The word of a respected CAL-admin is good enough proof for me. The league has a process to ensure it recruits sensible people, and after that point those people are given the opportunity to earn the trust and respect of the players as well as show themselves as impartial judges.
I've worked with Zephor on AC before (remember those days Zephie? ^_~) - he knows his ****, he's proven he's a fair mediator between teams, and it doesn't seem anyone outside the parties already holding an anti-cal grudge really made that big a stink of what's happened. I'm surprised this discussion keeps going on. Trust that your admins aren't stupid enough to take fake demos and doctored screen shots.
<!--QuoteBegin-JesusC+Apr 8 2005, 07:19 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (JesusC @ Apr 8 2005, 07:19 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> The word of a respected CAL-admin is good enough proof for me. The league has a process to ensure it recruits sensible people, and after that point those people are given the opportunity to earn the trust and respect of the players as well as show themselves as impartial judges.
I've worked with Zephor on AC before (remember those days Zephie? ^_~) - he knows his ****, he's proven he's a fair mediator between teams, and it doesn't seem anyone outside the parties already holding an anti-cal grudge really made that big a stink of what's happened. I'm surprised this discussion keeps going on. Trust that your admins aren't stupid enough to take fake demos and doctored screen shots. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> That's nice if it works, but a player who gets banned for hacking when they haven't ever hacked publicly is going to have a real hard time trusting.
By far the largest problem with the system is the inablility of the accused to defend themselves.
Seriously, guility untill proven innocent? How the hell are these accused supposed to prove themselves innocent?
Of course the system sucks. You don't need a laywer to figure this one out. I mean, you have CAL vs. (individual) and CAL then says, "Oh, actually we already know whatever we say is right, so there's no point in taking your input."
Sad... Thank god I don't live in a country that has a court system like that, I'd rather have the guilty go free than the innocent punished.
This is straight from the bible, btw. Would you kill a city of guilty men if there is one in there who is completely innocent? First testament. God then states, no, he would not.
And why not? Because the person who leads an innocent life shouldn't be punished by an angry community/society.
And Sariesel, impartial admins does not nessesarly mean that admins will be perfect in their bannings... no, realisitically, the best way to handle bans is only to ban players who are caught cheating <b>in matches</b>, because cheating in pubs is just too vague, punitive, and even as you have stated the CAL admins themselves would be banned by their own system.
Also, using matches as the only source of proof means that you will have tons of demos/spectators avalible, so everyone will know if the admin makes a bad choice or not.
Right now I'm thinking about police who show up at your door one day, and the next day the inhabients are gone, never to be found again... Simply put, any indiviual who is being impartial when reviewing the past CAL bannings can easily conclude that the system has way too much potential for abuse, and when the accused actually talk about how they are treated within the system, it's clear that the system is witchhunt started by community members with vested intrests.
Sarisel.::' ( O ) ';:-. .-.:;' ( O ) '::.Join Date: 2003-07-30Member: 18557Members, Constellation
No, actually if you look at the rate of competitive development in NS over its lifetime, it isn't that sad at all. There has never been much of a choice.
By far, the conclusion of this topic has already been reached: CAL admins are right because the majority of the players in that league trusts them, therefore there is no need to question their authority.
<!--QuoteBegin-Sarisel+Apr 9 2005, 01:13 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Sarisel @ Apr 9 2005, 01:13 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> No, actually if you look at the rate of competitive development in NS over its lifetime, it isn't that sad at all. There has never been much of a choice.
By far, the conclusion of this topic has already been reached: CAL admins are right because the majority of the players in that league trusts them, therefore there is no need to question their authority.
Strange conclusion from a strange community. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> This sort of trust and guillability is only found in young people.
I trust the CAL-Admins for a number of reason. First, why would they want to falsely accuse someone, especially someone who is cultivating the community (NSlearn), I don't see them as having some hidden agenda they want to fufill.
In addition to that I find NS to be much more leniant on hacking claims than CS. In CS, a single demo and your gone, but with NS it has been collaborated with other reports, logs, and other "evidence".
