»A problem with the rules [Annihilation]

Only thing I am not happy is the auto ban system because people who didn't hack got banned : Fercruz,tomaas and many more.
Ik they didn't hack because they are my friends.

 

@Marine4121 Is Right Whats So Hard About Typing /helpop Before U Hackusate ? Its Not That Hard -_-

 

Autoban? I think its doesnt Work!!!, last time i saw someone was hitting their teamates and i use helpop like 3 times to the same hacker.... few days later he still didnt get ban, and he get a warrior kit, We Need AUTOIPBAN not AUTOBAN, cause i know someone get ban by auto ban and he came back with same ip server !

 

lol what kinda hacks did he use? hitting your own teammates? that sounds really fun

 

their teamates. . . . . . . -_-

 

@StoneHeart

Hi StoneHeart,

Before I lay out my points, I would like to assure you that I have read every single word in your post and understand where you are coming from. Evidently, a lot of effort has been spent by you in attempting to justify why this rule should not be in place. Granted, some of your points are valid and the "No Hackusation" rule is unable to address every possible issue that arises, but quoting you, "No system is perfect".

Moving on to why you find this such a big issue, I have identified one key point that you keep emphasizing on:

- Dozens of players get muted everyday for this - including new players who are unclear of the rules

Indeed, many players have been muted, owing to the fact that they are unclear of the rules. However, while deciding whether a rule should be in place, it's important to look at both sides of the coin. Yes, without the "No Hackusation" rule, there will not be dozens of players who get muted everyday. Have you however, also considered the possible implications of removing this rule? First, let us look at the reasons for why this rule is in place.

1) Using logic (which you claimed the rules lack), Exposing a hacker in chat is akin to alerting the hacker that you have blown his/her cover. What happens when a person realizes his/her cover is blown? Instinctively, one would find all possible ways to "escape" such as through turning off the hacks etc. The rule is in place to ensure that hackers are caught off-guard and banned before they can even react (i.e. turn off the hack after someone exposes them in public chat)

2) Sometimes, players are unsure of what "hacking" is. I have seen dozens of players losing PVP and accusing the other party of being a hacker just because they lost to them. Can you imagine how many false accusations will surface in chat if the rule isn't in place? As if this isn't enough, accusing another player in public chat is not something pleasant. How does it feel to have someone announce to the whole world something bad that you did not commit? Think about it.

3) There is already a platform for hackers to be reported. /helpop. There's a reason this command is in place. You do realize that with the removal of "No Hackusation" rule, we can pretty much remove /helpop as well. What's the point when everyone can just throw accusations in chat? /helpop allows admins to pick out these reports faster and easier. With this command as a platform for reporting hackers, why would you still want to accuse in chat?

The 3 points raised above are logical reasons to why we need such a rule. To sum it up, it helps ensure that the playing environment is kept clean, fun and enjoyable for all where hackers also get the bans they deserve - Not a battleground where players throw endless accusations at one another. In fact, do you not realize that at the end of the day, with the removal of this rule, it is akin to allowing players to hurl accusations openly at one another and thus, creating a much less friendly environment? Clearly, accusing in chat isn't going to help build a friendly environment for all players to play in. What's more, /helpop is already in place. If you have anger management issues and need to express your anger in public chat, that's your own issue. /helpop is there but you chose not to use it, then you blame the rules? Now, you don't simply go out into the streets and start hurling accusations or swear words do you? Same applies here. There's a proper procedure to go about for everything. If you few that new players are being muted unfairly because they weren't even clear of the rules, then recall, warnings are given to new players. Besides, new players should get themselves acquainted with the rules before venturing around. Perhaps if you feel the rules aren't easily accessible to them, make a suggestion for this particular point?

