Team play forum
[ mod this thread ] << - < - > - >>
| From | Message |
daphsa03
8/05/2007
14:18:03
[ report abuse ] |
 Subject: Its time we send a powerfull message to GK
Message:
We need to send a powerful message to GK management!
We are more than 80.000 players on this site. GK gave us a wonderful and powerful tool, the site when it comes to playing chess is professional.
We all know that of some reason players cheat an manipulate their ratings, this behavior is exclusively practices by players on teams, do they do it of an interest of they own or team’s best, only God knows. Cheating is a cheating, the misbehave is to be stopped. The person I know best, my husband former captain on Hungarian Wanderers “mazsola” dedicated lots of time to trace and report cheaters, rating manipulators.
When a player evidently violates the rules, GK has both right and obligation to “punish” the player, so far it is ok. But what happens when a player is falsely accused, nothing! We have no chance to apply to an independent body for checking or getting a second opinion, once the almighty GK decided that you are a cheater, there is no chance to get them change their opinion.
We, more than 80.000 players on this site have no rights only obligations. Let’s use the power we representing and let’s demand an independent body, a “court of appeal” put together of honorable players, with right to overrule GK decisions. This “disciplinary body” should have a final word and not GK.
Read my message I sent to GK, it is about violating a player’s right, I have a long list of players who been harassed by GK in same way as ”mazsola”
You who read this add, please inform your friends teams and captains about it. Send a letter/mail to GK management about your support of the idea.
Do you send a message to GK, just as a step of safety send also a feed back to henryhunts@gmail.com the feed back makes sure that your letter of demand/support doesn’t evaporates in the GK administration. Let’s be united!!! We make the site not them.
Here bellow the subject triggering my will to publish my demand!
Hi!
My name is Junie, to you on GK known as “daphsa03”, I’m married to “mazsola” a former captain on Hungarian Wanderers, My husband doesn’t need a closer introduction to you or any captain on this net. Henry (mazsola) dedicated 3 years of his life to build a team, have fun with his favorite hobby playing chess. Henry in early stage of his captaincy realized that some players and unfortunately also some team-captains have put it into a system to cheat. He removed players from own team, for using engines, for having multiple accounts, for having multiple accounts and playing for 2 different teams some of them for unsportsmanlike behavior, rude language or manipulation of their ratings. He never hesitated to send a report to you when he found cheaters on other teams
He welcomed every new member on the team with presentation of the team rules. They explained the team’s expectation on the new members and demands, between them no cheating, no unsportsmanlike behavior, no political or religious discussion with the opponents.
Henry turned over the captaincy to “remete”, two days later you removed him from the team, you prevent him to communicate and according a mail you sent to a member on the team you are accusing him for cheating
Here is the mail you sent to a member on the team, I omitted the name of the member, because I didn’t ask him if I could use the message, but the message is genuine, you wrote it.
According to the team profile page, the captain of your team "Hungarian wanderers" is player "remete". There doesn't appear to be anything wrong with account "remete".
As for the account "maszola" -- according to our records, it has been suspended due to too many users listed as playing from the same computer. GameKnot employs an automated system that screens all user names for duplicate accounts (i.e. multiple accounts created by the same person). Unfortunately we have to keep such
system in place due to frequent abuse of our free accounts.
Best regards,
GameKnot.com
----------------------------------------------------------
In response to your inquiry submitted on 01-Aug-07, 06:06
----------------------------------------------------------
It makes me upset and surprised that you so willingly discuss my husband’s “misbehave” on the net with team members, but you don’t show him, to a generally respected and popular person, that much respect to answer his mail to you. Don’t misunderstand me I’m happy you answered the mail to one of team members, now we know his “sin”.
Henry got removed from the team without any explanation, without warning, but most of all of a reason of fabricated accusation.
My husband had Platinum membership during 3 years with possibility to play 100 individual games. He never, one more time never filled his quote, simply because he had no time for that, his job and team administration had higher priority.
I’m challenging the person on GK with enough intelligence to, read, to understand and answer my questions.
What use would he have with multiple accounts “deadlock” former player on Petit Roque registered in January 2005, “africanfrench06” registered November 2006, “deltaforce06” registered also November 2006, “globule” registered January 2007, “schroumph” registered March 2007, “acramax07” registered in April 2007 and “lovestory” registered July 2007, together with my and Henry’s account it makes 8 persons.
We recognize only one of all these players, “acramax07”, the French player enjoyed the team in June, he had some problems with settings of his team games, he asked “mazsola” to send him more team challenges. “Acramax07” is a premium member on the team, it was impossible for Henry to understand that GK system doesn’t allow more than 12 games to the member, he been asked by “acramax07” to check his settings if there was anything wrong, but it wasn’t. Henry contacted you, he also told you that he opened account “acramax07” for checking the setting, you replied that “acramax07” has Bronze premium membership with max 12 games at time.
I ask you how can this compromise “mazsola”, how come that your monitoring system can’t find that from our IP number never made any of those listed players a move.
I ask about an identical situation. I have no intention to compromise any member our team on GK, but “viking2” also he is a former captain, he is listed with 17 other players, between them late captain “recon”, with the a former captain “hunster57” and a acting captains “mal57”, “gothicgirl” and “mudraker”.
This is not a joke but, a past away captain, and 3 active captains from 3 different teams are playing chess together with 3 other former captains, all together 17 listed accounts are playing from the same computer, but “viking2” hasn’t been removed from the team like my husband “mazsola” got, why? I believe it is not about that. Do you really trust your monitoring system, do you really believe that all these 17 players are playing from same computer, probably the list could be much longer if there was more space to list them, your monitoring system is useless and you know that, it gives a wrong image and triggers false accusation and wrong pictures of honorable members on GK. My checking on the GK gave me facts, that there are thousands of accounts compromised same way like my husband’s but of some reason they can continue to be on teams and communicate. Do you dare to admit that it is not about multiple accounts. It is about your chance to get rid of a person who dared to criticize you and denied to be one of your lapdogs.
I ask you also, how do you dare to accuse somebody for cheating without evidence, your talk of your monitoring system is just rubbish, that is not an evidence that is only an excuse.
I demand you to reinstate “mazsola” to his rights according to his status as free player, I also demand to place him back to the team, you removed him, you place him back.
I also know that I risk a restrictions, that is your method, when somebody is too noisy and starts to be annoying, you put the person in lifetime quarantine, but I take that risk, we have to start protesting against unfair treatment of players and your total lack of interest to admit and correct mistakes.
Regards Junie
|
zmeyko
8/05/2007
17:19:12
[ report abuse ] | A few points from another member's perspective.
Message:
1. While emotions are just as much a part of being human as reason, and while I fully understand the sentiment behind Junie's statement, I would probably rephrase certain passages in it if I were the author.
2. That being said, the issue raised by Junie is, in my opinion, one of the most urgent. I can never imagine what can possibly outweigh the importance of it for the one person (so far at the time of writing) who already voted to delete this thread. And if it does get deleted eventually, I fervently hope it will make it to Google's cache beforehand.
3. I have only been on GK for a little more than two years, and I don't check the Forums very often, but even I lost count as to how many messages on this subject I've seen. If I understand correctly, when a person's communication rights on GK are revoked for having multiple accounts, he or she cannot post to Forums anymore, and the matter becomes public only if the "perpetrator"'s friends or teammates take it upon themselves to post a dismayed message or two on his or her behalf. And obviously, this happens only in case when the person who gets banned believes him- or herself in the right and has at least some means to prove that.
4. I find GameKnot's rules very reasonable and well thought-out - and not only in general, but in many particulars. I haven't seen all online chess sites, but out of the several that I have, I'd vote for GK as No.1 both in terms of features and regulations. It doesn't mean that GK is ideal. Nobody is perfect.
5. The reasoning behind the multiple accounts/paid accounts policy, as I have learned from GK's own posts on the Forums, is that a person's credit card or web currency (PayPal etc.) account number serves as a verification of a distinct identity. Hence, let's say, two non-paying members logging in from the same computer are treated differently (get banned) from two paying ones, or one paying and one non-paying. While even this policy can be challenged on the subject of fairness, my opinion is that such things are the prerogative of GK, whether it's a marketing strategy or not. If you want a completely free site, learn programming and build your own - and then you'll likely start charging people for your effort.
6. The situation in question is a bit different from Item 5 in that the member downgraded his/her account from paid to free - that means the member's identity has been already established. The reason for downgrading must be the member's inability or unwillingness to play as many games as before, or the wish to stay away from chess altogether for a little while. Even as a marketing strategy, revoking this person's access to new games or banning is ineffectual. People's interest in chess may wax and wane due to lifestyle changes and whatnot.
