On November 16 2011 10:51 HellionDrop wrote: well, stream cheating doesn't break any rule, so if streamers don't like cheaters, they could delay the streams by 1 min or more.... lol. that is the only way to do it.
but i agree, streamers should know the risk, you can't call somebody a cheater when you let him watch your stream.
Stream cheaters and snipers are what happen if you're high profile and streaming. It's not a risk, it's a given and streamers know they have to live with it. Honestly I don't think it's worth delaying the stream to avoid. Streamers are giving up some of their privacy in exchange for cash. That's their choice, you take the good witht he bad.
HOWEVER, we, the viewing community should condem snipers and cheaters being being the selfish, self centered prats they are.
Cheating is obviously bad. In my opinion sniping is also bad. Snipers are like some prat who jumps up on stage with Billy Connolly and starts telling yo mama jokes. Fuck off, we're not here for you, get off the fucking stage.
Build your own following. Start streaming yourself or get involved. Don't try and build a following by being that annoying guy who snipes streamers.
On November 16 2011 11:04 hkf wrote: Put a delay on your stream, wow how hard problem solved.
But a lot of streamers like to talk or otherwise interact with their viewers, and you can't do that with a delay (or at least a delay that's long enough to make a difference). From their point of view, that's a sacrifice they shouldn't have to make.
I like to annoy people by continuously sniping them on the ladder while also shamelessly plugging myself and talking to their stream chat while in-game. I limit the range of opponents they can face and ultimately lower the player variance they can expect. I also limit their practice to one race. I put myself in the exact same group as avid cheaters, hackers and general assholes and then get annoyed when the person I am sniping groups me with them. Hear my complaints!
I see Harstem on stream now and then. Sometimes he comes to the chat and talks a bit afterwards. He seems like a nice and mannered guy who just wants to play games and interact. Hope you get your own stream going one day.
On November 16 2011 09:30 Kaitlin wrote: Sometimes I wonder what's wrong with stream "cheating". They aren't hacking. Their opponent is telling the world exactly what they are doing because they have made a decision that it's worth it because they make money from having viewers. That's the decision made by the streamer. Isn't it kind of weak to call your opponent a cheater when you are the one telling them exactly what you are doing ?
If your argument is that stream cheating should be an assumed risk, I would agree with you to some extent; however, it appears that your argument is based only on a financial platform. Are you saying that it would be "okay" if someone streamed with no personal gain in mind? Following your logic, it's okay for someone to steal from a store with a poorly designed layout, simply because that is an assumed risk for opening a publicly accessible store with poor security conditions. While parameters of a situation change ethical debates frequently (think: stealing medication to save a life of another) I don't believe we're going to find such a beneficent set of circumstances occuring in stream cheating. So your debate shouldn't be about assumed risk or the parameters of the situation, it should be able whether cheating is acceptable or not. I guess in your case it's okay. I can't argue with that opinion, but I think it's unfair to place responsibility on the streamers.
The only reason I mentioned the financial aspect is the assumption that the streamer has made a decision to stream, even though that would open them up to stream "cheating", but they go ahead anyways because it's a tradeoff for them. Comparing this to stealing meds to save someone's life or TB's parked car is a bit over the top, don't you think ? These are ladder matches in a video game. It's not like they are streaming their MLG matches to their opponents.
I see this as akin to playing poker with your opponent placing his cards face up in front of him. Are you cheating to look at his cards ? I say no. It's just really stupid for you opponent to do that in poker because what is the benefit ? Same thing with Starcraft, except the opponent does benefit by streaming games to the public. Whether it's fame, money, ego, whatever. They make that decision to do it. I don't see the top pros streaming their practice sessions where they are working on secret builds, do you ? Why not ? Because they don't wish to "assume the risk" that people learn what they are doing. I think the whole idea of getting upset over people stream "cheating" mere ladder games is a bit silly.
For the record, I've never stream "sniped", "cheated", etc., as even if I tried, I'm not high enough to match against anybody important.
You missed the main analogy that he was referring to. "Stealing meds" was an aside that doesnt really need focusing on, the main analogy that you should have addressed as:
Following your logic, it's okay for someone to steal from a store with a poorly designed layout, simply because that is an assumed risk for opening a publicly accessible store with poor security conditions.
Perhaps stealing is still too harsh of a comparison for you since it involves literally taking from someone else. A better example, then, would be: Following your logic, it's ok for someone to stalk (or constantly harass with phone calls would be closer to the idea of stream sniping) a girl simply because it is an assumed risk of walking around in public for everyone to see, looking as sexy as she does.
I dont care about an occasional stream snipe. Using the example above, of course that girls gonna get hit on by some guys if she goes to a bar. However, constant harassment of a pro streamer should be looked down upon just as constant harassment of a girl could land you a restraining order.
No, stalking a girl is illegal. It is also illegal to expose yourself in public, which I guess in this example would be the equivalent to the streamer, if the 'stalker' is the sniper. It's a bad example. What about the open-faced poker player ?
About the repetitive 'harassment' of the streamers, I would be happy to see Blizzard implement something where you don't play the same person over and over again. But really, that's independent of sniping or stream 'cheating'. I thought they did put something in, but I'm not sure about that.
