|
07:06 KST - method linked here has been disproved here10:54 KST - Find a full timeline of pro comments (including Spades) in the topic here.08:47 KST - Summary:Accusations of maphacking have the potential to destroy a player's career if left unaddressed. Because of the potential consequences, we should be careful about accepting unproven accusations. The principle of 'innocent until proven guilty' should be applied here. That does not mean that there has been a conclusion about this case, however, which is why this thread remains tentatively open. Please discuss with caution and use evidence to back up your claims. (also a summary post by an unnamed pro on reddit here) |
On June 06 2012 04:23 NeMeSiS3 wrote:
Train is still rolling, TL is still not ending this thread... Apparently the IP matches existing users, but they won't release the name...
I was always curious, in ancient times, or medieval when the church/ruling party declared a witch with no proof other than (if we drop you off a cliff, or burn you, you should survive if you're a witch and die if not) what it would look like. You, the idiotic pitchfork carrying majority posting in this thread, are very interesting to observe... It's a shame that Spades has to be the witch who is forced to deny hacking against a poster who TL is hiding (apparently)... Last time I checked, if you accuse something, you don't call that conclusive evidence, especially an anonymous tip.
But hey, we're humans and apparently we are naturally acustomed to believe anything we hear. I have to go, my house hippo requires feeding.
The analogy you used does not work because dropping witches off cliffs does not provide substantial evidence, but pros and experts analyzing replays does. Also, people saw the witch using witchcraft years ago, and it was proven that she was a witch already. Bad analogy.
|
On June 06 2012 04:25 JustTray wrote:Show nested quote +On June 06 2012 04:21 Shiori wrote:On June 06 2012 04:19 OneOther wrote:On June 06 2012 04:02 Shiori wrote:On June 06 2012 03:59 JustTray wrote:On June 06 2012 03:56 Shiori wrote:On June 06 2012 03:55 JustTray wrote:On June 06 2012 03:52 Shiori wrote:On June 06 2012 03:50 Mrvoodoochild1 wrote:On June 06 2012 03:42 Shiori wrote:
[quote]
Lol. No matter what he says someone is going to take issue with it and use it as evidence (because everyone here suddenly morphs into a psychologist every time there's controversy) of whatever conclusion they want.
Yep, ex-teamates and former managers calling him a stream cheater while living with him, numerous pro players and community figures analyzing his games agreeing that he's hacker and cheater, Spades putting up a half ass effort defending himself trying to play the victim,ohhh and he's ALREADY A PROVEN HACKER, people are just drawing whatever conclusion they want right? People are doing exactly that. Axeltoss has made some very convincing analyses that basically make a lot of what Catz said irrelevant. Gix/Artist/Mihai's comments concern something completely different than maphacking. Lots of people streamcheat who don't maphack. Streamcheating is not sufficient to establish maphacking. He was a proven hacker in a different game. He did not hack in Sc2 for a long time (at the very least). That needs to count for something. It doesn't count for anything. If it did, it would only count that its more likely he's a hacker. Once a hacker, always a hacker. You're probably defending him because you are him, are friends with him, or are a hacker yourself. Yeah, clearly I'm Spades. Hope you're being sarcastic. I'm not sure how that refutes my point. Are you one of the teenage children who thinks a legal standard of proof is required for the public to out a video game hacker? Because those people are literally the dumbest ones in this thread. The evidence is there. It's VERY damning. You don't get to dismiss things just because they don't mesh with your preconceived notions. I'm one of the people who thinks you're a moron for implying that I'm affiliated with Spades (or myself a hacker) simply because I don't think there's sufficient evidence, and because you said that "once a hacker, always a hacker." What's your rationale behind spending hours and hours defending him against people's own opinions and judgements? Look, there's not going to be some damning irrefutable evidence. This is not 2006, where people would leave blatant trails of hacking and allow people to find out next week. People downloaded his replays and compared them to suspicious games, and formed their opinion based on those. Taken individually, each might have a reasonable explanation but the aggregate is convincing enough for different people. Progamers have voiced their opinions. Whatever it might be. You are not doing him any good by continuing to argue that there is no hard evidence, because people have different criteria of evaluating evidence, and some folks find the current evidence sufficient. I guess instead of self-victimizig, Spades should rather spend his time explaining the Fog of War discrepancies in his ladder games and the suspicious games. Because that's enough evidence for some people. Your efforts seem futile and pointless to me. No, I don't think you are Spades. I know you are going to reply something along the lines of trying to defend someone until proven guilty, but just realize that he's guilty enough for some, if not most, people given the evidence, his past and etc. If anything, you are making the situation worse by pissing people off who have firmly formed their opinions and who will not be pursuaded by your weak arguments. I'm not sure what you're trying to argue here. I think the jury's out on whether Spades hacked. I don't know if he did, and I don't know if he didn't. I just think there are far too many holes that keep cropping up in the case against them for me to conclude that he's hacking. Apparently this really offends some people like JustTray, to the point where they'd actually attack me personally. For the record, you started the personal attacks. I simply showed how you argued without logic and it made you mad. Others are now telling you the same, and you still refuse to admit it. Everyone is telling you you are doing nothing but harm to the person you are attempting to defend, and you still continue. You don't refute any of the points made, and you started the cherry picking of my post as one of three options by focusing on me saying you could be spades. Your continued defense does nothing but weaken your already illogical position. You should stop. You don't have to, but if you were at all intelligent, you would have.
Here is your first response to me: It doesn't count for anything. If it did, it would only count that its more likely he's a hacker. Once a hacker, always a hacker. You're probably defending him because you are him, are friends with him, or are a hacker yourself.
No. Stop lying. In fact, I didn't even reply to you until you, for no reason, asserted that I either was Spades, was a friend of his, or was a hacker myself. All three of these things are false, and all three of them are attacks on my credibility/character.