7. My teammate in good standing brendanibar recently downgraded his account from paid to free due to a busy schedule. His son had a free account on the same computer, with last login almost a year ago. As a result of downgrading, my teammate has been deleted from our team roster, and his communication rights have been revoked. If this is only due to the current configuration of the automated system, I think I'll not be alone in believing that configuring the system correctly would be a huge plus for everyone. And if this is indeed a policy, an explanation of its reasons - specifically for the case of formerly paid accounts - would be much appreciated. This is not the first nor second time when this matter pops up, and many people will be a lot happier when it is resolved.
Thank you,
Oleg.
|
chilliman
8/05/2007
23:23:19
[ report abuse ] |
Message:
surely in the case of several family members wanting gk access that it is logical that the family may not have more than one computer, necessitating several family members to log on from the same pc, the IP address would reflect that.
what about the situation where gk members meet up in person and want to make their moves, say, from one of the other members pc's, do all then get banned?
I agree that there needs to be a system in place to stop multiple account holders and logon sharing here. I don't know what the solution is but automatic disqualification will not solve these problems, especially if those suspended do not have a right of appeal. what about mozz and daddysgirl? they are getting married later this year and daddysgirl is moving to Australia to live, will they both be suspended?
gk is in a tough situation when these breaches are detected as I suspect 'they' will not publish their findings for all to see. my dealings with gk have always been handled fairly, and yes I have run foul of admin on the odd occasion but I do believe that most of the time gk gets it right. for those who believe they have been wrongly accused and punished, I suggest the use of private emails or pm's rather than a public soapbox as being a better way to handle things.
|
daphsa03
8/06/2007
01:53:49
[ report abuse ] | answer to zmeyko
Message:
1. I published these lines, because I find the subject important. We are individuals we use the phrases, vocabulary have. The most important thing is that we can communicate.
2. It is sad, that a member on this site is reporting my add to GK, there is nothing I wrote abusing anybody, the only abused is “mazsola”. It would be much better if that person developed his opposing opinion.
3. I have no intention to start a debate about rights about who should be authorized writing the rules, it is GK’s sovereign right, but the rules have to fir the US national law. GK’s practicing of the rules is discriminating and that is my add all about
4. I’m a lawyer, normal case I work as prosecutor. I’m not questioning the rules, I question the way they practice them, but mostly I find it totally unacceptable, that a “perpetrators” never gets never chance of higher and independent instance to prove their innocence.
The rules are just fine, without rule the site would turn to a paradise for “wild roses”, but as you said nobody is perfect, we need GK admit that.
5. The reason behind the multiple accounts/paid accounts policy, according GK's own statement is that a person's credit card, account number serves as a verification of a distinct identity. Yes it is correct, it is an evidence and verification for 1 single player, at same time GK invites us to pay for other member’s membership, it opens a possibility for a person with loaded credit card to pay any number of accounts, build a team of his own. This fact makes that a problem with multiple accounts remains, but GK seems to not only accept it but also propagating for it ”pay for an other players membership”. Who can guarantee that the other player is really an other player, no one, but as I said, it doesn’t bother GK. What I try to say that it is an inconsequence in GK policy, a paying member can have many accounts, a free member can’t play on campus computer because they get immediately caught by the automated monitoring system GK should have some kind of ID check to make sure that player A, B and C are different person despite of using same computer.
6. My husband “mazsola” already proved his identity by paying 3 years Platinum membership, he decided to downgrade his account and starting from September play just a few games, dedicate his time for helping members to improve their chess and set up a team site. We have a UN assignment in Indonesia, when the assignment is over we plan to a 6 months long safari to Africa, we have no need for a premium membership for a while. Unfortunately GK preferred to get rid of him. They don’t answer to his mail. We on the team decided to act because he can’t communicate with anybody beside of me
7. The story of brendanibar is a story of thousand of players on GK “jgszabo” got his membership paid by his 3 sons, it was a birthday gift from them, the kids remained free members, The family gathered to a Christmas celebration, they also made some moves from father’s computer, the 3 sons got captured by GK monitor and their account got terminated., we know lots of similar stories
8. “mazsola” is professional computer scientist, according to him 3 to 4 hours of a programming for a skilled programmer and situations like his would be eliminated. It is very simple to check the players IP number and who and how many players are using it and how many moves if any were made there by every single players. It is more difficult with a campus and library computers also internet coffee PCs, in this situation is a real ID check is necessary and probably it is the only solution. The problem is not if that is possible, the question is if GK wants to improve their monitoring system or not.
9. Thank you for your support and I hope the visitors and readers of this forum want a discussion and kill it.
Regards Junie
|
arpad
8/07/2007
00:14:49
[ report abuse ] | I cannot believe it !!!
Message:
Hello!
I heard about Imre's "punishment" and i was simply shocked.
Today i sent a message to GK with the following content:
---------
Hello!
I heard about punishment of player "Henry Mazsola" of the "Hungarian Wanderers".
It is very very strange for me, because i know Henry as an absolutely fair player. Henry is the team captain of the "Hungarian Wanderers" and i remember very well, that he never accepted wrong behaviour (timeouts, cheating and so on).
Henry is a powerful example for fairness and correctness in GK.
In my opinion, you should cancel his punishment and reinstate his account immediately!
At least, please explain your reasons of punishing Henry.
I think, you should answer to this important question. In case of no answer of your side, i think of cancelling my membership on GK.
Regards
Arpad.
----------
Here is my announcement to all thinking and brave GK members:
Please support Imre (Henry Mazsola) with protest messages to GK and inform other
GK members about that case.
My thoughts are also with Junie.
We shall overcome....
With friendly regards
Arpad.
|
daphsa03
8/07/2007
03:39:07
[ report abuse ] | answer to Arpad
Message:
Thank you for your add Gerold!
We are discussing "mazsola" today, but it is an overall problem, all captains recognize the situation, a member suddenly turnssilent and becomes inactive. I'm sure most of the cases it isn't a lack of interest plaing, but it is the GK monitoring system is to be blamed. The problem is not new, upon this it is irritating that the knowlege of it doesn't trigger a modification of an inadquate program. Unfortunately it is about greed Mammon is GK's guide
Regards to a friend
Junie
|
magyar
8/07/2007
10:07:27
[ report abuse ] | Membership
Message:
I believe an injustice has been wrought by GK.
I have dealt with Mazsola many times in arranging matches. And many times when matches could not be created between out teams
EVERY SINGLE TIME I HAVE felt that he is the most honorable captain with most integrity on GK
Magyar
Captain of Polg@r's Knights
|
skipslot
8/07/2007
12:12:07
[ report abuse ] |
Message:
Under the circumstances I am not surprised by the results of what has happened
here. I have seen it happen to so many people over the years but to
the premium members it hits harder because they have paid their way at some point. Its like the business expects everyone to remain premium forever and the only other option is a restricted account if you fail to keep paying. Doesn't give much incentive to purchase premium if one is considering it.
I have at times purchased premium memberships for members but don't practice that anymore because of what happened to some of the members. One player's financial situation was such that he could afford to pay premium memberships afterward, so it didn't become an issue. But one member could not after I bought them a years sub. That person has not logged on for almost 200 days now because of restrictions put in place when they failed to cough up the dough for continued support.
I had one team member who was kicked off for unknown reasons. He wasn't a premium member but decided to go to China and study something there that he was interested in. He thought he could take his chess with him, but the monitor caught him, I guess. I couldn't communicate with him and hadn't got his email yet, something I guess should be a requirement again when joining a team because our messaging system here doesn't work on restricted accounts.
I can go on and on with examples, but everyone's seen it. Chess is an activity that people at various times take a sabbatical from, but GK policy does not seem to see it that way.
The business philosophy here is called micro management. Attempting to control every aspect of what is happening at every given time and having subordinates accountable for all actions. In this case the subordinates are the site customers, the money coughers that support new features, activities and always new and improved functions.
I believe this multiple account monitor does have many bugs in it. I can't imagine so many people getting bit by it so many times without reason. Like most things nowadays humans rely on a machine to do its work. But if a human isn't watching its actions, then they might find their money machine drying up eventually do to lack of support and consumer confidence in its product.
