is there any way to reverse the false-positive learning by reworking the reward/punishment system?
@odoaker2015 said in #80:
> Let's ask a Lichess moderator! Does cheating in a correspondence chess game on Lichess result in the person being permanently banned and given a red mark? Will his opportunities to play be restricted? For example, that he is no longer allowed to play in rated tournaments? Or that he can only play against other cheats? It would be nice if a moderator could answer briefly. For clarification!
I don't know why you keep asking the same thing when you've been provided an answer already. Do you think I wrote the fair-play page or was it written by Lichess, presumably with moderators' consent?
Here, there is also a faq about correspondence: lichess.org/faq#correspondence.
> Let's ask a Lichess moderator! Does cheating in a correspondence chess game on Lichess result in the person being permanently banned and given a red mark? Will his opportunities to play be restricted? For example, that he is no longer allowed to play in rated tournaments? Or that he can only play against other cheats? It would be nice if a moderator could answer briefly. For clarification!
I don't know why you keep asking the same thing when you've been provided an answer already. Do you think I wrote the fair-play page or was it written by Lichess, presumably with moderators' consent?
Here, there is also a faq about correspondence: lichess.org/faq#correspondence.
@Deadban
Just because there are a few things in the Fair Play that are forbidden in correspondence chess games here and someone was caught cheating there does not mean that he will be permanently banned and that he will suffer the consequences. I know that from a reliable source.
Just because there are a few things in the Fair Play that are forbidden in correspondence chess games here and someone was caught cheating there does not mean that he will be permanently banned and that he will suffer the consequences. I know that from a reliable source.
Your "reliable source" is someone who was shadowbanned by Lichess for spreading misinformation. LOL, I'm done dude.
You're free to believe whatever you want.
You're free to believe whatever you want.
@IrwinCaladinResearch, why not deliberately conduct a series of 'cheat tournaments' where the players are allowed to cheat, in a double-blind format ... the point being, we know a priori who has cheated ...
Once we've got enough games across enough players then the model should be trained, no ?
This approach has got to be the way to do it ... or at least create a 'cheating strong human player bot' ... but how could that be as good as the real thing ?
Once we've got enough games across enough players then the model should be trained, no ?
This approach has got to be the way to do it ... or at least create a 'cheating strong human player bot' ... but how could that be as good as the real thing ?
Terms of service [ lichess.org/terms-of-service ] and Fair-play page [ lichess.org/page/fair-play ] clearly indicate what is allowed and what is not. The use of outside assistance such as engines or someone else's advise is not allowed in correspondence games.
If you violate ToS, your account will get the ToS violation mark.
If you violate ToS, your account will get the ToS violation mark.
Lichess and Chessdotcom Fair-Play rules for on-line correspondence play appear to be the same, no engines etc.
My experience comes from chessdotcom and most definitely accounts were closed - in fact most of the players who won their group section got banned, it was very scary I can tell you as I was entirely new to this form of chess. Funny thing was that many of the players played hundreds of concurrent games and made trivial mistakes you would expect to see in bullet chess. Kind of guessed why, never again!
Note that for off-line - normal - correspondence, engines are allowed as they can't be policed.
My experience comes from chessdotcom and most definitely accounts were closed - in fact most of the players who won their group section got banned, it was very scary I can tell you as I was entirely new to this form of chess. Funny thing was that many of the players played hundreds of concurrent games and made trivial mistakes you would expect to see in bullet chess. Kind of guessed why, never again!
Note that for off-line - normal - correspondence, engines are allowed as they can't be policed.
To clear up a couple of misconceptions.
- Just because some account has been tagged with a ToS violation mark, doesn't necessarily mean that the person has cheated. This could be for some other type of ToS violation, for example, rating manipulation.
- Just because someone's account is closed, doesn't necessarily mean they have been tagged with a ToS violation. Sometimes people choose to close their account in order to focus on their IRL matters and find online chess a distraction, or for some other reasons.
- Just because someone claims their ToS violation mark is a false positive, doesn't necessarily mean that it is. Though false positives do happen, we have an appeal system in place [ lichess.org/page/appeal ] to correct these errors. And we do.
- Just because someone is tagged with a ToS violation mark, let's assume for cheating, doesn't necessarily mean that they have cheated in their last game or games, or tournament. The violation could have happened a few days, weeks or months ago. This also doesn't mean that they have violated our terms in every single game. So if you report someone [ lichess.org/report ] and the person gets banned, this doesn't necessarily mean they have played unfairly against you. As mentioned previously, this could have been for some other game at some other time, or some other type of violation entirely. In any case, we do not appreciate any type of shaming, whether you deem it "justifiable" or not.
- Just because some account has been tagged with a ToS violation mark, doesn't necessarily mean that the person has cheated. This could be for some other type of ToS violation, for example, rating manipulation.
- Just because someone's account is closed, doesn't necessarily mean they have been tagged with a ToS violation. Sometimes people choose to close their account in order to focus on their IRL matters and find online chess a distraction, or for some other reasons.
- Just because someone claims their ToS violation mark is a false positive, doesn't necessarily mean that it is. Though false positives do happen, we have an appeal system in place [ lichess.org/page/appeal ] to correct these errors. And we do.
- Just because someone is tagged with a ToS violation mark, let's assume for cheating, doesn't necessarily mean that they have cheated in their last game or games, or tournament. The violation could have happened a few days, weeks or months ago. This also doesn't mean that they have violated our terms in every single game. So if you report someone [ lichess.org/report ] and the person gets banned, this doesn't necessarily mean they have played unfairly against you. As mentioned previously, this could have been for some other game at some other time, or some other type of violation entirely. In any case, we do not appreciate any type of shaming, whether you deem it "justifiable" or not.
This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.