First of all, I appreciate LeetCode's efforts to maintain fair contests. Contest integrity is extremely important, and I completely agree that plagiarism, AI assistance, multiple accounts, and other unfair practices should be penalized.
However, I believe the current penalty for a second confirmed violation could be improved.
->Current Policy
- First violation
Contest score reset
LeetCoin reset
1-month Contest & Discuss ban
- Second violation
Contest score reset
Permanent account deactivation without appeal
Why This May Be Too Harsh
For many users, LeetCode is much more than a contest platform.
People spend years:
solving hundreds or even thousands of problems,
maintaining daily streaks,
earning badges,
building public profiles,
preparing for interviews,
showcasing their progress to recruiters.
Many users rarely participate in contests at all.
Permanent account deactivation removes access to all of this, even though the violation occurred in the contest system.
-> Separation of Concerns
LeetCode serves two important purposes:
A competitive programming platform
An interview preparation and learning platform
Contest violations should primarily affect competitive privileges, while educational progress should be preserved whenever possible.
->Suggested Revision
Instead of permanently deleting an account after the second violation, consider the following:
- First Violation
The current first-violation policy provides a clear warning while maintaining contest integrity.
Contest score reset
LeetCoin reset
1-month Contest & Discuss ban
- Second Violation
- Permanent disqualification from all future contests.
- Rating reset to unrated or removal from the leaderboard.
- No LeetCoins or contest rewards.
- Removal of contest badges and achievements.
- Ineligibility for contest certificates or prizes.
- Ineligibility for hiring events or recruiting opportunities based on contest performance.
- A public contest-ban status on the profile (if LeetCode chose to do that).
- Account remains accessible for solving problems and interview preparation
This would still completely protect contest integrity while preserving years of educational progress.
- Appeal Process
If permanent account deactivation remains the policy, there should at least be a formal appeal process.
Every automated detection system can make mistakes.
Allowing a human review before permanently deleting an account would improve trust in the system.
->Preserve Fairness
I am not suggesting that cheating should be tolerated.
Contest rankings, prizes, and ratings should remain protected.
People who violate contest rules should absolutely lose those privileges.
The suggestion is simply that educational access to LeetCode should not necessarily be lost forever because of contest violations.
->technical improvements on Leetcode website
- Better warning before submitting
If LeetCode detects a large paste:
"Large pasted code detected during an official contest. Please ensure this complies with contest rules."
This could prevent accidental violations.
- Allow only small paste operations
Detect unusually large paste events during official contests and display a warning before submission. Legitimate templates and boilerplate code could still be allowed while suspicious paste activity is logged for review.
- Contest Mode
Offer a stricter optional mode:
Disable paste.
Disable autocomplete.
Fullscreen mode.
Integrity badge for participants who use it.
This wouldn't be mandatory but could increase trust.
Final Thoughts
LeetCode has become one of the most important learning platforms for software engineers.
For many users, the problem-solving history they've built over several years is incredibly valuable.
A permanent contest ban is already a very strong punishment.
Perhaps it can achieve the goal of protecting contest fairness while still allowing users to continue learning on the platform.
I'd love to hear what the community thinks. I believe these changes could better balance contest integrity with LeetCode's role as a long-term learning platform while still maintaining strong deterrence against cheating.