I am posting this on behalf of my friend np254, whose Codeforces account was recently disabled following Codeforces Round 1121 (Contest 2264). Since the account is disabled, they cannot publish this appeal themselves.
They have already contacted the relevant Codeforces administrators privately and sent a detailed appeal, but after several days their messages remain unread. They are therefore asking for a manual review of the account and Round 1121 submissions.
There are several points they would like the admins to consider:
1. The unusual A/B submission sequence
After their A solution was accepted, they used the browser's Back button to return to the previous Codeforces submission/editor page. Problem A was still selected. They then wrote their B solution directly in the Codeforces editor, but accidentally submitted it while A was still selected.
They noticed the mistake immediately, selected B correctly, and submitted the same B solution again, which was accepted.
Thus, the two submissions around the same time have a specific explanation: the B solution was written in the Codeforces editor, accidentally submitted while A was selected, and then submitted correctly under B. They are concerned that this sequence may look suspicious without the context.
2. Possible code-similarity concern
Their Round 1121 code follows the same coding conventions present in their older Codeforces submissions, including formatting, variable naming, loop structures, conditions, input-reading patterns, and overall program structure.
For example, the repeated do...while pattern used for input appears in their submissions from before Round 1121 as well.
They are completely willing for the admins to compare their Round 1121 submissions against their historical submissions, including Round 1120 and earlier.
3. AI-use concern
They state that they did not use AI assistance during the contest, receive solutions or help from another person, or share their solutions.
They solved A, B and C and attempted D, but their D solution was incorrect. They understand that this alone cannot prove authorship, but believe their complete contest performance should be considered together with their historical coding record.
They are not asking the community to determine whether the account should be restored.
They are simply asking the Codeforces administrators to manually review the case and identify what specifically triggered the account action.
np254 is willing to explain the approach, reasoning, implementation decisions, and even individual lines of every Round 1121 solution. They are also willing to provide any other evidence required.
If there is a concern other than the possibilities described above, they are equally willing to address it.
If an admin could please review the case or provide guidance on the appropriate appeal channel, it would be greatly appreciated.
Please, if any admin could take a moment to look into this case, I would sincerely appreciate it. Any response or guidance would mean a lot
Yeah right,they are disabling wrong accounts who are innocent while leaving cheaters,I recently noticed a newbie getting in top 100 in Codeforces Contest Round 1122(Div.3) among 35K people and he is still unbanned.
Hello @MikeMirzayanov, My Codeforces account @rahul.kumarundergrade has been disabled by administrators, and I am unable to log in.
I would respectfully like to request a manual review of my account and recent contest submissions. I would also appreciate clarification regarding the specific reason for the disablement and whether there is any particular submission or rule that I need to address.
If possible, please let me know how I can proceed with an appeal or account review.
Thank you for your time.
MikeMirzayanov KAN or any other CodeForces Admin can look into it, please.
MikeMirzayanov KAN any updates on np254
I request you to check this case atleast once
MikeMirzayanov, KAN, or any Codeforces admin — just following up once more regarding np254. I completely understand that you may be busy, but I would sincerely appreciate it if someone could review the case when possible. I am ready to provide any explanation or evidence needed. Thank you.
MikeMirzayanov, KAN, or any Codeforces admin — just following up once more regarding np254. I completely understand that you may be busy, but I would sincerely appreciate it if someone could review the case when possible. I am ready to provide any explanation or evidence needed. Thank you.
MikeMirzayanov KAN Vladosiya geranazavr555 I understand the admins are very busy, but even a one-line update or acknowledgment would be greatly appreciated. Thank you for taking the time to look into this.
I also want to clarify my position under the AI policy: I did not use AI to understand the problems, develop the algorithms, generate code, debug submissions, or make any contest-related decisions. I also did not take code from another contestant or any external source. All of my submitted solutions were written by me during the contest.
If my account was disabled because of code similarity, I would genuinely appreciate knowing which submission or similarity triggered the detection so I can explain the reasoning and implementation behind it.
Just one minute of time can really help me np254 PLEASE. It's a genuine REQUEST. PLEASE
MikeMirzayanov KAN Vladosiya geranazavr555
About
Dr_Agos_pixels, I can explain why I wrote it that way.While working on D, I was experimenting with an approach that I already suspected might not work. Since I was not very confident in the solution, I was being a little creative with the code and intentionally used an unusual/fancy name instead of the usual
n.After that, I wanted to use
nthroughout the rest of the implementation, so I simply did:int Dr_Agos_pixels = sc.nextInt();int n = Dr_Agos_pixels;I then kept the variable because there was no reason for me to rewrite the rest of the code just to rename it. The D solution was ultimately wrong anyway.
So the unusual name was just something I wrote myself while experimenting with the solution. It was not generated from a prompt, copied from another source, or inserted as a result of AI assistance.
I actually appreciate you pointing it out, because I can now clarify this point in my main appeal as well. I can also explain the complete reasoning behind D, including where my approach went wrong, if an admin wants to review it.
I found one more reason.
KAN MikeMirzayanov Vladosiya geranazavr555
Waiting for the response
KAN MikeMirzayanov Vladosiya geranazavr555
KAN MikeMirzayanov Vladosiya geranazavr555 Any updates on np254.
Please one look can help it out.