Chess.com FAQs and Discussion on Cheating

Erik and his team have my complete faith that they are doing the right thing regarding potential cheaters and cheating detection.

I think that he goes out of his way to ensure that any policies they have protect the members, first and foremost.

? What's not valid? If you're using your real name, loss of reputation can involve damages... -- suppose Mr. RealHandle is a professional chess player who gives lessons... or a lawyer, or an accountant, or a journalist, or a politician... someone who is not supposed to be lying about their chess skills, or just not supposed to be lying, period. When their name is damaged online that person would have real world $ damages. Proving damages does NOT involve having to find someone who will testify they would have given you money. It involves convincing judge and jury that such people exist. Nor do we need to have some specific dollars amount that is at issue... How much exactly a reputation is worth is hard to figure, but that's exactly what the lawyers are there to do... argue about the amount. 

I just don't think it would happen. Maybe -- maybe, if it were a bored law student, but then why are they spending so much time on chess.com anyways!

Boredom? 

For the record, mine as well. 

I wasn't trying to suggest it was likely (although betting that someone _won't_ bring a ridiculous lawsuit doesn't sound like a bet I want to make), just taking issue with the 'not Valid' statement someone made earlier. It didn't make sense to me. A libel action seems possible to me, if not especially worrying.

Agreed - and one of the first questions should be how does this site compare with other sites?

And when you balance the phantom risk of a lawsuit (I can't believe I'm even writing that) against the very real publishing of detection methodologies, it's not even close.

Why can't we just put our faith in the website management? It's not like we need to be convinced that everybody accused is in fact cheating. I mean, who cares?

@TheGrobe [#494] LOL

Yeah, that's the right attitude. I also trust Erik and the team and don't really care about anything else but playing chess and getting better at it.

As to the possible legal ramifications of publishing the names of purported cheaters, those who are scoffing should not do so too easily. The threat of damaging a real reputation by the public shaming of a purported cheater that is done here is real. These are the days when employers and HR departments (mine included) regularly scan Facebook, Twitter, private webpages and others for information on a candidate or employee. Nowadays, the news regularly has stories about people who have had job offers or places at university withdrawn or have been fired because of something that has been put online. So... yeah... if the site admins name someone, and he is branded a cheater for all the world, they better be able to back it up or, yes, a lawsuit is possible and (one day) probably likely, considering how litigous the US and the UK are, as just two examples. And I don't think the issue is that the "loss" they suffer by the shaming need be only financial, only substantial.

Perhaps this is part of why so much effort goes into verifying that cheating has in fact occurred instead simply closing accounts in a cavalier manner.  I'm certainly comforted as a member of this site that there is evidently a high degree of due diligence performed before punishment is meted out, but perhaps the rationale behind this is driven as much from a risk management standpoint as it is in deference to the desire to give users the benefit of the doubt.

Remember:  Neither libel nor slander has occurred if the statement is true.

If true, then kudos all the more to Erik and the team for being willing to run that risk.  

Employers looking to facebook accounts or others ... that is something really disturbing. I mean, what if I take the name of my boss who recently fired me, photoshop some bikini pictures of him on the beach with his secretary, and make a facebook account displaying them? It doesn't mean that my boss actually set up that account. Also, what if different persons have the same name? I discovered I have accounts on Facebook or Linkedln for instance, just googling my name.

As for the cheaters issue: this website - like any other website - has the right to refuse the access of any person. The reasons might be legitimate or not. The same thing would be with a store, not allowing naked people to go shopping. 

As for legitimate reasons, some people doubt that Erik & the rest of the staff are right when they say that X cheated. Others say that they trust Erik. I think that nobody needs to trust anybody: it is relatively easy to examine the games of banned cheaters using an engine. Myself, in the cases I reported  - and almost all of them were confirmed by chess.com - I have absolutely no doubt. I am 100% certain that, if the persons I reported don't cheat, then absolutely nobody cheats.

Costelus: I am sorry but I don't understand the logic behind your statement. Let me try to re-phrase the last piece, to make sure I understand what your point is.

You don't believe Erik/staff when they say that person X cheated.
You have several cases where you reported someone and they have not (yet) been banned.
Therefore, you don't trust their conclusions.

I don't follow - it seems to me that the two most obvious explanations are that either their bar is set too high, or that the process takes too long for your preference. (I know that at least one person that you reported "with overwhelming evidence" has had their account closed).

Please help me understand your viewpoint.

Sorry ... my wooden tongue or my squared head :) I wanted to say that I have no doubt about the guilt of the cheaters who were banned, and this can be easily checked with an engine.

There is only one case when I reported someone and that person was not banned. But I agree the evidence in that case was not overwhelming, and that person does not cheat in all the games he/she plays here.

I don't have the time or energy to check opponents against an engine. I don't even have an engine.

This is why I trust Erik and his team that they are doing the right thing with regards to addressing this issue.

 As I posted before: I also trust Erik and his team, but I really don't care if I play against a cheater. Cheat all you want, I'm just going to play the best I can.

Habeas corpus

I'm just not sure it is a risk worth running. I really enjoy this site. Would hate to see the talented and hard-working guys behind it getting stuffed just because they feel more and more pressure from their membership to "punish" suspected cheaters with a public shame list. One day or another some disgruntled soul w/ deep enough pockets is going to put this policy to the test.... I just don't see the reason to run the risk. Why not just ban the purported cheater and move on... it's the whole emblazoning the cheater's name on a running list thing that can cause future problems. Unnecessary. Just close the account and make it disappear.

 exactly how i feel

That is exactly my position as well and I was happy to find out that I have lost 4 games against 2 opponents and a few days later their names were on the cheating list here!

As rating points here mean nothing to me, I was happy because I think I played well against the 2 cheaters and that is enough to me...

It's difficult to prevent these things to happen in the online chess world, but I also trust Erik and his team and I really don't care if my opponent is cheating or not...