(Discussion)should you get flagged for late syncs?

[B1rvine]

1 hour ago, BB-BakkerJ said:

 

@Thropy_Croissant said it well. I’d also rather see a couple of cheaters get away instead of someone innocent getting wrongfully flagged.

 

 

I'll post my final thoughts on this topic using the same response I made to @Sergen's topic.

 

Quote

 

The debate (for me) is more about improving standards and having a higher integrity leaderboard overall going forward, not so much about late syncs. The "late sync" issue is more or less a side topic of my general concerns. CFW usage has always been against PSNP's rules, and generally everywhere. As you know, CFW users can edit existing timestamps and turn them into earlier "legit looking" times after they've been caught. Since there's no parameters defined in the rules about CFW, anybody can just claim they forgot to sync their original timestamps on a second console, and "late synced", while in actuality they CFW'd their times, and it's entirely "possible" either scenario is what happened. I'm arguing two issues. Closing loop holes, but also improving integrity overall.

 

Second, you (Sergen) previously started (?) (were involved) in the debate and argued to "on the fly" change the rules to allow "GoneSpy" as legitimate, when it was previously deemed illegitimate as defined by "using external software." Rules should be malleable from time to time, if it's deemed beneficial. 

 

 

Every flag on this website needs to be lifted to "guarantee 100%" that nobody innocent was flagged. Without some better, and defined rules, late syncing can always be pointed to as a loop hole around all of the current established rules.

 

Edited May 27, 2020 by B1rvine

[Ich1994-1994]

I meanlets look at how effevtive this rule would be

would it prevent hackers from doing what they do? Not at all. You could easily just hack some ofthe trophies with current time stanps and say you picked it up again and it was hidden before

 

could it cause some bad feelings for people that play legit? Yes it can

 

in the end you would have a rule that hits some non guilty people. Some hackers that are too dumb to work around

and hackers that dont care if you catch them

botg of the hackers you already find with current methods easily 

[charxsetsuna]

The idea of a vote was just blown away... ignored like leaves in the wind. I thought I was being fair to everyone with that suggestion, a poll no one is allowed to comment on that must be honoured. 

The opinion of a handful of people clearly mattering more than that of hundreds.

[ZachBoardyHD]

Forgive me if I'm missing something but isn't that just a bit of a ridiculous question? Imagine getting told "oh you've been flagged because you synced late",  why does it matter at all when someone syncs up their trophies?

[charxsetsuna]

Just now, ZachBoardyHD said:

Forgive me if I'm missing something but isn't that just a bit of a ridiculous question? Imagine getting told "oh you've been flagged because you synced late",  why does it matter at all when someone syncs up their trophies?

Give up,  we are just members we aren't CRT, what makes us think our opinions matter.

[B1rvine]

6 minutes ago, ZachBoardyHD said:

Forgive me if I'm missing something but isn't that just a bit of a ridiculous question? Imagine getting told "oh you've been flagged because you synced late",  why does it matter at all when someone syncs up their trophies?

 

Read my first response, and last response:

 

https://forum.psnprofiles.com/topic/89734-discussionshould-you-get-flagged-for-late-syncs/?page=2#comment-2062035

https://forum.psnprofiles.com/topic/89734-discussionshould-you-get-flagged-for-late-syncs/?page=10#comment-2062578

[charxsetsuna]

Your just showing how little our opinions matter, your allowed to dismiss our opinions but once we criticise yours it's called bullying or shitposting. I wasn't being entirely serious when I called this a cult but now I'm not too sure.

[Gibbo_0113]

Nowadays i dont usually sync a PS3 game until i have the online component done as PS3 servers can be shut off any time. Goldeneye for example i was halfway through when the servers got shut off so i deleted the user.

[majob]

2 minutes ago, charxsetsuna said:

Your just showing how little our opinions matter, your allowed to dismiss our opinions but once we criticise yours it's called bullying or shitposting. I wasn't being entirely serious when I called this a cult but now I'm not too sure.

Calm down. No one has dismissed what you said or accused you of such. The nature of debate means people are going to disagree with you

[charxsetsuna]

3 minutes ago, majob said:

Calm down. No one has dismissed what you said or accused you of such. The nature of debate means people are going to disagree with you

Look at the evidence, look at this entire thread. This happened before on the thread on if we should allow private servers.

Nearly everyone agreed with allowing them but the moment a crt came into the conversation,  suddenly none of that mattered. It took the owner to come in to say that private servers were ok as long as they approved.

