EPT I'm talking proxy gates outside my base without scouting
LoL Replay plz , because it never happen on a 4player map.
GooD oNe
Teamliquid's Stance On Promoting Cheaters - Page 4
| Blogs > -_- |
|
Deezer
Canada73 Posts
LoL Replay plz , because it never happen on a 4player map. GooD oNe | ||
|
ROOTFayth
Canada3351 Posts
also blind countering often happens pvp and you should know that anyway I'm just saying from every game i've seen on deezer he didn't seem to cheat at all | ||
|
XiVol
Wales74 Posts
| ||
|
XiVol
Wales74 Posts
On July 02 2011 15:39 Kennigit wrote: We only have a problem with cheaters, not BMers. People bm all they want on their streams and we have no problem with it - most of my favorite streams are the rage/bm fueled ones. Lot's of bming goes on TL and theres obviously a grey area with what is in good fun vs. malicious. With cheaters though... I thought Deezer wasn't allowed to stream because he was an asshole? "He's a bm asshole. To be allowed to stream, he has to not be an asshole." | ||
|
Feb
98 Posts
On July 02 2011 13:43 -_- wrote:For others, however, Starcraft is a career, and this drastically changes how cheating must be dealt with. A salaried Teamliquid Administrator can't approach cheaters like a hobbyist might want them to. To use an analogy, if a referee is paid off to fix a pickup Basketball game at the YMCA, the end result is a funny story. However, when Tim Donaghy was paid to fix National Basketball Association games, David Stern had a gigantic scandal on his hands. That's the position Teamliquid Administrators are in; by virtue of the popularity of Teamliquid.net they've arguably been conscripted into positions as commissioners of Starcraft 2. This is why they can't act like the hobbyist wants them to act. this paragraph makes you out to be gods. who's paying you? i'm fairly certain it's the community and advertisers (who are interested in having the largest viewership/community) and not blizzard. blizzard is the referees and administrators of starcraft 2. they're the only ones with the power to ban people from battle.net and make decisions regarding how to handle cheaters in the sc2 community at large. i think i can point to the recent situation between huk, tlo, and blizzard as a situation where blizzard disagreed with tl and tl had to acknowledge the mistake and assure it won't happen again. you have power over the teamliquid community, which is an extremely large part of the sc2 community, but it isn't everything. generally you are beholden to the members of your community (much like blizzard is beholden to those who purchase their game). on the teamliquid community there is a large amount of professional gamers, many of who no doubt agree with your policy on cheating, however the larger makeup of your community is likely made up of more casual gamers (i don't have actual numbers but the number of viewers on any stream you pull up could not account for a community of strictly pro-gamers). this doesn't mean these casual gamers support cheating (in fact i think a large amount despise it), but teamliquid then becomes not an arbitor of rules (which it did in the combatex situation and others), but rather a broadcaster or news source. it has the rights to not broadcast or publish anything it feels doesn't agree with their perception of what's good for its community, but i think to try to pretend it doesn't exist is foolish. overall, people wouldn't come to this site if they didn't find some entertainment value in it. if you don't like to discuss cheaters that's fine, and you certainly don't need to promote them, but disciplinary action against non-cheaters discussing them crosses a line for me. closing threads about such issues is fine, but i think if you do that you need to redirect those community members to a place they can discuss such a topic. meanwhile, banning and warning members on such issues seems extreme (though if you wanna punish me for not being a brown-nosing sycophant like so much of this community go ahead). they just want to participate in the community and find this aspect of it fun. i love watching high level pro starcraft. tournaments are great. most of what you do for the community is terrific. but just because you close your eyes doesn't make cheating and other aspects people find entertaining go away. you're a major provider for that community, and it's totally your call not to broadcast things. but people do find this stuff entertaining. to use a couple examples, everyone knows the harlem globetrotters are rigged but this doesn't mean they don't sell tickets, likewise wwe also has fixed and scripted matches and most major networks do not broadcast their events for a variety of reasons including the fixed nature of the "sport." but the celebrities of these events still appear on every network's talk show programs and are allowed some acknowledgement as an alternative element that exists in the world. whether you want to support this element in terms of announcing broadcasting on the sidebar or linking to streams is your call (and for what it's worth i do think you made the right one for the recent situation), but limiting what can be discussed crosses the line (though i do think stepping in during flamewars, redirecting/closing redundant or off-topic conversations, or otherwise moderating language people may find offensive to be totally fine). this is a community which implies democracy and listening to people's needs and desires. don't treat your power as a dictatorship. which brings me to my second and final point. On July 02 2011 13:43 -_- wrote:because of the popularity of Starcraft 2, there now exist legitimate alternative communities where they can have the discussions they want. what are these alternatives? if you want to pretend you're so open, please link them in your original post if not on the sidebar or some easy to find location. maybe this will create competition for you, and i can understand apprehension about that, but if you're so good as to claim a position as administrator over the entire sc2 community, what harm can competition cause? or to be less facetious, you aspire to be the best, best means an awareness of the competition and the ability to standout and rise above it, not a quest to become the only resource by ignoring everything else. if you are the best resource, providing links to them creates no threat to you, and if they start to threaten you it symbolizes that you may want to change up something about the way you conduct business. User was warned for martyring | ||
