[magilla]

J!NX posted:

Yep and guess what; only the people who truly will cheat again are going to make alts and do again, especially the ones with lots of money.

also, you don't teach someone to not steal by cutting off their hands. That's fucking insane.

and that way you have a filtered subgroup, which you may target by other means or repeatedly punish.

there is no way to ultimately eliminate the issue, but making things more difficult can funnel offenders into a limited subgroup.

your analogy is extreme.. but harsher punishments for offenders don't have to be brutal. this is only a steam account we're talking about.

[SteakStyles]

Can you imagine the publicity and financial nightmare that would happen due to the mass chargebacks/disputes that would happen if they ever did this? I get that you believe a harsher punishment would cut down on cheaters, but is it really worth the legal migraines what I mentioned would result in for Valve and Steam? You can't even say that they'd have a right if Steam's ToS was updated to reflect that they can do that as most people already treat ToS/EULA as merely a suggestion rather than actually listening to the "don't run 3rd party/cheat programs" parts.

[J!NX]

magilla posted:

and that way you have a filtered subgroup, which you may target by other means or repeatedly punish.

there is no way to ultimately eliminate the issue, but making things more difficult can funnel offenders into a limited subgroup.

your analogy is extreme.. but harsher punishments for offenders don't have to be brutal. this is only a steam account we're talking about.

How can they learn anything if you don't give them another chance? if they cheat once they can never play online again, what the hell kind of lesson is learned from that at all? "You stole once, now you're /never/ allowed in all stores again". At current its "You stole once, you can never go to specifically this store, and have your reputation publicly disgraced"

The reason I call it cynical and childish is because it is.

and "This is only a steam account we're talking about".

If I wanted to cheat and knew it was that harsh I would have bought the games on an alt and the lesson wouldn't be learned because my main would be totally unaffected. And banning across all acounts would be useless because you can change hardware ID's and use a VPN and gift card.

[laminblake]

PALLL posted:

currently in a rust server where a guy called Bagon, is using speedhack, aimbot, i searched up his profile this is what is displays.

1 VAC ban(s) on record | Info
24 day(s) since last ban

how is he still able to play Rust when he has an active ban?

Please stop VAC banned players playing rust.

Should be a 3 strike policy imo. 3 VAC bans = banned from all multiplayer servers of all games that use VAC to to manage it's anti-cheat.

[lolo]

magilla posted:

and that way you have a filtered subgroup, which you may target by other means or repeatedly punish.

there is no way to ultimately eliminate the issue, but making things more difficult can funnel offenders into a limited subgroup.

your analogy is extreme.. but harsher punishments for offenders don't have to be brutal. this is only a steam account we're talking about.

http://www.mysteamgauge.com/account?...61197999232155

Just look at my account's value

Sure it's just a steam account.

I think you forgot the money value all over it that could be lost with the global-ban policy you're defending.

And people will not be happy with that, at all.

Over 1 violation, just to lock me out of a large amount of games that I enjoy better than I did for one.

[J!NX]

laminblake posted:

Should be a 3 strike policy imo. 3 VAC bans = banned from all multiplayer servers of all games that use VAC to to manage it's anti-cheat.

That's more like it

if you have 3 vac bans, you obviously fall under the type of person that is never going to learn.

but it's black and white and cynical to do it over 1 ban.

[Spicyfish]

I would think a system wide timed ban would be more appropriate. I'd like to think a cheater is more likely to cheat again once an opportunity arises with enough perception on not being caught. If you got banned for a month from VAC enabled games, it's probably going to be enough to make you consider the implications next time around, may even be worth making the infraction more serious.

[magilla]

J!NX posted:

How can they learn anything if you don't give them another chance? if they cheat once they can never play online again, what the hell kind of lesson is learned from that at all? "You stole once, now you're /never/ allowed in all stores again". At current its "You stole once, you can never go to specifically this store, and have your reputation publicly disgraced"

The reason I call it cynical and childish is because it is.

and "This is only a steam account we're talking about".

