Response from Caught Cheater - Worth Reading

Maybe they thought that it was time, maybe they thought it was warranted by the instance of losing Lizard87. It is important for a community to go through a psychological catharsis related to the loss/adjustment. So a thread can happen, I don't see it as in any way confusing or hypocritical. Maybe the subtle caveat on the end of the "cheating discussion policy"... "unless the staff sees fit to start one."

 Ok, you're welcome to your opinion but I disagree. To me 14 pages of cheating discussion without anyone stepping in is rather counter-intuitive against the staff's idea of trying to lessen the cheating paranoia whatever way one looks at it.

babs, it helps to understand the timeline behind the rules on posting about cheating.

1. Originally, it was ok to post forum topics about cheating. It was against the rules to name names, unless that user had already been banned for cheating.
2. Because there were too many of these threads, and new ones would pop up all the time (and probably because they were crowding the "recent forum posts" space), they decided to create a single cheating forum topic and to lock all other ones that were created. Also around this time, they decided to create another topic dedicated exclusively to posting names of banned users.
3. #2 went on for quite awhile, but then ultimately they decided to create a Cheating Discussion group. It had the benefit of no longer having the single topic in the recent forum posts, and also had the benefit of allowing multiple topics, and had the drawback of being an opt-in group, so that a barrier to entry reduced the total postings and contributions.

Fair enough - I was just speculating on what I imagine their rationale is.

But you don't actually see any difference between a silly, member-created discussion like "lol how do you cheat in chess" on the forums and one due to the extenuating circumstances of having caught a mod cheating, and who offered not only that momentary example but then added his apology on top of it as perhaps warranting a unique exeption? Shrug.

FWIW, my deleted message was deleted by me.  Something weird happend in the "Save & preview" window while I was editing, possibly because I had two tabs open -- one for looking at posts on earlier pages and one for actually entering text. Somehow I ended up with the same message in the edting box of both tabs and it wouldn't let me get out of either one by simply deleting one of the copies.  So I ended up posting the same message twice, and then deleting the duplicate.  Two people managed to post in the interim, so the deleted one is actually three spaces after my first.  It does sort of look like I started to say something else and thought the better of it, but that wasn't the case.

I wasn't suggesting that at all Bigpoison.  All I was saying is that Maslow's hierarchy of needs is considered by most academics as being rather dated, there are more sophisticated models now that better explain what Maslow was describing.  In no way was this meant as a slight on Maslow or his model.

The staff's given reason for not allowing cheating discussion is that it creates unnecessary paranoia, not that it bores people to death. I don't see that this topic will create any less paranoia than the less interesting ones based on cheating. Shrug.

For my part, he's:

1.  Forgiven, as he already apologized;

2.  To be Remembered, for his openness and past positive contributions;

3.  An Example, for the just consequences of cheating, and the proper way of parting by stating he is not coming back to the site - which he enjoyed and wished the best of luck.

This is the bit I don't agree with.  Why should he be remembered for his openess?  Why hold him up as some sort of shining example of maturity and as a couple of posters put it 'guts'. 

I think it is a shame, and wrong, that people who do things wrong and then apologise/make good/etc/etc are then given more accolades than those here that don't do anything wrong to start with!

Agreed -- since when is using an engine to improve your play while concealing that fact from your opponents openness?  He only opened up once he was caught and there was nothing left to hide.

I agree with the honorable delegate Suggo.

On the one hand you have the prodigal son.

On the other hand, to all those who enjoyed their time with the individual in question, and who value said individual's contribution to the site: This person, every single time they logged in, was perpetuating a lie. This person is not the person you thought they were. One can argue that of course (of course!) they enjoyed their time here -- winning lots of games, being held in high regard by the general population, being in a position of authority. The persona they created, no matter what you may choose to believe, was all based on a lie.

Which hand? I'm not so sure I believe everything I wrote there on the second hand, but there's got to be some truth there.

HARIKIRI

It serves to reduce paranoia because it demonstrates that the staff is on task as far as eliminating cheating - they caught one of their very own, no one is above getting eliminated in this way.

Moreover, the fact that he owns up to how foolish having made the decisions he did serves as an example to others who might be tempted to start.

Both pertinent reasons to break the code momentarily and bring this to the community as an exemplary warning - a special exception.

Sure, some people in this thread might be running with it a tad... eagerly, inadvisably. But then, we can't control what others do.

All I was offering is why I can understand the staff's choice in this matter.

Cheating discussions are never "boring", nor was I implying that - they are almost by definition heated. All I'm suggesting is why this special circumstance warranted a temporary breach of the staff's own rules (which, being the people that set them, they are more than allowed to temporarily suspend).

What is the point if you have to cheat to win.You might fool someone else but not yourself. Vinny

Ok, it appears you've got me, again. *Note to self* Stop trying to win a debate against Rael! lol

I find it absolutely bone crushing funny that people cheat online. I know people personally that MUST be cheating because I stomp them at the club each week OTB and they have expert ratings here, yahoo and FICS. What a joke. Let em cheat. They must really feel like idiots when they actually have to play face to face with someone.

Fellow chessmate Suggo, I used the word "remembered" within its strictest context.  It isn't a form of an accolade or the like, coz we all abhor cheating.

Thus, for this unhappy incident, I'll simply remember 1-his apology for cheating, 2-his openness on his cheating , and 3-his pledge not to come back anymore to this site.

Now, how about a game of chess? Just kidding... (",)

Why would you want to remember his openness?

I wouldn't term it as "I want to",

but simply "I remember in that unhappy incident that he apologized, eventually opened up, and pledged not to make a comeback in this site."

So there, just a statement of facts.