Login

PremierBromanov · 10-02-2023, 07:04 PM

the punishment for using chat GPT should be 4 years of college english classes, from levels 100 to 400. If the user is ever caught using chat GPT during the class, they have to start over. The effect of this would be a well-educated AI user who has the discernment to trust their own sense of writing and creativity, in a way that puts the human touch back into any future AI use. So, at the very least this user can correctly utilize tools at their disposal, without falling prey to laziness and sloth. Also, by the time they finish the classes, AI might actually be useful instead of harmful. Then, our tasks would have to be increasingly long over time such that users are required to put real effort into their AI prompts that it would basically amount to 150 words written by hand, except the output would be bad novels no one will read, except chat GPT which we've also trusted to read PTs

5ympathies · 10-02-2023, 08:28 PM

Who is to really say or decide if someone is using chat gpt to write their point tasks. If you read my point task submissions, can you really tell if chat gpt wrote this? You can probably see that this is all me since chat gpt would probably write a better paragraph than I do. Anyway an appropriate punishment for using such an illicit tool to cheat on point tasks would be that you have to hand write your point tasks for the remainder of the season and scan them into the PT head. In order to not cheat on them and then just copy down the chat gpt result, you must use proctorio or whatever it is that seizes control of you computer, and write your point task submission with your camera on, while someone watches you write on a piece of paper. Any discrepancies while that is going on and you lose the ability to submit PTs for the remainder of the season.

Thanks to JSS for the signature

aeonsjenni · 10-02-2023, 09:06 PM

PBE Affiliate

***sve7en*** · 10-02-2023, 09:24 PM

Option 2

The only reasonable punishment fitting for the heinous crime of having a chatGPT answer ones point tasks would be to have to develop a new chatGPT to help in the creation of new point tasks. These point tasks would be valuable for the simulation hockey league on that they would be identified as point tasks written by a chatGPT and a user in the simulation hockey league who would try to use a chatGPT to answer the prompts would be unable to because of the chatGPT being restricted from answering chatGPT written prompts for the simulation hockey league point tasks. This would drive authentic responses and decrease responses done with outside assistance.

Alternatively, just like, don't give em TPE, maybe not let them do a few more PTs, that opportunity cost is probably enough on its own. It's like practice for fake hockey players, you don't practice you don't get better. Kinda simple.

Spartan · 10-02-2023, 09:24 PM

Option 2

Obviously ChatGPT is a massive issue in the world and in our sim league society. People plug in some random prompt, ask their question, and get some horrendous response that makes little to no sense within context. If used in our pure, original sim league, there should be severe consequences.

First, there should be a severe, long-term punishment regarding a user's TPE. A 1 season TPE ban, as in no earning, would be the minimum. The user would also lose 10 million in player store money, and would lose 100 TPE from their build. That should all be the absolute minimum punishment someone faces. They should then be faced with public humiliation, with a punishment thread required to be at least 6 pages long - with all the users in the league calling them a piece of garbage and a lowlife. Then mandatory 10 years in prison with no parole. And then ask ChatGPT why using ChatGPT is bad. That'll be fun.

ACapitalChicago · 10-02-2023, 09:55 PM

The punishment for using Chat GPT should honestly be a PT Ban for three times the amount of weeks worth of PTs that you completed with Chat GPT or whatever AI equivalent you used. Banning people from using Chat GPT and banning them from completing PTs would be a serious hit to their competitiveness and a serious punishment for doing something as shitty as using Chat GPT. Like honestly, how fucking lazy do you have to be? It's inexcusable and they should be made an example of. So ban people from getting TPE and make it hilarious that they're getting a proportional punishment for trying to skirt the system. Frankly I have zero patience for people who do so because writing a hundred and fifty words takes like five minutes tops, even if you just word vomit. I think that this is partly overblown, but also some people seriously need to get it together and actually put in some effort. Jesus.

S66 Damian Littleton

||

||

|

|

***Toast*** · 10-02-2023, 10:08 PM

Prompt #2

I can't really come up with something silly for this one because I think people using written ChatGPT or whatever for their PT and articles is the silliest thing. The effort that people go through to avoid typing for five minutes is beyond me. I think that if you're caught using AI for your written PT you should be disqualified for the season for all tasks. Compared to how things were back when the league was first getting started we had requirements that asked for 500ish words per prompt so I think 150 a week is pretty spoiled and yet we still have users going out of their way to get AI to spit out nonsense that refers to the NHL and don't even make the effort to change it to SHL related wording to at least hopefully sneak it by. It's weird though because graphics AI I can understand some of the argument but if you're asking ChatGPT for 150 words on aliens in hockey then I don't know what to tell you.

Code:
182

DigDoug11 · 10-02-2023, 10:31 PM

option 2

With AI getting better and better everyday, it’s also becoming harder to detect. But if someone was caught using one of these bots in the SHL, I could think of a few different ways to punish that individual. 1st off would be a temp ban, and possibly a full ban depending on how many times they have been caught. That one is a little harsh, so for my 2nd choice of punishment, it would be, they would have to decipher a “fitted” article into audio format and post that to the website. And my last option for a punishment would be to have that person change their site signature to a banner that reads “ I used ChatGPT to write my articles when I shouldn’t have” . Those are just a few of the things I could come up with. But it’s becoming harder and harder to track AI usage, who knows, maybe this whole thing was done by chaptGPT *wink wink*…. Not really though!

