|
This is not the place to argue whether or not spades hacked, do that in the relevant thread please.
(this is in effect page 10 onward) |
I am not a professional player, and have only looked through a few of the replays. I saw some odd events, but that's all I would call them.
I hope the community got this one right, this would be a good reminder for all of us to be VERY thorough in investigations before even bringing about allegations. I'm not commenting on the way it was done this time or Spades' innocence/guilt, but all of us have now seen the almost irreversible damage news like this does to a career, I just hope it is always done to those who are always guilty.
|
Everyone who is massively complaining at the "community", what are you thinking?
TL has so far come to the "conclussion" (the text they put at the top of the first thread regarding this matter) that we simply cannot know for sure thus far. Most people are suspicious or very suspicious as they should be given the circumstances and given Spades history. But thats it. There is no official verdict yet and i find it really strange that Spades seems to blame this suspiciousness to be the cause of his retirement. Man, 1 day has past, why arent you demaning that this is being looked into more thoroughly?
I would have imagined Spades (if he is completely innocent) doing things like looking up the current hacks to create replays when using those to compare those replays to his showmatch replays. And further calling for a thorough investigation by a couple of pros that would be willing to take on the task. Seing how much attention this is getting im sure some more pros (other the Catz etc.) would be willing to do this. They could do it while streaming which would result in really good viewership numbers.
The fact that Spades from the start wrote things like: "there is no point, there is no way to proove i didnt hack" and "doesnt matter my reputation is now destroyed" (after just hours had past that is) and that he now chooses to retire from his team after only 1 day is like people has stated, suspicious. Man if you know you did nothing wrong you have nothing to loose. Im sorry but given your history im leaning towards that cheating indeed went down in that showmatch.
|
this is a good day for esports. it goes to show what goes around comes around. spades got what was coming to him for hacking/stream cheating/whatever he did. justice is served, to show all that cheating doesnt pay
|
On June 06 2012 06:04 toiletCAT wrote:Show nested quote +On June 06 2012 06:03 IcedBacon wrote:On June 06 2012 06:01 toiletCAT wrote:On June 06 2012 06:01 Corrosive wrote:On June 06 2012 05:59 toiletCAT wrote:On June 06 2012 05:58 Myles wrote:On June 06 2012 05:57 toiletCAT wrote:On June 06 2012 05:55 Myles wrote:On June 06 2012 05:54 toiletCAT wrote:On June 06 2012 05:52 Myles wrote:
[quote]
You will never had definitive proof of maphacking unless the hacker in general is incredibly dumb, and even then someone could probably make an argument that it's still subjective. Honestly, there's enough circumstantial evidence to raise doubts based on the mechanics difference alone, and that's all it takes in the court of public opinion. Doubts =! evidence. Um, circumstantial evidence that raises doubt. Like I said, there will never be definitive proof and at some point you have to make a judgment call. It'd be nice to have an organizing body for that, but until that happens, it will be up to the community. A responsible, judgemental call would be to leave him be, not judge him without evidence. Evidence=/=proof. We do have evidence, we don't have proof. No, you don't have evidence. Yes, we do. If you want proof to ban a hacker then no hackers would ever be banned unless someone was recording them from behind with a video camera. that maphacker impa who just got banned? welp, cant ban him without proof, he could have just been lucky proxy 2 gating every correct location. strong evidence but no proof That's not evidence, though. I'm sorry, but it really isn't. Professional debating skills right there. "That's not evidence guys, because it's just not. Trust me." What do you want me to say? It's a fact, it's not evidence. I'm not going to tell you why "something we cannot be completely sure about" is "definitive proof"
What you, ToiletCAT, says is just hilarious. If it's not enough evidence no one would ever be banned if he's not streaming it. Probably even if someone saw it with his eyes, while standing behind him. Probably he was drunken or most likely he's just lying?
|
United States5162 Posts
On June 06 2012 06:07 toiletCAT wrote:Show nested quote +On June 06 2012 06:06 Myles wrote:On June 06 2012 06:04 toiletCAT wrote:On June 06 2012 06:03 IcedBacon wrote:On June 06 2012 06:01 toiletCAT wrote:On June 06 2012 06:01 Corrosive wrote:On June 06 2012 05:59 toiletCAT wrote:On June 06 2012 05:58 Myles wrote:On June 06 2012 05:57 toiletCAT wrote:On June 06 2012 05:55 Myles wrote:
[quote]
Um, circumstantial evidence that raises doubt. Like I said, there will never be definitive proof and at some point you have to make a judgment call. It'd be nice to have an organizing body for that, but until that happens, it will be up to the community. A responsible, judgemental call would be to leave him be, not judge him without evidence. Evidence=/=proof. We do have evidence, we don't have proof. No, you don't have evidence. Yes, we do. If you want proof to ban a hacker then no hackers would ever be banned unless someone was recording them from behind with a video camera. that maphacker impa who just got banned? welp, cant ban him without proof, he could have just been lucky proxy 2 gating every correct location. strong evidence but no proof That's not evidence, though. I'm sorry, but it really isn't. Professional debating skills right there. "That's not evidence guys, because it's just not. Trust me." What do you want me to say? It's a fact, it's not evidence. I'm not going to tell you why "something we cannot be completely sure about" is "definitive proof" I feel like you don't know the difference between evidence and proof. Okay, let's say that "we" have evidence but no proof, yet, maybe -- how can you justify that?
