Answers.Body: <p>Only FIDE could enforce that.  Talk to them.</p>
  <p>No other platform can or does do that.</p>
  
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2021-01-02T18:28:38.870Z
Answers.Text: Of course a platform could decide to enforce non-anonymity.
Answers.UserDisplayName: acye
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2020-09-05T22:50:01.317Z
Answers.LastActivityDate: 2020-09-05T22:50:01.317Z
Answers.UserDisplayName: edwina oliver
Body: <p>I would like to play online chess via an interface where name and FIDE number are disclosed, mainly because I believe that this discourages engine users.
  A few questions:</p>
  
  <ol>
  <li>I found the FIDE Arena application, and thought it indeed required
  disclosure of personal info, but after trying it out it
  doesn't seem so. Is that perhaps only a requirement for paying
  users? Any info what be appreciated on this.</li>
  <li>Any other platform that enforces such a requirement?</li>
  </ol>
  
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2019-09-28T22:54:57.317Z
Comments.Text: Cheating is pretty rare in online play, especially because no one's playing for any stakes.
Comments.UserDisplayName: Inertial Ignorance
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2019-10-05T16:31:29.083Z
Comments.Text: @InertialIgnorance My impression is that you're quite alone in that belief. Ego seems to be quite enough for many, many players. In any case, your answer seems unrelated to my question.
Comments.UserDisplayName: acye
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2019-10-05T17:37:50.180Z
Comments.Text: I know it doesn't answer the question that's why I commented. I'm 2300-2400 in online bullet/blitz and can't remember one time I felt someone was cheating. And even if the odd person does use a computer, so what? So you lose 10 online rating points once in a while. I also don't see how someone could boost their ego by using a computer, since the computer is the one who wins the game.
Comments.UserDisplayName: Inertial Ignorance
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2019-10-05T18:22:55.923Z
Comments.Text: I feel it's an epidemic, and that's corroborated by later computer analysis. I think at your level it's more rare, as there are fewer such players and probably cheat detection is more "on them" as they don't want to lose IMs and GMs because of cheater abundance. As for your question regarding the motivation, I would speculate that the ego aspect is in losing, i.e. they hate losing, and also perhaps there's some enjoyment is just making your opponent feel that he lost...
Comments.UserDisplayName: acye
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2019-10-05T22:52:58.013Z
Comments.Text: chess.com's cheating detection system is pretty good though. If your computer analysis corroborates your opponent has been cheating, there's a fair chance it would have been caught (especially if the website knows your opponent isn't 2000+). In any case, even if a platform did make people use their real name, it wouldn't be nearly as popular due to the lack of anonymity (which is what you're after). This would decrease the diversity of the player pool, increasing wait times to start each game.
Comments.UserDisplayName: Inertial Ignorance
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2019-10-07T07:47:52.320Z
Comments.Text: I will have to disagree about chess.com's cheat detection system. Certainly so in the case of "smart" cheating, when the cheater only uses the engine on critical junctions, or when he deliberately throws in sub-optimal but not losing moves to throw off the cheat detection. I would prefer non-anonymous platform and accept the smaller player pool, if there is no such platform out there I guess I must be rather alone in my preference.
Comments.UserDisplayName: acye
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2019-10-07T08:16:42.853Z
Comments.Text: Yes, if someone was clever they could get around the system. But it seems like a lot of effort and scheming just to win online points (without even earning it for crying out loud). If it's bugging you think of it this way: a cheater's rating probably still reflects their playing strength, if their playing strength = their natural strength + occasionally using an engine. By cheating they got to that rating and nothing more, so in a sense they're comparable to any other player with that rating. Assuming of course that the cheater has been playing for a while and isn't provisional.
Comments.UserDisplayName: Inertial Ignorance
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2019-10-07T09:50:22.650Z
Comments.Text: Well, one could think about it that way in an OTB game as well and not bother about enforcing the cell-phone ban, but for some strange reason it just takes away from the experience IMO. We want the mano-a-mano experience, don't we? :)
Comments.UserDisplayName: acye
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2019-10-07T10:14:32.420Z
Comments.Text: Sure, but nevertheless many tournaments don't enforce a non cell-phone ban. If someone really wants to cheat and they're smart about it, there's only so much you can do. But when it comes down to it, it's just a game.
Comments.UserDisplayName: Inertial Ignorance
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2019-10-07T11:42:55.730Z
Comments.Text: I don't know of tournaments that don't enforce a ban, but ok.. In any case, "just a game" could be said about life as a whole as well....
Comments.UserDisplayName: acye
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2019-10-07T16:17:09.553Z
Comments.Text: I've played in non-FIDE rated tournaments without the ban. And even if you do have a ban, how would you seriously enforce it? Have the TD search people? Yes, this is done by security at big and important FIDE tournaments, but nowhere else. Also don't start getting nihilistic on me :)
Comments.UserDisplayName: Inertial Ignorance
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2019-10-07T17:47:42.337Z
Comments.Text: Well, a 100% ban is not realistic, but every now and then it happens that someone gets caught with a phone in his bag that suddenly rings, and then he loses, and also people are alert to constant going to the rest room... So it does create a deterrent. Most of my opponents actually don't leave the chair, or hardly so, plus I see that they make mistakes (as do I, sadly...), so I would say cheating is very, very rare.
Comments.UserDisplayName: acye
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2019-12-25T23:59:34.233Z
Comments.Text: Cheating is rampant.  I have seen cheaters online.  OTOH I have seen sore losers accuse people of cheating when both sides made several bad moves and mistakes.
Comments.UserDisplayName: yobamamama
Tags: <online-chess><fide>
Title: Online chess with full disclosure of name and FIDE ID
ThreadText: # Online chess with full disclosure of name and FIDE ID
  
