Exploiting as an issue

Discuss master server operations and talk about your server clusters here.

Moderator: Master Server Staff

User avatar
The Toxic Avenger
Forum Staff
Posts: 1520
Joined: Fri May 25, 2012 1:12 am
Location: New Jersey
Clan: ???
Clan Tag: [???]
Contact:

RE: Exploiting as an issue

#61

Post by The Toxic Avenger » Mon Feb 08, 2016 6:40 pm

I don't remember any of the details from when Danzoa got banned; I was not involved with that IIRC, but yeah, deserved more.

Galactus BTW: for someone wanting an unban, your attitude is really vile and not doing you any favors.

User avatar
Galactus
Forum Regular
Posts: 351
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2012 9:22 am
Location: Belgium
Contact:

RE: Exploiting as an issue

#62

Post by Galactus » Mon Feb 08, 2016 6:42 pm

The Toxic Avenger wrote: Galactus BTW: for someone wanting an unban, your attitude is really vile and not doing you any favors.
I don't actually want an unban, I just want a ban that's more appropriate for what I did.

User avatar
Samurai
Frequent Poster Miles card holder
Posts: 907
Joined: Thu Jun 07, 2012 12:17 am
Location: England
Clan: Lost Faction
Clan Tag: [LF]

RE: Exploiting as an issue

#63

Post by Samurai » Mon Feb 08, 2016 6:47 pm

a year? :)

Code: Select all

00:11  <Jarin_cz>	i am pretty sure i have more doom friends than you

Ruin
Retired Staff / Community Team Member
Posts: 385
Joined: Tue May 29, 2012 8:43 pm
Location: The auto-parts store
Contact:

RE: Exploiting as an issue

#64

Post by Ruin » Mon Feb 08, 2016 6:48 pm

Catastrophe wrote: Tbh, it is kind of bullshit Danzoa actively exploited and got only a month. There are certainly some personal vendettas involved in this thread, but whatever. It's always been like this.
I just want to chime in on this part and say that I came to that decision mainly because this was something that we, at the time, have never really encountered before. There was nothing personal about Danzoa's ban. It honestly was a case of "oh shit, how do we handle this?" I intended it to be a way to signal that exploiting is not ok and those doing the same after seeing Danzoa get popped for it could expect harsher sentences. I originally wanted an announcement to be put on the boards, but I don't recall if that ever came to fruition.

~Back to lurking I go~
Last edited by Ruin on Mon Feb 08, 2016 6:49 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"Secondly, <PRO> is utter shit, and they're only "known" because almost all of them are also staff." - /vr/

User avatar
Galactus
Forum Regular
Posts: 351
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2012 9:22 am
Location: Belgium
Contact:

RE: Exploiting as an issue

#65

Post by Galactus » Mon Feb 08, 2016 6:51 pm

Ruin wrote: I just want to chime in on this part and say that I came to that decision mainly because this was something that we, at the time, have never really encountered before. There was nothing personal about Danzoa's ban. It honestly was a case of "oh shit, how do we handle this?" I intended it to be a way to signal that exploiting is not ok and those doing the same after seeing Danzoa get popped for it could expect harsher sentences. I originally wanted an announcement to be put on the boards, but I don't recall if that ever came to fruition.

~Back to lurking I go~
Couldn't you gradually increase the lenght of the bans instead of going from 1 week straight too 3 months? If I was aware that what I was doing was worth the lenght of the ban, then I obviously wouldn't have done it

Ruin
Retired Staff / Community Team Member
Posts: 385
Joined: Tue May 29, 2012 8:43 pm
Location: The auto-parts store
Contact:

RE: Exploiting as an issue

#66

Post by Ruin » Mon Feb 08, 2016 6:53 pm

Galactus wrote:
Ruin wrote: I just want to chime in on this part and say that I came to that decision mainly because this was something that we, at the time, have never really encountered before. There was nothing personal about Danzoa's ban. It honestly was a case of "oh shit, how do we handle this?" I intended it to be a way to signal that exploiting is not ok and those doing the same after seeing Danzoa get popped for it could expect harsher sentences. I originally wanted an announcement to be put on the boards, but I don't recall if that ever came to fruition.