When there is evidence but no 'smoking gun', so to say, people will look at everything and make a judgment call. It happens every day in real courts, the only difference being the standard of doubt there(at least in US) courts is probably higher.
However, regardless of whether or not you think the evidence presented is enough to make a judgment call, to make the claim that there isn't any evidence at all is just moronic.
|
Good job everybody. You just destroyed a man's career and now he probably has to work @ a macdonalds for $8 an hour. are you all happy with your witch hunt?
|
On June 06 2012 06:03 draumr wrote:Show nested quote +On June 06 2012 05:35 LucidityDark wrote:
This is one of the precise reasons why this community should stop being so dogmatic and stop witch hunting every few weeks. The "guilty until proven innocent" mentality has severely damaged yet another player's reputation to the point where his entire career is very likely to be completely ruined, and we don't even know if Spades hacked or not. This is beyond annoying. His reputation is not fucking ruined to the point where his career is ruined. Dragon admitted to fucking cheating, and over a very long period of time was slowly allowed to come back into the community. If he really was dedicated to this game, and really wanted to play it, and was convinced he wasn't hacking he should have said, hey, I didn't hack, do your witch hunt, and keep doing what he does. If he did hack, he should have said, yes I do hack, I apologize to the community, and went quiet for a couple of months and than slowly build his reputation up. Their are very few situations where someone's reputation is ruined to the point where they wont be able to make a career out of it. The only situation I can think of is the Savior one, where huge amounts of money was involved.
You're right, we should just all take matters into our own hands because we ourselves know how unbiased and 100% right we are all the time. Why have courts, judges and lawyers when we can go just go with our gut feelin' amirite!?
|
On June 06 2012 05:29 toiletCAT wrote:Show nested quote +On June 06 2012 05:27 Geo.Rion wrote:
Btw guys, I just want to put this out there, around the beta, there was a qualifier for the Hungarian national lineup, and i won the finals 3-0, got accused of maphacking.
I said, it's complete bullshit, mods looked at the replays, there was no real evidence, case solved, the guy who accuse me after losing the finals disappeared.
Compare that to the recent situation. Spade came out and said u can believe whatever u want, and 1 day later he "retires" because his reputation has been dmged.
There is no dmg done by an unproven accusation, i went on the be part of the national lineup and win a national LAN at Budapest later on.
So I hope everyone gets why i say, he's guilty for sure, 100%, and everyone who still defends him is stupid I say concluding that someone is guilty of hacking without proof is stupid.
you keep saying there is no real proof that he hacks, what proof do you want? there are tons of evidence in multiple games that suggests he maphacks and still you are not convinced? sure some of the evidence provided are sketchy but what are you looking for in particular? perhaps the proof you are looking for is for spades to admit himself that "i'm a hacker" ? in that case that may happen or he may never admit to hacking. If he doesnt admit, then you say he doesnt hack?
|
On June 06 2012 06:09 roym899 wrote:Show nested quote +On June 06 2012 06:04 toiletCAT wrote:On June 06 2012 06:03 IcedBacon wrote:On June 06 2012 06:01 toiletCAT wrote:On June 06 2012 06:01 Corrosive wrote:On June 06 2012 05:59 toiletCAT wrote:On June 06 2012 05:58 Myles wrote:On June 06 2012 05:57 toiletCAT wrote:On June 06 2012 05:55 Myles wrote:On June 06 2012 05:54 toiletCAT wrote:
[quote]
Doubts =! evidence. Um, circumstantial evidence that raises doubt. Like I said, there will never be definitive proof and at some point you have to make a judgment call. It'd be nice to have an organizing body for that, but until that happens, it will be up to the community. A responsible, judgemental call would be to leave him be, not judge him without evidence. Evidence=/=proof. We do have evidence, we don't have proof. No, you don't have evidence. Yes, we do. If you want proof to ban a hacker then no hackers would ever be banned unless someone was recording them from behind with a video camera. that maphacker impa who just got banned? welp, cant ban him without proof, he could have just been lucky proxy 2 gating every correct location. strong evidence but no proof That's not evidence, though. I'm sorry, but it really isn't. Professional debating skills right there. "That's not evidence guys, because it's just not. Trust me." What do you want me to say? It's a fact, it's not evidence. I'm not going to tell you why "something we cannot be completely sure about" is "definitive proof" What you, ToiletCAT, says is just hilarious. If it's not enough evidence no one would ever be banned if he's not streaming it. Probably even if someone saw it with his eyes, while standing behind him. Probably he was drunken or most likely he's just lying?