  (Asked by: username_0 on 2019-08-12)
  
  I would like to play online chess via an interface where name and FIDE number are disclosed, mainly because I believe that this discourages engine users.
  A few questions:
  
  1. I found the FIDE Arena application, and thought it indeed required
     disclosure of personal info, but after trying it out it
     doesn't seem so. Is that perhaps only a requirement for paying
     users? Any info what be appreciated on this.
  2. Any other platform that enforces such a requirement?
  
  **Tags:** online-chess, fide
  
  > **Comments:**
  > **username_1**: Cheating is pretty rare in online play, especially because no one's playing for any stakes.  
  > **username_0**: @InertialIgnorance My impression is that you're quite alone in that belief. Ego seems to be quite enough for many, many players. In any case, your answer seems unrelated to my question.  
  > **username_1**: I know it doesn't answer the question that's why I commented. I'm 2300-2400 in online bullet/blitz and can't remember one time I felt someone was cheating. And even if the odd person does use a computer, so what? So you lose 10 online rating points once in a while. I also don't see how someone could boost their ego by using a computer, since the computer is the one who wins the game.  
  > **username_0**: I feel it's an epidemic, and that's corroborated by later computer analysis. I think at your level it's more rare, as there are fewer such players and probably cheat detection is more "on them" as they don't want to lose IMs and GMs because of cheater abundance. As for your question regarding the motivation, I would speculate that the ego aspect is in losing, i.e. they hate losing, and also perhaps there's some enjoyment is just making your opponent feel that he lost...  
  > **username_1**: chess.com's cheating detection system is pretty good though. If your computer analysis corroborates your opponent has been cheating, there's a fair chance it would have been caught (especially if the website knows your opponent isn't 2000+). In any case, even if a platform did make people use their real name, it wouldn't be nearly as popular due to the lack of anonymity (which is what you're after). This would decrease the diversity of the player pool, increasing wait times to start each game.  
  > **username_0**: I will have to disagree about chess.com's cheat detection system. Certainly so in the case of "smart" cheating, when the cheater only uses the engine on critical junctions, or when he deliberately throws in sub-optimal but not losing moves to throw off the cheat detection. I would prefer non-anonymous platform and accept the smaller player pool, if there is no such platform out there I guess I must be rather alone in my preference.  
  > **username_1**: Yes, if someone was clever they could get around the system. But it seems like a lot of effort and scheming just to win online points (without even earning it for crying out loud). If it's bugging you think of it this way: a cheater's rating probably still reflects their playing strength, if their playing strength = their natural strength + occasionally using an engine. By cheating they got to that rating and nothing more, so in a sense they're comparable to any other player with that rating. Assuming of course that the cheater has been playing for a while and isn't provisional.  
  > **username_0**: Well, one could think about it that way in an OTB game as well and not bother about enforcing the cell-phone ban, but for some strange reason it just takes away from the experience IMO. We want the mano-a-mano experience, don't we? :)  
  > **username_1**: Sure, but nevertheless many tournaments don't enforce a non cell-phone ban. If someone really wants to cheat and they're smart about it, there's only so much you can do. But when it comes down to it, it's just a game.  
  > **username_0**: I don't know of tournaments that don't enforce a ban, but ok.. In any case, "just a game" could be said about life as a whole as well....  
  > **username_1**: I've played in non-FIDE rated tournaments without the ban. And even if you do have a ban, how would you seriously enforce it? Have the TD search people? Yes, this is done by security at big and important FIDE tournaments, but nowhere else. Also don't start getting nihilistic on me :)  
  > **username_0**: Well, a 100% ban is not realistic, but every now and then it happens that someone gets caught with a phone in his bag that suddenly rings, and then he loses, and also people are alert to constant going to the rest room... So it does create a deterrent. Most of my opponents actually don't leave the chair, or hardly so, plus I see that they make mistakes (as do I, sadly...), so I would say cheating is very, very rare.  
  > **username_2**: Cheating is rampant.  I have seen cheaters online.  OTOH I have seen sore losers accuse people of cheating when both sides made several bad moves and mistakes.  
  
  ---
  
  ## 1 answers
  
  ### Answer by username_3 on 2020-09-05. Score: 1
  
  Only FIDE could enforce that. Talk to them.
  
  No other platform can or does do that.
  
  > **Comments:**
  > **username_0**: Of course a platform could decide to enforce non-anonymity.  
  
  ---
  
  