Hacking bans on frail evidence and with intent disproved?

Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by The Infamous Doc Holiday, Oct 4, 2018.

  1. Disclaimer: I want to make clear that I may have this whole thing ass-backwards, making this statement irrelevant and stupid. That being said, I think I have paid pretty close attention to this whole series of events, going back to its first installments, and these are my two cents on the matter, as I understand it, being fairly confident I see the whole picture. If I am wrong, I welcome the correction.

    Also, and equally important, I hasten to note that we don't have a lot of information yet; the speculation below is based on what is currently available that I am aware of, and explanation of this recent ban and the vague charge of "sabotaging the system" will likely change things. However, it would be important to hear from the player in question again, but it seems that he has also been banned from the forums; hopefully we'll somehow be able to hear more from him to round out this picture.

    I'm sure it's evident this is about "rice and chicken". If we go back to his previous appeal(s), we find the same situation as what happened just a few days back.

    Based on the very long discussion in the previous encounters, and the immense amount of video evidence we were able to review, coupled with a few other factors, as well as myself having played for some time on the servers with the man in question, I find it puzzling to be banning him for hacking, and, as others pointed out, ridiculous when you take into account the poor quality of the video evidence relied on to ban him.

    I personally am not invested in his fate, but I find it disconcerting to be setting such a precedent of dishing out such weighty punishments on such flimsy evidence, something that will likely take us nowhere good. Now, granted, this is what we usually do rely on when banning hackers, but the situation is different here.

    Here we have a player who gives evidence from other venues of his above average skill, which, upon cursory examination of footage of pro matches of, say, CS:GO, is quite apparent does legitimately exist. It almost seems as though these bans are being lazily dished out because we don't see that kind of play around here and just assume it is cheating.

    Add to that the fact that "rice and chicken" has from the very start expressed his willingness to play under supervision, to provide recordings and have others capture high quality recordings, in order to show how his playstyle is legitimate, and I have to say that the case for him being legitimate is very strong, while the case for him hacking seems to be very weak. These would not seem to be the actions and assertions of a player who is cheating, but one who is legitimate and of a very high skill level and radically different playstyle, and who is offering to help our staff in proving the aforementioned legitimacy. This is what is puzzling and raises question about his bans.

    At the very least, I believe these points need considering:
    A) that the skill level that "rice and chicken" would seem to possess does exist and shouldn't be dismissed;
    B) higher quality recordings should become what we rely on as evidence when banning, rather than the Source demos.

    I want to end again with saying this is how I see what we currently know as far as I am aware of it. I may be wrong, or information that will be revealed in the future may prove me wrong. Thanks.
    @Opalium @HelixSpiral @ryanstein

    UPDATE: Just to clarify, in response to some false speculation, caused by people skimming over the details: I am not here because I specifically want to defend "rice and chicken". My purpose is to seek answers and urge the exercise of caution and careful judgement in these type of unclear situations.
    All of that for whatever my opinion on it is worth; like I said, just my 0.02
    Last edited: Oct 4, 2018
    • Agree x 4
    • Dumb x 3
    • Like x 1
    • Disagree x 1
    • Useful x 1
  2. jshore

    jshore MVP

    rice and chicken is a loser and somehow you all are defending him. he's playing you all and somehow even after opal banned him you all still pulling this Jim Jones shit outta your ass lmao. you all just gonna forget that he had a spectator cheat that the anticheat picked up and when I was spectating him on an alt he some how knew I was spectating him lmao...

    you delusional
    • Winner x 3
    • Dumb x 3
    • Funny x 2
    • Friendly x 1
    • Optimistic x 1
  3. If you bothered to read my post and use some cognitive capacity to process what you read, you would have made a much more respectable and actually helpful reply. I seem to remember you calling people "retarded" recently in the SB...might be something you want to pick up on there.

    However, I thank you for the information about the spec monitor, information I was not aware of, as stated above. Would be good to see some corroboration.
    • Funny Funny x 5
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1
    • Dumb Dumb x 1
  4. jshore

    jshore MVP

    nah I read it just looks like you don't know how to determine cheating lol
    • Like Like x 1
    • Useful Useful x 1
  5. neutral

    neutral Banned VIP

    You're wrong. The evidence on Rice and Chicken was 100% conclusive and on the server side of things. Opalium just hasn't gotten to the appeal yet.