If I wanted to cheat and knew it was that harsh I would have bought the games on an alt and the lesson wouldn't be learned because my main would be totally unaffected. And banning across all acounts would be useless because you can change hardware ID's and use a VPN and gift card.

if they cheat once, they lose everything. they (most likely) will have to go to their parents and tell them what happened if they want to make a new account (changing the credit card over.)

if they are older, they lose the equity that they invested into the account. how is this not a win win? a cheater endures more of a punishment, or learns a better lesson.

Edited:

SteakStyles posted:

Can you imagine the publicity and financial nightmare that would happen due to the mass chargebacks/disputes that would happen if they ever did this? I get that you believe a harsher punishment would cut down on cheaters, but is it really worth the legal migraines what I mentioned would result in for Valve and Steam? You can't even say that they'd have a right if Steam's ToS was updated to reflect that they can do that as most people already treat ToS/EULA as merely a suggestion rather than actually listening to the "don't run 3rd party/cheat programs" parts.

i would say it's worth it. besides, blizzard handled this fine with account wide bans.

Edited:

J!NX posted:

That's more like it

if you have 3 vac bans, you obviously fall under the type of person that is never going to learn.

but it's black and white and cynical to do it over 1 ban.

that's your opinion. making a crime harsher makes a criminal less likely to commit said crime, does it not?

[J!NX]

J!NX posted:

you told him where to find proof and don't even bother posting it yourself

how silly.

lolo posted:

Where do I go again?

It'd be much easier to come across your point if you posted it right here.

Looked on your name, found absolutely nothing.

still nothing

magilla posted:

if they cheat once, they lose everything. they (most likely) will have to go to their parents and tell them what happened if they want to make a new account (changing the credit card over.)

if they are older, they lose the equity that they invested into the account. how is this not a win win? a cheater endures more of a punishment, or learns a better lesson.

this is how much mine costs

Over the last 9 years, you've spent 5204.2 hours playing this selection, which includes 219 items, is valued at $3043.04, and requires 988.5 GB

So I should lose $3043.04 worth of money because I cheated once in some game?

magilla posted:

that's your opinion. making a crime harsher makes a criminal less likely to commit said crime, does it not?

There is no way you are a psychologist. Any idiot can understand why this doesn't work.

By that logic, an eye for an eye should easily work. Except everyone who believes that making a crime harsher makes them less likely to do it are insanely ignorant of human mentality.

[elixwhitetail]

magilla posted:

i am particularly interested in the opposite side of this argument, as well. the emotional flare is indicative of a. people who do not want to be punished this harshly (hackers,) or b. people who have hacked in the past and feel sympathy ("reformed cheaters.") i'll have you know that either way, your place in the discussion is fallacious on the grounds of emotional bias.

How convenient.

There are only two options: You are a cheater, or you were a cheater.

Is there truly no middle ground for "this is illogical, listen to the voice of reason" from a neutral party?

Because the "VAC bans should be everything forever" crowd doesn't appear to admit it's possible in their quest to brand the opposition cheaters who want to be let off easy.


It belies a black-and-white worldview that is so extreme and absolute that I can't trust the judgement of anyone who refuses to entertain the possibility that they might be wrong about it.

[magilla]

J!NX posted:

you told him where to find proof and don't even bother posting it yourself

how silly.

http://lab.facepunch.com/thread/1359346/4/

don't act ignorant. he knows how to do a simple internet search, and if he doesn't, he shouldn't be arguing with me.

Edited:

J!NX posted:

still nothing



this is how much mine costs



So I should lose $3043.04 worth of money because I cheated once in some game?



There is no way you are a psychologist. Any idiot can understand why this doesn't work.

By that logic, an eye for an eye should easily work. Except everyone who believes that making a crime harsher makes them less likely to do it are insanely ignorant of human mentality.

are you claiming yourself to be a cheater? why are you worried about losing the money? i'm saying you should have that underlying punishment instated, so that if you DID cheat, yes, you deserve to lose your privileges to enjoy your games (you are affecting the investments of others, and making their money invested of less value.)

actually, an eye for an eye does work exceptionally. in those civilizations, crime was only rampant because of how hard it was to detect. in today's society, if such a policy existed, crime would be virtually nonexistent. i could pull an article on this as well. (not that i agree of course. i believe in rights, after all.)