Finally, going back to the CALadmins, they won't ban on a "hunch", because they know that there are reprocussions throughout the community. And if you don't like their system, the NS community could easily build another league, and leave CAL to die.
I think the minimum required proof is a demo from either a scrim, match, or pub. Because cheating in a pub is cheating other people, and there should be reprocussions for this. Server logs optional. Also a screenshot of the steamid, and the gut feeling(like how the person submitting the items doesnt have a reason to want to person out of CAL, ie jmms providing demos of Mustang hacking before the CAL finals).
Also who has that much free time to doctor all of this evidence
Sarisel.::' ( O ) ';:-. .-.:;' ( O ) '::.Join Date: 2003-07-30Member: 18557Members, Constellation
edited April 2005
Well, most don't care either way as long as they don't get affected. There's not really any evidence made public to indicate that the league's admins should not be trusted. IRL you can find this kind of thing everywhere. So it isn't really a "young person" trend to be trustful and gullible. Part of a phenomenon called stupidity:
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->It is in the vested interest of the monied powers in America that the public be informed just enough to conform, that beliefs in the system are confirmed and that criticism is trivialized. Basically, the leaders need stupid followers. They do not want intelligent, informed, concerned citizens who are well qualified to criticize the imbalance of power in society. Stability is best assured by a pliant and compliant public, and this is exactly what the educational institutions produce and the media maintain.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> - <a href='http://www.stupidity.com/story2/index2.htm' target='_blank'>Understanding Stupidity</a>, <a href='http://www.stupidity.com/story2/page148.htm' target='_blank'>pg. 148</a>
<!--QuoteBegin-Rammstien+Apr 9 2005, 03:00 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Rammstien @ Apr 9 2005, 03:00 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Also a screenshot of the steamid, and the gut feeling(like how the person submitting the items doesnt have a reason to want to person out of CAL, ie jmms providing demos of Mustang hacking before the CAL finals). <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> Double checking- you were just saying that as an example, right? <!--emo&::nerdy::--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/nerd-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='nerd-fix.gif' /><!--endemo-->
<!--QuoteBegin-NGE+Apr 9 2005, 02:44 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (NGE @ Apr 9 2005, 02:44 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> This sort of trust and guillability is only found in young people. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> The sort of attacks on authority and quickness in which every decision the admins make are questioned, and random quoting of political philosophy in videogame forums are only found in angsty post-teens who hate their dads for not paying the DSL bill.
<!--QuoteBegin-JesusC+Apr 9 2005, 11:49 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (JesusC @ Apr 9 2005, 11:49 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin-NGE+Apr 9 2005, 02:44 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (NGE @ Apr 9 2005, 02:44 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> This sort of trust and guillability is only found in young people. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> The sort of attacks on authority and quickness in which every decision the admins make are questioned, and random quoting of political philosophy in videogame forums are only found in angsty post-teens who hate their dads for not paying the DSL bill. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> The mere fact that you call a CAL-admin an "authority" substiantes my other post.
To you, Zephor may be an authority. To me, he's just some dude who runs a video game league.
To you, I'm attacking authority. To me, I'm pointing out obvious flaws in a system and the inability of those with the responsibility to fix it.
Calling the people who you're arguing against stupid just totally killed what you were trying to accomplish. If we were stupid we would already be agreeing with you. <!--emo&::asrifle::--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/asrifle.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='asrifle.gif' /><!--endemo-->
<span style='color:yellow'>Unsportsmanlike conduct. First warning.</span>
Sarisel.::' ( O ) ';:-. .-.:;' ( O ) '::.Join Date: 2003-07-30Member: 18557Members, Constellation
Actually, not at all. You're not familiar with stupidity and what it means to be stupid. It does not mean being agreeable. So your retort is completely worthless.
