Proctor

„Wash me but don't wet me“ as we say in German.

You cannot complain against cheating AND measures containing observation. Yes, you will be monitored. Or not, than you have freedom and cheating.

@Druismat said in #30:

We cannot fight cheating without a sacrifice, that I would be willing to sacrifice my privacy tells me how much fair chess means to me. At the end it is the online chess world that has to find workable solutions. Anyway it is not about my thoughts but about the kids that learn the game now and they have great chess adventures ahead of them. And those adventures must be as fair as possible...

it should be called procedure

If you want to prevent cheating sometimes has to watch your „freedom“.

So what do you suggest?

@Former_Player said in #28:

What about a hidden camera + a helper + earphones/beads?
Coming from a medical family and looking at neighboring words in the dictionary, I'm wondering about the etymology of the word Proctor. Perhaps it should prevent players from using the beads?

@Ralph138 said in #32:

it should be called procedure
Some chessCOM user suggested that the program should be called Vladimir. :)

i love etymology and people who don't know the difference between etymology and entomology bug me beyond words.

I guess this might be the closest definition

From WordNet (r) 3.0 (2006) [wn]:

proctor
n 1: someone who supervises (an examination) [syn: {proctor},
{monitor}]
v 1: watch over (students taking an exam, to prevent cheating)
[syn: {invigilate}, {proctor}]

I think that might be a newer definition, some older ones are

Proctor \Proc"tor\, n. [OE. proketour, contr. fr. procurator.
See {Procurator}.]
One who is employed to manage to affairs of another.
Specifically:
(a) A person appointed to collect alms for those who could
not go out to beg for themselves, as lepers, the
bedridden, etc.; hence a beggar. [Obs.] --Nares.
(b) (Eng. Law) An officer employed in admiralty and
ecclesiastical causes. He answers to an attorney at
common law, or to a solicitor in equity. --Wharton.
(c) (Ch. of Eng.) A representative of the clergy in
convocation.
(d) An officer in a university or college whose duty it is to
enforce obedience to the laws of the institution.
(e) An official whom doth ensure by means of digital manipulation
naught is hidden inside a competitor's anus

Proctor \Proc"tor\, v. t.
To act as a proctor toward; to manage as an attorney or
agent. --Bp. Warburton.
[1913 Webster]

@Druismat said in #30:

We cannot fight cheating without a sacrifice, that I would be willing to sacrifice my privacy tells me how much fair chess means to me. At the end it is the online chess world that has to find workable solutions. Anyway it is not about my thoughts but about the kids that learn the game now and they have great chess adventures ahead of them. And those adventures must be as fair as possible...

This particular sacrifice is quite big. 1st it allow monitorin you machine at anytime. Rootkit can install another program to lurk on the background. most likely it wont but any update on it could change. Then you install into your machine a piece of se that can do anything which mean it will be used is targeted hacking attacks. amount of sw that has such right must be get kept minimal

@Sarg0n said in #31:

„Wash me but don't wet me“ as we say in German.

You cannot complain against cheating AND measures containing observation. Yes, you will be monitored. Or not, than you have freedom and cheating.
I'll take the cheaters, thanks.
Freedom and privacy are (or at least should be) nonnegotiable.

I certainly haven't come to a final decision, there is a lot to think about here. But it does seem that the cost of achieving a desirable result is a greater harm than the original problem.

Oh, btw, I used to help proctor exams at a uni I worked at; and while I did catch a few students cheating, I never got my finger brown. The good old days, eh?

@Druismat said in #30:

We cannot fight cheating without a sacrifice, that I would be willing to sacrifice my privacy tells me how much fair chess means to me.
Do you realize that "sacrificing privacy" in this case includes stuff like letting chess-com to sniff e.g. your Internet banking password if they decide to? (Or any other password or data, FWIW.) Even if we forget for a moment that "Proctor" still cannot possibly prevent all forms of cheating, does "fair chess" really mean that much to you?