[J!NX]

magilla posted:

http://lab.facepunch.com/thread/1359346/4/

don't act ignorant. he knows how to do a simple internet search, and if he doesn't, he shouldn't be arguing with me.

Obviously if you do it as a kid you're likely to do it again, but that doesn't mean you should be "Punished harsher" because that doesn't truly teach anything. And, tons of people who do that don't do it again when VAC banned, the fact that people with 700 days since last ban exists prove this.

This is why beating a child will cause them to act out much more in defiance of the parent. Cheaters will cheat more in defiance of the system.

magilla posted:

actually, an eye for an eye does work exceptionally. in those civilizations, crime was only rampant because of how hard it was to detect. in today's society, if such a policy existed, crime would be virtually nonexistent. i could pull an article on this as well. (not that i agree of course. i believe in rights, after all.)

You pretty much just lost all your credibility by saying that

I could pull an article on why the earth is flat, doesn't make it true you know.

[magilla]

elixwhitetail posted:

How convenient.

There are only two options: You are a cheater, or you were a cheater.

Is there truly no middle ground for "this is illogical, listen to the voice of reason" from a neutral party?

Because the "VAC bans should be everything forever" crowd doesn't appear to admit it's possible in their quest to brand the opposition cheaters who want to be let off easy.


It belies a black-and-white worldview that is so extreme and absolute that I can't trust the judgement of anyone who refuses to entertain the possibility that they might be wrong about it.

i wasn't remarking on the argument itself, whitetail, but the emotional flare that is invested in the other side of the argument. it strongly indicates emotional bias.

your opinion of extremity, on the other hand, is indicative of nothing. it is an opinion, plain and simple. we fundamentally disagree, just as an advocate of the death penalty might disagree with someone who prefers a lifetime of incarceration (at the expense of innocent taxpayers.)

[SteakStyles]

magilla posted:

i would say it's worth it. besides, blizzard handled this fine with account wide bans.

While both Valve and Bilzzard are companies and all about making money, its hardly a fair comparison. If Blizzard had their way you'd probably have to rebuy WoW every month at full price rather than pay a subscription. They'd probably also figure so way to do that with Starcraft and Diablo.

[elixwhitetail]

magilla posted:

http://lab.facepunch.com/thread/1359346/4/

don't act ignorant. he knows how to do a simple internet search, and if he doesn't, he shouldn't be arguing with me.

The burden of proof is on the one making the assertions.

I'd like to also point out that one of the pieces of "proof" you gave me was an article about a study on a single sample population of 181 participants with the outcome being evidence towards a genetic predisposition to be sexually unfaithful to their partners.

I know we all walk around in Rust with our penises hanging out but that does not mean we're in any sort of relationship that can involve mistresses.

Please now establish that sexual infidelity and aimbotting in video games are equivalent and linked mental phenomena in any statistical and cognitive-therapy way.

[lolo]

magilla posted:

http://lab.facepunch.com/thread/1359346/4/

don't act ignorant. he knows how to do a simple internet search, and if he doesn't, he shouldn't be arguing with me.

Edited:



are you claiming yourself to be a cheater? why are you worried about losing the money? i'm saying you should have that underlying punishment instated, so that if you DID cheat, yes, you deserve to lose your privileges to enjoy your games (you are affecting the investments of others, and making their money invested of less value.)

actually, an eye for an eye does work exceptionally. in those civilizations, crime was only rampant because of how hard it was to detect. in today's society, if such a policy existed, crime would be virtually nonexistent. i could pull an article on this as well. (not that i agree of course. i believe in rights, after all.)

The only reason I see you justify this now is because you expect everyone to have huge wallets and shrug it off like no big deal.

Some of us spend overtime because we can't just spend right then and there. It's not easy seeing things that took you months to maybe even years, get thrown away, over a silly time we had.

[magilla]

J!NX posted:

Obviously if you do it as a kid you're likely to do it again, but that doesn't mean you should be "Punished harsher" because that doesn't truly teach anything. And, tons of people who do that don't do it again when VAC banned, the fact that people with 700 days since last ban exists prove this.

This is why beating a child will cause them to act out much more in defiance of the parent. Cheaters will cheat more in defiance of the system.

this is subjective. what about the people who are banned from game to game within 30 days? there are always two sides to the coin.

the more you impress upon people that these cheats are socially unacceptable, the more people are likely to turn away from them in development.