Sarisel.::' ( O ) ';:-. .-.:;' ( O ) '::.Join Date: 2003-07-30Member: 18557Members, Constellation
<!--QuoteBegin-JesusC+Apr 9 2005, 11:49 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (JesusC @ Apr 9 2005, 11:49 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin-NGE+Apr 9 2005, 02:44 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (NGE @ Apr 9 2005, 02:44 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> This sort of trust and guillability is only found in young people. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> The sort of attacks on authority and quickness in which every decision the admins make are questioned, and random quoting of political philosophy in videogame forums are only found in angsty post-teens who hate their dads for not paying the DSL bill. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> Hardly random. Instead of spewing out more garbage onto the internet, why don't you contribute reason behind your opinion? There are better things to spend your time on than typing out derogatory nonsense, unless you are capable of nothing else.
<!--QuoteBegin-Sarisel+Apr 9 2005, 02:50 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Sarisel @ Apr 9 2005, 02:50 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> You're not familiar with stupidity and what it means to be stupid. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> I guess I'm not as I'm not a stupid person myself.
While I'm not a competitive gamer (I can hardly hold my own in a pub, I'm afraid), I've checked in here from time to time and followed this dispute. As it seems that people who are dead-set on it won't trust the validity of any sort of evidence that CAL admins will bring out in the case that they do, the point seems kind of moot, doesn't it? Sure, the rest of the community can look on and debate whether the player is hacking or just exceptionally skilled, but this is, essentially, a private matter between the player in question and the league. The punishments remedy any misplay prior to the conviction of said player, so the teams that have been hurt by this player have been taken care of, so, with the exception of the player's team, it's just himself and the league.
But I'm getting ahead of myself. Yes, I do agree that the "Guilty until proven innocent" clause is a tad over the top. However, what sort of case can the player present when the evidence is there? "I wasn't at that game at that time"? It comes down to an alibi versus possibly illegitimate evidence. I wish that there would be some way to prove that the source is, in fact, the real thing, but the only case that I can see if CAL allows both open evidence and defense in the regard that I'm taking it, is that people continue to argue over it based on which side they believe to be the most trustworthy. Which seems to be the same thing that's going on here. Some people trust CAL, others are skeptical, and yet, the only thing I can see coming of the proposed revisions to CAL, are the same arguments in a different context.
Personally, I'll trust CAL. If someone goes through all the trouble of setting up a league to professionalize and promote e-sports, I'm doubtful that they'd reduce themselves to petty squabbles over popularity. You might say that it's the admins themselves that are out to do it, and not higher-ups, and if that's the truth, then it's a shame, but it's my view that they're responsible for both the image of CAL and it's well-being, so they'll keep the greater good in mind and try to stay as impartial as they can.
Anyhow, to actually reply to the reason of this topic, I believe that a demo and screenshots of the person's steamid, as well as testimony should be sufficient. However, pub demos shouldn't be used to ban. They're just too easy to fake and they're too susceptible to ulterior motivation. However, with actual matches, you have HLTV and a variety of spectators who can testify. That's not to say that the pub demos should be disregarded entirely. Rather, just taken as a warning to take a closer look at this person in games. If they seperate their hacking between pubs and competitive gaming, while they're still hurting the scene, CAL doesn't seem like it would have enough evidence to actually ban a player. Well, that's my belief as to where the line should be drawn anyhow. After all, the pub admins can have a field day and ban them, and if enough people realize that they're banning the same SteamID, perhaps special circumstances can be achieved in CAL.
Oh yes, just a note to Sarisel. You seem to have missed the point in Albino's original post on stupidity. He was stating it as if you would have to be mentally handicapped to agree with your side, not in the manner in which you appeared to percieve it.
Minstrel_KnightThe truth and nothing but the truth...Join Date: 2002-11-21Member: 9562Banned
edited April 2005
<!--QuoteBegin-Golden+Apr 7 2005, 11:04 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Golden @ Apr 7 2005, 11:04 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> The only way it would be "clear" that people are being banned based on pub demos and hearsay evidence is if the evidence was released. Since it hasn't been released, nothing is "clear". <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> Yes nothing is released to the public so I have to resort to asking another CAL admin to request information on what evidence was used in the banning of a player to end up determining that Annihilator said he was wallhacking as a lerk on the vet server and there's a pub demo showing a speedhacker. That's good enough for me to ban anyone.
