Rehabilitation of cheaters. — Tournament Committee

PReDS

14 years ago

Auto-translated

Eldgernon

...
2. The login "Exit" itself hints at someone who was previously banned. Was anyone suitable banned there this spring?:rolleyes:

...

:smile20:
and with his nickname "Dirty_Player," Kostya is trying in every way to hint that the Heroes community hasn't seen such a malicious cheater as him yet. He should be awarded the "Champion of Cheating" award immediately!

In reply to Eldgernon

Marmot

14 years ago

Auto-translated

Eldgernon

The legend about deleted cookies doesn't quite align with the previous genuine interest in "dynamic IPs."

Personally, I also find the explanation about deleted cookies and forgotten passwords to be highly dubious ("a lame excuse," to put it in modern terms). If that were really the case, the person would have first written about it to someone using ICQ/Skype/... Logins and passwords are not stored in cookies in the browser, but in the password manager. And there are also ways to recover forgotten passwords! But even if a person registered a new account in such a situation, the very first thing they should do - if they are an honest person - is to say: "Hello, I am actually so-and-so, I just lost my passwords...":smile05: :smile45: :smile41: If they remain silent - they cannot be trusted!:smile29:
I, for example, regularly clear cookies and other junk (I recommend CCleaner, by the way!), and unfortunately, my memory is not very good, but there are programs for storing passwords (I use Notepad, for example); this explanation is just childish babble, IMHO!
And pity for cheaters leads to an increase in their numbers and arrogance!

Воскресайте, камінні душі, Розчиняйте серця і чоло, Щоб не сказали Про вас грядущі: їх на землі не було…
(Василь Симоненко. Люди – прекрасні)

In reply to PReDS

Eldgernon

14 years ago

Auto-translated

PReDS

:smile20:
then, using his nickname "Dirty_Player," Kostya tries in every way to hint that heroes haven't seen such a malicious cheater as him yet. He should be awarded the "Champion of Cheating" award immediately!

The nickname itself doesn't mean anything, of course. But combined with his actions, it already says a lot.
For example, Dirty's actions tell us that his nickname is just a joke.
In Exit's case, it's the opposite.
When people were guessing what kind of Heroes 3 clone it was, Exit quietly sat on the sidelines and blended in with the background. But when Dirty presented the screenshots, he readily shared his grief with the community. What prevented him from immediately saying, "this is a rip-off, please delete my forced clone"?
In general, Exit is a slippery type. Therefore, there is a possibility (just a possibility) that his nickname is also part of the "portrait."

dnaop-wr

14 years ago

Auto-translated

A person creates their own name (or nickname), and what it will be in the future depends on that person. Dirty Harry, for example, was considered "dirty" because he cleansed society of filth by eliminating various scoundrels. And one could call someone "lucky" not because they lived a happy life, but because they, by sheer luck, avoided the noose or a bullet as punishment for their crimes... And a slippery person feels comfortable in the bathhouse, so they can slip away if someone wants to "take care of" them.

Техника в руках индейца мертва.
Справочник по НоММ-4 http://handbookhmm.ru/pamyatka-dlya-heroes-iv.html

Памятка по НоММ-3 http://handbookhmm.ru/pamyatka-dlya-homm-iii.html
и HotA http://handbookhmm.ru/vyishla-obnovlennaya-pamyatka-dlya-homm-iii-hota.html

Marmot

14 years ago

Auto-translated

dnaop-wr, it’s good that you remembered Dirty Harry (Clint Eastwood, after all!). And you can also remember the meaning of nicknames in another famous movie: "The Good, the Bad and the Ugly".

Воскресайте, камінні душі, Розчиняйте серця і чоло, Щоб не сказали Про вас грядущі: їх на землі не було…
(Василь Симоненко. Люди – прекрасні)

In reply to Marmot

PReDS

14 years ago

Auto-translated

We are certain that everyone is just thinking about how to deceive us.

Everyone knows that you can't trust just anyone. The world is full of hidden intentions and concealed threats, so you must never let your guard down.

So, scientists claim that we trust people much less than they deserve. According to their research, we underestimate this level of trust by almost half.

Suspicions that the people around us are driven by motives unknown to us begin to appear at around the age of seven. Then we live with this for the rest of our lives. And if we once label someone as a liar, then in the future, we will most likely only be able to acknowledge that this person is good at pretending. This is similar to racism, sexism, and any other form of discrimination. It is almost impossible to restore trust.

