№ 106,
Interesting. I had previously thumbed up that first comment simply because of his closing words: “and do not breach the terms of service.” Telling people in that position to never cheat again certainly seemed like good advice. 😅 I have now retracted that reaction; however, I still have mixed feelings about the comment in question, since I think it’s possible to read it the way I did — i.e., as simply saying something like, “If you ever want to play here again, then next time never cheat.” (Taking it for granted that you won’t get your old account back. But perhaps I was wrong to take that for granted.) That’s all I got from it when I read it the first time; but on consideration, I can see how you might interpret it differently — perhaps as even encouraging cheaters to try again (yikes) — and while I doubt that was his intention, I understand & respect your position regarding such casual advice.
That said, I can think of one other spurious remark he made in recent history: lichess.org/forum/general-chess-discussion/correspondence-cheat#3 Here he confidently states that it’s impossible to tell if people cheat in correspondence games; and yet that can’t be true, as I know of people who’ve been caught doing it. I know there is even an algorithm in place for detecting similar positions on the Analysis Board when you’ve a correspondence game in progress, and for this reason I have always been careful not to analyze similar games till my current one is finished. 😅 (Probably I’m more paranoid about that than I need to be.) Anyway, I doubt if it’s a bannable offense, but he was overly dismissive of Lichess’s cheat detection, which I’m sure is better than he says it is (or at least implies).
In both cases, even if the substance of what he said is true, I notice he has expressed it quite confidently, and *seemingly* with little regard for this platform (at least you could read it that way). So going forward, perhaps all he needs is a touch more humility when saying such things. 🤷 Hey, that’s something we all need to work on 😇, and tpr has it extra tough because he’s in the public eye. I’m not criticizing, I’m sympathizing: in his position, it pays to go out of your way to be respectful, since others will likely follow your example; and if they interpret you as disrespecting Lichess — correctly or not — that could make you something of a potential rabble rouser. A tiny bit more deference toward the powers that be, or perhaps even just less certainty about one’s own opinions, could go a long way towards allaying such suspicions. 🙂 This is something I continue to work at myself whenever I write in these forums. (And continue to do an imperfect job of. Especially when drunk posting. 😇) Tone is hard to convey in writing.
* * *
To everyone who thumbed down Sarg0n’s № 89: His was the most sensible theory anyone had advanced in this thread, until somethingpretentious told us what really happened. When you post essentially the same advice in multiple places, it’s at least plausible that could trigger some kind of spam filter. 🤷 Anyway, he did preface his comment by saying it was just one possible theory, so give him a break. Contra № 91, at least his idea makes *some* sense.
Finally, to really believe we’d be better off without any moderation on this entire website, you’d need to be suicidally insane. . . . I for one am grateful for the necessary work the moderators do here. Theirs is often a thankless job, and we really should give them some respect for the way they do it, which 999 times out of 1,000 is really ideal. We also need to try harder to respect other users’ privacy. ;( On that note, I want to close by saying I am actually very impressed that they kept the details of this a secret unflinchingly, till tpr himself requested otherwise. In the unlikely event that I am ever in a similar position to his, I will know the details of my indiscretion are safely between me and Lichess. And that is very good to know! Despite what some others have said, it doesn’t diminish my trust in any way.
Cheers
Interesting. I had previously thumbed up that first comment simply because of his closing words: “and do not breach the terms of service.” Telling people in that position to never cheat again certainly seemed like good advice. 😅 I have now retracted that reaction; however, I still have mixed feelings about the comment in question, since I think it’s possible to read it the way I did — i.e., as simply saying something like, “If you ever want to play here again, then next time never cheat.” (Taking it for granted that you won’t get your old account back. But perhaps I was wrong to take that for granted.) That’s all I got from it when I read it the first time; but on consideration, I can see how you might interpret it differently — perhaps as even encouraging cheaters to try again (yikes) — and while I doubt that was his intention, I understand & respect your position regarding such casual advice.
That said, I can think of one other spurious remark he made in recent history: lichess.org/forum/general-chess-discussion/correspondence-cheat#3 Here he confidently states that it’s impossible to tell if people cheat in correspondence games; and yet that can’t be true, as I know of people who’ve been caught doing it. I know there is even an algorithm in place for detecting similar positions on the Analysis Board when you’ve a correspondence game in progress, and for this reason I have always been careful not to analyze similar games till my current one is finished. 😅 (Probably I’m more paranoid about that than I need to be.) Anyway, I doubt if it’s a bannable offense, but he was overly dismissive of Lichess’s cheat detection, which I’m sure is better than he says it is (or at least implies).
In both cases, even if the substance of what he said is true, I notice he has expressed it quite confidently, and *seemingly* with little regard for this platform (at least you could read it that way). So going forward, perhaps all he needs is a touch more humility when saying such things. 🤷 Hey, that’s something we all need to work on 😇, and tpr has it extra tough because he’s in the public eye. I’m not criticizing, I’m sympathizing: in his position, it pays to go out of your way to be respectful, since others will likely follow your example; and if they interpret you as disrespecting Lichess — correctly or not — that could make you something of a potential rabble rouser. A tiny bit more deference toward the powers that be, or perhaps even just less certainty about one’s own opinions, could go a long way towards allaying such suspicions. 🙂 This is something I continue to work at myself whenever I write in these forums. (And continue to do an imperfect job of. Especially when drunk posting. 😇) Tone is hard to convey in writing.
* * *
To everyone who thumbed down Sarg0n’s № 89: His was the most sensible theory anyone had advanced in this thread, until somethingpretentious told us what really happened. When you post essentially the same advice in multiple places, it’s at least plausible that could trigger some kind of spam filter. 🤷 Anyway, he did preface his comment by saying it was just one possible theory, so give him a break. Contra № 91, at least his idea makes *some* sense.
Finally, to really believe we’d be better off without any moderation on this entire website, you’d need to be suicidally insane. . . . I for one am grateful for the necessary work the moderators do here. Theirs is often a thankless job, and we really should give them some respect for the way they do it, which 999 times out of 1,000 is really ideal. We also need to try harder to respect other users’ privacy. ;( On that note, I want to close by saying I am actually very impressed that they kept the details of this a secret unflinchingly, till tpr himself requested otherwise. In the unlikely event that I am ever in a similar position to his, I will know the details of my indiscretion are safely between me and Lichess. And that is very good to know! Despite what some others have said, it doesn’t diminish my trust in any way.
Cheers