Further, not to criticize Destiny, but in a couple of his recent Youtube videos, I think about teaching someone a cheesy terran build, he is basically watching someone else's stream during a ladder game, giving them advice on how to play. This is kind of the opposite end of this whole spectrum, in this case the streamer is getting benefit from viewers. How do you guys feel about this ? Because it seems if you frown upon the stream "cheating", this should fall into the same category. Again, not to call out Destiny, as I find him entertaining and tune in his stream quite often, but if he's against this 'stream cheating', then it seems he's hopped on both sides of the fence, so to speak.
edit:
For the record, I don't have much problem with this video. My question is, do you ?
On November 16 2011 09:30 Kaitlin wrote: Sometimes I wonder what's wrong with stream "cheating". They aren't hacking. Their opponent is telling the world exactly what they are doing because they have made a decision that it's worth it because they make money from having viewers. That's the decision made by the streamer. Isn't it kind of weak to call your opponent a cheater when you are the one telling them exactly what you are doing ?
If your argument is that stream cheating should be an assumed risk, I would agree with you to some extent; however, it appears that your argument is based only on a financial platform. Are you saying that it would be "okay" if someone streamed with no personal gain in mind? Following your logic, it's okay for someone to steal from a store with a poorly designed layout, simply because that is an assumed risk for opening a publicly accessible store with poor security conditions. While parameters of a situation change ethical debates frequently (think: stealing medication to save a life of another) I don't believe we're going to find such a beneficent set of circumstances occuring in stream cheating. So your debate shouldn't be about assumed risk or the parameters of the situation, it should be able whether cheating is acceptable or not. I guess in your case it's okay. I can't argue with that opinion, but I think it's unfair to place responsibility on the streamers.
The only reason I mentioned the financial aspect is the assumption that the streamer has made a decision to stream, even though that would open them up to stream "cheating", but they go ahead anyways because it's a tradeoff for them. Comparing this to stealing meds to save someone's life or TB's parked car is a bit over the top, don't you think ? These are ladder matches in a video game. It's not like they are streaming their MLG matches to their opponents.
I see this as akin to playing poker with your opponent placing his cards face up in front of him. Are you cheating to look at his cards ? I say no. It's just really stupid for you opponent to do that in poker because what is the benefit ? Same thing with Starcraft, except the opponent does benefit by streaming games to the public. Whether it's fame, money, ego, whatever. They make that decision to do it. I don't see the top pros streaming their practice sessions where they are working on secret builds, do you ? Why not ? Because they don't wish to "assume the risk" that people learn what they are doing. I think the whole idea of getting upset over people stream "cheating" mere ladder games is a bit silly.
For the record, I've never stream "sniped", "cheated", etc., as even if I tried, I'm not high enough to match against anybody important.
You missed the main analogy that he was referring to. "Stealing meds" was an aside that doesnt really need focusing on, the main analogy that you should have addressed as:
Following your logic, it's okay for someone to steal from a store with a poorly designed layout, simply because that is an assumed risk for opening a publicly accessible store with poor security conditions.
Perhaps stealing is still too harsh of a comparison for you since it involves literally taking from someone else. A better example, then, would be: Following your logic, it's ok for someone to stalk (or constantly harass with phone calls would be closer to the idea of stream sniping) a girl simply because it is an assumed risk of walking around in public for everyone to see, looking as sexy as she does.
I dont care about an occasional stream snipe. Using the example above, of course that girls gonna get hit on by some guys if she goes to a bar. However, constant harassment of a pro streamer should be looked down upon just as constant harassment of a girl could land you a restraining order.
No, stalking a girl is illegal. It is also illegal to expose yourself in public, which I guess in this example would be the equivalent to the streamer, if the 'stalker' is the sniper. It's a bad example. What about the open-faced poker player ?
About the repetitive 'harassment' of the streamers, I would be happy to see Blizzard implement something where you don't play the same person over and over again. But really, that's independent of sniping or stream 'cheating'. I thought they did put something in, but I'm not sure about that.
Further, not to criticize Destiny, but in a couple of his recent Youtube videos, I think about teaching someone a cheesy terran build, he is basically watching someone else's stream during a ladder game, giving them advice on how to play. This is kind of the opposite end of this whole spectrum, in this case the streamer is getting benefit from viewers. How do you guys feel about this ? Because it seems if you frown upon the stream "cheating", this should fall into the same category. Again, not to call out Destiny, as I find him entertaining and tune in his stream quite often, but if he's against this 'stream cheating', then it seems he's hopped on both sides of the fence, so to speak.
I think you missed a crucial part of his analogy -- the girl isn't "exposing" herself in public -- she's just minding her own business, walking in public. She has done absolutely nothing wrong. However, because she's attractive (because she naturally is), the stalker starts to stalk her. And I don't see why stalking being illegal is relevant -- it's immoral, and just because stream cheating isn't illegal doesn't mean it's not also immortal.
While you will often play the same player multiple times just naturally (since you're both ending your previous game at the same time), stream sniping will often cause this to happen (when it otherwise wouldn't have). It can sometimes be independent of stream sniping, but isn't necessarily.
The difference here is that the person gave Destiny permission to do this. Stream snipers/cheaters do not receive permission from the people they're playing (and in fact, they're often asked to stop). Back to the girl analogy, Destiny in this case would be the girl's boyfriend. It's okay for him to have pictures of her, or send her love letters, or whatever, because he has her implied permission (by the fact that she continues to date him). The stalker, however, is in the wrong, simply because he does not have her permission to do such things.
