Escaping by Timeout

[Kosh]

@milchreis

So i really don’t get why people are crying “timeout escape”

I think I have already answered this question, at least on behalf of myself:

@Kosh

I too find myself fired up by this issue but for me it’s not the possibility of cheating that bothers me most.

I regard timing-out of correspondence games to be impolite. I regard repeatedly mass-timing-out of correspondence games to be the height of rudeness, disrespectful of the game and utterly inconsiderate of the multiple opponents who may be taking the game seriously.

The vast majority of consecutive time-outs are not related to cheating. However; @Wulfenia made an EXCELLENT observation that a degree of time-out cheating may occur unintentionally simply because players tend to spend more time thinking about a game that they think they might be able to turn around and such games are therefor more likely to end up in the batch of time-outs. In such cases it is impossible to convince a mod that cheating has occured because you still have a mix of won and lost games.

@Wulfenia

it is more common for people to time out of games that they have lost (and again, that does not need to be by intent, it is easier to find a reasonable move in a won game than deciding what to do about the one that is going to be lost)

If I may be so bold, I think the mistake that is being made on this issue, is that total consideration is being given to the mathematics and no consideration is being given to the psychology of the situation.

The current ‘annul consecutive correspondence time-outs rule’ condones poor behaviour and even encourages those who wish to use the site as if it were a bot-slave. ‘No Problem. Start some more games and quit playing them whenever you like.’

I offer the following example of a player who was gratuitously joining new tournaments while endlessly timing-out of them. Effectively using the site to set up a series of ‘whole board problems’ for their own idle amusement while having absolutely no regard for any of their numerous opponents. Nb. To the best of my knowledge, now banned.

miniond2

It’s an interesting example because on the one hand, it shows how large the amount of ‘garbage’ data could be without the current rule but on the other hand it was the current rule that allowed this player to continue to display a tenable rank. If the system had been allowed to mark his rank as garbage and provisional then at least future opponents would have been warned not to take such games seriously.

In conclusion, I have enough faith in the mods that have posted here and the dev team, that I accept that simply scrapping the rule is not an option.

But

We should continue to explore the various proposals that have been put forward to improve the situation. These include but are not limited to:

1. Allowing the winner of such games to determine how it is counted.
2. Automatically triggering Vacation for people who start a string of TO’s.
3. Removing the ‘Recently Timed-out’ flag from accounts as soon as they log back in.
4. Applying the ‘Provisional Rank’ tag to anyone with high uncertainty. Perhaps annulled time-outs should still add to uncertainty.
5. Other ideas that I have forgotten. Remind me and I will add them to this list.

I for one would feel happier about accepting the current regime if there was an automated system to identify users whose level of correspondence time-outs constitutes abuse of the site, instead of relying on dissatisfied opponents to make a complaint. Then the player could be warned or banned as the mods see fit.