Arimaa Forum
        (http://arimaa.com/arimaa/forum/cgi/YaBB.cgi)
      

        Team Games >> 2010 Arimaa World League >> Round 5 Nombril v. 722caasi: 722caasi disqualified
        
(Message started by: megajester on Jun 20th, 2010, 1:06pm)
Title: Round 5 Nombril v. 722caasi: 722caasi disqualified
Post by megajester on Jun 20th, 2010, 1:06pm
Based on IP logs it has been determined that Guest 13301, who was signed into the chatroom for the duration of 722caasi's game against Nombril, was in fact 722caasi. This is in clear and brazen violation of Amendment B in the League Rules: "While a game is being played there shall be no communication between any one of the players and anybody else concerning Arimaa. Such communication includes, but is not limited to, being signed in to the chatroom or the Teamspeak client. Any infringement of this rule shall result in forfeit subject to the discretion of the opposing player."

Because this is a case of willful cheating, the League Director and I have agreed to declare 722caasi's game a forfeit, and bar him from any participation in this League and any other League starting in 2010.

I would like to add that I am outraged at 722caasi's actions. Letting his team down like this is inexcusable, but more than that he has trampled on our core values of sportsmanship and mutual respect. I hope he will learn from this. However I find it hard to see how an individual who has not even divulged his name will succeed in regaining the trust of his teammates and the wider Arimaa community.
Title: Re: Round 5 Nombril v. 722caasi: 722caasi disquali
Post by Fritzlein on Jun 20th, 2010, 2:02pm
This is disappointing and sad.  We have known for a long time that someone can cheat via the chatroom archive without even logging in.  A cheater need only refresh the archive each move to look for good moves or plans that have been suggested.  If 722caasi had done this, he wouldn't have been caught.  Probably someone has already cheated this way in the past and not been caught.  Until now, however, I could delude myself with the happy thought that everyone here values the fun of the game more than they value winning.

Now that my illusion is shattered, I won't ever be comfortable chatting about a live game again.  Every time I suggest a move and that move is played, the ugly thought will occur to me that the player just read the chat archive.  Other readers will suspect the same.  The only way for a player to avoid suspicion will be to play something that nobody suggested in chat, which of course they can't be sure to do if they are not reading the archive.

Perhaps it would be possible to still give commentary via TeamSpeak if the logins to Teamspeak were password protected instead of being open.  There is no archive of the audio until after the game.  True, someone could have a friend listen in to Teamspeak and relay moves via phone, but at least no single bad apple could spoil the barrel, because an accomplice would be necessary.  If there were another suspicious correlation between commentary suggestions and actually-played moves, at least we would know exactly who could have passed on the information.

Until we have a closed system for commentary, however, I won't be giving any more, either in chat or in TeamSpeak.  Cheaters will find a way, but I won't volunteer my brainwaves to their assistance.  Hopefully we can get some kind of patch in place in time for the 2011 World Championship so that at least those games can have live audio.

Unfortunately, in only a few more years, we will have to face the reality that Internet games can barely be shielded from cheating at all.  If Arimaa gets larger and more serious, every contestant will be required to have a sworn witness present during all games to verify that he received no assistance, or else the World Championship will have to become a face-to-face tournament that 90% of the community won't be able to afford to attend.

Thanks, 722cassi, for making us face this unpleasant reality.  (Naturally my compliments about your excellent play are revoked. :P)
Title: Re: Round 5 Nombril v. 722caasi: 722caasi disquali
Post by Eltripas on Jun 20th, 2010, 3:40pm
Wow, that was unexpected, isn't there a way to force the players to be logged in the chat room to check the archive?
Title: Re: Round 5 Nombril v. 722caasi: 722caasi disquali
Post by ocmiente on Jun 20th, 2010, 4:10pm
That's too bad.  Especially losing Fritz' commentary.  His commentary is extremely helpful, and I hate to think that this can't be fixed somehow.  

I suspect that this has come up before?  I figured that if the spectators could only view a game after a  5 minute delay or something, that might be enough to get around this problem - but I also figure that someone has already recommended that and there's a reason why that won't work...
Title: Re: Round 5 Nombril v. 722caasi: 722caasi disquali
Post by 722caasi on Jun 20th, 2010, 6:59pm
I'm really sorry. I shouldn't have cheated, I let my team down. I am withdrawing myself from the Rockies. I'll never do anything like this again.
Title: Re: Round 5 Nombril v. 722caasi: 722caasi disquali
Post by Fritzlein on Jun 20th, 2010, 7:57pm

on 06/20/10 at 18:59:32, 722caasi wrote:
I'm really sorry. I shouldn't have cheated, I let my team down. I am withdrawing myself from the Rockies. I'll never do anything like this again.

Thanks for admitting it, and thanks for apologizing.  I'll see you in the 2011 Arimaa World League.
Title: Re: Round 5 Nombril v. 722caasi: 722caasi disquali
Post by leo on Jun 20th, 2010, 8:33pm

on 06/20/10 at 15:40:06, Eltripas wrote:
isn't there a way to force the players to be logged in the chat room to check the archive?

It looks like an important feature request for the next version of the chatroom.
Let's have permalinks to the archive but forbid direct access to the recent log slice?
This would require separate authentications for the gameroom and the chatroom.

