|
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 07:08 chebhe wrote:Show nested quote +On June 06 2012 07:06 itsjuspeter wrote:On June 06 2012 07:04 chebhe wrote:
There isnt one piece of 'evidence' that hasnt been adequately explained. Infact the biggest piece of proof for MHs, which so many were crying out and citing repeatedly; a camera jumping around in an odd fashion, has already been shown to be a quirk of how replays store information.
THe biggest reason this isn't an open and shut case is the public is involved, and 95 percent of people are not taking the time to read and carefully, rationally consider the evidence. No, the biggest piece of evidence is his drastic change in PLAY from LADDER to this BO7. Your standards for evidence are too high and your arrogant posting makes me feel disgusted. Get informed before belittling people who don't agree with you. DUDE. That is NORMAL. You play a series DIFFERENTLY than you play ladder. There is a strategic logic to playing a series, which is not present in random ladder games. You study the opponent. You plan out the series. .... Why are you allowed to have an opinion? See, do you see how your opinion made no sense and was terrible right there? We have 100s of people like you in this thread, with terrible opinions based on nonsense, asserting them as rational fact. And then using them as defamation.
You don't actually change your mechanics going from ladder to a showmatch. These things are so ingrained in muscle memory you do them unconsciously (when you're playing at the professional level). It's not something you change overnight and it's certainly not something you change for 7 games only. Regarding people talking about playing Bo7s and series different from ladder has to do with the strategies involved (usually incredibly greedy/less safe) than the actual mechanical execution of them.
|
On June 06 2012 07:16 hnQ wrote:
Guys,
there are PROS here supporting that he was hacking
there are OTHER PROS supporting he most likely wasn't
even in high level players there is doubt and inconclusive opinions so why are you all saying HE WAS HACKING like it was a fact? it's not, he's innocent until proven guilty
ALSO even on CATZ STREAM he looked into FOW (which they said he turned the hacks off while at it lol?) so why do you keep saying he NEVER did it?
such a weird accusation
There's one or two pros saying he probably wasn't hacking, and several pros along with other GM players saying it looks like he was. Given his history and the evidence, it's easy to make an assumption off that since you're never going to have 100% proof with hacking.
|
On June 06 2012 07:17 chebhe wrote:Show nested quote +On June 06 2012 07:16 hnQ wrote:
Guys,
there are PROS here supporting that he was hacking
there are OTHER PROS supporting he most likely wasn't
even in high level players there is doubt and inconclusive opinions so why are you all saying HE WAS HACKING like it was a fact? it's not, he's innocent until proven guilty Yes. Innocent until proven guilty. Not a hard concept.
As I said last night in page 80 something, innocent until proven guilty is a much harder concept when someone has been proven guilty of the same act multiple times in the past.
Try getting a rapist off who has been convicted of rape and sentenced multiple times, and has multiple character witnesses that say he is someone they think would still rape...... by your logic. Doesn't work.
|
On June 06 2012 07:18 Fyrewolf wrote:
Something many of the amateurs in this thread don't seem to realize also is that for every 1 fishy or suspicious thing Catz and Co went through in there analysis, there were 2-3 fishy or suspicious things they didn't cover. Claiming that "teh magic scan" has been refuted and therefore all their other things they noticed and showed or noticed and didn't show(because the show would have been 12 hours long if they did) must be wrong as well is silly. Concrete proof that 100% says something almost never happens in the real world. The building up of overwhelming amounts of evidence to the point where, although it's not 100%, is "beyond a reasonable doubt" is actually the norm, not the smoking gun of indisputable 100% proof.
Then name some of those fishy things they did not cover, instead of vaguely alluding to them.
There are nonfishy things, fuck ups that cost him games.