On November 16 2011 09:30 Kaitlin wrote: Sometimes I wonder what's wrong with stream "cheating". They aren't hacking. Their opponent is telling the world exactly what they are doing because they have made a decision that it's worth it because they make money from having viewers. That's the decision made by the streamer. Isn't it kind of weak to call your opponent a cheater when you are the one telling them exactly what you are doing ?
If your argument is that stream cheating should be an assumed risk, I would agree with you to some extent; however, it appears that your argument is based only on a financial platform. Are you saying that it would be "okay" if someone streamed with no personal gain in mind? Following your logic, it's okay for someone to steal from a store with a poorly designed layout, simply because that is an assumed risk for opening a publicly accessible store with poor security conditions. While parameters of a situation change ethical debates frequently (think: stealing medication to save a life of another) I don't believe we're going to find such a beneficent set of circumstances occuring in stream cheating. So your debate shouldn't be about assumed risk or the parameters of the situation, it should be able whether cheating is acceptable or not. I guess in your case it's okay. I can't argue with that opinion, but I think it's unfair to place responsibility on the streamers.
The only reason I mentioned the financial aspect is the assumption that the streamer has made a decision to stream, even though that would open them up to stream "cheating", but they go ahead anyways because it's a tradeoff for them. Comparing this to stealing meds to save someone's life or TB's parked car is a bit over the top, don't you think ? These are ladder matches in a video game. It's not like they are streaming their MLG matches to their opponents.
I see this as akin to playing poker with your opponent placing his cards face up in front of him. Are you cheating to look at his cards ? I say no. It's just really stupid for you opponent to do that in poker because what is the benefit ? Same thing with Starcraft, except the opponent does benefit by streaming games to the public. Whether it's fame, money, ego, whatever. They make that decision to do it. I don't see the top pros streaming their practice sessions where they are working on secret builds, do you ? Why not ? Because they don't wish to "assume the risk" that people learn what they are doing. I think the whole idea of getting upset over people stream "cheating" mere ladder games is a bit silly.
For the record, I've never stream "sniped", "cheated", etc., as even if I tried, I'm not high enough to match against anybody important.
You missed the main analogy that he was referring to. "Stealing meds" was an aside that doesnt really need focusing on, the main analogy that you should have addressed as:
Following your logic, it's okay for someone to steal from a store with a poorly designed layout, simply because that is an assumed risk for opening a publicly accessible store with poor security conditions.
Perhaps stealing is still too harsh of a comparison for you since it involves literally taking from someone else. A better example, then, would be: Following your logic, it's ok for someone to stalk (or constantly harass with phone calls would be closer to the idea of stream sniping) a girl simply because it is an assumed risk of walking around in public for everyone to see, looking as sexy as she does.
I dont care about an occasional stream snipe. Using the example above, of course that girls gonna get hit on by some guys if she goes to a bar. However, constant harassment of a pro streamer should be looked down upon just as constant harassment of a girl could land you a restraining order.
No, stalking a girl is illegal. It is also illegal to expose yourself in public, which I guess in this example would be the equivalent to the streamer, if the 'stalker' is the sniper. It's a bad example. What about the open-faced poker player ?
About the repetitive 'harassment' of the streamers, I would be happy to see Blizzard implement something where you don't play the same person over and over again. But really, that's independent of sniping or stream 'cheating'. I thought they did put something in, but I'm not sure about that.
Further, not to criticize Destiny, but in a couple of his recent Youtube videos, I think about teaching someone a cheesy terran build, he is basically watching someone else's stream during a ladder game, giving them advice on how to play. This is kind of the opposite end of this whole spectrum, in this case the streamer is getting benefit from viewers. How do you guys feel about this ? Because it seems if you frown upon the stream "cheating", this should fall into the same category. Again, not to call out Destiny, as I find him entertaining and tune in his stream quite often, but if he's against this 'stream cheating', then it seems he's hopped on both sides of the fence, so to speak.
I think you missed a crucial part of his analogy -- the girl isn't "exposing" herself in public -- she's just minding her own business, walking in public. She has done absolutely nothing wrong. However, because she's attractive (because she naturally is), the stalker starts to stalk her. And I don't see why stalking being illegal is relevant -- it's immoral, and just because stream cheating isn't illegal doesn't mean it's not also immortal.
While you will often play the same player multiple times just naturally (since you're both ending your previous game at the same time), stream sniping will often cause this to happen (when it otherwise wouldn't have). It can sometimes be independent of stream sniping, but isn't necessarily.
The difference here is that the person gave Destiny permission to do this. Stream snipers/cheaters do not receive permission from the people they're playing (and in fact, they're often asked to stop). Back to the girl analogy, Destiny in this case would be the girl's boyfriend. It's okay for him to have pictures of her, or send her love letters, or whatever, because he has her implied permission (by the fact that she continues to date him). The stalker, however, is in the wrong, simply because he does not have her permission to do such things.
First, I completely disagree with the whole analogy comparing a ladder game of Starcraft 2 to stalking a girl on the street. Second, in the Destiny situation, it's not relevant that SHE gave him permission. Did her opponent give him permission ? No, of course not. But do I care ? Not really because this is not much different than Destiny standing over he shoulder giving advice. Something that wouldn't be allowed in tournaments, but for meaningless ladder games, it's fine. Or is it ?