Edited:

elixwhitetail posted:

The burden of proof is on the one making the assertions.

I'd like to also point out that one of the pieces of "proof" you gave me was an article about a study on a single sample population of 181 participants with the outcome being evidence towards a genetic predisposition to be sexually unfaithful to their partners.

I know we all walk around in Rust with our penises hanging out but that does not mean we're in any sort of relationship that can involve mistresses.

Please now establish that sexual infidelity and aimbotting in video games are equivalent and linked mental phenomena in any statistical and cognitive-therapy way.

the university study displays that those who participate in "cheating behaviors" are more likely to cheat on spouses. this was in regards to my argument in that thread, so please make the correct separation here as well.

i'll give you a lesson on psychology; the human brain correlates cheating on tests and cheating on spouses on the same rung of function, simply because the words are associated. interesting, isn't it?

[J!NX]

magilla posted:

that's your opinion. making a crime harsher makes a criminal less likely to commit said crime, does it not?

magilla posted:

actually, an eye for an eye does work exceptionally. in those civilizations, crime was only rampant because of how hard it was to detect. in today's society, if such a policy existed, crime would be virtually nonexistent. i could pull an article on this as well. (not that i agree of course. i believe in rights, after all.)

this fucking dude is unbelievable You argue about us being ignorant, yet you say shit that is so unbelievably ignorant.

I take it we should cut hands of children off, I'm sure that will show them not to steal

please, do "Enlighten" us by posting an article on why eye for an eye works

when you treat people like animals they're going to revolt.

[elixwhitetail]

magilla posted:

actually, an eye for an eye does work exceptionally. in those civilizations, crime was only rampant because of how hard it was to detect. in today's society, if such a policy existed, crime would be virtually nonexistent. i could pull an article on this as well. (not that i agree of course. i believe in rights, after all.)

Please do conclusively disprove the age-old saying about an eye for an eye.

magilla posted:

just as an advocate of the death penalty might disagree with someone who prefers a lifetime of incarceration (at the expense of innocent taxpayers.)

You can't even get an example out without needlessly introducing mild bias.

Still can't take you seriously.

magilla posted:

the university study displays that those who participate in "cheating behaviors" are more likely to cheat on spouses. this was in regards to my argument in that thread, so please make the correct separation here as well.

i'll give you a lesson on psychology; the human brain correlates cheating on tests and cheating on spouses on the same rung of function, simply because the words are associated. interesting, isn't it?

Correlation does not equal causation. NEXT!

[magilla]

lolo posted:

The only reason I see you justify this now is because you expect everyone to have huge wallets and shrug it off like no big deal.

Some of us spend overtime because we can't just spend right then and there. It's not easy seeing things that took you months to maybe even years, get thrown away, over a silly time we had.

no man i'm not saying because you had a ban before you should be banned now! i'm saying it should be instated and implemented for future bans from a certain point.

Edited:

elixwhitetail posted:

Please do conclusively disprove the age-old saying about an eye for an eye.



You can't even get an example out without needlessly introducing mild bias.

Still can't take you seriously.



Correlation does not equal causation. NEXT!

bias? my analogy contained bias, but was not based on bias (i am allowed to express my opinion as long as i am not blurring it with fact.)

and lol that saying does not even apply there.

[J!NX]

hey magilla, have you ever tried meth?

I'm laughing my ass off right now.

Punishing violently teaches violence.

[elixwhitetail]

magilla posted:

and lol that saying does not even apply there.

magilla posted:

actually, an eye for an eye does work exceptionally.

Are you honestly telling me that "an eye for an eye makes the whole world blind" is somehow not applicable when I ask you to prove your assertion directly contradicting the wisdom of the saying?


I've had conversations with hopeless stoners that made more sense and were better held-together than this.