I'm just asking a simple question that none of you can answer, it seems. How can you in your right mind "conclude" something without proof?
you keep saying there is no real proof that he hacks, what proof do you want? there are tons of evidence in multiple games that suggests he maphacks and still you are not convinced? sure some of the evidence provided are sketchy but what are you looking for in particular? perhaps the proof you are looking for is for spades to admit himself that "i'm a hacker" ? in that case that may happen or he may never admit to hacking. If he doesnt admit, then you say he doesnt hack?
I already told you. Tell me which hack he is using, when he is using it and for which purpose and if you could, wait for Warden to be able to detect it. Until then, your so-called "evidence" is not enough, but that doesn't matter now, because his career is ruined and he's gone, and we probably won't ever find out of he actually did hack, which only indicates that he most likely didn't.
|
"We didn't investigate fully, but we've already deemed the merit of the evidence circumstantial at best."
I got it now thanks.
|
I don't buy into this "innocent until proven guilty" shit when the guy had a reputation of hacking in BW. I think the only possible solution is spades and lucifron playing each other in a LAN tournament within 10 days so I can compare his showmatch replays and LAN replays. And what he should've done was instead of saying "random chance", "standard tvt stuff", he should've analyzed his 7 games go through the thought process of what he was doing and thinking so he at least put effort in defending his case. Instead he didn't try, only cared about his reputation, making vague/general statements anyone can make when you lie, etc. <Put in some fucking effort to defend your case first before talking about sponsers, invitation to showmatch because in the past you did hack so if you didn't do it, make analytical statements to prove the doubters wrong.> And last thing for TL, if your going to reopen the original thread find the ip of the OP and tell the name because this is serious accusation and no longer some kids playing in the backyard fighting.
|
This guy - spades is really extraordinary and shameless.... He fucking cheats , ... FUCKING CHEATS and then good guy catched him , pointed it out , and now he says : my reputation is damaged and gone , im the only victim in this whole 200 page thread... No dude , ur not the victim... ur the guilty and you should admit that cause everybody knows you cheats as you did in broodwar , besides you and your "friends" from the team / old teams. You better say thanks to WW for giving you possibility to write your retire statement on your own and lie even more , instead of they just kick your cheating ass off. Hope you will never touch starcraft anymore , shameless hacker.
Its obvious that person who is victim fights for his rights and dont give up and say "fuck this...." bassicly.
User was warned for this post
|
On June 06 2012 06:10 toiletCAT wrote:Show nested quote +On June 06 2012 06:09 roym899 wrote:On June 06 2012 06:04 toiletCAT wrote:On June 06 2012 06:03 IcedBacon wrote:On June 06 2012 06:01 toiletCAT wrote:On June 06 2012 06:01 Corrosive wrote:On June 06 2012 05:59 toiletCAT wrote:On June 06 2012 05:58 Myles wrote:On June 06 2012 05:57 toiletCAT wrote:On June 06 2012 05:55 Myles wrote:
[quote]
Um, circumstantial evidence that raises doubt. Like I said, there will never be definitive proof and at some point you have to make a judgment call. It'd be nice to have an organizing body for that, but until that happens, it will be up to the community. A responsible, judgemental call would be to leave him be, not judge him without evidence. Evidence=/=proof. We do have evidence, we don't have proof. No, you don't have evidence. Yes, we do. If you want proof to ban a hacker then no hackers would ever be banned unless someone was recording them from behind with a video camera. that maphacker impa who just got banned? welp, cant ban him without proof, he could have just been lucky proxy 2 gating every correct location. strong evidence but no proof That's not evidence, though. I'm sorry, but it really isn't. Professional debating skills right there. "That's not evidence guys, because it's just not. Trust me." What do you want me to say? It's a fact, it's not evidence. I'm not going to tell you why "something we cannot be completely sure about" is "definitive proof" What you, ToiletCAT, says is just hilarious. If it's not enough evidence no one would ever be banned if he's not streaming it. Probably even if someone saw it with his eyes, while standing behind him. Probably he was drunken or most likely he's just lying? I'm just asking a simple question that none of you can answer, it seems. How can you in your right mind "conclude" something without proof?
