|
On June 05 2012 05:30 ExO_ wrote:Show nested quote +On June 05 2012 05:22 LlamaNamedOsama wrote:On June 05 2012 05:18 ExO_ wrote:On June 05 2012 05:13 nath wrote:On June 05 2012 05:08 ExO_ wrote:On June 05 2012 05:06 nath wrote:On June 05 2012 05:03 dani` wrote:On June 05 2012 05:00 Phobbers wrote:On June 05 2012 04:54 Nerchio wrote:
I watched the replays more carefully and it looks like a lot of points that OP makes are false, for example 4 scv's at shakuras plateau, he took them after he saw marine in his natural. Also a lot of movement on Tal'darim looks like standard mech play with taking good spots for tanks. Other than that we should assume that Spades is not the best player so moving your army without care isn't anything special. He can also use mini-map to send his scouting worker, i do that sometimes as well. In the end i don't really think it's cheating there is a lot of points that are not true and the rest we can include into luck which happens quite often in SC2. Don't jump on the witch hunt so soon folks. Nerchio took a look at the replays and tossed up his opinion on it. After which the thread was immediately closed by a mod. I don't know about that, the OP of the thread provided an insanely detailed log of 'suspicious actions', and while I agree not all of them were true it is quite weird to insta-close a thread based on 1 pro opinion? I hope the thread can be re-opened. mod said *until a pro disagrees* its closed. i think thats fair enough. why should the opinion of 1 pro be enough to close it? Is said pro somehow smarter than everybody else when it comes to matters of hacking? Its likely OP of that thread exaggeratted some points, but some points were not exaggerated. I think the closing of the thread was a bit early and more to avoid a mass witch hunt, even though the witch hunt might be correct. Anybody else notice that the mod that closed it said something along the lines of "the OP has ties to lucifron". That comment seemed to come entirely out of left field its not enough to close it indefinitely, its enough to PAUSE (something that the community cannot do), TAKE A SECOND LOOK (something else the community cant do), and REJUDGE the accusation (something that the community wont do without it being closed), BEFORE saying he hacked. i still think its debatable and i do not fully agree with Nerchio but I am going to wait for more pro opinions, because why? They do actually know better than you when it comes to what actions at a high level of play could be suspicious. I think it's safe to say you don't need to be a high level player to understand a few fundamental things: Never looking in fog of war is strange. Stranger, is the camera pausing in certain areas of your base for more than 1-2 seconds with no actions being issued, espicially as the game gets past the early game. I'm not currently at home so I cannot review the replays for myself, but I'm going to assume that at least the camera lock bits in the OP were true....otherwise it'll be obvious they aren't and this will all go away quickly anyway. That being said, your putting too much faith in a pro gamer. A pro gamer is just a guy like you and me. The only area in which a pro's opinion would be more valid than somebody with a decent level of game knowledge would be with specific army movements, build orders, strategies, etc....none of which are what I would consider the "evidence" in this case. People get lucky and spot things all the time, or randomly move their troops to the right place at the right time. Camera locks and never looking in fog....that seems highly unusual to me. Your post directly contradicts itself. You criticize others for "putting too much faith in a pro gamer" when you yourself are blindly believing a one-post anonymous account: On June 05 2012 05:08 ExO_ wrote:I'm not currently at home so I cannot review the replays for myself, but I'm going to assume that at least the camera lock bits in the OP were true There's a reason why modern legal systems operate under the mantra of "innocent until proven guilty": so stupid witch hunts don't start and tamper with due process and objective investigation. Likewise, the mods/system err on innocence until proven guilty, as this is a person with real reputation and real professional potential that could be irreversibly damaged by bullshit slander. If he is guilty, a pro will eventually come out and review it (Nerchio has already seen it so soon after the thread began, doubtless other pros have and will hear about this thread). I never said I'm 100% in agreement with the 1 post OP. So let me clearly state I don't think the thread should've been closed off the opinion of 1 pro, and I think the evidence should still be discussed. And again, I'm making a basic assumption that the camera locks and not looking in fog of war parts of the replay are true. Do you really think this is such an unreasonable assumption? I will ofc review the replays when I get home, but in my opinion if at least these parts of the OP's post aren't true then it's just flat out lying and it won't matter anyway.
