EPTBlizzard statement and ruling on WCS win-trading - Page 3
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
ejozl
Denmark3340 Posts
| ||
|
Charoisaur
Germany15883 Posts
| ||
|
argonautdice
Canada2705 Posts
On April 15 2016 05:27 ejozl wrote: How many points did MarineLord lose? 345 for Marinelord, and 235 for Major (and none for DnS I believe) | ||
|
HugoBallzak
700 Posts
On April 15 2016 05:17 NonY wrote: Just the authority to stop playing and watching. Lol been there done that since December. | ||
|
suddendeathTV
Sweden388 Posts
On April 15 2016 05:17 NonY wrote: Just the authority to stop playing and watching. The players could also theoretically sue, though that's obviously not gonna happen. The ONLY way to get away with something like this (not having a single person's name even signed to it, and not reporting the full evidence and details and arguments and conclusions) is if it's from an EXTREMELY reputable source. The Blizz esports team is definitely not that (no offense to them, but I'm talking like highly educated and experienced people with decades of their work made public and scrutinized and they are deemed extremely competent and fair). Why shouldn't they publish the proof? If they're 100% sure they made zero errors and no judgment calls were involved? Personally I want to know how they proved major was lying. What was the evidence that made it conclusive, as opposed to the inconclusive cases that only resulted in warnings? Isn't it irrelevant whether or not Maj0r was lying, considering he was also using the account in question? Blizzard stated; "Rule-breaking or other malfeasance that occurs on shared accounts will be taken as evidence against all parties with access to the account, regardless of who directly took the action in question." which means Maj0r is as guilty as whoever else used the account. | ||
|
Topher_Doll
United States76 Posts
On April 15 2016 05:17 NonY wrote: Just the authority to stop playing and watching. The players could also theoretically sue, though that's obviously not gonna happen. The ONLY way to get away with something like this (not having a single person's name even signed to it, and not reporting the full evidence and details and arguments and conclusions) is if it's from an EXTREMELY reputable source. The Blizz esports team is definitely not that (no offense to them, but I'm talking like highly educated and experienced people with decades of their work made public and scrutinized and they are deemed extremely competent and fair). Why shouldn't they publish the proof? If they're 100% sure they made zero errors and no judgment calls were involved? Personally I want to know how they proved major was lying. What was the evidence that made it conclusive, as opposed to the inconclusive cases that only resulted in warnings? They have the right to ban them purely on the ToS for account sharing, legally that is all they need. You saying anything about suing is destroyed purely on that one line. All the other proof is just frosting on top. Also they have the game logs and the fact MajOr wouldn't share his publicly says all we need to know. | ||
|
OtherWorld
France17333 Posts
On April 15 2016 05:24 ZigguratOfUr wrote: Apart from the fact that knowing how the investigation was done makes it easier for future cheaters to avoid getting caught. And also a lot of the information used in the investigation is probably something the players don't want floating around. To identify who used the account for example Blizzard most likely used information about the source IP, MAC address, and all the telemetry about the source machines. Blizzard probably also did analysis on player behaviour pattern, such as when they normally queue for ladder, when they queued that day etc. Come on, we're not talking about terrorism, we're talking about win-trading. Blizzard's investigation, assuming it has been made in legal ways, includes most likely two things : analysis of SC2-related data (chat-logs), and analysis of replays themselves. Thus, any potential wintrader now knows that he shouldn't communicate with his fellow wintrader through chat logs and that him leaving the game shouldn't look too suspicious. What additional information could the investigation give? For your second point, just ask for the player's consent. If he doesn't want the information to be published, then you put a nice [The concerned player deemed this information as confidential and did not wish to see it published] instead of said information. Nothing that prevents from publishing the proofs, really. | ||
|
Lightrush
Bulgaria164 Posts
mod edit: removed link User was warned for this post | ||
|
mahrgell
Germany3942 Posts
On April 15 2016 05:35 OtherWorld wrote: Nothing that prevents from publishing the proofs, really. And nothing requires them to do it, really. | ||
|
shabby
Norway6402 Posts
 I guess if you're in the top 16 of the ladder, you should never queue if there is any chance of you having to leave the queue or the game before it is finished. Too suspicious. | ||
|
geokilla
Canada8224 Posts
So if account sharing is against the terms of service and agreement, I guess all the pro SC2 players are fucked then. There's lots of account sharing going on in all regions. Might as well not hold WCS at all and just ban everyone but the casuals. | ||
|
BronzeKnee
United States5217 Posts
On April 15 2016 05:06 NonY wrote: Is this a private investigation? Show the evidence rofl. Why does this have no details? I want to see the records myself, not what some person I have no reason to trust believes the records indicate. The technology just isn't there yet to show you the records NonY. Keep the faith in Blizzard. | ||
|
OtherWorld
France17333 Posts
On April 15 2016 05:38 mahrgell wrote: And nothing requires them to do it, really. That's true, as I've already stated. However, since there are no downsides to publishing the proofs while there are downsides to not publishing them, it would seem like a good and logical decision to do it. | ||
|
NinjaToss
Austria1383 Posts
| ||
|
Silvana
3713 Posts