How about we start analyzing his replays for all the fuck ups he makes?
|
On June 06 2012 07:16 nath wrote:Show nested quote +On June 06 2012 07:08 Trumpet wrote:Really should have done this the BW way. in BW, the maphack disabled you from clicking opponent's units/buildings so that your click wouldnt get registered and show up as an obvious maphack on replay analyzer. So the conclusive proof then became getting large amounts of replays of someone and having them never click an enemy unit in a large amount of games. The same could be used here, if he never looked at fog of war in his games, not even once for a scan or scout or something, then it'd be pretty obvious. Has anyone done this? I'm not about to read through 200+ pages to check  well he didnt look in fog of war once in the bo7. that was one of the points that was not in his favor.
http://www.twitch.tv/rootcatz/b/320407912
go to 1:13:50
that's just one example
|
On June 06 2012 07:15 chebhe wrote:Show nested quote +On June 06 2012 07:09 StarStrider wrote:On June 06 2012 06:59 chebhe wrote:Even the preponderance of evidence sways in his favor... On June 06 2012 06:57 jacksonlee wrote:
Am I the only person who didn't think any of Catz' analysis was definite evidence? One moment he's like, "oh he can't look in fog of war", next he's like "here he is looking at fog of war, he must've turned it off." what... No, you aren't. The 50% of rational people watching noticed the same. The preponderance of evidence most definitely does not sway in his favor. Did you look at the evidence? All of it? I did. Way before I watched the VoD of Catz and friends. Then I looked at more evidence from Illusion. Then I looked at more counter evidence from Spades himself. If you looked at all these things, I don't understand how the perponderance of evidence favors his position. Everything presented validates the charges that he is indeed cheating. And I would venture to guess the heavy majority of people who have actually examined this evidence would find him guilty. Ignoring Catz's sometimes negligent statements in his commentary and just focusing on the things that truly are questionable. There is no way opinion is even close to being evenly split. Yes I've looked at the evidence, and I conclude he is innocent. Reading your post, I see nothing concrete in it for me to respond to. Cite some actual evidence which you consider proof, or stop talking.
Considering how things have already gone, no one needs to try and convince you specifically that he was hacking. If you're going to post like that go for it, no one is really listening or cares.
|
On June 06 2012 07:14 Nightshade_ wrote:Show nested quote +On June 06 2012 07:13 StarStrider wrote:On June 06 2012 07:08 Trumpet wrote:Really should have done this the BW way. in BW, the maphack disabled you from clicking opponent's units/buildings so that your click wouldnt get registered and show up as an obvious maphack on replay analyzer. So the conclusive proof then became getting large amounts of replays of someone and having them never click an enemy unit in a large amount of games. The same could be used here, if he never looked at fog of war in his games, not even once for a scan or scout or something, then it'd be pretty obvious. Has anyone done this? I'm not about to read through 200+ pages to check Yes. He looked at fog of war in his 'normal' ladder pack games. Every game. Whereas he never once looked at fog of war in his 'questionable' tourney games. Not even to scan. He would scan first then look at what he scanned. People have tried to write this off as a misreading of the way the replay viewer moves the screen around, but if you compare his showmatch games to his ladder games again, it is a very different way. but he used le mniimap xxDD
Oh you. Stop it you.
|
On June 06 2012 07:16 hnQ wrote:
Guys,
there are PROS here supporting that he was hacking
there are OTHER PROS supporting he most likely wasn't
even in high level players there is doubt and inconclusive opinions so why are you all saying HE WAS HACKING like it was a fact? it's not, he's innocent until proven guilty
ALSO even on CATZ STREAM he looked into FOW (which they said he turned the hacks off while at it lol?) so why do you keep saying he NEVER did it?
such a weird accusation
There is only one pro that is defending him out of seven or eight. Who is going to prove him guilty, or innocent for that matter, if not us? Should we wait for Blizzard to step in? That could take a while and they might not find anything because some hacks are undetectable at the moment.
|
Catz thinks he knows everything. More than he actually does. It's not a surprise he thinks he's pinned the tail on the donkey this time, either.
|
On June 06 2012 07:08 chebhe wrote:Show nested quote +On June 06 2012 07:06 itsjuspeter wrote:On June 06 2012 07:04 chebhe wrote:
There isnt one piece of 'evidence' that hasnt been adequately explained. Infact the biggest piece of proof for MHs, which so many were crying out and citing repeatedly; a camera jumping around in an odd fashion, has already been shown to be a quirk of how replays store information.
