Connection ErrorBad RequestSession ExpiredSign in requiredForbiddenNot FoundToo Many RequestsServer ErrorBad GatewayService UnavailableGateway TimeoutHTTP Version Not Supported
Session Expired
Your session has expired. Please log in to continue.
Sign in required
You need an account to do that. Sign in or create one — it only takes a minute.
Request Failed
We encountered an issue while processing your request.
Please check your internet connection and try again.
Error Details:
Share Link
Posts from Leaving Heroes of Might and Magic in protest of Alex’s removal from the Facebook group.
P.S. When Vitalik's case was being investigated, a public opinion poll was conducted, and it very accurately reflected the opinion of the players – not a single vote against, more than half in favor, and a few abstentions. I'm just wondering – why wasn't a public opinion poll conducted this time? Could it be because it's clear that the result would likely be the opposite?
I don't understand why a public opinion poll is needed? :confused: The Administration Council decided by vote that there was no cheating (4-3). I see the situation differently: we need to determine the measure of punishment for unsportsmanlike conduct. Let's discuss that instead, if you're interested. Oelm
Yura, there is no bias. It's just that the decision had to be one, and it has been made. Although, as I understand it, the question of unfair play should have been decided by a general vote. Why did the Administration Council take it upon itself to decide this?
Pasha, we investigate many cases of unfair play. Each member of the Administration Council is often sent some save files with suspicions, which the Administration Council rejects. If we hold a vote for every case, it will be complete nonsense!
I see the situation differently: we need to determine the appropriate punishment for unsportsmanlike conduct.
Kostya, what kind of unsportsmanlike conduct are we talking about? What exactly did he do? Did he swear at the referee? Did he start a fight with his opponent? If we draw an analogy with sports, he was shown a red card, removed from the match, but he wouldn't be disqualified from the entire championship for that. Plus, there's such a thing as provocation. If someone (or a group of people) had been bothering you for a month, constantly saying that you're a cheater, you would eventually tell them to go away, especially if you didn't feel guilty (psychology textbook, 3rd grade of middle school). Let's remember Zidane and Materazzi. Zidane was sent off, but public opinion was on his side, and no one banned him from football.
Yura, there is no bias here. The decision simply had to be made, and it was. Although, as I understand it, the issue of unfair play should have been resolved through a general vote. Why did the AC take it upon itself to make this decision?
Well, what other explanation could there be?
Very recently, we witnessed another high-profile case of cheating, which, among other things, served as a practice ground for argumentation techniques, both in defense and accusation. Now, let's compare them point by point:
1) Many players were convinced of Vitalik's cheating (as the poll showed).
Very few are convinced of Alex's cheating. There is no poll, but the discussion on the forum already shows the balance of power.
2) After the investigation into Vitalik's games began, various opinions and stories from the distant past began to emerge en masse, with many unexpected arguments in favor of the accusation from different people.
After the investigation into Alex's games began, a wave of "what are you guys smoking?" emerged, with the sentiment that "Alex is a good guy." Moreover, no similar and previously unknown stories have surfaced.
3) In Vitalik's case, the arguments for the accusation were quite numerous, and many of them were never answered, and where they were, it seemed more like a stretch.
In Alex's case, it's exactly the opposite - the arguments for the accusation are clearly contrived, and many of the counter-arguments for the defense remain unanswered (there are no answers to them).
4) The decision on Vitalik was made after a very long debate, with many arguments being heard and confirmed/refuted. And only when the discussion began to subside due to a lack of new information was the decision made.
The decision on Alex was made unexpectedly quickly, just like in a military tribunal. Three people conferred and decided. Moreover, I think the decision would have been made much earlier if it hadn't been for the wave of public discontent. In the initial posts, the AC had the idea that "well, we've already decided that Alex was cheating, but you can still discuss it a little."
So, where is the impartiality after all this?