Double logins are harder to check because legitimate players might connect from the same LAN sometimes.

Anyway I'm very puzzled by the idea of peeking into the chat while playing.
Doing so would just confuse me and make me lose all my games. LOL
Title: Re: Round 5 Nombril v. 722caasi: 722caasi disquali
Post by Harren on Jun 20th, 2010, 11:40pm
Too bad...

Is there no way to put a password on the teamspeak server? If not, there should be other audio-chat programs that we might use?

As others have mentioned, Fritz's live commentaries are very helpful in learning this game..
Title: Re: Round 5 Nombril v. 722caasi: 722caasi disquali
Post by Fritzlein on Jun 21st, 2010, 1:41am

on 06/20/10 at 23:40:52, Harren wrote:
As others have mentioned, Fritz's live commentaries are very helpful in learning this game..

... especially helpful in learning how to beat the opponent you are currently playing.  ;)  But for the record, the key move that enabled 722caasi to rescue a difficult position was a suggestion from Sconibulus that I didn't see or even understand at first.  So it isn't just my chatting that can tip the balance of a game for a cheater.

I'm glad we are thinking about solutions for making it less tempting to listen in to commentary, because I enjoy giving it as well as hearing it from others, and I feel it adds a lot to the community.  But I also think that live cheating takes more away from the community than live commentary adds.  >:(
Title: Re: Round 5 Nombril v. 722caasi: 722caasi disquali
Post by Harren on Jun 21st, 2010, 2:16am
It seems the arimaa teamspeak server can be protected by a password. Perhaps the procedure for live commentary can then be as follows:
1. give a few active (trusted) arimaa players admin powers over the teamspeak server.

2. Before the beginning of a live commentary, one of these players present will change the password (this player is either chosen in advance from the players from 1, or whoever of these players is online before the game).

3. Anyone wanting to listen in should indicate so to the chosen player, who will pm them the password.

Of course, this does not directly solve the problem of duplicate accounts. However, one might decide to only give the password to ``known'' players?
Title: Re: Round 5 Nombril v. 722caasi: 722caasi disquali
Post by chessandgo on Jun 21st, 2010, 2:26am
My take on this is that live commentary via both the chatroom and teamspeak should continue. Possible cheating should not deter anyone from contributing to the overall spreading of arimaa knowledge. I wouldn't mind losing to a player who would have cheated this way, or at least much less than I would mind Fritzl (and others) having to keep his opinions to himself. Strategic and tactical live chat is a great way for everyone to improve their game in my opinion, and that's what really matters.
Title: Re: Round 5 Nombril v. 722caasi: 722caasi disquali
Post by megajester on Jun 21st, 2010, 2:31am
The League's purpose is partly to improve our game, yes, but it's also about having a competitive tournament. Take away the last part and you'll kill the League spirit. Cheating must be taken seriously.

I reckon the whole thing could be solved by disallowing simultaneous logins to the gameroom from the same IP, and not allowing guests to log into Teamspeak. Of course we can't prevent all cheating, but this will at least allow commentary to go on unhindered. Unless I'm missing something here...
Title: Re: Round 5 Nombril v. 722caasi: 722caasi disquali
Post by RonWeasley on Jun 21st, 2010, 4:45am

on 06/20/10 at 18:59:32, 722caasi wrote:
I'm really sorry. I shouldn't have cheated, I let my team down. I am withdrawing myself from the Rockies. I'll never do anything like this again.

This is a significant statement that justifies, for me, Omar's decision not to impose heavier penalties immediately.

On future commentary, I'm with chessandgo in wanting it to continue.  Maybe I'm too trusting, but I don't think a serious contender in the WC or future AWL would try to win by using outside help, chatroom or bots.  Additionally, this community is very perceptive, and I expect any consistent cheating behavior would get noticed and exposed, like this was.
Title: Re: Round 5 Nombril v. 722caasi: 722caasi disquali
Post by chessandgo on Jun 21st, 2010, 6:43am

on 06/21/10 at 02:31:41, megajester wrote:
The League's purpose is partly to improve our game, yes, but it's also about having a competitive tournament. Take away the last part and you'll kill the League spirit. Cheating must be taken seriously.


I meant for the WC as well as for the League (or any other event).
Title: Re: Round 5 Nombril v. 722caasi: 722caasi disquali
Post by megajester on Jun 21st, 2010, 6:56am

on 06/21/10 at 02:26:31, chessandgo wrote:
I wouldn't mind losing to a player who would have cheated this way.

I know where you're coming from, and I'm all for advancing Arimaa knowledge, but I for one definitely would mind.
Title: Re: Round 5 Nombril v. 722caasi: 722caasi disquali
Post by janineb on Jun 21st, 2010, 8:49am
I an 722caasi's mother and I would also like to give my sincere apology for my son's behavior.  He truly loves playing Arimaa and wanted so much to win for himself and his team that he made a very poor decision.  You can be assured that I am working with him to help him understand the true impact of what he did and how important it is for him to never do anything like this in the future.  He is a very smart kid and this is the first time he's done anything like this to my knowledge.  Part of growing up is making mistakes and learning from them and this is a very important learning experience for him. I'm sorry for the impact what he has done has had on the community and I hope that everyone will find a way to maintain this site's warm and collegial environment while building in greater security against cheating.
Title: Re: Round 5 Nombril v. 722caasi: 722caasi disquali
Post by Fritzlein on Jun 21st, 2010, 11:15am

on 06/21/10 at 04:45:50, RonWeasley wrote:
Additionally, this community is very perceptive, and I expect any consistent cheating behavior would get noticed and exposed, like this was.

