587 replies to this topic

[thinkn bout thos Beans mans game]

ICEFANG13, on 11 May 2015 - 06:37 PM, said:

I mean we can see who cheated, why not make a list of shame? I think that would be awesome. Cheaters can suck it.




They should never do that, since it helps the cheaters. If they tell us how they found it, then the cheaters would know too and aid in hiding the cheats.

That is a specious argument. For us to trust PGI, proof must be given for infractions, lest we slip to the bad old days of draconian moderation. This is especially true when it is possible that offending players have money invested.

[ICEFANG13]

Mustafa Kemal Ataturk, on 11 May 2015 - 06:40 PM, said:

This is a fallacy. There is no cheat detection tool in this game.

Although I am aware that generally, the person that makes the claim has to provide the proof, and I agree with it, I'd like to hear what makes you so sure of your stance?

I mean if you're so sure it's so safe, you can cheat and see how long it takes for you to get caught.

ilKhan Judge Dreddrensky, on 11 May 2015 - 06:42 PM, said:

That is a specious argument. For us to trust PGI, proof must be given for infractions, lest we slip to the bad old days of draconian moderation. This is especially true when it is possible that offending players have money invested.

Agree completely, but they cannot share those details for the reason provided. They would have to show some other proof.

Edited by ICEFANG13, 11 May 2015 - 06:43 PM.

[N0MAD]

So because you PGI have initiated this post, well an good that you are actively working on deterring 3rd party cheats (well done) BUT, what is being done about editing certain files that can drastically change game mechanics (not mentioning which files and what can be edited).

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

"it was an overly salty email"


riiiiiiiiight

[Mustafa Kemal Ataturk]

My worry is not that there are cheaters, but that PGI as a company is willing to label anyone who is not satisfied a cheater.

[Triordinant]

PGI should keep a close eye on other players he MIGHT have shared his cheat tools with.

[thinkn bout thos Beans mans game]

ICEFANG13, on 11 May 2015 - 06:42 PM, said:

Although I am aware that generally, the person that makes the claim has to provide the proof, and I agree with it, I'd like to hear what makes you so sure of your stance?

I mean if you're so sure it's so safe, you can cheat and see how long it takes for you to get caught.




Agree completely, but they cannot share those details for the reason provided. They would have to show some other proof.

Unfortunately details must be provided, even if only to those involved. When actual cash is involved the standards of evidence are raised and allowing a company with a past history of how should we say "unethical behavior" to just waltz over paying customers is ludicris

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

Mustafa Kemal Ataturk, on 11 May 2015 - 06:39 PM, said:

Are you sure that this is not a result of the player in question's assertion that they will seek a refund?

That is, are you sure PGI as a company is not taking vengeful action against the said individual and declaring them a cheater while providing no evidence?

there are videos all over both reddits, its not hard to find your evidence

[thinkn bout thos Beans mans game]

Basically, if PGI can confirm that they have provided proof to the offending player, than I would understand. As is I do not trust PGI, and if it continues like this, I never will.

Mechwarrior Buddah, on 11 May 2015 - 06:48 PM, said:

there are videos all over both reddits, its not hard to find your evidence

Proof from PGI, not a jury reviewing the zapruder film

[Mustafa Kemal Ataturk]

When is PGI intending to contact the banned player with evidence of their cheating?

[ICEFANG13]

Mustafa Kemal Ataturk, on 11 May 2015 - 06:45 PM, said:

My worry is not that there are cheaters, but that PGI as a company is willing to label anyone who is not satisfied a cheater.

I have been here a long time (not saying that you have or have not), so I completely understand that it's acceptable to be wary and questioning of PGI's processes and announcements, but I do hope that it is true, and that we (the players and PGI) could work together to ensure that it is true for the betterment of the game.

Seriously, if what you said is true, it would not surprise me, but since that stance is so unhelpful (there's nothing constructive or beneficial to this stance), we would have to take the 'trust' stance at this time, otherwise the game is already gone, as it should be for a company that (theoretically) did this.

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

ilKhan Judge Dreddrensky, on 11 May 2015 - 06:49 PM, said:

Basically, if PGI can confirm that they have provided proof to the offending player, than I would understand. As is I do not trust PGI, and if it continues like this, I never will.

ah youre just getting pissy to get pissy. I see.

Carry on

[Harvey Batchall Kerensky at Law]

With a company with a record of banning people who spoke out on unrelated forums and a rocky history with the truth/promises, I would think they should err on the side of being as transparent as possible and say how they could figure it out. Without that, and again considering someone got a LIFETIME ban for insulting a dev (which isn't exactly evidence of sane, evenhanded moderating), why would anyone with a skeptical bone in their body believe that PGI wouldn't do something as petty as smear someone over a chargeback?

Edited by MadWOPR, 11 May 2015 - 06:52 PM.

[IraqiWalker]

MadWOPR, on 11 May 2015 - 06:51 PM, said:

With a company with a record of banning people who spoke out on unrelated forums and a rocky history with the truth/promises, I would think they should err on the side of being as transparent as possible and say how they could figure it out. Without that, and again considering someone got a LIFETIME ban for insulting a dev (which isn't exactly evidence of sane, evenhanded moderating), why would anyone with a skeptical bone in their body believe that PGI wouldn't do something as petty as smear someone over a chargeback?

Hilariously, that just shouldn't be done. Since it would allow cheaters to find the holes in their software.

[Triordinant]

Does anyone else notice that all 3 people questioning the ban are all from the same Unit?

[Mustafa Kemal Ataturk]

ICEFANG13, on 11 May 2015 - 06:50 PM, said:

I have been here a long time (not saying that you have or have not), so I completely understand that it's acceptable to be wary and questioning of PGI's processes and announcements, but I do hope that it is true, and that we (the players and PGI) could work together to ensure that it is true for the betterment of the game.

Seriously, if what you said is true, it would not surprise me, but since that stance is so unhelpful (there's nothing constructive or beneficial to this stance), we would have to take the 'trust' stance at this time, otherwise the game is already gone, as it should be for a company that (theoretically) did this.

Assuming good faith after repeated evidence of bad faith is foolish. Adopting a 'more constructive' mindset in face of evidence of repeated and unrepentant abuse of consumer rights is foolish.

[Harvey Batchall Kerensky at Law]

Triordinant, on 11 May 2015 - 06:54 PM, said:

Does anyone else notice that all 3 people questioning the ban are all from the same Unit?

GET OUT YOUR PITCHFORKS BOYS, WE AREN'T DONE YET, I'VE GOT SOME THEORIES AND AN INABILITY TO DEAL WITH PEOPLE CRITICAL OF PGI

Edited by MadWOPR, 11 May 2015 - 06:55 PM.

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

MadWOPR, on 11 May 2015 - 06:51 PM, said:

again considering someone got a LIFETIME ban for insulting a dev

and lifetime mod approval for far far less

[Mustafa Kemal Ataturk]

Triordinant, on 11 May 2015 - 06:54 PM, said:

Does anyone else notice that all 3 people questioning the ban are all from the same Unit?

You aren't significant enough to be targeted.

[thinkn bout thos Beans mans game]

Triordinant, on 11 May 2015 - 06:54 PM, said:

Does anyone else notice that all 3 people questioning the ban are all from the same Unit?

Please respond to the arguments at hand, not the sane person behind them