Wlk777
Auto-translated
Wicc, there are 3 facts. A video recording of cheating, and testimony from one witness – an old acquaintance – claiming that he did it, which contains many obvious inconsistencies and therefore there are grounds not to trust him. Testimony from another witness (impartial) who is certain that Alex conducted at least those battles that he supposedly didn't conduct. What are we supposed to do with this?
Всем удачи ! И Морали !
Captain
Auto-translated
To Wicc:
1. What if a poll is conducted and it turns out that many people can name Alex?... If there's no poll, there's no data, so there's nothing to judge or invent.
2. This is not bad – a stream on the fan site – and it's not boring for any of us :)
Alex is just a reason now not to be bored :))
3. Well, Vitalik was caught on the Heroes Portal, and he wasn't banned there. They said that his guilt wasn't proven! I didn't consider my explanations of his actions there to be far-fetched.
4. Well, there were no fewer arguments about Alex – they even created a special website.
On that website, by the way, I wrote about what we would get if Alex turned out to be a cheater. I was already tired of it... I suggested not punishing him too harshly. And there, the evidence of cheating was even recorded. Of course, now these are the actions of a guest, and such actions are generally allowed on the server.
I want to ask about Alex – why do many people think he has skill? I'm not arguing, I'm just asking to point out what he has that a dozen other players don't have. I'm asking this question not to provoke Alex, but to really learn – to find out what he has that allows him to win. I played three games with him and didn't see anything unusual in any of them...
Дипломатия - искусство говорить собаке "хорошая собачка" до тех пор пока не найдешь подходящую палку.
Wicc, there are 3 facts. A video recording of cheating, testimony from one witness – an old acquaintance who claims he did it – which contains many obvious inconsistencies and therefore there are grounds not to trust him. Testimony from another witness (impartial) who is sure that Alex conducted at least those battles that he supposedly did not conduct. What do you suggest we do with this?
Moderated: OFF-TOPIC in the message
No, you're really slow. The arguments have been going around in circles for the tenth time, but wlk777 just can't seem to grasp it. Apparently, because he doesn't have a brain.
Once again, briefly about your 3 facts:
1) The video recording does not show who was sitting at the computer. Unfortunately. The fact that the save file was opened by someone is not disputed; what is disputed is whether Alex was at the computer at that time. The video recording will not help with this.
2) The same goes for the witness's testimony. The only thing you can latch onto is the "switching" moment. But given that the witness expressed himself not very clearly about this and then withdrew from the discussion, and also ran back and forth with a camera, it follows that he is either not sure about the correctness of his conclusions, or even if he is sure, he does not consider them convincing enough for the public.
3) Confusion in testimony is not an argument for the prosecution in any court. Because human memory is structured in such a way that it discards things that a person does not consider particularly important. Hence, there is also the effect of remembering later what actually happened. Because he did it and forgot, and then it turned out that it was very important, he had to think and reconstruct it.
To make it clear, here is a clear example – writing a report on a game. Can you reproduce the sequence of your actions from memory in every game? What if you are asked to list them by day? What if the game is not for 2 weeks, but for 6 weeks?
I recently, when writing one report, struggled for a long time, trying to understand where an entire game week had gone. That is, according to the last save, the game ended on the 6th week, and restoring the chronology from memory gave the 5th week. I had to go into the saves, figure out where the week had gone. And this is despite the fact that I have a very good memory for Hero games, I can even now restore reports on many games played 2-3 years ago.
Moderated: OFF-TOPIC in the message
Yes, please do me a favor and save me from reading your answer to this post. You'll just roll out another cartload of nonsense, and I'll have to read it and grieve over the imperfection of the world.
I want to ask about Alex — why do many people think he has skill? I'm not disputing it, I'm simply asking to point out what he has that a dozen other players don't. I'm asking this question not to provoke Alex, but to really find out and learn what he has that allows him to win. I played three games with him and didn't see anything unusual in any of them...
There are facts :) Alex was the leader of a tournament where the best HeroesWorld players competed. Well, I won't say anything further :) As for the rest... I've already started to agree with Vic's opinion about AK's bias. They probably didn't want someone from Baia to win the tournament.
