|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Cpt Branko
Retired Pirate Club
   |
Posted - 2010.04.22 22:10:00 -
[1]
Edited by: Cpt Branko on 22/04/2010 22:14:03
The logs show nothing so surely nothing happened and since when does CCP accept evidence which is not the logs?
You are surely delusional. The logs show nothing.
Edit: no seriously, what proof does CCP have vs huhuhuhu and it doesn't have vs monkeysphere? The logs show nothing. The rest is just heresay and trolling and the logs show nothing and you cannot go around believing stuff which is not in the logs, which show nothing. Since the logs show nothing the video is obviously a fake.
If CCP reproduces it, then they cannot prove huhuhuhu did it in that precise way, as the logs show nothing.
Tl;dr version: the logs. They show nothing.
Sig removed, inappropriate link. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint |
Cpt Branko
Retired Pirate Club
|
Posted - 2010.04.22 23:02:00 -
[2]
Edited by: Cpt Branko on 22/04/2010 23:03:15
 Originally by: Lady Spank
This is not a witch hunt. I just believe that anyone with access to an unfair advantage should not be given that opportunity. As such, the only person proven to have this advantage is huhuhuhuhuhuh.
The logs. They show nothing.
No, seriously; IF we are going to go by "we need definite proof to ban monkeysphere" since he's just doing, I don't know, a clever logoffski with perfect timing then we also need definite proof to ban huhuhuhu and his video is a shop and he's just trolling he can do it, right?
The standard of proof is the problem; CCP's policy has always been (and in that way the petitions by the guys who got killed using the exploit were handled) is that if logs show nothing, you **** off.
So using THAT standard of proof, please prove huhuhuhu was hacking.
Sig removed, inappropriate link. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint |
Cpt Branko
Retired Pirate Club
|
Posted - 2010.04.23 11:12:00 -
[3]
Edited by: Cpt Branko on 23/04/2010 11:18:56
Until we can get definite irrefutable proof via the system (and not player testimonials) that someone is using a exploit, we cannot ban them unless we accept that player testimonials (in whatever form) are valid proof that someone is exploiting.
Either proof beyond reasonable doubt is the standard or it is not.
Furthermore, knowing a exploit being bannable leads to the following situation:
(a) I uncover a exploit.
(b) I use my alt to send you a ingame mail detailing how the exploit is done. (which is logged somewhere, so proof exists)
(c) Both my alt and your main get banned for knowing a exploit.
Knowing how a exploit is done becoming a bannable offense is definitely exploitable itself. For instance, imagine if he posted how the exploit is done in the thread; should not every single player who read the thread get banned for it?
Originally by: kaisersauzee
I agree to banning this character.....are we supposed to just take his word that he wont use the exploit to his advantage in TQ
How is this different then taking his word that the exploit exists and he didn't just shop the video? 
Sig removed, inappropriate link. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint |
Cpt Branko
Retired Pirate Club
|
Posted - 2010.04.23 23:49:00 -
[4]
A interesting question; do you consider that CCP should implement a policy that people who provably have knowledge of how to exploit get banned until the exploit is fixed? 
Sig removed, inappropriate link. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint |
|
|
| |
|