    EDIT: A bit of a side note btw on the topic as a whole.

    This issue was brought up about 4-5 months ago (I believe Han made the thread). We made some pretty drastic changes on the staff team side of things. EVERY hacking ban has evidence posted where anyone on the staff team can review it as a sort of peer review type of measure. Furthermore, every second offense ban has both the first offense, and second offense reviewed by a lead admin before being issued a permaban. We put quite a bit of check and balances for hacking bans in at the time.
    • Winner x 5
    • Like x 4
    • Agree x 1
    • Disagree x 1
    • Informative x 1
  6. Noccam :^)

    Noccam :^) Member

    I think the main problem is that there are ways he can make sure he isn't caught even under supervision. No staff member is going to spectate him all day long to watch and make sure he isn't hacking, especially if there is a chance that he is using a program that reveals when he is being spectated. While he has "proof" that he is that good in other games, theres no way to tell if he's actually that good, if he's hacking, or if he has doctored footage. I do believe there is credit to the idea that because he hasn't been banned by anti-cheat in other games he is innocent, but even then there's no guarantee ESPECIALLY on Garry's Mod, where the anti cheat might as well not even be there. There's way too much uncertainty to the case but there is one constant.

    EVERYONE on the server was tired of playing with him. His guaranteed headshots were frustrating the player base and everyone was advocating for his removal. Now of course that isn't grounds for a ban of any kind, but when the staff is also complaining about how obvious it is, there is a problem. Either he should be playing professionally but for whatever reason isn't, or he's playing better than he is capable of actually playing, ergo cheating. Why would someone with such great potential waste his time on a server where they aren't even having fun half of the time, constantly voting for de_dolls (Where snipers are incredibly strong), and constantly being accused of hacking?

    I'll mention that I have a personal history with Rice and Chicken because him and I have spent a lot of time debating whether or not he was hacking. The conclusion we reached is that 1) He's been banned 7 times for hacking from other servers. 2) He's never been banned by Anti-Cheat (as far as we know). His argument that 30 tick source demos aren't valid evidence is fair, but hit reg in Garry's Mod is also notoriously faulty which SHOULD make the shots he's hitting near impossible sometimes. He claimed that you can fix your tick rate by entering a console command which would make your aiming near 1:1 and almost 100% accurate eliminating hit reg problems, but that doesn't quite make sense to me so I'll let other people talk about that point or debate it.

    For me, there is just too much in the air regarding the case but I think it's because of that uncertainty that the ban was issued. It should be a cut and dry case - he's either hacking or he's not. Never before have we had a case that was so uncertain and for that to be true there has to be something we are missing or something that is intentionally being left out.

    On the topic of your "Points that should be considered":
    A) The skill level that Rice and Chicken has is shared equally between pros and hackers alike, and the possibility of using illegal programs to hide any hacking along with 30 tick servers makes determining which he is nearly impossible.
    B) I agree that higher quality recordings should be what we rely on when banning, but they aren't always available. At this time though everyone should be able to download OBS and record so I am in agreeance with you there.

    On another note, why is your profile picture facing the opposite way of your signature?
    • Like Like x 1
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1
  7. Doctor Smurfenstein

    Doctor Smurfenstein Active member Banned VIP

    There's also a typo if you compare the profile name to the signature.
    And again, no one bothers to TLDR
    • Funny Funny x 2
  8. Rozboon

    Rozboon Forgive and Forget, or just forget. VIP

    Is the command to "fix your tick rate" downloading hacks? Did he say what the command was? cause i have yet to find any commands to fix the shit reg of Gmod.
    • Informative Informative x 1
  9. Noccam :^)

    Noccam :^) Member

    He actually gave me the console command but I forget what it was because I don't really care for hitting my shots, I play for the interaction cause I have no friends :)
    • Friendly Friendly x 2
    • Funny Funny x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1
  10. Saturnity

    Saturnity SGMs Personal Planet VIP

    Well, it's just a visual thing, doesn't actually help you. But if i recall it's cl_cmdrate 33
  11. Nathan776