There's a big difference between cheating that is noticed and cheating that is proved.  It was just a fluke that Omar could produce hard evidence in this case to go along with a suspicious correlation between good moves on the board and suggestions that had been made in chat.

Imagine that we continue as we have with commentary, and a few good moves from chat appear on the board.  The loser of the game reads the chat archive and cries foul.  Maybe we have our suspicions, but what can we do about it?  Tell the winner that he isn't good enough to have thought of those moves on his own?  How would you handle that situation if you thought probably the winner had cheated, but he hotly denied it?

Or contrariwise, suppose that one day chessandgo is commentating on my game and we happen to be on the same wavelength.  It wouldn't be unrealistic for him to suggest ten of my moves before I played them, merely due to thinking alike.  How could the community say, "but of course we trust that Fritz wasn't listening" without angering anyone else who we decided wasn't beyond suspicion?

The Arimaa community is indeed perceptive, but counting on them to play a guessing game is a recipe for suspicion, hard feelings, unproven accusations, bitter denials, and having discussion about cheating steal all the attention from discussion about the game per se.


on 06/21/10 at 02:26:31, chessandgo wrote:
My take on this is that live commentary via both the chatroom and teamspeak should continue. Possible cheating should not deter anyone from contributing to the overall spreading of arimaa knowledge. I wouldn't mind losing to a player who would have cheated this way, or at least much less than I would mind Fritzl (and others) having to keep his opinions to himself. Strategic and tactical live chat is a great way for everyone to improve their game in my opinion, and that's what really matters.

Jean, I applaud you for genuinely not caring if your opponents are cheating.  It's great to play a game only for the challenge and for the learning, like you do.  But it is different for you being at the top of the ladder, where wins are easy to come by and challenge is a rare commodity.  For mere mortals challenge is easy to come by, whereas wins are more precious.

Imagine if there was commentary by me or you on every game, and imagine if cheating was widespread.  For the honest players, every tournament game would be like playing against the World Champion.  Say what you like about learning and spreading knowledge, beating your head against the wall like that would not be fun.

Of course we can't make cheating impossible, but we need to improve our safeguards to the point that cheating is not a wide-open temptation.  Then we will be able to compete and commentate without having half our attention mulling over the possibility that cheating is going on.  I know that's where my thoughts would be distracted if I continued to give commentary in the current environment, and I doubt I would be the only one with his mind in the gutter.
Title: Re: Round 5 Nombril v. 722caasi: 722caasi disquali
Post by omar on Jun 21st, 2010, 11:23am
722caasi, thank you for apologizing and promising never to do this again. I appreciate and admire your courage to choose this harder option over other easier options. It's a great sign. You've been an active member of the community and we really welcome having you here.

I don't think the possibility of cheating should hamper the spectators or commentators from discussing the game. The benefits outweigh the risks and drawbacks. However, additional safety measures need to be put in place.

As far as solutions go, it would be nearly impossible to prevent all forms of cheating as long as the games are online. However, this particular form of cheating can best be stopped by delaying the spectator view of the game by 5 minutes as suggested by ocmiente. I'll look into adding this for event games.

Also I guess it might help to place more stern warnings in the event rules in the future and mention that cheating can be detected by reviewing the server logs and will not be tolerated.
Title: Re: Round 5 Nombril v. 722caasi: 722caasi disquali
Post by Fritzlein on Jun 21st, 2010, 11:28am

on 06/21/10 at 08:49:35, janineb wrote:
I an 722caasi's mother and I would also like to give my sincere apology for my son's behavior.  He truly loves playing Arimaa and wanted so much to win for himself and his team that he made a very poor decision.  You can be assured that I am working with him to help him understand the true impact of what he did and how important it is for him to never do anything like this in the future.  He is a very smart kid and this is the first time he's done anything like this to my knowledge.  Part of growing up is making mistakes and learning from them and this is a very important learning experience for him. I'm sorry for the impact what he has done has had on the community and I hope that everyone will find a way to maintain this site's warm and collegial environment while building in greater security against cheating.

Thanks for chiming in, janineb.  722caasi has played anonymously and not shared anything about himself, which makes it harder for us to know what to think.  It definitely changes my perception to know that he is young.  When I was growing up, I did worse things than cheat on a board game, and I came out (I hope) all right in the end.

I truly hope this can be a learning experience.  It's so easy to either veer to one side or the other: (A) being angry at being caught, resentful of authority, and deciding to self-justify bad behavior to try to make the guilt go away or (B) being consumed with guilt and shame to the point that, say, it is impossible to ever enjoy a game of Arimaa again.   The middle ground of being sorry and behaving better while also being able to go forward positively and enjoy doing the right thing in the future is a hard path to find.

My thoughts and good wishes are with you and 722caasi as you try to find the best but hardest way forward.
Title: Re: Round 5 Nombril v. 722caasi: 722caasi disquali
Post by omar on Jun 21st, 2010, 11:31am

on 06/21/10 at 11:23:28, omar wrote:
As far as solutions go, it would be nearly impossible to prevent all forms of cheating as long as the games are online. However, this particular form of cheating can best be stopped by delaying the spectator view of the game by 5 minutes as suggested by ocmiente. I'll look into adding this for event games.


