Remove

[2d]

So far I've seen not one single person other than quadz who actually said WHY they dont see walling.

Just to point this out, my claims of magic not hacking fully come from Quadz' statements that he's seen nothing in magic's demos to be out of the ordinary or hack worthy. Also, his opinion should carry extreme weight, and needing anyone else's view point seems trollish 

At this point I see a lot of people who know exactly dick about what walling looks like saying this exact same thing [hes not hacking] and it would be beneficial to the community to not see 20 meaningless repetitions of that sentiment.

dervish your acting like a mall cop or a parking meter bitch trying to portray himself as a detective or a lawyer.
you lost dervish, you are in the minority. stop crying already and find NEW PROOF or  play him and record your demos or forever hold your evil tongue. whats past is past. stop bringing it up.   

[Whirlingdervish]

blah blah I'm a fuckwit 

9:8 that something at the very least needs to be done about magic, with 3 people not giving a shit what is done to him.

Tell me more about how I'm in that supposed minority? Can you not do math?

Also, nothing you said in your dumb post above actually makes sense or addresses what I said.

1: You are basing your claim that you "see no walling" on what someone else sees? Illogical nonsense.
2: In no way have you disproven my claim, or supported yours. Nobody who knows dick about what walling actually looks like, other than quadz, has posted WHY they don't think he's walling. It would be very informative to the community if they supported their claims with evidence that they could actually tell walling from a hole in the ground.
I have done so with mine, why can't they?

Asking people who know nothing about wallhacks if they can spot them, is about the same as asking blind people if the sky is blue.

You will not understand this and you will continue to post really dumb shit, but others will understand what I'm saying and my point will be made. I don't need your understanding for that to happen, and all told, you are so fucking clueless that I really shouldn't even bother to address you with this post.

[2d]

the 3 people who have no opinion would have no problem if they played with him or were in his presence so they should be added into non ban.

11 - 6 for ban
11 - 9 for mute

[2d]

if he was in their presence they wouldnt care. otherwise they would vote ban. add them to non ban

[VaeVictis]

force name to douche.magic and give em like a 45 second half mute or something

i don't think hes ban-able yet

but hes definitely annoying to even have around... and i have NO clue why he was unbanned in the first place

[Arm0r]

i have NO clue why he was unbanned in the first place

Yeah.  To be honest if Magic is unbanned then I don't see why razor is still banned.  They pretty much did the same exact thing.

[[BTF]Sigma]

I've only recently been back on the servers playing and one game in particular stands out.

It was on the railz server with Magic.

It was one of the most fun games I have had in a long while. I never got the sense that he was cheating. Good aim, patience and great spawn coverage. I don't think he should be banned if it counts for anything. There was no shit talking or any other BS. From what I saw in game he was a class act.

[bluemeanies]

My worthless opinion is to invoke the "Shut up and play" clause for magik. Half-mute on server, like vae refers to, and limited forum posting ability. Must post demos when asked, but should not post demos otherwise. No ability to start threads.

Why you ask? This guy cheated, hacked, harassed, spammed, proxies, etc when the game became too boring for him. Why should he be able to come back from that with full tasty privileges?

If he made a sufficiently convincing  case to the admins to get back in that's fine, but it's obvious that giving him full member privileges is too much for him to handle. And while the admins have seen fit to forgive past trespasses, it's also very understandable while other members of this community might be very upset about his presence.

I can easily understand Dervish on this. He had his OWN server that this guy hacked on repeatedly...If that was my server, he would have a lifetime ban for hacking as well...as would any cheater/hacker period...

[BIG DICK RICK]

When i played him i didn't think he was hacking. But then he magically wasn't being hit by my railz. Now this sounds strange but i think he has developed some sort of future prediction dodging hack. Like i rail him but he doesn't get hit. Its like he has a bot that dodges time.

Its like he has a bot that dodges time

a bot that dodges time.

oh lawwwwwwd.  Another person thinking that a dodge bot or the like, can be made.  There is no way a dodge bot can be made, at ALL.  quadz explained it best(http://forum.tastyspleen.net/quake/index.php?topic=14805.msg150825#msg150825) in this thread awhile back when golgo was on his tangent about people using dodge bots(lol). 

[quadz]

While I'm at it: If ANY OF YOU are going to come on here and spray us with "Oh he shows no signs of walling" you should pony up what you think those "signs of walling" would be. So far I've seen not one single person other than quadz who actually said WHY they dont see walling.

For whatever it's worth, one thing I try while watching demos is to attempt to falsify the hacking hypothesis.