THe biggest reason this isn't an open and shut case is the public is involved, and 95 percent of people are not taking the time to read and carefully, rationally consider the evidence. No, the biggest piece of evidence is his drastic change in PLAY from LADDER to this BO7. Your standards for evidence are too high and your arrogant posting makes me feel disgusted. Get informed before belittling people who don't agree with you. DUDE. That is NORMAL. You play a series DIFFERENTLY than you play ladder. There is a strategic logic to playing a series, which is not present in random ladder games. You study the opponent. You plan out the series.
No you dont. Not core mechanics they doesnt change thats why pro players play 1k games practising. To make sure core mechanics are as fluid as possible. You simply do not change core mechanics it become automatic like breathing..
Wake up plz and face the truth
|
On June 06 2012 07:17 chebhe wrote:Show nested quote +On June 06 2012 07:16 hnQ wrote:
Guys,
there are PROS here supporting that he was hacking
there are OTHER PROS supporting he most likely wasn't
even in high level players there is doubt and inconclusive opinions so why are you all saying HE WAS HACKING like it was a fact? it's not, he's innocent until proven guilty Yes. Innocent until proven guilty. Not a hard concept.
I'd prefer this to be the last response to someone with a low post count/recent join date. Again, your standards for evidence is alarmingly high. In the real world there will most likely never be 100% proof unless the suspect openly admits he did what he was accused of. It is indeed true we cannot say for 100% that he maphacked but the OVERWHELMING amount of evidence tips n the favor of him doing it. His "playing the victim" responses instead of going "hey look I didn't hack and here is why" really doesn't help his case. We will never hit 100% proof but we can get close to unreasonable doubt that he did which is what many believe is where the evidence is at and thus we believe Spades does hack. Your continued posting and low understanding of mechanics as well as incredibly ridiculous standards for evidence needs to end. Hiding behind the wall of 100% proof isn't good enough anymore.
|
On June 06 2012 07:23 itsjuspeter wrote:Show nested quote +On June 06 2012 07:17 chebhe wrote:On June 06 2012 07:16 hnQ wrote:
Guys,
there are PROS here supporting that he was hacking
there are OTHER PROS supporting he most likely wasn't
even in high level players there is doubt and inconclusive opinions so why are you all saying HE WAS HACKING like it was a fact? it's not, he's innocent until proven guilty Yes. Innocent until proven guilty. Not a hard concept. I'd prefer this to be the last response to someone with a low post count/recent join date. Again, your standards for evidence is alarmingly high. In the real world there will most likely never be 100% proof unless the suspect openly admits he did what he was accused of. It is indeed true we cannot say for 100% that he maphacked but the OVERWHELMING amount of evidence tips n the favor of him doing it. His "playing the victim" responses instead of going "hey look I didn't hack and here is why" really doesn't help his case. We will never hit 100% proof but we can get close to unreasonable doubt that he did which is what many believe is where the evidence is at and thus we believe Spades does hack. Your continued posting and low understanding of mechanics as well as incredibly ridiculous standards for evidence needs to end. Hiding behind the wall of 100% proof isn't good enough anymore.
And I don't really care what you prefer. Go rally your mod friends and get me banned if you want me to go away. Else I'm staying put.
|
On June 06 2012 07:15 chebhe wrote:Show nested quote +On June 06 2012 07:09 StarStrider wrote:On June 06 2012 06:59 chebhe wrote:Even the preponderance of evidence sways in his favor... On June 06 2012 06:57 jacksonlee wrote:
Am I the only person who didn't think any of Catz' analysis was definite evidence? One moment he's like, "oh he can't look in fog of war", next he's like "here he is looking at fog of war, he must've turned it off." what... No, you aren't. The 50% of rational people watching noticed the same. The preponderance of evidence most definitely does not sway in his favor. Did you look at the evidence? All of it? I did. Way before I watched the VoD of Catz and friends. Then I looked at more evidence from Illusion. Then I looked at more counter evidence from Spades himself. If you looked at all these things, I don't understand how the perponderance of evidence favors his position. Everything presented validates the charges that he is indeed cheating. And I would venture to guess the heavy majority of people who have actually examined this evidence would find him guilty. Ignoring Catz's sometimes negligent statements in his commentary and just focusing on the things that truly are questionable. There is no way opinion is even close to being evenly split. Yes I've looked at the evidence, and I conclude he is innocent. Reading your post, I see nothing concrete in it for me to respond to. Cite some actual evidence which you consider proof, or stop talking.