I do enjoy this site, but have to make an informed decision on future support if something isn't done to resolve issues like this. This isn't the first time and chances are it will not be the last. The replies I've seen on the subject in the past have been very vague and I except the same in the future as well. Somehow the site has to evolve past this issue.
|
davewv
8/07/2007
13:16:26
[ report abuse ] | veemutema
Message:
I can only sympathize. I still have not forgotten the unfair and wrong treatment of Veemutema. She was a 16 year old girl on my team (Brothers) from Zimbabwe. She and her dad were in an auto accident and she was gone for some time. Also at the time Zimbabwe was having major political issues, so the team worried a lot about her. She was a beloved team member and we loved her. She was such a fine outstanding and smart young person. I did tell GK that I went on the site in her behalf and postponed her games when I heard about the accident. At the time I did not realize this would trigger the multi-user monster. It did and they removed her from my team. Many messages and explanations (that it was not her fault) were not heeded. I allowed that if anyone should be kicked off it should be me....not her (she was a free member). This was over a year ago and we have not heard from her since. I still worry what has happened to her. I truly hope she is safe. This chess site may have been her only outlet to the outside world....I do not know. I am not even sure GK would allow her back on if she tried to communicate with us. I do notice that even now when I access her username they list many users who could not possibly be using her computer. One has passed away and one is a ten year old in the USA.
At the time I pleaded with GK that they give Captains the prerogative for postponing games should unforseen accidents and health emergencies happen. They did not listen. I got the usual banter about their automated system from which there is no appeal or extenuating circumstance.
Like I said I completely sympathize with the prevailing opinions in this thread.
davewv (Captain of The Brothers)
|
tag1153
8/07/2007
13:30:37
[ report abuse ] | well said magyar.......
Message:
....mazsola has ALWAYS been the friendliest, most honest, and most fair captain I have ever dealt with. Any question of his ethical behavior is a question wasted. This individual should be re-instated immediately IMHO. I have dealt with mazsola for almost three full years, and he is certainly a gentleman. I urge Mike to please reconsider.
tag1153
Team Captain of Southern Chess
Lifetime Platinum Member
|
eqj2
8/07/2007
13:42:36
[ report abuse ] | A Sad Day
Message:
I am sorry to hear that mazsola was removed one of the finest and honorable chess players and captain that I have ever worked with. I am with tag1153 on this and hopefully Mike reconsiders.
Cheers to all Eddie captain of the Chess Players of the World
|
lm3ut
8/07/2007
15:55:31
[ report abuse ] | Additional problems to ponder
Message:
The stories mentioned above are incredibly poignant and definitely should be considered. This issue has touched all of us, and as mentioned above, is especially evident in team play. I cannot but further agree with the aforementioned comments. However, I, too, feel I must interject with my own story to provide yet another example of the flaws found in the current system.
I am a university student attending Seattle University, in Seattle, Washington USA. I live in the residence halls and am on the university network. Now, I have my own laptop computer, but even still, I sign onto the school network to access the internet. This means that regardless of which computer I use (that is connected to the internet) it will show up as coming from the same IP. Fortunately for me, I believe I am the only player who plays on this website using my network. But what if you're not so lucky. What if people use a public domain to access the internet? This can be done in schools, libraries, internet cafes, bookstores, really anywhere with internet access. Then what happens? I wholeheartedly agree that this is a major issue, especially because it marginalizes those who try to play from public areas.
That is just one issue to think about. There are many more. Families have definitely been served an injustice. My father, brother and me all play on this site. We have different computers now, but we use to all play from the same. It wouldn't let us until we paid. We all used the same credit card. That doesn't matter. It's not about "individual identity", it's about money. We all pay to have multiple accounts, even though I am a lifetime member. Rating manipulation is a major problem to deal with, but why is it so difficult to address? Think about it this way: if we as players believe someone is a cheater, or believe that a team cheats, then we can simply not play against them. GK shouldn't just kick them off for alleged cheating. I mean as it stands now, they are kicking off the wrong people. I think most captains have a pretty good sense of who is and who is not cheating, and I have to agree that the captains should be able to decide. The suggested way of implementing this is through a committee to overall determine who is and who is not a cheater. I think of it like a trial, which should be good. The simple solution, in addition to this, is just to just check out a person's profile. If it's apparent to you, then simply elect to avoid playing team games with them. If everyone did this, we wouldn't have as big of a problem in team games. There's no use to slander that player, and spread the word, but if you personally recognize it then trust that someone else probably does too.
Regards,
Mike
(captain of Mikey's Crew)
|
gameknot_com
8/07/2007
16:09:47
[ report abuse ] | Here we go again....
Message:
I find it a bit strange how the point of this whole message thread was supposed to be that there is a need for an independent panel of impartial GameKnot players that would ensure the fairness of everything that happens on GameKnot. Yet the basis of this "demand" is a situation that wasn't even represented by the initial poster fairly. And now we have more people jumping on the bandwagon of "GameKnot is bad, mazsola was punished for nothing" based on incorrect information. What happened to actually finding out the real facts and only then making the conclusion? I'm calling for creation of an independent panel of impartial GameKnot players that would ensure that all of the assumptions made in these forums are fair and correct. Heck, I demand it!
Now, for the facts: there are 8 other players listed as using the same computer on mazsola's profile page. It is also a well known fact that one of the limitations of a free membership here on GameKnot is that you cannot have too many users listed as playing from the same computer. It didn't apply to mazsola before because as far as I can see from our records, he had a premium membership until recently. Premium subscription expires -- the account status returns to the free membership -- player becomes subject to all the limitations associated with a free account, including how many games can be played at the same time, access to advanced features, and not being able to have too many users listed as playing from the same computer. As simple as that. There was no decision made by anyone (well, not anyone human at least) -- there's an automated script that runs on the server each night that takes care of it.
Let me reiterate it one more time, just in case it wasn't clear -- mazsola wasn't "punished" for anything, mazsola wasn't accused of anything, mazsola hasn't violated any rules that I'm aware of -- all I can see from the server logs is that his account was simply flagged as having too many users listed as playing from the same computer by an automated script.
And no, if someone has other players listed on their profile page, it doesn't mean that GameKnot is accusing said player of cheating. It simply means that the player logged in to his/her account using the same computer as someone else (or vice versa) on more than one occasion. Which, to keep things simple, is not allowed if you have a free account. Also, I hope everyone realizes that there's no reason for logging in to anyone else's account, not to mention that it is expressly prohibited by GameKnot rules. If someone you know needs a postponement, but unable to do so themselves, please have them contact us directly (or do it for them, if they cannot access Internet at all) and we will postpone their games for them.
Now, it has already been debated ad nauseam how GameKnot is such a greedy monster for limiting free accounts in so many ways. Is it unfair that you have to subscribe to a premium membership if you don't want to be subjected to the limitations of a free one? Well, I don't know -- is it unfair that you have to pay for your groceries? Or for your beer? Or to have your car washed? Or to see a movie or play a videogame?
And lastly, I can see people calling for making an exception in this case. Personally, I'm all for it. Someone who has so many friends on GameKnot probably even deserves it. But you see, once that happens, you start getting questions like "you made an exception in case of player A, how come you cannot make the same exception in case of player B"? And there's no fair answer to that question. Which is the reason why unfortunately it is GameKnot's policy not to make any exceptions, no matter how deserving the person is. I hope you all understand.
|
annie-jade
8/07/2007
16:22:55
[ report abuse ] | This is shameful!!!
Message:
Hello Junie and everybody. I am a co-admin of the JADE STARS discussion board, and a co-founder of the JADE STARS -> gameknot.com chess team at GK. As a Hungarian-speaker, I have had some friendly interest in the Hungarian Wanderers team for a long time, and have occasionally looked in on your forum threads, so I am aware of what a thoroughly decent and honorable person Henry is. Today, the team caught my eye due to its high placing on the teams ratings list, so I looked at your team page just to see what it says now - and was astonished to discover that mazsola was not only no longer the captain, but had apparently even left the team. Due to his great previous involvement, this seemed extremely odd, so I became concerned, and came to the forums next to see if there was anything said about it... and found this shocking thread. I am just so angry now, both on Henry's behalf, and seeing all these other accounts of cold, uncaring, and unfair treatment of upstanding site members by the GK administration!
I have also just realized reading this, that I and two of my teammates are apparently in a similar predicament ourselves, and I think I should also tell our story here, to add our team's information to the pile. I have been asked on occasion by two of my friends and fellow team members, zafarraya and catfriend, to access their accounts, to set vacation flags for them, or to just check how much time they had left in their games, at times when they found themselves cut off from net access. Zafarraya and I are both Premium members, and nothing whatsoever happened when I accessed his account, so I was very surprised and distressed to discover, after I have - just once - accessed catfriend's account, to attempt to postpone games for him, that while zafarraya and I continued to show no other users listed in our profiles, catfriend, who has a free account, immediately started showing both me AND zafarraya as other users playing from his computer! As it makes very little sense for GK to mark him out of the three of us otherwise, our conclusion is that GK's policy is simply to pick on the free accounts. Now, at the time I was only distressed about the slight to catfriend's reputation (which is entirely uncalled for, in any case, considering that no moves were ever made by any of us in anybody else's games but their own, and we never would have done such a thing), but now I also realize that this state of affairs means that neither zafarraya nor I can ever stop paying for Premium membership, for any time, because if one of us does, both that one of us, and catfriend may well find ourselves kicked off the site! Frankly, I am feeling simply blackmailed right now.