And it doesn't matter what views you hold or what party you belong to – everyone plays the "guess the hidden intention" game. This game gives us only one thing: a reason to ignore any arguments from the opposing side. You reject them as deceit, they do the same, and how can we talk about social cooperation in that case?

..........

In reply to PReDS

Eldgernon

14 years ago

Auto-translated

PReDS

So, scientists claim that we trust people significantly less than they deserve. According to their research, we underestimate this level by almost half.

Does the person who wrote this simplified version of a complex problem deserve trust? Or am I, in full accordance with the research, simply lowering the bar?:D
Seriously, it would be interesting to see a brief description of the experiments that led to these results. Something like:
- a brief scenario of the experiments
- characteristics of the sample of participants (age, education, social status, etc.)
I'm saying this because it's quite easy to get exactly the opposite results. For example, if you try to find out the level of trust in the "Shop on the Couch" show and, at the same time, select participants from the desired segment.

PReDS

And it doesn't matter what views you hold or what party you belong to – everyone plays the "guess the hidden intention" game.

It is precisely such categorical statements that make me lower the bar of trust in the presented work.
This statement is incorrect. There are, at least, 2 main behavioral stereotypes. (in reality, there are many more)
1. When meeting a new person, treat them as a righteous person until they prove otherwise.
The scheme of action for this stereotype is as follows. Any "contact person" is assigned a default "threat coefficient" (TC) = 0 when entering into contact. If, for example, this contact person actually has a TC = 15, then under the pressure of facts, the subject will increase their assessment of the TC until it is brought into line.
2. This category of people sets a TC value that is not zero by default. If, in reality, the "contact person" has a TC = 0, then the TC is further adjusted downwards.
Of course, the exact percentage distribution of the population according to the indicated stereotypes is a matter of discussion.:) But to claim that stereotype No. 1 does not exist is incorrect.

P.S. Among other stereotypes that were not considered, one can mention such an exotic one as the "saint" stereotype. Here, too, a TC = 0 is set by default, but this value remains constant under any pressure from any external factors.

In reply to Eldgernon

PReDS

14 years ago

Auto-translated

All that remains is to cite examples of players who have changed their position to a positive one towards a particular side as a result of the endless debates that have taken place here: this includes the 16 pages of this thread, the endless discussions in the 2012 World Cup thread, and earlier discussions on similar topics.
However, there are plenty of examples of the opposite happening; as soon as someone shouts: "Cheater!", a support group immediately appears, having long suspected this person of unfair play.
As one character in a popular movie said:
"...all this time, he skillfully disguised himself as a decent person!"
"...I believe that a person can only be trusted in the most extreme case."

In reply to PReDS

Eldgernon

14 years ago

Auto-translated

PReDS

All that remains is to cite the nicknames of players who have changed their position to a positive one towards someone.

Well, here's an example of a shift in a positive direction.:) (Nickname - Dirty Player).

It is also worth noting the wonderful Catherine, who has graced our male company. Definitely, she is someone to understand and forgive:D

PReDS

But there are plenty of examples of the opposite,

Yes. Plenty. Both in that topic and in life in general.
And it makes me sad. Just as it does you.
But still, this is not a reason for generalizing judgments, such as:
- "You can't trust anyone"
- "All men are scoundrels"
- "Everyone plays the 'Guess Who' game"

"...I believe that you can only trust a person in the most extreme case."

There is, by the way, another curious stereotype that I haven't mentioned.
However, it is also quite rare. And not just rare, but stands apart from all other classes of stereotypes, as it is a consequence of a special psychological type. Nevertheless, in Japanese, there is even a special term to denote this category of people.
Personally, I really like this type. At least because it makes concepts such as "offense," "betrayal," and, in fact, the term "trust" itself meaningless. This stereotype can be called "Probabilistic." A character who always thinks only in terms of probabilities is interesting in itself. But even more interesting to me are the strong analogies that can be traced here.
1. Ordinary stereotypes work by analogy with a semiconductor, which can only take one of two possible positions (Yes/No, I believe/I don't believe, Will let down/Will not let down, Will help in trouble/Will not help). In fact, all quarrels, offenses, etc., are actually not a mismatch of our expectations (that is, the position of our internal semiconductor that we have set in advance).
2. There is a fundamentally different approach, and those who adhere to the "Probabilistic" stereotype do not play "Guess Who." The strongest analogy from physics that suggests itself here is the quantum state.
Quantum physicists also do not play "Guess Who," and the question "Is Schrödinger's cat alive or dead?" is meaningless to them.
Before the "measurement" takes place, the cat is in both states simultaneously.
A person with a probabilistic stereotype behaves in exactly the same way. Until the "measurement" of the contactor takes place, he considers both possibilities and calmly perceives the object as a mixture of probabilities. And after the fact of "measurement," such a person simply calmly records the result of the "measurement" that has occurred.
Learning to behave in this "quantum" way consciously is extremely difficult. Most likely, you have to be born with such quantum brains. At least, my own attempts cannot be called completely successful.:smile32:

