Forum

Ok, decided to move this post from Abra’s LAN movie topic because its way too long for that.

My take on this is that the admin team should have a documented process and appeals system for those players who are deemed to be hacking based SOLELY on the subjective assessment of the admin team.

This means, players who are banned or deemed to be hacking by admins with no solid evidence other than their own subjective conclusions should have a right to appeal against the decision.

In such cases, they could have the right to insist that a certain maximum number of independent adjudicators (people not on the admin team but who’s judgement is equally respected and have no bias or association to the player in question OR a favourability towards the admin team or player) assess the demos and make a further determination.

This way, the element of doubt is massively reduced, for example a player who is banned based on subjective assessment by 5 admins is way less likely to be a genuine cheater than someone banned based on the subjective assessment of 5 admins AND 5 independent adjudicators.

Players who are suspected of hacking but for which there is no solid PROOF could be monitored over a certain period of time and then subsequently checked on at random times in the future without any warning, and perhaps without any knowledge that they are being watched/checked.

Obviously this sort of thing could be hugely over-complicated and there could be many potential opportunities for exploitation, by both the admin team and the player in question, but if it was set up properly with a simple and consistent method, it would at the very least, limit the doubt associated with these scenarios.

A system such as this is very similar to those that can be find throughout many different professions in todays culture, and are almost always put in place for those situations where subjective judgement alone is not deemed to be an acceptable form of assessment, mainly because such an assessment could be damaging to the “client” and there is doubt regarding competence or subjective error of judgement.

Those cheaters who are found and banned through more conventional means – such as anti-cheat logs showing the use of client-side cheats or screenshots clearly showing a wallhack or cheat gui in use – should not have any right to appeal against the decision, as evidence of this kind is solid proof of cheating.

Another way to reduce doubt would be to simply increase the size of the admin team, perhaps with several extra people who are not primarily acting anti-cheat admins but would be called in to help in cases where only subjective assessments are being made. Basically the same idea as independent adjudicators, except it would be the same set of people each time that an appeal was made.

At the very least, there should be a distinction between those cheaters found by means of solid, reliable proof, and those who are deemed to be cheating based only on the opinion of the admins after reviewing demo’s.

——–

If the current system remains in place with no guidance, detail or comments by the admin team on how they make decisions on a case-by-case basis, then at the very least, there should be some form of standard guidance for the admin team to assure the community that the admins don’t make brash, rushed decisions without sufficient time and effort (due diligence).

For example, I think its rediculous that a player could be banned for aimbotting based on a 30 second clip of a player which one admin thinks is dodgy, sends/informs the rest of the admin team who subsequently view the clip and deem to be evidence of an aimbot.

Fact is, there are many occasions in games where things happen that look dodgy and can be interpreted as evidence of cheating, but actually are completely legitimate.

For this reason, it should be necessary that every admin involved with such a subjective determination assess an agreed amount of content for a player in question. Hypothetically, this could be something like 3 full match demo’s, from start to finish, before making an assessment. At the very least, it should be one full match.

edited

Respecting the admin’s methods I deleted my posts

Respecting the admins methods?

Ah here now; telling us who’s in the admin team is NOT gonna make it easier to avoid detection by not making hacker mistakes… Let’s not be daft.

Sorry but apart from title, in terms of analysing a suspected cheater what seperates an “admin” from an “independent adjudicator”?

The way I see it your suggestion could be cut down to “Get more admins.”

I have more confidence in the etf2l admin team then this banned person pursuing his innocence in a clumsy way tbh.

My basic thought in this is the rule of who benefits most. Etf2l is a free league with only a couple of steelseries headsets for the absolute winner. The places below nr1 div1 in gains technically dont count. The etf2l admin team sacrifices free their free time and expertise for to keep this fun league clean. The only result they get out of their actions is the rage of the convicted and their own altruistic sense of doing good. (you do agree abra that hackes should be banned for the good of all?).

Now I dont know a great deal on the subject of hacking. I’ve been new to this game, and I actually was intrigued that people actually pay a fair amount of cash to appear like they are awesome. And to be fair cheating (doping) occurs in all types of sports.

Now, whilst in most sports quite substancial amounts of money can be made, and also fame, while in this particular esport the grand prize is a 50 euro headset.

So it follows the only prize to be gained by hacking, is epeen, fame.

Now. What has the etf2l admin team to gain from their pov? I think the only thing they gain from their jobs is the hatred an flame from the people they banned.

I dont think neither of the parties (hackers and admins) is after being hated/scorned by a large group of people. And thats why I think admins try to be absolutely sure when they ban someone, and hackes try everything in their power to not get caught.

Now to get OT (finally): KOVACS i dont agree the admin team should give insight in their methods. Not to the general public. To make a rulesystem to maximize objectivity and minimize unfairness would be great. But objectivity in this matter would always be questionable, and setting up this control system would only make the etf2l organisation more cumbersome/costly in manpower, while in the end still steamgroups would be made against the brave/poor man that would be responsible for handing out the bans. Also insight in the persecution methods would eventually lead to hacks circumventing them.

Its simple… enter the etf2l and abide the rules or don’t. If you don’t agree with their methods, dont play int the league. Its a free service dammit and everyone should be grateful some inglorious bastards spend their free time to keep the thing clean.

This means, players who are banned or deemed to be hacking by admins with no solid evidence other than their own subjective conclusions should have a right to appeal against the decision.

All cheats are banned with solid evidence lol.
Can you name one example of someone who’s banned without it?
As far as im aware all admins need to view the evidence and aggree the persons cheating before they can issue a ban, thats why all the bans come in big batches an it takes ages for cheats to become exposed.

No ones banned in this league because for example Byte, or winneh think” LOL THEIR DODGEY. BAN PLIX PLOX”

You’re just getting sucked in because Abra is actually a very skilled player but used hacks to gain that extra “edge”. All bans are correct, i guess you’re one of the “realease evidence so the hackers can see how to avoid detection better” crowd :-p

I have lost at the internet.

Please accept my resignation and ignore this post :<