Jump to content

Dispute Thread Posting


Recommended Posts

It's a nice idea, but not all disputes need a knowledge of the game. I saw a dispute only today where one of the most prominent posters on the dispute forums admitted to having not played the game. But that guy is really good at finding info about a user such as CFW stuff, posts on other forums, web archive stuff like that. So it isn't always necessary to have an in depth knowledge. I think probably it would be best if only a small group of people were allowed to post full stop and disputes were handled between the person flagged, the person doing the flagging and staff 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, DaivRules said:

 

Then how do you go about explaining a profile should even be flagged and expect the flagging team to approve things if they can't be explained?

 

They can be explained, but not by people who haven't played the game, which is what the topic title was suggesting. It's not going to stop some people from posting, it just gives the cheater team members a better idea of who has the more valuable opinion. If you have never played the game that is being disputed, how can you expect your opinion to be taken seriously? Some games it's common sense when the trophies are hacked, but some things are specific to people who have played the game. You're not going to believe an Art student who tries to do a Biology lecture are you? 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Ms Serzilla said:

Another case I had to see was people who argued in Monox18's dispute where most people posting had not played the game but the reason for flagging was the fact that I found that they were sharing save data with a person who earned the platinum long before them. The people in that thread argued that this website is a "trophy site, not an NGS2 leaderboard site", but all I did was use the in-game leaderboard as evidence to support my argument. 

 

I feel like it's important to point out that the person that helped provide evidence that Monox18 was lying hadn't played the game in question (or at least it's not on his list).  That was @BillyHorrible. Without his input it's not clear whether that dispute would have went your way.  In any case, he certainly helped as much as anyone in that thread.

 

That said, I think it's a fine idea to make it clearer whether someone has played a game or not... but it should also be clear that it's possible to contribute without having played the game in question.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, dmland12 said:

 

I feel like it's important to point out that the person that helped provide evidence that Monox18 was lying hadn't played the game in question (or at least it's not on his list).  That was @BillyHorrible. Without his input it's not clear whether that dispute would have went your way.  In any case, he certainly helped as much as anyone in that thread.

 

That said, I think it's a fine idea to make it clearer whether someone has played a game or not... but it should also be clear that it's possible to contribute without having played the game in question.

 

He did look at it when I had already found Monox18's NextGenUpdate account but throughout the 105 posts of the thread, it was only two people in the entire thread who had played the game and left any comments. I've flagged people for the same reasons in the past and they tried to dispute it through PMs and grimy believed me over them during that, so I'm sure he wasn't going to unflag Monox18 that night. People can do the research to show that the person used CFW, but technical issues such as getting 300 precursor orbs within 15 minutes is something specific to Jak 3 players since they would have used the glitch or played the game and would know exactly how long it took them. The idea of the posts is mainly to avoid seeing people who just believe people blindly without playing the game, since the idea of a dispute thread is to influence the decision of the cheater team members by providing evidence and asking people who have knowledge of the game to come forward. 

 

At the end of the day, it's always good to know if the person posting in the threads is someone who knows about the game, an opinion of someone who says "I believe you" and has played the game is infinitely more valuable than a person who hasn't played the game but says "I believe you". 

Edited by Ms Serzilla
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Ms Serzilla said:

 

They can be explained, but not by people who haven't played the game, which is what the topic title was suggesting. It's not going to stop some people from posting, it just gives the cheater team members a better idea of who has the more valuable opinion. If you have never played the game that is being disputed, how can you expect your opinion to be taken seriously? Some games it's common sense when the trophies are hacked, but some things are specific to people who have played the game. You're not going to believe an Art student who tries to do a Biology lecture are you? 

 

So had the example you posted which triggered this thread started by following the existing rule of having the Disputer post the flagging reason and then someone with knowledge of the game merely posted "There is an in-game Leaderboard that tracks various stats and the Disputer is not on it or their stats don't match the trophy requirements" (<- since that cannot be explained by someone who has not played the game, as you claimed) that wouldn't resolve this big problem?

 

That is stuff that should be documented for the staff and other members here, so that it becomes common knowledge, not hoarded and hidden in PMs. It only needs to be posted in a dispute thread for a game once and then it can be referenced by everyone, not just an artificially restricted group of people.

 

Its inaction like withholding information that keeps these dispute threads going longer than they need to.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Honestly, not seeing this happening, if for no other reason than that it requires a lot of work for Sly. He would have to make a forum add-on dedicated to this. Helping the disputer with what they should do etc doesn't require you have played the game, and while mods can do that, they're not always around for it. They may also post about other useful and related things they very much can post about without having the game on their profile.

