|
On June 06 2012 03:43 Insane wrote:
I think it's better to keep the identity anonymous. While I'm personally curious who it is, there are always going to be haters who refuse to believe Spades is guilty, and will harass the whistleblower. Subjecting them to harassment because people are immature seems to serve no purpose other than to allow people who support Spades to harass them.
The validity of the accusations doesn't rest at all upon the identity of the original accuser, as a large number of well-respect pros have taken up the accusations since then.
This is why I would use a smurf when making such claims.
|
On June 05 2012 11:43 NrGmonk wrote:
Because his IP doesn't match those of any other accounts. If it did, the new account would probably be banned instantly. Trust me, checking the IP was the first thing I did when I saw that thread from an account with 1 post. I bet every other mod did that too.
Ever heard of a proxy server?
|
I don't know if this is in the right thread, but i thought this might be the place to say this.
Can't all the spades thread just be closed? It's in no one's interest that they stay open, because they all end up in one big accusation thread with or without arguments. it's so frustrating and embarressing. ):
|
TL has the users IP, they are now debating if they should release it, incase anyone still thinks it hasnt been found.
|
United States8476 Posts
On June 06 2012 06:24 crocodile wrote:Show nested quote +On June 05 2012 11:43 NrGmonk wrote:
Because his IP doesn't match those of any other accounts. If it did, the new account would probably be banned instantly. Trust me, checking the IP was the first thing I did when I saw that thread from an account with 1 post. I bet every other mod did that too. Ever heard of a proxy server?
I don't see what that has to do with what I said. My erroneous statement was because I didn't know that I didn't have full IP viewing privileges. Obviously, there's the consideration that the user was using a proxy server or just a random public computer. However, as stated before, in this scenario, this was probably not the case.
|
On June 06 2012 01:52 Urasim wrote:Show nested quote +On June 06 2012 01:42 Alryk wrote:
I found it kind of depressing that the mob so easily jumped on Spades. I don't think it's a matter of whether or not he's actually maphacking (I'm not skilled enough to pretend to know) along with almost everybody posting in that thread. Anybody under GM will read the thread, and then see what they want to see, especially potentially interpreting a better player's game sense for map hacking. Which is why I think that only the pros comments matter.
In light of that information, I agree with exposing his identity. It's silly for accusations like this to remain unknown, especially when other pros as far as I understand have agreed that a lot of the OP's accusations are very very flimsy. (Not that the accusation of maphacking is, just that his comments are).
For better or worse, Spades' career is pretty over most likely. Only he will ever actually know whether or not he's getting what he deserves (And nobody will ever know otherwise unless he admits it or somebody hacks his desktop and looks at his files O.o), but nobody will know who did it to him, which is a shame if that person is somebody notable. His career isn't over... It hasn't even started. He can easily gain any lost reputation by winning or placing well in a lan. Also, there is only one pro so far that is defending spades out of seven or so.
Well as we see, he has to leave his team. Obviously his career isn't over but it's much harder to overcome a rep like this, even if it turns out to somehow be false.
I know, I wasn't saying the pros agree with Spades. I'm just saying that nobody else's opinion should matter. So if everyone on TL was like "Spades is innocent" but we had 10 pros who were pretty suspicious, I think the pros would carry much more weight.
Just keep in mind, no team means much harder to practice. And who else would want to practice with spades when they think he might be maphacking? It invalidates any practice he might want to do with other pro players. Therefore it's much harder for him to actually practice and prepare for games. So while his career isn't over, it's significantly harder to maintain now.
|
So come on just tell us who the hell the OP is, or at least tell us from which country his IP comes from ?
|
On June 06 2012 08:36 lulutheking wrote:
So come on just tell us who the hell the OP is, or at least tell us from which country his IP comes from ?
Probably in the 192.168/16 block!
|
On June 06 2012 03:43 Insane wrote:
I think it's better to keep the identity anonymous. While I'm personally curious who it is, there are always going to be haters who refuse to believe Spades is guilty, and will harass the whistleblower. Subjecting them to harassment because people are immature seems to serve no purpose other than to allow people who support Spades to harass them.
The validity of the accusations doesn't rest at all upon the identity of the original accuser, as a large number of well-respect pros have taken up the accusations since then.
My question to this is.... what about all the people who believed he was guilty before any sufficent evidence was truly presented? Why can some no-name anonymous member sic the brainless mob on Spades and have people harass him (death threats et al that started well before there was even close to enough 'evidence' against him) without any personal ramifications or involvement? You seem to be being incredibly unfair towards the accusee (if we want to continue to use the spades situation you have to revert your way of thinking to having read only the incredibly weak and incomplete OP post and not any of the followup information or evaluations by pros).
I don't like that it's apparently ok to harass to a completely unproven suspect but NOT ok to harass a completely unproven whistleblower. Either this should happen behind closed doors so that neither party is harassed before a conclusion or completely out in the open so that both parties are.
|
intrigue
Washington, D.C9935 Posts
what about them? in any thread there are going to be people who take everything at face value. the OP was as good as hack accusations get; it included a replay pack and the poster's analysis of the games broken down by minutes. the thread was closed early on because nobody qualified to review them had chimed in yet, and it was reopened only after quantic's illusion deemed the matter as a claim with some legitimacy. since then multiple pros have given their opinions.
i understand how spades may seem like a victim here if you aren't familiar with the history of hackers in this community and haven't reviewed the evidence with an experienced eye. there are currently no publicly known methods to 100% determine a hacker so all we have to go on is the analysis of pros, personal judgments and a player's history. we try our best to prevent unfounded bandwagons but at the same time maphacking is the ultimate crime in competitive rts - it'd be irresponsible if we didn't let it be discussed.
it would make sense to punish the accuser if he was just messing with someone's reputation just for shits and giggles, but i don't understand how his identity is relevant if his claims have held up to public scrutiny (unlike spades's games).
|
If you guys are interested in trying to find the identity of 'Drolets' come over to Gheed's blog. There are a number of us working on figuring out the identity of the poster and, I think, we're on the right track.
