another rule change suggestion

Suspend founders 30 days and captains 15 days when someone is found to be cheating on their team. 90 days and 30 days for each incident after the 3rd. I think that the best way to stop cheaters is from the top down and you start doing that by holding team leaders accountable.

PS. Its a huge conflict of interest to hold a founders vote for something like this or even anykind of vote. Anybody who could potentially be suspended would probably vote against it not because they think its a bad rule, but because they want to be able to recruit anybody and not suffer the consequences. That said, I've no doubt that there are founders and captains who would vote yes, but I think that the vast majority would take a selfish stance.

I urge the head ut04 admins to step up and demonstrate they are community leaders and take a firm stance against cheating.

Thanks!

As a founder, I think this is a good idea.

+1

Agreed. Strongly.

Also remove "Suck My Shock" from TWL please. I believe that 2 people from that team have gotten banned in the last 2 weeks(?)(and it has biohazard on it). lol.

Good idea Justin.

As long as we are suggesting rules...

Moratorium on disputing a team after they have been found clean time and time again please.

yea thats a good rule, will make people think about who they are letting on their roster

Don't mess with the captains. On many teams some captains are barely around or all are captains. It really has no meaning many times. As for founders, meh, sure.

Although, i do believe that suspensions are common for founders caught. Ain't that right Beck?

Originally posted by: {pdX}Lostsoul
Don't mess with the captains. On many teams some captains are barely around or all are captains. It really has no meaning many times. As for founders, meh, sure.

Although, i do believe that suspensions are common for founders caught. Ain't that right Beck?

I'd say captain is an elevated responsibility and in a lot of cases they have as much or more to do with recruiting than the founder. And then if they're never around anyway they probably aren't going to care a whole lot if they're suspended or not.
Post edited by slyde at 9/12/2007 1:06:12 PM

Originally posted by: slyde
I'd say captain is an elevated responsibility and in a lot of cases they have as much or more to do with recruiting than the founder. And then if they're never around anyway they probably aren't going to care a whole lot if they're suspended or not.

But then it would go on there record. Having captain status on TWL really means nothing. Entire teams can be captains, pdX for example, and only a few do stuff. Reinstate the 2 captain limit and then sure, go for.

PS
This is part of the problem in the 2k4 community. The clan leaders are not always to blame. The witch hunt that happens when a team may have a botter leads to leaders wanting there guy to be clean. They don't help because no matter what, the team will get shit on.

Originally posted by: {pdX}Lostsoul
Don't mess with the captains. On many teams some captains are barely around or all are captains. It really has no meaning many times. As for founders, meh, sure.

Although, i do believe that suspensions are common for founders caught. Ain't that right Beck?

True Story..seem's like i was the only one, tho.

Then teams like "suck my shock" don't recieve anything, when 2 people from that team have been caught in the lastt 10 days.

What are ya going to do.
Post edited by beckizzle` at 9/12/2007 1:36:21 PM

Originally posted by: beckizzle`
True Story..seem's like i was the only one, tho.

Lord n00b was banned and the clan was transfered to Torinir. Lost all our history with that

Founders sure but captains would be hard to pinpoint. All my players are captains so that they can answer questions in match comms or read them to find the status of a match.

Well I was going to say suspend the whole team, but I figured nobody else would go along with that. Dunno, I think more than just the founder should be accountable.

Maybe that team could be forced to automatically forfeit the next match, or drop "X" number of spaces on the ladder?

I definitely think they should be dropped ##% of the POSITION they are, (in case the suspected player/caught player HAD played in a match) and the leader/founder should have a 30 day suspension.

And to LS:

I wasn't aware of that.
Post edited by beckizzle` at 9/12/2007 6:17:38 PM

Not every time is a captain aware of the wrong doing. Sometimes it is proven that they are. Those times in which it is proven that the captain is either aware or simply refuses to acknowledge the mountain of evidence and take corrective action, the captain *is* punished.

Good example of a bad call if this rule is applied in a blanket manner. Way back in early 2k4, an IGer, RiP Juke tried out for NERV to play on our IG TDM team. We have one 2v2 with 2 NERV guys vs him and Kraven. They win but nothing seems bot like. He's brought in. Doesn't play a match with us in 2-3 weeks but goes and gets busted on a pub server with a bot. Soon as we hear about it, he's removed from the clan. Should myself or any other NERV captain be punished? Hell NERV's founder on TWL doesn't even play the UT series. Should he suffer too?