Whether or not you are "100% in agreement", 75% agreement, or even 25% agreement does not matter. What matter is that you're "making a basic assumption that [any one of the allegations] are true." Obviously, that is fallacious. You cannot assume that there is truth in any bit of the allegations, you can only know that someone is making allegations, period. And to repeat myself, presumption of innocence. That thread was not a neutral thread or courtroom for objective due process. It was a one-sided accusation from a source that did not present legitimate background. Nonetheless, the accusation has been aired and has been viewed by relevant authorities (moderators, pros, and any pros that they can contact). It already has been routed through appropriate avenues of review, and if you have an issue with that process, go to website feedback or reread the first rule in the TL Ten Commandments.
Bottom line, the worst decision that can be made in that scenario is leaving that thread open, because it's obviously drawing witch hunt/mob-mentality bait, which you yourself are evidence of if you're going to assume that some of the allegations are true by mere fact of them being stated rather than actual evidence, fact, or knowledge.
|
On June 05 2012 05:52 tsuxiit wrote:
I don't think that thread should have been closed. Maybe the title and conclusion should be changed, but people need a place to discuss the evidence.
I guess that's what this thread is turning into.
I watched the replays and the op is exaggerating. Spades does some things that are suspicious but nothing really that proves him as guilty.
The most suspicious thing are in fact the "camera locks" where he does nothing for a few seconds. These points in the game are weird because the rest of the time he is moving his camera pretty fast as you would expect it from a good player.
The best way to find out if these suspicious points are a prove of maphack would be to download a hack and make some tests so that we have an example for comparison. Without that you can't condemn him.
|
On June 05 2012 05:57 las91 wrote:
direct build order counters (including Daybreak with the 3rd cc and double e-bay) is suspicious
Yeah, 3cc double ebay such a hard counter to 3cc double ebay : )
stop being ridiculous, nothing was suspicious about those games. Spades TvT is good and it's not hard to prepare correctly against 2 builds.
|
On June 05 2012 05:59 LlamaNamedOsama wrote:Show nested quote +On June 05 2012 05:30 ExO_ wrote:On June 05 2012 05:22 LlamaNamedOsama wrote:On June 05 2012 05:18 ExO_ wrote:On June 05 2012 05:13 nath wrote:On June 05 2012 05:08 ExO_ wrote:On June 05 2012 05:06 nath wrote:On June 05 2012 05:03 dani` wrote:On June 05 2012 05:00 Phobbers wrote:On June 05 2012 04:54 Nerchio wrote:
I watched the replays more carefully and it looks like a lot of points that OP makes are false, for example 4 scv's at shakuras plateau, he took them after he saw marine in his natural. Also a lot of movement on Tal'darim looks like standard mech play with taking good spots for tanks. Other than that we should assume that Spades is not the best player so moving your army without care isn't anything special. He can also use mini-map to send his scouting worker, i do that sometimes as well. In the end i don't really think it's cheating there is a lot of points that are not true and the rest we can include into luck which happens quite often in SC2. Don't jump on the witch hunt so soon folks. Nerchio took a look at the replays and tossed up his opinion on it. After which the thread was immediately closed by a mod. I don't know about that, the OP of the thread provided an insanely detailed log of 'suspicious actions', and while I agree not all of them were true it is quite weird to insta-close a thread based on 1 pro opinion? I hope the thread can be re-opened. mod said *until a pro disagrees* its closed. i think thats fair enough. why should the opinion of 1 pro be enough to close it? Is said pro somehow smarter than everybody else when it comes to matters of hacking? Its likely OP of that thread exaggeratted some points, but some points were not exaggerated. I think the closing of the thread was a bit early and more to avoid a mass witch hunt, even though the witch hunt might be correct. Anybody else notice that the mod that closed it said something along the lines of "the OP has ties to lucifron". That comment seemed to come entirely out of left field its not enough to close it indefinitely, its enough to PAUSE (something that the community cannot do), TAKE A SECOND LOOK (something else the community cant do), and REJUDGE the accusation (something that the community wont do without it being closed), BEFORE saying he hacked. i still think its debatable and i do not fully agree with Nerchio but I am going to wait for more pro opinions, because why? They do actually know better than you when it comes to what actions at a high level of play could be suspicious. I