shows that you are not honest and that you don't want to deal seriously with my arguments. Then we don't need to discuss it any further. What a pity!

@odoaker2015 said in #32:
> But it's a pity that you evade a legitimate objection. That doesn't speak well for you. It also shows that you are not honest and that you don't want to deal seriously with my arguments. Then we don't need to discuss it any further. What a pity!

It's not a legitimate objection.

This all appears to be really similar to the idea that if Facebook bans you, it is violating your Freedom Of Speech.

No, it's not. Your freedom on internet communities is not protected by law. An internet community can limit your freedom however they please, even without explaining themselves.

The only reason a chess server like lichess 'plays nice' is because having lots of members is in its best interest. It doesn't help if people go to other chess servers because they are annoyed by the quality of the service and/or limitations of freedom.

To quote XKCD: Freedom of speech means the government can't arrest you for what you say. It doesn't mean anyone else has to listen to you, or host you while you share your opinion.

And so it is with ALL other by law protected rights.

Yes, if you are prosecuted by the government in the context of criminal law, you have the right to be informed about the evidence. That doesn't mean Lichess has any obligation to show you how they caught you cheating. They don't. They don't even have to tell you they're banning you because you cheated. They can ban you whenever they want without providing any reason at all.

And like I said: if you don't like this approach to catching cheaters, you are perfectly free to move to a chess server that does this differently. It is your choice.

The Lichess moderator explained this perfectly. It's not that he doesn't understand your objection. He just disagrees, and he should.

@ProvingAPoint said in #24:
> Cause on the board you have 1h and 30mn to think(usually). At the games that we are analyzing they are rapid games which are 10mn with no time addition.
I know that I am just saying that cheating otb is still possible especially in smaller tournaments

Again, it's not about showing me, but an independent body. Do you actually read what I write?
And it's a legitimate objection!

@Molurus

@Molurus said in #33:
> It's not a legitimate objection.
>
> This all appears to be really similar to the idea that if Facebook bans you, it is violating your Freedom Of Speech.
>
> No, it's not. Your freedom on internet communities is not protected by law. An internet community can limit your freedom however they please, even without explaining themselves.
>
> The only reason a chess server like lichess 'plays nice' is because having lots of members is in its best interest. It doesn't help if people go to other chess servers because they are annoyed by the quality of the service and/or limitations of freedom.
>
> To quote XKCD: Freedom of speech means the government can't arrest you for what you say. It doesn't mean anyone else has to listen to you, or host you while you share your opinion.
>
> And so it is with ALL other by law protected rights.
>
> Yes, if you are prosecuted by the government in the context of criminal law, you have the right to be informed about the evidence. That doesn't mean Lichess has any obligation to show you how they caught you cheating. They don't. They don't even have to tell you they're banning you because you cheated. They can ban you whenever they want without providing any reason at all.
>
> And like I said: if you don't like this approach to catching cheaters, you are perfectly free to move to a chess server that does this differently. It is your choice.
>
> The Lichess moderator explained this perfectly. It's not that he doesn't understand your objection. He just disagrees, and he should.

Well, we have different points of view. And why should I leave Lichess? Aside from the anti-cheat policy, Lichess is an excellent site. Besides, we have freedom of speech. And if I have something to criticize, then I do that too. Whether you like it or not.

@odoaker2015 said in #35:
> Again, it's not about showing me, but an independent body. Do you actually read what I write?
> And it's a legitimate objection!
>
> @Molurus

You would be moving the final judgement from one private organization to another. What would be the point in that? You would still not be seeing any evidence, and it still amounts to the question if you trust a private organization to protect the rights you didn't have in the first place.

But again, if you feel you would rather have that.. go for it. Thing is: it doesn't exist. (That's strange? Why is that? Because no one is interested in it, that's why.)

@odoaker2015 said in #35:
> Again, it's not about showing me, but an independent body.

Don't you think that the Lichess mods - who are not payed employees but doing their job on a honorary basis - don't constitute an independent enough body? If not: Why not? And what should this body look like in your opinion?

@Katzenschinken said in #38:
> Don't you think that the Lichess mods - who are not payed employees but doing their job on a honorary basis - don't constitute an independent enough body? If not: Why not? And what should this body look like in your opinion?

Frankly, I very much doubt the moderators of this forum get to see cheating analysis and evidence. They probably don't.

But they don't really need to to understand the reasons why they don't.

@Katzenschinken said in #38:
> Don't you think that the Lichess mods - who are not payed employees but doing their job on a honorary basis - don't constitute an independent enough body? If not: Why not? And what should this body look like in your opinion?

Well, humans can make mistakes, right? Since Lichess moderators are probably humans too, they make mistakes. Right? Especially since there are too few moderators for too many appeals.

The only answer I can give to your last question is that I don't know. I don't have to.