Again, what about the poker analogy ? Is it cheating to look at your poker opponent's cards if he lays them out face-up in front of him ?
if you make a habit of stream sniping there is little doubt that you are willing to trade starcraft cred for that attention you're so desperate for and sometimes that is going to include being called a cheater. I agree that most of them are probably just attention whores rather than attention whores and cheaters, a la deezer, but please don't ask me to pity you over the witch hunts that you are personally responsible for creating via your infantile, desperate behavior
On November 16 2011 09:30 Kaitlin wrote: Sometimes I wonder what's wrong with stream "cheating". They aren't hacking. Their opponent is telling the world exactly what they are doing because they have made a decision that it's worth it because they make money from having viewers. That's the decision made by the streamer. Isn't it kind of weak to call your opponent a cheater when you are the one telling them exactly what you are doing ?
If your argument is that stream cheating should be an assumed risk, I would agree with you to some extent; however, it appears that your argument is based only on a financial platform. Are you saying that it would be "okay" if someone streamed with no personal gain in mind? Following your logic, it's okay for someone to steal from a store with a poorly designed layout, simply because that is an assumed risk for opening a publicly accessible store with poor security conditions. While parameters of a situation change ethical debates frequently (think: stealing medication to save a life of another) I don't believe we're going to find such a beneficent set of circumstances occuring in stream cheating. So your debate shouldn't be about assumed risk or the parameters of the situation, it should be able whether cheating is acceptable or not. I guess in your case it's okay. I can't argue with that opinion, but I think it's unfair to place responsibility on the streamers.
The only reason I mentioned the financial aspect is the assumption that the streamer has made a decision to stream, even though that would open them up to stream "cheating", but they go ahead anyways because it's a tradeoff for them. Comparing this to stealing meds to save someone's life or TB's parked car is a bit over the top, don't you think ? These are ladder matches in a video game. It's not like they are streaming their MLG matches to their opponents.
I see this as akin to playing poker with your opponent placing his cards face up in front of him. Are you cheating to look at his cards ? I say no. It's just really stupid for you opponent to do that in poker because what is the benefit ? Same thing with Starcraft, except the opponent does benefit by streaming games to the public. Whether it's fame, money, ego, whatever. They make that decision to do it. I don't see the top pros streaming their practice sessions where they are working on secret builds, do you ? Why not ? Because they don't wish to "assume the risk" that people learn what they are doing. I think the whole idea of getting upset over people stream "cheating" mere ladder games is a bit silly.
For the record, I've never stream "sniped", "cheated", etc., as even if I tried, I'm not high enough to match against anybody important.
You missed the main analogy that he was referring to. "Stealing meds" was an aside that doesnt really need focusing on, the main analogy that you should have addressed as:
Following your logic, it's okay for someone to steal from a store with a poorly designed layout, simply because that is an assumed risk for opening a publicly accessible store with poor security conditions.
Perhaps stealing is still too harsh of a comparison for you since it involves literally taking from someone else. A better example, then, would be: Following your logic, it's ok for someone to stalk (or constantly harass with phone calls would be closer to the idea of stream sniping) a girl simply because it is an assumed risk of walking around in public for everyone to see, looking as sexy as she does.
I dont care about an occasional stream snipe. Using the example above, of course that girls gonna get hit on by some guys if she goes to a bar. However, constant harassment of a pro streamer should be looked down upon just as constant harassment of a girl could land you a restraining order.
No, stalking a girl is illegal. It is also illegal to expose yourself in public, which I guess in this example would be the equivalent to the streamer, if the 'stalker' is the sniper. It's a bad example. What about the open-faced poker player ?
About the repetitive 'harassment' of the streamers, I would be happy to see Blizzard implement something where you don't play the same person over and over again. But really, that's independent of sniping or stream 'cheating'. I thought they did put something in, but I'm not sure about that.
Further, not to criticize Destiny, but in a couple of his recent Youtube videos, I think about teaching someone a cheesy terran build, he is basically watching someone else's stream during a ladder game, giving them advice on how to play. This is kind of the opposite end of this whole spectrum, in this case the streamer is getting benefit from viewers. How do you guys feel about this ? Because it seems if you frown upon the stream "cheating", this should fall into the same category. Again, not to call out Destiny, as I find him entertaining and tune in his stream quite often, but if he's against this 'stream cheating', then it seems he's hopped on both sides of the fence, so to speak.
I think you missed a crucial part of his analogy -- the girl isn't "exposing" herself in public -- she's just minding her own business, walking in public. She has done absolutely nothing wrong. However, because she's attractive (because she naturally is), the stalker starts to stalk her. And I don't see why stalking being illegal is relevant -- it's immoral, and just because stream cheating isn't illegal doesn't mean it's not also immortal.
While you will often play the same player multiple times just naturally (since you're both ending your previous game at the same time), stream sniping will often cause this to happen (when it otherwise wouldn't have). It can sometimes be independent of stream sniping, but isn't necessarily.
The difference here is that the person gave Destiny permission to do this. Stream snipers/cheaters do not receive permission from the people they're playing (and in fact, they're often asked to stop). Back to the girl analogy, Destiny in this case would be the girl's boyfriend. It's okay for him to have pictures of her, or send her love letters, or whatever, because he has her implied permission (by the fact that she continues to date him). The stalker, however, is in the wrong, simply because he does not have her permission to do such things.
First, I completely disagree with the whole analogy comparing a ladder game of Starcraft 2 to stalking a girl on the street. Second, in the Destiny situation, it's not relevant that SHE gave him permission. Did her opponent give him permission ? No, of course not. But do I care ? Not really because this is not much different than Destiny standing over he shoulder giving advice. Something that wouldn't be allowed in tournaments, but for meaningless ladder games, it's fine. Or is it ?