think it's safe to say you don't need to be a high level player to understand a few fundamental things: Never looking in fog of war is strange. Stranger, is the camera pausing in certain areas of your base for more than 1-2 seconds with no actions being issued, espicially as the game gets past the early game. I'm not currently at home so I cannot review the replays for myself, but I'm going to assume that at least the camera lock bits in the OP were true....otherwise it'll be obvious they aren't and this will all go away quickly anyway. That being said, your putting too much faith in a pro gamer. A pro gamer is just a guy like you and me. The only area in which a pro's opinion would be more valid than somebody with a decent level of game knowledge would be with specific army movements, build orders, strategies, etc....none of which are what I would consider the "evidence" in this case. People get lucky and spot things all the time, or randomly move their troops to the right place at the right time. Camera locks and never looking in fog....that seems highly unusual to me. Your post directly contradicts itself. You criticize others for "putting too much faith in a pro gamer" when you yourself are blindly believing a one-post anonymous account: On June 05 2012 05:08 ExO_ wrote:I'm not currently at home so I cannot review the replays for myself, but I'm going to assume that at least the camera lock bits in the OP were true There's a reason why modern legal systems operate under the mantra of "innocent until proven guilty": so stupid witch hunts don't start and tamper with due process and objective investigation. Likewise, the mods/system err on innocence until proven guilty, as this is a person with real reputation and real professional potential that could be irreversibly damaged by bullshit slander. If he is guilty, a pro will eventually come out and review it (Nerchio has already seen it so soon after the thread began, doubtless other pros have and will hear about this thread). I never said I'm 100% in agreement with the 1 post OP. So let me clearly state I don't think the thread should've been closed off the opinion of 1 pro, and I think the evidence should still be discussed. And again, I'm making a basic assumption that the camera locks and not looking in fog of war parts of the replay are true. Do you really think this is such an unreasonable assumption? I will ofc review the replays when I get home, but in my opinion if at least these parts of the OP's post aren't true then it's just flat out lying and it won't matter anyway. Whether or not you are "100% in agreement", 75% agreement, or even 25% agreement does not matter. What matter is that you're "making a basic assumption that [any one of the allegations] are true." Obviously, that is fallacious. You cannot assume that there is truth in any bit of the allegations, you can only know that someone is making allegations, period. And to repeat myself, presumption of innocence. That thread was not a neutral thread or courtroom for objective due process. It was a one-sided accusation from a source that did not present legitimate background. Nonetheless, the accusation has been aired and has been viewed by relevant authorities (moderators, pros, and any pros that they can contact). It already has been routed through appropriate avenues of review, and if you have an issue with that process, go to website feedback or reread the first rule in the TL Ten Commandments. Bottom line, the worst decision that can be made in that scenario is leaving that thread open, because it's obviously drawing witch hunt/mob-mentality bait, which you yourself are evidence of if you're going to assume that some of the allegations are true by mere fact of them being stated rather than actual evidence, fact, or knowledge.
Okay fair enough. But if I watch the replays, and if the portions I'm referring to are indeed there, does it mean my opinion is all of a sudden valid?
What I'm arguing is that people need a place to discuss this, and 1 pro saying "I don't think so" shouldn't be enough to close it.
And there seems to be a lot of unreasonable hate towards assumptions in here. People make assumptions all the time, and the assumptions I'm making are quite reasonable. If the guy had been flat out lying about camera locks/Not looking at fog of war, somebody would've called him out on it by now. I will ofc review the replay myself, but I think my assumptions are perfectly reasonable, and shouldn't discredit my opinion.
Again you seem to think I'm immediately condemning Spades. I'm not. But I do think it's worth reviewing, and I think it's worth reviewing by the community as a whole. I don't think 1 pro saying he's innocent should mean that I should just accept that as fact, and I don't think the elitist tone in your posts basically telling me I'm not a pro therefore I have no idea what I'm talking about are really addressing any of the issues I'm bringing up.