I'm not here to protect Spades's public persona. I want to know if he's hacking.
|
On June 06 2012 04:25 Acritter wrote:Show nested quote +On June 06 2012 04:22 fraktoasters wrote:On June 06 2012 04:16 Acritter wrote:On June 06 2012 04:09 JustTray wrote:On June 06 2012 04:03 Acritter wrote:On June 06 2012 03:59 JustTray wrote:On June 06 2012 03:56 Shiori wrote:On June 06 2012 03:55 JustTray wrote:On June 06 2012 03:52 Shiori wrote:On June 06 2012 03:50 Mrvoodoochild1 wrote:
[quote]
Yep, ex-teamates and former managers calling him a stream cheater while living with him, numerous pro players and community figures analyzing his games agreeing that he's hacker and cheater, Spades putting up a half ass effort defending himself trying to play the victim,ohhh and he's ALREADY A PROVEN HACKER, people are just drawing whatever conclusion they want right? People are doing exactly that. Axeltoss has made some very convincing analyses that basically make a lot of what Catz said irrelevant. Gix/Artist/Mihai's comments concern something completely different than maphacking. Lots of people streamcheat who don't maphack. Streamcheating is not sufficient to establish maphacking. He was a proven hacker in a different game. He did not hack in Sc2 for a long time (at the very least). That needs to count for something. It doesn't count for anything. If it did, it would only count that its more likely he's a hacker. Once a hacker, always a hacker. You're probably defending him because you are him, are friends with him, or are a hacker yourself. Yeah, clearly I'm Spades. Hope you're being sarcastic. I'm not sure how that refutes my point. Are you one of the teenage children who thinks a legal standard of proof is required for the public to out a video game hacker? Because those people are literally the dumbest ones in this thread. The evidence is there. It's VERY damning. You don't get to dismiss things just because they don't mesh with your preconceived notions. The same goes to you. What about the posts from actual hackers that outline the fact that Spades COULD NOT have been using camera lock? Are you just dismissing those? How about the post from that D3 or whatever website that called the people on TeamLiquid idiots and said that Spades wasn't hacking? You're throwing aside input from experts to follow along with your own "preconceived notions". Before anyone can accuse Spades of maphacking, they need to find a hack that he realistically could have been using. As of right now, none have surfaced. If someone can find one, then I will accept that he was most likely maphacking. If nobody can find one, then it is absolutely impossible that he was maphacking. You mean, the notion that admitted Hackers are asserting that there is only one hack, that doesn't allow you to make actions, therefore Spades could not have cheated? Yes, I'm entirely discounting that, because I'm a rational, logical person, not a moron. There ARE more than 1 version of hacks, and any skilled hacker wouldn't bother to use a packaged one, they would customize it. Not saying that's the case, I'm just saying that to believe hackers defending other hackers and for that reason, is literally the dumbest thing you could do. So no, we don't need to find the hack he used. Not at all. That's an unreasonable, and unnecessary level of proof that only a hacker, or the person being accused would ever think is reasonable. Due to this post the entirely of your opinions can be routinely ignored as entirely without merit, logic, or reason. If anything, you only solidify the case that he is 100% a hacker. You do yourself a favor and him if you don't post your fallacies any longer. If it is impossible to replicate the tool used to commit the crime, then there was no crime committed. If, to prove that someone committed a murder, you need a bullet that can pass through a brick wall without leaving a trace, then you can't prove that that person committed the murder. This is really, really simple. If the crime is impossible to recreate, it is scientifically impossible that it happened. Miracles and magic are not acceptable evidence in a court of law. Programming is not Miracles or Magic. Are you suggesting Spades produced his own maphack by himself? Please indicate what programming experience he has.
I seriously can't believe that just because you can't find this hack that he used you claim that it cannot exist.
|
OK; everyone open up the game on Cloud Kingdom and go to ~9:50.
Better proof cannot be asked for. Blacklist this hacker.
|
On June 06 2012 03:58 TommyP wrote:
Even without Catz's stream, I know hes a hacker just by his answers. He wouldnt have to "sleep" on anything if he was innocent.He shouldve just came in here and laughed it off rather than all the BS he said. Obvious hacker, I hope you dont win a map this weekend.
Now people are judging Spades based on how they would respond to a career ending accusation and his peers turning on him -- as if doing the wrong PR build order is now evidence of hacking as well.
I'm sorry, but this is fucking idiocy. Artosis made a similar accusation on the SOTG, and I was appalled that someone so smart could make such a stupid assumption.
|
On June 06 2012 04:26 Acritter wrote:Show nested quote +On June 06 2012 04:24 artanis2 wrote:On June 06 2012 04:16 Acritter wrote:On June 06 2012 04:09 JustTray wrote:On June 06 2012 04:03 Acritter wrote:On June 06 2012 03:59 JustTray wrote:On June 06 2012 03:56 Shiori wrote:On June 06 2012 03:55 JustTray wrote:On June 06 2012 03:52 Shiori wrote:On June 06 2012 03:50 Mrvoodoochild1 wrote:
[quote]
Yep, ex-teamates and former managers calling him a stream cheater while living with him, numerous pro players and community figures analyzing his games agreeing that he's hacker and cheater, Spades putting up a half ass effort defending himself trying to play the victim,ohhh and he's ALREADY A PROVEN HACKER, people are just drawing whatever conclusion they want right? People are doing exactly that. Axeltoss has made some very convincing analyses that basically make a lot of what Catz said irrelevant. Gix/Artist/Mihai's comments concern something completely different than maphacking. Lots of people streamcheat who don't maphack. Streamcheating is not sufficient to establish maphacking. He was a proven hacker in a different game. He did not hack in Sc2 for a long time (at the very least). That needs to count for something. It doesn't count for anything. If it did, it would only count that its more likely he's a hacker. Once a hacker, always a hacker. You're probably defending him because you are him, are friends with him, or are a hacker yourself. Yeah, clearly I'm Spades. Hope you're being sarcastic. I'm not sure how that refutes my point. Are you one of the teenage children who thinks a legal standard of proof is required for the public to out a video game hacker? Because those people are literally the dumbest ones in this thread. The evidence is there. It's VERY damning. You don't get to dismiss things just because they don't mesh with your preconceived notions. The same goes to you. What about the posts from actual hackers that outline the fact that Spades COULD NOT have been using camera lock? Are you just dismissing those? How about the post from that D3 or whatever website that called the people on TeamLiquid idiots and said that Spades wasn't hacking? You're throwing aside input from experts to follow along with your own "preconceived notions". Before anyone can accuse Spades of maphacking, they need to find a hack that he realistically could have been using. As of right now, none have surfaced. If someone can find one, then I will accept that he was most likely maphacking. If nobody can find one, then it is absolutely impossible that he was maphacking. You mean, the notion that admitted Hackers are asserting that there is only one hack, that doesn't allow you to make actions, therefore Spades could not have cheated? Yes, I'm entirely discounting that, because I'm a rational, logical person, not a moron. There ARE more than 1 version of hacks, and any skilled hacker wouldn't bother to use a packaged one, they would customize it. Not saying that's the case, I'm just saying that to believe hackers defending other hackers and for that reason, is literally the dumbest thing you could do. So no, we don't need to find the hack he used. Not at all. That's an unreasonable, and unnecessary level of proof that only a hacker, or the person being accused would ever think is reasonable. Due to this post the entirely of your opinions can be routinely ignored as entirely without merit, logic, or reason. If anything, you only solidify the case that he is 100% a hacker. You do yourself a favor and him if you don't post your fallacies any longer. If it is impossible to replicate the tool used to commit the crime, then there was no crime committed. If, to prove that someone committed a murder, you need a bullet that can pass through a brick wall without leaving a trace, then you can't prove that that person committed the murder. This is really, really simple. If the crime is impossible to recreate, it is scientifically impossible that it happened. Miracles and magic are not acceptable evidence in a court of law. This is trivial to replicate though. The things that you are saying do not exist could have easily been added to the publicly available hack. The fact that he was selecting his hotkeyed units while the camera lock was on does not mean that he was not using a camera lock. The no-selection-while-locked is protection feature so hackers dont accidentally give themselves away, not a requirement of the lock. Disabling that protection means he can lock camera and spam hotkeys while he's looking around the map. Does he have any experience in programming that could account for him modifying the hack like that?