Edited by MMDE
Link to comment
Share on other sites

While I agree that people without knowledge should not post in the dispute forums, there are circumstances in which a trophy list not being a profile doesn't mean that they don't understand. This is my 3rd account, due to forgetting the old account's email/password combinations and being made when I was much younger. However, I know the trophy lists from those accounts extremely well and have information on those lists. Examples would be the entire Jak and Daxter series, Every Call of Duty, and Batman games. Just because these aren't currently on my list, doesn't mean that I don't know the trophy lists in and out. For this reason alone, I have to say that the idea, while smart, is flawed. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, DaivRules said:

Its inaction like withholding information that keeps these dispute threads going longer than they need to.

 

Wholeheartedly agree. In this dispute a poster, who actually had statistical proof, kept flamebaiting people, referencing completely meaningless sources and bragging about his education and the proof all the while he was withholding it, until some seventy posts later he was coerced into giving up the data. And accounts that data was relevant for, I don't know how many he flagged in the end, but he claimed it to be a thousand.

 

Looking at that thread - or LanceTheSpartan's thread I linked to earlier - I can't really see the threads going any other way regardless people would have some sort of a "badge of excellence" like this thread suggests. Rather it brings an adverse effect where you make a claim about how a game functions (which may or may not be true) and this claim should now weigh more than others, because you also claim you played it (which may or may not be true).

Edited by ars
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, TristanBrown17 said:

 For this reason alone, I have to say that the idea, while smart, is flawed. 

 

Yeah, or PS2 games remade for PS3 or PS4... :P And you may have watched videos of it, or read deep into it, informed by someone who knows etc. And as I said earlier, they may contribute with other things.

4 minutes ago, ars said:

 

Wholeheartedly agree. In this dispute a poster, who actually had statistical proof, kept flamebaiting people, referencing completely meaningless sources and bragging about his education all the while he was withholding required information, until some seventy posts later he was coerced into giving up the data. And accounts that data was relevant for, I don't know how many he flagged in the end, but he claimed it to be a thousand.

 

Looking at that thread - or LanceTheSpartan's thread I linked to earlier - I can't really see the threads going any other way regardless people would have some sort of a "badge of excellence" like this thread suggests. Rather it brings an adverse effect where you make a claim about how a game functions (which may or may not be true) and this claim should now weigh more than others, because you also claim you played it (which may or may not be true).

 

 

26 minutes ago, DaivRules said:

That is stuff that should be documented for the staff and other members here, so that it becomes common knowledge, not hoarded and hidden in PMs. It only needs to be posted in a dispute thread for a game once and then it can be referenced by everyone, not just an artificially restricted group of people.

 

Its inaction like withholding information that keeps these dispute threads going longer than they need to.

 

Why information is withheld may be for many reasons. If you're actually interested in knowing why they withheld the information, you may want to PM them. And be assured, the mods are informed, just not public.

Edited by MMDE
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, MMDE said:

Why information is withheld may be for many reasons. If you're actually interested in knowing why they withheld the information, you may want to PM them. And be assured, the mods are informed, just not public.

 

That's complete nonsense and the very thing I've been talking about here - prolonging a debate by providing misinformation while you suggest it as fact because "you're somehow in the know". If you actually bothered to look at the linked dispute you're now commenting on the poster says in plain English he parsed his snapshot (which could be gigabytes in size) in order to provide it for the thread, so no. No one had the information except him.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, MMDE said:

 

Yeah, or PS2 games remade for PS3 or PS4... :P And you may have watched videos of it, or read deep into it, informed by someone who knows etc. And as I said earlier, they may contribute with other things.

 

 

 

Why information is withheld may be for many reasons. If you're actually interested in knowing why they withheld the information, you may want to PM them. And be assured, the mods are informed, just not public.

 

I guess another option there could be "Played game on another console", but the quality of the post should be considered, if someone really knows the game well then they would be able to post about it without simply copying + pasting things from wikipedia. With the suggestion, people who haven't played the game can still post, but ideally it should be limited to people who have played it, you yourself avoid reporting games that you didn't play yourself, so I don't see how it's wrong to avoid posting in threads for games you didn't play. What I and many other members would like to see reduced is clueless people who say "I believe you" to someone because their other trophies on the game don't look out of order and people who only send one link to a 2009 trophy guide in a 2017 dispute to try to provide an argument (things could have changed since then). 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Ms Serzilla said:

 

I guess another option there could be "Played game on another console", but the quality of the post should be considered, if someone really knows the game well then they would be able to post about it without simply copying + pasting things from wikipedia. With the suggestion, people who haven't played the game can still post, but ideally it should be limited to people who have played it, you yourself avoid reporting games that you didn't play yourself, so I don't see how it's wrong to avoid posting in threads for games you didn't play. What I and many other members would like to see reduced is clueless people who say "I believe you" to someone because their other trophies on the game don't look out of order and people who only send one link to a 2009 trophy guide in a 2017 dispute to try to provide an argument (things could have changed since then). 

