TOPIC: Harsher punishment hackers

Nakker wrote: The biggest issue in the community has nothing to do with policies, it has to do with the amount of harm it causes to users.

Say we would condone racism in the community. Users would be allowed to go around on the servers, scream n-word at each other and name their gangs after antisemetic and racist groups and supporters. I could then say that we should change the policies so that certain racist terms or openly supporting fascist and discriminative groups should no longer be allowed as it "is the biggest problem in the community currently."

However, where is the proof? Maybe everyone is okay with calling eachother n-word, maybe everyone is okay with mass racism across all servers. It would only be a problem if massive amounts of users each day would have legitimate issues with the mass racism on the server.

And yes, I agree, hacking is a legitimate problem - I even stated that in some of my other posts. It just isn't the biggest problem in the community, and saying that it is is simply false. (unless you can get me numbers and facts that would prove me wrong).

.

My only issue with the current policy is that i dont believe the punishment given to a hacker is worth all of the work put by lead team members that could last even weeks especially when all of this is voluntarily done. Its just not worth spending days to weeks to convict someone of hackingnjust so they can get a warn.

If a policy protects hackers more often than it protects users who aren't cheating, I don't see why we are using it.

Morgan wrote:
Change 'em both!

Not sure about it being the biggest problem but the punishments don’t fit that’s for sure even if there was only two hackers a year and the argument was well there isn’t that many so just a kick should be fine, that same thing could be said for other things like exploiting? We have little to no exploiters and they wouldn’t be getting a kick they would be banned.

To add up to my previous comment.

Lead team members would be able to focus on their actual duties which are managing the team and not spend all of their time trying to catch cheaters. Everything should have a balance. The quality of the staff team has gone really down due to that.

RedPowder wrote: I fully support a policy change, I just believe people are focussing on the wrong things. Sorry if that wasn't clear from my earlier comments.

Yes.A kick clearly doesnt help.

1 day ban
3 - 6
1 - 2 weeks
I don't think that's harsh at all, maybe up to months

DarrenB wrote:
I was just stating an example.

lol back in the day we just perm banned them

Studio Banter wrote: Well i miss those days...
#1 nov. 1955 – 30 apr. 1975

@Nakker
The problem with catching cheaters is the type of cheats that are available.
For example CitizenHack has an anticheat blocker, it blocks Head Admins from seeing your Steam Overlay. it is really easy to excuse yourself out of it aswell by just saying you have it disabled or simply just refusing to open Steam Overlay. Staff cannot force players to record, screenshot or even open Steam Overlay which leads to many ways to get around cheating.

Even with Aimware it's easy to get away with just using Aimbot and no visuals as long as you don't enable ESP.

@Spoderman
The only person I see with actual power that is actively trying to enforce a new policy is RedPowder, if only people listened to him more we would have less hackers in the community.

GmadTheH4cker wrote: It would be more of a psychological effect, Right now there is little intimidation about being banned because of the policy and relatively medium punishment. If someone gets punished hard, Say like a 3/5 month ban for example, Less people would actually risk getting banned/caught. Since its more severe then last time, No longer would you be unbanned after 1/2 months maybe a couple of weeks for cheating, Apology posts that people make for the sole purpose of sympathy and not actually apologising should be out right ignored and shouldnt have an impact, What I mean by this is when people make apology posts a couple of hours or days later after they're caught. Yeah you definatly changed after a couple of days right? That might sound hard and harsh but thats how things go around. People dont give a shit if they're ruining the experience for others, aslong as they benefit off it.

Mobile Task Force Gunner wrote: Exactly why intimidating should be allowed within moderation.
Nothing extreme but we can't just get a player on Teamspeak and be like "Hello sir are you using cheats" "no" "Okay have a good day" "See I told you guys he isn't cheating"
Basically ZARP in a nutshell

Use me as an example, The amount of times i fucked up <3

lol how many of these threads have been made and ignored now?

RealDenis wrote: I can actually confirm that these threads have not been ignored at all. Just because you see no changes (although there have actually been changes, just not the ones people primarily asked for) does not mean nothing is going on.

You have failed to outline why hacking shouldn't carry a harsher punishment.


An irrelevant piece of purely subjective, anecdotal evidence.


The abunance of a certain form of rulebreak should not correlate to the punishment associated with it. I'd say murder is a lot less common than speeding, but you don't get a life sentence for going 30 in a 20 zone.


Losing items to a rulebreaker is bad no matter what. The rulebreak itself has no bearing on this.



What is your point here? The fact that they are hacking means that they have intentionally given themselves an unfair advantage over players. The consideration of any other outcome is moot because they are hacking and they have a completely unfair advantage.


It is probably a given, yes, but the idea that has been put forward is to do with the punishment given to those proven to be hacking, therefore this point is also irrelevant.