The point is that the author of the hack could enable this with a checkbox and one line of code. The change requires disabling code that they wrote in the first place. It is trivial therefore irrelevant.
|
The fact that Spades has been so hostile towards all the accusations makes me positive that he is hacking. If he were innocent, all he would have to do is answer any questions honestly and provide as many replays as necessary, and people will see he is not hacking.
edit: shortened because my original post looked way too overthought
|
On June 06 2012 04:27 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On June 06 2012 04:16 Acritter wrote:On June 06 2012 04:09 JustTray wrote:On June 06 2012 04:03 Acritter wrote:On June 06 2012 03:59 JustTray wrote:On June 06 2012 03:56 Shiori wrote:On June 06 2012 03:55 JustTray wrote:On June 06 2012 03:52 Shiori wrote:On June 06 2012 03:50 Mrvoodoochild1 wrote:On June 06 2012 03:42 Shiori wrote:
[quote]
Lol. No matter what he says someone is going to take issue with it and use it as evidence (because everyone here suddenly morphs into a psychologist every time there's controversy) of whatever conclusion they want.
Yep, ex-teamates and former managers calling him a stream cheater while living with him, numerous pro players and community figures analyzing his games agreeing that he's hacker and cheater, Spades putting up a half ass effort defending himself trying to play the victim,ohhh and he's ALREADY A PROVEN HACKER, people are just drawing whatever conclusion they want right? People are doing exactly that. Axeltoss has made some very convincing analyses that basically make a lot of what Catz said irrelevant. Gix/Artist/Mihai's comments concern something completely different than maphacking. Lots of people streamcheat who don't maphack. Streamcheating is not sufficient to establish maphacking. He was a proven hacker in a different game. He did not hack in Sc2 for a long time (at the very least). That needs to count for something. It doesn't count for anything. If it did, it would only count that its more likely he's a hacker. Once a hacker, always a hacker. You're probably defending him because you are him, are friends with him, or are a hacker yourself. Yeah, clearly I'm Spades. Hope you're being sarcastic. I'm not sure how that refutes my point. Are you one of the teenage children who thinks a legal standard of proof is required for the public to out a video game hacker? Because those people are literally the dumbest ones in this thread. The evidence is there. It's VERY damning. You don't get to dismiss things just because they don't mesh with your preconceived notions. The same goes to you. What about the posts from actual hackers that outline the fact that Spades COULD NOT have been using camera lock? Are you just dismissing those? How about the post from that D3 or whatever website that called the people on TeamLiquid idiots and said that Spades wasn't hacking? You're throwing aside input from experts to follow along with your own "preconceived notions". Before anyone can accuse Spades of maphacking, they need to find a hack that he realistically could have been using. As of right now, none have surfaced. If someone can find one, then I will accept that he was most likely maphacking. If nobody can find one, then it is absolutely impossible that he was maphacking. You mean, the notion that admitted Hackers are asserting that there is only one hack, that doesn't allow you to make actions, therefore Spades could not have cheated? Yes, I'm entirely discounting that, because I'm a rational, logical person, not a moron. There ARE more than 1 version of hacks, and any skilled hacker wouldn't bother to use a packaged one, they would customize it. Not saying that's the case, I'm just saying that to believe hackers defending other hackers and for that reason, is literally the dumbest thing you could do. So no, we don't need to find the hack he used. Not at all. That's an unreasonable, and unnecessary level of proof that only a hacker, or the person being accused would ever think is reasonable. Due to this post the entirely of your opinions can be routinely ignored as entirely without merit, logic, or reason. If anything, you only solidify the case that he is 100% a hacker. You do yourself a favor and him if you don't post your fallacies any longer. If it is impossible to replicate the tool used to commit the crime, then there was no crime committed. If, to prove that someone committed a murder, you need a bullet that can pass through a brick wall without leaving a trace, then you can't prove that that person committed the murder. This is really, really simple. If the crime is impossible to recreate, it is scientifically impossible that it happened. Miracles and magic are not acceptable evidence in a court of law. That is not correct. Scott Peterson was convicted largely through circumstantial evidence. There was no murder weapon, witness to the crime or hard evidence that he committed the murder. However, there was overwhelming evidence that he had committed some sort of crime and was acting as if he was attempting to hide a body. The case came down to the argument that there was no other reasonable argument for what he was doing except attempting to hide his wife’s body.