Beck's usage of this rule happens to be a bit closer to something manageable. When you can see a totally cheat riddled team with multiple players getting caught, that's far different from some captain who has no idea until somebody hands him a log or screenshot or demo.

---

|NERV|NapalmDawn
TeamWarfare Competition Manager
Email: NapalmDawn@teamwarfare.com
IRC: #teamwarfare, #twl_UT

Originally posted by: NapalmDawn
Not every time is a captain aware of the wrong doing. Sometimes it is proven that they are. Those times in which it is proven that the captain is either aware or simply refuses to acknowledge the mountain of evidence and take corrective action, the captain *is* punished.

Good example of a bad call if this rule is applied in a blanket manner. Way back in early 2k4, an IGer, RiP Juke tried out for NERV to play on our IG TDM team. We have one 2v2 with 2 NERV guys vs him and Kraven. They win but nothing seems bot like. He's brought in. Doesn't play a match with us in 2-3 weeks but goes and gets busted on a pub server with a bot. Soon as we hear about it, he's removed from the clan. Should myself or any other NERV captain be punished? Hell NERV's founder on TWL doesn't even play the UT series. Should he suffer too?

Beck's usage of this rule happens to be a bit closer to something manageable. When you can see a totally cheat riddled team with multiple players getting caught, that's far different from some captain who has no idea until somebody hands him a log or screenshot or demo.

You brought the dude in after 1 2v2? Yeah, its your fault, suspension. In my opinion, anytime you give someone the right to join your team, you're making a statement to the community that this guy is legit and will compete against you fairly. When you break that trust you should pay the price.

Bottom line is this, regardless of how much research you did and how quickly you responded, the fact still remains that a member of your team got busted for cheating and you should be held accountable.

I want to amend the rule too:
If you recruit a previously busted cheater who has served their suspension and is now eligible to play again and then they go and get busted again. 90 days for the leader, 30 days for -ALL- other clan members. The reason for suspending everyone is that they all should know that guy's history, and if they were okay with being in a clan with a formerly busted cheater, they should be okay serving the penalty when he/she becomes a repeat offender.
Post edited by slyde at 9/12/2007 11:50:31 PM

LOL Slyde. "It's your fault." Uhh no it's not and your proposed rule is far to hard core in its current state. First off, the person happened to have been the BF of a then NERV player. Some clans have a kind of friends/family thing. Secondly, what if he was perfectly legit during the try out but chose to f**k around with a bot sometime after?

It's amazing how schizo the community is at times. In the 2v2 rule thread, we're called too hard nosed for a non-professional site. Then with this rule, we're nuking the planet over a cheater.

I happen to be extremely tough on cheaters. Back when clear hackers got a free ride back to TWL when the faked keyevent rulings were over turned, I was pissed. You get a team with 2-3 cheaters caught in a 3 month period, I'm the one lobbying to throw the whole team out the window.

I still say if it's proven the captain had knowledge or involvement, string him up.

---

|NERV|NapalmDawn
TeamWarfare Competition Manager
Email: NapalmDawn@teamwarfare.com
IRC: #teamwarfare, #twl_UT

Difference of opinion I guess.

Suspend captains too, the more people held responsible for a bot the better. This is an online video game ladder and needs an absolute stance on cheating. If you cheat, you and all your buddies are banned suspended. End of story. It does absolutely no good to have a soft stance on cheating. Any legit team should not have a problem with this.

If this were a rule teams would think twice about putting a player on the roster after only one match. You could argue "ohh the poor captian didn't know anything about the guy! whaa waaahh" well to damn bad. He should have gotten to know him before giving out the join pass. The more bans the better. Legit teams have nothing to fear.

Originally posted by: garcia_y_vega
Suspend captains too, the more people held responsible for a bot the better. This is an online video game ladder and needs an absolute stance on cheating. If you cheat, you and all your buddies are banned suspended. End of story. It does absolutely no good to have a soft stance on cheating. Any legit team should not have a problem with this.

If this were a rule teams would think twice about putting a player on the roster after only one match. You could argue "ohh the poor captian didn't know anything about the guy! whaa waaahh" well to damn bad. He should have gotten to know him before giving out the join pass. The more bans the better. Legit teams have nothing to fear.