Lastly, while you do wish to make complaints and suggestions about a certain rule in GC, it is completely unnecessary to launch attacks on the staffs on GC. You have an issue with the rule? Go straight to it. Ever thought how those who truly want to serve other players will feel if they read your post, accusing them as staffs who do not care about the players? Coincidentally, this is why we need a rule to stop public accuse in chat! In any case, I have no interest in your views on the staffs - neither do the others. We can see and judge for ourselves. As for your points raised concerning the rule, I believe many have taken them into consideration. However, if you think they did any less thinking than you while coming up with the rules, then think again. Afterall, all the rules were carefully put in place to make GC a friendly environment for all.

Peace Out.

 

Okk so i am kinda getting at what stoneheart is trying to convey, sadly i feel as if most of the people replying have some kind of resentment against stoneheart because of the stone vs kinqcake incident. Normally stoneheart is not a toxic player, but i think he has some underlying issue with kinqcake, anyway my solution on this topic would be too deny people even using the word hacks or hax haxor hecker in public and/or team chat etc. This way much less people will be muted. Sometimes when you get killed unfairly by a hacker while you have OP stuff, you will get emotionally triggered by rage so accusing is a way to let off steam.

 

@TheCatsKing @YashP @Mickyle @pebro13 and everyone else who disagrees with me: You are freaking missing the point! Not one of you has been able to paraphrase my point yet!

The point is that, from my years of experience, I know that hackusating does nothing to encourage a hacker to continue hacking or discourage them! This rule is unnecessary and as such is a trap which gets players muted for nothing!

How much simpler can I get? State your idea that "it's easy to use /h" all you want, but if you have an argument to counter the above statement then give it! PLEASE stop posting the same thing over and over again.

@2920131 That is the single minded view of a child. Understand perspective, understand Kinq's view of his own position, and you will understand my problem with him. But that is besides the point: This post is to get aXed's attention so something can change, not to discuss my relations with Kinq.

 

In this week i never seen people getting autoban again. ,i always always seeing people are hacking, and never get ban by staff/ autoban sistem.

 

@StoneHeart what did you think about my suggestion up above your post???

 

Lol @blissey no joke about the 'underlying issue' or resentment. I'd tell my 'KinqCake Story' if I had any confidence that it would fix anything! I don't think a single mod on this server is even capable of hearing the most rudimentary sense coming from me! It's disgusting and only reflects their ages -not the maturity they should demonstrate due to their positions.

 

let me dismantle the sturdy points you have set up.

First off, your second point contradicts your first one. Because of the number of false accusations, do you really think admins care about public chat accusations? see it from staff perspective. i would just mute and go. because of this, public accusing logically doesn't pose a threat to hackers at all.

Let's talk about helpop. There's no way to know if an admin receives your helpop or not. Admins don't reply, talk, or even remain visible. since the private message feature is disable, theres no solid reassurance that the staff has seen your accusation, unless the player is banned immediately.

Ive got to go now, ill talk more about this later.

 

I don't see the contradiction. To put it simply:

Point 1: Don't give hackers a chance to react.

Point 2: To prevent unnecessary false accusations in chat which may hurt the feelings of other players who are wrongfully accused.

Contradictions? Highlight it for me. Admins care about public chat accusations, which is why there's the mute. (Now you're contradicting yourself). I'll quote it for you.

"do you really think admins care about public chat accusations? (you mean they don't?) see it from staff perspective. i would just mute and go (But hey they just muted those who publicly accuse)."

*Note: Words in red are my comments

Admins care, that's why they mute. A responsible admin however, would not simply just mute the player who accused in public and leave. They would and should still check on the player being accused. Of course, this would bring us on to discuss what the staffs are doing which I would like to leave out of this.

Secondly, true that there's no way to know if admins saw your /helpop. However, the forum has a section dedicated to reporting players. If this isn't a point strong enough, then tell me, how does allowing players to accuse in chat publicly solve the issue, if let's say the admins don't give any reassurance in /helpop. If like what you said, they don't bother replying you in /helpop, do you think they would reply if you start accusing in public chat? No. Simply put, I see the potential for a lot of harm and hurt caused if players are allowed to accuse in chat publicly. The negative consequences of removing this rule heavily outweighs the positive consequences (players who are unable to resist accusing in chat are not muted) which comes with it.