|
Torte de Lini
Germany38463 Posts
this paragraph makes you out to be gods. who's paying you? i'm fairly certain it's the community and advertisers (who are interested in having the largest viewership/community) and not blizzard. blizzard is the referees and administrators of starcraft 2. they're the only ones with the power to ban people from battle.net and make decisions regarding how to handle cheaters in the sc2 community at large. i think i can point to the recent situation between huk, tlo, and blizzard as a situation where blizzard disagreed with tl and tl had to acknowledge the mistake and assure it won't happen again. You assumed these staff members are paid at all, and you assume or presume the values or interests of those that sponsor them. The only one acting God is you pretending to know what business go on between people that doesn't include you. I'm all for power to the community, but you're setting a line that is meant to separate two entities when they are one. The intergrity of the site goes hand-in-hand with the community's reputation and thus the staff and thus the sponsors' interests and reputation. If the site doesn't support or want cheaters. Then that's their decision, you are right, they aren't B.net and if Deezer or CombatEx want to stream their games, they can do it without TL. No one is playing God, you're just assuming that a decision made by TL makes your own decisions and that's your fault based on your misinterpretation. Ask Combat-Ex to stream, he doesn't need TL. you have power over the teamliquid community, which is an extremely large part of the sc2 community, but it isn't everything. generally you are beholden to the members of your community (much like blizzard is beholden to those who purchase their game). on the teamliquid community there is a large amount of professional gamers, many of who no doubt agree with your policy on cheating, however the larger makeup of your community is likely made up of more casual gamers (i don't have actual numbers but the number of viewers on any stream you pull up could not account for a community of strictly pro-gamers). this doesn't mean these casual gamers support cheating (in fact i think a large amount despise it), but teamliquid then becomes not an arbitor of rules (which it did in the combatex situation and others), but rather a broadcaster or news source. it has the rights to not broadcast or publish anything it feels doesn't agree with their perception of what's good for its community, but i think to try to pretend it doesn't exist is foolish. They're not pretending it doesn't exist, in fact, this proactive move shows that it does exist and it is not acceptable by a pillar of the StarCraft II scene and community. Where you got the notion that they're sweeping it under the rug in beyond my limited understanding. I bolded a statement you might want to actually doing more research on for it be taken more seriously. overall, people wouldn't come to this site if they didn't find some entertainment value in it. if you don't like to discuss cheaters that's fine, and you certainly don't need to promote them, but disciplinary action against non-cheaters discussing them crosses a line for me. closing threads about such issues is fine, but i think if you do that you need to redirect those community members to a place they can discuss such a topic. meanwhile, banning and warning members on such issues seems extreme (though if you wanna punish me for not being a brown-nosing sycophant like so much of this community go ahead). they just want to participate in the community and find this aspect of it fun. Information is entertainment. The problem here is that you are strictly viewing one form of entertainment and then generalizing it over an assume majority of people. Big step there and a poor one at that: TL doesn't need to redirect people, the streamer who got banned should be redirecting those who are interested. If he does something that obviously violates the rules and views of TL (which are pretty simple and straight-forward), then it is his job to follow-up, not TL. Your bolded statement is practically matyring no? i love watching high level pro starcraft. tournaments are great. most of what you do for the community is terrific. but just because you close your eyes doesn't make cheating and other aspects people find entertaining go away. you're a major provider for that community, and it's totally your call not to broadcast things. but people do find this stuff entertaining. to use a couple examples, everyone knows the harlem globetrotters are rigged but this doesn't mean they don't sell tickets, likewise wwe also has fixed and scripted matches and most major networks do not broadcast their events for a variety of reasons including the fixed nature of the "sport." but the celebrities of these events still appear on every network's talk show programs and are allowed some acknowledgement as an alternative element that exists in the world. whether you want to support this element in terms of announcing broadcasting on the sidebar or linking to streams is your call (and for what