~Back to lurking I go~
Couldn't you gradually increase the lenght of the bans instead of going from 1 week straight too 3 months? If I was aware that what I was doing was worth the lenght of the ban, then I obviously wouldn't have done it
That decision is no longer up to me, as I am no longer part of the staff. Though I'm sure someone who is will be able to answer that for you. Though I think that is a good suggestion to discuss.
Last edited by Ruin on Mon Feb 08, 2016 6:54 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"Secondly, <PRO> is utter shit, and they're only "known" because almost all of them are also staff." - /vr/

User avatar
John Zombie
Forum Regular
Posts: 219
Joined: Mon Jun 04, 2012 1:59 pm

RE: Exploiting as an issue

#67

Post by John Zombie » Mon Feb 08, 2016 6:55 pm

Galactus wrote:
John Zombie wrote: It's all good, you acted exactly like the aforementioned individuals once caught thinking you'd get a shorter ban sentence as well and got disappointed when you didn't. Better luck next time :cry:
If I was caught actually ruining the game for someone I would fully own up to it, but this is just not the case. Do you honestly believe I could use the ssg drop to cheat? Don't you think people would notice if suddenly a stack of ssg's would be on a place where there normally aren't any?
People might notice a stack, but would they notice a single drop at an unconvenient spawn? Unless someone is F12ing you I don't think so.

Besides the point about the question you still haven't answered stands: if you're using a hacked exe packed with a bunch of exploits rather than the default exe you're certainly up to no good, otherwise you would've just used the default exe like everyone else; the fact you didn't send the exe to admins when you got asked to (pretending you didn't read the message later on) summed to the constant arrogant attitude, denial and contradictions did the rest more than the exploit itself.

TL;DR you're full of shit
Last edited by John Zombie on Mon Feb 08, 2016 7:00 pm, edited 1 time in total.
[quote=mr. Coherence]
Logging started at Sat Dec 28 00:47:52 2013
00:47:52 <capodecima> http://zandronum.com/forum/showthread.p ... 8#pid55238
00:48:10 <capodecima> can you post something here ?
00:48:29 <capodecima> decay just crap talk about me all time when beat me and after avoid my challenge lol
[/quote]

Tux
Forum Regular
Posts: 510
Joined: Mon Jun 04, 2012 1:18 pm
Location: satan's gaping anus
Contact:

RE: Exploiting as an issue

#68

Post by Tux » Mon Feb 08, 2016 7:06 pm

Decay wrote: Galactus is one of those people who needs every edge possible to win.
sorry for interrupting your polite conversation but you're doing the same, trying to grab absolutely every edge to get him banned :lol:
peace.
Image
dear diary, tux today was a faggot again[/size]

User avatar
The Toxic Avenger
Forum Staff
Posts: 1520
Joined: Fri May 25, 2012 1:12 am
Location: New Jersey
Clan: ???
Clan Tag: [???]
Contact:

RE: Exploiting as an issue

#69

Post by The Toxic Avenger » Mon Feb 08, 2016 10:27 pm

HEY EVERYONE:
Please no:
- Attacks on random members like what was going on with Decay/Blue.
- Random offtopic derail posts like Aenima's.

I've already split thirteen posts from this thread, I really hope to not have to split more!
Last edited by The Toxic Avenger on Mon Feb 08, 2016 10:28 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Ru5tK1ng
Frequent Poster Miles card holder
Posts: 794
Joined: Fri Jun 01, 2012 9:04 pm

RE: Exploiting as an issue

#70

Post by Ru5tK1ng » Mon Feb 08, 2016 10:57 pm

Galactus wrote: Lastly I didn't throw anyone under the bus, open this http://pastebin.com/DnNg3d5G do CTRL+F, type carp and see how I'm not the first person to mention his name. It was already established that he got reported and was going to get banned.
Honestly, I don't know if it's a language barrier, if you're that dense, if you're trolling or if you're that retarded. There are clear examples of you throwing others under the bus in that pastebin, but whatever.
Blue wrote: Galactus is correct. His ban is extremely biased from outsiders in the community via personal vendettas which are affecting the decisions of master server admins. It seriously reminds me of this, and I don't want it happening again.
Is this the part where we play the world's smallest violin?

