Cheating

[tbhp]

I don't see why stripping a BGA member of an arena title and promoting the runner-up to the actual title would be difficult to do after the fact.

BGA has removed people from the arena leaderboard right near the end of the season. It just happened again in Ark Nova, this week. Yes, some cases might be more difficult than others, but some are easy, aren't they?

It's not difficult to agree that Tommy Wiseau is a bad director, but it's still a subjective determination. Just because it appears obvious to most everyone doesn't make the ruling akin to an objective following of a rule.

What people find permissible is very subjective. If it were up to me, winning games by intentional timeout should automatically disqualify people. But I don't make the rules, and I accept that if a game happened and a winner was declared, then that's what it is.

I find it funny that some people have a problem with general cheating but are fine with things like kicking out in a competitive context, which is also grabbing a win in a way that has nothing to do with skill.

Both are equally problematic, but at the same time, not much can be done about either once the deed is done.

[tbhp]

We understand that Maradona's handball or uncalled traveling in an NBA game or incorrect ball/strike calls in baseball have happened and affected the outcome of games and even championships, and they are not open to adjuducation after the book is closed. Those are not *cheating*.

Right, and my point is that there is not a fundamental difference between those irregularities and the irregularity of someone winning Arena with multiple accounts. People think it's different because one case is extreme, while the other is something more subtle. But in reality both are the same type of thing. They exist on the same spectrum of irregularity, and if a case is close enough to the extreme, then people will tend to agree that it's just too much and should be revoked. So what I'm saying is that it's subjective opinions that determine those things, which is contradictory to the spirit of sportsmanship where rules should be objectively followed, not people's feelings on whether something is "too much" or not.

[ChiefPointThief]

Allowing a fraudulent result to stand sets a dangerous precedent. It tells the community that as long as you don't get caught during the match, your stolen ELO or Arena points are safe. This undermines the integrity of the entire leaderboard. Board Game Arena’s moderation policy specifically allows for retroactive penalties because collusion is only visible once you can analyze the entire game log after the fact. The result should absolutely be nullified

The moderation policy as a whole sets a bad precedent and I have stated on numerous occasions that I feel it’s bga’s biggest stain. A -30 karma to a convicted cheater meanwhile just simply falling asleep or losing power can get you -20 karma. Talking about a cheater in forum or “challenging a moderation” gets -50 karma and 10 day ban.

I’ve seen people get found guilty of multi accounting and have a perfect reputation within days and right back to playing again. Even competing in the same contest they were found of being guilty in lol. This would be like someone being found guilty of a violent felony, getting community service picking up trash on the side of the road for a weekend, and then having a “perfect” reputation in society.

What bga is telling me is that cheating isn’t a big deal at all to them which is sad.

[Michael417]

Let’s look at the objective rules. Board Game Arena’s official moderation policy explicitly states that multi-accounting or colluding to cheat the Arena ranking system is a direct violation of the rules. You can't claim to stand for the 'spirit of sportsmanship' and objective rules while simultaneously arguing that explicit tournament rules against collusion shouldn't be enforced. You are twisting yourself into logical knots just to defend cheating, and it’s pure trolling at this point.

[tbhp]

The problem is you are not addressing the inconsistency. It's also against the rules that a football player can touch the ball and keep going like nothing happened. Yet, when we see the proof of players doing that, we don't ask that everything that happens after that becomes invalid. Why is that? That's because people have a personal threshold of where a breaking of an explicit rule is "still okay" or becomes "too much" and calls for cancelling the title.

It's like, they can accept that a team won a title despite making some unregulated fouls, because it doesn't fundamentally change the quality of the team and the fact that they were good enough to win the championship. On the other hand, if someone uses multiple accounts, they don't have to exhibit any skill to do that, the wins are given freely to them.

The reasoning is valid in terms of stating that one case is more extreme than the other, but the determination of when does something pass the permissible threshold is a subjective one. It's not something that is stated in any rule. The rules just say what is allowed and what is not. They don't make two separate categories where on one hand there are the offenses that you will have your title revoked if they are later found out, and on the other hand there are the offenses that are okay to do and still win the tournament. It's people who appear to make this distinction.

[Ceaseless]

The problem is you are not addressing the inconsistency. It's also against the rules that a football player can touch the ball and keep going like nothing happened. Yet, when we see the proof of players doing that, we don't ask that everything that happens after that becomes invalid. Why is that? That's because people have a personal threshold of where a breaking of an explicit rule is "still okay" or becomes "too much" and calls for cancelling the title.