it's worth i do think you made the right one for the recent situation), but limiting what can be discussed crosses the line (though i do think stepping in during flamewars, redirecting/closing redundant or off-topic conversations, or otherwise moderating language people may find offensive to be totally fine). this is a community which implies democracy and listening to people's needs and desires. don't treat your power as a dictatorship. The dictatorship are those networks that, despite fooling their viewers, still allow these scripted characters and actors of sports to come on those shows. However, if TL is a dictatorship, they are only within their realm as you have said and you can leave freely just like you can stop watching T.V. Don't play the victim when there is nothing there and don't "stick it to the man", when he is only preserving what truly matters in the end and because of their stature, something you've hardly considered thus far (hardly). They aren't limiting what can be discussed, they are limiting what promotes or activates accepted views of Combat-Ex, these views are often misinformed and of poor judgement, often lacking a good memory to recall all the bullshit and harm one has done as a person, player and previous representative. which brings me to my second and final point. what are these alternatives? if you want to pretend you're so open, please link them in your original post if not on the sidebar or some easy to find location. maybe this will create competition for you, and i can understand apprehension about that, but if you're so good as to claim a position as administrator over the entire sc2 community, what harm can competition cause? or to be less facetious, you aspire to be the best, best means an awareness of the competition and the ability to standout and rise above it, not a quest to become the only resource by ignoring everything else. if you are the best resource, providing links to them creates no threat to you, and if they start to threaten you it symbolizes that you may want to change up something about the way you conduct business. Use Google and inform yourself. Why ask for help for a site that you disagree so strongly with. P.S: -_- is a member like mostly everyone else here :3 | ||
|
DeckOneBell
United States526 Posts
Obviously, users shouldn't be banned without proof, but Deezer seems to be hanging out in this thread unbanned, so there's that. It's not like they're stopped from streaming, you can still watch them if you want to. | ||
|
Feb
98 Posts
the original post makes mention of teamliquid mods being paid (specifically refering to them as salaried), so that was the source of my information, any inaccuracies in -_-'s original post that i took as fact are probably my own fault for not researching and if he's not a mod like you say, then i would like to point out that one of my major problems i have with this community is people acting like mods when they're not, which your response falls under. the rest of your argument i feel i responded to accurately in my first post, in particular if team liquid wants to pretend they're bigger administrators than blizzard in terms of the sc2 community they should provide links to other like minded sites (or at least allow their members to) rather than banning a user for posting details where one can watch combatex's stream. i'm fairly certain blizzard's boards would never do this. | ||
|
Torte de Lini
Germany38463 Posts
On July 03 2011 07:52 Feb wrote: @torte the original post makes mention of teamliquid mods being paid (specifically refering to them as salaried), so that was the source of my information, any inaccuracies in -_-'s original post that i took as fact are probably my own fault for not researching and if he's not a mod like you say, then i would like to point out that one of my major problems i have with this community is people acting like mods when they're not, which your response falls under. the rest of your argument i feel i responded to accurately in my first post, in particular if team liquid wants to pretend they're bigger administrators than blizzard in terms of the sc2 community they should provide links to other like minded sites (or at least allow their members to) rather than banning a user for posting details where one can watch combatex's stream. i'm fairly certain blizzard's boards would never do this. Staff aren't paid (minus a very selected few). Blizzard's boards are hardly moderated. To compare them with TL is laughable (To compare them with Reddit is equally laughable). Being proactive and contributory to the site is not acting like a staff member, it's just showing how much you enjoy your stay and support the staff's decision. You consider it otherwise because you're cynical and one doesn't agree with your misguided views. -_- is not acting like a mod, he's acting like a veteran and a valued member, take note. As for Team Liquid acting as if they're bigger administrators is equally a distortion of views. They're acting as admins of their site. They don't support Combat-Ex or anything related to him. They don't want to be a platform for any form of advertising for him because of what he represents. That's their right because it's their site. Go on the B. Net forums and advertise and talk about Combat-Ex there. P.S: Should and would, change your absolutes and you'll soon find yourself seeing the world a lot more clear. | ||
|
Feb
98 Posts