Again, what about the poker analogy ? Is it cheating to look at your poker opponent's cards if he lays them out face-up in front of him ?
First of all, I don't see why the stalking analogy doesn't apply, but oh well.
Why would the opponent's permission matter? We're talking about stream cheating here. It's the streamers permission that matters. You can argue that it's still wrong for different reasons (the opponent probably isn't getting advice for a pro player), but that's a different issue entirely. I'm talking about whether it's wrong to watch someone's stream as you play them, not if it's wrong to give them advice as they play someone else.
It wouldn't be cheating if he your opponent lays his cards face-up on the table. However, it is cheating if he shows them to a friend, and you sneak a look at his cards, which is a much better analogy to the stream cheating. Even if you view it as laying the cards down on the table, it's doing so (so the crowd can see), but asking you not to look. Is it cheating to look when you were asked not to (or when he laid down the cards in a culture in which it's assumed you'd realize that by doing so he's not inviting you to look)? I think so. If you think about it, it's no different from just sneaking a peek at his cards when he's holding them normally -- he just happens to have made them easier to see for his own reasons.
I'm a bit tired right now, so if I didn't explain very well, feel free to ask for clarification.
On November 16 2011 07:03 iNcontroL wrote: lets break this down:
player wants more exposure so he snipes high level / famous players. player has stream going to snipe but won't look at it cause he is an honorable guy.
Player realizes sniping is half the battle. Why not do a weeeeeeeee bit cheating as well? Winning makes you famous. Stream sniper becomes stream cheater. All the while they swear "nah I am not like the others! I don't do it!"
I don't trust players to be admirable and not cheat when they have nothing at stake. If Sheth is found cheating he loses public image etc.. it's bad. If Hammerstanstein is found cheating nobody cares.
if you admit you stream snipe don't fault the people who don't trust you to not go the 1 step further and cheat.
I don't see why you need to be so defensive about it and rush to judgment. Sniping and cheating really are two different things, I get that your experience with some players has caused you to be irritated and cynical about this, but I think innocent until proven guilty is a good guideline to follow here.
Can you blame the top streamers for having this opinion? How are you supposed to magically tell if someone is cheating or being legit? I would be inclined to not trust the guy that has been sitting there waiting 20+ minutes for my last game to finish, just to get his 15seconds of fame.
On November 16 2011 09:30 Kaitlin wrote: Sometimes I wonder what's wrong with stream "cheating". They aren't hacking. Their opponent is telling the world exactly what they are doing because they have made a decision that it's worth it because they make money from having viewers. That's the decision made by the streamer. Isn't it kind of weak to call your opponent a cheater when you are the one telling them exactly what you are doing ?
If your argument is that stream cheating should be an assumed risk, I would agree with you to some extent; however, it appears that your argument is based only on a financial platform. Are you saying that it would be "okay" if someone streamed with no personal gain in mind? Following your logic, it's okay for someone to steal from a store with a poorly designed layout, simply because that is an assumed risk for opening a publicly accessible store with poor security conditions. While parameters of a situation change ethical debates frequently (think: stealing medication to save a life of another) I don't believe we're going to find such a beneficent set of circumstances occuring in stream cheating. So your debate shouldn't be about assumed risk or the parameters of the situation, it should be able whether cheating is acceptable or not. I guess in your case it's okay. I can't argue with that opinion, but I think it's unfair to place responsibility on the streamers.
The only reason I mentioned the financial aspect is the assumption that the streamer has made a decision to stream, even though that would open them up to stream "cheating", but they go ahead anyways because it's a tradeoff for them. Comparing this to stealing meds to save someone's life or TB's parked car is a bit over the top, don't you think ? These are ladder matches in a video game. It's not like they are streaming their MLG matches to their opponents.
I see this as akin to playing poker with your opponent placing his cards face up in front of him. Are you cheating to look at his cards ? I say no. It's just really stupid for you opponent to do that in poker because what is the benefit ? Same thing with Starcraft, except the opponent does benefit by streaming games to the public. Whether it's fame, money, ego, whatever. They make that decision to do it. I don't see the top pros streaming their practice sessions where they are working on secret builds, do you ? Why not ? Because they don't wish to "assume the risk" that people learn what they are doing. I think the whole idea of getting upset over people stream "cheating" mere ladder games is a bit silly.
For the record, I've never stream "sniped", "cheated", etc., as even if I tried, I'm not high enough to match against anybody important.
You missed the main analogy that he was referring to. "Stealing meds" was an aside that doesnt really need focusing on, the main analogy that you should have addressed as:
Following your logic, it's okay for someone to steal from a store with a poorly designed layout, simply because that is an assumed risk for opening a publicly accessible store with poor security conditions.
Perhaps stealing is still too harsh of a comparison for you since it involves literally taking from someone else. A better example, then, would be: Following your logic, it's ok for someone to stalk (or constantly harass with phone calls would be closer to the idea of stream sniping) a girl simply because it is an assumed risk of walking around in public for everyone to see, looking as sexy as she does.
I dont care about an occasional stream snipe. Using the example above, of course that girls gonna get hit on by some guys if she goes to a bar. However, constant harassment of a pro streamer should be looked down upon just as constant harassment of a girl could land you a restraining order.
No, stalking a girl is illegal. It is also illegal to expose yourself in public, which I guess in this example would be the equivalent to the streamer, if the 'stalker' is the sniper. It's a bad example. What about the open-faced poker player ?