Thinking about this a bit more I guess if I just throw out the most recent two move in the move list for spectators, that would be easiest way to implement it and work regardless of the time controls for the game.
Title: Re: Round 5 Nombril v. 722caasi: 722caasi disquali
Post by Fritzlein on Jun 21st, 2010, 11:39am

on 06/21/10 at 11:23:28, omar wrote:
However, this particular form of cheating can best be stopped by delaying the spectator view of the game by 5 minutes as suggested by ocmiente. I'll look into adding this for event games.

A time-delay in broadcasting games would be a neat deterrent to several types of cheating.  Good idea, ocmiente.  Thanks for addressing this, Omar.


Quote:
Also I guess it might help to place more stern warnings in the event rules in the future and mention that cheating can be detected by reviewing the server logs and will not be tolerated.

I am no fan of talking tough when the tough talk can't be backed up.  The rules to the World Championship already have harsh penalties for cheating, but have you ever caught anyone cheating in the World Championship?  This shouldn't be about how angry we will be if cheating happens.  Instead let's focus on actually doing something that would make cheating harder.  It's ridiculous to have a big bark and be toothless in practice.  Much better is to walk softly and carry a big stick.
Title: Re: Round 5 Nombril v. 722caasi: 722caasi disquali
Post by chessandgo on Jun 21st, 2010, 11:44am

on 06/21/10 at 11:15:21, Fritzlein wrote:
Jean, I applaud you for genuinely not caring if your opponents are cheating.  It's great to play a game only for the challenge and for the learning, like you do.  But it is different for you being at the top of the ladder, where wins are easy to come by and challenge is a rare commodity.  For mere mortals challenge is easy to come by, whereas wins are more precious.

Imagine if there was commentary by me or you on every game, and imagine if cheating was widespread.


Well, cheating is currently *not* widespread as far as I can tell. And no, my opinion has nothing to do with my current ranking. I've been a beginner, I've lost many games (228 in 724, as much as you who have played more than twice as many games), and I know I'd have felt the same way back then.

I learnt a huge amount of things by being able to discuss with you back then, more than anyone did ever learn from anyone in arimaa I believe, and I would not be half the player I am without it, so I do mean what I wrote about the value of having strategic discussion available to all.

As far as I can remember, the only abuses that the community has suffered have been maybe one mutliple accounts thing, one rating abuse, and this game's abuse. That's only 3, we can live with that. If cheating becomes anywhere near widespread then I'll change my mind and agree with you, but for the moment increasing the overall arimaa knowledge is a much more important issue than preventing cheating, to me.
Title: Re: Round 5 Nombril v. 722caasi: 722caasi disquali
Post by Fritzlein on Jun 21st, 2010, 11:45am

on 06/21/10 at 11:31:38, omar wrote:
Thinking about this a bit more I guess if I just throw out the most recent two move in the move list for spectators, that would be easiest way to implement it and work regardless of the time controls for the game.

I assume you mean not sending them from the server side, as opposed to not displaying them client-side?  Not only is the server completely under your control, but also you wouldn't have to fix every client.

Also, do you mean omitting the last four ply?  Throwing out just one move from each side is probably too small a buffer, because sometimes a good move from two ply previous is still good.
Title: Re: Round 5 Nombril v. 722caasi: 722caasi disquali
Post by chessandgo on Jun 21st, 2010, 11:53am

on 06/21/10 at 06:56:08, megajester wrote:
I know where you're coming from


What is this supposed to mean exactly?

(not being a native speaker, I'm probably sometimes saying things I did not exactly mean, and sometimes misunderstand things being written, so I apologize if the meaning should be clear to me)
Title: Re: Round 5 Nombril v. 722caasi: 722caasi disquali
Post by ChrisB on Jun 21st, 2010, 12:06pm
I just heard about this incident this afternoon after being away all weekend.  As captain of the Rockies, I support the LD's and LC's decision to declare the game a forfeit.  I also concur with a ban for this year, but I hope 722caasi will be given the opportunity to return to league play during 2011.

Thanks 722caasi for apologizing and voluntarily stepping down.  I appreciated you being one of our top volunteers for playing in League games and hope you'll continue to participate in arimaa events. I'll be happy to welcome you back as a teammate next year.
Title: Re: Round 5 Nombril v. 722caasi: 722caasi disquali
Post by Fritzlein on Jun 21st, 2010, 12:06pm
You are right, Jean.  You have always cared more about learning than about winning.  I am sorry that I implied your attitude came only from your rating when in fact you have always displayed the brilliant growth-oriented mindset you do now.  I wish I were more like you in this way.

Still, it is not the same for you to have this great attitude yourself as to say that everyone else must have that attitude too.  If we don't try to fix the problem, we are requiring everyone to take it in good humor if they lose due to cheating.  That's an unreasonable and unrealistic requirement, especially given that at least one of our tournaments has cash prizes.

I agree with you that cheating does not appear to be widespread at the moment.  However, if you think that the only instances of cheating that have occurred are the ones you mentioned, I have bridge I'd like to sell you.

