Cheaters are not banned

It typically goes like this: 1200 player loses against 1200 player, presses analyse button, sees high accuracy score and is absolutely convinced they were cheating, because how could a 1200 play such a perfect game?

Reality is, they blundered, and the win was easy, and picking one of the many good obvious moves at each move was enough to win a game at high with high accuracy scores. And they totally miss that they have such games themselves.

The accuracy score seems to be one of the metrics that gets heavily abused in that regard over and over.

And the moves where the opponent played badly? Well, that's just to make nobody suspicious.

Oh, and of course theses heavy cheaters magically keep their rating at 1200, despite winning all those games.

@Cedur216 said in #2:

Very uneducated statements

Then maybe you could educate, why.

@nadjarostowa said in #5:

IP does very little nowadays in that regard, as getting a new IP is often trivial

IP address is main identification of PC in the internet and getting everytime new IP is not trivial. You can't ask your ISP every time to give you new IP.

@nadjarostowa said in #5:

some IP addresses serve multiple users.

First time hearing this. If you mean local network where several users share one external IP, then they also share responsibility. If they play from some public place, then may they go to their homes to their personal computers and play from there. Yes, this is for the sake of security and fair-play of online chess and everyone should understand this.

@nadjarostowa said in #5:

Also, I don't understand what you mean with email in that regard, as you can only register one account per email address.

I mean that if you ban the registered email of someone, he/she in order to come and create new account, first needs to create new email account, which consumes time and nerves. To add to this IP ban, they (cheaters) will understand that what they are doing is hard and not worth of it.
Also, email providers, if they care about spam and illegal activities, should be alerted when someone constantly creates new accounts in a short period of time and don't allow. They might be get acknowledged even from chess sites owners (why not)
what's going on. I of course don't think this will stop them creating new emails at all, but will make their life harder.

@nadjarostowa said in #11:

It typically goes like this: 1200 player loses against 1200 player, presses analyse button...

1200 player is very, very bad example.

Other comments does not make sense, sorry.

@Alex-31 said in #12:

Then maybe you could educate, why.

IP address is main identification of PC in the internet and getting everytime new IP is not trivial. You can't ask your ISP every time to give you new IP.
First time hearing this. [...]

No, they don't. Who told you that and why do you believe them?
The only thing that is (almost) unique is the ID of your network adapter.

https://www.hotspotshield.com/resources/will-my-ip-address-change-if-i-move/#:~:text=Even%20if%20you%20don't,terms%20change%2C%20your%20IP%20address

That's only 1 out of 1000's sources you can learn about ip adresses.

facepalm

@Alex-31 said in #12:

IP address is main identification of PC in the internet and getting everytime new IP is not trivial. You can't ask your ISP every time to give you new IP.
Wrong. Today even most home users have dynamically assigned IP addreses and most ISPs only offer static address as a paid service (some not even that). And some don't even offer actual connectivity but only provide access via a masquerade. It's sad but it's how things work these days. There might be lucky countries with abundance of IP(v4) addresses but it certainly doesn't work the way you think worldwide.

If you mean local network where several users share one external IP, then they also share responsibility.
Like every employee of one company? Every student of a university or living in the same university dormitory? Every visitor of the same hotel? Those are typical examples of who can - and quite often does - share the same IP address.

1200 player is very, very bad example.
No, it's actually quite common example representing majority of these complaints. You are much stronger chess player but other ideas you presented are just as misguided.

@Alex-31 said in #12:

IP address is main identification of PC in the internet and getting everytime new IP is not trivial. You can't ask your ISP every time to give you new IP.

With many providers, you simply hit "reconnect" on your router and voilà, you get a new connection with a new IP within seconds. And mobile users frequently get new IPs as well.

First time hearing this. If you mean local network where several users share one external IP, then they also share responsibility. If they play from some public place, then may they go to their homes to their personal computers and play from there. Yes, this is for the sake of security and fair-play of online chess and everyone should understand this.

This is ridiculous. IPs are not only reused, but also shared in many settings like public computers, and shared networks. Quite big networks may share one IP to the outside. For example, all the devices in your home share one IP to the outside world.

And no, I do not share any responsibility with that guy that visited the hotel yesterday! Like at all!

I mean that if you ban the registered email of someone, he/she in order to come and create new account, first needs to create new email account, which consumes time and nerves. To add to this IP ban, they (cheaters) will understand that what they are doing is hard and not worth of it.

No idea why you think that email addresses are suddenly free again after a TOS violation?

Also, email providers, if they care about spam and illegal activities, should be alerted when someone constantly creates new accounts in a short period of time and don't allow. They might be get acknowledged even from chess sites owners (why not)
what's going on. I of course don't think this will stop them creating new emails at all, but will make their life harder.

Good luck with that! Not sure if you're making fun of everyone now.

The internet is quite an anonymous place. And while it does come with some benefits, here you get the full load of downsides. Spammers, cheaters, no personal responsibility.

1200 player is very, very bad example.

Very bad? Very relevant. You don't need to look farther than this thread to see how relevant it is.

Other comments does not make sense, sorry.

Well...

@Alex-31 said in #12:

Then maybe you could educate, why.

the other people here did the job. Ban evasion is not as trivial as you think.

@Shadow1414 said in #8:

Two: Translation: I think cheaters shouldn't be able to hide their mark by closing/deleting their accounts—as that would discourage some from cheating—or be given second chances, as cheating is a more impactful offfence.)

I think maybe a way (although already suggested before on Lichess) is that if you were marked, have a permanent ToS Mark on them.

Idk how to explain it, but basically have a "This account was closed for ToS violations" vs "This account was closed by the creator."

Although I suppose such things have already been tried and they have failed.

@nadjarostowa

"It typically goes like this: 1200 player loses against 1200 player, presses analyse button, sees high accuracy score and is absolutely convinced they were cheating, because how could a 1200 play such a perfect game?"

That may well be true, I can only speak for myself. I have never reported a cheater based on a game I played against them. My reports are only made after analyzing many games the player has.

"The accuracy score seems to be one of the metrics that gets heavily abused in that regard over and over."

Can you tell me the statistical probability of said 1200 rated player running off 10 straight games at greater than 90% accuracy? Oh, and every move was made in 8-10 seconds, regardless how obvious or difficult.

What ban because why?

@nadjarostowa said in #15:

The internet is quite an anonymous place.

you sweet, innocent child. That might have been a little true in the early 00s. It's far from true today.