It's like, they can accept that a team won a title despite making some unregulated fouls, because it doesn't fundamentally change the quality of the team and the fact that they were good enough to win the championship. On the other hand, if someone uses multiple accounts, they don't have to exhibit any skill to do that, the wins are given freely to them.

The reasoning is valid in terms of stating that one case is more extreme than the other, but the determination of when does something pass the permissible threshold is a subjective one. It's not something that is stated in any rule. The rules just say what is allowed and what is not. They don't make two separate categories where on one hand there are the offenses that you will have your title revoked if they are later found out, and on the other hand there are the offenses that are okay to do and still win the tournament. It's people who appear to make this distinction.

No, not all issues are treated equal here, that would obviously be ridiculous. If one team is using poison to cripple the other team and it's not caught until after the results, officials are not going to go "they still won". If one team is actively murdering another team's players and they aren't caught until after the results, it's not "they still won".

Actions can be judged differently between extremity and intention. A mistake happening is often not considered cheating and will often be judged differently as a result. And yes, the severity of an action is generally going to play a factor as well. To what degree is something that may change somewhat as you look between different policies and rulesets across the vast number of games and events out there, but these factors remain a notable distinction is a large amount of them.

[ResonanceSM]

I've also reported a player and gotten no response, but their profile page was deleted, so I assume mods took action.

Interesting thing now is... the account they used to kingmake suddenly came back recently and has boosted a "new player" to #1 with the same gameplay gimmick. (Honestly, it's really sad. They're a good player, I guess they can't handle the variance and the risk associated with playing, so when they get close to #1, they bring in the "kingmaker" to make sure they get there.)

Do I have to keep waiting until they do it enough to report them again? They already got caught once, so I'm guessing they'll be a little sneakier about it this time, but there's a lot of circumstantial evidence. I don't think it's enough of a slam dunk case to report if it's a new player (somehow reusing the kingmaker account), but it's still annoying to watch happen. I wonder if there's any way for the mods to see if it's the same player somehow.

[tbhp]

No, not all issues are treated equal here, that would obviously be ridiculous. If one team is using poison to cripple the other team and it's not caught until after the results, officials are not going to go "they still won". If one team is actively murdering another team's players and they aren't caught until after the results, it's not "they still won".

And yet, I'm fairly sure there is no written specification that states those exact circumstances will lead to a title being cancelled.

Instead, it basically comes down to human judgment. It's just that most people are gonna be like "obviously we can't let that happen", but in truth, there is no formal rule they are basing themselves on. This subjectivity has no place in determining who wins a competition. You are proving my point.

Actions can be judged differently between extremity and intention. A mistake happening is often not considered cheating and will often be judged differently as a result. And yes, the severity of an action is generally going to play a factor as well. To what degree is something that may change somewhat as you look between different policies and rulesets across the vast number of games and events out there, but these factors remain a notable distinction is a large amount of them.

Yeah, you're just reiterating that people are basically making judgment calls. This is what happens in a court. Games and sports are all about who does best at following objectively defined rules. If there's personal judgments and things you decide as you go along that's a serious problem.

[ChiefPointThief]

Comparing digital fraud to a referee missing a split-second field call is a logical fallacy. Board Game Arena isn't a stadium with a whistle, it's a digital platform with an immutable data log. When the Olympics or the World Chess Federation uncovers doping or engine-use after a tournament, they don’t say "what's done is done." They strip the medals, ban the players, and fix the historical record. True sportsmanship is about protecting the integrity of the game, not protecting the unearned titles of cheaters just because a timer expired.

We also have the recorded proof that Maradona cheated in the world cup, yet no one is pushing for Argentina's title to be revoked.

Wait!
Your example is about a referee missing a call? Lol
Well I guess take away the Chicago Bulls 1988 championship with the infamous Jordan shot in which he technically pushed off.

If referees missing calls is the equivalent of blatant cheating to you I could understand why you wouldn’t want victories voided under that criteria

[FrankJones]

I think perhaps what tbhp is saying is, BGA would be better off making a clear list of rule violations with clearly stated penalties, including some that might retroactively change results. In other words, remove subjectivity from the equation.

Then, everyone knows what you may and may not do, and what the consequences will be.