I happen to know of two other cases of dishonesty (one ratings abuse and one malicious use of a duplicate account) that haven't seen the light of day because I have no proof.  What good would it do for me to make my suspicions public?  Since I couldn't prove anything, it would only promote a negative atmosphere to say what I believe is true.  But these cases of dishonesty that not everyone knows about makes it seem very implausible that the single case of in-game cheating we have proof of (722caasi) is the only one that has happened.

I'm sorry, but my feeling about the matter has reached a tipping point where the status quo is no longer acceptable to me.  Fortunately Omar is on the job.  :)
Title: Re: Round 5 Nombril v. 722caasi: 722caasi disquali
Post by Fritzlein on Jun 21st, 2010, 12:19pm

on 06/21/10 at 11:53:42, chessandgo wrote:
What is this supposed to mean exactly?

(not being a native speaker, I'm probably sometimes saying things I did not exactly mean, and sometimes misunderstand things being written, so I apologize if the meaning should be clear to me)

For megajester to say that he knows where you are coming from suggests that you have a reason for believing what you believe and he knows that reason.  You could read that as being arrogant (i.e. he can see things from your viewpoint but you can't see things from his viewpoint), but that would be a very easily-offended interpretation.  I would read it as being purely sympathetic, i.e. he thinks you have a legitimate case and he respects it, even though he disagrees.  It's a way of acknowledging the validity of your perspective, your worldview, "where you are coming from".
Title: Re: Round 5 Nombril v. 722caasi: 722caasi disquali
Post by leo on Jun 21st, 2010, 12:33pm
My crappy evening connection cut me off and Fritzlein already replied meanwhile.
I had clipboarded my message though, so I'm posting it anyway ^^

@chessandgo: "I know where you're coming from" is a highly idiomatic way of saying "I understand your point of view".
The first time I saw the phrase I was perplex too :)
Title: Re: Round 5 Nombril v. 722caasi: 722caasi disquali
Post by ocmiente on Jun 21st, 2010, 1:05pm

on 06/21/10 at 11:31:38, omar wrote:
Thinking about this a bit more I guess if I just throw out the most recent two move in the move list for spectators, that would be easiest way to implement it and work regardless of the time controls for the game.


Seems like sometimes good moves can persist for a couple of turns, so maybe it should be 2 moves for each player - or 4 turns total - I think.

For AWL games, that would average about a 4 minute delay if I'm doing the math right... 1 minute per turn... 4 turns... 4 minutes?

I still tend to confuse move, turn, ply :)  

Anyway, it would be cool to see this implemented - and I'm sure I'm not the first to think of this spectator delay feature - I just don't have the forum search skills to credit the right person.  
Title: Re: Round 5 Nombril v. 722caasi: 722caasi disquali
Post by Korhil on Jun 21st, 2010, 4:30pm

on 06/21/10 at 11:31:38, omar wrote:
Thinking about this a bit more I guess if I just throw out the most recent two move in the move list for spectators, that would be easiest way to implement it and work regardless of the time controls for the game.

This seems to be the best solution since it avoids having to put up layers of security in many other places.

This solution also gets around the possibility of a player being able to 'phone a friend' and ask for moves.

Cheers,
Martin
Title: Re: Round 5 Nombril v. 722caasi: 722caasi disquali
Post by FireBorn on Jun 21st, 2010, 4:41pm
My only concern with the move-delay is it ruins the timing of the game, and thus moves that would have warranted deep analysis/commentary might be passed quickly.

Maybe a solution would be to have the moves displayed in real time with a delay but pause the display of new moves if showing a move would violate the move-delay rule.

I think this would end up with the game being delayed by the amount of time it took to make the longest move.
Title: Re: Round 5 Nombril v. 722caasi: 722caasi disquali
Post by leo on Jun 21st, 2010, 5:30pm
A side effect of the delayed broadcast is that when the players come back to the chat room after the game, they won't read "congrats" and "good game" but "who won?" as the spectators are still receiving the last moves ;D

A radically different solution would be that the championship games are played entirely privately, then broadcasted in the presence of the players who are then available to comment their own game and discuss it with the spectators. It would feel somewhat like a documentary.

Does anybody know any useful bits about how other game communities organize their online tournaments?
Title: Re: Round 5 Nombril v. 722caasi: 722caasi disquali
Post by megajester on Jun 21st, 2010, 8:05pm
What, so disallowing simultaneous logins from the same IP wouldn't work then?
Title: Re: Round 5 Nombril v. 722caasi: 722caasi disquali
Post by Fritzlein on Jun 21st, 2010, 8:45pm

on 06/21/10 at 20:05:13, megajester wrote:
What, so disallowing simultaneous logins from the same IP wouldn't work then?

At the moment, you don't have to log in to either the game room or the chat room to read the chat archive (try it! (http://arimaa.com/arimaa/chat/arch.php)), nor do you have to be logged in to the game room to keep playing a game you have started.  Policing based on IP couldn't be enforced at the login level, only at the request level.  It would require somehow filtering the IP's of folks making chat archive requests against the IP's of people known to be playing event games.  And even if you set up such screening, someone could get two different IP's, for example by playing the game from a PC while being logged in to chat (on a duplicate account) from a mobile device.