    Nathan776 Moderator VIP

    Cl_cmdrate 33 doesn't do anything of use to you. It should already be set to the max plausible to the server. This is just the command that is used to mask ping if you got over the limit in function. Obviously different for different source games but for gmod pretty much all it is.
    • Like Like x 1
  12. Rozboon

    Rozboon Forgive and Forget, or just forget. VIP

    You could put in the perfect commands in console and it wont make you be able to play it like cs go, the models have shit boxes and the game itself has shit reg.
    • Agree Agree x 1
  13. Tedelicious

    Tedelicious The knight in white armor! Elite

    Let's get back on topic guys and girls.

    First of all i can feel and see what you see infamous duck, but as a former staff member and head assistent moderator "unofficial role but officially mine" i have seen it from the other side of the story as well.

    If there is a thread with all recent hacking offenses to ensure they have proof for hackers because if they get caught the amount of time that was set to keep video's of hacking was almost as long as the ban lenght was for a second offsense so you only had a few weeks to get them on their second offense for the perm ban. Do keep in mind everytime somebody gets banned for a first offense the video is first seen first hand by a moderator. Secondly by an admin who has to global the ban.

    So for a second offense ban already 4 people at least have seen the evidence so in my opinion if 4 people have seen it wich of 2 first hand and 2 by video evidence and maybe even more mods who watch the thread or players who were spectating such player in game.

    With that in mind i believe the change that you have not been hacking on a second offense for hacking is a chance of 1:99.000.000

    How i got this number? When i was mod i found about 3-10 hackers a week. This in mind with the appeals accepted for hacking i come to the conclusion that there will only be 1 guy that i banned for hacking in my lifespan that was not hacking.

  14. Pacifist

    Pacifist Very Strange Lead Admin VIP+ Bronze

    I think the whole thing is silly to be honest. Your argument and your tone says two different things. You proclaim to be neutral, but you bring up a problem with how his hacking ban was handled? Look man if you want to give your opinion on this do it or stop wasting my time.

    Personally? I didn't handle Rice and Chicken's ban, but the people who did? I'd figure they'd have the know how and capability to handle such a ban. Helix and Opalium aren't idiots, and especially if they had back end knowledge? A hacker got banned. This is a non-issue.
    • Agree Agree x 3
    • Winner Winner x 3
    • Confusing Confusing x 1
  15. First of all, I'd like to thank (most) everyone who has contributed here. This is the kind of productive discourse I was very much hoping for and wish we could see in this community more often.

    Reiterating my reasons for the original post, I wanted to: A) voice my concerns; B) gain some knowledge. As already stated, I made the post based on all the facts that I was aware of at the time, as I saw them. I am better informed at this time, so, again, thank you.

    Thanks for your input; hopefully, as you say, we'll see some information come to light soon that, again, hopefully, will put this to rest. On the note of the peer review, obviously that is a tremendously helpful step in the right direction; however, I still see us being in the predicament of reviewing evidence that is sub-par, without the aid of a more solid way of detecting cheats, as @Noccam :^) stated. Obviously, if that is the best we can do, that is the best we can do. Once again, my whole concern is that caution be exercised, and when we think we have done so, do it again.

    Special thanks to you, sir; I find this post very well thought out and helpful. Obviously, as you say, his invitation to prove his innocence under supervision could very well be deceptive. Now, I can't say this for 100% certain, so, I welcome the correction if I am wrong on this, but I feel like perhaps it was an offer that might not have been taken up as well as it should have been. He extended this suggestion multiple times, and, once again, without certainty, I suspect it may not have been utilized as well as it could have been, which would be concerning, as it would be a very useful way to find answers to this unique problem. I think it would be helpful to see a high quality recording of him playing when all parties are aware he was being spectated by staff, and compare it to the evidence used to justify his previous bans.

    I think you hit the nail right on the head as far as the AC. The fact that we are relying on manual review of evidence I think we can all agree on is dubious as far as reliability, coupled with the fact that he hasn't, as far as we know, been banned by credible AC, just leaves this black hole of uncertainty at present. In the face of those facts, to be banning would seem to be rash and of poor judgement. And the charge of "sabotaging the system" and "back end" or "server side" knowledge, when as you say, such systems as a AC on these servers might as well not exist, seems somewhat idiotic. But, that is just as we see it now; hopefully, as @HelixSpiral said, we will see some new facts soon to explain this mess.

