A frank and open dialogue about hacking

[Fiel]

Do people actually care this much about it?

Yes. Some are strongly against the rule because it gives too much leniency to hackers. Pretty sure users like @Sarah; and @CarrionCrow;, had they written the rules, would have written them far harsher than I did when it comes to hackers.

There was a reason I wrote that rule the way I did. Back on Sleepywood users would be banned simply for "hacking" without any evidence on the forums or if enough people said that this or that person was a hacker. I did not like this moderation policy, and I felt that Sleepywood was overmoderating in this regard. This rule has four essential purposes:

(1) Limit the moderation powers of Southperry. Moderation should only happen within Southperry and should not be influenced by factors outside of Southperry. I still believe this. If it were otherwise, we'd have to moderate our users across the entire internet for everything that they say. This is also why the southperry rules do not apply to the IRC and the IRC is anything goes.

(2) Still make it clear that hackers are not wanted here.

(3) Reduce the amount of Maplestory drama that the moderation team has to deal with.

(4) Still allow hacking for the public good. This includes things like private server use for research or editing the WZ files to figure out formulas.

Considering the importance of this rule in determining Southperry moderation, I'm glad it lasted through the administration change.

Note: I am not a moderator. Do not consider any of what I said to be a part of moderation policy. These are my thoughts alone.

[Five Second Pose]

Do people actually care this much about it?

Scroll up.

[Eos]

Since I'm sure this thread is talking about me and is using me as an example, I might as well show the similarities of Eos' sentences to our discussion.

Just because you're someone who's done it doesn't mean you were being singled out unless you were the only one doing it, and if that were the case it'd hardly warrant an entire thread.

All you've demonstrated here is that my stance is consistent, as it should be, and that we've personally had this discussion more than once.

[Locked]

Just because you're someone who's done it doesn't mean you were being singled out unless you were the only one doing it, and if that were the case it'd hardly warrant an entire thread.

All you've demonstrated here is that my stance is consistent, as it should be, and that we've personally had this discussion more than once.

Tch.
I'm very doubtful anyone else someone else did it the same way I did. Especially with the way you're stating it in the OP. It's the only event that is even recent enough to warrant a thread as there haven't been many examples of this case anywhere.

[Eos]

Tch.
I'm very doubtful anyone else someone else did it the same way I did

Funny, because I can think of six different people from the 24th alone. You're not nearly as original as you imagine.

[Locked]

Funny, because I can think of six different people from the 24th alone. You're not nearly as original as you imagine.

This isn't about originality. You're saying six people paraphrased it exactly like I did? That's funny because I can't even name six people who browse the MapleStory forums enough to know who the person is personally.

[godofturtles]

So this rule is basically a don't ask, don't tell guideline, customized for hackers lol. Except the people who are forced to conceal their identities are actually bad people who really are detrimental to the community as a whole. It seems like a good rule though, I'm STRONGLY against hackers, more-so than the majority of people I meet in game, and even I don't see the importance of chasing down people who may or may not be hackers here. The rule is correct, if they aren't flat out expressing anything remotely close to hacking, why should we care who they are?

[IImaplers]

Very well-said and a great message. But I think if it is common knowledge that the person posting is a hacker and continues to be a proponent of hacking, they should not be allowed to be a member of the forum, even if they would follow the rules of the forum to a tee. I can think of at least two people fitting this criteria.

To answer above post, I think we should care who they are because they do not deserve to be a part of a community which they partake in ruining. Yes, the forum aspect is different from the in-game aspect, but we are all players who have a majority standpoint in improving the game, and we don't want anyone who is and has been detrimental to what we stand for to have the same privileges.

[Justin]

Very well-said and a great message. But I think if it is common knowledge that the person posting is a hacker and continues to be a proponent of hacking, they should not be allowed to be a member of the forum, even if they would follow the rules of the forum to a tee. I can think of at least two people fitting this criteria.

Southperry moderates Southperry. They're not the internet police. Get over it.

They're not going to play babysitter and watch your every little move. The whole point is to keep the actual full-on vocal trouble makers on the run, and to keep drama to a low level.