I fully agree with both Junie and skipslot's posts. The GK administration's attitude of treating their site as "strictly business", which becomes quite evident as soon as you scratch the surface, is abhorrent. Sure, GK is a commercial site... but come on, if you are running a site that has pretenses of being a community (as evidenced by the promotion of on-site social activities, such as the formation of teams, clubs, etc), you also have a responsibility to treat your "community members" as human beings, and to act like a human being yourself. You can't have it both ways!
|
annie-jade
8/07/2007
16:31:20
[ report abuse ] | cross-post
Message:
Cross-posted, gameknot_com, but nevertheless, my point stands. If you are running a community, you can't just entirely shirk the duty of taking personal interest in your members, and hide behind automatons. Yeah, it's a bit of work. Tough.
Err, contact you to ask that you postpone people's games for them? You have got to be kidding! With a 3-day waiting period, they'd all time out before you get around to it! And then it would be "oh well, we can't reinstate, sorry", right?
Mind you, I am not all gung ho to have you nominated the devil incarnate. You guys really do a fantastic job in most ways, and the constant technical improvements are much appreciated. But please, rethink some things.
|
heinzkat
8/07/2007
16:31:46
[ report abuse ] | I agree
Message:
on gameknot_com's statement. I have been banned for a while as well, and GK was totally in its right since I was a free member. mazsola just has too many users listed on his computer for a free account. Simple as that.
|
heinzkat
8/07/2007
16:40:07
[ report abuse ] | By the way...
Message:
It would be really disappointing if this message thread would be deleted...
|
zafarraya
8/07/2007
18:11:59
[ report abuse ] | I disagree with GameKnot
Message:
I am the Captain of JADE STARS and if I am reading GameKnot's reply carefully and understand it, I am appalled.
If I am a premium member and others use my comp to play at GameKnot with free accounts, and then I decide to take a break and become a free member, I will be banned for having too many accounts from my comp? So, in effect I am being blackmailed into retaining my premium membership.
And, as in Annie_Jade's example, if either she or I become a free member, we all get the boot? Please clarify this GameKnot and explain why it isn't blackmail to remain a premium member - not sure whether to be glad I just renewed or not here.
And, while you say it is easy to contact you, it is indeed not the case. What if the player has a few hours left and can't get online for whatever reason? Captains should have the right to access other teams member's accounts to postpone. Or will you provide an email address where people can email you and a telelphone number (since they may not be able to get on the net) that you will answer within minutes and not hours or days? And will you guarantee that no one will time out if you don't reply in a timely fashion and postpone for us? And what will you do when you say you didn't get the mail, but people can prove it was sent to you? Sounds rather time consuming.
As for reinstating mazsola, you are simply making an excuse. Exceptions can and are made in real life, in real businesses every day. There is the legal thing (or by the rules thing to do) and then there is the RIGHT thing to do. Go do the right thing.
Zafarraya
|
gameknot_com
8/07/2007
19:27:00
[ report abuse ] |
Message:
Zafarraya, let me get this straight, you are appalled that you cannot get something for free? I really don't understand why some people keep expecting that they should be able to get everything for free on the Internet? And that they are appalled, shocked and feel like they are getting blackmailed when they discover that companies and people providing services to them kind of sort of prefer to get paid for what they do so that they can in turn give the money to someone else to get something to eat or to provide shelter for their families...
|
zafarraya
8/07/2007
19:49:49
[ report abuse ] | reply to GameKnot
Message:
No, read the post please. I am not appalled that I cannot get something for free. You are making a strawman argument, please don't do that.
This is not the issue, please don't change the subject and please answer my questions.
I happily pay for GameKnot - have since day one - but then you know that. But if I choose to take a sabbatical and go to free membership for a while, I risk being banned and removed from my team because of the above issues. Please address those issues. No one is asking for "free" anything here. But, in effect I am being forced to continue premium membership when I otherwise might not be needing or using all the premium membership's services.
Zafarraya
|
mal57
8/07/2007
20:13:10
[ report abuse ] | GameKNot's automation simply is inaccurate
Message:
In the original post, comment was made regarding viking 2, former Team Captain for The Red, White, and Bue Chess Team, of which I am currently the Team Captain. I can say that he and I have never had access to either of the other's computers, nor others mentioned in the original post. As I understand GameKnot's automation and reporting, supposedly it logs when a player on GameKnot logs in from the same computer as another player. This is quite simply untrue. At one point in time, my account which is a paid account, listed a bunch of players logging in to my account from the same computer (i.e. not a "free" account for which GameKnot alleges its automated script runs). This occurred when I previously was on the team and then left the team for a while. Some I knew that became listed as logging in from my computer and were on the team, others I did not know at all. Not one ever had access to my computer as mentioned by GameKnot (and some posts in cases such as family members). I inquired to GameKnot and never got a satisfactory answer how its system could do so. In some cases while on the team previously, I had someone log into my account to set my vacation flag during emergency situations. I have various medical problems that can result in emergency hospitalizations. GameKnot says to contact them in such a situation, but if you send a message to GameKnot it expressly states that it could take a few days (!) to get a response (and often does !!!). Timeouts in many cases such as that cannot be prevented by GameKnot and relying on it is simply impossible to prevent losses for the team. Having teams put into place a system for the team with its Captains and others on the team looking out for team members is a reasonable and practicable solution. Yet, GameKnot rigidly refuses to acknowledge the concept of "team" and team administration.
|
tag1153
8/07/2007
20:38:10
[ report abuse ] | Mike
Message:
There are so many people like me that practically live on GK. I can rattle them off just as I'm sure you can. I fully understand that this is one of those "rock and a hard place" kind of things. We just miss our friend. We probably did jump in too quickly, but just to stand up for our friend. I don't have the first clue as to the technical aspects of the multiple user issue, so I offer no "solution". I do, however, offer my services should any future need arise for member involvement. I can't imagine playing my on line chess ANYWHERE else. GK is widely held to be a top tier chess site, and will always be where I go to play. I hope an outcome acceptable to all will arise.
tag1153
|
dafool
8/07/2007
22:42:50
[ report abuse ] | Work with or without pay
Message:
Running a site like this is not free. Try running a web site somewhere else than on university/college/school server and you soon learn that every byte transferred in and out costs you money. Try running a forum and you soon learn that there are not enough hours in a day to you serve your angry community members who accuse each other for being idiots, complain about viagra adds all over your site and meantime post illegal and offensive material to your site. Soon you will also deal with more inventive means that people are using to profit from your loss or otherwise get personal gain while hurting someone else. There will be misunderstandings and hurt feelings when people get corrected and soon you will read from every competing site and board what kind of a****le you are. Soon you either stop working and improving your service or stop listening and raise the compensation. There is also the turn side of the thing. If your site grows enough, it becomes more like a privately funded community generating revenue (hopefully) to you. Then if you wish to continue to grow still more and do good business it pays to donate back to your community.
What Gameknot said in this case was: a customer stopped paying so his computer and account become void of protection of money and subject of more strict rules. His computer did not apply rules and as a consequence he was automatically kicked out. Gameknot said that they recognize Henry's status as a good and respected community member and therefore are sad they can not make an exception to the rules. And I think that is what we should respect. I am also very sad that Henry got "kicked out". I think Henry's team was and is one of the best run teams on this site. I also liked to play him because I was sure that I was not playing against a committee or a computer program.
What we could do is
1) Donate money for Henry's membership
2) Propose a change of the overall charging policy. Let's say that gameknot raises fees for 1% and that 1% of collected money goes to a different account where it will be used to sponsor premium memberships for respected community members. I think Henry would qualify for a sponsorship.
3) Propose a better way to automatically detect rule breakers or even donate code to do that. Asking for them to just stop protecting their revenue and continuance of this site is not leading anywhere but more hurt feelings. It is a lot easier to point at things that are broken than find means to fix them! And sometimes the broken things do adequate job and they should be left untouched.
|
schaakhamster
8/07/2007
22:43:12
[ report abuse ] | I find the log
Message:
in for vacation flag setting not acceptable: who say you only set the vacation flag? For the rest: if you don't want this to to happen, stay a paying member.
|
lm3ut
8/07/2007
22:50:51
[ report abuse ] |
Message:
i feel like neither side is willing to compromise, and so we're ultimately not getting anywhere. what would it take to see change? what will happen if change does not occur? is there any room for compromise here?
|
joynandi
8/07/2007
23:33:03
[ report abuse ] | What are we cribbing about, again??