That... that's not at all the same. There's a difference between "we don't know" and "it can't be done". Like, let's say a murderer throws his knife into the lake. We can't tell what kind of knife he used, but from the stab wounds on the body he's trying to bury we can tell it was a knife. But if the murderer stabs the victim while being present at a ballroom dance halfway across the globe... there's no knife that can do that. Similarly, the hackers themselves have said that what Spades has shown is inconsistent with the hacks that are out there. This means he's using an impossible weapon, unless evidence can be offered to support the ridiculous notion that he created his own hack or modified the existing one.
|
On June 06 2012 04:16 Acritter wrote:Show nested quote +On June 06 2012 04:09 JustTray wrote:On June 06 2012 04:03 Acritter wrote:On June 06 2012 03:59 JustTray wrote:On June 06 2012 03:56 Shiori wrote:On June 06 2012 03:55 JustTray wrote:On June 06 2012 03:52 Shiori wrote:On June 06 2012 03:50 Mrvoodoochild1 wrote:On June 06 2012 03:42 Shiori wrote:On June 06 2012 03:40 Mrvoodoochild1 wrote:
[quote]
You don't know what to say? If you weren't hacking, you either don't address the issue at all because there is nothing to address or you do the other extreme and type in all caps THAT YOU ARE INNOCENT AND YOU DIDN'T HACK. Remember. Truth is the ultimate defense. No, instead you try to play the victim and blame the mob mentality. Your defense is laughable in all honesty. You need to either confess or just retire because you are embarrassing yourself. You are a disgrace to this community sorry. Lol. No matter what he says someone is going to take issue with it and use it as evidence (because everyone here suddenly morphs into a psychologist every time there's controversy) of whatever conclusion they want. Yep, ex-teamates and former managers calling him a stream cheater while living with him, numerous pro players and community figures analyzing his games agreeing that he's hacker and cheater, Spades putting up a half ass effort defending himself trying to play the victim,ohhh and he's ALREADY A PROVEN HACKER, people are just drawing whatever conclusion they want right? People are doing exactly that. Axeltoss has made some very convincing analyses that basically make a lot of what Catz said irrelevant. Gix/Artist/Mihai's comments concern something completely different than maphacking. Lots of people streamcheat who don't maphack. Streamcheating is not sufficient to establish maphacking. He was a proven hacker in a different game. He did not hack in Sc2 for a long time (at the very least). That needs to count for something. It doesn't count for anything. If it did, it would only count that its more likely he's a hacker. Once a hacker, always a hacker. You're probably defending him because you are him, are friends with him, or are a hacker yourself. Yeah, clearly I'm Spades. Hope you're being sarcastic. I'm not sure how that refutes my point. Are you one of the teenage children who thinks a legal standard of proof is required for the public to out a video game hacker? Because those people are literally the dumbest ones in this thread. The evidence is there. It's VERY damning. You don't get to dismiss things just because they don't mesh with your preconceived notions. The same goes to you. What about the posts from actual hackers that outline the fact that Spades COULD NOT have been using camera lock? Are you just dismissing those? How about the post from that D3 or whatever website that called the people on TeamLiquid idiots and said that Spades wasn't hacking? You're throwing aside input from experts to follow along with your own "preconceived notions". Before anyone can accuse Spades of maphacking, they need to find a hack that he realistically could have been using. As of right now, none have surfaced. If someone can find one, then I will accept that he was most likely maphacking. If nobody can find one, then it is absolutely impossible that he was maphacking. You mean, the notion that admitted Hackers are asserting that there is only one hack, that doesn't allow you to make actions, therefore Spades could not have cheated? Yes, I'm entirely discounting that, because I'm a rational, logical person, not a moron. There ARE more than 1 version of hacks, and any skilled hacker wouldn't bother to use a packaged one, they would customize it. Not saying that's the case, I'm just saying that to believe hackers defending other hackers and for that reason, is literally the dumbest thing you could do. So no, we don't need to find the hack he used. Not at all. That's an unreasonable, and unnecessary level of proof that only a hacker, or the person being accused would ever think is reasonable. Due to this post the entirely of your opinions can be routinely ignored as entirely without merit, logic, or reason. If anything, you only solidify the case that he is 100% a hacker. You do yourself a favor and him if you don't post your fallacies any longer. If it is impossible to replicate the tool used to commit the crime, then there was no crime committed. If, to prove that someone committed a murder, you need a bullet that can pass through a brick wall without leaving a trace, then you can't prove that that person committed the murder. This is really, really simple. If the crime is impossible to recreate, it is scientifically impossible that it happened. Miracles and magic are not acceptable evidence in a court of law.
Huh? That doesn't make sense at all. So basically if I go shot someone and pull out the bullet I'll never be caught?
Forget the fact that the guy has a bullet sized hole in his body, possible gun powder residue depending if it was point blank or not. If I leave a hair follicle at the seen "Oh well I was just passing by on my morning jog." Hell if my own blood is found at the scene its cause I cut my self shaving as I was walking by! Maybe magic killed the guy.
Basically what your saying is if they don't find a bullet or a gun with my fingerprints on them I can walk away a free man?
|
On June 06 2012 04:28 Dodgin wrote:Show nested quote +On June 06 2012 04:25 Acritter wrote:On June 06 2012 04:22 fraktoasters wrote:On June 06 2012 04:16 Acritter wrote:On June 06 2012 04:09 JustTray wrote:On June 06 2012 04:03 Acritter wrote:On June 06 2012 03:59 JustTray wrote:On June 06 2012 03:56 Shiori wrote:On June 06 2012 03:55 JustTray wrote:On June 06 2012 03:52 Shiori wrote:
[quote]
People are doing exactly that. Axeltoss has made some very convincing analyses that basically make a lot of what Catz said irrelevant. Gix/Artist/Mihai's comments concern something completely different than maphacking. Lots of people streamcheat who don't maphack. Streamcheating is not sufficient to establish maphacking.
He was a proven hacker in a different game. He did not hack in Sc2 for a long time (at the very least). That needs to count for something.
It doesn't count for anything. If it did, it would only count that its more likely he's a hacker. Once a hacker, always a hacker. You're probably defending him because you are him, are friends with him, or are a hacker yourself. Yeah, clearly I'm Spades. Hope you're being sarcastic. I'm not sure how that refutes my point. Are you one of the teenage children who thinks a legal standard of proof is required for the public to out a video game hacker? Because those people are literally the dumbest ones in this thread. The evidence is there. It's VERY damning. You don't get to dismiss things just because they don't mesh with your preconceived notions. The same goes to you. What about the posts from actual hackers that outline the fact that Spades COULD NOT have been using camera lock? Are you just dismissing those? How about the post from that D3 or whatever website that called the people on TeamLiquid idiots and said that Spades wasn't hacking? You're throwing aside input from experts to follow along with your own "preconceived notions". Before anyone can accuse Spades of maphacking, they need to find a hack that he realistically could have been using. As of right now, none have surfaced. If someone can find one, then I will accept that he was most likely maphacking. If nobody can find one, then it is absolutely impossible that he was maphacking. You mean, the notion that admitted Hackers are asserting that there is only one hack, that doesn't allow you to make actions, therefore Spades could not have cheated? Yes, I'm entirely discounting that, because I'm a rational, logical person, not a moron. There ARE more than 1 version of hacks, and any skilled hacker wouldn't bother to use a packaged one, they would customize it. Not saying that's the case, I'm just saying that to believe hackers defending other hackers and for that reason, is literally the dumbest thing you could do. So no, we don't need to find the hack he used. Not at all. That's an unreasonable, and unnecessary level of proof that only a hacker, or the person being accused would ever think is reasonable. Due to this post the entirely of your opinions can be routinely ignored as entirely without merit, logic, or reason. If anything, you only solidify the case that he is 100% a hacker. You do yourself a favor and him if you don't post your fallacies any longer. If it is impossible to replicate the tool used to commit the crime, then there was no crime committed. If, to prove that someone committed a murder, you need a bullet that can pass through a brick wall without leaving a trace, then you can't prove that that person committed the murder. This is really, really simple. If the crime is impossible to recreate, it is scientifically impossible that it happened. Miracles and magic are not acceptable evidence in a court of law. Programming is not Miracles or Magic. Are you suggesting Spades produced his own maphack by himself? Please indicate what programming experience he has. I seriously can't believe that just because you can't find this hack that he used you claim that it cannot exist. You're the one that needs to find the hack, not me. Burden of proof, right?