About the repetitive 'harassment' of the streamers, I would be happy to see Blizzard implement something where you don't play the same person over and over again. But really, that's independent of sniping or stream 'cheating'. I thought they did put something in, but I'm not sure about that.
Further, not to criticize Destiny, but in a couple of his recent Youtube videos, I think about teaching someone a cheesy terran build, he is basically watching someone else's stream during a ladder game, giving them advice on how to play. This is kind of the opposite end of this whole spectrum, in this case the streamer is getting benefit from viewers. How do you guys feel about this ? Because it seems if you frown upon the stream "cheating", this should fall into the same category. Again, not to call out Destiny, as I find him entertaining and tune in his stream quite often, but if he's against this 'stream cheating', then it seems he's hopped on both sides of the fence, so to speak.
I think you missed a crucial part of his analogy -- the girl isn't "exposing" herself in public -- she's just minding her own business, walking in public. She has done absolutely nothing wrong. However, because she's attractive (because she naturally is), the stalker starts to stalk her. And I don't see why stalking being illegal is relevant -- it's immoral, and just because stream cheating isn't illegal doesn't mean it's not also immortal.
While you will often play the same player multiple times just naturally (since you're both ending your previous game at the same time), stream sniping will often cause this to happen (when it otherwise wouldn't have). It can sometimes be independent of stream sniping, but isn't necessarily.
The difference here is that the person gave Destiny permission to do this. Stream snipers/cheaters do not receive permission from the people they're playing (and in fact, they're often asked to stop). Back to the girl analogy, Destiny in this case would be the girl's boyfriend. It's okay for him to have pictures of her, or send her love letters, or whatever, because he has her implied permission (by the fact that she continues to date him). The stalker, however, is in the wrong, simply because he does not have her permission to do such things.
First, I completely disagree with the whole analogy comparing a ladder game of Starcraft 2 to stalking a girl on the street. Second, in the Destiny situation, it's not relevant that SHE gave him permission. Did her opponent give him permission ? No, of course not. But do I care ? Not really because this is not much different than Destiny standing over he shoulder giving advice. Something that wouldn't be allowed in tournaments, but for meaningless ladder games, it's fine. Or is it ?
Again, what about the poker analogy ? Is it cheating to look at your poker opponent's cards if he lays them out face-up in front of him ?
It isn't cheating for you to look at a guys cards if he intentionally shows them to you. However, this isn't quite analogous as you not looking at the guys cards means you need to go out of your way, not the other way around. By streaming, you are showing the public your gameplay, however while playing against someone they are no longer paart of the public, as they are now your opponent.
A much better analogy would be if he was playing poker on TV and you tuned into ESPN in order to see his cards.
As far as I am concerned stream sniping is cheating and breaking the system in the first place. Even disregarding the potential to stream cheat, being able to pick your opponent in an environment that is supposed to match you with someone random of the same skill level gives you a huge advantage. It is much like going to a Casino and playing Blackjack while counting cards; the game is intended to give you a 1/50 chance to get any given card, but if you start counting cards suddenly you know when your chances are much much higher to get any card in particular. For example, if I streamsnipe IdrA I can almost guarantee you he isn't going to 6pool me, whereas random GM zerg just might.
On November 16 2011 09:30 Kaitlin wrote: Sometimes I wonder what's wrong with stream "cheating". They aren't hacking. Their opponent is telling the world exactly what they are doing because they have made a decision that it's worth it because they make money from having viewers. That's the decision made by the streamer. Isn't it kind of weak to call your opponent a cheater when you are the one telling them exactly what you are doing ?
If your argument is that stream cheating should be an assumed risk, I would agree with you to some extent; however, it appears that your argument is based only on a financial platform. Are you saying that it would be "okay" if someone streamed with no personal gain in mind? Following your logic, it's okay for someone to steal from a store with a poorly designed layout, simply because that is an assumed risk for opening a publicly accessible store with poor security conditions. While parameters of a situation change ethical debates frequently (think: stealing medication to save a life of another) I don't believe we're going to find such a beneficent set of circumstances occuring in stream cheating. So your debate shouldn't be about assumed risk or the parameters of the situation, it should be able whether cheating is acceptable or not. I guess in your case it's okay. I can't argue with that opinion, but I think it's unfair to place responsibility on the streamers.
The only reason I mentioned the financial aspect is the assumption that the streamer has made a decision to stream, even though that would open them up to stream "cheating", but they go ahead anyways because it's a tradeoff for them. Comparing this to stealing meds to save someone's life or TB's parked car is a bit over the top, don't you think ? These are ladder matches in a video game. It's not like they are streaming their MLG matches to their opponents.
I see this as akin to playing poker with your opponent placing his cards face up in front of him. Are you cheating to look at his cards ? I say no. It's just really stupid for you opponent to do that in poker because what is the benefit ? Same thing with Starcraft, except the opponent does benefit by streaming games to the public. Whether it's fame, money, ego, whatever. They make that decision to do it. I don't see the top pros streaming their practice sessions where they are working on secret builds, do you ? Why not ? Because they don't wish to "assume the risk" that people learn what they are doing. I think the whole idea of getting upset over people stream "cheating" mere ladder games is a bit silly.
For the record, I've never stream "sniped", "cheated", etc., as even if I tried, I'm not high enough to match against anybody important.