Botters have gotten very good at hiding there cheats. If it was easy, there would not always be so much debate about it. I can see holding founders accountable, but not the captains. You should not punish people for not being anti-cheat admins. Maybe we should just make it so that every new recruit to be added to a ladder has to first pass a TWL test?

Originally posted by: {pdX}Lostsoul

Originally posted by: garcia_y_vega
Suspend captains too, the more people held responsible for a bot the better. This is an online video game ladder and needs an absolute stance on cheating. If you cheat, you and all your buddies are banned suspended. End of story. It does absolutely no good to have a soft stance on cheating. Any legit team should not have a problem with this.

If this were a rule teams would think twice about putting a player on the roster after only one match. You could argue "ohh the poor captian didn't know anything about the guy! whaa waaahh" well to damn bad. He should have gotten to know him before giving out the join pass. The more bans the better. Legit teams have nothing to fear.

Botters have gotten very good at hiding there cheats. If it was easy, there would not always be so much debate about it. I can see holding founders accountable, but not the captains. You should not punish people for not being anti-cheat admins. Maybe we should just make it so that every new recruit to be added to a ladder has to first pass a TWL test?

It should be a global rule for all games and all communities. You should be judging the person when you let someone in your clan, not their gameplay. If you get duped, you get duped. Kick the cheater out, serve the suspension, and learn from your mistakes. Life goes on.
Post edited by slyde at 9/13/2007 1:56:02 PM

Age minimums help a lot. How many caught cheaters didn't have an age that sounded something like x-teen?

It's less about the founders being able to tell if someone cheats, and more about their character judgment IMO. As well, right now, there really is minimal recoil for founders, unless their player gets caught in a TWL match, which nearly never happens, and they have little motivation to really scout out each new recruit, before just signing them up, and letting them play.

I know the game is pretty dead right now, but founds should treat their teams more professionally, and not just throw people in the mix so fast. They should do as much spectating as playing when recruiting heavily.

Originally posted by: slyde
If you get duped, you get duped. Kick the cheater out, serve the suspension, and learn from your mistakes. Life goes on.

Yep, it will just be a lesson to those captains who were tricked. People will need to adjust their recruitment strategy to the new rule. Obviously the days of tossing just anyone on your roster would be over.

Originally posted by: garcia_y_vega

Originally posted by: slyde
If you get duped, you get duped. Kick the cheater out, serve the suspension, and learn from your mistakes. Life goes on.

Yep, it will just be a lesson to those captains who were tricked. People will need to adjust their recruitment strategy to the new rule. Obviously the days of tossing just anyone on your roster would be over.

How awesome would that be?

so any news on updating this?

This thread is so funny... UT is the ONLY community that thinks like this. Every other pities the team with the cheater because there's no way to know. We're not their father. You think a "founder" has time to pour through demos or inspect people every single night of their lives? If a team is actually serious, no, not even close.

So that would beg the question, what are you punishing the founder for? Not giving up his/her life to do AC's job?

Granted I could see if the founder knew the player in question had a shady history, was warned, and STILL took them in. Example: I warned OwN about Kokuei multiple times. Or, example: I warned Icon about Ganja's catch. Or example: I warned Merkaba about Cocaine. But when you look at the wide scale, few founders really have the time to directly interact with their new players... if someone does well in scrims, but not too well, and gets along with the team... that's good enough... you can't expect people to throw away their lives to just watch all their players.

Personally, for pure this would be logistically impossible... we have divisions in CoD2, DoDS, CSS, UT04 (inactive), Q3, War3, TF2 (new), QW:ET, and we're always expanding and contracting. All professional multi-gaming teams are like this, so would I be accountable for someone cheating in CoD2? LOL... someone was caught and removed from our first season in CoD2 cheating oddly enough, nobody once blamed pure and interviews with myself and the team after were very positive. We went on to be CAL-I, CEVO-P, and LAN at WSVG in CoD2.

Stop thinking so tiny.
Post edited by sk`` at 9/19/2007 2:06:07 PM

2k4 community is tiny

And thinking like it will help? Usually when someone else is far more successful you mimic, you don't do the opposite.

Originally posted by: sk``
This thread is so funny... UT is the ONLY community that thinks like this. Every other pities the team with the cheater because there's no way to know. We're not their father. You think a "founder" has time to pour through demos or inspect people every single night of their lives? If a team is actually serious, no, not even close.

So that would beg the question, what are you punishing the founder for? Not giving up his/her life to do AC's job?