|
On June 06 2012 04:31 Acritter wrote:Show nested quote +On June 06 2012 04:27 Plansix wrote:On June 06 2012 04:16 Acritter wrote:On June 06 2012 04:09 JustTray wrote:On June 06 2012 04:03 Acritter wrote:On June 06 2012 03:59 JustTray wrote:On June 06 2012 03:56 Shiori wrote:On June 06 2012 03:55 JustTray wrote:On June 06 2012 03:52 Shiori wrote:On June 06 2012 03:50 Mrvoodoochild1 wrote:
[quote]
Yep, ex-teamates and former managers calling him a stream cheater while living with him, numerous pro players and community figures analyzing his games agreeing that he's hacker and cheater, Spades putting up a half ass effort defending himself trying to play the victim,ohhh and he's ALREADY A PROVEN HACKER, people are just drawing whatever conclusion they want right? People are doing exactly that. Axeltoss has made some very convincing analyses that basically make a lot of what Catz said irrelevant. Gix/Artist/Mihai's comments concern something completely different than maphacking. Lots of people streamcheat who don't maphack. Streamcheating is not sufficient to establish maphacking. He was a proven hacker in a different game. He did not hack in Sc2 for a long time (at the very least). That needs to count for something. It doesn't count for anything. If it did, it would only count that its more likely he's a hacker. Once a hacker, always a hacker. You're probably defending him because you are him, are friends with him, or are a hacker yourself. Yeah, clearly I'm Spades. Hope you're being sarcastic. I'm not sure how that refutes my point. Are you one of the teenage children who thinks a legal standard of proof is required for the public to out a video game hacker? Because those people are literally the dumbest ones in this thread. The evidence is there. It's VERY damning. You don't get to dismiss things just because they don't mesh with your preconceived notions. The same goes to you. What about the posts from actual hackers that outline the fact that Spades COULD NOT have been using camera lock? Are you just dismissing those? How about the post from that D3 or whatever website that called the people on TeamLiquid idiots and said that Spades wasn't hacking? You're throwing aside input from experts to follow along with your own "preconceived notions". Before anyone can accuse Spades of maphacking, they need to find a hack that he realistically could have been using. As of right now, none have surfaced. If someone can find one, then I will accept that he was most likely maphacking. If nobody can find one, then it is absolutely impossible that he was maphacking. You mean, the notion that admitted Hackers are asserting that there is only one hack, that doesn't allow you to make actions, therefore Spades could not have cheated? Yes, I'm entirely discounting that, because I'm a rational, logical person, not a moron. There ARE more than 1 version of hacks, and any skilled hacker wouldn't bother to use a packaged one, they would customize it. Not saying that's the case, I'm just saying that to believe hackers defending other hackers and for that reason, is literally the dumbest thing you could do. So no, we don't need to find the hack he used. Not at all. That's an unreasonable, and unnecessary level of proof that only a hacker, or the person being accused would ever think is reasonable. Due to this post the entirely of your opinions can be routinely ignored as entirely without merit, logic, or reason. If anything, you only solidify the case that he is 100% a hacker. You do yourself a favor and him if you don't post your fallacies any longer. If it is impossible to replicate the tool used to commit the crime, then there was no crime committed. If, to prove that someone committed a murder, you need a bullet that can pass through a brick wall without leaving a trace, then you can't prove that that person committed the murder. This is really, really simple. If the crime is impossible to recreate, it is scientifically impossible that it happened. Miracles and magic are not acceptable evidence in a court of law. That is not correct. Scott Peterson was convicted largely through circumstantial evidence. There was no murder weapon, witness to the crime or hard evidence that he committed the murder. However, there was overwhelming evidence that he had committed some sort of crime and was acting as if he was attempting to hide a body. The case came down to the argument that there was no other reasonable argument for what he was doing except attempting to hide his wife’s body. That... that's not at all the same. There's a difference between "we don't know" and "it can't be done". Like, let's say a murderer throws his knife into the lake. We can't tell what kind of knife he used, but from the stab wounds on the body he's trying to bury we can tell it was a knife. But if the murderer stabs the victim while being present at a ballroom dance halfway across the globe... there's no knife that can do that. Similarly, the hackers themselves have said that what Spades has shown is inconsistent with the hacks that are out there. This means he's using an impossible weapon, unless evidence can be offered to support the ridiculous notion that he created his own hack or modified the existing one.
