Hackers come and hackers go. And for once I think I might just play devils advocate for a group of people for whom I have no time for (except for the time required to write this column).
I'd like to use the example of
RazZ as this is the most recent, however I'm not assigning guilt, nor pointing a finger in his direction, as I am completely out of the loop on this scenario.
Lets say that RazZ cheated in a practice (I dont know fully whether he was caught in an official or not). However, lets say he cheated in a practice, who says you cant? Why is it clanbase's position to ban him, or for Warleagues to ban him?
The problem faced is that no organisations rules cover the world of practice, nobody can say you can and cannot practice, or scrim against another team.
Lets say there was conclusive proof that RazZ was caught hacking in a scrim against pinkgorillas (they're dead btw). pinkgorillas would then take the PB screenshots and cry on a public forum, just like xfire. The community would be in uprage that there was proof that he was a hacker, however there is no proof that hes ever done this in an official. Theres no proof that he has used this hack to his or his teams advantage in a Eurocup game or warleagues game, so why until there is that proof should he be stopped?
Now this is a big point of double standards by myself. I caught the lovely b2k now known as Kamz hacking some 3 years ago, on my server which was running public mode. I cried wolf, and the wolves came down and teared him apart. But what right did they have? Only the host of the server and the people playing on it can have a grievance.
Lets apply this theory to football. If my new favourite german Michael Ballack was playing in a field with some friends, and he cheated because he either fouled someone and should be banned for 3 games, or he was using drugs during this game and should be given a 2 year ban, nobody is going to do jack.
Why is this situation any different? If he cheated whilst wearing the beautiful shirt of Chelsea next season, no matter the competition he would face a ban from FIFA, but a governing body like that, for which every league and competition must answer to does not exist in gaming.
If we look across the pond to the American Counterstrike league, CAL. You have to be caught cheating IN a CAL match to have action taken against you. You could hack all day long on a public, and they'd not take action.
Whats the difference? Well the big difference is that both CS and then of course football are on such a bigger scale than our tightly knit ET community, but the principal is the same dont you think?
I'm not defending cheaters, and I'm not voicing my opinion on what I believe should happen in this specific example, espcially as I openly admit to knowing extremely little about it. This column exists in hypothetics, but hypothetically speaking, in ET Gaming legality (politicaly correct!) should someone like this go free?
I'd like to use the example of
RazZ as this is the most recent, however I'm not assigning guilt, nor pointing a finger in his direction, as I am completely out of the loop on this scenario. Lets say that RazZ cheated in a practice (I dont know fully whether he was caught in an official or not). However, lets say he cheated in a practice, who says you cant? Why is it clanbase's position to ban him, or for Warleagues to ban him?
The problem faced is that no organisations rules cover the world of practice, nobody can say you can and cannot practice, or scrim against another team.
Lets say there was conclusive proof that RazZ was caught hacking in a scrim against pinkgorillas (they're dead btw). pinkgorillas would then take the PB screenshots and cry on a public forum, just like xfire. The community would be in uprage that there was proof that he was a hacker, however there is no proof that hes ever done this in an official. Theres no proof that he has used this hack to his or his teams advantage in a Eurocup game or warleagues game, so why until there is that proof should he be stopped?
Now this is a big point of double standards by myself. I caught the lovely b2k now known as Kamz hacking some 3 years ago, on my server which was running public mode. I cried wolf, and the wolves came down and teared him apart. But what right did they have? Only the host of the server and the people playing on it can have a grievance.
Lets apply this theory to football. If my new favourite german Michael Ballack was playing in a field with some friends, and he cheated because he either fouled someone and should be banned for 3 games, or he was using drugs during this game and should be given a 2 year ban, nobody is going to do jack.
Why is this situation any different? If he cheated whilst wearing the beautiful shirt of Chelsea next season, no matter the competition he would face a ban from FIFA, but a governing body like that, for which every league and competition must answer to does not exist in gaming.
If we look across the pond to the American Counterstrike league, CAL. You have to be caught cheating IN a CAL match to have action taken against you. You could hack all day long on a public, and they'd not take action.
Whats the difference? Well the big difference is that both CS and then of course football are on such a bigger scale than our tightly knit ET community, but the principal is the same dont you think?
I'm not defending cheaters, and I'm not voicing my opinion on what I believe should happen in this specific example, espcially as I openly admit to knowing extremely little about it. This column exists in hypothetics, but hypothetically speaking, in ET Gaming legality (politicaly correct!) should someone like this go free?
FIRST EVER COMMENT OMFGGGG