<!--QuoteBegin-NGE+Apr 9 2005, 01:57 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (NGE @ Apr 9 2005, 01:57 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> To you, Zephor may be an authority. To me, he's just some dude who runs a video game league. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> So what exactly is the difference here?
When a pub demo is brought too CAL, its usually done so by one or more CAL players who know the accused is also in CAL.
The main motivation in limiting acceptable demo's to at least scrims is because there are a bunch of other CAL players there who can testify. It seems to me that if you judge each circumstance in its own merits, many pub demo's could be considered very vaild. The demo that was released on these forums of Funbags we're taken by Shoe and Lynxij, two veteran, and trusted, players in the scene.
Why would they release demos? CAL-CS doesn't release demos, CAL-CSS doesn't release demos....You're right, CAL-NS should release demos because Sarisel, NGE, and Minstel asked for it.
<!--QuoteBegin-MrMojo+Apr 10 2005, 03:11 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (MrMojo @ Apr 10 2005, 03:11 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Why would they release demos? CAL-CS doesn't release demos, CAL-CSS doesn't release demos....You're right, CAL-NS should release demos because Sarisel, NGE, and Minstel asked for it. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> I totally agree, if non-cal players need evidence to why cal players are banned then cal should break their own rules and release the demos.
<!--QuoteBegin-Keyser+Apr 10 2005, 11:17 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Keyser @ Apr 10 2005, 11:17 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin-NGE+Apr 9 2005, 01:57 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (NGE @ Apr 9 2005, 01:57 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> To you, Zephor may be an authority. To me, he's just some dude who runs a video game league. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> So what exactly is the difference here? <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> There's no need for thinking that Zephor is an authority, or is on a higher plane of judgement than the rest of us.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Why would they release demos? CAL-CS doesn't release demos, CAL-CSS doesn't release demos....You're right, CAL-NS should release demos because Sarisel, NGE, and Minstel asked for it.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Community sizes of each can take 100 bannings a month and not suffer for it. NS has far less players than of these leagues, and each ban is much more significant.
Many things in life are not fair. However where can one draw the line so to speek. Like many people here have suggested impartail admins. Take baseball for exsample are the umpires always right? Of cource not however they are right in most cases, and in cases where their wrong they are not wrong by much. If multipul sorces provide digital evidence from seperate occasions, one might claim conspiricy, however if it were my call I would remove them from CAL. When the finger gets pointed at you alot by spereate sources who have taken the time to provide solid demo footage, showing suspect footage. I would prefer to error on the side of caution. There is a slight possibility that they may be innocent, however should each players rights be used a sheild for cheaters to hide behind? My answer with much thought is this, no. I have faith in CAL admins, and with the addition of Chimpzelot this season CAL admins are as solid as ever. They know what high level clan play looks like and can spot inconsistancies.
This said, one demo does not a case make. But as evidence mounts I say ban 'um. Don't look back and don't make appologies. This sends a message to other possible cheaters and show that your not parilized to act. Maybe an honest person gets hurt this way, but I belive this to be preferable to letting other cheaters spoil the integrity of the league. This issue has no easy fix ATM and I belive hard desisions must be made otherwise the competitive game leans toward irrelivance.
Life is not fair, when I was younger I thought that it should be, however solveing problems by catering to everyone is difficult, true leaders must pick paths at times that are difficult. I belive a hard-line is needed at this time.
<!--QuoteBegin-NGE+Apr 11 2005, 11:03 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (NGE @ Apr 11 2005, 11:03 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin-Keyser+Apr 10 2005, 11:17 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Keyser @ Apr 10 2005, 11:17 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin-NGE+Apr 9 2005, 01:57 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (NGE @ Apr 9 2005, 01:57 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> To you, Zephor may be an authority. To me, he's just some dude who runs a video game league. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> So what exactly is the difference here? <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> There's no need for thinking that Zephor is an authority, or is on a higher plane of judgement than the rest of us. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> <!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->3 a : persons in command; specifically : GOVERNMENT b : a governmental agency or corporation to administer a revenue-producing public enterprise <the transit authority><!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Zephor has the power to make decisions, thus he is an authority. You agreement or disagreement has nothing to do with whether he is an authority or not.