That entire YT incident is completely external to the community in terms of servers and what not. It's hardly related to this incident. Also, if there were personal vendettas playing a part as you claim, he would have been banned for far longer.

Another thing worth mentioning is that multiple people have brought up fatelord's and denzoa's ban period and have compared them to these bans. Please keep in mind that members of the staff have been shifted around since then. Different people have different ways of interpreting the rules and dealing with people. Some do well and some fuck up. Can't really do much about Fatelord now even if many people feel he should still be banned. It sucks, but that's how the hand played out.
Projects

EonDM - With Hatred as my sidekick.
RageCTF - Made 1 map and did much more.
DBAB LMS - Pack made for Last Man Standing.
EonWeapons - Improve vanilla weapons and add stuff for kicks.
Progressive Duel - Leaving the old behind.
IDL201X CTF - Maintaining since 2013.
Strife AA - Helped tested + 1 map

User avatar
Erma
Forum Regular
Posts: 418
Joined: Wed Nov 07, 2012 11:39 pm

RE: Exploiting as an issue

#71

Post by Erma » Tue Feb 09, 2016 12:33 am

I have no idea why, but I get the feeling this has happened before (not specifically with Galactus); but has it happened before that some Zandronum admin was being unruly in his actions? In any case, glad that justice has been served.
Image

TerminusEst13
Retired Staff / Community Team Member
Posts: 865
Joined: Tue Jun 05, 2012 11:06 pm

RE: Exploiting as an issue

#72

Post by TerminusEst13 » Tue Feb 09, 2016 2:29 am

Yo, I'm noticing a lot of discussion going on about comparing ban lengths. Danzoa only gets one week for actively malicious exploits. Fatelord gets two months for wallhacking. "Harmless" exploits get 3/4 months? Seems a little inconsistent, doesn't it?
Well, yes. It's completely inconsistent, and this brings up something we're hoping to address--everyone doing different rulings under different circumstances with completely different ideas of what's good and what's not. At the risk of stating the obvious, the staff is not one single entity. We all have different ideas as to what's a fair metric.

http://zandronum.com/forum/announcements.php?aid=17 - We do have a singular metric here, but the problem we keep running into is that it's an incredibly broad umbrella that doesn't (or maybe shouldn't) apply to everything. Every single ruling we've done so far has been tempered with "one year is a lot, isn't it?", and then whittling it down based on what seems "appropriate", with inflation adjusted as to cooperation or severity or cluelessness or whatever other external factors.

Frankly, this is biting us in the ass now, and it's something that we need to stop doing. I don't speak for everyone, but I still want to personally apologize to the userbase for mis-stepping like this. This doesn't do much to inspire confidence in us as fair people, because...well, it isn't.
But it's something we're going to be taking steps to adjust, and a scenario like this is our first step to start it. And if we let this one slide and started with the next one, it'd be the same complaint next time. Why two months for Fatelord and one octoyear for me?? Why does Danzoa get a slap on the wrist and I get an outright ban ??? ??

But we're going to be rectifying this, starting with this event. We're actually working right now on a more consistent metric of how long for what offense.
Last edited by TerminusEst13 on Tue Feb 09, 2016 2:38 am, edited 1 time in total.
The Ranger - New class for HeXen.
ZDoom Wars - I drew some pictures.
Samsara - Some class-based mod I guess?
Metroid: Dreadnought - I am a dumb fanboy.
DemonSteele - ~come with me to anime world~

Jenova
Under Moderation
Posts: 199
Joined: Fri Jun 08, 2012 8:05 am
Location: Africa
Contact:

RE: Exploiting as an issue

#73

Post by Jenova » Tue Feb 09, 2016 3:26 am

I think a lot of people are jumping the gun. Is Galactus a retarded euro? yeah, but what he did shouldn't even be classified as cheating tbh.

