I have to say sorry to you because my English is quite bad.
Codeforces community has happened something unpleasent recently,and I have some doubts.
As everyone knows,goodbye2023 is hard to be called a good contest.It has three problems which have appeared elsewhere before.More absurdly,you secretly rated it,even without a "You are wrong,here is why".
As everyone know,Kangyang Zhou is one of the top coders in today's world.And he just used two accounts to take part in different contests.He never do something cheating by his two accounts.And I have enough reasons to believe he will also get good grades if he has only one account.So,in my eyes,what he do can not disrupting community order.
If you insist on saying "Two accounts have bad effect and it violates Codeforces rules",I think I should talk to you.
Firstly,Codeforces rules is not immutably and they mustn't be immutably.They must follow the paces of times.Having multiple accounts has been a common things nowadays.Furthermore,If you insists on the policy of using a single account,why don't you ban all illegal accounts?You just want to ban some illegal accounts with high rating,isn't it rating discrimination?You think users with lower rating are unworthy of your attention?Of course,you don't have the ability to ban all illegal accounts.Since you can't eliminate the unfair phenomena,you shouldn't just ban some of illegal accounts.
Secondly,since you attach importance to the fairness of community,why you still rated goodbye2023?Problem H1 and H2 could be easily on oeis.org and I think most of solvers of the two problems solve them by using oeis.Is it your original intention to test participants' oeis ability?Of course not.So why do you stick to rated it?Your action seriously effected Codeforces community's fairness.
Why do you not ban goodbye2023 but ban zh0ukangyang?
orzdevinwang
came from real Ac Sir : )
that sounds dictatorial.
The problem is if he let people have multiple accounts someone may just make 10 accounts and don't allow other people to be in the top 10. Also it won't be fair for people with lower rating having a LGM participating in a Div 3 with alt account.
unrelated question how do you have negative rating? I didn't think this was possible
oh damn, I am a newbie and I thought codeforces used an algorithm similar to chess elo formula to come up with a rating. I didn't think negatives were even possible.
Elo rating has translation symmetry, meaning that if one subtracts a constant from all ratings, all formulae still work. So there is nothing impossible with the negative ratings, one just need to consistently show performance which is 1400 points lower than a performance of an average person. To do that a person needs to deliberately finish at the last place in contests, to do that participants submit one problem in a rated round and then spam with a lot of unsuccessful hacks, resulting in a negative score in the round. Or just making one incorrect attempt to get a score of zero (however this may lead to some place other than the last one, therefore, it can be a positive delta if your rating is already negative).
HighLow-performance sports as it is.Bro is down to earth :) . Are you planning to reach inverse grandmaster?
Your argument is ridiculous. People violate the rules, but it's hard to punish everyone who does it, so no one should be punished ever, and if MikeMirzayanov bans one of the twins, he is unfair? It seems like you're the one who is a "You're wrong. Here's why" person here. I don't think I would enjoy living in a society where you set the rules.
As for not banning Goodbye 2023, I don't see any hypocrisy here. Firstly, there were some issues with three problems, but were all of them "known before"? As far as I understand, no, some of them weren't. Secondly, MikeMirzayanov explicitly said in the past that the repetition of a past problem only should lead to the cancelation of the round if it was consciously stolen (cite notorious coincidence) or if the round was completely disrupted (that is, the issue lead to a situation where the round doesn't rank the people by the ability to solve problems [possibly with the assistance of search engines which have been allowed for a long time] and instead sorts them by something else). I believe none of these holds.
"Secretly rated it" is another one incredible somersault. Was Hello 2024 also "secretly rated" because Mike never said publicly that it'll be rated? Only making a round unrated is an active action which really requires a properly made and commented decision, making it rated isn't.
I totally understand Mike not wanting two accounts of the same person being in top-10, so personally I don't condemn him for his decision. Dragging in "rating discrimination" is also an utter drivel in my point of view.
I'll skip the first paragraph, for I'm not arguing this.
However, (1) at least some of them is "known before", while the others is available online. At least (almost) direct solutions are available on the Internet. (2) Please take a look at the first page of the leaderboard (100-200, especially), you can easily find many CMs, Experts, or even Pupils. (disclaimer. no ratism intended) Many of them don't even solve E. I do wonder if they did actually solve H, or just OEIS H and implement it. It is obvious unfair to the participants ranking 200-1000.
For "Secretly rated it", I believe it is more about Mike ignoring the community. There be (actually many) people asking for unrate, but where is the response?
I'll skip the last paragraph again, for I'm not arguing this.
It's hard to check the leaderboard for pupils and experts because of the New Year masquerade.
I also did not solve E, but solved H. But for me H was just a simpler problem, I honestly solved H without Google and genuinely don't understand how so many people solved E and F so easily.
why?
He had both the highest and second highest rated accounts before Hello 2024.
if this allowed then why wouldn't just make hundred accounts and occupying top 100 rated coder.
sounds ridiculous right?