 

But it could be things that are not strictly related to knowledge of the game. I've even reported people for tons of games I've never played, because the reason I reported them was either someone who had informed me or because it had nothing to do with knowledge of the game. :P 

Edited by MMDE
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, MMDE said:

 

But it could be things that are not strictly related to knowledge of the game.

 

I guess you could say "Never played the game", but what you do is send a link to the web archive showing that the game wasn't on their list or time stamps got changed. Showing that you haven't played a game shouldn't be the main thing, the posts should still be acknowledged. It's just if two people say the opposite thing like:

 

Poster 1

 

Hasn't played game

 

I believe he did it legit, timestamps for other trophies look fine. 

 

Poster 2

 

100% Trophy List

 

There's no way to do the trophies in that order legitimately. 

 

Who are you more likely to believe? Not everyone has the time to check out each full trophy list just to find out if the person played the game or not. 

Edited by Ms Serzilla
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Ms Serzilla said:

 

What I and many other members would like to see reduced is clueless people who say "I believe you" to someone

 

Those posts should already be reported for not being helpful to the dispute, which has always been a rule of the dispute threads. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, DaivRules said:

 

Those posts should already be reported for not being helpful to the dispute, which has always been a rule of the dispute threads. 

 

But in some cases that can be a way of influencing the decision of a cheater team member. Just look at Monox18's dispute, even you were believing him without having a clue about the game. Your post wasn't helpful, it was bashing me for trying to clean up a game's trophy leaderboard and I don't see the point of you doing that since what the fuck have I ever done to you? If the majority of people on the thread are saying "I think he did this legit" like in Monox18's dispute then there should be an indicator that they have actually played the game before saying those things, since grimy won't have the time to scroll down many trophy lists. I think one opinion of a 100% trophy list achiever who thoroughly explained how the scores got there in the first place is more valuable than 10 people who didn't play the game simply saying there's no grounds to flag someone based on the stats that they uploaded to the servers of the game.  

Edited by Ms Serzilla
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, Ms Serzilla said:

 

I guess you could say "Never played the game", but what you do is send a link to the web archive showing that the game wasn't on their list or time stamps got changed. Showing that you haven't played a game shouldn't be the main thing, the posts should still be acknowledged. It's just if two people say the opposite thing like:

 

Poster 1

 

Hasn't played game

 

I believe he did it legit, timestamps for other trophies look fine. 

 

Poster 2

 

100% Trophy List

 

There's no way to do the trophies in that order legitimately. 

 

Who are you more likely to believe? Not everyone has the time to check out each full trophy list just to find out if the person played the game or not. 

 

 

What do you think? I've never played Batman...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Personally, I'd rather subject matter experts post only in the dispute, i.e. people who have actually completed the game (despite how that conflicts with my previous behavior), rather than quote/unquote "talented amateurs" (people who haven't played it but are good at putting outside clues together). In my suggestion, (I'm going to continue linking that till more people take it seriously) only people who've played it and Staff members would have access to the dispute. If you really want that person who is good at taking externals clues to gain a clear picture helping handle disputes, and you want to take my or Serzilla's suggestion seriously, make that person (as much as my next words make me throw up a little in my mouth) an actual Staff member. There's a difference between people that consistently show talent at putting things together that a website should want to tap into, and a stopped clock that was right once.

Edited by damon8r351
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, Ms Serzilla said:

 

But in some cases that can be a way of influencing the decision of a cheater team member. Just look at Monox18's dispute, even you were believing him without having a clue about the game. Your post wasn't helpful, it was bashing me for trying to clean up a game's trophy leaderboard and I don't see the point of you doing that since what the fuck have I ever done to you? If the majority of people on the thread are saying "I think he did this legit" like in Monox18's dispute then there should be an indicator that they have actually played the game before saying those things, since grimy won't have the time to scroll down many trophy lists. I think one opinion of a 100% trophy list achiever who thoroughly explained how the scores got there in the first place is more valuable than 10 people who didn't play the game simply saying there's no grounds to flag someone based on the stats that they uploaded to the servers of the game.  

 

Your approach to the disputes is shady and troll-ish. You withheld information that would have prevented myself and many others from evaluating partial information. Posts in the dispute threads should be factual and helpful, and from the beginning you used them as entertainment. If I influence a flagging team members decision, it should be because I have done so with what facts are available to be evaluated.