 

@FrozenFever

First I want to tell you how much I appreciate it that you took the time to try to understand my point. It means a great deal to me and I owe you a response in full!

Your first point is, in fact, the very reasoning that led to the creation of the rule in the first place. As I stated repeatedly in my main post: Hackers do not care! What is a killaura or a no-slowdown going to do when they're found out? Do you think they were expecting to have free reign for all time? Of course not: This is why they do not care. Your assumption that they will automatically attempt to avoid discovery is incorrect: I can tell you from brutal, hands-on experience, that this does not happen (except for maybe one in hundreds of cases). The sense of power given to player upon victory is what these hackers want: to hear you rage is what they want.

Your second point is a valid point! Many players do not understand hacking on even the most basic level. But you are incorrect to imagine a GuildCraft spammed with hackusation. I've been in servers where there are no rules: those who will hackusate will hackusate and those who will not will not. If the rule were removed I would expect only a small rise in hackusation. And besides: I like to know where hackers are in a round.

Your third point is ridiculous -sorry, but I must be as frank to you as you were for me. Just because I don't think hackusation should be mutable does not mean I believe hackers should be given free reign. /h can still be used to altert admins -and it will, as much as ever.


The paragraph following your three points is once again speculation. If someone is going to hackusate then they will hackusate, and if they're not then they won't. The rule only can effect a relatively small percentage. Refer to my post second to this to better understand my point.


Finally: I said what I said concerning the moderators and administrators to get a point across. A lot of the mods truly don't care about the players. Oh yes, they care about the 'players' but not the player. That is the problem. Also, without the rude and abrasive attitude many moderator's take in addressing rule breakers, this post would never have been made. I will not hide in mod chat and verbally abuse those I dislike! I will say what I have to say to their faces and not be a coward about it! If they don't like that then they can mute me and continue badmouthing me in my silence!


Again: Thank you for responding seriously. I understand your point and I agree somewhat. A possible suggestion, if aXed can see my point, would be to remove the 'no hackusation' rule temporarily. If your scenario ended up playing out (experience is nothing if applied improperly) then it would have to be re-applied and I would be happy in knowing that my concerns had been fairly addressed.

 

@KinqCake was your rating my post as 'agreed' a mistake or an attempt to ridicule me? I say this with an open mind: do not take offence from it. You have never agreed with me before in anything. I can't see why you would agree with this unless you can see my logic... if that's the case I would like to know.

 

@StoneHeart

I am actually curious about the first point you have just raised. Could you shed some light on how allowing players to hackusate in chat deals with the issue? Much more, if like what you said, hackers like to hear the losers whine and rage and cry, then wouldn't allowing for accusations in chat simply give the heads up for these "losers" to whine and the hackers to feel that sense of power you just mentioned? In fact, if it really is the sense of power they get from beating these players and seeing them whine in chat, then this rule serves to cleanly cut of the source of their "power". By disallowing players to accuse in chat, how else do the hackers get their sense of power? Following your idea of hackers wanting to feel good from seeing players cry (yes I am exaggerating), this rule will only deter and bore those hackers because players here can cry all they want in /helpop and the hackers won't get the satisfaction that they want.

Glad we see eye-to-eye on the second point. I do not dare predict just how much hackusations will surface if the rule is removed, but I don't see a point in taking this risk. Besides, removing this rule is akin to saying that it is fine to accuse. This clearly isn't something to be promoted. Allowing hackusations in chat sends the wrong message to the players, that they can simply point fingers at other players and accuse them of something they have not done, without suffering any consequences.

