Subscribe
Why 1st person evidence can be better than 3rd person
Posted on 05 January 2017 - 11:58 AM
sabz101 wrote
You never had proof he cheated/cheats. Videos of someone getting "weird" hits will never be legitimate proof and the fact you got him banned off of it is sad. In some fights i can beat him with close to a row of potions. If i was to fight you and you happened to record, you could easily get me banned just off of that fight. This is very unprofessional from both you and the badlion staff team.
I'm not trying to attack you from my comments. You should just accept you are not the best pvper. If you think you are the best, and that everyone who beats you cheats, just wait for premium.
Edit: From what i know, he admitted to cheating to shorten the unban process, as i myself have tried to be unbanned after a false ban and know it is virtually impossible (Judgement day 1)
I'm not trying to attack you from my comments. You should just accept you are not the best pvper. If you think you are the best, and that everyone who beats you cheats, just wait for premium.
Edit: From what i know, he admitted to cheating to shorten the unban process, as i myself have tried to be unbanned after a false ban and know it is virtually impossible (Judgement day 1)
before ban:
https://m.
after ban:
https://m.
Posted on 05 January 2017 - 12:02 PM
iHackLiTE wrote
_Happykitten_ wrote...
has armoda ever sniped you, even once maybe? also, did i ever say a single thing about applying for staff? did i say i wanted staff?
Me saying "If iHackLite was staff he would ban everyone that beats him" was more focused on how often you hackusate people. I never said you wanted staff, I just pictured you as a staff member to create a scenario that showed the problems with accepting 1st person evidence, that problem being false bans
Posted on 05 January 2017 - 12:03 PM
sabz101 wrote
Edit: From what i know, he admitted to cheating to shorten the unban process, as i myself have tried to be unbanned after a false ban and know it is virtually impossible (Judgement day 1)
this makes you look bad :I
Posted on 05 January 2017 - 12:06 PM
sabz101 wrote
You never had proof he cheated/cheats. Videos of someone getting "weird" hits will never be legitimate proof and the fact you got him banned off of it is sad. In some fights i can beat him with close to a row of potions. If i was to fight you and you happened to record, you could easily get me banned just off of that fight. This is very unprofessional from both you and the badlion staff team.
I'm not trying to attack you from my comments. You should just accept you are not the best pvper. If you think you are the best, and that everyone who beats you cheats, just wait for premium.
Edit: From what i know, he admitted to cheating to shorten the unban process, as i myself have tried to be unbanned after a false ban and know it is virtually impossible (Judgement day 1)
I'm not trying to attack you from my comments. You should just accept you are not the best pvper. If you think you are the best, and that everyone who beats you cheats, just wait for premium.
Edit: From what i know, he admitted to cheating to shorten the unban process, as i myself have tried to be unbanned after a false ban and know it is virtually impossible (Judgement day 1)
i agree
personally I think that banning of first person/third person evidence is pretty unprofessional. I think it should only be done if it's crazy blatant not if the other person gets some sketchy hits here and there. Hope badlion premium fixes all these issues and BAC will be the only thing banning anyone.
Posted on 05 January 2017 - 12:06 PM
_Happykitten_ wrote
iHackLiTE wrote...
Me saying "If iHackLite was staff he would ban everyone that beats him" was more focused on how often you hackusate people. I never said you wanted staff, I just pictured you as a staff member to create a scenario that showed the problems with accepting 1st person evidence, that problem being false bans
literally 100% of my reports have either gotten accepted, or if they got denied and the player got gcheated shortly later, minus this singular and very recent report that freek went out of his way to deny. i imagine the player getting gcheated soon. if you think someone like bean got false banned idek what to say to you
Last edited on 05 January 2017 - 12:08 PM by sabz101
Unfortunately this how being a top level AU player is. Especially for someone with terrible internet, like Bean. Obviously there is chance he was cheating and no one will ever know but Bean. I personally don't think he cheats based on the fact hes been a consistent high level player since Kohi.I hope one day premium blows up and it grows to the point where AU teams have the opportunity to compete over seas against other NA/EU teams. Until then, we will never have a fair playing field.
Posted on 05 January 2017 - 12:08 PM
sabz101 wrote
Unfortunately this how being a top level AU player is. Especially for someone with terrible internet, like Bean. Obviously there is chance he was cheating and no one will ever know but Bean. I personally don't think he cheats based on the fact hes been a consistent high level player since Kohi.