Granted I could see if the founder knew the player in question had a shady history, was warned, and STILL took them in. Example: I warned OwN about Kokuei multiple times. Or, example: I warned Icon about Ganja's catch. Or example: I warned Merkaba about Cocaine. But when you look at the wide scale, few founders really have the time to directly interact with their new players... if someone does well in scrims, but not too well, and gets along with the team... that's good enough... you can't expect people to throw away their lives to just watch all their players.

Personally, for pure this would be logistically impossible... we have divisions in CoD2, DoDS, CSS, UT04 (inactive), Q3, War3, TF2 (new), QW:ET, and we're always expanding and contracting. All professional multi-gaming teams are like this, so would I be accountable for someone cheating in CoD2? LOL... someone was caught and removed from our first season in CoD2 cheating oddly enough, nobody once blamed pure and interviews with myself and the team after were very positive. We went on to be CAL-I, CEVO-P, and LAN at WSVG in CoD2.

Stop thinking so tiny.

I would expect a "pro" team to go to extra lengths to ensure the character of their players. Maybe that should be the priority over recruiting every random good player you find.

You should be accountable because it is your team. If the people you make responsible for recruiting for those divisions screw up, you serve the penalty just like they do. After all, you put them in that position.

Slyde:
So then... are the Giants responsible for what Barry Bonds does? Or the Cowboys for the antics of Terrel Owens?

Should the league fine the owners of those teams? The managers?

No, and like the professional establishments they are they contain their punishment, pending or not, to the players themselves. Teams cannot control their players. We are not their fathers. Expecting us to be is absurd.

For your own reference, no league complies with what you're asking, and I doubt any ever will. The standard was set in professional sports and if the league is to be taken seriously, they should adhere to that standard. No professional team thoroughly inspects players because who has the time? Nobody. If the player is cheating it will get discovered and that player will suffer accordingly. A great team won't suffer because they will pull their talent as needed. A great example there: guilty or not, when Beynd wouldn't LAN I cut him. Pure was at around 20 wins in TAM. We went on to win some 80+ more without him. Regardless of what Beynd was or wasn't it wasn't a part of our success. His unwillingness to prove it when given the chance to only now makes him look bad.
Post edited by sk`` at 9/19/2007 3:11:51 PM

^^

Originally posted by: sk``
Slyde:
So then... are the Giants responsible for what Barry Bonds does? Or the Cowboys for the antics of Terrel Owens?

Should the league fine the owners of those teams? The managers?

No, and like the professional establishments they are they contain their punishment, pending or not, to the players themselves. Teams cannot control their players. We are not their fathers. Expecting us to be is absurd.

For your own reference, no league complies with what you're asking, and I doubt any ever will. The standard was set in professional sports and if the league is to be taken seriously, they should adhere to that standard. No professional team thoroughly inspects players because who has the time? Nobody. If the player is cheating it will get discovered and that player will suffer accordingly. A great team won't suffer because they will pull their talent as needed. A great example there: guilty or not, when Beynd wouldn't LAN I cut him. Pure was at around 20 wins in TAM. We went on to win some 80+ more without him. Regardless of what Beynd was or wasn't it wasn't a part of our success. His unwillingness to prove it when given the chance to only now makes him look bad.

The patriots were just fined 250k and stripped of a draft pick because their coach was caught cheating. Your analogy to barry bonds doesnt work because then baseball would have to punish every team because steroids were so rampant. Your analogy to TO doesn't work because TO hasn't been caught cheating. A better example would have been the patriots recent spy scandal and oh look, robert kraft got punished.
Post edited by slyde at 9/19/2007 3:31:30 PM

Slyde:
Thank you for proving my exact argument! The league fined the EXACT OFFENDER. They didn't fine the owner of the team (read, founder).

Your baseball example fails because they have been actively testing and punishing PLAYERS they catch. Multiples there of.

Also, TO was fined by the league for conduct. Online league also punish players, NOT TEAMS OR FOUNDERS, for conduct.

Again, you've proven my point, so thank you, you focus the punishment on the offender and don't demand team owners/founders be father figures.

(BTW, you're wrong about the fine, it was on the Pat's coach, not the Pat's. The "draft pick" it obviously on the team itself and that was written in the rules.)
Post edited by sk`` at 9/19/2007 3:47:14 PM

Originally posted by: sk``
Slyde:
Thank you for proving my exact argument! The league fined the EXACT OFFENDER. They didn't fine the owner of the team (read, founder).