The idea of delayed broadcast (except to the players) of moves of event games does have some weird artifacts of a live game not really being live, but it seems a lot less leaky than other solutions that have been suggested.  It wouldn't stop the kind of cheating whereby a computer program and ten of your Arimaa buddies are in the room giving you advice, but it would stop live commentary from being abused, so we could discuss and learn with abandon.
Title: Re: Round 5 Nombril v. 722caasi: 722caasi disquali
Post by Korhil on Jun 21st, 2010, 8:52pm

on 06/21/10 at 20:05:13, megajester wrote:
What, so disallowing simultaneous logins from the same IP wouldn't work then?

It is possible that many users would have legitimate reasons for coming from the same IP.
Users behind a NAT at a University is one.
Title: Re: Round 5 Nombril v. 722caasi: 722caasi disquali
Post by 722caasi on Jun 21st, 2010, 8:59pm
I would just like to say that I am again very sorry for what I have done, but I am glad that it will not make enjoying Arimaa impossible. I have always liked listening to the commentary on the TeamSpeak, and I hope that commentary can continue. I would really, really hate it if my idiotic decision ruined Arimaa commentary for everyone.
Title: Re: Round 5 Nombril v. 722caasi: 722caasi disquali
Post by megajester on Jun 21st, 2010, 9:40pm

on 06/21/10 at 20:59:20, 722caasi wrote:
I would just like to say that I am again very sorry for what I have done, but I am glad that it will not make enjoying Arimaa impossible. I have always liked listening to the commentary on the TeamSpeak, and I hope that commentary can continue. I would really, really hate it if my idiotic decision ruined Arimaa commentary for everyone.

We all make mistakes, so don't go beating yourself up about it. It'll pass. Don't worry about the commentary either, we'll work something out. :)
Title: Re: Round 5 Nombril v. 722caasi: 722caasi disquali
Post by chessandgo on Jun 21st, 2010, 9:43pm

on 06/21/10 at 12:06:49, Fritzlein wrote:
 However, if you think that the only instances of cheating that have occurred are the ones you mentioned, I have bridge I'd like to sell you.


Haha :) But I've bought that bridge already!
Title: Re: Round 5 Nombril v. 722caasi: 722caasi disquali
Post by chessandgo on Jun 21st, 2010, 10:07pm

on 06/21/10 at 12:06:49, Fritzlein wrote:
as to say that everyone else must have that attitude too.  If we don't try to fix the problem, we are requiring everyone to take it in good humor if they lose due to cheating.


My point was that preventing someone from listening to Fritzl's live commentary if he's willing to give one will make one lose more games than cheats. I haven't been telling anyone what attitude to take, neither said anything about good humour. You didn't hear me after I bought that bridge for the fifth time ....
Title: Re: Round 5 Nombril v. 722caasi: 722caasi disquali
Post by Fritzlein on Jun 21st, 2010, 10:31pm

on 06/21/10 at 22:07:06, chessandgo wrote:
You didn't hear me after I bought that bridge for the fifth time ....

I hear you, and I agree with you that live commentary is a serious thing to lose.  I just disagree with you when you say that games lost to cheats listening in on the commentary are a tiny matter in comparison.  You and I can listen to each other and still disagree, don't you think?


Quote:
I haven't been telling anyone what attitude to take, neither said anything about good humour.

But you have said that I should keep on giving live commentary.  So you are telling me what to do without telling me how to feel about it?

Imagine this.  Suppose you give live commentary on a game.  Suppose that all the best moves of the winning player were moves that you suggested in your commentary.  Suppose the losing player is upset and asks you, "Why did you do that?  Why did you help him cheat?"

Now, you don't have to tell that player how to feel, but I think you do have to justify yourself.  From what you have posted in this thread, I am worried you will tell him, "Don't worry about losing.   It doesn't matter.  You learned something and that is more important.  Also, all the other people listening to me learned something, which is also more important than you losing to a cheater."  But I shouldn't put words in your mouth.  Let me ask you instead: What will you say if that happens?

For myself, I don't want to be in that situation.  I don't want to know that I have helped someone cheat.  Perhaps you think I would have nothing to feel bad about, since I didn't do the cheating myself.  I think that is a reasonable excuse, but it can only be used once.  If it happens again, my good intentions are no excuse.  Fool me once, shame on you.  Fool me twice, shame on me.

I am not telling you that you must feel the same way I do.  You are welcome to continue to give commentary on every game if you like, even before more safeguards are in place.  I won't try to stop you.  But for myself, I'm not going to pass out invitations to use my ideas to cheat, for the reasons I have given.
Title: Re: Round 5 Nombril v. 722caasi: 722caasi disquali
Post by Korhil on Jun 22nd, 2010, 1:14am

on 06/21/10 at 22:31:31, Fritzlein wrote:
Now, you don't have to tell that player how to feel, but I think you do have to justify yourself.  From what you have posted in this thread, I am worried you will tell him, "Don't worry about losing.   It doesn't matter.  You learned something and that is more important.  Also, all the other people listening to me learned something, which is also more important than you losing to a cheater."  But I shouldn't put words in your mouth.  Let me ask you instead: What will you say if that happens?

I think you have stretched the example too far Fritz.
I share Chessandgo's view; I would much rather improve my game overall for the loss of a match.