|
On June 05 2012 06:07 ExO_ wrote:Show nested quote +On June 05 2012 05:59 LlamaNamedOsama wrote:On June 05 2012 05:30 ExO_ wrote:On June 05 2012 05:22 LlamaNamedOsama wrote:On June 05 2012 05:18 ExO_ wrote:On June 05 2012 05:13 nath wrote:On June 05 2012 05:08 ExO_ wrote:On June 05 2012 05:06 nath wrote:On June 05 2012 05:03 dani` wrote:On June 05 2012 05:00 Phobbers wrote:
[quote]
Don't jump on the witch hunt so soon folks. Nerchio took a look at the replays and tossed up his opinion on it. After which the thread was immediately closed by a mod. I don't know about that, the OP of the thread provided an insanely detailed log of 'suspicious actions', and while I agree not all of them were true it is quite weird to insta-close a thread based on 1 pro opinion? I hope the thread can be re-opened. mod said *until a pro disagrees* its closed. i think thats fair enough. why should the opinion of 1 pro be enough to close it? Is said pro somehow smarter than everybody else when it comes to matters of hacking? Its likely OP of that thread exaggeratted some points, but some points were not exaggerated. I think the closing of the thread was a bit early and more to avoid a mass witch hunt, even though the witch hunt might be correct. Anybody else notice that the mod that closed it said something along the lines of "the OP has ties to lucifron". That comment seemed to come entirely out of left field its not enough to close it indefinitely, its enough to PAUSE (something that the community cannot do), TAKE A SECOND LOOK (something else the community cant do), and REJUDGE the accusation (something that the community wont do without it being closed), BEFORE saying he hacked. i still think its debatable and i do not fully agree with Nerchio but I am going to wait for more pro opinions, because why? They do actually know better than you when it comes to what actions at a high level of play could be suspicious. I think it's safe to say you don't need to be a high level player to understand a few fundamental things: Never looking in fog of war is strange. Stranger, is the camera pausing in certain areas of your base for more than 1-2 seconds with no actions being issued, espicially as the game gets past the early game. I'm not currently at home so I cannot review the replays for myself, but I'm going to assume that at least the camera lock bits in the OP were true....otherwise it'll be obvious they aren't and this will all go away quickly anyway. That being said, your putting too much faith in a pro gamer. A pro gamer is just a guy like you and me. The only area in which a pro's opinion would be more valid than somebody with a decent level of game knowledge would be with specific army movements, build orders, strategies, etc....none of which are what I would consider the "evidence" in this case. People get lucky and spot things all the time, or randomly move their troops to the right place at the right time. Camera locks and never looking in fog....that seems highly unusual to me. Your post directly contradicts itself. You criticize others for "putting too much faith in a pro gamer" when you yourself are blindly believing a one-post anonymous account: On June 05 2012 05:08 ExO_ wrote:I'm not currently at home so I cannot review the replays for myself, but I'm going to assume that at least the camera lock bits in the OP were true There's a reason why modern legal systems operate under the mantra of "innocent until proven guilty": so stupid witch hunts don't start and tamper with due process and objective investigation. Likewise, the mods/system err on innocence until proven guilty, as this is a person with real reputation and real professional potential that could be irreversibly damaged by bullshit slander. If he is guilty, a pro will eventually come out and review it (Nerchio has already seen it so soon after the thread began, doubtless other pros have and will hear about this thread). I never said I'm 100% in agreement with the 1 post OP. So let me clearly state I don't think the thread should've been closed off the opinion of 1 pro, and I think the evidence should still be discussed. And again, I'm making a basic assumption that the camera locks and not looking in fog of war parts of the replay are true. Do you really think this is such an unreasonable assumption? I will ofc review the replays when I get home, but in my opinion if at least these parts of the OP's post aren't true then it's just flat out lying and it won't matter anyway. Whether or not you are "100% in agreement", 75% agreement, or even 25% agreement does not matter. What matter is that you're "making a basic assumption that [any one of the allegations] are true." Obviously, that is fallacious. You cannot assume that there is truth in any bit of the allegations, you can only know that someone is making allegations, period. And to repeat myself, presumption of innocence. That thread was not a neutral thread or courtroom for objective due process. It was a one-sided accusation from a source that did not present legitimate background. Nonetheless, the accusation has been aired and has been viewed by relevant authorities (moderators, pros, and any pros that they can contact). It already has been routed through appropriate avenues of review, and if you have an issue with that process, go to website feedback or reread the first rule in the TL Ten Commandments. Bottom line, the worst decision that can be made in that scenario is leaving that thread open, because it's obviously drawing witch hunt/mob-mentality bait, which you yourself are evidence of if you're going to assume that some of the allegations are true by mere fact of them being stated rather than actual evidence, fact, or knowledge. Okay fair enough. But if I watch the replays, and if the portions I'm referring to are indeed there, does it mean my opinion is all of a sudden valid? What I'm arguing is that people need a place to discuss this, and 1 pro saying "I don't think so" shouldn't be enough to close it. And there seems to be a lot of unreasonable hate towards assumptions in here. People make assumptions all the time, and the assumptions I'm making are quite reasonable. If the guy had been flat out lying about camera locks/Not looking at fog of war, somebody would've called him out on it by now. I will ofc review the replay myself, but I think my assumptions are perfectly reasonable, and shouldn't discredit my opinion. Again you seem to think I'm immediately condemning Spades. I'm not. But I do think it's worth reviewing, and I think it's worth reviewing by the community as a whole. I don't think 1 pro saying he's innocent should mean that I should just accept that as fact, and I don't think the elitist tone in your posts basically telling me I'm not a pro therefore I have no idea what I'm talking about are really addressing any of the issues I'm bringing up.
