Hi all
I really think as there are more members every year, they become more important than the "hit and run" drivers that potentially damage tournaments.
I did a poll here from stream about this:
http://www.strawpoll.me/6267491/rFeedback welcome
This is a good idea
The latest tournament vicitimised by a brand new "hit and run" driver:
http://en.lichess.org/tournament/iIir026nI agree. From viewing streamers, I have seen it many times...engine users join the site, and win a tournament that same day only to be banned later (their engine use becomes obvious upon computer inspection of their games). The only problem is, the tournament experience is degraded for the legitimate users.
Make new users play 20 or so RATED games before being allowed in tournaments, in the same category (ie. 20 rated blitz games if a blitz tourny).
Voted "yes". This place is far too good to have it compromised by those cheaters. I'd rather loose from an 1000-rated member over here...
It raises an important issue,for the long term survival of the site and security of existing long term genuine players,cheating should be addressed.The 50 game rule tho is to lenient, i would suggest 500,even 1000 games to be played before a new player can be allowed to enter a major tournament.Its like a quota,then you can join any event you wish , but only then. New players can still play in the site to achieve the target of 500/1000 games, no one is being denied to play,its merely a restriction to stop cheats stealing what isnt theres.
This has been discussed many, many times. Lichess has, by a very significant margin, the best computer detection of any chess website or server. The owners, developers, and moderators are doing an amazing job. The program in place to protect and ban cheaters is effective, and making a 50 game "trial period" would make for a much worse user experience for those that do not cheat. This is similar to what another chess website, chess cube, uses. They use a level system where certain things are unlocked at certain levels, and it makes a HORRID user experience. For example, say a streamer, Kingscrusher, Chessnetwork, or chessbrah, creates a tournament on lichess. One of their viewers, who does not have a lichess account, decides to create an account to play in the tournament, only to find that they can not play because they have to play 50 rated games first. It is a stupid thing to put in place, especially with the massive growth lichess is currently having. The few users that cheat are being handled as they should be, the hundreds and thousands of people that play on this site that don't cheat shouldn't have to wait 50 games just to play in tournaments.
First I voted for this idea.
I don't think the played games have to be in the same category.
Also I don't believe that 20 games are necessary. It should be just enough analysed games that lichess can detect obvious cheaters.
I don't know if it is practically possible that lichess analyse the first games of a new account automatically but if it is that's a possible way to go.
Also, just as a side note, the poll sent out by Kingscrusher is inherently biased, because the main people that took the poll were in Kingscrushers stream where he simply told them his perspective without them able to hear the other side of the story.
