Last validated CoC

Can someone from CG (@TwoSteps or @_CG_SaiksyApo I presume), after a natural investigation, can treat the following COC and remove them and have, at least, a serious discussion with their(s?) validator(s?).

Btw, as @eulerscheZahl said “Thank you very much for this demonstration of how vulnerable the approval system is.”


One can add,,,,
to the previous list.

I really think, it’s time to seriously modify CoC validation system.


these clashs are :

  • not fun
  • not interesting
  • with bad tests
  • wth bad statements

but who cares, no time to check, validated as soon as they appeared by friend/fake accounts …
if i could, i had removed them as quickly ( and banned all these account ) … ( i can … but i won’t because they’ll be stupid enough to resubmit )

it is rottening clash of code as we said it was going to happen …
cf Ian Malcolm: I hate being right all the time.


These clashes are trash !


I really like CoC, actually it was the first reason I created my Codingame account.
And it’s really nice to have new puzzles from time to time

But these are just bad clashes. Like the one in Reverse mode, with always 0 as output in samples, that expects 1 in validation cases. Seriously?

There are plenty of CoC topics that are just perfect, from easy to really tough - nobody will miss these…


I’ll look into the contributions and accounts today. Thank you for reporting it.

1 Like

I’ve removed moderator rights to jafar_03, Firdavsihas, Nazarov_Shohrukh, _ismoil, Ibrohim, Dark_hack, A.Safarkhon. I’ll contact them on Thursday to send a last warning before ban of their account.

On the 10 contributions reported:

  • 4 have been removed by the moderation bot already
  • 1 should be removed soon (once it gets enough notes)
  • 2 have OK ratings. They could benefit from a few updates (validators mainly).
  • 1 has too few ratings to judge even if it seems a bit easy (80% mean score; 124 players)
  • 2 are WIP

The point here is not to let a bot do the job but MANUALLY remove those contributions since they, most probably, have been validated by fake accounts and without any real review process ! CG must really act against that kind of XP farming and have a real brain storming on the most global problem of contribution validation.

XP “farming” (we’re talking about 10x3x15 = 450 XP spread over 8 approvers here) won’t be an issue anymore since these 15 XP will be removed.

To prevent group of friends to bypass the moderation system like they did, we could:

  • change the conditions to become a CoC moderator and raise the threshold of 50 CoC played to 100 or 150. Or add an minimum level too. Or add a minimum number of CoC victories.
  • add a delay of 1 day during which no approval/refusal is possible

May I suggest a mix of those. Something like:
lvl 20, 100 CoC played and at least 50 CoC won facing real users (not a duplicate account nor a bot)

Concerning the delay, it won’t solve anything IMHO

Not for the one who’s submitting the bogus CoCs.


WOW ,this is shock for me !!!
I’ve never seen like this cool problem !!

The author has been banned and the clash deleted.

1 Like

The validators are banned too ?

These moderators are not moderators anymore but I haven’t deleted their account. I’m giving them a chance (I’m always trying to give people a chance).

have or haven’t ?

Btw, the contrib is still present in the accepted contributions page. Are you sure you have removed the contrib ?

wups, edited. Yes, the clash is not available anymore in the pool of exercises but the contrib is still visible.

not a bad clash … maybe i should have validated it …
but the approve comment “I approved this contribution because it’s made by akai Sadi” … :disappointed:

There is still one problem with it (and I don’t have permission to modify already approved clashes and correct it myself):
The validators are always much longer than the visible tests. The default code is generated by read s:string(256), which isn’t sufficient for validators having a length > 900.

I know that i don’t touch CoC validation so maybe i’m wrong.

But how the f*ck is this not a bad clash ? Validators are not even close to visible tests. There’s no chance anyone found the solution during a CoC. Just, no … no chance. How am i suppose to guess this code. Even with validators there’s no chance i’ll find it.