[STeel]

idonthinkso posted:

i would appreciate to delete the whole steam profile once a cheater get cought!
THEN they might learn to play legit

So if I ever cheated in a single game or have been falsely detected of doing so (the whole case with MW2 for example), I should lose ~$2,490 worth of games completely unrelated to it?
lol no

[J!NX]

STeel posted:

So if I ever cheated in a single game or have been falsely detected of doing so (the whole case with MW2 for example), I should lose ~$2,490 worth of games completely unrelated to it?
lol no

if you cheated on your N64 as a kid you should be banned from steam forever and have your legs tied to a rock

also, I like to drink paint thinner, and eat my toe nails

Edited:

man this section is killing me

[STeel]

J!NX posted:

if you cheated on your N64 as a kid you should be banned from steam forever and have your legs tied to a rock

also, I like to drink paint thinner, and eat my toe nails

Edited:

man this section is killing me

I once cheated in Heroes Of Might And Magic 3 and Doom, what am I up against here?

[J!NX]

STeel posted:

I once cheated in Heroes Of Might And Magic 3, what am I up against here?

6 years in the isocube

[STeel]

:(

[TornadoThomas]

there should be something like a three strikes account ban for people with games worth more than 100euro/dollar.

people with an account with a total value of games less than that should get a ban immediately.

i don't see any problem with terminating cheater accounts, but it might be a legal issue why they don't do that. not just because of the money like many think.

[theQQ]

TornadoThomas posted:

there should be something like a three strikes account ban for people with games worth more than 100euro/dollar.

people with an account with a total value of games less than that should get a ban immediately.

i don't see any problem with terminating cheater accounts, but it might be a legal issue why they don't do that. not just because of the money like many think.

"you can pay to have more strikes!"

[tirpider]

I like the idea of the plugin that denies folks with arbitrary VAC bans. But only as a plugin because it gives server operators an option.

As an official policy, I think it's a bit heavy handed. Blocking their entire Steam library is just dumb.
Kinda like taking someone's car if they get any kind of driving infraction.

I also think this "once a cheater, always a cheater" is some simple-minded, hillbilly bullshit, and I question the quality of the studies he brought up in the other thread.

It's like saying reform or redemption don't exist.

[magilla]

elixwhitetail posted:

Are you honestly telling me that "an eye for an eye makes the whole world blind" is somehow not applicable when I ask you to prove your assertion directly contradicting the wisdom of the saying?


I've had conversations with hopeless stoners that made more sense and were better held-together than this.

you misused correlation & causation in an attempt to unintelligibly refute my statement.

and i've had deeper conversations with my dog (at least he seems to comprehend things.)

Edited:

J!NX posted:

if you cheated on your N64 as a kid you should be banned from steam forever and have your legs tied to a rock

also, I like to drink paint thinner, and eat my toe nails

Edited:

man this section is killing me

no, you shouldn't be banned for prior offenses. i was arguing that the rule should be instated for future offenses.

[chicken-]

elixwhitetail posted:

Do you realize what would happen if Valve implemented such overkill policies?

People would craft malware to infect banner ads and sites frequented by Steam users (like gaming forums and even cheat forums, lol), and the ultimate payload wouldn't be spyware, but VAC-detected cheats to infect any one of a number of common and popular games that the malware finds installed on the system (TF2, CoD, etc.).

Oh, look, you weren't even trying to cheat, and you may not have even noticed anything visually different (no reason why the aimbot has to actually display to you what it's doing, just being injected is enough for VAC), but now you're VAC banned from everything forever.

The trolling would be terrible. And before you say that won't happen, it's documented to have happened with PunkBuster, although PB was sloppy and would detect snippets of cheat code that merely existed in an IRC channel. Yes, trolls were getting people PB-banned by just pasting cheat source into IRC channels they were in. Getting a VAC ban requires putting injection files onto the machine, but malware can already do all of that.

If VAC was abused to ban innocents like that, it would ruin the company's reputation. Hell, just the mass overkill of VAC banning you from everything forever would seriously damage Valve. I'd start buying more games off GOG and Desura and other places that wouldn't ban you from everything for one cheat in one game.

Valve has thought about this more than you have and have come up with better solutions (that are being used right now) than you've come up with.

I don't click banner ads, I don't get infected by malware. That would be the least of my concerns. You're probably one of those people that ends up with those fake virus scanners on their PC every 3 months cuz you can't help yourself but click on stuff you shouldn't. You give me a paycheck every week though so it's not all bad.

