Due to the nature of this thread, locking it would be viewed as bad form. However, since the original issue has been more or less resolved, please do not use it as an excuse to snipe at one another.
Think before you post.
--------------
PSA: If you have been having stutter/FPS lag on Disco where it does not run as smoothly as other games, please look at the fix here: https://discoverygc.com/forums/showthrea...pid2306502
----------
Durandal you should take the opportunity and respond to the community.
Quoting chat logs without permission to start a discussion was a very bad start.
Also you should consider that there are some members around who got skills in dev-stuff.
Using tools and modify inis is not development by the way.
(09-02-2016, 05:31 PM)DragonLancer Wrote: Durandal you should take the opportunity and respond to the community.
Quoting chat logs without permission to start a discussion was a very bad start.
Also you should consider that there are some members around who got skills in dev-stuff.
I take this opportunity to say that the administration should give developers some leeway to edit clientside files because they should be trusted not to cheat. I also take this opportunity to say that developers should have their own [Dev] tag and a limited set of admin commands for testing purposes.
The answer thus far has been a resounding no, for vague reasons revolving around infrastructure which are quantifiably false. Dunno what else anyone wants from me because I'm not going to apologize for defending the integrity of the people I work with.
(09-02-2016, 05:31 PM)DragonLancer Wrote: Using tools and modify inis is not development by the way.
Uhhhh... what? By this logic system development isn't development, because it is done entirely with ini files. Modeling isn't development because it is done with modeling programs, which are tools.. wtf do you consider to be development then?
Thank you, Justin, for posting that chat protocol for the sake of transparancy. It's very transparent and revealing indeed, especially about you.
It shows that the admin politely told you that chillermiller triggered the anti-cheat by modding files on the main server (which is quite clearly a rule violation, and you know it), and that they would like to settle this in a chat rather than a sanction thread like done for other people. Thats something the 23 other people who triggered the anti cheat didnt get, so its already preferential treatment towards a dev. The admin even explains that he's not saying chillermiller is cheating but that he simply triggered the anti-cheat, and that they would like him to fix his file because of that. But you, Justin, go out of your way to try to paint this as a vicious attack on the integrity of the "men in gold", and begin demanding that you be treated equally to admins when it comes to "trust", and not equally to normal players, in a very transparent attempt to escalate things as much as possible.
The arguments you produce are wrong on several levels, the foremost being that people are made admins assuming they are responsible enough to not abuse admin powers, while devs are devs because they have certain IT skills and not because they are expected to make responsible admins too. Furthermore,
Quote:[2:23:24 PM] Justin Hopkins: Hello you (admins) can go buy instakill guns.
[2:23:35 PM] Justin Hopkins: Danny can make instakill guns by editing the same ini file.
[2:23:41 PM | Edited 2:24:58 PM] Justin Hopkins: That's the only (malevolent) thing he could do with said file.
2:29:44 PM] Justin Hopkins: The most malicious thing which could be done with weapon equip is to create a gun with the maximum amount of damage, max refire, max projectile speed, etc.
No, thats not the only malicious thing, nor the most malicuous thing he could do, nor is it equally or less malicious than blasting someone with admin guns, nor are the two even comparable. Everyone can scan and see the admin instakill guns. Everyone who gets killed by an instakill gun knows he got killed by an instakill gun, and if an admin did it, he'll know which one. The most malicious thing someone could do is not to cheat or abuse in a way that everyone know's he's cheating or abusing withing 5 seconds, but to do it in ways where the victims can't prove he's cheating, and possibly dont even know it. That's achieved by buffing those stats enough to give you the winning edge, but not quite enough to make it painfully obvious to the untrained eye. You should know that, but you pretend you dont to further your "argument".
Instead of reacting reasonably and affirmatively to a reasonable request which was made to avoid seeing devs banned, bastilled, and in sanction threads, you cook up all these ridiculous arguments about how devs should be equal to admins, about how "the men in gold" are beyond reproach and suspicion, and about how stuff can totally only be tested on the main server. Then when chillermiller's name apears in a sanction thread after YOU pretty much sabotaged the admin's attempt to avoid it because you wanted to rock the boat, you take your berzerker rage to the forums and start summoning idiotic ancient vets to spill the beans on how 3-8 years ago other admins (who routinely invised posts like your OP in a flash back in the day, and who you said you want back) let them and others do things which were and are considered cheating, under a pre-DPC "trusted cheaters" anti-cheat policy (which would be more accurately described as a pro-cheat policy rather than an anti-cheat policy).
For that too let me thank you, Justin, with all my heart. Rock on!
User was banned for: Karlotta.
Time left: (Permanent)
Wow, you seem pretty angry to have made an account for the express purpose of replying here. I'm going to address the only legitimate argument in your post which hasn't already been covered numerous times over.
(09-02-2016, 05:41 PM)gung_ho Wrote:
Quote:[2:23:24 PM] Justin Hopkins: Hello you (admins) can go buy instakill guns.
[2:23:35 PM] Justin Hopkins: Danny can make instakill guns by editing the same ini file.
[2:23:41 PM | Edited 2:24:58 PM] Justin Hopkins: That's the only (malevolent) thing he could do with said file.
2:29:44 PM] Justin Hopkins: The most malicious thing which could be done with weapon equip is to create a gun with the maximum amount of damage, max refire, max projectile speed, etc.
No, thats not the only malicious thing, nor the most malicuous thing he could do, nor is it equally or less malicious than blasting someone with admin guns, nor are the two even comparable. Everyone can scan and see the admin instakill guns. Everyone who gets killed by an instakill gun knows he got killed by an instakill gun, and if an admin did it, he'll know which one. The most malicious thing someone could do is not to cheat or abuse in a way that everyone know's he's cheating or abusing withing 5 seconds, but to do it in ways where the victims can't prove he's cheating, and possibly dont even know it. That's achieved by buffing those stats enough to give you the winning edge, but not quite enough to make it painfully obvious to the untrained eye. You should know that, but you pretend you dont to further your "argument".
This is true and not something I took into account in the heat of the moment, and is absolutely correct. Unfortunately this easily falls under the "developers should be trusted not to cheat" portion of the whole argument that we've already been over ten thousand times, which you and I seem to be on two sadly different pages on.
But yes, you are right to say that subtle cheating is definitely more malicious then maxing out a gun's stats and having a single day of unadulterated slaughter.
![[Image: oNG6Z9E.gif]](https://i.imgur.com/oNG6Z9E.gif)
![[Image: kauket.gif]](https://sig.grumpybumpers.com/host/kauket.gif)