[Eos]

I think if it is common knowledge that the person posting is a hacker

"Common knowledge" should never be judge jury and executioner. What people believe and what people know are drastically different. We saw with the salem witch trials how well the court of public opinion works.

This isn't about originality. You're saying six people paraphrased it exactly like I did? That's funny because I can't even name six people who browse the MapleStory forums enough to know who the person is personally.

I've no idea what paraphrasing you're referring to. I'm talking about sheer volume of people with the same issue you had. How they, or you, expressed it I give not a flying pineapple because the issue was what was relevant.

[KhainiWest]

What I would like is for this forum to be positive about the game it is made for, and to be negative about the ones that ruin it. I know this is a pipe dream since the team as a whole is not really here because they love the game.

A ban might be too much considering the devil and his aunt profit from hacks one way or another these days, but a harder tone and some infractions for behaving like the guy from yesterday would be swell. Perhaps you issued many of those for him, and in that case he was just to stupid to get that his kind should crawl back down under the slippery rocks that spawned him, and then I appologize.

I agree and disagree with you at the same time. Take a step back and look at that specific person for a second. He purposely tippy toed initially because I made him f`uck up, he got smarter. All he did was brag about his range, and how he made the game easy mode for himself. Yes he hacked, (Not an accusation, based off the banned reason), but in order for it to be fair, he has to cross that line.

I understand why Eos is so strict with that, it's the same with general law, and examples, as @Fiel; mentioned, like sw.net, abused the feature to get rid of players they didn't like. That place is dead now, basil downright supports them in every way possible, southperry is the only forum that is remotely fair.

Look at @Killed;, he's not a bad person, I can't confirm he cheats, but he does communicate with cheaters. But anytime he posts it's informative and straight to the point. There are hackers who are just people who choose to do it as a personal issue that isn't revolved around ego, I've met them.

So yes, southperry should be against players in general who want to feed their ego in that obnoxious manner. But because someone cheat's, it doesn't affect you until he says "I'm better than you because I get away with it". Eos is against that, the rules are against that, and that dumb ass got owned for a what 4th time?

This isn't about originality. You're saying six people paraphrased it exactly like I did? That's funny because I can't even name six people who browse the MapleStory forums enough to know who the person is personally.

I've reported that idiot like 3 times trying to stretch the rules in my favor, you won locked, honestly, you did better than I did sticking it to that kid and I'm kind of jealous. I'm in agreement with you though, but it's not worth elaborating now since he's burned, finally.

@Eos;
I do have a question though, when a player get's banned with "isn't coming back" is that just specifically to the account, well I mean obviously it is, but are they allowed to make a new account to start over? Like if khainiwest got banned, would I be banned on sight if I made Khainiwest2(or did something else obvious that would 100% verify it's me)

[IImaplers]

The whole point is to keep the actual full-on vocal trouble makers on the run, and to keep drama to a low level.

I understand the whole point and I don't think extra effort to remove hackers is worth it or even practical, but at the same time I don't want them to feel welcome here, and I'm sure most of us would agree.

There might not be a better way of handling a situation like this than how we are already, but I don't want to just sit on it and think there can't be a way small or big, of improving on it.

[Locked]

I've no idea what paraphrasing you're referring to. I'm talking about sheer volume of people with the same issue you had. How they, or you, expressed it I give not a flying pineapple because the issue was what was relevant.

The paragraph I linked you to originally. It's what I've been talking about the entire time.

[MariettaRC]

@Eos;
I do have a question though, when a player get's banned with "isn't coming back" is that just specifically to the account, well I mean obviously it is, but are they allowed to make a new account to start over? Like if khainiwest got banned, would I be banned on sight if I made Khainiwest2(or did something else obvious that would 100% verify it's me)

If you were banned and made a second account, that would be ban evasion. Those get banned on sight.

[Foxino]

I think this has been brought up before but what of screens/video links that show a hack being used by the author yet not the main subject?
(i.e. posting a screenshot whilst the background is black from the use of that popular hack program)

Also, something that does actually bug me quite greatly (and it happens quite often on SP), what of obvious hackers that ambiguously admit to it?

