AI use not allowed message

[GreenAsJade]

@MrMTal

I do not like how you phrased that. Please keep in mind that even if you may be right with the “not cheap” thing in terms of OGS it might not be right in a general sense. Your point of view is not the absolute truth either.

Ah that is fair.

But - to be equally fair - your original statement was phrased equally “absolutely”.

I was specifically referring to “you have to…” when I said “not true”.

@MrMTal

I understand the problem. The consequence is that unanswered AI reports lead to frustration of the people reporting. i’d suggest: make it clear that the reporter has to be like 99% sure that it’s an AI cheated game in the AI-use form.

I don’t think it would make a dent. This is of course the same discussion

We could put words in the AI report form saying “please don’t report unless you are 99% sure”, but unless there are negative consequences for getting it wrong, people will ignore it.

I suppose that we could have a three-strikes-and-you-are-out … no more AI reports from you

@MrMTal

The consequence is that unanswered AI reports lead to frustration of the people reporting.

I hate that this happens as much as you do, I’m sure

[jlt]

To reduce frustration of reporters, would it be possible to show them the status of past reports? Like

• Pending
• A moderator examined your report, action was taken.
• A moderator examined your report and concluded there wasn’t enough evidence of cheating.
• No moderator was able to examine your report in time.

[MrMTal]

@GreenAsJade

Ah that is fair.

But - to be equally fair - your original statement was phrased equally “absolutely”.

I was specifically referring to “you have to…” when I said “not true”.

Yeah ok “you have to” was just rhetorical - so do we settle on a jigo with this?

@GreenAsJade

We could put words in the AI report form saying “please don’t report unless you are 99% sure”, but unless there are negative consequences for getting it wrong, people will ignore it.

Man you gotta believe in people … wait… i mean you could choose to believe in people :). Some will ignore some will not. At least trying to clarify things might be worthwhile. (in general not only regarding this AI-use dialog)

@GreenAsJade

I hate that this happens as much as you do, I’m sure

You cannot be sure. You don’t know how i feel about it… ok just kidding.

[GreenAsJade]

@MrMTal

Man you gotta believe in people … wait… i mean you could choose to believe in people :). Some will ignore some will not. At least trying to clarify things might be worthwhile. (in general not only regarding this AI-use dialog)

OK - well this one really is cheap, so I’ll get it in

[MrMTal]

@GreenAsJade

OK - well this one really is cheap, so I’ll get it in

Nice! While you are at it can you also do a popup-window showing the TOS as bullet points when a new account is created real quick?

[GreenAsJade]

While you are at it can you also do a popup-window showing the TOS as bullet points when a new account is created real quick?

This is a very easy PR - I suggest you raise it as an issue in github, maybe have a crack at it.

Just don’t be too sad when it gets rejected

I’m not going to do it, because I have a week of depression when my PRs are rejected

[MrMTal]

I should have waited longer some people have a way too good short term memory.

[marioxcc]

@MrMTal

There are a lot of prohibition signs in the world - are they all useless?

No, because some inform people about things that are not obviously forbidden, like “No parking” (some streets have parking, so it is an useful distinction). It is obvious than when playing a competitive game, no external assistance is allowed. Saying “No AI use” may even make some players get the idea to use it, whereas otherwise they would not.

[benjito]

Some games have external assistance