You missed the main analogy that he was referring to. "Stealing meds" was an aside that doesnt really need focusing on, the main analogy that you should have addressed as:
Following your logic, it's okay for someone to steal from a store with a poorly designed layout, simply because that is an assumed risk for opening a publicly accessible store with poor security conditions.
Perhaps stealing is still too harsh of a comparison for you since it involves literally taking from someone else. A better example, then, would be: Following your logic, it's ok for someone to stalk (or constantly harass with phone calls would be closer to the idea of stream sniping) a girl simply because it is an assumed risk of walking around in public for everyone to see, looking as sexy as she does.
I dont care about an occasional stream snipe. Using the example above, of course that girls gonna get hit on by some guys if she goes to a bar. However, constant harassment of a pro streamer should be looked down upon just as constant harassment of a girl could land you a restraining order.
No, stalking a girl is illegal. It is also illegal to expose yourself in public, which I guess in this example would be the equivalent to the streamer, if the 'stalker' is the sniper. It's a bad example. What about the open-faced poker player ?
About the repetitive 'harassment' of the streamers, I would be happy to see Blizzard implement something where you don't play the same person over and over again. But really, that's independent of sniping or stream 'cheating'. I thought they did put something in, but I'm not sure about that.
Further, not to criticize Destiny, but in a couple of his recent Youtube videos, I think about teaching someone a cheesy terran build, he is basically watching someone else's stream during a ladder game, giving them advice on how to play. This is kind of the opposite end of this whole spectrum, in this case the streamer is getting benefit from viewers. How do you guys feel about this ? Because it seems if you frown upon the stream "cheating", this should fall into the same category. Again, not to call out Destiny, as I find him entertaining and tune in his stream quite often, but if he's against this 'stream cheating', then it seems he's hopped on both sides of the fence, so to speak.
I think you missed a crucial part of his analogy -- the girl isn't "exposing" herself in public -- she's just minding her own business, walking in public. She has done absolutely nothing wrong. However, because she's attractive (because she naturally is), the stalker starts to stalk her. And I don't see why stalking being illegal is relevant -- it's immoral, and just because stream cheating isn't illegal doesn't mean it's not also immortal.
While you will often play the same player multiple times just naturally (since you're both ending your previous game at the same time), stream sniping will often cause this to happen (when it otherwise wouldn't have). It can sometimes be independent of stream sniping, but isn't necessarily.
The difference here is that the person gave Destiny permission to do this. Stream snipers/cheaters do not receive permission from the people they're playing (and in fact, they're often asked to stop). Back to the girl analogy, Destiny in this case would be the girl's boyfriend. It's okay for him to have pictures of her, or send her love letters, or whatever, because he has her implied permission (by the fact that she continues to date him). The stalker, however, is in the wrong, simply because he does not have her permission to do such things.
First, I completely disagree with the whole analogy comparing a ladder game of Starcraft 2 to stalking a girl on the street. Second, in the Destiny situation, it's not relevant that SHE gave him permission. Did her opponent give him permission ? No, of course not. But do I care ? Not really because this is not much different than Destiny standing over he shoulder giving advice. Something that wouldn't be allowed in tournaments, but for meaningless ladder games, it's fine. Or is it ?
Again, what about the poker analogy ? Is it cheating to look at your poker opponent's cards if he lays them out face-up in front of him ?
It isn't cheating for you to look at a guys cards if he intentionally shows them to you. However, this isn't quite analogous as you not looking at the guys cards means you need to go out of your way, not the other way around. By streaming, you are showing the public your gameplay, however while playing against someone they are no longer paart of the public, as they are now your opponent.
A much better analogy would be if he was playing poker on TV and you tuned into ESPN in order to see his cards.
As far as I am concerned stream sniping is cheating and breaking the system in the first place. Even disregarding the potential to stream cheat, being able to pick your opponent in an environment that is supposed to match you with someone random of the same skill level gives you a huge advantage. It is much like going to a Casino and playing Blackjack while counting cards; the game is intended to give you a 1/50 chance to get any given card, but if you start counting cards suddenly you know when your chances are much much higher to get any card in particular. For example, if I streamsnipe IdrA I can almost guarantee you he isn't going to 6pool me, whereas random GM zerg just might.
This is why poker games broadcast on ESPN are not live ...
On November 16 2011 09:30 Kaitlin wrote: Sometimes I wonder what's wrong with stream "cheating". They aren't hacking. Their opponent is telling the world exactly what they are doing because they have made a decision that it's worth it because they make money from having viewers. That's the decision made by the streamer. Isn't it kind of weak to call your opponent a cheater when you are the one telling them exactly what you are doing ?
If your argument is that stream cheating should be an assumed risk, I would agree with you to some extent; however, it appears that your argument is based only on a financial platform. Are you saying that it would be "okay" if someone streamed with no personal gain in mind? Following your logic, it's okay for someone to steal from a store with a poorly designed layout, simply because that is an assumed risk for opening a publicly accessible store with poor security conditions. While parameters of a situation change ethical debates frequently (think: stealing medication to save a life of another) I don't believe we're going to find such a beneficent set of circumstances occuring in stream cheating. So your debate shouldn't be about assumed risk or the parameters of the situation, it should be able whether cheating is acceptable or not. I guess in your case it's okay. I can't argue with that opinion, but I think it's unfair to place responsibility on the streamers.