Also a lot of people dismissed it but using this categorization the full-speed sr50 is technically an "exploit". Is the only difference between the two the fact that one uses a modified client? If so, then how come people were also banned (at least from FC) for abusing the "summon bfgball x1000" bind to lag and skip across the map?

From what I can tell this bug was reported like 3 months ago, not fixed, and used by Galactus to drop a ssg during a map pick during a scrim. I can understand banning him for 3 months or whatever if he used it during an actual game, but the dude was just dicking around. I mean sure its an exploit, but I doubt there was any malicious intent behind this, the dude was probably just dicking around.
Last edited by Jenova on Tue Feb 09, 2016 3:35 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Frits
Forum Regular
Posts: 298
Joined: Fri Jun 01, 2012 9:04 pm

RE: Exploiting as an issue

#74

Post by Frits » Tue Feb 09, 2016 9:20 am

Jenova wrote: From what I can tell this bug was reported like 3 months ago, not fixed, and used by Galactus to drop a ssg during a map pick during a scrim. I can understand banning him for 3 months or whatever if he used it during an actual game, but the dude was just dicking around. I mean sure its an exploit, but I doubt there was any malicious intent behind this, the dude was probably just dicking around.
Sensible post. There was no malicious intent but the consensus seems to be that there somehow was? A 3 month ban for dropping a gun during warm-up just for laughs seems a bit overkill.

Code: Select all

Mode #grandvoid -o Konar6 by Frits
<Konar6> the fuck
<Konar6> who made this IRC
<Konar6> how is this possible

Konda
Forum Regular
Posts: 487
Joined: Thu Jun 07, 2012 5:22 pm

RE: Exploiting as an issue

#75

Post by Konda » Tue Feb 09, 2016 11:47 am

Well, it appears a lot of people don't like the guy so it doesn't surprise me that they blow the wistle so hard. At this point it's probably best to not use anything that can be classified as an exploit, if you want to avoid accusations like "he knew it for months, who knows how many times he cheated", assumptions on your knowledge of the staff's knowledge like "he didn't know the staff knew, so his intent was malicious", and especially "cheating is cheating, end of story". People are very sensitive to cheating and exploits - either that or they're not as sensitive as their reactions tell, but don't mind pulling off such reactions if the right person does it.
Last edited by Konda on Tue Feb 09, 2016 11:50 am, edited 1 time in total.

Code: Select all

<Synert> fuck
<Synert> plugged in my memory stick and got a bsod

User avatar
ZZYZX
Posts a lot
Posts: 742
Joined: Thu Jun 07, 2012 5:56 pm
Location: Ukraine
Clan: A3
Clan Tag: [A3]

RE: Exploiting as an issue

#76

Post by ZZYZX » Tue Feb 09, 2016 11:52 am

Ru5tK1ng wrote:Another thing worth mentioning is that multiple people have brought up fatelord's and denzoa's ban period and have compared them to these bans. Please keep in mind that members of the staff have been shifted around since then. Different people have different ways of interpreting the rules and dealing with people. Some do well and some fuck up. Can't really do much about Fatelord now even if many people feel he should still be banned. It sucks, but that's how the hand played out.
This is why the punishments for rule violation should be more specific and not precedent-based (this is not followed anyway) and not based on the wish of left bottom limb of a master admin like in this case.

The following is random, just meant to suggest the general direction.

For example, exploiting and cheating.
Exploiting = using absence of serverside checks, like Galactus or that old kgsws hack to score 22 flags on 5 pointlimit, or making some purely clientside code to assist playing.
Cheating = using the aforementioned code for advantage above other players.

Base length for exploiting = 1, doing it on public server = *2, cheating = *24, recidivism = *N where N is count of previous violations. The resultant number will be weeks, if anything.

The calculations were based on the fact chat cheaters get 1 yr ban.