Message:
Hello all,
I read through the entire post-trail, and here are my observations and opinions,
1. Whilst what happened to "mazsola" was unfortunate, it was a simple albeit automated decision to not allow multiple players on the same computer if you are a "free" player. When, mazsola downgraded his account from Premium to Free, the rule automatically kicked in.
2. I don't really see what is wrong with this. There are limitations to what a Free player can/can't do and have access too. These are clearly articulated on the site, and you have to be responsible for your decisions/actions should you violate them.
3. A lot of people seem to be taking this example, and others that they know off - as a reflection on the "person" and the fact that he/she was "punished". This is quite frankly, an emotional overstatement. Since a human didn't penalize them, there is no emotion involved.
4. At best we can question - a) the rules, b) the ways to detect violations. On the question of "rules" - if you have a suggestion to make GK more effective, you can provide the suggestion to the GK creator(s). It is, however, entirely their prerogative to implement them. You are buying and/or using (if free) a service. If you are not happy in any way, raise it, if it doesn't change, and you can't live with that decision - go elsewhere. It's a free world. However, I cannot fathom questioning the "motives" of the GK creator(s), on what and how they provide the service.
5. Can the system be improved on detecting "violation" of "rules" - surely - but the question who is paying for it to create an "AI" or "MI" (more intelligent) interface on the rules-checking automaton? If possible, maybe, some genius computer wizkids/wizmen can offer a plug-in to GK creator(s), to improve the rules checking. Currently, rest assured, we all have to and should live with the current status of "rules" and "rules-checking" if we want to stay and enjoy the site. If not, you are always free to go elsewhere.
6. And, finally, on the question of an "elite-panel" to review erring individuals, whilst blatant (or even inadvertent) breaking the rules (which I would put the "multiple player" syndrome in) is something which is "not" a case required to be reviewed, there indeed are instances of using engines to play/manipulate ratings, which can be quite difficult to detect (even with the most advanced detection algorithms). In these cases (and maybe a few others that can be ascertained by popular opinion), maybe a review board can be created. The members on the board can be chosen by GK creator(s) at their own absolute discretion, and the members should be rotated a) periodically, and b) based on the value of their inputs. The second part is subjective, but again, GK creator(s) decision on that should be sole and final. The only question is the "worth" of doing all this from the GK creator(s) point of view. If they don't think, it's worth it - please take it as their "prerogative" and "sole decision" - and do not question it. There are enough challenges managing "egos" of an "elite-panel" on what they think is right or wrong, especially if disagreement is there in the panel.
As has been rightly pointed out - we are all using a service - paid or otherwise - with all their respective limitations (if we think so to be). We can leave if we don't like it.
|
gameknot_com
8/07/2007
23:55:03
[ report abuse ] |
Message:
Tag1153, yeah, I realize that people usually complain the loudest about the things they care about the most. :) If everyone thought that GameKnot was utter rubbish, everyone would've already moved on long time ago. But I sure hope people would also realize that the reason why GameKnot is so popular, and keeps getting more popular every year, is because of the way it is. The hardest thing is finding good balance in everything, and believe it or not, but it is not possible to satisfy everyone. For every dozen complaints we get about how the postponement system is too restrictive and stupid, we get another dozen complaints about how someone is annoyed about their opponents postponing their games all the time. When someone is upset about something on GameKnot, most of the time they simply fail to see the other side. For example, when somebody complaints about the automated system that finds accounts with too many other players listed as using the same computer being... well... too automated and how there should be a human reviewing each case -- they fail to realize that there's close to 1000 new accounts registered on GameKnot each day during peak months and it would be a full time job for someone to check all the accounts manually every day, including weekends. Where would the money come to pay for that person's time? Do I hear from doubling the membership fees? I sure wouldn't want to be the one answering angry e-mails after that announcement. No, I don't think everything here at GameKnot is 100% perfect. But in the 7 years we've been tweaking things at GameKnot, I believe we are getting close to a good balance between keeping most of the players happy and not running out of money to pay for the bandwidth and the necessary upgrades to the servers each year, and to still find time to keep on adding new features and improvements to the site (which also costs a lot of money, by the way, but I'm already starting to sound like a broken record).
Dafool, thank you for offering additional insight into running a self-sustaining website. While it is not quite the way you are describing it at GameKnot, but close enough...
|
heinzkat
8/08/2007
00:29:01
[ report abuse ] | Just one point though...
Message:
Now we're on the subject anyway. The automated suspending accounts just doesn't seem right sometimes. Can't a human review all the accounts that are to be suspended (that an automatic system has detected and listed) and then put those suspensions into effect himself (after reviewing the situation briefly; which doesn't mean he has to do an in-depth research of the situation, of course)? Or are there hundreds/thousands of accounts suspended every day? In which case this point can be neglected :-)
|
zmeyko
8/08/2007
00:52:43
[ report abuse ] | Message
Message:
To Junie:
I certainly did not mean your vocabulary by saying "I would probably rephrase certain passages". I meant to say that, for example, it would be incorrect to call an imprefection of GK system a punishment, etc. The subject you have raised is a very serious one, and the way I see it, both sides need to view it from the other's perspective in order to find an acceptable solution. Just like yourself and many others who read and posted to this thread, I am very interested in it staying alive and not getting deleted - so perhaps we should refrain from rash words. This is only my opinion, of course, and I apologize if my first post caused misunderstanding.
As for Mazsola , I know him as a very friendly and exceptionally polite person, and honorable and cooperative team captain. I am appalled to learn that his account has been deleted - just as I am appalled to see my teammate Brendanibar 's name removed from my team, for the exact same reason! But I understand that there is nothing personal in either situation, there is just a system which, I believe, can and should be set up in a better way than now.
To All (mainly addressing No.2 and 3 in dafool 's post):
1. Just repeating the obvious - the multiple accounts/paid accounts system doesn't work to the satisfaction of many who posted here - and of many who didn't, particularly in the case of downgrading one's account or when logging in to another's account to prevent timeouts. (I agree, joynandi , we are using a service - and it is natural to wish for improvements in it. To its credit and, ultimately, its and our benefit, GameKnot has always tried to listen to its customers, at least in my experience. And that's the way to go from the business point of view as well as from simply being human.)
2. In the case of downgrading, the former paying members are likely to become paying members again, after taking their break. But it is they who should determine the duration of their break - and not the fact that their privileges got automatically cut off and they must either pay or have no account at all.
3. In the case of logging in to another's account, people go against the rules simply because the system doesn't offer an alternative. Contacting GK to postpone one's games is unrealistic.
4. The existing system doesn't work well in verifying players' identites by credit cards - Junie and Mike, thank you for explaining this one! (See posts by daphsa03, 8/06/2007 01:53:49, item 5, and by lm3ut, 8/07/2007 15:55:31, last paragraph.)
5. An alternative verification system based on IP addresses and such wouldn't work either, because of public Internet access points like a school or a cafe, and because of proxies and IP masking. And setting up a human to watch over multiple accounts, even in the way heinzkat suggested, means extra time and money.
6. In addition to whatever income paying members bring to GK, there is another - and very tangible - value (or lack thereof) both paying and non-paying members carry. GameKnot is a community site, and people come and (especially) stay here not only for the features, but for friends, teammates, eternal chess foes, favorite forum posters etc. The number of people who sprang up to Maszola 's defense tells something of this member's community value. Those chess sites who invite famous GMs for exhibition games - probably paying them an appearance fee - do so because of the GMs' community value.
7. Multitudes of non-chess community sites and public forums employ one or another sort of community value ratings. These ratings are usually based on members' activity (e.g., number or frequency of forum posts) or other members feedback (e.g., 20 people said thank you to member A for a particular post), or a combination of both. Perhaps number of forum posts isn't so good a criterion for a chess site purposes, but how about others' feedback? Let's say a few veteran GK players like tag and gothicgirl get N community "points" to award to N people of their choosing. The chosen get their N "points" to award to the next wave, etc. The waves will inevitably intersect, some people will get more points and some less, in the end pretty accurately representing their community value. This is the simplest possible setup; there are more complex and more accurate ones.
8. Members who accumulated a certain community rating score - let's call it "qualification score" - or a higher one, cannot have their accounts deleted or access rights revoked automatically, but only as a result of GK's direct action. Qualification score should be set reasonably low to allow for busy lifestyles and introvert personalities. It will still be a more consistent, if indirect, way to verify identity.
9. Besides solving the problem discussed in this thread, the introduction of community value score may prevent many instances of undesirable behavior (while disciplinary measures can only prevent repetitions) and act as a powerful incentive for everyone to be nice to each other.