[J!NX]

chicken- posted:

I don't click banner ads, I don't get infected by malware. That would be the least of my concerns. You're probably one of those people that ends up with those fake virus scanners on their PC every 3 months cuz you can't help yourself but click on stuff you shouldn't. You give me a paycheck every week though so it's not all bad.

I don't even know where you came up with that

[elixwhitetail]

chicken- posted:

I don't click banner ads, I don't get infected by malware. That would be the least of my concerns. You're probably one of those people that ends up with those fake virus scanners on their PC every 3 months cuz you can't help yourself but click on stuff you shouldn't. You give me a paycheck every week though so it's not all bad.

It's hilarious that you assume I'm Grandma McToolbars and you seem to be unaware that drive-by downloads that operate through banner ads without any action on the user are out in the wild already. Never mind the possibility of using image renderer exploits where merely attempting to load the image exposes you to attack if you're vulnerable.

When's the last time you checked yourself for rootkits? Do you browse with Flash and Javascript enabled by default?

Please hush while the adults are talking.

[lintz]

so you're saying that i should have my account, probably one of the first sets of steam accounts, totalling over $2.4k, VAC banned uniformly, because i once cheated (on a non VAC server) in CS 1.6?

never mind the fact that it's been 2799 days since my ban?

fuck. you.

[magilla]

lintz posted:

so you're saying that i should have my account, probably one of the first sets of steam accounts, totalling over $2.4k, VAC banned uniformly, because i once cheated (on a non VAC server) in CS 1.6?

never mind the fact that it's been 2799 days since my ban?

fuck. you.

no, you shouldn't be banned for prior offenses. i was arguing that the rule should be instated for future offenses.

[lintz]

what i'm saying applies to the future as well. what if everything that i said there was exactly the same, only it happened now (or in the future), with your proposed changes in place.

getting VAC banned from goldsrc taught me to never trust anyone who told me to cheat (and so i never did).

getting VAC banned from everything would probably have turned me away from steam forever.

[ZombieJesus]

Most of us hate hackers due to the fact that they are an extreme nuisance for PC gaming but permabans for every game on Steam is way too heavy handed. From a strictly economic standpoint Steam would lose out on an enormous amount of revenue by being that heavy handed. As a realist it is not even worth discussing this policy since it would never happen for a variety of reasons.

Also had to laugh at the guy claiming and eye for an eye would work out well in the modern world. It would cut down on crime in the short term but would eventually lead to a bloody revolt over a heavy handed totalitarian government. So I think I would rather live in a society that had a well rounded approach to criminal justice than a powder keg waiting to explode in horrific infighting.

[RudolphHess]

If I was going to make grandiose claims about cheaters' behaviour and how it is backed by peer reviewed scientific studies and how I am also a psychologist, I would:

1. Use proper grammar and punctuation. People are much more likely to believe you have a degree if you can communicate effectively.

2. Link to the said studies or refer to the journals in which they were published. In academia this is called referencing. Please note that if a study has been peer reviewed it will be published somewhere.

3. Not link to Business News Daily or The Huffington Post as neither of those are scientific journals.

4. Make sure that the studies were at least searchable in academic libraries. http://imgur.com/RwQT26q
Which it's not, either by title or author.

5. Not have a post history that displays xenophobia and bigotry.

[J!NX]

RudolphHess posted:

If I was going to make grandiose claims about cheaters' behaviour and how it is backed by peer reviewed scientific studies and how I am also a psychologist, I would:

1. Use proper grammar and punctuation. People are much more likely to believe you have a degree if you can communicate effectively.

2. I would link to the said studies or refer to the journals in which they were published. In academia this is called referencing. Please note that if a study has been peer reviewed it will be published somewhere.

3. I would not link to Business News Daily or The Huffington Post as neither of those are scientific journals.

4. I would make sure that the studies were at least searchable in academic libraries. http://imgur.com/RwQT26q
Which it's not, either by title or author.

it's not like he has any credibilty anyways

especially considering he thinks an eye for an eye would "Totally remove all crime" and actually work at all

The only psychologist that actually believes that shit are the ones who don't belong near any mental patients, he would literally cause them to kill themselves and make them even worse.

Also, that was an amazing first post, I see very good potential in you.