Er, yes, fair enough. I did not see the "my account was hacked" defence coming. I was just trying to make the point that amateur anti-cheating is relevant to participation rates.
Actually "my account was hacked" seems important, since it is used quite a lot when someone posts something misjudged and wants to disassociate themselves with the consequences. For those who feel online cheating should have consequences OTB, they should expect to have to deal with this line of defence, whether it is true or not.
I see it as analogous to statistical cheat detection, the people flagged by Ken Regan's software, chess.com or lichess are probably cheats. But they are not proven to be cheats beyond reasonable doubt to the satisfaction of many people. Of course some people consider proof beyond reasonable doubt unnecessary. The "I was hacked" defence is another way for people to create doubt, because in some cases it will be true.