The only stipulation is that the people who are making the decisions compete in the same league.
Its like having a referee throw on a Jersey during a game in the season.
Admins should not compete in the league they play in, plain and simple. This will minimize any favortism, or "ban this player because he threatens us" bias. It would be best for CAL and the competitive community to find admins who aren't competing in the league, but know the game well enough to admin the league efficently.
*awaits comments about retirement and other irrelevant information about my post, please flame away <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/smile-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile-fix.gif' /><!--endemo--> *
<!--QuoteBegin-Firewater+Apr 17 2005, 06:40 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Firewater @ Apr 17 2005, 06:40 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> The only stipulation is that the people who are making the decisions compete in the same league.
Its like having a referee throw on a Jersey during a game in the season.
Admins should not compete in the league they play in, plain and simple. This will minimize any favortism, or "ban this player because he threatens us" bias. It would be best for CAL and the competitive community to find admins who aren't competing in the league, but know the game well enough to admin the league efficently.
*awaits comments about retirement and other irrelevant information about my post, please flame away <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/smile-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile-fix.gif' /><!--endemo--> * <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> go away
<!--emo&::asrifle::--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/asrifle.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='asrifle.gif' /><!--endemo--> Your ideas are ideal, but unfortunately, the ideal is rarely incorporated into the real deal.
Comments
I've worked with Zephor on AC before (remember those days Zephie? ^_~) - he knows his ****, he's proven he's a fair mediator between teams, and it doesn't seem anyone outside the parties already holding an anti-cal grudge really made that big a stink of what's happened. I'm surprised this discussion keeps going on. Trust that your admins aren't stupid enough to take fake demos and doctored screen shots.
I've worked with Zephor on AC before (remember those days Zephie? ^_~) - he knows his ****, he's proven he's a fair mediator between teams, and it doesn't seem anyone outside the parties already holding an anti-cal grudge really made that big a stink of what's happened. I'm surprised this discussion keeps going on. Trust that your admins aren't stupid enough to take fake demos and doctored screen shots. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
That's nice if it works, but a player who gets banned for hacking when they haven't ever hacked publicly is going to have a real hard time trusting.
Seriously, guility untill proven innocent? How the hell are these accused supposed to prove themselves innocent?
Of course the system sucks. You don't need a laywer to figure this one out. I mean, you have CAL vs. (individual) and CAL then says, "Oh, actually we already know whatever we say is right, so there's no point in taking your input."
Sad... Thank god I don't live in a country that has a court system like that, I'd rather have the guilty go free than the innocent punished.
This is straight from the bible, btw. Would you kill a city of guilty men if there is one in there who is completely innocent? First testament. God then states, no, he would not.
And why not? Because the person who leads an innocent life shouldn't be punished by an angry community/society.
And Sariesel, impartial admins does not nessesarly mean that admins will be perfect in their bannings... no, realisitically, the best way to handle bans is only to ban players who are caught cheating <b>in matches</b>, because cheating in pubs is just too vague, punitive, and even as you have stated the CAL admins themselves would be banned by their own system.
Also, using matches as the only source of proof means that you will have tons of demos/spectators avalible, so everyone will know if the admin makes a bad choice or not.
Right now I'm thinking about police who show up at your door one day, and the next day the inhabients are gone, never to be found again...
Simply put, any indiviual who is being impartial when reviewing the past CAL bannings can easily conclude that the system has way too much potential for abuse, and when the accused actually talk about how they are treated within the system, it's clear that the system is witchhunt started by community members with vested intrests.
Pretty sad this is still the best NS league, huh?
By far, the conclusion of this topic has already been reached: CAL admins are right because the majority of the players in that league trusts them, therefore there is no need to question their authority.
Strange conclusion from a strange community.
By far, the conclusion of this topic has already been reached: CAL admins are right because the majority of the players in that league trusts them, therefore there is no need to question their authority.
