Tornelo plus Zoom plus Ken Regan plus pgnspy is where I am at right now!Robin Nandi wrote: ↑Mon Jul 13, 2020 5:59 pmSo do I in one sense - they don't want to deal with the agro of claims and counterclaims. However, given the high rate of cheating in the online format, I believe publishing a list of names is necessary to give those who played fairly confidence that cheaters will be caught and to deter would be cheaters from doing so.
I think it is possible for organisers to publish such a list if they frame it carefully i.e. indicates likelihood of cheating above a certain threshold, like a "pregnancy test" rather than "speed camera". And have a panel for reviewing appeals by players.
I can understand why many players will not play in organised online tournaments if something like this is not in place. There are plenty of hourly tournaments on lichess (e.g. Daily Rapid Arena) with decent players participating. What is the advantage in playing in an organised tournament with no prize money?
One suggestion on the prevention rather than detection front: it might help to require a video call between the players. This means that the players can see each others faces during the game and may notice e.g. if the opponent checks his phone. More importantly, it is much harder to lie to someone while looking at their face.
Actually, I never use the ch... word if I can avoid it. I have seen too many false accusations, and it is ugly. I don't think naming people is appropriate because you can say they are guilty of breaking some rules, but technically they are innocent until proven guilty.
Making accusations about people on a Forum is different to withholding prizes, or deleting results, refusing entries or closing accounts. You are definitely on dodgy ground as a publisher and that means Carl.