So please tell me what is a proof for you? And what is evidence for you? And where is the difference for you? If you claritfy this a little bit better then "That's not evidence, though. I'm sorry, but it really isn't." we might discuss this.
|
On June 06 2012 06:10 toiletCAT wrote:Show nested quote +On June 06 2012 06:09 roym899 wrote:On June 06 2012 06:04 toiletCAT wrote:On June 06 2012 06:03 IcedBacon wrote:On June 06 2012 06:01 toiletCAT wrote:On June 06 2012 06:01 Corrosive wrote:On June 06 2012 05:59 toiletCAT wrote:On June 06 2012 05:58 Myles wrote:On June 06 2012 05:57 toiletCAT wrote:On June 06 2012 05:55 Myles wrote:
[quote]
Um, circumstantial evidence that raises doubt. Like I said, there will never be definitive proof and at some point you have to make a judgment call. It'd be nice to have an organizing body for that, but until that happens, it will be up to the community. A responsible, judgemental call would be to leave him be, not judge him without evidence. Evidence=/=proof. We do have evidence, we don't have proof. No, you don't have evidence. Yes, we do. If you want proof to ban a hacker then no hackers would ever be banned unless someone was recording them from behind with a video camera. that maphacker impa who just got banned? welp, cant ban him without proof, he could have just been lucky proxy 2 gating every correct location. strong evidence but no proof That's not evidence, though. I'm sorry, but it really isn't. Professional debating skills right there. "That's not evidence guys, because it's just not. Trust me." What do you want me to say? It's a fact, it's not evidence. I'm not going to tell you why "something we cannot be completely sure about" is "definitive proof" What you, ToiletCAT, says is just hilarious. If it's not enough evidence no one would ever be banned if he's not streaming it. Probably even if someone saw it with his eyes, while standing behind him. Probably he was drunken or most likely he's just lying? I'm just asking a simple question that none of you can answer, it seems. How can you in your right mind "conclude" something without proof?
you conclude it beyond reasonable doubt, anyone looking at this objectively without getting all "omgzzz the community sucks !!!1!!!" can see that he more than likely hacked
|
he just admitted he did.
guilty.
|
It feels like hating the "evil mob" is the new thing here!? Even if the opinions of that "mob" are backed up by evidence and most progamers who analyzed this topic?
This thread hurts my brain.
|
|
|
On June 06 2012 06:13 roym899 wrote:Show nested quote +On June 06 2012 06:10 toiletCAT wrote:On June 06 2012 06:09 roym899 wrote:On June 06 2012 06:04 toiletCAT wrote:On June 06 2012 06:03 IcedBacon wrote:On June 06 2012 06:01 toiletCAT wrote:On June 06 2012 06:01 Corrosive wrote:On June 06 2012 05:59 toiletCAT wrote:On June 06 2012 05:58 Myles wrote:On June 06 2012 05:57 toiletCAT wrote:
[quote]
A responsible, judgemental call would be to leave him be, not judge him without evidence. Evidence=/=proof. We do have evidence, we don't have proof. No, you don't have evidence. Yes, we do. If you want proof to ban a hacker then no hackers would ever be banned unless someone was recording them from behind with a video camera. that maphacker impa who just got banned? welp, cant ban him without proof, he could have just been lucky proxy 2 gating every correct location. strong evidence but no proof That's not evidence, though. I'm sorry, but it really isn't. Professional debating skills right there. "That's not evidence guys, because it's just not. Trust me." What do you want me to say? It's a fact, it's not evidence. I'm not going to tell you why "something we cannot be completely sure about" is "definitive proof" What you, ToiletCAT, says is just hilarious. If it's not enough evidence no one would ever be banned if he's not streaming it. Probably even if someone saw it with his eyes, while standing behind him. Probably he was drunken or most likely he's just lying? I'm just asking a simple question that none of you can answer, it seems. How can you in your right mind "conclude" something without proof? So please tell me what is a proof for you? And what is evidence for you? And where is the difference for you? If you claritfy this a little bit better then "That's not evidence, though. I'm sorry, but it really isn't." we might discuss this.
I'd assume that he means that the evidence is not conclusive. It would not stand up in a real court process, however it IS suspicious. That does not mean he is guilty though. No one gave him due process in this event.
|
It's funny, with all the witch hunting... I've noticed a odd amount of the users totally shitting on Spades consisted of users who bitch all the time in balance discussions. Hopefully, next time another player is thrown under the bus blizzard can announce another patch so the idiots who are posting can be slimmed down to the regular squabbling over who's races dick is bigger than the others.
Spades, you'll likely not read this, but you were a damn good terran and a good up and coming player, my personal advice would be to simply forget the haters, and take the next 6months to just play and improve, then come back to the scene... But I understand how difficult and betrayed you probably feel. Goodluck in your future, preferably pick a game without such an immature audience next time you want to go pro though...
Speaking of which, I now find it mildly ironic Nony mentioned how mature (age wise) are community was on SOTG, it doesn't seem to correlate with how we act.
|
On June 06 2012 06:14 RusHXceL wrote:
he just admitted he did.
guilty.
lol Post proof that he said that
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