And your argument of "it can't be done" is blatantly false. Thank's for proving that your point is wrong.
|
On June 06 2012 04:27 Shiori wrote:Show nested quote +On June 06 2012 04:25 JustTray wrote:On June 06 2012 04:21 Shiori wrote:On June 06 2012 04:19 OneOther wrote:On June 06 2012 04:02 Shiori wrote:On June 06 2012 03:59 JustTray wrote:On June 06 2012 03:56 Shiori wrote:On June 06 2012 03:55 JustTray wrote:On June 06 2012 03:52 Shiori wrote:On June 06 2012 03:50 Mrvoodoochild1 wrote:
[quote]
Yep, ex-teamates and former managers calling him a stream cheater while living with him, numerous pro players and community figures analyzing his games agreeing that he's hacker and cheater, Spades putting up a half ass effort defending himself trying to play the victim,ohhh and he's ALREADY A PROVEN HACKER, people are just drawing whatever conclusion they want right? People are doing exactly that. Axeltoss has made some very convincing analyses that basically make a lot of what Catz said irrelevant. Gix/Artist/Mihai's comments concern something completely different than maphacking. Lots of people streamcheat who don't maphack. Streamcheating is not sufficient to establish maphacking. He was a proven hacker in a different game. He did not hack in Sc2 for a long time (at the very least). That needs to count for something. It doesn't count for anything. If it did, it would only count that its more likely he's a hacker. Once a hacker, always a hacker. You're probably defending him because you are him, are friends with him, or are a hacker yourself. Yeah, clearly I'm Spades. Hope you're being sarcastic. I'm not sure how that refutes my point. Are you one of the teenage children who thinks a legal standard of proof is required for the public to out a video game hacker? Because those people are literally the dumbest ones in this thread. The evidence is there. It's VERY damning. You don't get to dismiss things just because they don't mesh with your preconceived notions. I'm one of the people who thinks you're a moron for implying that I'm affiliated with Spades (or myself a hacker) simply because I don't think there's sufficient evidence, and because you said that "once a hacker, always a hacker." What's your rationale behind spending hours and hours defending him against people's own opinions and judgements? Look, there's not going to be some damning irrefutable evidence. This is not 2006, where people would leave blatant trails of hacking and allow people to find out next week. People downloaded his replays and compared them to suspicious games, and formed their opinion based on those. Taken individually, each might have a reasonable explanation but the aggregate is convincing enough for different people. Progamers have voiced their opinions. Whatever it might be. You are not doing him any good by continuing to argue that there is no hard evidence, because people have different criteria of evaluating evidence, and some folks find the current evidence sufficient. I guess instead of self-victimizig, Spades should rather spend his time explaining the Fog of War discrepancies in his ladder games and the suspicious games. Because that's enough evidence for some people. Your efforts seem futile and pointless to me. No, I don't think you are Spades. I know you are going to reply something along the lines of trying to defend someone until proven guilty, but just realize that he's guilty enough for some, if not most, people given the evidence, his past and etc. If anything, you are making the situation worse by pissing people off who have firmly formed their opinions and who will not be pursuaded by your weak arguments. I'm not sure what you're trying to argue here. I think the jury's out on whether Spades hacked. I don't know if he did, and I don't know if he didn't. I just think there are far too many holes that keep cropping up in the case against them for me to conclude that he's hacking. Apparently this really offends some people like JustTray, to the point where they'd actually attack me personally. For the record, you started the personal attacks. I simply showed how you argued without logic and it made you mad. Others are now telling you the same, and you still refuse to admit it. Everyone is telling you you are doing nothing but harm to the person you are attempting to defend, and you still continue. You don't refute any of the points made, and you started the cherry picking of my post as one of three options by focusing on me saying you could be spades. Your continued defense does nothing but weaken your already illogical position. You should stop. You don't have to, but if you were at all intelligent, you would have. Here is your first response to me: It doesn't count for anything. If it did, it would only count that its more likely he's a hacker. Once a hacker, always a hacker. You're probably defending him because you are him, are friends with him, or are a hacker yourself. No. Stop lying. In fact, I didn't even reply to you until you, for no reason, asserted that I either was Spades, was a friend of his, or was a hacker myself. All three of these things are false, and all three of them are attacks on my credibility/character. I'm not here to protect Spades's public persona. I want to know if he's hacking.
Lying? You just admitted you started the ad hominem. If you think he could be innocent, why would those be attacks on your character? Admit it, you started it and flew off the handle. I just put you in your place.
"I'm not defending spades I'm just yelling down anyone who believes he's a hacker."
Do you really not see how moronic you sound? You must not.
|
On June 06 2012 04:30 artanis2 wrote:Show nested quote +On June 06 2012 04:26 Acritter wrote:On June 06 2012 04:24 artanis2 wrote:On June 06 2012 04:16 Acritter wrote:On June 06 2012 04:09 JustTray wrote:On June 06 2012 04:03 Acritter wrote:On June 06 2012 03:59 JustTray wrote:On June 06 2012 03:56 Shiori wrote:On June 06 2012 03:55 JustTray wrote:On June 06 2012 03:52 Shiori wrote:
[quote]
People are doing exactly that. Axeltoss has made some very convincing analyses that basically make a lot of what Catz said irrelevant. Gix/Artist/Mihai's comments concern something completely different than maphacking. Lots of people streamcheat who don't maphack. Streamcheating is not sufficient to establish maphacking.
He was a proven hacker in a different game. He did not hack in Sc2 for a long time (at the very least). That needs to count for something.
It doesn't count for anything. If it did, it would only count that its more likely he's a hacker. Once a hacker, always a hacker. You're probably defending him because you are him, are friends with him, or are a hacker yourself. Yeah, clearly I'm Spades. Hope you're being sarcastic. I'm not sure how that refutes my point. Are you one of the teenage children who thinks a legal standard of proof is required for the public to out a video game hacker? Because those people are literally the dumbest ones in this thread. The evidence is there. It's VERY damning. You don't get to dismiss things just because they don't mesh with your preconceived notions. The same goes to you. What about the posts from actual hackers that outline the fact that Spades COULD NOT have been using camera lock? Are you just dismissing those? How about the post from that D3 or whatever website that called the people on TeamLiquid idiots and said that Spades wasn't hacking? You're throwing aside input from experts to follow along with your own "preconceived notions". Before anyone can accuse Spades of maphacking, they need to find a hack that he realistically could have been using. As of right now, none have surfaced. If someone can find one, then I will accept that he was most likely maphacking. If nobody can find one, then it is absolutely impossible that he was maphacking. You mean, the notion that admitted Hackers are asserting that there is only one hack, that doesn't allow you to make actions, therefore Spades could not have cheated? Yes, I'm entirely discounting that, because I'm a rational, logical person, not a moron. There ARE more than 1 version of hacks, and any skilled hacker wouldn't bother to use a packaged one, they would customize it. Not saying that's the case, I'm just saying that to believe hackers defending other hackers and for that reason, is literally the dumbest thing you could do. So no, we don't need to find the hack he used. Not at all. That's an unreasonable, and unnecessary level of proof that only a hacker, or the person being accused would ever think is reasonable. Due to this post the entirely of your opinions can be routinely ignored as entirely without merit, logic, or reason. If anything, you only solidify the case that he is 100% a hacker. You do yourself a favor and him if you don't post your fallacies any longer. If it is impossible to replicate the tool used to commit the crime, then there was no crime committed. If, to prove that someone committed a murder, you need a bullet that can pass through a brick wall without leaving a trace, then you can't prove that that person committed the murder. This is really, really simple. If the crime is impossible to recreate, it is scientifically impossible that it happened. Miracles and magic are not acceptable evidence in a court of law. This is trivial to replicate though. The things that you are saying do not exist could have easily been added to the publicly available hack. The fact that he was selecting his hotkeyed units while the camera lock was on does not mean that he was not using a camera lock. The no-selection-while-locked is protection feature so hackers dont accidentally give themselves away, not a requirement of the lock. Disabling that protection means he can lock camera and spam hotkeys while he's looking around the map. Does he have any experience in programming that could account for him modifying the hack like that? The point is that the author of the hack could enable this with a checkbox and one line of code. The change requires disabling code that they wrote in the first place. It is trivial therefore irrelevant.
