Attach a "cheater" to folks caught cheating

by **PLAYER57832** on Tue Jul 08, 2008 8:51 pm

Poll added, as requested

by **MrBenn** on Wed Jul 09, 2008 4:17 am

I still like my suggestion of a 'Cheaters Medal' that will supercede any other medals!

How about changing the colour of somebody's feedback star next to their name to red if they're convicted of cheating? That way it would show up in games as well as in the forums?

by **PLAYER57832** on Wed Jul 09, 2008 3:49 pm

Except that would be confusing since new recruits who are premium are red, too, now.

Maybe they should be Gold, like the regular ranks? and then cheaters can be red?????

by **PLAYER57832** on Tue Jul 15, 2008 12:59 pm

21 votes for, none against, so far.

Official response?

by **AndyDufresne** on Tue Jul 15, 2008 8:16 pm

We know about this suggestion, and will be taking it into account. I suggest some more discussion about it all.

Regarding the specifics,

PLAYER57832 wrote:When someone is confirmed and convicted as a cheater, place a mark next to their name or rating number. Click on this and you will go to a list of all the convicted cheaters ... within a given time period. The cheater and the names of all aliases would all be listed.

Would this just appear next to their rating? What would it look like? Would it appear in the profile? Would the names of those busted with appear in the profile? Would it be a new page that would have to be created?

I'm not sure a list of all convicted cheaters would be feasible, as it would have to be constantly updated, but a mark may perhaps.

There would also have to be some hard coding done by Lack, in case of a Reversal from further investigation, among other coding to be done.

What about a BLOCK instead of a BUST? Does it receive a mark? Does it receive a different mark? Blocks are sometimes used for safety precautions, and don't always necessarily mean Cheating.

The mark might last for 1-2 months the first time, 6 months the second ... a year or a permaban if caught 3 or more times.

The last part goes into site policy, which is a different issue all together (regarding how many strikes a person can get), save that for another topic I believe.

If the mark disappears, is there a history on their profile? Or is it a clean forgiven slate? What if it is too difficult to code a decay for it to disappear after a time?

More discussion. Hopefully those questions will guide some discussion.

--Andy

by **PLAYER57832** on Tue Jul 15, 2008 8:47 pm

AndyDufresne wrote:We know about this suggestion, and will be taking it into account. I suggest some more discussion about it all.

Thank you!

AndyDufresne wrote:Regarding the specifics,
PLAYER57832 wrote:When someone is confirmed and convicted as a cheater, place a mark next to their name or rating number. Click on this and you will go to a list of all the convicted cheaters ... within a given time period. The cheater and the names of all aliases would all be listed.

Would this just appear next to their rating? What would it look like? Would it appear in the profile? Would the names of those busted with appear in the profile? Would it be a new page that would have to be created?

These are my thoughts ... (let's hear others..)
I envisioned two things ... either a mark next to the name, that would appear whenever the name appears
eg PLAYER57832 C

AndyDufresne wrote:I'm not sure a list of all convicted cheaters would be feasible, as it would have to be constantly updated, but a mark may perhaps.

A master list might be in the Abuse forum, as a sticky. The "primary" profile name and the aliases would be listed in a spread-sheet like chart.

The aliases for the person might be placed in their profile, maybe just above the wall or perhaps as a kind of "sticky"/permanent posting to the top of the wall.

AndyDufresne wrote:There would also have to be some hard coding done by Lack, in case of a Reversal from further investigation, among other coding to be done.

Mistakes can happen, yes. But if they happen frequently, then I would say more care needs to be taken at the front end -- that is in the accusation stage. It might be worth having a delay before putting the "mark" on the name if this is implemented.

AndyDufresne wrote:What about a BLOCK instead of a BUST? Does it receive a mark? Does it receive a different mark? Blocks are sometimes used for safety precautions, and don't always necessarily mean Cheating.

I am not real clear on how blocks are used or what they entail. I envisioned this for actual cheaters. If someone were "convicted" of the other big no-no's... serious racism, etc. those issues might be worth consideration, but probably would be a seperate issue. They should not have the same color.

AndyDufresne wrote:
PLAYER57832 wrote:The mark might last for 1-2 months the first time, 6 months the second ... a year or a permaban if caught 3 or more times.

The last part goes into site policy, which is a different issue all together (regarding how many strikes a person can get), save that for another topic I believe.

The timing would have to be a site administration issue ... I just put those down for examples.

AndyDufresne wrote:If the mark disappears, is there a history on their profile? Or is it a clean forgiven slate? What if it is too difficult to code a decay for it to disappear after a time?

I would think it would disappear, except that perhaps the aliases should be somehow marked so that anyone doing a search would know that they are busted multis.
That is, a red "m" or some such attached to the end of their name. However, I don't know if there should be any reference to who the "primary" profile was, if the mark is removed.

AndyDufresne wrote:More discussion. Hopefully those questions will guide some discussion.