The thread was re opened. Illusion chimed in.
|
Guess it's going to be proved (or generally accepted) that he either hacked or didn't fairly soon...
|
I don't it even matters anymore whether or not these accusations are true or false. I think that this incident of accusing is enough to do some damage so that whenever we think of major, princess, or terran, w/e his name is now and in the future, we'll have a hint of suspicion.
|
On June 05 2012 06:07 ExO_ wrote:Show nested quote +On June 05 2012 05:59 LlamaNamedOsama wrote:On June 05 2012 05:30 ExO_ wrote:On June 05 2012 05:22 LlamaNamedOsama wrote:On June 05 2012 05:18 ExO_ wrote:On June 05 2012 05:13 nath wrote:On June 05 2012 05:08 ExO_ wrote:On June 05 2012 05:06 nath wrote:On June 05 2012 05:03 dani` wrote:On June 05 2012 05:00 Phobbers wrote:
[quote]
Don't jump on the witch hunt so soon folks. Nerchio took a look at the replays and tossed up his opinion on it. After which the thread was immediately closed by a mod. I don't know about that, the OP of the thread provided an insanely detailed log of 'suspicious actions', and while I agree not all of them were true it is quite weird to insta-close a thread based on 1 pro opinion? I hope the thread can be re-opened. mod said *until a pro disagrees* its closed. i think thats fair enough. why should the opinion of 1 pro be enough to close it? Is said pro somehow smarter than everybody else when it comes to matters of hacking? Its likely OP of that thread exaggeratted some points, but some points were not exaggerated. I think the closing of the thread was a bit early and more to avoid a mass witch hunt, even though the witch hunt might be correct. Anybody else notice that the mod that closed it said something along the lines of "the OP has ties to lucifron". That comment seemed to come entirely out of left field its not enough to close it indefinitely, its enough to PAUSE (something that the community cannot do), TAKE A SECOND LOOK (something else the community cant do), and REJUDGE the accusation (something that the community wont do without it being closed), BEFORE saying he hacked. i still think its debatable and i do not fully agree with Nerchio but I am going to wait for more pro opinions, because why? They do actually know better than you when it comes to what actions at a high level of play could be suspicious. I think it's safe to say you don't need to be a high level player to understand a few fundamental things: Never looking in fog of war is strange. Stranger, is the camera pausing in certain areas of your base for more than 1-2 seconds with no actions being issued, espicially as the game gets past the early game. I'm not currently at home so I cannot review the replays for myself, but I'm going to assume that at least the camera lock bits in the OP were true....otherwise it'll be obvious they aren't and this will all go away quickly anyway. That being said, your putting too much faith in a pro gamer. A pro gamer is just a guy like you and me. The only area in which a pro's opinion would be more valid than somebody with a decent level of game knowledge would be with specific army movements, build orders, strategies, etc....none of which are what I would consider the "evidence" in this case. People get lucky and spot things all the time, or randomly move their troops to the right place at the right time. Camera locks and never looking in fog....that seems highly unusual to me. Your post directly contradicts itself. You criticize others for "putting too much faith in a pro gamer" when you yourself are blindly believing a one-post anonymous account: On June 05 2012 05:08 ExO_ wrote:I'm not currently at home so I cannot review the replays for myself, but I'm going to assume that at least the camera lock bits in the OP were true There's a reason why modern legal systems operate under the mantra of "innocent until proven guilty": so stupid witch hunts don't start and tamper with due process and objective investigation. Likewise, the mods/system err on innocence until proven guilty, as this is a person with real reputation and real professional potential that could be irreversibly damaged by bullshit slander. If he is guilty, a pro will eventually come out and review it (Nerchio has already seen it so soon after the thread began, doubtless other pros have and will hear about this thread). I never said I'm 100% in agreement with the 1 post OP. So let me clearly state I don't think the