“I learned much more from defeat than I ever learned from winning”
Title: Re: Round 5 Nombril v. 722caasi: 722caasi disquali
Post by chessandgo on Jun 22nd, 2010, 1:17am

on 06/21/10 at 22:31:31, Fritzlein wrote:
But you have said that I should keep on giving live commentary.  So you are telling me what to do without telling me how to feel about it?



on 06/21/10 at 22:07:06, chessandgo wrote:
My point was that preventing someone from listening to Fritzl's live commentary if he's willing to give one will make one lose more games than cheats.


Oh no, what I meant to say was that *if* you (or anyone else) are willing to go on giving live commentary / discussing live in the chatroom, I'm supporting you/him/her wholeheartedly. Sorry if I've been forgetting important if's in some of my posts. I certainly understand and respect your point of view.
Title: Re: Round 5 Nombril v. 722caasi: 722caasi disquali
Post by megajester on Jun 22nd, 2010, 2:33am

on 06/21/10 at 20:45:31, Fritzlein wrote:
At the moment, you don't have to log in to either the game room or the chat room to read the chat archive (try it! (http://arimaa.com/arimaa/chat/arch.php)), nor do you have to be logged in to the game room to keep playing a game you have started.

I would think it shouldn't be too hard for Omar to make it so you can only read the archive if you're logged in, but that might be moot point if there's no way around what Korhil said about uni's etc...

I like the 5 minute delay idea. It'll still feel like it's live, in fact most of the noobs won't even know. Until the players log into the chatroom congratulating each other when we're still holding our breaths for the final moves :D
Title: Re: Round 5 Nombril v. 722caasi: 722caasi disquali
Post by rbarreira on Jun 22nd, 2010, 2:40am
Filtering based on IP addresses has never worked, and it works less and less as time passes. It just gives a false sense of security, which is worse than no security at all.

Nowadays there are well known sites which allow you to hide your IP (google translate, for one). Plus, as Fritzlein said, more and more people have a mobile phone which can browse the web.
Title: Re: Round 5 Nombril v. 722caasi: 722caasi disquali
Post by Fritzlein on Jun 22nd, 2010, 12:26pm

on 06/22/10 at 01:17:24, chessandgo wrote:
Oh no, what I meant to say was that *if* you (or anyone else) are willing to go on giving live commentary / discussing live in the chatroom, I'm supporting you/him/her wholeheartedly. Sorry if I've been forgetting important if's in some of my posts. I certainly understand and respect your point of view.

Great, thanks.  I'm glad you understand and can respect why I am going to wait for new safeguards before resuming commentary.  And likewise I can respect those who continue to give commentary under the present circumstances, although I do think they need to be prepared to answer the I question posed above (and repeat below).


on 06/21/10 at 22:31:31, Fritzlein wrote:
Imagine this.  Suppose you give live commentary on a game.  Suppose that all the best moves of the winning player were moves that you suggested in your commentary.  Suppose the losing player is upset and asks you, "Why did you do that?  Why did you help him cheat?"

on 06/22/10 at 01:14:42, Korhil wrote:
I share Chessandgo's view; I would much rather improve my game overall for the loss of a match.

“I learned much more from defeat than I ever learned from winning”

That's a great attitude to have for yourself, but it doesn't directly address the question I asked chessandgo about how other people feel.  What would you tell the player who is upset that his opponent got unfair help, particularly if you were the one who gave that help?
Title: Re: Round 5 Nombril v. 722caasi: 722caasi disquali
Post by chessandgo on Jun 23rd, 2010, 4:33am
I don't expect that to happen, and I don't feel like I need to have an answer ready. If someone feels like he wouldn't like his games being commentated live, he can make that clear, and I won't commentate when he's playing. (edit: not that I'm commentating any game these days anyway)
Title: Re: Round 5 Nombril v. 722caasi: 722caasi disquali
Post by megajester on Jun 23rd, 2010, 7:43am
Chessandgo's placing more importance on learning the game than winning is very admirable. But Jean, how would you feel if you lost to somebody in the World Championship because of cheating? I don't know about you, but I would feel as if somebody stole something from me. How would you feel if the community didn't care, saying it's more important to increase our knowledge about Arimaa than to prevent people from cheating? I would feel very disappointed and frustrated, and would stop taking the WC seriously. In fact I doubt I would bother taking part.

Right from the very beginning (http://arimaa.com/arimaa/forum/cgi/YaBB.cgi?board=events;action=display;num=1255867337;start=0) my vision of the League has been of a serious team competition that you can get enthusiastic about, not simply a glorified way of pairing players or of getting some practice in before the WC. And I believe we do have that now. I think the teams by now have built up quite a following, with players working hard to win and teammates rooting for them.

However we now have a situation where cheating is easy and everybody knows how to do it. From now on whenever a player plays better than usual, or plays the same moves the spectators spot, he will come under suspicion. Players will feel as if they have to choose between cheating and winning or playing honourably and losing.

If the League spirit is to continue, this situation is utterly unacceptable.

Therefore, my preferred solution is to delay the publishing of the moves once they've been played by 5 minutes, or another reasonable period. It's the most watertight solution anybody's come up with yet. Yes, you will have the situation where players come into the chatroom before the spectators see the last moves, but I think it's worth it if our commentators feel free to provide their valuable insights. I think we'll be surprised how quickly we get used to it.