    As far as the public opinion, I would say it is worth noting, but, as you already said yourself, is not anywhere near grounds for punishment of any kind, and is just poor sportsmanship. I too spent some time playing with the man, and I did get handily whupped many times. However, I also defeated him at his own game a fair share, too. It is quite possible that this was just a "fluke" in his cheats, but I just didn't feel like it was hacking, comparing it to incidents where there was no question from the get-go that hacking was present. As you said, we haven't seen this kind of thing before, which, unfortunately, muddies the waters. And I wouldn't use "if he is so good, why is he here" as an argument. To my knowledge, this community doesn't have a cap on skill level where you are excluded if you exceed it. If a legitimate player who is head and shoulders above the rest wants to play here, I think he should be allowed to do so.

    Your points about the mechanics of Gmod are new to me, something I hadn't considered before, and they make a lot of sense. Unfortunately, as you said, there is a lot of inconsistency, and even more uncertainty. My one and only concern here is the uncertainty. I am not trying to defend this particular individual for his own sake, but, as I currently see it, there just doesn't seem to be enough solid ground for his ban, and the fact that it was still issued just, to me, seems to open up a can of worms, carve a slippery slope, set a disturbing precedent. In my mind, it just seems like we haven't satisfied "innocent until proven guilty" and "when in doubt, check it out". And I realize this is a video game, not a murder trial, but we have striven very hard to create a high quality and fair community here, and the way this latest incident was handled doesn't seem to reflect that.

    Yes, it does seem, with the performance of Gmod, coupled with the lack of reliable AC programs, we are at a very sharp disadvantage when trying to dissect this kind of problem. I admit I am not certain what the best way to do is, but I just do feel more should be done and greater care should be exercised. And good point about OBS; as you say, there is no good excuse why with such good resources available we still rely on archaic methods, which, in the realm of staff business, IMO, should be prohibited.

    To your last question, I am not sure. I would have to ask @anime girl , but I think it's a nice touch, I am pretty happy with the sig.
    • Informative Informative x 1
    • Dumb Dumb x 1
  16. I appreciate the input, Tedilicious :p , but what you said seems awfully anecdotal. To your main argument, I am not sure I quite understood it, as it is worded rather oddly. But, as far as I understood what you said, it would seem to be that you're stating that there is pressure to justify perma banning someone for hacking, before the evidence expires, which would be rather alarming, if that is what you are saying. Please correct me if this is inaccurate.

    Now, do we have a plethora of good, solid evidence of his innocence that is not anecdotal? No, but that is precisely why I believe the action taken against him might not be justified, as we simply are shrouded by uncertainty, with some steps that would help appearing not to have been taken. AGAIN, I say based on what I am aware of now, as I see it. He may very well be a hacker who deserves this ban; it just isn't clear yet.

    Hey there, Pacifist. I think I have well enough reiterated above my purpose for the thread, so I won't say it again here right now. I do want to address the other two things you said though:
    When you say "give your opinion or stop wasting my time", it really is kind of strange. I don't want to get heated about this with you, which is what unfortunately occurred with other people who brought the same accusation against me. Hopefully this will help: this is a free and open public forum. If any one member feels that the expressions by another member are a "waste of time", I would say it denotes that the offended member has the wrong attitude about the whole venue. No one is going to tell, much less force you, to read something you would rather not. So, to complain about it in that manner would seem to be, bluntly, stupid, or the real waste of time. Again, bluntly, if you don't like something, don't stick around.

    As to your last statement, I am not at all trying to say that @HelixSpiral and @Opalium in any way are idiots, but that is really beside the point, isn't it? I don't think I, myself, am an idiot, but at the same time I don't profess to be perfect either.