I didn't even have a psnprofiles account at that point I was just watching the debate go from agreeing to private servers to suddenly because a CRT didnt like it everyone started agreeing with them and anyone who didn't got silenced essentially.

Edited May 27, 2020 by charxsetsuna

[majob]

17 minutes ago, charxsetsuna said:

Look at the evidence, look at this entire thread. This happened before on the thread on if we should allow private servers.

Nearly everyone agreed with allowing them but the moment a crt came into the conversation,  suddenly none of that mattered. It took the owner to come in to say that private servers were ok as long as they approved.

I didn't even have a psnprofiles account at that point I was just watching the debate go from agreeing to private servers to suddenly because a CRT didnt like it everyone started agreeing with them and anyone who didn't got silenced essentially.

You misunderstand what I'm trying to say. This is a discussion thread yes? What good is it if you feel a dissenting voice is one of oppression. No one has dismissed your opinion because this thread is still open and no one has called you a shitposter either. I think you make a valid point but you don't have at act like you're being personally attacked because B1rvine is defending their postion.

Edited May 27, 2020 by majob

[ProfBambam55]

quite a discussion here...here's where I'm at...late syncing should be allowed...i think flagging people for this crosses a line I don't like...i'll extrapolate a bit in hopes of highlighting the flaw I see...next year, the site decides using turbo controllers will be considered as cheating...hard to tell who used them or not so flag everyone who might've and make them prove they didn't...boosting?...now it's cheating...prove you didn't do it...account sharing?...cheating...prove you didn't...and so on...if the site is going to maintain the integrity of the leaderboards and not be willing to handle things on a case-by-case basis then the default stance should be benefit of the doubt to members not instant guilt assumption imo...and yes, I'm all for rule changes if it encourages people to enjoy playing games and earning trophies legitimately without having to worry about this behaviour leading to a flag...this is not one of those instances though...it's quite the opposite...

[Beyondthegrave07]

19 hours ago, charxsetsuna said:

The idea of a vote was just blown away... ignored like leaves in the wind. I thought I was being fair to everyone with that suggestion, a poll no one is allowed to comment on that must be honoured. 

The opinion of a handful of people clearly mattering more than that of hundreds.

Because your poll tells us doesn't really tell us anything. It doesn't define "very late" and only gives two polarizing options when several people could be on the fence or see scenarios where it's both, yes and no. There's also several people who probably voted who know nothing about how the CRT process works or understand the intricacies of CFW or even what it stands for.

 

Therefore, people either vote the extreme that's more relatable to them (even though they don't fully agree with it) or don't vote at all. @Mesopithecus gave a perfect scenario why most people are going to say "no" to flagging late syncs, and I'm sure others who voted no did so on the side of caution in case they were ever in a similar scenario.

 

The fact that @B1rvine is even taking the time to respond to the thread shows that the CRT is listening to the concerns of the community.

 

I also want to reemphasize that this whole late syncing is being blown out of proportion.  The person wasn't flagged for just "late syncing." There was more evidence that showed possible CFW use and was enough for someone on the CRT to apply the flag to the profile.

 

I think some are missing the bigger picture here:

 

1.) He wasn't just flagged for late syncing alone. Other factors were in play. This was just the only one brought up in the dispute. People are not currently just lazily getting flags for late syncs. Give the CRT a little bit more credit than that.

 

2.) The person successfully defended themselves to have the flag removed which are how disputes are supposed to work. You are wrongly flagged, you dispute it, and it gets taken off if you provide evidence.

 

3. There is no witch hunt going on to get people flagged. What the CRT really want is a fair definition of what we should consider CFW (as B1rvine has mentioned several times).

Edited May 28, 2020 by Beyondthegrave07
Grammar

[charxsetsuna]

2 minutes ago, Beyondthegrave07 said:

Because you're poll tells us doesn't really tell us anything. It doesn't define "very late" and only gives two polarizing options when several people could be on the fence or see scenarios where it's both, yes and no. There's also several people who probably voted who know nothing about how the CRT process works or understand the intricacies of CFW or even what it stands for.

 

Therefore, people either vote the extreme that's more relatable to them (even though they don't fully agree with it) or don't vote at all. @Mesopithecus gave a perfect scenario why most people are going to say "no" to flagging late syncs, and I'm sure others who voted no did so on the side of caution in case they were ever in a similar scenario.

 

The fact that @B1rvine is even taking the time to respond to the thread shows that the CRT is listening to the concerns of the community.

 

I also want to reemphasize that this whole late syncing is being blown out of proportion.  The person wasn't flagged for just "late syncing." There was more evidence that showed possible CFW use and was enough for someone on the CRT to apply the flag to the profile.

