Correspondence rules are absurd

@TropicBird said in #1:
> I found out, after being disqualified for "cheating" (which I assumed was a bug, but it wasn't), that using an engine is prohibited in correspondence games.
Most online correspondence has ban for engines. what would be point of tournamens "who has most cpu"

ICCF tournaments computers are allowed with draw rate in excess of 90%. so engine ban keep the competition meaningful

@petri999 said in #11:
> so engine ban keep the competition meaningful

If you want to compete, then why not just play a rated game or enter a tournament? I don't go into a library thinking I am going to be graded.

Deadban: When the rules are so absurd that a sensible person cannot even imagine them, , many players will have been banned without even suspecting why.
That could be me: Mi first assumption was that it must surely be a bug.
Im not "kept cheating" because i wasent cheating in the first place.

OK. Whatever. I goint to create an acount in FlyOrDie.
Bye

@TropicBird said in #1:
> Do you really think someone is going to play by mail without consulting an engine?

Yes.

Wdym play by mail?

@OneMoveBeyond said in #10:
> That appears to be in context of a rated game or perhaps a tournament where prizes are awarded. An educational unrated game should have both players looking up and studying from databases, books, and tools like software programs which might have engines.
>
> To not allow it is silly and takes away from good training opportunities.
U can use studies for tht

Funny how people who are caught doing wrong always think they're sensible and that the rules are absurd.

@OneMoveBeyond said in #10:
> That appears to be in context of a rated game or perhaps a tournament where prizes are awarded.
If engines were not banned in unrated games, the TOS would have specifically stated so.
You also cannot assume anything when regarding formal documents.

@InkyDarkBird said in #18:
> You also cannot assume anything when regarding formal documents.

But also in this case the assumption ("appears to be in context of a rated game") is clearly refuted by the formal document.
The table clearly shows NO for "Chess engine" in real-time (rated or casual) and in correspondence.