    We've been here already, methinks. My name came about many years ago, and the nuanced spelling was something I decided to keep around for the heck of it. Perhaps, at Christmas, I will change it, just for you :)

    Also been there, too, but TLDRs are a sign of a chronic laziness, lack of good attention span, and perseverance. There is nothing wrong with a good executive summary, but this obsessive demand for the "TLDR" and subsequent outrage when one fails to appear is moronic. You wouldn't try live off three bites of food a day because you had no interest in sticking around for the length of the whole meal, would you? This is an extreme example, but I think you get the point.
  17. Rozboon

    Rozboon Forgive and Forget, or just forget. VIP

    All I'm getting from what you've said is that you think it's an unjust ban and will lead to many more unjust bans of "Pro" players because of this one situation?

    There's a lot of evidence that you are not able to see, not allowed to see and will never ever see. You have no rights to see said evidence, this isn't America, this is a private forum, a private company of sorts that can do whatever they want and honestly don't have to justify why they do something besides trying to keep the populace happy to keep people coming back, which means, since so many people bitched about rice, that this ban is actually a good thing and will result in people not getting tired of one guy who was "too good to be true" on a game that has a lot of engine side issues that prevent someone from playing at a pro position.

    Last thing, didn't rice always bitch about having a shit computer and that's why he couldn't stream or record video? With his record of being so good at games, why did no gaming houses try to pick him up?
  18. Xproplayer

    Xproplayer VIP Silver

    I'd rather lean towards a policy of false positives (banning clean people) rather than false negatives (letting hackers play)

    So fuck rice and chicken.
    • Winner x 2
    • Dislike x 1
    • Funny x 1
    • Optimistic x 1
    • Dumb x 1
  19. Pacifist

    Pacifist Very Strange Lead Admin VIP+ Bronze

    I wasn't upset that you wasted my time. I was more upset that you are pretending to be neutral when it seems that you are highly opinionated on the subject. :cigar:
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Funny Funny x 1
  20. Yes and no. To summarize once again, my concerns are that, as far as I am aware, because as you say, there is likely evidence we have not seen yet and evidence we may not ever see, the evidence to justify this ban is disturbingly weak; that, to the best of my knowledge at present, there were actions that could have been taken that appear not to have been; and that, yes, if the previous two concerns are true, that it sets a dangerous precedent.

    As far as the effect on player base, one could also argue that banning someone for "being too good" is likely to drive just as many people away on principle. We've seen that happen before.

    Your rant about evidence is quite amusing. Nowhere did I gripe about not being able to see everything I want to right now. I would hope, however, we would be able to see enough to show good justification, or at least a good explanation. Failure to do this would also hurt player base, as it would create the impression of the community being a dictatorship where the individual member doesn't matter, and would most certainly dissuade many newcomers from staying or donating, if that is how they felt they were treated. I am not saying this is the reality at present, but articulating what we want to be certain never happens.

    As far as the questions about his hardware, etc., those would certainly be strong pieces of evidence against him if they could be validated. Like I have said numerous times, I am not here preaching his innocence, I am just cautioning against the kind of action on poor evidence and in the face of such uncertainty that appears to have taken place. Rice may well be a hacker, and may deserve all the bans we could possibly give him; I just don't see that the facts are clear enough to proceed in that manner.

    You seem to have misunderstood me. I apologize if I wasn't clear. I am in neutral in regards to the fate of rice and chicken specifically. I am highly opinionated on the actions, lack of actions, poor evidence, and uncertainty that surrounds this incident. My concern isn't for this player specifically, but for the disconcerting circumstances pertaining to this situation that he is the subject of, because those will certainly affect many more people than him.

    However, on the subject of you saying that what someone else posts might be "wasting your time", my earlier response holds true.

    This kind of belief is contrary to the whole concept of justice.
    Obviously, this is a video game, and not real life, so we can approach things with some degree of flexibility. But, we should seriously consider these things and let these principles guide us, because our actions even here are not in a vacuum.

    The whole point here seems to continue to be missed: Rice and chicken may very well be this odious hacker, and may well deserve nothing less than a permanent ban. But, in light of what we currently know, as far as I am aware, the uncertainty is too great to say that. We must patiently wait for @Opalium to show the facts here, because we just don't know. My position is that in these situations care must be taken, and I know it already is, but, again, in light of what we currently know, as far as I am aware, it would seem not enough care may be being exercised in these situations. I hope I am wrong.
    • Funny Funny x 1