Strange conclusion from a strange community. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
This sort of trust and guillability is only found in young people.
In addition to that I find NS to be much more leniant on hacking claims than CS. In CS, a single demo and your gone, but with NS it has been collaborated with other reports, logs, and other "evidence".
Finally, going back to the CALadmins, they won't ban on a "hunch", because they know that there are reprocussions throughout the community. And if you don't like their system, the NS community could easily build another league, and leave CAL to die.
I think the minimum required proof is a demo from either a scrim, match, or pub. Because cheating in a pub is cheating other people, and there should be reprocussions for this. Server logs optional. Also a screenshot of the steamid, and the gut feeling(like how the person submitting the items doesnt have a reason to want to person out of CAL, ie jmms providing demos of Mustang hacking before the CAL finals).
Also who has that much free time to doctor all of this evidence
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->It is in the vested interest of the monied powers in America that the public be informed just enough to conform, that beliefs in the system are confirmed and that criticism is trivialized. Basically, the leaders need stupid followers. They do not want intelligent, informed, concerned citizens who are well qualified to criticize the imbalance of power in society. Stability is best assured by a pliant and compliant public, and this is exactly what the educational institutions produce and the media maintain.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
- <a href='http://www.stupidity.com/story2/index2.htm' target='_blank'>Understanding Stupidity</a>, <a href='http://www.stupidity.com/story2/page148.htm' target='_blank'>pg. 148</a>
Double checking- you were just saying that as an example, right? <!--emo&::nerdy::--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/nerd-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='nerd-fix.gif' /><!--endemo-->
THERE IS NO 100% PROOF
im quite sure that even in a demo you recorded, people could argue if the person cheats or if he is just good...
The sort of attacks on authority and quickness in which every decision the admins make are questioned, and random quoting of political philosophy in videogame forums are only found in angsty post-teens who hate their dads for not paying the DSL bill.
The sort of attacks on authority and quickness in which every decision the admins make are questioned, and random quoting of political philosophy in videogame forums are only found in angsty post-teens who hate their dads for not paying the DSL bill. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
The mere fact that you call a CAL-admin an "authority" substiantes my other post.
To you, Zephor may be an authority. To me, he's just some dude who runs a video game league.
To you, I'm attacking authority. To me, I'm pointing out obvious flaws in a system and the inability of those with the responsibility to fix it.
It's important to be realistic.
<span style='color:yellow'>Unsportsmanlike conduct. First warning.</span>
The sort of attacks on authority and quickness in which every decision the admins make are questioned, and random quoting of political philosophy in videogame forums are only found in angsty post-teens who hate their dads for not paying the DSL bill. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
Hardly random. Instead of spewing out more garbage onto the internet, why don't you contribute reason behind your opinion? There are better things to spend your time on than typing out derogatory nonsense, unless you are capable of nothing else.
I guess I'm not as I'm not a stupid person myself.
But I'm getting ahead of myself. Yes, I do agree that the "Guilty until proven innocent" clause is a tad over the top. However, what sort of case can the player present when the evidence is there? "I wasn't at that game at that time"? It comes down to an alibi versus possibly illegitimate evidence. I wish that there would be some way to prove that the source is, in fact, the real thing, but the only case that I can see if CAL allows both open evidence and defense in the regard that I'm taking it, is that people continue to argue over it based on which side they believe to be the most trustworthy. Which seems to be the same thing that's going on here. Some people trust CAL, others are skeptical, and yet, the only thing I can see coming of the proposed revisions to CAL, are the same arguments in a different context.
Personally, I'll trust CAL. If someone goes through all the trouble of setting up a league to professionalize and promote e-sports, I'm doubtful that they'd reduce themselves to petty squabbles over popularity. You might say that it's the admins themselves that are out to do it, and not higher-ups, and if that's the truth, then it's a shame, but it's my view that they're responsible for both the image of CAL and it's well-being, so they'll keep the greater good in mind and try to stay as impartial as they can.