 

I think some are missing the bigger picture here:

 

1.) He wasn't just flagged for late syncing alone. Other factors were in play. This was just the only one brought up in the dispute. People are not currently just lazily getting flags for late syncs. Give the CRT a little bit more credit than that.

 

2.) The person successfully defended themselves to have the flag removed which are how disputes are supposed to work. You are wrongly flagged, you dispute it, and it gets taken off if you provide evidence.

 

3. There is no witch hunt going on to get people flagged. What the CRT really want is a fair definition of what we should consider CFW (as B1rvine has mentioned several times).

I never started this thread with that intent, the poll was only intended to gauge a general interest as I stated on a very early reply. I only started this thread because we got told to move it off the dispute .

It got out of hand and I apologise for that but I'm not even the extreme here, I actually think you should provide evidence for having earned unobtainable trophies years ago but only just syncing them now and I've made that clear. 

That's why I suggested a moderator run poll that is clearly worded and that no one is allowed to comment on. A vote that is actually accurate because this poll was never meant to be that.

Why should I be the extreme here I obsessively sync my trophies when I get them even in the middle of a cutscene. But i must apologise for what this has become.

 

@B1rvineB1rvine I am sorry for the annoyance I caused you, I dont hate you and we are both highly opinionated people that is clear. I was wrong to blame this all on you and I hope you can forgive me.

[ProfBambam55]

5 minutes ago, Beyondthegrave07 said:

There is no witch hunt going on to get people flagged. What the CRT really want is a fair definition of what we should consider CFW

the answer is a paradox...how can we successfully detect cfw?...simple answer, by only using trophy timestamp data, you can't really...we could define it with 100 different clauses but there would still be circumstamces where it could be confused with what most would agree to be a legitimate course of action like with this late syncing situation...

[Astray404]

12 minutes ago, Beyondthegrave07 said:

1.) He wasn't just flagged for late syncing alone. Other factors were in play. This was just the only one brought up in the dispute. People are not currently just lazily getting flags for late syncs. Give the CRT a little bit more credit than that.

IIRC his problem is that there were questionable timestamps caused by late sync between different PS3 consoles, not just the late sync itself, isn't it?

[charxsetsuna]

Can i please ask the moderators to close this thread, start a new one thats identical without the drama and delete this one.

I won't get involved in the new one, I'll watch but I wont get involved I've caused enough of a stain on this website at it is.i feel horrible about what I've done, remove my presence on  this thread from existence.

 

 

Edited May 28, 2020 by charxsetsuna

[MMDE]

There's two recent cases I guess, and I'm not for either flag.

As I said in the disputes these threads originates, I think those cases should probably not be flagged. There's a lot of definite cases that can be flagged though. If you're in doubt, it should probably favor the disputer.

 

One person was already flagged for earning a trophy after it went unobtainable with the help of some modder, but eh, it's not related. As I also said, if the reason it's synced late is because they bought it from someone, that stuff is so often cheated... I'm also no fan of late online trophy syncs, especially when servers have closed down.

The other self-boosted, which can be problematic when the timestamps sync out of order and PSNP caches the "newest" before the "oldest" is synced with PSN. You can usually tell the difference, and it should favor the disputer tbh, but I know it can be difficult sometimes. More often than not it's just someone who changed the timestamps before trying to dispute, but as I said, there's ways to tell most of it apart.

Edited May 28, 2020 by MMDE

[Super-Fly Spider-Guy]

No. Unless someone has

 

A. A trophy with a timestamp from a time that it is impossible to earn that trophy, ie, the GTA IV MP trophies being earned while the servers were down

B. Ridiculous timestamps that are impossible to achieve, ie, someone has every story related trophy in a 10 hour game pop in 10 seconds

C. Straight up admitted to cheating their trophies, though this is the unlikeliest

 

Then they should not be flagged. Plain and simple. No conditions, no bullshit, plain and simple. 

 

...

 

Late syncs are not just fine, not just super common, but something I have myself. There's plenty of times I played games on a friend's PS3, but on my account, and their internet was down, or in some cases they full on didn't have internet, etc. and the trophies weren't synced until the next time I was over at their place using my account, which would often be months. My log has a bunch of shit load in from 2014 or so when you're scrolling through my games played in 2017 because of this very situation. 