Zidane was sent off, but public opinion was on his side, and no one excluded him from football.
Well, let's reconsider the punishment since the public is so unhappy... Let's create a list for voting and let everyone vote. At the same time, let's also gauge the public's opinion on Alex in terms of trust.
RAPER
Auto-translated
Probably they didn't want someone who plays a lot of tournaments to win.
Sorry, but that's nonsense. According to these criteria, Kobre shouldn't have received the Jebus award either. IMHO
As for the rest... I'm starting to agree with Vik's opinion about the bias of the AK. Maybe they didn't want a guy who plays the same build all the time to win the tournament.
Oleg, you know me in real life. Do you really think that way about me? :eek:
Oleg, you know me in real life. Do you really have such an opinion of me? :eek:
Kostya, are you the only one in the AK? And you wrote here that the best option would be a tech support person in the party. But judging by everything, this proposal was not even considered in the AK. I carefully studied the situation both on an external forum and in the tournament. I saw the report and its confirmation from a month and a half ago. And Alex's post about some situation that was resolved. And then, after Alex won more than half of the matches, the tournament was canceled. Well, whether you like it or not, it makes you think... Especially given the lack of clear arguments from the AK regarding this particular decision. By the way, I didn't notice in the rules, or anywhere else, about the penalty system. In what cases is tech support assigned, in what cases is a player removed from the tournament, and in what cases is a player disqualified,
No, you're really slow. The arguments have been going around in circles for the tenth time, but wlk777 just can't seem to grasp them. Apparently, he lacks the capacity to do so.
Once again, briefly about your 3 points:
1) The video doesn't show who was sitting at the computer. Unfortunately. The fact that the save file was tampered with is not being disputed; what is being disputed is whether Alex was at the computer at that time. The video doesn't help with that.
That's your conclusion, but it's not the truth. Wicc
2) The same goes for the witness testimony. The only thing you can latch onto is the "switching" moment. But considering that the witness wasn't very clear about it and then withdrew from the discussion, and also ran back and forth for the camera, it suggests that he is either not confident in the correctness of his conclusions or, even if he is confident, he doesn't consider them convincing enough for the public.
3) Confusion in testimony is never an argument for the prosecution in any court. Because human memory works in such a way that it discards things that a person doesn't consider particularly important. Hence, the effect of remembering later what actually happened. Because he did it and forgot, and then it turned out that it was very important, so he had to think and reconstruct it.
I don't understand, what confusion are you talking about? In my witness statement, I clearly and concisely wrote that there was not even a second of interruption in the actions! Do I have to answer this in every post?
You also wrote about some arguments for the defense that have no answer, but I haven't seen a single argument yet, except that Stinger vouched for Alex. What Vova writes is pure nonsense, or a stream of consciousness, call it what you want. I don't know who even takes this seriously, but it seems like he's writing it just for himself. Vova, no offense, but that's how it is. Answering all of this would just be adding more nonsense, and I don't have time for this pointless exercise.
So, I repeat for all the theorists with rose-colored glasses and the like! The mouse was flying around like crazy, which is typical for Alex's gameplay. He did everything very quickly and deliberately, at the same pace both in the game and when loading the save file, and there were no signal delays. Everyone who wanted to see it saw the video, and the fact that the hero moved so quickly on the map speaks to both the pace and the quality of the program!
Of course, if you claim that it only takes a second to switch, then he can't be blamed. But it looks very absurd, as Alex likes to say. And yet, all the arguments for the defense boil down to this, that there was a switch, and I'm an idiot for not noticing it!
In reality, the situation has turned into something very absurd, but the fact that Stinger vouched for Alex says a lot. All the other discontent from Ketch (sorry, but you really are the most upset) and other "defenders" I consider to be irrelevant.
In general, it's time to make peace. It's a pity that Alex considers it beneath him to at least clearly explain the situation to AK. He didn't do that two months ago, and he's not doing it now. Now he needs to explain the situation to the entire Heroes community. Sometimes, just two or three words are enough to set everything straight.
