I can't give you the profile here as Lichess has a policy against public shaming of players on a public forum. But in this thread alone, you will find people actually admitting to having done so because 'they prefer it that way'.
So if you are asking for proof of abuse, you can simply check their profiles.
What statistic would you consider proof of abuse? To provide you with a relevant statistic, we would first need to determine the parameters that would qualify as proof.
To me, seeing players with a 90k white/ 0black abuse is proof enough. Seeing tens of people on this thread, even more so.
I can DM you their usernames, or you could tell me by which parameters or qualifiers you would concede that there has indeed been excessive abuse of this feature.
I can't give you the profile here as Lichess has a policy against public shaming of players on a public forum. But in this thread alone, you will find people actually admitting to having done so because 'they prefer it that way'.
So if you are asking for proof of abuse, you can simply check their profiles.
What statistic would you consider proof of abuse? To provide you with a relevant statistic, we would first need to determine the parameters that would qualify as proof.
To me, seeing players with a 90k white/ 0black abuse is proof enough. Seeing tens of people on this thread, even more so.
I can DM you their usernames, or you could tell me by which parameters or qualifiers you would concede that there has indeed been excessive abuse of this feature.
@Sofia-Mary said in #594:
Where can we find the statistic, that shows the ecaxt numbers of all Lichess white games and black games over the years?
I invite you to just... think about this for a second. First, think about your question, and then think about what it implies.
Then, please, think about what that says about the quality of your assumptions so far......
@Sofia-Mary said in #594:
> Where can we find the statistic, that shows the ecaxt numbers of all Lichess white games and black games over the years?
I invite you to just... think about this for a second. First, think about your question, and then think about what it implies.
Then, please, think about what that says about the quality of your assumptions so far......
@BeDecentForAChange said in #596:
Okay, tell me what a diplomatic answer means
@Sofia-Mary did you answer this? :)
@BeDecentForAChange said in #596:
> Okay, tell me what a diplomatic answer means
@Sofia-Mary did you answer this? :)
@BeDecentForAChange said in #601:
I can't give you the profile here as Lichess has a policy against public shaming of players on a public forum. But in this thread alone, you will find people actually admitting to having done so because 'they prefer it that way'.
Oh, this is a missunderstanding. I did not ask for names, I asked for numbers.
So if you are asking for proof of abuse, you can simply check their profiles.
No, I am interested in numbers about for example games they evidence the "abuse". How many people do this here for white?
What statistic would you consider proof of abuse? To provide you with a relevant statistic, we would first need to determine the parameters that would qualify as proof.
Yes, what are the parameters? You not thought about them before? Hmmm. You know it best, I thought.
To me, seeing players with a 90k white/ 0black abuse is proof enough. Seeing tens of people on this thread, even more so.
No, come on, here have been many black players too, only some white profiles are not enough to evidence the idea of the big abuse. That means, you do not know about the % of "abusive" white players?
I can DM you their usernames, or you could tell me by which parameters or qualifiers you would concede that there has indeed been excessive abuse of this feature.
What, you have all the usernames of people, playing white only? Hmmm. Interesting, then you only can give me the %? Means: How many players of all players are "white abusive"? (months and years)
@BeDecentForAChange said in #601:
> I can't give you the profile here as Lichess has a policy against public shaming of players on a public forum. But in this thread alone, you will find people actually admitting to having done so because 'they prefer it that way'.
Oh, this is a missunderstanding. I did not ask for names, I asked for numbers.
>
> So if you are asking for proof of abuse, you can simply check their profiles.
No, I am interested in numbers about for example games they evidence the "abuse". How many people do this here for white?
>
> What statistic would you consider proof of abuse? To provide you with a relevant statistic, we would first need to determine the parameters that would qualify as proof.
Yes, what are the parameters? You not thought about them before? Hmmm. You know it best, I thought.
>
> To me, seeing players with a 90k white/ 0black abuse is proof enough. Seeing tens of people on this thread, even more so.
No, come on, here have been many black players too, only some white profiles are not enough to evidence the idea of the big abuse. That means, you do not know about the % of "abusive" white players?
>
> I can DM you their usernames, or you could tell me by which parameters or qualifiers you would concede that there has indeed been excessive abuse of this feature.
What, you have all the usernames of people, playing white only? Hmmm. Interesting, then you only can give me the %? Means: How many players of all players are "white abusive"? (months and years)
@Sofia-Mary said in #604:
Oh, this is a missunderstanding. I did not ask for names, I asked for numbers.