--Andy

by **Gutshots** on Tue Jul 15, 2008 10:26 pm

Good post... this is a no-brainer, which suits me perfectly I might add, but I wont....

by **Gutshots** on Fri Jul 25, 2008 11:59 am

AND... I think there should be zero tolerance for cheating period! How can we draw more attention to this post!

by **The Neon Peon** on Fri Jul 25, 2008 12:49 pm

I think that their rating star should be a differnet color, to show that they have cheated, or we could have something like mod names: green, hunters: orange, map makers: blue, lack and twill and andy: red, cheaters: ? Which would seriously distinguish them in the forums.

by **The Neon Peon** on Sun Jul 27, 2008 4:07 pm

Why would someone want to mark someone then have it expire? A mistake should be forgiven, but outright cheating should not.

by **deceangli** on Mon Oct 27, 2008 2:14 pm

Cheats should be banned, in my view. At present they are free to continue taking points from the rest of us, and in some cases, actually boast about it in game chat! A convicted cheat should be kicked out - I don't see why we'd even consider letting them back into the game

by **PLAYER57832** on Sun Nov 02, 2008 4:23 pm

Does not seem like either option is going to happen.

This thread has been around a while.

by **saraith** on Sun Nov 02, 2008 4:52 pm

MrBenn wrote:I still like my suggestion of a 'Cheaters Medal' that will supercede any other medals!

How about changing the colour of somebody's feedback star next to their name to red if they're convicted of cheating? That way it would show up in games as well as in the forums?

I think that's a great Idea.

I also like the "sentencing," too -- 3 months for a first offence, etc.

by **BGtheBrain** on Thu Jan 31, 2013 12:33 pm

*****

by **trinicardinal** on Thu Jan 31, 2013 12:38 pm

I love it! nice graphics also... Yes I agree that when a multi is allowed to remain on CC for whatever reason it is only fair that other players know that they are playing a person who had more than one account. They would go into games more informed as a result and maybe there will be less surprises... I know its a bit harsh in some ways but seeing that we consider it to be such a major rule of the site there should be a major cost to violating the rule.

by **Keefie** on Thu Jan 31, 2013 12:57 pm

Stupid idea.

Remember this

by **BGtheBrain** on Thu Jan 31, 2013 12:59 pm

*****

by **Keefie** on Thu Jan 31, 2013 1:06 pm

Labeling someone as a Multi just leaves them open to persecution by the rest of the community. I don't see much difference really.

and you're a Site Moderator too

by **BGtheBrain** on Thu Jan 31, 2013 1:19 pm

*****

by **Keefie** on Thu Jan 31, 2013 1:24 pm

So everyone who disagrees with your idea will be asked not to post again will they :lol:

Bollocks to that mate.

I will repeat what I have already said;

Tagging a Multi will just leave them open to persecution. It's a very bad idea.

What should really happen is:

If for some reason a Multi is allowed to continue as an active member, then it should be up to the 'Multi Hunters' to keep a VERY close eye on their future conduct.

by **koontz1973** on Thu Jan 31, 2013 1:28 pm

I agree with the suggestion in principle but do see it the other way as well. How about a time limit on the tag? Say 3-6 months or when the premium is bought again depending on what is shorter. That way we get the deterrent but it is not a stigma that will be around 5 years later. Just because you have had multiple accounts in the past does not mean you have them later.

by **BGtheBrain** on Thu Jan 31, 2013 1:29 pm

*****

by **Swifte** on Thu Jan 31, 2013 1:31 pm

This suggestion doesn't go far enough. Why would you just mark multis?

Everyone's C&A history should be summarized on their profiles.
Chat warnings/bans
Forum warnings/bans
Secret Dip
Ratings Abuse
All of it.

Then no one can ever say they didn't know, and everyone knows who they're dealing with.

by **GeneralRisk** on Thu Jan 31, 2013 1:50 pm

Swifte wrote:This suggestion doesn't go far enough. Why would you just mark multis?

Everyone's C&A history should be summarized on their profiles.
Chat warnings/bans
Forum warnings/bans
Secret Dip
Ratings Abuse
All of it.

Then no one can ever say they didn't know, and everyone knows who they're dealing with.

I think this is a good idea. I also like the idea of a tag after the multi's username. May I further suggest that the tag be a skull and cross bones or a totenkopf.

by **cooldeals** on Thu Jan 31, 2013 1:57 pm

Keefie wrote:Stupid idea.

Remember this

You're exactly right. Multis are essentially a prosecuted race of people. They were born multis by no apparent choice of their own. I'm guessing you also think child offenders should not be registered. Those poor persecuted felons.

I agree with the tag only being a temporary thing. This site is young and some kid making a multi when he is 14 probably shouldn't have the tag when he is 45.

Also I like Swifte's idea. I think everyone's "paddle" as I've heard it called should be visible. Just realize that peoples infractions aren't even visible to them at this point. Sometimes they aren't even sure exactly what happened (Free Phatscotty!!!). We should know where we stand at least, if not everyone else know as well.