By this:
1) exploiting = (no one cares what you do locally anyway)
2) exploiting in pub = 2 weeks
3) cheating in pub = 1 year
4) cheating not in pub = 0.5 years

By public server a server that's advertised to master is meant.
Last edited by ZZYZX on Tue Feb 09, 2016 12:48 pm, edited 1 time in total.

mifu
Retired Staff / Community Team Member
Posts: 1075
Joined: Tue May 29, 2012 10:34 am
Location: Aussie Land
Clan: Demon RiderZ

RE: Exploiting as an issue

#77

Post by mifu » Tue Feb 09, 2016 1:06 pm

ZZYZX wrote:
Ru5tK1ng wrote:Another thing worth mentioning is that multiple people have brought up fatelord's and denzoa's ban period and have compared them to these bans. Please keep in mind that members of the staff have been shifted around since then. Different people have different ways of interpreting the rules and dealing with people. Some do well and some fuck up. Can't really do much about Fatelord now even if many people feel he should still be banned. It sucks, but that's how the hand played out.
This is why the punishments for rule violation should be more specific and not precedent-based (this is not followed anyway) and not based on the wish of left bottom limb of a master admin like in this case.

The following is random, just meant to suggest the general direction.

For example, exploiting and cheating.
Exploiting = using absence of serverside checks, like Galactus or that old kgsws hack to score 22 flags on 5 pointlimit, or making some purely clientside code to assist playing.
Cheating = using the aforementioned code for advantage above other players.

Base length for exploiting = 1, doing it on public server = *2, cheating = *24, recidivism = *N where N is count of previous violations. The resultant number will be weeks, if anything.

The calculations were based on the fact chat cheaters get 1 yr ban.
Maybe you should post HERE as well :)

Also i want to point out that despite all things Gal and Carp could of got a year because right now by the book cheaters get a year and this would of probably been an issue. We realized this so we reduced his ban already.

We are not going to be able to reduce this again because of the simple fact that we already did

Gal, your not on irc so I'll post this here since you asked us to reconsider your ban. As stated, we are not going to be able to do it, but what I will do is we will see how things go on a certain period and then re-review your case then during your time spent on the ban. I wont tell you when here obviously so you will need to come have a chat to me, but that's what we have decided. We do believe that maybe during the time circumstances will change. It's the best we can offer, so take it or leave it, it's up to you.

If we start reducing more bans, then other people will probably do the same thing, which is something we do not want hence that thread I linked. I want everyone's opinions on it (including yours Gal, instead of fighting.. doing good stuff might be a contributing factor)

If we start reducing more bans, we may aswell go ahead and either unban most cheaters or reduce ban times of current cheaters (this would also go for shadowfox and kalfoxis)

If that ban is not fair and it gets reduced, then every other cheater ban is also simply not fair. That's what i am trying to get at.
Image

User avatar
Galactus
Forum Regular
Posts: 351
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2012 9:22 am
Location: Belgium
Contact:

RE: Exploiting as an issue

#78

Post by Galactus » Tue Feb 09, 2016 1:39 pm

mifu wrote: Maybe you should post HERE as well :)

Also i want to point out that despite all things Gal and Carp could of got a year because right now by the book cheaters get a year and this would of probably been an issue. We realized this so we reduced his ban already.

We are not going to be able to reduce this again because of the simple fact that we already did

Gal, your not on irc so I'll post this here since you asked us to reconsider your ban. As stated, we are not going to be able to do it, but what I will do is we will see how things go on a certain period and then re-review your case then during your time spent on the ban. I wont tell you when here obviously so you will need to come have a chat to me, but that's what we have decided. We do believe that maybe during the time circumstances will change. It's the best we can offer, so take it or leave it, it's up to you.

