Chessbase banned by site rules?!

Just now someone said that chessbase is against site rules because it has an engine installed on it. What does that have to do with the price of tea in China or a vote chess game since the engine is only used to analyze games upon completion and has otherwise never been used. What he actually found suspicious was my database move choices and positional understanding. Maybe a relevant question would be does Chessbases mega database automatically contain engine lines upon purchase? I don't think it does and my understanding was that only occured when someone added analyzed games to a database. I also thought the sentence structure of the site rules said just that there was no engine evaluation of a position of a game in progress. I think this guy is really just a jealous idiot, so I quit his clubs. But since this is such a controversy, I'm asking. 

Daily style games allow the use of databases, as long as engines aren't being used to evaluate positions and the database isn't engine derived or includes numerical evaluations of positions.

https://support.chess.com/article/648-what-do-i-need-to-know-about-fair-play-on-chess-com

Thanks that's what I thought and that's what I'm doing. I think this guy is misinterpreting the site rules or thinks I have the engine turned on when loading the position. I'm really furious with these people accusing others of cheating when all I did was work hard on his stupid games. He's not the first person to claim cheating simply because I know better than to move how he's moving. Although I got plenty of good positional ideas from him. He thinks when I play the odds with percentages in the database, that it's a numerical evaluation when really it's statistical. As if anyone with a better idea than his at a given moment couldn't have had better intuition. It seems to me there's this weird type of person who doesn't understand their own psychology and the real reason they're saying something. Translation his pride is hurt by my overruling some of his moves.

I've heard this argument before but that isn't what they mean by engine derived lines. The fault seems to be that they needed to be more elaborate when writing the rules. They're talking about engine analysis being mapped out and added to the database. Not humanly played engine prepared grandmaster games contained within the database because that's just the evolution of the game. Chess.com is no fool and can tell the difference. They don't discuss their algorithm but if player x go's on for many moves and games where their play consistently eliminates branches of lines favorable to the opponent and would have to calculate tens of thousands of lines to know what the less obvious moves were worth, then too many of these subtle moves or this constant pruning would obviously not be humanly calculable. It doesn't matter who does it they'll know. Besides all of this, it's not socially acceptable to tell someone they're cheating. He should have reread the rules and reported it saying he wasn't sure but just checking. I only play daily as I feel only the best solutions are chess whereas many people just want to get on with the game. Someone cheated against me once but they can't do anything about it because they need more than one sample game. The main purpose of this forum is to get feedback to message this guy and confront him. Apparently he does not know what the rules mean exactly and he doesn't know how the Chessbase GUI works. Even if that's an honest mistake, the mistaken party will be galled by my logical response of how this should have gone.

After 50 years of playing Daily chess I’ve decided to call it a day… (for the above  stated issues). Just to many players playing at extremely high levels and never, ever being banned anymore. Seems it’s nigh near impossible to detect engine use nowadays ( that can be proven as “outside assistance” ) even when it’s so obviously evident. Come the final rounds of tournaments honest players stand little chance at present.

They do ban people for cheating.  Yes i said the dreaded "C" word.  But banning people is like putting your finger in holes in a damn.  It looks good but doesnt really stop the flood.

Many solutions though engine derived are common knowledge and part and parcel to not playing in certain lines so I don't think those count. There's just no adding engine vs. engine games or deliberately covering all the bases in an opening with an engine so that there are numerical evaluations in the pgn's. I've never been suspicious about losing on my own blunders. There was just this one certain time where the opponent was better than a grandmaster despite making terrible mistakes in vote chess forums. When I compared his calculations to what would have been required in that game, I knew there was no way it was human. Yet when I've lost to very strong opponents I didn't find anything suspicious about it. He was a lower rated guy that suddenly played better than 2200 rated opponents. I have beaten chessica, little chess partner and drew against Rybka and Houdini timed out so anything is possible. This business of the boy who cried engine must end and all such matters should be directed to the staff. I won't give up on daily and I don't think I frequently face engines. It's seldom acknowledged that there are daily players better than some grandmasters not because of their resources but because they have several days per move to find answers. The grandmaster will just sit down and play like he does over the board as if there was an invisible clock hounding him/her. I played a grandmaster and he only escaped with a draw because I didn't find a precise move. But he didn't look very good at all. It's a tough time control and this gives some people the illusion that it must be cheating. Interestingly enough, Grandmasters turn to correspondence moves as part of their prep. I played vote chess with an account that was rumored to be John Nunn. It was an awesome sight, he single handedly defeated an entire team and they didn't stand a chance. He could explain how it all worked and was highly knowledgeable and many people thought it was an engine but I doubt it because he was so articulate. Engine users can't explain what they're doing. That kind of talent coupled with that amount of time made him formidable. He talked about general consensuses among grandmasters with all our moves. Jesse Krai was also losing to me in the world vs. GM events that took place years ago but the voters wouldn't vote for my moves. I'll say no more about that event because people who were there know what really went on with it. I don't even use Chessbase to it's full potential and haven't updated it or added my games. I also don't know how many features work. It's like having to take a Microsoft course for typing. I was certain my intermittent errors was a sure sign I was human but apparently not to some people.

Getting banned in Daily is a result of carelessness or ignorance- rarely the result of piece play.

Well I'm confident. If there really are people doing that, They amount to more difficult opposition and I have to rise to the occasion. It's at that point, when the human player is so good that the engine user would use too many engine moves and get caught. The real question is what sort of weirdo builds an online personality with their lack of integrity and strength at it's core. Romantic chess wants to know who is best with full honor intact. These engine user don't love the game enough to want to know how strong they are or what it means for reputation, fulfillment and satisfaction to go hand in hand with integrity. See that's the thing. To me, Someone questioning anyone's integrity by accusing cheating is the same as going around calling people thieves and rapists. And I've come to the conclusion that instead of reacting right away, I have to tell this person just what it is he's calling me, inform him of the site rules and then become an opponent that always works to make sure he never wins. It's ridiculous really, because he's a titled player too and knows nothing about the only professional choice of software or the time control rules and isn't interested that most people didn't contribute on the team. A couple of vote chess captains recently were banned. People want to appear strong without really being. Here's another one for you. In 2011 coach Joshi Kiev abandoned our game when he realized he would lose a knight. I suppose he cried engine too. I rarely encounter engines. I never lose to some grand scheme, just to my own common blunders. My navigation through the database sees me playing in 2300 -2500 variations on average. What would be the point of building a huge lead in the opening with an engine and then squandering the whole game in one move? I think the time has come now to message this person. 

Lol I just went to his profile to message him and he blocked me. Is it because he saw this forum? Is it because when I left it was a sign I was an engine to him? That's what I'm talking about, he wouldn't face the music. I'm going to get that guy. His rating range is no big deal. Isn't there this kind of person who is so self unaware that their own psychology is hidden from them? Like he blocked me before I said all this in person. Or he's so ignorant about daily rules that he's in a playdough cave where I must have cheated. Or he's so careless with team mismanagement that any sign of diligence or professional behavior in a player is just them and their engine wanting to steal his spotlight.

I was able to message him in a vote chess game I hadn't quit yet. I simply told it like it was without any hoopla. Now he's declined my challenge to play. Someone here is suspicious but not me.