165 words

zaybae · 10-02-2023, 10:36 PM

option 1

if a team is caught with too many players on the ice, the game pauses and everyone on that team has to stop where they are and do 10 burpees. the 2 min powerplay is only awarded to the other team if the penalized team fail to do their 10 before a 1 minute timer runs out.

if a player is unable to do burpees they can either have a teammate do an extra 10 and stay in the game or theyre removed from the game for the rest of the period. if the penalized team scores a goal after their player is removed from the game, the team has the choice whether or not to bring that player back into play! However you can only bring a player back into play one tike per game.

Also it should be a new rule to let trans women compete in womens leagues, trans men in mens leagues, and any and everything in between. LETS SEE OUR TRANS HEROES COMPETING AT THE TOP LEVELS !!!!!!

MCP_ · 10-02-2023, 10:44 PM

Code:
OPTION 2 - I'm on to you.

Written Task: Describe an appropriate punishment for using ChatGPT to do point tasks. The sillier the better.

An appropriate punishment for using ChatGPT for PTs would be for that player to make any in-league decision only using the program for a pre-determined amount of time, depending on how often the user used ChatGPT. This includes everything from "do I re-sign with my current team?" to "Do I do this week's activity check?" Considering that it's unlikely ChatGPT has been trained on any data from the SHL website(s), it would be interesting to see what decisions it will make for the offender, as well as the rationale the program uses to make these decisions. In theory, some TPE would not be earned due to this, and it seems (in theory) fair for cheating out of doing the task in the first place. It also makes the end punishment random; some may even gain TPE from doing this, some may not get TPE for the season at all; it is chaos incarnate.

natedoeshockey · 10-02-2023, 10:46 PM

Patya given power to change or add one rule in the hockeys? Oh wow, what would Patya change. Hmmm, Patya think he know. Patya think that getting only one challenge is much dumb, and if that challenge fail, you am get a penalty? That also dumb. Patya give each team 2 or 3 challenges, or Patya remove penalty from failing challenge. Patya watching this sport called the football and team is only charged with timeout for failing challenge. Why not just charge timeout for this in hockey too? Patya not really understanding the point. Maybe peoples am worried about slowing game down more? Patya guess he can understand this, but it also seem for make challenges way less enticing. Challenges these days is almost always for offsides or goalie interference. Imagine if you can challenge for get penalty called on other team and if it not happen, you only lose timeout. Maybe then more peoples am use it and it making things more interesting.

Phantom Desperado · 10-02-2023, 10:57 PM

Instead of shootouts to end regular season games the teams will play sudden death overtime 3 on 3 for 5 minutes and every intermission they do not score they lose a player until it is down to goalie vs goalie.

***frithjofr*** · 10-02-2023, 11:28 PM

OPTION 1 - Rules are Rules?

After the first overtime, instead of going to a shootout they should just add one skater for each team. Every third overtime they add one additional puck. At overtime 12 they put out more goals and the backup goaltenders go in. Eventually, theoretically, it's now the 24th overtime and every skater from both teams is on the ice, including backup goalies, and there are 8 pucks in play. Players are allowed to go to the bench for a breather and IVs to hydrate. Coaches and trainers are allowed to take shifts. Fans are recruited for both teams, and also to serve as officials. In the event of a 25th overtime the emergency backup goaltender goes in at center ice and whichever team scores on him wins, golden-goal style. If the emergency backup is already in for whatever reason (one of the other goalies passed out, maybe?) then the fan who spent the most money on the 50/50 raffle gets to go in their place.

LampLighter · 10-03-2023, 12:02 AM

Option 1:

I think the one rule that I would change in hockey is that you should not be allowed to ice the puck while on a penalty kill. I think this would be a good rule change to allow the offenses on the power-play to have more possession time, and the better chance of scoring if the penalty killers are not allowed to just shoot the puck down the ice once they get it. I think this rule gives a team that took a penalty more of a disadvantage because now on the penalty kill, you actually have to have a strategy about what to do when you get the puck and how to get it out of the zone without just shooting it down the ice. Also when you take a penalty you should be put at a significant disadvantage due to taking that penalty and I think this change in rule would do just that. Plus people always like scoring and if there’s any way to get more scoring in the game I think this is a good way to do it.

JNH · 10-03-2023, 12:05 AM

The funniest rule change that I could think of would be to make it so that for every time that a goalie dislodges the net, they have to eat a hot dog in under a minute. One time? you’re fine. Two times? Probably alright. Three times? Starting to sit a little heavy. 7th time net comes off? The gastrointestinal system is going to be making more noise than the crowd as the goalie struggles to get from the ice back up standing and vice versa. Similarly, could do that every blocked shots earns the player a hot dog to make the other team eat. This would encourage players laying it all on the line to help their teams gain an advantage beyond stopping the shot from hitting the net. The last option is that every time a coach drops an f bomb on the bench, a player has to eat a hot dog. Teams could have designated eaters as players if the coach thinks they’ll be particularly vulgar that night - no playing just eating.

Navigation

Extra Menu

About us