The only reason I mentioned the financial aspect is the assumption that the streamer has made a decision to stream, even though that would open them up to stream "cheating", but they go ahead anyways because it's a tradeoff for them. Comparing this to stealing meds to save someone's life or TB's parked car is a bit over the top, don't you think ? These are ladder matches in a video game. It's not like they are streaming their MLG matches to their opponents.
I see this as akin to playing poker with your opponent placing his cards face up in front of him. Are you cheating to look at his cards ? I say no. It's just really stupid for you opponent to do that in poker because what is the benefit ? Same thing with Starcraft, except the opponent does benefit by streaming games to the public. Whether it's fame, money, ego, whatever. They make that decision to do it. I don't see the top pros streaming their practice sessions where they are working on secret builds, do you ? Why not ? Because they don't wish to "assume the risk" that people learn what they are doing. I think the whole idea of getting upset over people stream "cheating" mere ladder games is a bit silly.
For the record, I've never stream "sniped", "cheated", etc., as even if I tried, I'm not high enough to match against anybody important.
You missed the main analogy that he was referring to. "Stealing meds" was an aside that doesnt really need focusing on, the main analogy that you should have addressed as:
Following your logic, it's okay for someone to steal from a store with a poorly designed layout, simply because that is an assumed risk for opening a publicly accessible store with poor security conditions.
Perhaps stealing is still too harsh of a comparison for you since it involves literally taking from someone else. A better example, then, would be: Following your logic, it's ok for someone to stalk (or constantly harass with phone calls would be closer to the idea of stream sniping) a girl simply because it is an assumed risk of walking around in public for everyone to see, looking as sexy as she does.
I dont care about an occasional stream snipe. Using the example above, of course that girls gonna get hit on by some guys if she goes to a bar. However, constant harassment of a pro streamer should be looked down upon just as constant harassment of a girl could land you a restraining order.
No, stalking a girl is illegal. It is also illegal to expose yourself in public, which I guess in this example would be the equivalent to the streamer, if the 'stalker' is the sniper. It's a bad example. What about the open-faced poker player ?
About the repetitive 'harassment' of the streamers, I would be happy to see Blizzard implement something where you don't play the same person over and over again. But really, that's independent of sniping or stream 'cheating'. I thought they did put something in, but I'm not sure about that.
Further, not to criticize Destiny, but in a couple of his recent Youtube videos, I think about teaching someone a cheesy terran build, he is basically watching someone else's stream during a ladder game, giving them advice on how to play. This is kind of the opposite end of this whole spectrum, in this case the streamer is getting benefit from viewers. How do you guys feel about this ? Because it seems if you frown upon the stream "cheating", this should fall into the same category. Again, not to call out Destiny, as I find him entertaining and tune in his stream quite often, but if he's against this 'stream cheating', then it seems he's hopped on both sides of the fence, so to speak.
I think you missed a crucial part of his analogy -- the girl isn't "exposing" herself in public -- she's just minding her own business, walking in public. She has done absolutely nothing wrong. However, because she's attractive (because she naturally is), the stalker starts to stalk her. And I don't see why stalking being illegal is relevant -- it's immoral, and just because stream cheating isn't illegal doesn't mean it's not also immortal.
While you will often play the same player multiple times just naturally (since you're both ending your previous game at the same time), stream sniping will often cause this to happen (when it otherwise wouldn't have). It can sometimes be independent of stream sniping, but isn't necessarily.
The difference here is that the person gave Destiny permission to do this. Stream snipers/cheaters do not receive permission from the people they're playing (and in fact, they're often asked to stop). Back to the girl analogy, Destiny in this case would be the girl's boyfriend. It's okay for him to have pictures of her, or send her love letters, or whatever, because he has her implied permission (by the fact that she continues to date him). The stalker, however, is in the wrong, simply because he does not have her permission to do such things.
First, I completely disagree with the whole analogy comparing a ladder game of Starcraft 2 to stalking a girl on the street. Second, in the Destiny situation, it's not relevant that SHE gave him permission. Did her opponent give him permission ? No, of course not. But do I care ? Not really because this is not much different than Destiny standing over he shoulder giving advice. Something that wouldn't be allowed in tournaments, but for meaningless ladder games, it's fine. Or is it ?
Again, what about the poker analogy ? Is it cheating to look at your poker opponent's cards if he lays them out face-up in front of him ?
It isn't cheating for you to look at a guys cards if he intentionally shows them to you. However, this isn't quite analogous as you not looking at the guys cards means you need to go out of your way, not the other way around. By streaming, you are showing the public your gameplay, however while playing against someone they are no longer paart of the public, as they are now your opponent.
A much better analogy would be if he was playing poker on TV and you tuned into ESPN in order to see his cards.
As far as I am concerned stream sniping is cheating and breaking the system in the first place. Even disregarding the potential to stream cheat, being able to pick your opponent in an environment that is supposed to match you with someone random of the same skill level gives you a huge advantage. It is much like going to a Casino and playing Blackjack while counting cards; the game is intended to give you a 1/50 chance to get any given card, but if you start counting cards suddenly you know when your chances are much much higher to get any card in particular. For example, if I streamsnipe IdrA I can almost guarantee you he isn't going to 6pool me, whereas random GM zerg just might.
This is why poker games broadcast on ESPN are not live ...
So you're saying that you want the SC2 community to stop feeding us hours of virtually free content in order to appease a couple of stream snipers?
How about instead of screwing over the whole community we screw the portion of the community who associates themselves with cheaters.
EPT