Well thank you mister know-it-all, but robert kraft is the OWNER of the patriots and he was FINED 250k.

I'd also like to point out that baseball fines the players, not the owners, because in baseball its the owners making the rules and it wouldn't be cool for them to fine themselves for having players with steroids.

In online leagues we avoid the conflict of interest because leagues can be run by players and founders.
Post edited by slyde at 9/19/2007 3:49:00 PM

Seems like a better idea to me to model gaming leagues after successful professional leagues like the NFL instead of growing online leagues like CEVO.

Originally posted by: slyde

Originally posted by: sk``
Slyde:
Thank you for proving my exact argument! The league fined the EXACT OFFENDER. They didn't fine the owner of the team (read, founder).

Well thank you mister know-it-all, but robert kraft is the OWNER of the patriots and he was FINED 250k.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2007/football/nfl/09/13/belichick.fine.ap/index.html

My bad, I only noticed how much they fined the offender, the coach, $500k.

Again, you proved my point however because the NFL fined the exact offender. This incident was also a team offense and the team itself was punished accordingly. NO WHERE does it state the owner of the Pats was fined. The Pats are a company owned by Kraft. The company pays, not the owner (though no doubt the owner directly feels it). It says the Pats were fined $250k and a draft pick. It doesn't even say the level of pick yet.

So, the coach committed the direct crime and faced the stiffest penalty. His team aided him in his crime and was also punished. Now certainly, if someone knowingly let a cheater play for them they should be suspended... see the examples I listed above there.

Again, thanks for proving my point. No professional league punishes owners/founders.

Also, the model for how the NFL/MBL/NBA work is basically the same... Player's Association, Owners, Coaches Union... these control who is the overall commissioner who directly updates the league's policies and rules. More or less nothing like how online gaming leagues work (as they lack even a Players Association to lobby for them).
Post edited by sk`` at 9/19/2007 4:14:49 PM

Originally posted by: sk``

Originally posted by: slyde

Originally posted by: sk``
Slyde:
Thank you for proving my exact argument! The league fined the EXACT OFFENDER. They didn't fine the owner of the team (read, founder).

Well thank you mister know-it-all, but robert kraft is the OWNER of the patriots and he was FINED 250k.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2007/football/nfl/09/13/belichick.fine.ap/index.html

My bad, I only noticed how much they fined the offender, the coach, $500k.

Again, you proved my point however because the NFL fined the exact offender. This incident was also a team offense and the team itself was punished accordingly. NO WHERE does it state the owner of the Pats was fined. The Pats are a company owned by Kraft. The company pays, not the owner (though no doubt the owner directly feels it). It says the Pats were fined $250k and a draft pick. It doesn't even say the level of pick yet.

So, the coach committed the direct crime and faced the stiffest penalty. His team aided him in his crime and was also punished.

Again, thanks for proving my point. No professional league punishes owners/founders.

Yes, you're right, they fined the team. But who do you think pays that bill? Do you think the owner tells each of his employees to give $10 towards the fine?

This is getting off topic and stupid anyway. It doesn't matter what other leagues are or aren't doing. The rule is for this community on this ladder because there is no accountability here.

Originally posted by: slyde
Yes, you're right, they fined the team. But who do you think pays that bill? Do you think the owner tells each of his employees to give $10 towards the fine?

As the owner of the company he could.

Originally posted by: slyde
This is getting off topic and stupid anyway. It doesn't matter what other leagues are or aren't doing. The rule is for this community on this ladder because there is no accountability here.

Way to think tiny... well as someone with interest in expansion for UT I certainly welcome gun wounds to the foot that this would yield. Certainly wise to go opposite to all professional sports and all other online leagues. You should be an admin Slyde... with all these smart ideas you have.

HAY MAYBE YOU SHOULD HAVE TO PLAY AND BE ACTIVE AT TWL TO VOTE ON THIS MATTER. WHY DO YOU CARE WHAT HAPPENS TO THIS LEAGUE/LADDER SYSTEM IF YOU DON'T PLAY HERE.

Go toot your horn on the "UNHOLY PLACE" where people are FORCED to listen to you.

Beck:
Nobody is "forced" to listen to me there actually. Good luck demonstrating anything that would show as much.

Anyway, yes, by all means, pass this. It is a wonderful idea and I was a fool to oppose it.