The evidence has already been cited numerous times. I have nothing to add to it.
If you want me to repeat the evidence for you because you are too lazy to go look at it yourself, then no. No I'm not going to do that.
And your assertion that opinion is evenly split on this issue could easily be solved by a poll. Go for that. Last one I saw leaned 70-80% that he is guilty.
|
On June 06 2012 07:16 hnQ wrote:
Guys,
there are PROS here supporting that he was hacking
there are OTHER PROS supporting he most likely wasn't
even in high level players there is doubt and inconclusive opinions so why are you all saying HE WAS HACKING like it was a fact? it's not, he's innocent until proven guilty
ALSO even on CATZ STREAM he looked into FOW (which they said he turned the hacks off while at it lol?) so why do you keep saying he NEVER did it?
such a weird accusation
which proplayer, that has already reviewed the material is STILL saying he's not hacking? i have only seen posts, that say he's hacking for along time.
|
On June 06 2012 07:16 StarStrider wrote:Show nested quote +On June 06 2012 07:11 s4life wrote:On June 06 2012 06:48 StarStrider wrote:On June 06 2012 06:37 Ace.Xile wrote:
I just want to say one thing, it's days like this that I absolutely hate being a part of this community. One person comes out and suggests a variety of circumstantial evidence at best and the next thing you know some guy, guilty or not, has to give up something he loves doing. The absolute worst part is that it doesn't even matter if he was innocent or if he could prove that he wasn't hacking because people just jumped on some bandwagon and crucified him. Even if he was somehow able to prove that he's never hacked this whole thing would have followed him for the rest of his career. Great job.
I completely disagree with your last statement. If he was somehow able to prove he's never hacked, the whole thing would die instantly because he has proved that he's never hacked. This is pretty simple. BUT he has hacked in the past, and that has been proven. So barring your impossible scenario of him being able to prove that he didn't hack this time, I don't blame anyone at all for jumping to conclusions about him this time based on the fact that he hacked in past, and has responded with the same victim mentality this time that he did last time, instead of proactively trying to clear his name. All that, and there is a huge amount of evidence in multiple replays that makes the objective investigator lean toward saying he is cheating in some form. How do you suppose he'd do that without being his opinion against yours? There is no reliable way to prove/disprove hacking so your post is rubbish. Yes, that idea IS rubbish, but it's not my idea, its the guy I was responding to. Click the quoted material view next time idiot. He was saying if it was somehow able to be proved then his career would still be ruined. And I said if it was possible... then no, no his career would not be because he would be vindicated in innocence. User was warned for this post
You insult me for my oversight and then went on and stated the same thing in the second paragraph. How do you suppose he proactively tries to clear his name without offering concrete proof he didn't maphack?, because as we've agreed he is unable to do so..
|
On June 06 2012 07:22 Urasim wrote:Show nested quote +On June 06 2012 07:16 hnQ wrote:
Guys,
there are PROS here supporting that he was hacking
there are OTHER PROS supporting he most likely wasn't
even in high level players there is doubt and inconclusive opinions so why are you all saying HE WAS HACKING like it was a fact? it's not, he's innocent until proven guilty
ALSO even on CATZ STREAM he looked into FOW (which they said he turned the hacks off while at it lol?) so why do you keep saying he NEVER did it?
such a weird accusation There is only one pro that is defending him out of seven or eight. Who is going to prove him guilty, or innocent for that matter, if not us? Should we wait for Blizzard to step in? That could take a while and they might not find anything because some hacks are undetectable at the moment.
One? i've seen at least 3
Nerchio and Attero are the ones who come to mind instantly
|
On June 06 2012 07:22 chebhe wrote:
Catz thinks he knows everything. More than he actually does. It's not a surprise he thinks he's pinned the tail on the donkey this time, either.
