To those who believe that new accounts don't have anything to do with cheating/abusing and so on, they are simply wrong.
This is a part of an older post of mine after conducting a logging of games with new accounts:
"For the record, after played 52 games against new accounts:
I've won 5 games out of 52 total games, against 37 different opponents.
In most of those games I was totally destroyed obviously by a 3000 rated player or a bot.
All 37 accounts were closed within a few days."
As for what the OP said, it would be nice for Lichess to give some incentive for players to have a single account.
I would personally prefer to see 'verified' accounts.
This is a part of an older post of mine after conducting a logging of games with new accounts:
"For the record, after played 52 games against new accounts:
I've won 5 games out of 52 total games, against 37 different opponents.
In most of those games I was totally destroyed obviously by a 3000 rated player or a bot.
All 37 accounts were closed within a few days."
As for what the OP said, it would be nice for Lichess to give some incentive for players to have a single account.
I would personally prefer to see 'verified' accounts.
@XeRo13g said in #12:
> I would personally prefer to see 'verified' accounts.
Lichess has some verified accounts: lichess.org/help/master
> I would personally prefer to see 'verified' accounts.
Lichess has some verified accounts: lichess.org/help/master
@Toadofsky said in #13:
> Lichess has some verified accounts: lichess.org/help/master
What if,
we've renounced our title
or in the rare case that we don't have one?
> Lichess has some verified accounts: lichess.org/help/master
What if,
we've renounced our title
or in the rare case that we don't have one?
I like the general idea, but not so radical as to make it part of lichess default.
I would suggest just a simple configuration option in the player settings, so we can choose, say, filter and play only players with more than X games played on the site.
It is simple, opt-in, and doesn't change much in the policy realm
I would suggest just a simple configuration option in the player settings, so we can choose, say, filter and play only players with more than X games played on the site.
It is simple, opt-in, and doesn't change much in the policy realm
To get an idea what is simple... look at what other chess sites and gaming sites have done.
It's understandable that you would want to see Lichess do more to protect experienced players from encountering cheaters, especially given the time and effort you have put into building up your reputation on the platform. However, it is important to recognize that implementing a system to separate new players from experienced ones based on playtime or reputation could potentially have unintended consequences.
For example, such a system could create a sense of elitism or exclusivity among experienced players, and it could also make it more difficult for new players to find opponents to play against. It could also be challenging to implement and enforce such a system in a way that is fair and unbiased.
Ultimately, the best way to deal with cheating on any platform is to report it to the platform so that they can take appropriate action. If you encounter a player who you believe is cheating, you can report them by clicking on their username and then selecting the "Report player" option. This will allow Lichess to investigate the situation and take appropriate action if necessary.
It's also worth remembering that not all players with low ratings or fewer games played are necessarily cheating. It's possible that they are new to the platform or that they are taking a break from playing. It's important to approach all players with an open mind and to give them the benefit of the doubt until there is evidence to the contrary.
For example, such a system could create a sense of elitism or exclusivity among experienced players, and it could also make it more difficult for new players to find opponents to play against. It could also be challenging to implement and enforce such a system in a way that is fair and unbiased.
Ultimately, the best way to deal with cheating on any platform is to report it to the platform so that they can take appropriate action. If you encounter a player who you believe is cheating, you can report them by clicking on their username and then selecting the "Report player" option. This will allow Lichess to investigate the situation and take appropriate action if necessary.
It's also worth remembering that not all players with low ratings or fewer games played are necessarily cheating. It's possible that they are new to the platform or that they are taking a break from playing. It's important to approach all players with an open mind and to give them the benefit of the doubt until there is evidence to the contrary.
@Toadofsky said in #13:
> Lichess has some verified accounts: lichess.org/help/master
I think #12 ment verified accounts for none masters.
Not by giving them a title, but as an indication that these users identity, has been verified by Lichess.
Even if their identity isn't publicly displayed.
On another note, I remember the (unfortunately now almost dead site) chesshere.com had an option to search for opponents, both by ratings and number of games played.
This was a good way to find opponents, whose rating was already settled on the players approximate level.
> Lichess has some verified accounts: lichess.org/help/master
I think #12 ment verified accounts for none masters.
Not by giving them a title, but as an indication that these users identity, has been verified by Lichess.
Even if their identity isn't publicly displayed.
On another note, I remember the (unfortunately now almost dead site) chesshere.com had an option to search for opponents, both by ratings and number of games played.
This was a good way to find opponents, whose rating was already settled on the players approximate level.
@NaturalBornTraveller said in #18:
> On another note, I remember the (unfortunately now almost dead site) chesshere.com had an option to search for opponents, both by ratings and number of games played.
> This was a good way to find opponents, whose rating was already settled on the players approximate level.
And maybe this is a reason for being almost dead now?
> On another note, I remember the (unfortunately now almost dead site) chesshere.com had an option to search for opponents, both by ratings and number of games played.
> This was a good way to find opponents, whose rating was already settled on the players approximate level.
And maybe this is a reason for being almost dead now?
@sheckley666 I doubt it.
I was very active there back in 2010/2011. Even had a paid year subscription at a time, because of their maximum of "3 games daily limit" for unpaying users.
I just think it was just outplayed in popularity by other sites, such as chess .com and Lichess.
Last I logged on was in 2019, after several years of absence in online chess. Last login I waited 5 minutes for an opponent, (without restrictions) none showed.
So I tried chess .com, but after 3 games, they showed me a pop-up advertisement. I hate advertisement, especially pop-ups. So I searched for another site, and found Lichess.
(Chesshere also had advertisement back in the day, but that was in the form of banners, not pop-ups, whichever developer created pop-ups should be excluded from internet access)
I was very active there back in 2010/2011. Even had a paid year subscription at a time, because of their maximum of "3 games daily limit" for unpaying users.
I just think it was just outplayed in popularity by other sites, such as chess .com and Lichess.
Last I logged on was in 2019, after several years of absence in online chess. Last login I waited 5 minutes for an opponent, (without restrictions) none showed.
So I tried chess .com, but after 3 games, they showed me a pop-up advertisement. I hate advertisement, especially pop-ups. So I searched for another site, and found Lichess.
(Chesshere also had advertisement back in the day, but that was in the form of banners, not pop-ups, whichever developer created pop-ups should be excluded from internet access)
This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.