I hope one day premium blows up and it grows to the point where AU teams have the opportunity to compete over seas against other NA/EU teams. Until then, we will never have a fair playing field. @Arhcybot
I hope one day premium blows up and it grows to the point where AU teams have the opportunity to compete over seas against other NA/EU teams. Until then, we will never have a fair playing field. @Arhcybot
if you actually dont know if he was cheating then you shouldnt make a big deal about it especially considering "does bean cheat" is not the title of this thread
Last edited on 05 January 2017 - 12:24 PM by crusaders
iHackLiTE wrote
_Happykitten_ wrote...
literally 100% of my reports have either gotten accepted, or if they got denied and the player got gcheated shortly later, minus this singular and very recent report that freek went out of his way to deny. i imagine the player getting gcheated soon. if you think someone like bean got false banned idek what to say to you
Beans recent ban was false, you NA players don't know anything about delayed hits lol
Posted on 05 January 2017 - 12:20 PM
I'm not making a big deal, I'm just have a discussion with you.Posted on 05 January 2017 - 12:23 PM
iss wrote
sabz101 wrote...
i agree
personally I think that banning of first person/third person evidence is pretty unprofessional. I think it should only be done if it's crazy blatant not if the other person gets some sketchy hits here and there. Hope badlion premium fixes all these issues and BAC will be the only thing banning anyone.
if badlion just banned every person they thought looked a little funny, id have gotten banned long ago and so would others. in fact, thats why this thread was made, because they try so hard not to false ban that its negatively affecting them and they're missing out on a number of cheaters
Posted on 05 January 2017 - 12:24 PM
_Happykitten_ wrote
iHackLiTE wrote...
Bean was false banned, you NA players don't know anything about delayed hits lol
g00d g0d bean isnt the only australian ive ever fought, dude. watch the two fuckin videos i just posted of before and after.
Posted on 05 January 2017 - 12:27 PM
iHackLiTE wrote
iss wrote...
if badlion just banned every person they thought looked a little funny, id have gotten banned long ago and so would others. in fact, thats why this thread was made, because they try so hard not to false ban that its negatively affecting them and they're missing out on a number of cheaters
look at my most recent appeal on the antikb ban and look at the evidence the mod provided.
Posted on 05 January 2017 - 12:30 PM
iss wrote
iHackLiTE wrote...
look at my most recent appeal on the antikb ban and look at the evidence the mod provided.
whoops i mean check the "too many bans" appeal
Posted on 05 January 2017 - 12:36 PM
iHackLiTE wrote
_Happykitten_ wrote...
g00d g0d bean isnt the only australian ive ever fought, dude. watch the two fuckin videos i just posted of before and after.
Do you think that those videos are 100% proof of bean cheating? They aren't, just goes to show that you rely on 1st person evidence way too much. First person evidence is just as unreliable as third person evidence, it's sad, but sometimes there isn't a relyable way too know whether someone is cheating or not.
Posted on 05 January 2017 - 01:40 PM
Automatically DeletedPosted on 05 January 2017 - 02:00 PM
_Happykitten_ wrote
iHackLiTE wrote...
Do you think that those videos are 100% proof of bean cheating? They aren't, just goes to show that you rely on 1st person evidence way too much. First person evidence is just as unreliable as third person evidence, it's sad, but sometimes there isn't a relyable way too know whether someone is cheating or not.
i only report people that im 100% confident are cheating and only when i have evidence that is 100% valid
Last edited on 05 January 2017 - 02:11 PM by freekkiller
I swear, if I cloned you and made you fight each other I'd see 2 reports appearing in the report section.I'll quote my staff forum thread
freekkiller wrote
You only ban for any evidence when you are 100% sure he cheated. If GCheat's bans were 1% false we would have never enabled it. The same principle goes for you. I see too many people thinking "I think he cheats so I will ban him". That is not enough. You need to be SURE. I'm looking at myself too now
This is something you are missing. For too long we have been banning people who we thought were cheating without actually being sure. With the new 'policy' lots of hackers will get away, yes, but that faith was already to be expected with the inevitable evolution of ghost clients. It wasn't IF people would go undetected, it was WHEN they would be. That time has come. Fortenately, BL Premium is coming, as is JD10. Same thing, it's not IF these people get banned, it's WHEN. They might be able to cheat on the server for longer, but if that means we will spare innocents then I'm signing for it. And I did.
iHackLiTE wrote
You don't even know for a fact that he [Bean] wasn't cheating.