10. Yes, it would require another table in the database and all that. More importantly, it's a bit more of a change than the annotated games or the green dot feature. But it would solve the problem - and this problem, I daresay, is causing more than mere dissatisfaction. Just imagine what Maszola must be feeling...
Thanks all,
Oleg.
|
joeblacky
8/08/2007
02:14:03
[ report abuse ] | Suggestion
Message:
Just a little suggestion on how the monitoring system can be improved. I think it would be beneficial and fair if a time stamp was added to the players logging in from the same computer and monitoring the date of the last login. When the last login time exceeds a fix period of time (i.e. a month) then this players info should be removed from the list of players playing on the same computer.
I think this might be a solution to most of the players experiencing this problem. IMHO the only problem with the monitoring system is that it only increases the list of player playing on the same computer, never decreasing it and that is a serious issue as it causes allot of problems to respectful and dedicated players. I had the same problem a few years ago, when I went to a Internet Cafe and logged in to GK, only to find the next day that my account was locked.
I hope this is a usefull suggestion and I think it will help.
|
daphsa03
8/08/2007
04:27:20
[ report abuse ] | answering to GameKnot
Message:
Thank you all for adds, I’m also greateful to GameKnot for taking this discussion. I went public because I know this problem isn’t only mazsola, every team is suffering of it.
I’m accused by GK that my presentation of the subject is unfair. I don’t know what is unfair in my presentation mazsola is kicked from the team and revoked from all his right as player. I always believed that it was up to the team captains to accept, to reject and remove a member on the team except in case of cheating, obvious rating manipulation. You declare that mazsola isn’t for for any wrong doing, not cheating either. He is accused for opening and playing multiple accounts, gentlemen to me that is cheating and revoking mazsola’s account is a punishment, I’m a lawyer do I have wrong with a terminology? Yes of course you can’t do any exceptions, I never asked you for favoritism, but taking cover behind your automated monitoring system is not a solution. Why don’t you take a manual check of what happened. Account acramax07 is a probable reason to the multiple account list. Do you give it a time you find that not a single move was made from our computer. I share a link with my husband as I share lot of other things with him, after all we been married for 16 years now.
I hate when I have to repeat my self, but these are the facts. A player acramax07 enjoyed the team, mazsola sent him the English version of the rules, he asked the player to set his team game settings to minimum 4 but not more than 8 games, after the first challenge was settled indicator disappeared from the screen, mazsola contacted the player and asked him to set to at least 4 games, the player replied that he did. We are talking about a premium player, mazsola couldn’t understand why the player can’t get more games, he had only 13 active games, mazsola sent you a mail and asked you to check out the account, he also wrote to you that he gonna open the account and check if the setting is correct. Your messaging system takes 3 days some times when weekend is involved 5, the captains live in a real time world they have to take decision on spot and immediately. Opening the account wasn’t an act of cheating but act of service to the new member on the team. You replied some days later, acramax07 has a bronze premium membership with 12 maximum individual games, till today I didn’t find a description of the bronze premium membership.
What I’m asking you to do is checking out mazsola’s account and you find that no other player made a single move from our computers, also none of those other accounts been opened from our computer. Please accept the fact that a captain on Hungarian Wanderers doesn’t open an account and start play on Petit Roque.
I also demand on longer term an open communication between GameKnot management and players, an answer “if you don’t like it leave the site” is not an answer when you are confronted with some “hot potatoes”, no one is perfect, it would be welcomed if GameKnot could also admit that and made some efforts to correct errors made by automated system instead of taking cover behind it and like here the first sentence starts with “here we go again”. We absolutely NEED an independent body of “Appeal” so we can eliminate his kind of time killing discussions, else it shall continue the “yes here we go again” and we shall go again and again till the problem remains unsolved. I believe we have thousands of skilled programmers, system analysts on this site. I’m sure they are surprised that this subject isn’t solved yet, it is extremely easy to make some few adjustments in the programs, said by mazsola a PhD in computer science. After such a changes also the monitoring system could trace the difference between making or not making a moves from some certain computers, when and were the different accounts were open.
My drear friend dafool you are very generous, but mazsola would never accept that kind of donation.
This is the background to his will to downgrade his account, btw later this year I do the same. My husband is a UN diplomat working with the tsunami aid program in Indonesia, his assignment expires in February next year after that the entire family( Henry, Junie and 3 kids) shall to Africa for 3 to 6 months, we shall live in the outback with no chance for chess games, at least without risking timeouts. When he decided to resign as a captain, he also decided to downgrade his account, play some few games till we leave for Africa, we plan to return to Europe and planned to return to GameKnot as premium members in June next year. It is something GameKnot can’t accept, considering this, we are extremely sad to leave all the friends we made, but gameknot’s rigid policy doesn’t leave us any other option than leave the site. We wanted to stay as members on the team and keep a spontaneous contact with the team with those few occasions we may have access to net, the almighty automatic system can’ accept that.
Thanks again for all the adds and all the support, keep nagging till gameknot realizes that it’s time to listen and act in the benefit of all parties, it absolutely includes gameknot too.
Regards Junie
|
brynner
8/08/2007
05:15:41
[ report abuse ] |
Message:
Can you just make it so that when a premium membership terminates, the list of "other users who have used the same computer" clears?
|
malfurion
8/08/2007
05:21:57
[ report abuse ] | Technical Issue
Message:
Hi,
I see a technical issue with these automation scripts Gameknot uses. Or to be more precise: unless they don't use client certificates or similar it is technically not possible to implement a solution which works completely reliable.
How they want to ensure that somebody is abusing an account?
They can check the used ip address and the account name, but what do they achieve with this? Almost nothing, because most users use dial up networks and get different ip addresses with each login and if they use different providers then this is even more true. Not to talk about proxy servers hiding the real ip, public Internet access places...
What about sessions? Well, my browser is configured to delete all session cookies when exitting and I would suggest everyone else to configure this in that way. Nobody needs a life-time "cookie-collection".
Another option is to scan as many system specific information (like Browser or OS) as possible. But the information is very limited and looking to my own envirnment with virtual boxes this wouldn't work well.
I guess gk uses kind of heuristics to determine if more than one account is used on one pc. This works as good as the underlaying technology allows and leads sometimes to poor results.
I think this procedure is acceptable with "default" free accounts, especially if they're new, but people who already played several years in gk with paid accounts should be handled differently even when they decide to take a longer "rest" and play with a free account for a while.
Regards,
Otto
|
rt4sm
8/08/2007
07:48:41
[ report abuse ] | For gameknot_com's benefit...
Message:
We all appreciate your efforts to provide us with a good site and rules obviously need to be enforced, but this does not excuse the arrogant replies you've managed to come up with. How can you compare this site to hard working families efforts to make ends meet e.g. buying groceries? Do you really think gameknot is life and death? If you do, that's quite sad. You also rattle on about how mazsola fully deserved to have their account disabled for whatever reason. Have you noticed that countless other GK members have had their accounts disabled for no reason whatsoever? This is not an isolated case, it happens all the time, but you do nothing about it, pretending everything is perfect like a politician.
You've also said how your right and everyone else is wrong. is this really the way to discuss things? It's good that you've bothered to reply to our complaints, but the way you've done it makes yourself out to be some kind of saint, this is not the approach you should be taking. You said yourself in your first message that we should be using this for sensible arguments, but your arguments are extremely childish. For example, you say you haven't punished mazsola when you quite clearly have, do you think we're stupid enough to believe that? you also say you can't afford to pay someone for doing a full-time job, but then you boast about how GK is the most popular chess site on the web. If this is true, you must have plenty of money coming in, these arguments seem contradictory to me. You said we should be basing our arguments on facts, but your not!
There is no doubt this is a very good chess website and you've done a good job designing it, but great program designers do not make great people, whatever you might think. When presenting your arguments, you need to make sound like a civilized person who people can feel ok talking to and feel your actually taking their arguments into consideration, not like some kind of dictator who scorns and ignores other peoples views. I might get into trouble for saying this, but if i'm not wanted on GK i've got better things to do with my time, i can live with that.
|
daphsa03
8/08/2007
08:21:35
[ report abuse ] | answer to Im3ut
Message:
Yes of course a compromise, but what can mazsola offer? He can't communicate, GameKnot didn't even answer to his mail. The new team captain remete sent a mail to GameKnot, the petition was supported by long list number of players on the team. The answer was "mazsola's account due violation of F.A.Q #16 is revoked" or something like that.
The only acceptable solution is that GameKnot takes a look at their racords, before acramax07's appearance on the site had mazsola only 2 accounts connected to his computer, his own and mine.