If we start reducing more bans, then other people will probably do the same thing, which is something we do not want hence that thread I linked. I want everyone's opinions on it (including yours Gal, instead of fighting.. doing good stuff might be a contributing factor)

If we start reducing more bans, we may aswell go ahead and either unban most cheaters or reduce ban times of current cheaters (this would also go for shadowfox and kalfoxis)

If that ban is not fair and it gets reduced, then every other cheater ban is also simply not fair. That's what i am trying to get at.
You've tried to do what you could and there's nothing more I could ask from you, so I'm thanking you for that.

Jenova
Under Moderation
Posts: 199
Joined: Fri Jun 08, 2012 8:05 am
Location: Africa
Contact:

RE: Exploiting as an issue

#79

Post by Jenova » Tue Feb 09, 2016 2:47 pm

mifu wrote:
ZZYZX wrote:
Ru5tK1ng wrote:Another thing worth mentioning is that multiple people have brought up fatelord's and denzoa's ban period and have compared them to these bans. Please keep in mind that members of the staff have been shifted around since then. Different people have different ways of interpreting the rules and dealing with people. Some do well and some fuck up. Can't really do much about Fatelord now even if many people feel he should still be banned. It sucks, but that's how the hand played out.
This is why the punishments for rule violation should be more specific and not precedent-based (this is not followed anyway) and not based on the wish of left bottom limb of a master admin like in this case.

The following is random, just meant to suggest the general direction.

For example, exploiting and cheating.
Exploiting = using absence of serverside checks, like Galactus or that old kgsws hack to score 22 flags on 5 pointlimit, or making some purely clientside code to assist playing.
Cheating = using the aforementioned code for advantage above other players.

Base length for exploiting = 1, doing it on public server = *2, cheating = *24, recidivism = *N where N is count of previous violations. The resultant number will be weeks, if anything.

The calculations were based on the fact chat cheaters get 1 yr ban.
Maybe you should post HERE as well :)

Also i want to point out that despite all things Gal and Carp could of got a year because right now by the book cheaters get a year and this would of probably been an issue. We realized this so we reduced his ban already.

We are not going to be able to reduce this again because of the simple fact that we already did

Gal, your not on irc so I'll post this here since you asked us to reconsider your ban. As stated, we are not going to be able to do it, but what I will do is we will see how things go on a certain period and then re-review your case then during your time spent on the ban. I wont tell you when here obviously so you will need to come have a chat to me, but that's what we have decided. We do believe that maybe during the time circumstances will change. It's the best we can offer, so take it or leave it, it's up to you.

If we start reducing more bans, then other people will probably do the same thing, which is something we do not want hence that thread I linked. I want everyone's opinions on it (including yours Gal, instead of fighting.. doing good stuff might be a contributing factor)

If we start reducing more bans, we may aswell go ahead and either unban most cheaters or reduce ban times of current cheaters (this would also go for shadowfox and kalfoxis)

If that ban is not fair and it gets reduced, then every other cheater ban is also simply not fair. That's what i am trying to get at.
Saying that you can't reduce his ban just because you already reduced his ban doesn't make much sense.

Also, I don't understand how Kalfoxis, Shadowfox or any other cheaters have anything to do with this? I'm genuinely confused unless you somehow mean to imply that what Galactus did was somehow as bad as cheating, getting caught, and then proxying like 600 times while still cheating? How hard is it to differentiate between a harmless exploit and chronic cheaters?

The reason those scenarios can't be directly compared (besides cheating vs. exploiting thing) is also because of the context behind it. You guys are trying to enforce some dumb "no exploits" rule without taking the context of the situation into account. It's like some dude breaking into a car on a hot sunny day to save a baby on the inside. Are you going to put him in jail too? Obviously I'm not implying Galactus is some sort of hero here, but you can see how there's a big difference if you're breaking into a car to save someone vs. stealing it.

Carpathia
 
Posts: 34
Joined: Thu Jun 14, 2012 7:07 pm
Location: Potato land

RE: Exploiting as an issue

#80

Post by Carpathia » Tue Feb 09, 2016 5:00 pm

I still don't understand why it took the admins 4 months to decide to ban me, despite them being aware of what I did. Seems like it's just an excuse to ban me as no one cared for the past 4 months.
Image

Post Reply