Probably, they didn't want a player from Bay to win the tournament.
Nonsense... no offense, but it really is. On the contrary, the resource is interested in attracting strong players from Bay.
In general, a lot has been written here, respect:rolleyes:. I didn't feel like getting involved in such discussions these days, but still:
Question: what decision by the Arbitration Committee would not have caused a stir and a split? Answer: none. Any of the possible decisions was doomed from the start... The guys definitely had a hard time, and I think the decision was weighed many times.
And in general, I liked posts #5 and #6 by Dirty and Mizrael on page 1 - short, concise, and to the point, especially about the mess on the computer.
And finally: regarding the hints that Pete is eliminating the competition. When selecting for FB1, they said the same thing about another Alex - I hope everyone remembers how it ended.
All the other dissatisfaction is from Ketch (sorry, but really you're the most indignant again)
Well, that's just how I am :) You know, on the Portal I always cited the AK on HeroesWorld as an example of how controversial situations should be handled. I even suggested creating a similar body there, but it hasn't been created yet. But in this situation, I am simply surprised (stunned, amazed, shocked, flabbergasted) (pick one) by the unprofessionalism of the AK. What do we have? The recording and your testimony, the fact of the game, the absence of complaints from Player2 (confirmed by the report), Player1's explanations, and Guest's testimony. The recording is the strongest argument. Without it, there would have been nothing at all. Player1's testimony explains that such a thing could have happened, but he is not aware of it because there was Guest, who stayed at the computer after he left. This is confirmed by Guest. In contrast to their testimony, there is your testimony that the mouse was moving in Player1's style. Fast and confident. So Guest moves the mouse slowly and with the cursor trembling across the screen? Well, never mind... You have no more arguments in favor of Player1 moving the mouse rather than Guest. And the recording does not show the moment the mouse was handed over. You yourself wrote that you started recording only after the codes were entered and the save was loaded. That is, the moment of the mouse handover cannot be tracked from the recording. So we have your testimony, based on the mouse movement, that Player1 was playing, and contradicting testimony from Player1 and Guest that Guest was moving the mouse. Well, sorry... No unbiased court would render a verdict of "guilty" based on such arguments. Okay, but there is a recording of the codes being entered. What to do in that case? The save was opened. The rules prohibit it. Although it doesn't say that other people are not allowed to open it. There are no complaints from Player2 at the time the game ended. You could simply turn a blind eye to it, but take note of the situation and quietly but closely monitor Player1's future behavior. Or, show principle and give him a technical loss for making a mess at his computer and warn him that such behavior is unacceptable. If it happens again — an immediate and unconditional disqualification. But, definitely not a ban or removal from the tournament. Since the fact of Player1 cheating was not confirmed. If the AK had made such a decision, then if Player1 is indeed honest, he would never let any guests near his computer again, and Guest himself would never sit at his computer to look at his saves if he does not wish Player1 ill. If Player1 himself cheated, then sooner or later he will still get caught. And then, on completely legal grounds, given that he had been issued a warning, he receives a disqualification. In general, this is exactly the procedure for reviewing controversial situations that is practiced everywhere. I have not judged or conducted online tournaments, but in offline tournaments I caught several cheaters this way. And the situation was settled amicably. The person was banned, and neither he nor anyone else had any complaints against anyone.
P.S. I am not personally or virtually acquainted with Player1, Player2, or Guest. I have communicated a little with the Witness a few times on ICQ, and even then mostly offline. My attitude toward the resources they represent is evenly benevolent. On this basis, I consider my opinion to be completely unbiased.
Сатир
Auto-translated
Since everyone is writing here, I'll share my opinion too.
Kicking ATG from a nearly won tournament wasn't right. A technical warning, or whatever AK has, would have been enough. However, if AK changes its decision, Alex's sense of self-importance will increase many times over, and it's already visible from 5 km away without a doctor's examination.
I didn't like Forest's show of bravado; I thought he was above that. In short, I agree with what Besha said; it's the most sensible post in the thread, in my opinion.