Till GameKnot keeps like a parrot repeating "our automatic monitoring system" there is no compromise and no solution
Cheers Junie
|
daphsa03
8/08/2007
08:39:56
[ report abuse ] | about rt4sm's add
Message:
When I wrote my first add here I had a sentens telling that I challenge the intelligence of GameKnot, in hope there is some one who can read it, understand it and give an acceptable answer to it. I know they read at least part of my add, but they are not even close to undestand it and no solution in sight. I hope they read rt4sm's add, it can't be said better.
Money is a solution and if necessary take a food from your kids and instead of giving them pair of shoes, pay your fee to GameKnot, even if a player has no intention to play for 6 to 7 months
Thank you for your add rt4sm it gives new life and energy to this debate
|
j1mmy
8/08/2007
10:12:13
[ report abuse ] | Things dont add up
Message:
Although i understand the reasons stated for removal, i feel that in this case it seems GK may have over reacted, surley when cases are disputed a human aproach and comone sense can be injeted! i am not a 'tecki' but it seems someone who has a solid reptuation and many team caps who have defended him the case should be reviewed! it would suck to be removed from something you were passionate about when not even a human made that important choice! i love the site, dont mind my subs, but want a manager to look into this matter as a customer
|
graderguy
8/08/2007
10:14:00
[ report abuse ] | Brynner's suggestion
Message:
There you have it folks, an easy to implement solution! Good job Brynner!
*Can you just make it so that when a premium membership terminates, the list of "other
users who have used the same computer" clears?*
From my reading of this thread, this action would clear up the problems with mazsola and the
others who have had previously paid accounts terminated when they they go "free". If the
users on the computer increases after this purge, then it might be assumed that other forces
are at play and then the account termination would be more reasonable.
I also believe the suggestion for allowing team captains to help their players out in situations
like illness, unexpected travel, etc and allow the captain to set vacation flags (and nothing
else, to avoid the possibility of "helping" by making a move) is a good one, and couldn't be all
that hard to implement.
Also, rt4sm has a good point, keeping discussions reasonable and addressing the issues at
hand rather than using hyperbole would do much to actually _solve_ this seemingly real
problem. The internet can easily turn normal folks into leering, cretinous fools and I hate to
see that on a site that offers an intellectual pursuit such as chess.
As Mom always tells me, "Keep it civil, dave."
I hope a decent resolution to this can be found. Playing chess is much more entertaining!
|
wiracocha
8/08/2007
10:23:35
[ report abuse ] | Abuses
Message:
I say! These is quite a problem indeed, I thought that there were no cheating in chess, but if there is, my friends, report it and smash it. In my computer there are two people playing sometimes (me and my brother, I hope there's no problems with that).
According to what I have readed here from daphsa03, I've formed my own opinion which has weight as much as another one here. Maszola, former captain of Hungarian Wanderers, has been framed by those that he proved to be cheaters and GK administration did found him guilty for others misbehaveour, so the right thing to be done is an apologize from GK administration, the punishment of the real guilty ones and a simple question: Does Maszola want to come back and share our entertainment chess family?
Chess is an ethic game, let's just keep it like this and enjoy it.
Join the good ones and be like them!
Daphsa03, you may count on me to critisize whatever may be wrong.
|
michael_qin
8/08/2007
13:04:40
[ report abuse ] | Hi
Message:
I have had many experiences arranging matches with Maszola, and I believe he is a fair and honorable player.
I agree that the formation of an independent court that could make calls with more careful screening than automatic records.
|
spygirl
8/08/2007
13:49:00
[ report abuse ] | I know of at least one person...
Message:
who was a paying member and actively played with 2 accounts and said person was simply forced to delete one of the accounts. That was a direct violation of Gameknot policy, but said person wasn't prohibited from accessing the site and is, in fact, an active player here today. Said player, from what I know, has since been an exemplary gk member and is very well known and well liked, and I don't have a problem with that since said player now follows the rules.
I suppose the point I'm trying to make is that the rules should be applied uniformly in all cases, and I can understand Mike's argument about "well if player A did this, then player b did this..."
But I think, unfortunately, this situation is slightly different. I have always had the deepest and utmost respect for mazsola, and in fact, helped him catch a cheater or two on this site.
From my perspective, Gameknot's argument is that mazsola's membership was downgraded to a free membership and as a result, Henry lost the protections and benefits of a premium subscription. It appears that the consensus of most people on here is that he should've been cut some slack because he was a good paying, well-respected premium subscriber for years and perhaps should've been afforded certain protections...or at least had someone manually review his account before it was suspended.
I may not be popular for espousing this opinion, but if one is not paying for a premium membership, then one should be subject to the rules and regulations of a free membership, including a limitation on how many people play from one computer. In my heart of hearts, I don't think mazsola engaged in any kind of cheating and I think it was wrong to suspend mazsola's account...I really do. But tend to agree with Gameknot's position in that if one has a free membership, one should be subject to those rules. Whether mazsola even realized that having more than one free account on a computer was a violation of gk rules is hard to tell. I also believe that, with hundreds of thousands of members on here, it would be impossible to make individual judgment calls on who really violated the rules of this site and who didn't...Hence the computer's automatic suspension.
I'm not sure how practical an independent court would be on this site, honestly. I think there are groups of people who are friends and then you run into favoritism and a bunch of people who may disagree, language barriers, and all other myriad issues...
I'm afraid there is no easy solution to this problem.
|
silverrook_2000
8/08/2007
19:24:12
[ report abuse ] | A very complex situation
Message:
I am a captain here and have been for a couple of years. I took over from a previous captain as a temporary replacement until he recovered his health. I have lost players on the two users from one computer rule (they were brothers) and I understand the problems that gameknot has with people who abuse the system. I play on a number of other sites and I have a chess site of my own although it is not a playing site. It's a tremendous amount of effort to come up with the bandwidth and the software to run this site. Since I am a system admin in real life, I also know how much effort it takes to run a site of this size. I think Gameknot is to be commended for allowing people to pay for free at all. While there are other sites who do, with one exception this the only side I know of that combines the features, the interface and the breadth of competition and allows you up to 10 games for free. That having been said, the management could stand to be a little more customer centric and at least try and address some of the problems that have been brought up in this series of posts. Not because of the players, but for the good of the site and its fiscal health. If the ads on the site don't provide enough revenue, perhaps Gameknot should try charging everyone. That would solve the revenue issue. If you had a basic membership of say $20 a year for 20 games at time, you would be able to have a registration system that would allow you register everyone and a disincentive for a person having multiple ids. If everyone is paying, than the fact that they play from a number of different machines or on the same machine is not relevant, everyone is paying member. If you prorated the membership with a 6 month and yearly membership, the cost should be quite reasonable and you know longer have worry about a free membership. You can offer a month trial as an alternative. Obviously, even with the tremendous number of players on the site, advertising is not covering your costs or generating a profit so it makes no sense to offer free accounts in the first place. Would this shrink the number of players on gameknot? Probably, but that will have the effect of lowering costs while increasing your revenue base. For players who cannot afford the modest basic fee, there are lots of other playing sites they can go to for no charge. I think an automated system with no appeal is poor business. Almost all governments and most private corporations have some sort of appeal process and you are not compromising your integrity if you do it on a case by case basis. It's a shame to see people so unhappy, especially with a site that has been done so well. I know Henry and I think you should reinstate him based on the fact that he had a platinium membership and is certainly not cheating. To make this work, create some appeals criteria, follow them and that should take care of the problem.
|
linizar
8/08/2007
21:16:21
[ report abuse ] | GK rules but...
Message:
Hello,
GK rules is to use only one account per person, it should be at least one message of alert to captain of the team if there is such problem found.
deleting them is not good.
I know Mazola he is a very good player and Captain.
I don't think that he did that for cheating.
GK Rules should change to give Captain of teams more apreciation and value
All we love chess and we want to play with no problem...
GK is one of the best site in the internet.
RULES should be changed and it should be some communication between administrator of the site and Team captains.
|
echuck215
8/08/2007
21:18:29
[ report abuse ] | Could be a big deal, if....