 

There's more unlikely situations, like someone not having internet when you play on their machine so your stamps have no date, then you take their console to your house one time and it gets internet and every trophy earned beyond that day has a timestamp, and then you go and play a game on their machine again every now and then, this time earning time stamps, but it's not synced because they don't have internet, then you play the same game on your own PS3 and have to start over and so the first few missions that were beaten without timestamps are now overwritten by your new timestamps, but the levels beyond that that you played on their machine *with* the ability to make timestamps now, are dated before the ones you got for beating the first few levels on your machine and you're left having beaten mission 6 before mission 2. Obviously with how much the internet has come in the last decade or so, it's incredibly unlikely to find yourself in that situation *now*, but it happened to me years ago and I don't think I even got like a third of the trophies in the game overall so somehow I doubt I was rigging it for trophies. 

 

Point being, that's entirely questionable and with no proof I guess fuck it, guilty until found innocent. Buuuuut, late syncs? If the timestamps add up, suck my dick, you do not deserve to be flagged because you were playing on your girlfriend's PS3 or something and didn't bother to sync it up. 

 

Edit: This is so weird, the game in question was Just Cause 2, and I went to check the times and shit, and it's been years since I looked, but it seems to have corrected itself out and everything lines up now. I remember it said my first instance of causing chaos was earned after beating like mission 3 or something in the past. This is trippy yo.

Edited May 28, 2020 by Super-Fly Spider-Guy
I had more shit to say, why'd you think?

[Beyondthegrave07]

4 minutes ago, ProfBambam55 said:

the answer is a paradox...how can we successfully detect cfw?...simple answer, by only using trophy timestamp data, you can't really...we could define it with 100 different clauses but there would still be circumstamces where it could be confused with what most would agree to be a legitimate course of action like with this late syncing situation...

That may be why no one has given a straight answer to the question either. It's something decided on a case by case and I'm not sure there's a fair way to streamline it, and maybe that's B1rvine's point. Like you said, I don't think you could really define it without writing a book on every possible scenario and even at that, some situations will still fall through the cracks.

 

3 minutes ago, Astray404 said:

IIRC his problem is that there were questionable timestamps caused by late sync between different PS3 consoles, not just the late sync itself, isn't it?

In short, yes. It was caused by using multiple consoles at once which caused it to appear like CFW usage. Not just the late sync itself which is why I think is why a lot of people's outrage or anger is being overblown. People aren't going to be flagged for late syncs alone. You have to be doing a pretty good job of earning trophies on two different consoles and syncing them in an odd order to get flagged for it (not to mention other factors such as prior history, etc.). This is a non-issue for most people.

[ProfBambam55]

1 minute ago, Beyondthegrave07 said:

That may be why no one has given a straight answer to the question either. It's something decided on a case by case and I'm not sure there's a fair way to streamline it, and maybe that's B1rvine's point. Like you said, I don't think you could really define it without writing a book on every possible scenario and even at that, some situations will still fall through the cracks.

agreed...and so it seems what is being discussed is : if we had to choose one definite course of action, should we err on the side of caution and give gamers benefit of the doubt or do we rewrite the rules which could potentially see some legit gamers removed from the leaderboards"...and i think i'll always be on the side of legitimate gamers over legitimate leaderboards...yes, both can be corrupted but at least the leaderboards don't have feelings...haha...

[charxsetsuna]

Please just lock the thread...

[B1rvine]

Alright, the community has apparently voiced their opinion on this matter.

 

https://forum.psnprofiles.com/topic/89764-soundfreedoms-dispute/#comment-2062691

 

[grimydawg___]

Folks talking without thinking as usual.  How about not starting another thread @charxsetsuna That would be a wonderful idea, that way @B1rvine won't have to go through more stupid nonsense...

[SpacebarPlays]

13 minutes ago, B1rvine said:

Alright, the community has apparently voiced their opinion on this matter.

 

https://forum.psnprofiles.com/topic/89764-soundfreedoms-dispute/#comment-2062691

 

I dont even have a dog in this race, just been watching from the sidelines.

I actually agreed with you on some points (And dissenting voices about other things).

 

This is so ridiculously childish, its not even funny. 

There's valid concerns, the mature thing would have been to go and discuss this with the rest of the CRT, whether in private or make it public, up to you.

Discuss the concerns and decide if theres any changes that COULD be made to facilitate this stuff and then actually have an open conversation about the decisions made ffs.

 

When people have raised other CRT members getting involved to discuss this, its very worrying that your reply was quite literally 'Half of them dont give a shit really'.

Im not even gonna question how much of a commitment your role is as a CRT, just in the few months ive actively been reading the forums, i see how much stupid shit you guys have to put up with in the dispute threads but you made a choice to take on that role.