Cheating

mido22, I didn't blame you to be a cheater; I can only judge from what I can see, and as I pointed out, that really has a bad taste.
What happened to my 253-Bytes AC Python solution I explained before and won't repeat that.

If I understand correctly, you spent some time in solving that problem before it was published and then, after it was published, submitted the shortest C++ solution among your friends (340 Bytes). After I worked out and submitted a 319 Bytes PHP solution it took less than two hours(!) and you submitted a 287 Bytes C++ solution. No one knows, if you get to know others solutions and no one knows if you know the expected output which consists of only 7 lines in case of problem NUMWORD. That really has a bad taste and I do not feel as to take part in a fair competition. And that's what I want. I will not be the one who will tell you to disqualify your submission - that had a bad taste as well because of my actual second place in ranking.

There are two things that could be done:
1. In case you are related or one of the problemsetters and decide to submit a solution though, you should submit only 1 solution before any other solutions are submitted (that's what kokosek said). So no one can blame you that you had any advantage from knowing other's solutions.
2. As I stated in my latest comment below the problem, problemsetters should increase the number of datasets so that even submitting the expected output (without a real algo) would lead to a "long" solution. Number of cases could be changed e.g. to 200 and then a rejudge could be done. All working AC solutions can easily be modified to solve 200 testcases instead of 7.

ok numriex i will disquilfy my last submissions and i will leave the before submission , but i can't add other test cases becz it is not my problem >>> thx becz u understand me .... but when u wrote me in cheating subject then u say that i'm a cheater .... i 'll make what u want and what other users what >>>> when there is a problem from kawmia institutes problem setters i 'll submit only one accepted solution no more no less

Sorry for thinking You're a cheater, but it seemed You were.
The best option, I think, (in this case) is numerix's 2nd idea. I understand that You souldn't change somebody's task but You can always ask the author to enlarge it.
Then, after rejudge, we will all see whether You just printed the output or wrote the correct program and noone would ever call You a cheater again (I think, because unless somebody makes a printscreen it can't be proved that Your submissions were rejudged).

ok i told him and he changed problem statment when can i submit my solution ????? any time with any condition u want i'll do to prove that i'mnot a cheater

After my comment below the problem had been deleted without any note or explanation of the problemsetters (to whom you are related), I saw no other way to point these things out than using the forums cheating-thread.

It seems that moderators have not interest in that case and it's not up to me to tell you, if or when to submit a solution.

IMHO one shouldn't submit a solution to a problem at all, if he belongs to the group of problemsetters and thus knows (or at least could know) the problem's input and expected output as well as other users AC code.

I think printscreen would be enought.
You can send it to numerix if You and he want because I wanted only to show my point of view and don't care about cheaters (except these with many points from SPOJPL).
Sorry for washing my hands.

ok good idea see nw
i disqualified my ac solution until moderators tell me if it is accepted to submit my solution or not

9ower.com/uploads/9ower.comf ... 786161.png1
then
9ower.com/uploads/9ower.comf ... 786162.png

296...nice. 377 is my best till now and i think i am missing something.

The problemsetters opened the problem for some other languages again - thanks for that.

My other suggestion was to increase the number of testcases in a way that even someone who knows the expected output and thus could submit a code that only prints that output (instead of processing the input data) has no chance to get a short code.
If you look at the changes they made at the problem description, it seems that the number of test cases has really increased ("15 to 20").
But that isn't true. The only change is adding the number of testcases as first line of input data, but there are still only 7 testcases!
Problemsetters, if you are really interested in avoiding any "bad taste": Why do you do such things? Why not producing an input of, say, 200 lines.
Just write a short piece of code and generate 200 random testcases, perhaps add some special cases and even one who knows about the i/o doesn't have any advantage by that.

I agree with numerix. My best solution will fail for several cases. But due to weak test data it got accepted.

Take a look at 10th page here: http://www.spoj.pl/ranks/GOALFR/5.

Too much accounts for one guy I think.

spoj.pl/ranks/FAMILYP/lang=TEXT1

Something is wrong with test cases i guess( empty txt file gets AC ).

spoj.pl/forum/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=98084

I regret to say, there exist some indications that Rully Soelaiman (arena) might be a cheater. That would be devastating, because I believed that he was brilliant coder worthy of position next to Oleg and Xilinx, not a cheater.
I have posted 1 problem on spoj, and my friends many more. They all say that Rully posted someone's code. As for my problem this is true, and I disq his solution.

Please look into it. If I am wrong I apologise to all of you, especially to Rully for saying this stuff.

The following I can confirm for my problemset PRIMPERM23:
The solution of Rully Soelaiman32, submitted on 02-05-2011, is byte by byte identical to the solution of Tegg62, submitted on 29-04-2011.

I have seen him submitting solutions to multiple problems under a minute. But he has also solved several difficult problems having less than 10 AC solutions. May be he is some kind of professor in the institute having access to spoj account of all students.

User alrezza21 (name of the ancients) has 450 problems solved within a single week, submitting one solution after another. Must be a genius.

I'm sorry, but again it is very obvious that Rully Soelaiman15 continues submitting others solutions:
Solutions to NWERC11A .. NWERC11J are those of Jonathan Schmidt-Dominé ...

Now i get how Institut Teknologi Sepuluh Nopember is at top in the institute ranking.