Message:
This could be worthy of players getting upset, it seems to me, IF mazsola cannot get his "good standing," team captaincy, and ability to communicate and play back by continuing to pay for a subscription. If he can get all of those things back, then he is only being restricted as much as any other "free" member. If their loss is only temporary, no injustice is being done. If not, then I think there's a reason to complain, and will join in the complaints! Can anyone clarify this issue for me?
|
gameknot_com
8/08/2007
22:57:49
[ report abuse ] |
Message:
As I already said it in my previous post, player "mazsola" is not being accused of anything. I don't really know how else to say it -- he hasn't done anything "wrong", he is not being suspected of doing anything "wrong", he has not violated any of the GameKnot rules that I know of, and he must be the most fair and honorable person everyone says he is and I have no reasons whatsoever to believe otherwise. The only issue here is that he let his premium subscription expire without renewing, which made his account be subjected to all the limitations that are applied to all other "free" members. I'm a bit tired of explaining the reasoning behind it, so for the simplicity sake, let's just say it is a weird and arbitrary limitation that GameKnot requires of all "free" members that they cannot have more than a couple of other players listed as playing from the same computer. I hope everyone can respect it, since we are talking about complimentary memberships that are FREE! And all it takes to get rid of the limitations of a free membership is to subscribe to a premium membership.
In other words, yes, mazsola can simply get a premium subscription to return his account to the normal status.
Also to clarify, we haven't taken away mazsola's captaincy -- as far as I can see from our records, he had transferred his team captaincy to someone else in the team shortly before his premium subscription expired.
|
zafarraya
8/09/2007
01:12:58
[ report abuse ] | Hello?
Message:
You aren't listening GameKnot and you refuse to answer specific questions - how is that constructive?
If I have a premium membership, I am allowed to have different players using the same computer. I pay for that. Fine If I have a free membership, I am not. Fine. No issue there. However, if I revert to free membership, I should not be punished for something that happened in the past, while I was a paying member, ie multiple players from one computer. I paid for that privilege at that time. I should not be penalised for something I paid for and something that happened in the past.
If, however, I go to free membership and have multiple users, then of course I am bound to follow the rules, as imprecise as they may be.
A number of solutions have been offered - you have not responded to any.
Zafarraya
|
echuck215
8/09/2007
01:29:01
[ report abuse ] | Hmm...
Message:
I feel like the two sides are talking past each other a bit here. The way I understand it is this: there are certain conditions that cause someone to have the "multiple players from one computer" flag on their account. This flag prevents free accounts from accessing gameknot, but not paid subscriptions. Gameknot is arguing that no deliberate "punishment" is being handed out: the account is being treated like all other free accounts, and if a subscription is bought again, will be treated like all other subscribers.
However, on the other hand, it seems that the reasons that the account came to be "flagged" in the first place happened a while back, and mazsola paid for the privilege of "ignoring" the flagged condition (as do all subscribers). Further, it has been argued, the fact that the "multiple users" happened long ago, and especially the fact that there was a paid membership in between, means that this account should not be treated like "just any other free account," but rather as a "former subscriber" who may have additional rights. So really, the most relevant part of the issue is this: the two sides disagree about the policy that causes free accounts to be flagged. People like zfarraya are arguing that the conditions that cause an account to be flagged ought to be tweaked, so that someone in mazsola's position can still play with a free account. I think it would be more constructive to frame the debate along that issue, and it would be less personal: what are the conditions under which an account becomes "flagged", and could gameknot benefit anyone by changing them?
|
rupert29
8/09/2007
01:46:59
[ report abuse ] |
Message:
I never usually comment on these things, but I have thought of a possible solution.
Can Gameknot implement a loyalty system? As far as I can see, mazsola has been a paid member for a number of years, so why can't an exception in his case be made in the event that he has to downgrade.
To keep him as a customer, Gameknot could allow him to remain as a free member with all the limitations of free membership except for removing him from playing due to 'too many users being listed as playing from the same computer'. After 3 or more years of being a paid member, his identity is obviously not an issue. I think that as a loyal customer for, say, 2 or more years of continuous subscriptions, some slack could be cut.
This could be implemented for all players who pay subscriptions. It makes sense to want to keep a person who, after downgrading, intends to buy another subscription at a later date.
What happened to 'the customer is always right' policy?
So, what I'm trying to say is implement a loyalty program for players who have paid for 2 or more years of membership. Then if they, for whatever reason, need to downgrade they could then revert to being a free member BUT without having other accounts linked to his/her computer. This could probably last for a period of time to be determined by GK admin, perhaps 6 months, perhaps 12months. Then after that period of time it could revert back to COMPLETE free membership which includes the account linking limitation. This gives the player in question a fair go after being a loyal customer.
I think that there are always exceptions and GK should respect that this is so and be able to show a certain amount of flexibility in cases such as this.
It seems to me that mazsolas probable return to being a premium member after a period of time away in Africa is not a huge worry to GK.... which makes me wonder why.... perhaps they are making plenty of money?
I'd like to add that I have always found mazsola to be a decent bloke to deal with.
I hope I make sense.
Cheers,
rupert29 - Captain of VB Fourex United
|
daphsa03
8/09/2007
02:07:21
[ report abuse ] | gentlemen at GameKnot, I'm also sick and tired
Message:
I’m/ we are also sick an tired to trying to make you understand
1 I and and mazsola, we accept the limitations for a free players, but mazsola’s limitation is far much more than an ordinary free member’s
2 What I have difficult to understand, that you like a parrot keep repeating that mazsola didn’t do anything wrong, but as a free players he has to accept the limitations
3 I can’t accept your total lack of will to make a manual check if there was ever made a move from our computer.
4 Mazsola did what almost every captain do they, some times open a members account to check if the setting was correct. He had a communication with about it. Mazsola did it first time and only time during his captaincy, the new member acramax07 is ethnic French, there was some problem with a communication mazsola and acramax07. That is the only account possibly “allowed” to be connected to our computer. Only God knows and almighty GK should also know what the other accounts come from.
5 A manual check would confirm what I’m saying, and after confirmation of this erase those accounts from the list manually and a problem is solved!
6 What I know nobody accused you for removing mazsola from his captaincy, it is picked from some imaginary world, “WE ARE ACCUSED FOR THAT TOO”, no you are not, but YOU REMOVED HIM FROM THE TEAM, correct?
7 Yes mazsola is a popular person, he documented during 3 years his fairness and integrity. He shoe show respect to opponents and fellow captains. He always fought for this site and keeping this site clear from abuse and cheating, your records can witness about that, that is a reason so many captains and players made add declared to support mazsola. I hope they shall keep to do so unless you use your powerful tools to stop it. Obviously a free debate is not so popular at GameKnot, specially when your shortcomings are discussed. All the people on on the thread asking for compromise, some kind of solution and changes/adjustments in the automatic monitoring programs. What is your proposal “ business as usual, money solves everything, pay” sensationally intelligent answer, all these captains and players on this net couldn’t figure out ……???
With other words, who cares how many accounts we have on our computers, do we pay for them, you cover for us. Openly declared!
8 I was mistaking, 3 days of discussions, adds from lot of honorable members, captains on GameKnor and you still didn’t understand or standings, the issue and reason for this discussion. Hopefully the discussion shall go on till you get the picture and start a discussion about
a., changing policy, more friendly attitude to players
b., independent body of appeal
c., adjustment of an obviously inadequate monitoring system
d., a long time premium member after downgrading to free member, specially captains like viking2 and mazsola get their sheet of multiple accounts erased, do the “unknown” accounts pop up later too, than it is obvious and evidenced that the computer is used by more than like in mazsola’s case and daphsa03
e., discussion how to solve a bigger families need for games
f., My proposal is, no more than 2 free accounts per computer, and introducing a junior/family member account 5 dollars a year fee/18 games paid by a member of family or anyone but connected to at least one golden premium member
Finally let’s start a discussion GameKnot in stead of defending your position
|
daphsa03
8/09/2007
02:27:40
[ report abuse ] | a statement forwarded from mazsola
Message:
I write on behalf of my husband and forward a few words from him.
I don't ask for any special favour, I don't beg for contribution and definitively don't need any excetion. I ask for a simple status of a free member, nothing else. I ask for an answer from gameknot, why they in haven sake removed me from the team dispite of their declaration that I'm not accused for anything and as far they know I don't do anything wrong, Halleluyah brother, than why all these limitations.I believ you would be a nightmare in a witness stand whatever you say it is full of contradictions. Finally a manual check of my account and erasing of the accounts never been opened and used from my and my wife's accout. Is this simple request that difficult to understand for GK and perfom?
|
cash1981
8/09/2007
03:36:06
[ report abuse ] |
Message:
I am also a captain and also lifetime member here in gameknot. I have had many players get kicked from this automated system and it blows. But I guess we need it.
What daphsa03 is saying is true. Sometimes there comes names on ones account on players sharing a computer, and I have never heard of that player, and they live in another country. So obviously that script which checks has some strange bugs.
Anyways, mazsola can return to play whenever he wants. He can just start paying again. No harm done. However, my player arshia was banned, even when he was a member for some unknown reason. Hopefully he can return by creating a new account and pay again. I dont know :/
|
| | Maximum number of reply messages has been reached | |
|  |
