TOPIC: TTT is broken.

LonelyDodo wrote: And why should you get to decide whether or not someone is hacking, when you have no actual proof? These things are voted on in Lead Team meetings for a very specific reason. And even if you are trusted, then what about the others? Are they trusted enough? It's too easy to make a mistake by depending on people's gut feelings than actual visual evidence.

Raeker wrote:
Did you watch videos I recorded of him? I have 10 minutes of him obviously hacking that is visual confirmation. All I was suggesting regarding this issue was letting us ban him until next meeting where LT decides whether or not extend this ban. The way it is handled atm is way worse than my suggestion (and in my suggestion I even mentioned that gathering evidence is crucial to this.)

Do you know what Johnler had to do when he joined (twice) when I called him? He ran anticheat. Said sorry no hits and observed him with me until he left

"The Lead Team does not want us to ban hackers"
- Wait what.. Ofcourse we do

LonelyDodo wrote: The issue with your suggestion is that you're implying that you as an admin, without any actual visual evidence, get to ban hackers because you believe they're hacking at least until it's reviewed. This suggestion goes against multiple core values of the community that I'd rather not go into at 1 AM but keep in mind that we're literally talking in circles here.

I am saying that a team of experienced, trusted staft members get to vote on whether or not the user is even hacking in the first place. Although we technically vote on which punishment the hacker receives, that is nothing but a formality.

Like I said, and I'll specify it again, a GROUP of people vote on the issue. Never, under any circumstances, should a staff member on their own decide that they have enough "proof" that a user is in fact hacking. I find it rather impudent of you that you completely ignore that point to say "But I've got proof," when that isn't even the issue.

LonelyDodo wrote:
Might i add we were told to record them by a few LT members

LonelyDodo wrote: I already explained it to you, you can't see the the anitcheats. The message for having no punishments is only sent if the person has no punishments at all. Just because you can't see them doesn't mean they aren't there. Just to double check I've reviewed the code and everything looks to be in working order. If you want to double check this searching someone via steamid even when they are on the server will refresh their punishment and pulls directly from the database.

Jaxjaxjack wrote: And you did, didn't you? It's even mentioned in the post that the user got punished. I seriously cannot understand the issue here.

Raeker wrote:
I get this all but I dont accept it. It BREAKS the experience of other users. and once again I ask you this: Did you have any doubt after watching the video I gave that the guy was hacking? I am talking strictly about theses instances when its more obvious than anything I can imagine

You do realise if we actually EVER gave you admins anticheat someone would inevitably abuse the fuck out of it because you'd get to see who is a traitor and who isn't. There is no way we'd let that happen and that's why it will never happen. There have been mistakes in the past where people think others are hacking when it is just pure skill.
That's why there's the hacking policy to prevent that.

LonelyDodo wrote: The reason why I'm not responding to that question is because that's not the issue here. You're asking me whether or not I'd say they'd be hacking because you'd see that as confirmation in your eyes that you're right and that a single individual should be allowed to make that decision on their own.

I will once again emphasise that I'm fine with evidence being provided, but it would have to be considered valid by a group of individuals, not just one.

CrankyBot wrote:
So instead of allowing us to ban people who are obviously hacking (like the guy in video I showed) until further review you are saying we should give them up to 168 hours to ruin the game until someone MIGHT act up...... This seems like a solid system

Is this someone hacking?


There is a difference between how things look and what is clear signs of modification the anticheats came back with no clear signs so the video was the only form of proof and was what the user was punished off. The fact that a trusted group of experienced staff members took time to look at the proof given and came to a conclusion to punish the user in accordance to the policy should make you feel better than if you were to punish them for their cheats and having no clue of the policy and the possibility of breaking it which would've lead to consequences for yourself. Punish the user for the rules they have broken and you can punish for not the rules in which they've possibly broken and with no knowledge of the proper process to follow.

LonelyDodo wrote: If there's one in-between that I can agree with that'd be that Lead Team members can request the CM team to host an emergency meeting purely to vote on one or two hackers so that not such a long time would have to pass. After all, the staff team is here to improve the users' experience, and you're right when you say that obvious hackers ruin that.

However, for a billionth time, why do you get to decide what is "obvious hacking"? One single person can easily be wrong, and the term "obvious" is hard to define. That's why it has to be voted on.

Raeker wrote:
He has resigned so stop going on at him now.

I agree with Cranky that most admins just aren't trusted enough to have that power, but I do agree with Dodo that the kick system wasn't my favorite either...

LonelyDodo wrote: You can always ban him for other rules hes broken? If hes going around just rdming ban him for RDM and have it extended to a perma in the meeting. I fail to see how someone would be able to ruin everyones experience while hacking but not break any other rules.

EMP wrote: I know a couple of users that would only use their hacks during their traitor rounds. Then again they'd always kill a traitor buddy or two during those rounds so after 3 or 4 times there'd still be a reason to ban them.

Dodo Said:From what I have experienced there is either a need for an update for the anticheat as in the past we have had people using software to cheat, taunt staff about using anti cheat to scan them and nothing comes up apparently, ( for at least two cases). But were dealt with as LT was on to check them. So the reliance on the anticheat needs to be lowered due to software camouflaging its use.
Also Raeker mentioned:Possibly then LT members need to be re-trained if unsure or struggling for usage of anticheat?

But I realised that it is best that action for hacking are voted on between the LT in meetings as some people are simply very good at aiming or using gaming knowledge to their advantage. Although it is rather troublesome that it can take a week to catch user breaking rule 1.5.

Raeker wrote:
I see no one gives a fuck about video proof I provide. It is obviously shown that this person didn't use the hacks to kill unless he was provoked to shoot back. Mind you that I had edited out 10 minutes of me steam chatting with Johnler out of respect. So in total I had well over 20 minutes of footage.

CrankyBot wrote:
Huh did not know that but makes sense. Would of cleared up things about lower staff having access to it for TTT at least.