Now a question to Omar: How difficult is this to implement? Could this be implemented before Thursday next week (1 July), when the first of the Round 6 games might be played?
Title: Re: Round 5 Nombril v. 722caasi: 722caasi disquali
Post by The_Jeh on Jun 23rd, 2010, 10:03am

on 06/23/10 at 07:43:30, megajester wrote:
Yes, you will have the situation where players come into the chatroom before the spectators see the last moves


It could be set up to display all the moves immediately once the game is over.  And I hate to mention this, since Fritz might use it as a reason to keep silent, but none of this guards too well against commentary on strategy. On the other hand, it doesn't guard against computers, either, so it might be as good as we can get online.
Title: Re: Round 5 Nombril v. 722caasi: 722caasi disquali
Post by Hippo on Jun 23rd, 2010, 10:38am
Wow, I absolutely missed that thread. What to say ... The server side solution is really good choice. I agree there is no problem to log from diferent IP's. After I lost game to woh I am playing in configuration with 2 computers ... game running on one connection and watching on other connection. So I am almost sure I have not lost the information.

Unfortunately the delay would work against that, but this is tiny drawback compared to safety it gives.

Of course there could be other cheating ... including computer power (in near future it could matter) or better human power (at least two cheaters included) ... if team Europa makes a meeting, we could play with c&g suggesting moves to whoever plays ...

Much easier way not requiring meeting is just to tell login information to him and he logs as you and plays the game.
It would be better not to play from the usual connection, but whoever can play during holiday at a hotel ...

(I hope you understand that I don't expect it would ever happen ... but I am not sure with my English to rather state it explicitly.)

... I don't expect marwin was cheating, but he used 2 of the several moves I have suggested ... I don't remember in which game :)

And I have told korhil was in chatroom during his league game and we was commenting it really hard. I have noticed it just when his opponent came and korhil started chatting. I have not went through the chat to see if there could be a suspiction to play according the chat, but how could we know if he was really watching the chat?
Yes, he didn't try to hide under another account so we could expect it is just his bad habbit to never leave the chatroom.
[edit]I have just noticed it is discussed in another thread.[/edit]

P.S.: And I still think we could stay on path of honor.
P.P.S.: I am in Puzzle Hunt comunity, in our first hunt we were playing "on the edge of rules" or even worse. When I have read what the best teams write about their missions, I went to the as honor path as possible. What is interesting ... all indicias lead to conclusion the best teams never cheat, while there are teams in the 2nd half cheating. Fortunately the puzzle hunts have only moral winners so the comunity chosen not to distract itself by the cheaters at all.
Title: Re: Round 5 Nombril v. 722caasi: 722caasi disquali
Post by Fritzlein on Jun 23rd, 2010, 4:34pm

on 06/23/10 at 10:03:27, The_Jeh wrote:
And I hate to mention this, since Fritz might use it as a reason to keep silent, but none of this guards too well against commentary on strategy.

I thought about that, and I can live with it at a 4-ply delay.  If you are always two turns late in doing the right strategy, you will lose almost all the races anyway.

Everyone is right to point out all the other kinds of cheating that will not be fixed by a broadcast delay.  That's why I said in my original post that if Arimaa continues to grow and get more serious, we will either need sworn witnesses present with each player, or will need to have the World Championship become a live tournament.  It is something to keep in mind for the future, especially if computers rise to the level of World Championship contenders.  But maybe the community will stay small, the prizes will stay small, computers will stay mediocre, the community will stay collegial, and the best solution for us will be to do the best we can over the Internet.  For three or five years, anyway, that's what I expect.

Even if I was pretty sure that other types of cheating were going on, it would be no reason for me to stop giving commentary.   ;)
Title: Re: Round 5 Nombril v. 722caasi: 722caasi disquali
Post by Korhil on Jun 23rd, 2010, 5:57pm

on 06/23/10 at 16:34:37, Fritzlein wrote:
It is something to keep in mind for the future, especially if computers rise to the level of World Championship contenders.

Given that currently that computers aren't up to that standard, it's hard for someone to cheat alone.

A 4 ply delay will eliminate the opportunistic ability to get outside information from observers.

The methods remaining can't really be stopped, but I don't expect anyone would go to that length given that it's mostly just pride that is on the line.
Title: Re: Round 5 Nombril v. 722caasi: 722caasi disquali
Post by Hippo on Jun 24th, 2010, 3:10pm
Seems Omar have implemented the 2+2 turns delay already. The postal games I was watching went to past :).
Title: Re: Round 5 Nombril v. 722caasi: 722caasi disquali
Post by FireBorn on Jun 24th, 2010, 4:18pm
Does anyone else have a problem with the pacing of the game being screwed up by a move-delay? Like, what if a move that took a player 2 minutes went by quickly because his next move took 15 seconds. To an observer, the 2 minute move would take 15 seconds, wouldn't it?
Title: Re: Round 5 Nombril v. 722caasi: 722caasi disquali
Post by Nombril on Jun 24th, 2010, 5:48pm
I know I don't need to keep seeing my name in the headlines (at least in this context  ;) ) so I started a new thread if there is additional discussion regarding the spectator delay or other general aspects not related to this specific game.

http://arimaa.com/arimaa/forum/cgi/YaBB.cgi?board=siteIssues;action=display;num=1277430073;start=0#0


Arimaa Forum » Powered by YaBB 1 Gold - SP 1.3.1!
YaBB © 2000-2003. All Rights Reserved.