On July 03 2011 08:00 Torte de Lini wrote: Staff aren't paid (minus a very selected few). Blizzard's boards are hardly moderated. To compare them with TL is laughable (To compare them with Reddit is equally laughable). Being proactive and contributory to the site is not acting like a staff member, it's just showing how much you enjoy your stay and support the staff's decision. You consider it otherwise because you're cynical and one doesn't agree with your misguided views. -_- is not acting like a mod, he's acting like a veteran and a valued member, take note. As for Team Liquid acting as if they're bigger administrators is equally a distortion of views. They're acting as admins of their site. They don't support Combat-Ex or anything related to him. They don't want to be a platform for any form of advertising for him because of what he represents. That's their right because it's their site. Go on the B. Net forums and advertise and talk about Combat-Ex there. P.S: Should and would, change your absolutes and you'll soon find yourself seeing the world a lot more clear. I found this thread from a link a mod posted addressing why various combatex threads have been closed (which imo they largely should have been, though i woulda leaned towards consolidation of them rather than closing them). any inaccuracies in the original post, really should be addressed by a mod if he or she wants to link to such a post, as they were not, yet they were linked to, they can kinda be accepted to be true (even though as we've both pointed out (though you seem to constantly ignore that -_- originally said tl mods are "salaried" i merely repeated what he said) there are problems with -_-'s original statements). i'm not being cynical, i'm offering constructive criticism. i've noticed you and many in this community cannot tell the difference. another common mistake you make (and many on the site do too) is that being a veteran rather than an admin makes you an authority on matters. tell that argument to pete rose or any of the baseball veterans who used steroids currently sorting out hall of fame eligibility with mlb. high post count makes you an authority on nothing, and boards with an attitude that it does have severe problems with moderation as they alienate new members, grow stale, and become obsolete which i fear is a fate which may befall tl. teamliquid is not the greatest moderated board. it is moderated extremely inconsistently with little explanation from actual mods explaining their actions with frequent disciplinary actions taken on those who disagree while people who pad thread counts by uselessly praising tl mods are allowed to roam free (i'm looking at you anyone who's made a post that amounted to: "not worthy of a thread," let the mods handle and redirect, or offer a link that redirects yourself and have the mods fold in the original "not worthy of a thread" post). yes, blizzard and reddit are hillariously undermodded, but they're consistently modded. though i feel calling tl overmodded is an extreme, i do feel it to be at least inconsistently modded; though you seem to have no problems with their moderation so you're welcome to keep your opinion. i'm merely saying how i feel and you or anyone is welcome to disagree. i love what teamliquid does. the only other site that does what teamliquid does currently (offering a message board and posting links to streams) that i could find is wellplayed.org. which is still in beta. i'm merely expressing concern that i don't like the attitude of many of the mods and community members associated with teamliquid, and will probably be switching my attention to wp if tl continues to transfer power to veterans rather than make statements themselves (as evidenced by how i found this original thread). i think i have nothing more to say to you, torte. fundamentally we disagree, but i harbor no animosity towards you. please do not comment any further to me personally unless you think your statements would be beneficial to the community at large. most of your nitpicks seem to specifically draw attention to my more minor points and point out inconsistencies in -_-'s original post that were not my own observations. | ||
|
Torte de Lini
Germany38463 Posts
I've already hit on all your main points in quotes. Each paragraph is quoted, how that is "missing the main point" is beyond my understanding. Best of luck. | ||
|
Trizz
Netherlands1318 Posts
But he's a draw, and I enjoy watching him. | ||
|
RevRich
United States218 Posts
After comparing his hotkeys and APM from his deezer account it was proven to in fact be him playing on the hacker account. Pretty sure thats proof enough, but maybe I'm wrong. As for people being outcasted due to extreme BM/sniping/harassing, I'm all for it! Some parts of the community, however, seem to flock to these types of players. They enjoy the "deezer" type players and their antics. Not sure what that says about our community, but people like deezer should be ignored. | ||
|
SCPlato
United States249 Posts
On July 03 2011 05:28 iNcontroL wrote: I on the other hand won't shed a tear when a guy like deezer isn't given the benefit of the doubt. Also, we are an online community SOMETIMES you have to act without perfect evidence. It isn't perfect but it's what we got and that is fine. My only problem with what you said is consistency. If this is your stance and you are acting based on "imperfect" information then you should be doing it to everyone that fits into the category. So anyone that has ever gotten lucky with random proxy gates should be banned. Even if there is not conclusive evidence they are actually cheaters and they just try and get lucky with proxy gates (insert w.e cheese). TL would have to ban a lot more people than just Deezer who are "questionable cheaters." If they just banned people like Deezer, then it would not really be about cheating at that point but an issue of character (that people don't like Deezer). If people like Deezer "harass" you somewhere else, like BNet, then is it TL's policy to ban people for actions outside of their site? I think on SoTG Kennegit said (in reference to the Idra and Cruncher issue) that if you are saying something outside of their site, they don't ban you. Personally I am completely for the idea of giving people the benefit of the doubt. Maybe because I am American and our political philosophy is suppose to be based on innocent until proven guilty. I don't jump to conclusions until solid evidence is produced. Without at the very least substantial evidence you can make bad and flat out wrong decisions about members of the community. It is a HUGE deal for a person of the community to get banned from TL since it is the hub of the Foreign community. If substantial evidence is produced though and someone ends up on the TL hacker database, then bring the Ban Hammer like an Angry fist of God. | ||