In reply to Eldgernon

Marmot

14 years ago

Auto-translated

Eldgernon

1. Ordinary stereotypes work by analogy with a semiconductor, which can only take one of two possible states (Yes/No, Believe/Don't believe, Will let down/Won't let down, Will help in trouble/Won't help).

This is called "binary thinking" (0/1).

2. There is a fundamentally different approach...
Before the "measurement" occurs, the cat is in both states simultaneously.
A person with a probabilistic stereotype behaves exactly the same way. Until the "measurement" of the contactee occurs, they consider both possibilities and calmly perceive the object as a mixture of probabilities. And after the fact of the "measurement", such a person simply calmly records the result of the "measurement" that occurred.
Learning such "quantum" behavior consciously is extremely difficult. Most likely, one must be born with such quantum brains.

Well, yes: most men have a binary computer in their heads, and only some (more often women) have a quantum one. :) A corny joke:

A blonde is asked:
- What is the probability that you will meet a dinosaur on the street right now?
- 50%.
- How?!
- Either I will, or I won't.

:D
As for the problem of cheating, let's be realists and face the truth! And it is that modern people think: if I cheat/steal/rape/kill/... and no one finds out, and I don't get anything for it — then why not? Personally, I am a kind person by nature, and I want to believe and trust people, but I constantly find: when I am ashamed in my thoughts for thinking badly of someone — they later turn out to be even worse! Yes, I constantly have to be disappointed in people. :(
If we return to cheating in "Heroes" again, then maybe someday a mod will be created that makes cheating absolutely impossible. But for now, against cheating offline, there is only one remedy: daily saves and viewing the replay of turns. And online, the problem remains open and unsolved — hence all the heated debates. Yes, and for now, everything relies on mutual trust and the reputation of the players!

Воскресайте, камінні душі, Розчиняйте серця і чоло, Щоб не сказали Про вас грядущі: їх на землі не було…
(Василь Симоненко. Люди – прекрасні)

In reply to Eldgernon

PReDS

14 years ago

Auto-translated

Eldgernon

Well, for example, there was a shift in a positive direction. :) ...

There's no need to distort things; Kostina's position was initially in favor of Ekaterina. I might be wrong, but it seems that Ekaterina's visit took place largely thanks to players who were friendly towards her.

In reply to PReDS

Dirty_Player

14 years ago

Auto-translated

PReDS

No need to distort the facts; Kostin's position was initially in favor of Ekaterina. I might be wrong, but it seems that Ekaterina's visit was largely due to players who were favorably disposed towards her.

Regarding Ekaterina, the position was definitely the same as it is now – understand and forgive.

Vigo

14 years ago

Auto-translated

Wow, what insightful comments! You could learn a lot about psychology and human nature just by reading the posts here! :)

Всё будет хорошо!!! Только неизвестно когда... НО ОБЯЗАТЕЛЬНО БУДЕТ!!!
Но!...
Слушай всех, прислушивайся к немногим, решай сам...

aka.Ward3n

13 years ago

Auto-translated

I'd like to share my opinion about Chinese players. I've been playing WC3 for a long time, and there are plenty of cheaters there. So, cheaters were observed among Koreans (even top players), Europeans, and Americans, but not among Chinese players. Maybe it really depends on the playing style? My opinion is subjective, as I'm not yet skilled at identifying cheating in Heroes.

nik312

13 years ago

Auto-translated

I apologize for the slow response, but is the new HD mod already broken? Or do corrupted saves not solve the problem? Wouldn't it be better to simply require all serious matches to be played with this option enabled? Sorry in advance for my naivety.