Cheating on Go servers
Bill: I gather that game records are kept for finished games, and that some people try to cheat by marking stones dead at the scoring phase. If they tried to do that to me, I would let them, and then appeal the result. The game record is good evidence. ;-)
- This is considered worse than escaping. If an admin sees someone doing this then their account will be deranked. DrStraw
- Cheyenne: Remember however -- that one can accidently mark a group dead (done it myself a few times), you can mark the group alive again by shift-clicking on the group. Also the scoring facility has problems if an area isn't closed off the whole way
Here black could be marked dead by the scoring facility until the area is closed off (black is alive unconditionally here)
Imagist: I don't see the problem here. If this position is on the board, the game shouldn't be in scoring phase anyway.
However if the opponent would continue to mark alive groups dead then I would end up reporting the incident to an admin
penguin: The admins are not interested in refereeing games.
Bill: I still appeal. :-) If people really are trying to cheat in this way, the message will get through.
Zarlan: I'd be stubborn and correct the life/death status ...or if I get tired of that, I'd just leave.
I would not allow an incorrect result. Not getting the game finished is very annoying even if it's a free game (has happened to me), but well... it's just one game and the only real lasting annoyance is the fact that I won't be able to access the game-record through my game list.
Karl Knechtel: This sort of thing is a huge problem on KGS for beginners, because neither will see the problem with the position, or know how to fix things up (they won't even have an idea like "get an admin", because as I've noted elsewhere, it's much too difficult to get an admin when you actually need one on KGS). They'll make complaints like "I'm just trying to mark these three dead stones but it marks this whole other opponent group too", and they'll appeal to observers (sadly, they can't hear a response from the observer unless/until they - wrongly - click done, at least unless they're watching PMs).
We really need a better way to deal with this.
tapir: Once, when I started playing, I had a player at KGS admitting after the game that he played the same game simultaneously against a bot, basically being an interface between me and the bot. This may become really troublesome with bots increasing in strength.
Jay: Yes. It's a horrendous problem on Chess servers now. But take heart. Think of it as you vs. some kind of cyborg. They're rated as a cyborg. The same problem has always existed in that groups of people can play. Or someone can play and get occasional good moves from a better player who looks over their shoulder. You're not playing just some person, you're playing an account, whatever amalgam may be behind that account.
tapir: Hmm, I guess I don't mind playing a cyborg so much, but I feel it will end up with people getting their rank by letting the bot play and then playing the mismatched games against far too strong players themselves.