Have you actually looked at the hack in question to provide evidence to support this? No? Then stop talking. You can't just assert things like this. You have to actually go out there and find evidence.
|
This is a very interesting thread.
I'd give my opinion, but who really gives a shit what I think.
|
On June 06 2012 04:29 Starshaped wrote:OK; everyone open up the game on Cloud Kingdom and go to ~9:50. Better proof cannot be asked for. Blacklist this hacker.
What? He unsieged his tanks because he knew from watching his opponent's army walking up the ramp before hand?
|
On June 06 2012 04:21 ZenithM wrote:Show nested quote +On June 06 2012 04:12 Crow! wrote:
After watching the replays I failed to se anything at all which was the slightest bit suspicious.
Game 1: the scouting SCV saw enough that he could reasonably have made the call that there was no expansion. No expansion = probably tech of some kind, so getting turrets up is the safe play. Vikings moved to the smoke vents to cover for the possibility of a drop; that a Banshee blundered into one of the most obvious to defend positions was just bad play by Lucifron's part.
Game 2: he scouted the opponent's gas, which furthermore means his opponent knows that he knows he has gas and his opponent went cloak the previous game. Lucifron going cloak would have been really gutsy, and Spades made the call that Lucifron wouldn't do that again. He was correct. He then executes a perfectly normal tank push, sieging the tanks at the most logical positions to put tanks anyway.
Game 3: Spades was concerned with keeping his CC-constructing SCV safe, and started contemplating pulling SCVs in response to the scouting worker harass. The SCVs finally got actually pulled once a second offensive dot appeared on the mini map, and not earlier than that. For the scan (which was placed in the most obvious place to scan ever) the mini map tells Spades everything that his camera doesn't explicitly show: there is a third CC (you can tell by the building size), and therefore any production structures are going to be barracks.
Game 4: Spades' SCV got walled off, as is clearly visible on the mini map. That SCV is hotkeyed, and it is returned home because it isn't going to accomplish anything more than it already has. Spades saves a scan for when a cloaked banshee would hit, but Lucifron reveals his whole elevator play to the watchtower. While his army is in limbo between trying to defend the front and defending against the drop threat, he spends his excess APM fiddling it around. Eventually the hellions show up on the mini map and he moves to defend.
And that was all the nonsense I'm going to take the time for. I'm not a BW fan and I don't know who this Spades fellow is, but nothing in these replays is credible evidence of cheating, and I feel cheated out of my time for having bothered to consider these accusations. Game 3: how do you explain the decision to scan at this location and at this time, while your first scouting SCV is half way across the map, and you rallied in close air position first, then to cross position (as you would for normal scouting)?
Not one but two retreating Marines broadcasted Lucifron's spawning location loud and clear. The SCV rally was just a mistake based on habit - that is, as you pointed out, the direction you usually send your first SCV.
|
On June 06 2012 04:32 Acritter wrote:Show nested quote +On June 06 2012 04:28 Dodgin wrote:On June 06 2012 04:25 Acritter wrote:On June 06 2012 04:22 fraktoasters wrote:On June 06 2012 04:16 Acritter wrote:On June 06 2012 04:09 JustTray wrote:On June 06 2012 04:03 Acritter wrote:On June 06 2012 03:59 JustTray wrote:On June 06 2012 03:56 Shiori wrote:On June 06 2012 03:55 JustTray wrote:
[quote]
It doesn't count for anything. If it did, it would only count that its more likely he's a hacker. Once a hacker, always a hacker. You're probably defending him because you are him, are friends with him, or are a hacker yourself. Yeah, clearly I'm Spades. Hope you're being sarcastic. I'm not sure how that refutes my point. Are you one of the teenage children who thinks a legal standard of proof is required for the public to out a video game hacker? Because those people are literally the dumbest ones in this thread. The evidence is there. It's VERY damning. You don't get to dismiss things just because they don't mesh with your preconceived notions. The same goes to you. What about the posts from actual hackers that outline the fact that Spades COULD NOT have been using camera lock? Are you just dismissing those? How about the post from that D3 or whatever website that called the people on TeamLiquid idiots and said that Spades wasn't hacking? You're throwing aside input from experts to follow along with your own "preconceived notions". Before anyone can accuse Spades of maphacking, they need to find a hack that he realistically could have been using. As of right now, none have surfaced. If someone can find one, then I will accept that he was most likely maphacking. If nobody can find one, then it is absolutely impossible that he was maphacking. You mean, the notion that admitted Hackers are asserting that there is only one hack, that doesn't allow you to make actions, therefore Spades could not have cheated? Yes, I'm entirely discounting that, because I'm a rational, logical person, not a moron. There ARE more than 1 version of hacks, and any skilled hacker wouldn't bother to use a packaged one, they would customize it. Not saying that's the case, I'm just saying that to believe hackers defending other hackers and for that reason, is literally the dumbest thing you could do. So no, we don't need to find the hack he used. Not at all. That's an unreasonable, and unnecessary level of proof that only a hacker, or the person being accused would ever think is reasonable. Due to this post the entirely of your opinions can be routinely ignored as entirely without merit, logic, or reason. If anything, you only solidify the case that he is 100% a hacker. You do yourself a favor and him if you don't post your fallacies any longer. If it is impossible to replicate the tool used to commit the crime, then there was no crime committed. If, to prove that someone committed a murder, you need a bullet that can pass through a brick wall without leaving a trace, then you can't prove that that person committed the murder. This is really, really simple. If the crime is impossible to recreate, it is scientifically impossible that it happened. Miracles and magic are not acceptable evidence in a court of law. Programming is not Miracles or Magic. Are you suggesting Spades produced his own maphack by himself? Please indicate what programming experience he has. I seriously can't believe that just because you can't find this hack that he used you claim that it cannot exist. You're the one that needs to find the hack, not me. Burden of proof, right?
