Author |
Topic: Round 5 Nombril v. 722caasi: 722caasi disqualified (Read 13511 times) |
|
FireBorn
Forum Guru
Arimaa player #1832
Gender: 
Posts: 123
|
 |
Re: Round 5 Nombril v. 722caasi: 722caasi disquali
« Reply #30 on: Jun 21st, 2010, 4:41pm » |
 Quote  Modify
|
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.
|
|
 IP Logged |
|
|
|
leo
Forum Guru
Gender:
Posts: 278
|
|
Re: Round 5 Nombril v. 722caasi: 722caasi disquali
« Reply #31 on: Jun 21st, 2010, 5:30pm » |
Quote Modify
|
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 
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?
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
megajester
Forum Moderator
Forum Guru
Istanbul, Turkey
Gender:
Posts: 710
|
|
Re: Round 5 Nombril v. 722caasi: 722caasi disquali
« Reply #32 on: Jun 21st, 2010, 8:05pm » |
Quote Modify
|
What, so disallowing simultaneous logins from the same IP wouldn't work then?
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
Fritzlein
Forum Guru
Arimaa player #706
Gender:
Posts: 5928
|
|
Re: Round 5 Nombril v. 722caasi: 722caasi disquali
« Reply #33 on: Jun 21st, 2010, 8:45pm » |
Quote Modify
|
on Jun 21st, 2010, 8:05pm, 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!), 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.
|
| « Last Edit: Jun 21st, 2010, 8:50pm by Fritzlein » |
IP Logged |
|
|
|
Korhil
Forum Senior Member
Arimaa player #5160
Gender:
Posts: 27
|
|
Re: Round 5 Nombril v. 722caasi: 722caasi disquali
« Reply #34 on: Jun 21st, 2010, 8:52pm » |
Quote Modify
|
on Jun 21st, 2010, 8:05pm, 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.
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
Isaac Grosof
Forum Guru
Longtime Arimaa Fan
Gender:
Posts: 175
|
|
Re: Round 5 Nombril v. 722caasi: 722caasi disquali
« Reply #35 on: Jun 21st, 2010, 8:59pm » |
Quote Modify
|
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.
|
|
IP Logged |
Sorry about that one thing.
|
|
|
megajester
Forum Moderator
Forum Guru
Istanbul, Turkey
Gender:
Posts: 710
|
|
Re: Round 5 Nombril v. 722caasi: 722caasi disquali
« Reply #36 on: Jun 21st, 2010, 9:40pm » |
Quote Modify
|
on Jun 21st, 2010, 8:59pm, 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. 
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
chessandgo
Forum Guru
Arimaa player #1889
Gender:
Posts: 1244
|
|
Re: Round 5 Nombril v. 722caasi: 722caasi disquali
« Reply #37 on: Jun 21st, 2010, 9:43pm » |
Quote Modify
|
on Jun 21st, 2010, 12:06pm, 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!
|
| « Last Edit: Jun 21st, 2010, 9:47pm by chessandgo » |
IP Logged |
|
|
|
chessandgo
Forum Guru
Arimaa player #1889
Gender:
Posts: 1244
|
|
Re: Round 5 Nombril v. 722caasi: 722caasi disquali
« Reply #38 on: Jun 21st, 2010, 10:07pm » |
Quote Modify
|
on Jun 21st, 2010, 12:06pm, 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 ....
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
Fritzlein
Forum Guru
Arimaa player #706
Gender:
Posts: 5928
|
|
Re: Round 5 Nombril v. 722caasi: 722caasi disquali
« Reply #39 on: Jun 21st, 2010, 10:31pm » |
Quote Modify
|
on Jun 21st, 2010, 10:07pm, 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.
|
| « Last Edit: Jun 21st, 2010, 11:49pm by Fritzlein » |
IP Logged |
|
|
|
Korhil
Forum Senior Member
Arimaa player #5160
Gender:
Posts: 27
|
|
Re: Round 5 Nombril v. 722caasi: 722caasi disquali
« Reply #40 on: Jun 22nd, 2010, 1:14am » |
Quote Modify
|
on Jun 21st, 2010, 10:31pm, 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”
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
chessandgo
Forum Guru
Arimaa player #1889
Gender:
Posts: 1244
|
|
Re: Round 5 Nombril v. 722caasi: 722caasi disquali
« Reply #41 on: Jun 22nd, 2010, 1:17am » |
Quote Modify
|
on Jun 21st, 2010, 10:31pm, 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 Jun 21st, 2010, 10:07pm, 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.
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
megajester
Forum Moderator
Forum Guru
Istanbul, Turkey
Gender:
Posts: 710
|
|
Re: Round 5 Nombril v. 722caasi: 722caasi disquali
« Reply #42 on: Jun 22nd, 2010, 2:33am » |
Quote Modify
|
on Jun 21st, 2010, 8:45pm, 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!), 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 
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
rbarreira
Forum Guru
Arimaa player #1621
Gender:
Posts: 605
|
|
Re: Round 5 Nombril v. 722caasi: 722caasi disquali
« Reply #43 on: Jun 22nd, 2010, 2:40am » |
Quote Modify
|
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.
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
Fritzlein
Forum Guru
Arimaa player #706
Gender:
Posts: 5928
|
|
Re: Round 5 Nombril v. 722caasi: 722caasi disquali
« Reply #44 on: Jun 22nd, 2010, 12:26pm » |
Quote Modify
|
on Jun 22nd, 2010, 1:17am, 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 Jun 21st, 2010, 10:31pm, 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 Jun 22nd, 2010, 1:14am, 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?
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
|
Home
Help
Search
Members
Login
Register
Reply
Notify of replies
Send Topic
Print