Maybe my third point wasn't clear enough. I wasn't stating that you believe hackers should be given free reign. I was simply raising the point that /helpop is in place for proper reports to be made. Reason being it's easier for admins to filter out these reports and take actions rather than sieve through endless chats. If players are allowed to accuse in chat, it makes the job doubly hard for the admins. On top of addressing /helpop issues, they still need to spot for these hackusations in chat to address them. Why go through all these when everyone can just cooperate and use the /helpop?

I know that ultimately, there will still be players who are innocently banned. Which is why I did say perhaps you could go about suggesting how new players can quickly and easily access the rules the first time they join. This actually also helps reduce the unnecessary bans on new players who don't know the rules, yet keeps the current rule in place

 

I agreed because this thread made to discuss about your suggestion not our relations.

 

@FrozenFever

That first paragraph was depressing: honestly. You didn't understand what I was saying in the least. The hackers will feel what they will feel no matter what we say... to assume otherwise is borderline idiocy. And putting it as you did is a brutal attempt to throw me in an incompetent light. I don't appreciate it.

In fact you have, whether you read all my post or not, completely missed my point. The point isn't to find a better way to deal with hackers. Didn't I ask you to refer to one of my previous posts to have the main post's point spelled out for you? I don't think you did that before responding. I took half an hour to respond to your post: Do my the favor of treating me as seriously.

I think it worth noting, so you understand my situation better, that I have been banned twice falsely. My first run-in with a mod was with Fone_Bone: Not Kinq. I have little faith in the GuildCraft system, but I'm willing to care enough to try and help fix it.

 

@KinqCake ah. I guessed as much.

 

Sorry if I had misunderstood you. Just to set things right again, I know that you are trying to speak up for those who have innocently suffered bans or mutes under this rule. This is the reason you find a need for change, a need to address the fact that players are getting punishments they do not deserve.

Back to the first point, hackers do not care about getting caught. I am pretty certain this isn't true for all hackers, but for the sake of continuing with the discussion, let's just assume most do not care about being caught. Effectively, accusing in chat no longer makes it hard for admins to catch those hackers because they couldn't care less. What you are getting at is that, players accuse all they want in chat, but admins can still handle the hackers because hackers do not care about being caught. On top of that, players who accuse are not muted! That's the picture you are painting isn't it? If I am still getting you wrong, then I apologize because I really can't see what else your points can get at. Anyway, I do agree that this mitigates the issue of players being punished innocently etc. However, while you are concerned with helping these players avoid the punishments they do not deserve, you need to also be concerned about other possible implications. I did raise some implications earlier, but I will just bring back in a few points I feel are strong for consideration.

Firstly, accusing in chat is able to and will most likely escalate to players exchanging endless fire in chat with one another. I am sure you know what gamers are like. If someone flames or accuses you, you most likely won't sit quiet. Now if these start to appear in chat, it compromises the type of environment GC wants for its players. A fun, safe and enjoyable place to have fun is not possible with accusations appearing in chat.

Secondly, wrong accusations can tarnish the reputation of certain players, possibly even hurting their feelings. Imagine a scenario where you get accused of being a thief in real life and everyone judges you for that. No one would like that feeling.

I know that you feel unjust for those players who have been wrongfully punished. However, spend some time weighing the pros and cons and you will realize that these implications compromise the server more than the rule is doing so. I agree the rule isn't perfect, which is why I did say you could make suggestions so that new players are able to know the rules immediately. While of course we cannot leave the minority in the lurch and watch them get punished as such, we also cannot afford to give up the clean chat we have now that players can safely type and enjoy in.

I had no intention of not taking you seriously. I pondered through all your points. Perhaps it's the different approach we took. Nevertheless, I hope my points do get to you this time. Ultimately, everyone has the welfare of the server in their heart afterall I got to apologize I can't come up with a solution to help those who are getting punished innocently. I still find the implications too much to handle. All I can say is, be clear of the rules before playing. This alone actually saves a lot of unnecessary punishments. Till then, don't give up trying to help the server