Anyhow, to actually reply to the reason of this topic, I believe that a demo and screenshots of the person's steamid, as well as testimony should be sufficient. However, pub demos shouldn't be used to ban. They're just too easy to fake and they're too susceptible to ulterior motivation. However, with actual matches, you have HLTV and a variety of spectators who can testify. That's not to say that the pub demos should be disregarded entirely. Rather, just taken as a warning to take a closer look at this person in games. If they seperate their hacking between pubs and competitive gaming, while they're still hurting the scene, CAL doesn't seem like it would have enough evidence to actually ban a player. Well, that's my belief as to where the line should be drawn anyhow. After all, the pub admins can have a field day and ban them, and if enough people realize that they're banning the same SteamID, perhaps special circumstances can be achieved in CAL.
Oh yes, just a note to Sarisel. You seem to have missed the point in Albino's original post on stupidity. He was stating it as if you would have to be mentally handicapped to agree with your side, not in the manner in which you appeared to percieve it.
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Yes nothing is released to the public so I have to resort to asking another CAL admin to request information on what evidence was used in the banning of a player to end up determining that Annihilator said he was wallhacking as a lerk on the vet server and there's a pub demo showing a speedhacker. That's good enough for me to ban anyone.
So what exactly is the difference here?
The main motivation in limiting acceptable demo's to at least scrims is because there are a bunch of other CAL players there who can testify. It seems to me that if you judge each circumstance in its own merits, many pub demo's could be considered very vaild. The demo that was released on these forums of Funbags we're taken by Shoe and Lynxij, two veteran, and trusted, players in the scene.
I totally agree, if non-cal players need evidence to why cal players are banned then cal should break their own rules and release the demos.
So what exactly is the difference here? <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
There's no need for thinking that Zephor is an authority, or is on a higher plane of judgement than the rest of us.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Why would they release demos? CAL-CS doesn't release demos, CAL-CSS doesn't release demos....You're right, CAL-NS should release demos because Sarisel, NGE, and Minstel asked for it.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Community sizes of each can take 100 bannings a month and not suffer for it. NS has far less players than of these leagues, and each ban is much more significant.
This said, one demo does not a case make. But as evidence mounts I say ban 'um. Don't look back and don't make appologies. This sends a message to other possible cheaters and show that your not parilized to act. Maybe an honest person gets hurt this way, but I belive this to be preferable to letting other cheaters spoil the integrity of the league. This issue has no easy fix ATM and I belive hard desisions must be made otherwise the competitive game leans toward irrelivance.
Life is not fair, when I was younger I thought that it should be, however solveing problems by catering to everyone is difficult, true leaders must pick paths at times that are difficult. I belive a hard-line is needed at this time.
So what exactly is the difference here? <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
There's no need for thinking that Zephor is an authority, or is on a higher plane of judgement than the rest of us. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->3 a : persons in command; specifically : GOVERNMENT b : a governmental agency or corporation to administer a revenue-producing public enterprise <the transit authority><!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Zephor has the power to make decisions, thus he is an authority. You agreement or disagreement has nothing to do with whether he is an authority or not.
Its like having a referee throw on a Jersey during a game in the season.
Admins should not compete in the league they play in, plain and simple. This will minimize any favortism, or "ban this player because he threatens us" bias. It would be best for CAL and the competitive community to find admins who aren't competing in the league, but know the game well enough to admin the league efficently.
*awaits comments about retirement and other irrelevant information about my post, please flame away <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/smile-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile-fix.gif' /><!--endemo--> *
Its like having a referee throw on a Jersey during a game in the season.
Admins should not compete in the league they play in, plain and simple. This will minimize any favortism, or "ban this player because he threatens us" bias. It would be best for CAL and the competitive community to find admins who aren't competing in the league, but know the game well enough to admin the league efficently.
*awaits comments about retirement and other irrelevant information about my post, please flame away <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/smile-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile-fix.gif' /><!--endemo--> * <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
go away
<!--emo&::asrifle::--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/asrifle.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='asrifle.gif' /><!--endemo-->
Your ideas are ideal, but unfortunately, the ideal is rarely incorporated into the real deal.