On April 15 2016 05:35 OtherWorld wrote: Come on, we're not talking about terrorism, we're talking about win-trading. Blizzard's investigation, assuming it has been made in legal ways, includes most likely two things : analysis of SC2-related data (chat-logs), and analysis of replays themselves. Thus, any potential wintrader now knows that he shouldn't communicate with his fellow wintrader through chat logs and that him leaving the game shouldn't look too suspicious. What additional information could the investigation give? For your second point, just ask for the player's consent. If he doesn't want the information to be published, then you put a nice [The concerned player deemed this information as confidential and did not wish to see it published] instead of said information. Nothing that prevents from publishing the proofs, really. But that would start a new round of drama and witch hunting on the player, further damaging his reputation... Maybe they acknowledge their fault and want to move on instead of giving people another reason to keep talking about this topic for another week... | ||
|
Cyro
United Kingdom20282 Posts
VACation day lol | ||
NonY
8748 Posts
On April 15 2016 05:24 ZigguratOfUr wrote: Apart from the fact that knowing how the investigation was done makes it easier for future cheaters to avoid getting caught. And also a lot of the information used in the investigation is probably something the players don't want floating around. To identify who used the account for example Blizzard most likely used information about the source IP, MAC address, and all the telemetry about the source machines. Blizzard probably also did analysis on player behaviour pattern, such as when they normally queue for ladder, when they queued that day etc. This was the key thing: A number of other replays were examined, and along with the chat in those games, the records indicate MajOr was deliberately awarding wins. They analyzed chat logs and gameplay to make their conclusion. I'm assuming they also analyzed the times when major queued. There's nothing to hide about this analysis. As for the investigation being public making it easier for future cheaters to avoid detection, you have to weigh the value of that against other things: that all of this is being handled incorrectly (which we have a chance to know only if we can scrutinize it ourselves) and the ability for a player to avoid doing the things which would result in him being a false positive. Even if you forget for a second that Blizzard is fallible, the fact remains that these ladder qualifiers occur in an environment where a lot of people have different goals than the players who are trying to qualify. Regular ladder behavior that is typically innocuous, or at worse only a mild disturbance, can actually result in a player getting banned from competition if it occurs during one of these qualifiers. Blizzard should want to educate players on the things they need to avoid. In fact this is the exact same with account sharing. Blizzard is absolutely okay with account sharing in some cases. Proleague teams share accounts (even when it causes problems with hotkey profiles etc). Tournament broadcasters share accounts. The rules and ToS don't specify these exceptions, but they do exist. Blizzard is simply incapable of publishing an accurate set of rules. Instead they write extensive rules to cover their asses and enforce them when they want to. That's fine and understandable but they should also be putting an effort into educating people on how they actually have to act. They can't just ban people whenever they break a rule that Blizzard themselves set a precedent for not enforcing before. Yes it's a different situation -- not saying Blizzard is being inconsistent -- but the rules and their applications are vague so they must educate people. Blizzard hasn't used this opportunity to minimize the chance of future problems occurring. | ||
|
geokilla
Canada8224 Posts
On April 15 2016 05:25 thecrazymunchkin wrote: Ladder qualification isn't a concern for them though It's not but they explicitly said account sharing is not allowed. This means they should all be banned and stripped of WCS points. SSL, GSL, and Proleague should be forced to close as well. | ||
|
ZigguratOfUr
Iraq16955 Posts
On April 15 2016 05:35 OtherWorld wrote: Come on, we're not talking about terrorism, we're talking about win-trading. Blizzard's investigation, assuming it has been made in legal ways, includes most likely two things : analysis of SC2-related data (chat-logs), and analysis of replays themselves. Thus, any potential wintrader now knows that he shouldn't communicate with his fellow wintrader through chat logs and that him leaving the game shouldn't look too suspicious. What additional information could the investigation give? For your second point, just ask for the player's consent. If he doesn't want the information to be published, then you put a nice [The concerned player deemed this information as confidential and did not wish to see it published] instead of said information. Nothing that prevents from publishing the proofs, really. I think you're underestimating how much telemetry Blizzard has. Also no way Blizzard legal agrees to revealing user information and metadata to the public even with permission. There are way too many repercussions that extend far beyond WCS. On April 15 2016 05:39 geokilla wrote: Rofl sounds like something Blizzard made up. The best part is that they claim there is a WCS 2016 Rulebook. Since when did this exist? So if account sharing is against the terms of service and agreement, I guess all the pro SC2 players are fucked then. There's lots of account sharing going on in all regions. Might as well not hold WCS at all and just ban everyone but the casuals. ... it does exist. And was published before these alleged offenses. | ||
|
OtherWorld
France17333 Posts
On April 15 2016 05:40 Silvana wrote: But that would start a new round of drama and witch hunting on the player, further damaging his reputation... Maybe they acknowledge their fault and want to move on instead of giving people another reason to keep talking about this topic for another week... I'm really not sure anyone (apart from our fellow Jealous, maybe) would start a witchhunt on MajOr for refusing to have his IP or MAC public... And yes, if the players want to acknowledge their fault, we just have to issue a statement saying that it's their fault and all is over. For now, we've had MajOr saying he was innocent, PtitDrogo saying that MajOr was innocent (thus hinting that MLorD was not, but that's extrapolation), and no statement whatsoever from MLorD/DnS. | ||
| ||