So I suppose your logic also extends to Illusion, Painuser, Idra, Drewbie, TT1, and others who have said his behavior is extremely suspicious, if not downright conclusive of maphacking.
|
On June 06 2012 07:23 chebhe wrote:Show nested quote +On June 06 2012 07:23 itsjuspeter wrote:On June 06 2012 07:17 chebhe wrote:On June 06 2012 07:16 hnQ wrote:
Guys,
there are PROS here supporting that he was hacking
there are OTHER PROS supporting he most likely wasn't
even in high level players there is doubt and inconclusive opinions so why are you all saying HE WAS HACKING like it was a fact? it's not, he's innocent until proven guilty Yes. Innocent until proven guilty. Not a hard concept. I'd prefer this to be the last response to someone with a low post count/recent join date. Again, your standards for evidence is alarmingly high. In the real world there will most likely never be 100% proof unless the suspect openly admits he did what he was accused of. It is indeed true we cannot say for 100% that he maphacked but the OVERWHELMING amount of evidence tips n the favor of him doing it. His "playing the victim" responses instead of going "hey look I didn't hack and here is why" really doesn't help his case. We will never hit 100% proof but we can get close to unreasonable doubt that he did which is what many believe is where the evidence is at and thus we believe Spades does hack. Your continued posting and low understanding of mechanics as well as incredibly ridiculous standards for evidence needs to end. Hiding behind the wall of 100% proof isn't good enough anymore. And I don't really care what you prefer.
You obviously didn't even bother reading my well explained thoughts as you replied in almost 10 seconds. I'm done with your posts and I hope the others in this thread stops trying to inform you, as I can see numerous replies already to your posts.
|
On June 06 2012 07:24 Greenei wrote:Show nested quote +On June 06 2012 07:16 hnQ wrote:
Guys,
there are PROS here supporting that he was hacking
there are OTHER PROS supporting he most likely wasn't
even in high level players there is doubt and inconclusive opinions so why are you all saying HE WAS HACKING like it was a fact? it's not, he's innocent until proven guilty
ALSO even on CATZ STREAM he looked into FOW (which they said he turned the hacks off while at it lol?) so why do you keep saying he NEVER did it?
such a weird accusation which proplayer, that has already reviewed the material is STILL saying he's not hacking? i have only seen posts, that say he's hacking for along time.
Nerchio and Attero are the ones who I can remember right now
|
On June 06 2012 07:24 StarStrider wrote:Show nested quote +On June 06 2012 07:15 chebhe wrote:On June 06 2012 07:09 StarStrider wrote:On June 06 2012 06:59 chebhe wrote:Even the preponderance of evidence sways in his favor... On June 06 2012 06:57 jacksonlee wrote:
Am I the only person who didn't think any of Catz' analysis was definite evidence? One moment he's like, "oh he can't look in fog of war", next he's like "here he is looking at fog of war, he must've turned it off." what... No, you aren't. The 50% of rational people watching noticed the same. The preponderance of evidence most definitely does not sway in his favor. Did you look at the evidence? All of it? I did. Way before I watched the VoD of Catz and friends. Then I looked at more evidence from Illusion. Then I looked at more counter evidence from Spades himself. If you looked at all these things, I don't understand how the perponderance of evidence favors his position. Everything presented validates the charges that he is indeed cheating. And I would venture to guess the heavy majority of people who have actually examined this evidence would find him guilty. Ignoring Catz's sometimes negligent statements in his commentary and just focusing on the things that truly are questionable. There is no way opinion is even close to being evenly split. Yes I've looked at the evidence, and I conclude he is innocent. Reading your post, I see nothing concrete in it for me to respond to. Cite some actual evidence which you consider proof, or stop talking. The evidence has already been cited numerous times. I have nothing to add to it. If you want me to repeat the evidence for you because you are too lazy to go look at it yourself, then no. No I'm not going to do that. And your assertion that opinion is evenly split on this issue could easily be solved by a poll. Go for that. Last one I saw leaned 70-80% that he is guilty.
Great way to determine if someone is guilty or innocent - start a random poll. How about we randomly poll all of bnet on the best way to open in TvZ, and then go with it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