|
iNcontroL
USA29055 Posts
On July 03 2011 14:09 Mikusbunkarus wrote: My only problem with what you said is consistency. If this is your stance and you are acting based on "imperfect" information then you should be doing it to everyone that fits into the category. So anyone that has ever gotten lucky with random proxy gates should be banned. Even if there is not conclusive evidence they are actually cheaters and they just try and get lucky with proxy gates (insert w.e cheese). TL would have to ban a lot more people than just Deezer who are "questionable cheaters." If they just banned people like Deezer, then it would not really be about cheating at that point but an issue of character (that people don't like Deezer). If people like Deezer "harass" you somewhere else, like BNet, then is it TL's policy to ban people for actions outside of their site? I think on SoTG Kennegit said (in reference to the Idra and Cruncher issue) that if you are saying something outside of their site, they don't ban you. Personally I am completely for the idea of giving people the benefit of the doubt. Maybe because I am American and our political philosophy is suppose to be based on innocent until proven guilty. I don't jump to conclusions until solid evidence is produced. Without at the very least substantial evidence you can make bad and flat out wrong decisions about members of the community. It is a HUGE deal for a person of the community to get banned from TL since it is the hub of the Foreign community. If substantial evidence is produced though and someone ends up on the TL hacker database, then bring the Ban Hammer like an Angry fist of God. you seem new here so a lot of what you said isn't necessarily stupid just completely uninformed. 1. No. That doesn't make logical sense at all. It isn't like you can look at a situation, assess that because I am acting on imperfect information that needs to be cross-applied to all concepts in life. Deezer is not some random dude who blind countered me. And it is utterly mindless for you to try and argue that. 2. TL does ban people for their actions outside of TL. This has been done several times... you just are new around here and don't know how things work yet. Stop spending your time defending cheaters and your stay should be fairly long. 3. No it isn't a huge deal to get banned from TL.. you make a new account. It IS a huge deal to cheat. It is also a huge deal to be nothing but a nuisance and harass everyone in the community. These are all things that describe combatex/deezer and yet you want to apply the "innocent until proven guilty" clause on a internet forum. Sorry, that isn't realistic sometimes. Obviously TL doesn't act on imperfect action ALL THE TIME but in some cases people earn the treatment.. and this is one of them. | ||
|
Kerotan
England2109 Posts
TL will not promote cheaters, and it its in TL's interest not to link users that come to TL wishing to watch combat ex for entertainment to places where he is publicised. We are a competitive community, and one of our goals should always to preserve a competitive spirit, I watch and play SC for enjoyment, but that enjoyment is derived from competing and self improvement. Any person that repeatedly cheats is a joke, and needs to be squashed utterly, they are no longer members of the SC community, they have earned there place in a community where the admission fee is the Oblivion hack. | ||
|
ChickenLips
2912 Posts
On July 03 2011 16:20 iNcontroL wrote: you seem new here so a lot of what you said isn't necessarily stupid just completely uninformed. 1. No. That doesn't make logical sense at all. It isn't like you can look at a situation, assess that because I am acting on imperfect information that needs to be cross-applied to all concepts in life. Deezer is not some random dude who blind countered me. And it is utterly mindless for you to try and argue that. 2. TL does ban people for their actions outside of TL. This has been done several times... you just are new around here and don't know how things work yet. Stop spending your time defending cheaters and your stay should be fairly long. 3. No it isn't a huge deal to get banned from TL.. you make a new account. It IS a huge deal to cheat. It is also a huge deal to be nothing but a nuisance and harass everyone in the community. These are all things that describe combatex/deezer and yet you want to apply the "innocent until proven guilty" clause on a internet forum. Sorry, that isn't realistic sometimes. Obviously TL doesn't act on imperfect action ALL THE TIME but in some cases people earn the treatment.. and this is one of them. See, incontrol just make it easy for everyone, go look for that replay where he proxy gated you without scouting your position, upload it. BAM Deezer = cheater and we can terminate this ridiculous discussion I know it's annoying having to deal with him when all you wanna do is get some practice games in on ladder, but stuff like "being a nuisance" and "blind-countering my tech" doesn't qualify as Kennigit and others have pointed out earlier in this thread. | ||
|
alexhard
Sweden317 Posts
| ||
|
alexhard
Sweden317 Posts
| ||
|
j0k3r
United States577 Posts
| ||
| ||