True. But we work with a system 'innocent until 100% proven guilty' (just like in the normal world) and that 100% was never reached with Bean. I don't know for a fact that Bean wasn't cheating. I also don't know for a fact that Bean was cheating.
iHackLiTE wrote
There is a very fine line between lag and cheating.
True. This is the reason why I told seniors to watch out before banning from 1st person evidence.
iHackLiTE wrote
There is absolutely no reason that this little alt of Armoda's should have been unbanned.
He provided counter evidence, so there is a reason. Hell, he probably cheated in that counter evidence but it was nowhere near sufficient for a ban. You can see for yourself, does that counter evidence seem fishy enough for a ban? Remember, for a ban we need to be 100% sure. To me it doesn't, Erca is only fishy in your POV
You know what's more so fishy though? I'll help explaining by this quote:
iHackLiTE wrote
You can't reduce your kb by being better at the game
Go look at the counter evidence from Erca
0:25 You don't move for several hits. You toggled KB modifier
0:38 You hit him CLEARLY out of reach
0:42 You take literally 0 KB
I'm too lazy to continue witchunting your fishy behaviour, but do you see my point? This is where my first sentence of this post came from. You BOTH look fishy, you would seriously report yourself if you were fighting yourself.
iHackLiTE wrote
"With just a bit of latency and faulty MC mechanics all is possible." Nope. It's embarrassing to say this, but it seems a bunch of cheaters persuaded you into rethinking mechanics of Minecraft, and now you're reluctant to ban people that are obviously cheating.
This is absolutely not the reason. I told my seniors to be more careful on 1st person because of numerous instances where we had a legit player outreaching the recorder, and then 3-6 seniors approving the evidence. It looks fishy but it's not enough, every time again. It's not because of you or Bean. I don't have many examples, but here is one: https://youtu.be/vgNVWTAgsnw
Clearly he cheats right? He looks up, he hits him from far away, etc. Actually, the rod of Adeum (the supposed hacker) actually never reached the recorder, but stops earlier. Also when the recorder died, the fence was placed like 4 blocks behind him. The recorder was laggy and he seemed to be slightly desynced to the server due to latency. In Adeums POV he was much nearer. He didn't cheat, yet ~6 seniors approved the evidence.
So this means that,
iHackLiTE wrote
The only thing lag does is allows players to get delayed hits and delayed kb
is not true.
I am not refuting the right for seniors to ban for 1st person evidence. Thanks to my chances in the policy a long time ago they are even able to. I'm just telling them to be more careful. Watch out for latency. Watch out for shitty MC mechanics. Have the evidence be approved by other seniors. And if you aren't sure, ask an admin.
I forgot how your latest reports were like, but they were likely denied for good reason
Last edited on 05 January 2017 - 02:28 PM by ISS
the man has spoken and finally debunked all of this bullshit!Last edited on 05 January 2017 - 04:30 PM by iHackLiTE
freekkiller wrote
Clearly he cheats right? He looks up, he hits him from far away, etc. Actually, the rod of Adeum (the supposed hacker) actually never reached the recorder, but stops earlier. Also when the recorder died, the fence was placed like 4 blocks behind him. The recorder was laggy and he seemed to be slightly desynced to the server due to latency. In Adeums POV he was much nearer. He didn't cheat, yet ~6 seniors approved the evidence.
i dont feel like writing another essay at this very moment, so i wont try and argue with anything just yet- except for this.
i was talking about a non-lagger recording a lagger. this is a lagger recording a non-lagger. obviously, the guy lagging will have a screwed up connection. ive seen people get quite literally 20 blocked off of cliffs in sg.
lagging allows you to GET 20 blocked, but it doesnt allow you to DO the 20 blocking, which was my point. i might sit down and write a few more things later because theres some things in there i dont agree with but this was the biggie.
Posted on 05 January 2017 - 04:48 PM
I have prime examples of non-lagger recording laggers with huge reach too, but I don't have an example readyTruly, I wouldn't point this out to my seniors if there was no reason to. Why all the distrust in our abilities?
Thread is locked