Cheating in PBEMs

[Choke]

.

[Case]

I discussed this in my article on cheating in the first issue of SLM. Basically, while it would be effective in deterring cheating, it strikes me as being something of an over reaction banning people from a site as large and varied as Apolyton or CFC.

On the other hand, the moderator of the PBEM forum could impliment a better targeted version of what Choke suggests by running IP checks on new players

[Dr. Nick]

For ISPs where IPs are recycled, an IP ban is worthless.

[Pavlov]

Migh I suggest a two strikes you're out-system? One offence is "acceptable" but a second means banning.

[H Tower]

IIRC, the mods have only perma-banned two people, YYYH and Spink. Even civnation has been told that he can come back if he promises not to go all anti-homosexual again

So I have a hard time believing that the admins would ever adopt your proposal.

Besides, what you are suggesting doesn't actually prevent cheating, it prevents people from cheating again. How does the old saying go? Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me. If someone has been caught cheating, other players don't have to let them join in another game.

[techumseh]

One offence is not "acceptable". I think cheating is always unacceptable. However, in some cases, where the cheater admits the action, is sorry for it, and undertakes to promote honesty in PBEM gaming, then the community may decide to allow them to continue in the game(s) they are involved in on a probationary basis.

We need to promote a culture where no self respecting gamer would even think of cheating. IMHO this won't be accomplished if every time someone is caught, most of the players say, " Oh, he's sorry, let's let him continue." This should be the exception, not the rule. In Pavlov's case, he is willing to take part in the debate, even after being caught, and I think that's healthy.

Rather than a strict "one strike and you're out" policy, I think fear of exposure is more effective. I'd like to see more random audits of games by experienced and neutral third parties. While we recently had an unfortunate experience with this in the Mongols game, I think it can work if we have stronger rules about attempting to contact suspected cheaters before going to the forums.

Hats off to Case for his efforts to bring this issue to the attention of the community and to make PBEM cheating unacceptable.

[Dr. Nick]

Boddington is Spink.

[Choke]

.

[yop73]

Maybe we could start a self-help therapy group for ex-cheaters?

[The ANZAC]

Actually, I don't think cheaters should be banned. The forum shouldn't have control who plays in what game. If the people in a certain PBEM want that cheater to play fine, if they don't, fine as well. The forum should however keep track of DLs so we don't get cheaters coming back under aliases. That's my two cents.

[Case]

Originally posted by El Awrence
Boddington is Spink.

And YYYH also returned under a different name. From what I understand, Markos and Dan didn't want to perma-ban those guys, but were pressured into it by the then owners of Aployton's server.

[The ANZAC]

Why did they get banded, again? I think I might have heard it before....

[Case]

They did something extrodinarily dumb on another of the then gamestats forums (flame wars and mass spamming from memory), and the admin of the Gamestats network decided to make an example of them. From what I've read, had they not been banned, Markos and Dan would have lost the site.

[Kull]

Some combination of Awareness & Public Humiliation is better than banning, IMO. Why not establish a "sticky thread" that lists Name, Date, & Sordid Details for anyone caught cheating? Sort of a modern version of the "Stocks" of yore.....

(Then all we'd need is a cool new smiley depicting the "throwing of the rotten tomato")

[Case]

I like that idea