thread should've been closed off the opinion of 1 pro, and I think the evidence should still be discussed. And again, I'm making a basic assumption that the camera locks and not looking in fog of war parts of the replay are true. Do you really think this is such an unreasonable assumption? I will ofc review the replays when I get home, but in my opinion if at least these parts of the OP's post aren't true then it's just flat out lying and it won't matter anyway. Whether or not you are "100% in agreement", 75% agreement, or even 25% agreement does not matter. What matter is that you're "making a basic assumption that [any one of the allegations] are true." Obviously, that is fallacious. You cannot assume that there is truth in any bit of the allegations, you can only know that someone is making allegations, period. And to repeat myself, presumption of innocence. That thread was not a neutral thread or courtroom for objective due process. It was a one-sided accusation from a source that did not present legitimate background. Nonetheless, the accusation has been aired and has been viewed by relevant authorities (moderators, pros, and any pros that they can contact). It already has been routed through appropriate avenues of review, and if you have an issue with that process, go to website feedback or reread the first rule in the TL Ten Commandments. Bottom line, the worst decision that can be made in that scenario is leaving that thread open, because it's obviously drawing witch hunt/mob-mentality bait, which you yourself are evidence of if you're going to assume that some of the allegations are true by mere fact of them being stated rather than actual evidence, fact, or knowledge. Okay fair enough. But if I watch the replays, and if the portions I'm referring to are indeed there, does it mean my opinion is all of a sudden valid? What I'm arguing is that people need a place to discuss this, and 1 pro saying "I don't think so" shouldn't be enough to close it. And there seems to be a lot of unreasonable hate towards assumptions in here. People make assumptions all the time, and the assumptions I'm making are quite reasonable. If the guy had been flat out lying about camera locks/Not looking at fog of war, somebody would've called him out on it by now. I will ofc review the replay myself, but I think my assumptions are perfectly reasonable, and shouldn't discredit my opinion. Again you seem to think I'm immediately condemning Spades. I'm not. But I do think it's worth reviewing, and I think it's worth reviewing by the community as a whole. I don't think 1 pro saying he's innocent should mean that I should just accept that as fact, and I don't think the elitist tone in your posts basically telling me I'm not a pro therefore I have no idea what I'm talking about are really addressing any of the issues I'm bringing up.
I don't care whether you condemn Spades or not. You seem to still be missing the point though: the mere fact that a person makes allegations does not merit those allegations freestanding until disproven. Your only argument is that there has to "be a forum for discussion," but there's nothing to discuss about a false allegation until a claim is actual serious. Otherwise, anyone could throw up any number of half-baked seemingly legitimate posts of accusations while leading everyone astray with redherrings and bullshit clogging the forums.
The fact remains that it was okay for moderators to close that thread because pros and other valuable members of the community still had access and relevant information was able to be PM'd to moderators. All in all, it filters the bullshit witch hunt posts (see: the first page of the thread, where there were at least three posts already calling hate on Spades without any sort of verification or confirmation). Again I will repeat: how the moderators handled it seemed to pan out perfectly fine.
|
Hey, I was wondering who won the giveaway? I wasn't able to tune in regretfully, but I'd like to know what happened.
|
On June 04 2012 08:58 PocketStarcraft29 wrote:Wow I love how everyone is hating on Spades. Most expected Lucifron to 4-0 him and instead Spades did a lot better than expected and instead of giving him his props people still hate on him, when they themselves couldn't beat Spades, Lucifron or any other pro gamer that they talk shit on lol. People honestly. 
lol
|
Dear God, this has to be locked.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