We'd all love your input.
|
Here's the link to Gheed's blog.
And intrigue's cat is sooooo cute.
|
On June 06 2012 01:22 Ghanburighan wrote:
I guess I should repost my thoughts on the matter as you recommended, Doodsmack.
I hope the mods take a nice long time to discuss the possible unveiling of the poster. As they probably know, there are a number of possible consequences:
a) If the allegations are deemed false, his reputation is marred just because he reported a pro.
b) Concerned parties can enact retribution in various unpleasant ways.
c) If either of the previous is the case, we can forget about anyone posting anonymous tips again, which also means more maphackers unreported.
d) If the previous points can be disregarded, there's still the question that they alone can decide regarding the particular details of the relationship between him and Spades.
e) Lastly, we damage the message that objective arguments trump authority of the speaker.
P.S. (b) also includes litigation on slander. Yet, TL's choice to reveal the identity of the OP does not change whether that litigation will take place, only its process. A judge can hypothetically order TL to reveal the information.
a) unlike Spades reputation which is marred regardless of whether the allegations are false or not.
b) Not really. They'd have to have a lot more information to go on than just a tl username.
c) People shouldn't make accusations which are so flimsy? The burden has to be on the person accusing, not on the player who is suspected. Anything else is completely unfair. If he had posted it privately, that would be one thing. But he posted circumstantial evidence publicly, with great confidence stating that Spades was 100% a maphacker. Not the actions of a responsible tl user.
d) isn't necessarily relevant and e) is unlikely to be a problem, unless it's someone incredibly high-profile or another pro doing the accusing.
On June 06 2012 01:26 Urasim wrote:
Why not prove, with 100% certainty, that drolets information is completely wrong before going for your witch hunt on a guy that wants to stay anonymous? Only people that should be made aware of the identity is spades and the team liquid staff. If spades is innocent then he can go and slander drolets reputation all he wants. You nor I should have any say in the matter. The fact that this thread still exists means that team liquid is actually considering it, and that would be bad for anyone and everyone who wants to out cheaters and stay anonymous from the mob of people that want to discredit and/or defame said posters.
Because he didn't prove with 100% certainty that his information was correct before posting it himself? And the worry of a witch-hunt on the accuser is mind-boggling, when you consider the amount of hate Spades has endured. Why should just the accuser get to remain annonymous? It's not like Spades was proven guilty before he was "outed" as a hacker.
And you're worried about this guy being discredited or defamed? There's a guy whose name is irrevocably tarnished, all based on 7 replays.
|
There's no witch hunt going on over at Gheed's blog. We just want to see if we can find out the truth.
|
On June 07 2012 11:16 CursivE wrote:
There's no witch hunt going on over at Gheed's blog. We just want to see if we can find out the truth.
And I for one had some free time. I'm having a good time finding this guy's identity.
|
Another thing I would question is whether it's TL's policy to allow people to make new accounts for risky posts in order to avoid potential ban consequences for their main accounts. Also the fact that OP made a lot of bullet points with timestamps doesn't imply solid evidence or a quality post. The real evidence has come from other people and that's why the thread was closed initially. The OP established the precedent that you can make a new account in order to shield yourself from accountability for a hit job.
|
On June 07 2012 23:36 Doodsmack wrote:
Another thing I would question is whether it's TL's policy to allow people to make new accounts for risky posts in order to avoid potential ban consequences for their main accounts. Also the fact that OP made a lot of bullet points with timestamps doesn't imply solid evidence or a quality post. The real evidence has come from other people and that's why the thread was closed initially. The OP established the precedent that you can make a new account in order to shield yourself from accountability for a hit job.
The OP didn't even get banned. I'm certain in both past and future if somebody got banned and it was known they had another account, both got banned.
|
I'm not sure about other countries, but, in America, there is a legal precedent towards keeping someone's identity anonymous if they wish it to be so. Many of the greatest scandals in our history (such as the Watergate scandal) have been uncovered by informants whose identity was kept secret by the news outlet to whom incriminating evidence was given.
|
Person in Gheed's blog posted about the top 10 commandments.
4. THOU SHALL RESPECT YOUR ID
This means you don't use clones or aliases or any other form of obfuscation of identity (other than the ID you first signed on with). Try any skullduggery with your ID and you get an automatic ban. We can see your IPs in real-time and if we even suspect someone's abusing, we just ban you. So, don't even try it. It's not worth it.
|
On June 08 2012 15:26 Aurious wrote:Person in Gheed's blog posted about the top 10 commandments. Show nested quote +4. THOU SHALL RESPECT YOUR ID
This means you don't use clones or aliases or any other form of obfuscation of identity (other than the ID you first signed on with). Try any skullduggery with your ID and you get an automatic ban. We can see your IPs in real-time and if we even suspect someone's abusing, we just ban you. So, don't even try it. It's not worth it.
This states clearly that one's ID is form of obfuscation of identity. This isn't Google, you do not insert your real name to use TL. In the end, this issue is bigger and more precarious for a mere argument twisting the meaning of the 10 commandments.
Edit: Perhaps you assume that the poster has an earlier TL account that differs from Drolets and say that it is basis enough to ban Drolets? Because I thought Gheed uncovered that Drolets has been a member for a while, editing Liquipedia but not posting.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