None of the people who you make fun of in dispute threads ever did shit to you and you bash on them, seems like you were okay with that kind of behavior. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, DaivRules said:

 

Your approach to the disputes is shady and troll-ish. You withheld information that would have prevented myself and many others from evaluating partial information. Posts in the dispute threads should be factual and helpful, and from the beginning you used them as entertainment. If I influence a flagging team members decision, it should be because I have done so with what facts are available to be evaluated.

None of the people who you make fun of in dispute threads ever did shit to you and you bash on them, seems like you were okay with that kind of behavior. 

The problem is, the more evidence you present, the more material the disputer has to manipulate and work with to appear innocent. Withholding vital pieces of info can be used as trump cards later when the OP says something that isn't possible when said trump card is revealed.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, DaivRules said:

 

Your approach to the disputes is shady and troll-ish. You withheld information that would have prevented myself and many others from evaluating partial information. Posts in the dispute threads should be factual and helpful, and from the beginning you used them as entertainment. If I influence a flagging team members decision, it should be because I have done so with what facts are available to be evaluated.

None of the people who you make fun of in dispute threads ever did shit to you and you bash on them, seems like you were okay with that kind of behavior. 

 

And what if you got facts that will make them hide other games too before the flags are approved? I hope nobody did tell the person I talked with yesterday, because now they've hidden those additional games I reported. I also don't want cheaters to know how they are tracked and caught, it will just make it so they will avoid it and then you got cheaters that are harder to catch. Mods know and can make a judgement on it. As I've said a million times, if you got an issue with someone, talk with them. PM is super useful. Then you can discuss it with them and you might get the entire picture too.

Edited by MMDE
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, madbuk said:

The problem is, the more evidence you present, the more material the disputer has to manipulate and work with to appear innocent. Withholding vital pieces of info can be used as trump cards later when the OP says something that isn't possible when said trump card is revealed.


I have certainly seen it before where the accused says they had no idea how their list got that way and then several people say "maybe this, maybe that" and immediately they say "I did that.". There are situations where the information could legitimately help them though so it can be tough to judge.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, madbuk said:

The problem is, the more evidence you present, the more material the disputer has to manipulate and work with to appear innocent. Withholding vital pieces of info can be used as trump cards later when the OP says something that isn't possible when said trump card is revealed.

The problem is the Disputer hasn't disputed anything at that point. No one should be saying anything. If the Disputer doesn't dispute, the flag stands, no thread discussion necessary.

 

13 minutes ago, RVMcypress_grave said:


I have certainly seen it before where the accused says they had no idea how their list got that way and then several people say "maybe this, maybe that" and immediately they say "I did that.". There are situations where the information could legitimately help them though so it can be tough to judge.

 

Thats exactly the wrong reason to post in the dispute threads. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, DaivRules said:

 

Your approach to the disputes is shady and troll-ish. You withheld information that would have prevented myself and many others from evaluating partial information. Posts in the dispute threads should be factual and helpful, and from the beginning you used them as entertainment. If I influence a flagging team members decision, it should be because I have done so with what facts are available to be evaluated.

None of the people who you make fun of in dispute threads ever did shit to you and you bash on them, seems like you were okay with that kind of behavior. 

 

Withholding information or you're just ignorant? THIS is a post I made shortly after Monox18 opened up his dispute thread, it includes a 19 minute video (that you obviously didn't watch) and a compilation of 95 images that show the similarities between four different people who share the same save data as each other was in the video description, you didn't care to look at that post and instead thought "Oh, Serzilla is the one who reported him, must be a false flag then, throw it out", you know it, I know it. Sure, early on I would make jokes with @MMDE about people doing time attack within seconds, because if they joke about their trophies by saying they're legit, why can't I joke about their trophies for not being legit?

 

If it's a game I've done myself, I will provide the best information I can to either support flagging or unflagging those people, I've been through games on many occasions to find specific people that I've played with on the leaderboards and so on and in some cases they have been discovered as a cheater through their stats in the game. I've also flagged around 100 people for NGS2 in particular simply based on their time stamps and there's more to go so yeah, I'll keep policing with prejudice like you said ;)

 

It's actually funny because in the video I even said there was a possibility that Monox18 was a legitimate platinum achiever who just used the save after getting the platinum, I told him to make a dispute because I thought he'd have videos to back up his points because the game has a feature that allows you to save videos for Team Missions and his claims were that he did the missions 100% legit as Ryu without exploits, to make those claims on that game you need to have the videos to back it up. 

 

@B1rvine is the only person on that entire thread who told me they watched the video and he told me that the video was very informative and helpful, but since 5-10 minutes of your time to check out when Monox18 was shown in the video was too long for most people, they just decided to bash me without providing any evidence to support Monox18's arguments. 

 

Edited by Ms Serzilla
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...