I don't need to do anything because I'm not invested in this, It's just hilarious that you say this hack cannot exist because you can't find it anywhere. I'm sure you tried real hard.
|
On June 06 2012 04:32 artanis2 wrote:Show nested quote +On June 06 2012 04:31 Acritter wrote:On June 06 2012 04:27 Plansix wrote:On June 06 2012 04:16 Acritter wrote:On June 06 2012 04:09 JustTray wrote:On June 06 2012 04:03 Acritter wrote:On June 06 2012 03:59 JustTray wrote:On June 06 2012 03:56 Shiori wrote:On June 06 2012 03:55 JustTray wrote:On June 06 2012 03:52 Shiori wrote:
[quote]
People are doing exactly that. Axeltoss has made some very convincing analyses that basically make a lot of what Catz said irrelevant. Gix/Artist/Mihai's comments concern something completely different than maphacking. Lots of people streamcheat who don't maphack. Streamcheating is not sufficient to establish maphacking.
He was a proven hacker in a different game. He did not hack in Sc2 for a long time (at the very least). That needs to count for something.
It doesn't count for anything. If it did, it would only count that its more likely he's a hacker. Once a hacker, always a hacker. You're probably defending him because you are him, are friends with him, or are a hacker yourself. Yeah, clearly I'm Spades. Hope you're being sarcastic. I'm not sure how that refutes my point. Are you one of the teenage children who thinks a legal standard of proof is required for the public to out a video game hacker? Because those people are literally the dumbest ones in this thread. The evidence is there. It's VERY damning. You don't get to dismiss things just because they don't mesh with your preconceived notions. The same goes to you. What about the posts from actual hackers that outline the fact that Spades COULD NOT have been using camera lock? Are you just dismissing those? How about the post from that D3 or whatever website that called the people on TeamLiquid idiots and said that Spades wasn't hacking? You're throwing aside input from experts to follow along with your own "preconceived notions". Before anyone can accuse Spades of maphacking, they need to find a hack that he realistically could have been using. As of right now, none have surfaced. If someone can find one, then I will accept that he was most likely maphacking. If nobody can find one, then it is absolutely impossible that he was maphacking. You mean, the notion that admitted Hackers are asserting that there is only one hack, that doesn't allow you to make actions, therefore Spades could not have cheated? Yes, I'm entirely discounting that, because I'm a rational, logical person, not a moron. There ARE more than 1 version of hacks, and any skilled hacker wouldn't bother to use a packaged one, they would customize it. Not saying that's the case, I'm just saying that to believe hackers defending other hackers and for that reason, is literally the dumbest thing you could do. So no, we don't need to find the hack he used. Not at all. That's an unreasonable, and unnecessary level of proof that only a hacker, or the person being accused would ever think is reasonable. Due to this post the entirely of your opinions can be routinely ignored as entirely without merit, logic, or reason. If anything, you only solidify the case that he is 100% a hacker. You do yourself a favor and him if you don't post your fallacies any longer. If it is impossible to replicate the tool used to commit the crime, then there was no crime committed. If, to prove that someone committed a murder, you need a bullet that can pass through a brick wall without leaving a trace, then you can't prove that that person committed the murder. This is really, really simple. If the crime is impossible to recreate, it is scientifically impossible that it happened. Miracles and magic are not acceptable evidence in a court of law. That is not correct. Scott Peterson was convicted largely through circumstantial evidence. There was no murder weapon, witness to the crime or hard evidence that he committed the murder. However, there was overwhelming evidence that he had committed some sort of crime and was acting as if he was attempting to hide a body. The case came down to the argument that there was no other reasonable argument for what he was doing except attempting to hide his wife’s body. That... that's not at all the same. There's a difference between "we don't know" and "it can't be done". Like, let's say a murderer throws his knife into the lake. We can't tell what kind of knife he used, but from the stab wounds on the body he's trying to bury we can tell it was a knife. But if the murderer stabs the victim while being present at a ballroom dance halfway across the globe... there's no knife that can do that. Similarly, the hackers themselves have said that what Spades has shown is inconsistent with the hacks that are out there. This means he's using an impossible weapon, unless evidence can be offered to support the ridiculous notion that he created his own hack or modified the existing one. And your argument of "it can't be done" is blatantly false. Thank's for proving that your point is wrong.
Burden of proof. Nobody has provided any hack, existing or modified, that can replicate Spades' replays. Until you do, he's innocent. That's the way this stuff is supposed to work.
|
The main reason I am interested in this thread is pretty simple. As a rank 1 masters player, people accuse me of hacking all the time. It gets me suspicious that in order for them to lose, the other person must be hacking, so I review the replay only to find that they are blatantly hacking (some of the time).
People who I beat in this fashion usually have one thing in common - they all get their score doubled by me. I mean i'm beating them so badly that supply counts during midgame are similar to these numbers:
30 to 80
50 to 120
in one case 17 to 150
It seems as though their map hacking gives them the confidence to recover from any deficit, while at the same time their complete lack of skill disallows them to see that they have no chance whatsoever
|
On June 06 2012 04:30 phantaxx wrote:
The fact that Spades has been so hostile towards all the accusations makes me positive that he is hacking. If he were innocent, all he would have to do is answer any questions honestly and provide as many replays as necessary, and people will see he is not hacking.
If we look at the outcomes of playing victim and calling the accusations ridiculous and sad in all cases:
- If he is not hacking:
a) the community takes his side in thinking that the accusations are absurd and drops the investigating, but it is never fully proven that he did not hack.
b) the community continues investigating despite his hostile denials, and finds him to be innocent, but the most now think that he handled the situation poorly with his responses.
- If he is hacking:
a) same outcome as above a) ^
b) the community continues investigating and determines that he is in fact hacking.
Spades only has something to gain from playing victim in the case that he is guilty.
Oh shutup. The way he answers questions on a forum is hardly proof of ANYTHING. You are not a PhD in Psychology and don't have 30 years of experience in the field. Even then, what you say would STILL be taken with a grain of salt.
But you want us to believe you because you would act differently in this type of situation. Give me a fucking break.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
