1) It is no longer permitted to discuss cheating publicly on chess.com. Not only cheating, but also talking about it creates bad atmosphere between players. It is staff's bussines.
2) If you were doing it somewhere it has been permitted (e.g. ICCF), it wasn't cheating. But i still recommend to minimize outside help (other player, computer engine). Chess is royal and gentlemen's game, real chessplayers never ask for help.
As someone who started playing chess online with the 'aid' of a computer (for my first five-ten games in my facebook chess account), it took me a few months to realize how much of a disservice I was doing to myself by not allowing myself to play the moves I wanted to play. I simply wanted to win, and had convinced myself that I was still learning even though I didn't always make a move based entirely on my own analysis. Eventually I saw what I was doing as nothing but cheating. So I stopped. (I'm proud of myself to say I've only used a computer for post-game analysis here on chess.com).
What I have come to realize is that by playing the moves I want to play, that I see clearly when I have good ideas, and when I don't. One example I have found humbling is to realize that I've made a move that a computer liked (upon analyzing it), but that I haven't followed it up how the machine would have. Thus, the initial move was more luck/intuition, or just perhaps one of a couple natural moves in the position.
Another observation is that there are games where BOTH me and the other player miss the 'best' move, and I still win despite playing an inferior move. Often times the combination is then noticed by both players a move later, and well, the human side of chess is unveiled. My first games using a computer on facebook using a computer simply didn't teach me very much. I was never clear the reasons behind every line I considered (other than 'the comp confirmed my idea was best', no matter how misled I was), and I've found I'm learning a lot more by looking at certain wins/and losses that have come entirely of my unaided analysis. I see more clearly the strategies and necessary calculations needed to play sharper openings (e.g. sicilians), and am wiser for the many losses I've enjoyed here on chess.com.
I look at the games where I have spent the most time and see fewer mistakes. But moreso than simple mistakes I see my own understanding of my strengths and weaknesses come to the forefront. For instance, I know I can calculate with the best of them. I've found six or seven move forced mates. But the real challenge that I struggle with, is to know when to pour that energy into calculating in the first place. I took the 'chess exam' by IM Khmelnitsky and was surprised to see my unilaterally good scores in the 'A' range, except for calculation. (note that he splits calculation and tactics). And the biggest thing I see in his recommendations for me is to know when to calculate and when not to (based on static vs dynamic positions).
I would venture to guess that most people who endeavor to learn here on chess.com actually realize the points I've made above. However, if one of you who might be using a computer occasionally can understand how much they're hurting themselves by having a computer play a move for them, then I'm happy I posted here.
A FINAL note: if you think you're playing over a game to 'see' what the computer would do (part of my thinking when I did it on facebook!), I suggest that you simply GO OVER AN ANNOTATED GAME, covering up the moves on one side and seeing how often you match up, why, etc. You'll get a lot more helpful feedback! And this is a universally understood necessary step to get better.
Peace, and I'd appreciate any positive comments about something you take away from what I shared here.