No, I am interested in numbers about for example games they evidence the "abuse". How many people do this here for white?
Exactly, that is why I just explained to you. I may find 100 abusers on the server proof of abuse. You may not find 5% of all players on the server enough.
Yes, what are the parameters? You not thought about them before? Hmmm. You know it best, I thought.
:) You don't understand what you are saying.
Yes that is correct. But it seems you don't understand enough to know what you are asking, that is why I am asking you for the parameters that you would consider proof of abuse. I have already established my parameters, which I gave you. But since you are asking for a specific statistic, I am asking you what that statistic is so I can run the numbers for you
No, come on, here have been many black players too, only some white profiles are not enough to evidence the idea of the big abuse. That means, you do not know about the % of "abusive" white players?
Yes, those have been abused too :). But you don't understand your own words here. What % of one color would you consider abusive? Statistical outliers already, or a Z score of >=10?
What, you have all the usernames of people, playing white only? Hmmm. Interesting, then you only can give me the %? Means: How many players of all players are "white abusive"? (months and years)
:) no, you don't understand what you are saying. You are asking for 'how many players'. That is not a percentage. You are then asking for months and years. Those are not units of either the percentage or the number of players.
Please take a moment to think about what you would like to ask, and then I could tell you the answer
@Sofia-Mary said in #604:
> Oh, this is a missunderstanding. I did not ask for names, I asked for numbers.
>
> No, I am interested in numbers about for example games they evidence the "abuse". How many people do this here for white?
Exactly, that is why I just explained to you. I may find 100 abusers on the server proof of abuse. You may not find 5% of all players on the server enough.
>
> Yes, what are the parameters? You not thought about them before? Hmmm. You know it best, I thought.
:) You don't understand what you are saying.
Yes that is correct. But it seems you don't understand enough to know what you are asking, that is why I am asking you for the parameters that you would consider proof of abuse. I have already established my parameters, which I gave you. But since you are asking for a specific statistic, I am asking you what that statistic is so I can run the numbers for you
>
> No, come on, here have been many black players too, only some white profiles are not enough to evidence the idea of the big abuse. That means, you do not know about the % of "abusive" white players?
Yes, those have been abused too :). But you don't understand your own words here. What % of one color would you consider abusive? Statistical outliers already, or a Z score of >=10?
> What, you have all the usernames of people, playing white only? Hmmm. Interesting, then you only can give me the %? Means: How many players of all players are "white abusive"? (months and years)
:) no, you don't understand what you are saying. You are asking for 'how many players'. That is not a percentage. You are then asking for months and years. Those are not units of either the percentage or the number of players.
Please take a moment to think about what you would like to ask, and then I could tell you the answer
@BeDecentForAChange said in #603:
@Sofia-Mary did you answer this? :)
@Sofia-Mary did you answer this? :)
@BeDecentForAChange said in #603:
> @Sofia-Mary did you answer this? :)
@Sofia-Mary did you answer this? :)
@BeDecentForAChange said in #605:
What % of one color would you consider abusive?
I told you before, that I am not the one, who is thinking, that only white playing is abusive. This question I should ask you.
@BeDecentForAChange said in #605:
> What % of one color would you consider abusive?
I told you before, that I am not the one, who is thinking, that only white playing is abusive. This question I should ask you.
@Sofia-Mary said in #607:
I told you before, that I am not the one, who is thinking, that only white playing is abusive. This question I should ask you.
Any player with over 1000 games, and more than 70% of one color. Shall we agree that is conclusively abusive of the feature?
@Sofia-Mary said in #607:
> I told you before, that I am not the one, who is thinking, that only white playing is abusive. This question I should ask you.
Any player with over 1000 games, and more than 70% of one color. Shall we agree that is conclusively abusive of the feature?
@Sofia-Mary said in #607:
I told you before, that I am not the one, who is thinking, that only white playing is abusive. This question I should ask you.
You should, if you are asking for a specific statistic though
@Sofia-Mary said in #607:
> I told you before, that I am not the one, who is thinking, that only white playing is abusive. This question I should ask you.
You should, if you are asking for a specific statistic though
Now the server has set up my game black 10 times in a row. I am time out. No, if another player wants to play me it will be on my terms. After 8 years and playing 129 days and donating to support the site I must retire and move on
Now the server has set up my game black 10 times in a row. I am time out. No, if another player wants to play me it will be on my terms. After 8 years and playing 129 days and donating to support the site I must retire and move on