[Eos]

The rule is not "people you can prove hacked are thrown out". Don't even bother trying.

There is no way to "prove" someone is a hacker.
Unless they admit it, here specifically, we don't care.

Nothing you submit will amount to anything more than hearsay. Doesn't matter if you have videos, screen shots, chat logs, DNA.

We're not forensic technologists here trying to prove your evidence is legitimate and actually ties to a specific person. That would take more time, resources, effort and interest than any of us have.

Ambiguous confessions are not. Anything they can use the excuse of "you misunderstood me" is not an admission.

[Shidoshi]

I think this has been brought up before but what of screens/video links that show a hack being used by the author yet not the main subject?
(i.e. posting a screenshot whilst the background is black from the use of that popular hack program)

Also, something that does actually bug me quite greatly (and it happens quite often on SP), what of obvious hackers that ambiguously admit to it?

Posting a video with proof that a certain character is hacking is not proof that a certain USER is hacking. Not to mention the rule specifically states ADMITTING.
I could just go on my merry Private Server and produce a video of a character with a certain name doing hacks, etc.

SP moderation is not the police, they won't do full-on investigations to see if someone is indeed a hacker. That's way too much work and probably pointless.

I understand the whole point and I don't think extra effort to remove hackers is worth it or even practical, but at the same time I don't want them to feel welcome here, and I'm sure most of us would agree.

There might not be a better way of handling a situation like this than how we are already, but I don't want to just sit on it and think there can't be a way small or big, of improving on it.

And how do you make the rules see the difference between White-hat hacking, like we've seen done countless times by JoeTang or Stereo from hacking for personal profit? The rule is currently made to give less trouble to moderators as well, it's just like the porn rule. If you put too much of a grey area in the rules it's either abusable by the moderation or abusable by the users and will just generate additional headaches to the mods.

[Untradeable]

Seems like so much effort put into just a few possibly-annoying people.

Then again, I'm not advocating that they're right, because they're not. I just feel like some people make it their personal vendetta to seek and destroy hackers. I like @KhainiWest; 's postion on the matter:

I dont care if you hack as long as you dont interfere with my gameplay.

(Not 100% accurate but too lazy to look it up)

Now people have different opinions on what constitutes inteference, but thats a personal choice.

If someone is dumb enough to provide sufficent evidence to prove they're hacking, They deserve the ban. Nuff said.

[GreatOrator2]

"Common knowledge" should never be judge jury and executioner. What people believe and what people know are drastically different. We saw with the salem witch trials how well the court of public opinion works.

This one line is all that needs to be said against "We know you are, we have no proof, but that's not important"

I realize this is a discussion pertaining specifically to the forum, but grant me a bit off leeway here...

I realize that the idea of "Justice is Blind" is nearly a long forgotten concept, but consider southperry as it's own independent nation...anyone is welcome as long as you behave yourself...a Sweden of sorts...Yes what you have done is abhorrent, yes you have possibly destroyed the thing i love, but I am willing to not necessarily ignore what you have done, just put it aside for he overall benefit of the community I am currently a part of.

I am not the judge, jury and executioner and until/unless you show me that you do not want to be a contributing member by means of your actions here, you are welcome for your input and contribution.

I would love to say that everything is black and white in the world, and I realize that sometimes it is a challenge to put aside feelings when here, but you just have to. even if there is proof beyond a doubt they hack, if they have done nothing here, on southperry, to violate the "law" persecuting them makes you no better in the grand scheme in regards to this community.

As a side note: I chose to join Southperry in particular because of the relative drama free zone it is compared to nearly every other maplestory forum out there.

[IImaplers]

And how do you make the rules see the difference between White-hat hacking, like we've seen done countless times by JoeTang or Stereo from hacking for personal profit?

That's up to the moderators to decide and should also be based on merit and actually how beneficial this "good" type of hacking should be. I think we all want the ones who blatantly do it for personal gain to not be welcome.