For anyone reading this, I'm not trying to be condescending or patronizing by quoting the following.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confirmation_bias

Confirmation bias is a tendency of people to favor information that confirms their beliefs or hypotheses. People display this bias when they gather or remember information selectively, or when they interpret it in a biased way. The effect is stronger for emotionally charged issues and for deeply entrenched beliefs. Biased search, interpretation and memory have been invoked to explain attitude polarization (when a disagreement becomes more extreme even though the different parties are exposed to the same evidence), belief perseverance (when beliefs persist after the evidence for them is shown to be false), the irrational primacy effect (a greater reliance on information encountered early in a series) and illusory correlation (when people falsely perceive an association between two events or situations).

A series of experiments in the 1960s suggested that people are biased toward confirming their existing beliefs. Later work re-interpreted these results as a tendency to test ideas in a one-sided way, focusing on one possibility and ignoring alternatives. In certain situations, this tendency can bias people's conclusions. Explanations for the observed biases include wishful thinking and the limited human capacity to process information. Another explanation is that people show confirmation bias because they are weighing up the costs of being wrong, rather than investigating in a neutral, scientific way.

Confirmation biases contribute to overconfidence in personal beliefs and can maintain or strengthen beliefs in the face of contrary evidence.

As we've all learned over the years from the many false positives, it's not hard to find "hackish moments" while closely scrutinizing just about any demo--regardless of whether hacking is actually occurring.

But given that confirmation bias is prevalent enough that the scientific method is deliberately structured in order to guard against it, I try to remember spend at least as much time watching a demo looking for evidence that hacking isn't likely occurring, as looking for evidence that it is. Scientifically, the more I'm personally invested in finding evidence of someone walling, the more I need to have the discipline to watch for evidence that they aren't.

All that aside, I have a few questions/comments regarding some of the accusations leveled at douche-magic:


1. "You can't provide demos of you playing alpha in duel because you were walling and didn't take any. Instead you posted demos of playing other people or playing different games than requested and tried to pretend you did what was asked of you like a dumbshit troll."

My understanding was that douche-magic had asked about enabling autorecord back on March 8, 2013, and has ostensibly been willing to provide demos since?

[16:09:14] <magic> u can demo all my games, i dont gives a fuck
[16:09:15] <|iR|Dervish> prove me wrong
[16:09:21] <|iR|Dervish> beat anyone of note, on demo, in eyes
...
[16:11:49] <magic> how do you autorecord demos?
[16:12:19] <@quadz> cl_autorecord 1
[16:12:30] <magic> i will post all my demos for you niggaz

So what's the story with the duel with Alpha? Did it take place after douche-magic turned on autorecord, but he refuses to post the demo?


2. "the presence of a known waller on the railz server every day has driven them away from this community and game."

Frags per month on railz has been declining for awhile, although March and April do look like outliers on the low side. (There's no corresponding dip on vanilla or dm for those months.)

So there's indeed a drop in railz activity for March/April.

What seems unusual, though, is if someone is hacking to the extent that players are leaving the server in droves, I'd traditionally have expected to hear more about it. Besides Alpha, I haven't been contacted on IRC, nor via forum PM's about recent hacking on railz. (I don't know what that means, other than it seems different from how it usually works.)

It may be worth running some metrics on the railz server logfiles, to see if keywords relating to "walling" trended up at the same time the population dipped.

Also, if anyone is reading this who has stopped playing railz in the past couple months because you felt you were being botted or walled, and you've been silent about it so far, please speak up here or at least send me a PM.


3. "Most people do not have a handful of incidents where they are aiming at people exactly through a wall and leading them for movement that cannot be seen. I have viewed hundreds of demos and yours always show this where others do not."

I've only watched a couple of douche-magic's so far (the ones I commented on a few weeks ago.) I'll watch a few more this weekend.


4. "Your mythical experience does not negate my easily verifiable claims about the hard coded visibility data in a specific .bsp that the vis check uses as it's sole method of figuring out what can and cannot be seen from any point on a map."

Just a technical point, but I don't believe sv_nc_visibilitycheck uses the Potentially Visible Set data in the BSP. I think it just runs some sloppy traces to check for occlusion along current line of sight.


5. "Nobody notices the tiny momentary effects of the vis check being engaged on a regular basis unless they are walling. It doesn't show in normal play, and like vae said it doesn't show unless you have a very poor connection which you do not."

I notice players blinking in and out around corners quite a bit on vanilla and dm. My netgraph is typically squeaky-clean, with about 45 ping. Maybe it's like a "once seen, can't unsee" thing. Haunted and I had discussed an approach to improve the vis check by adding some per-client persistence, so that models would no longer disappear the moment they were determined to be occluded, but would remain visible for a few more frames. (This doesn't compromise the vis check in a way that would help wallhackers, it just reduces some of the artifacting.)


Excelsior, or whatnot.

quadz

[LedZep]

When i played him i didn't think he was hacking. But then he magically wasn't being hit by my railz. Now this sounds strange but i think he has developed some sort of future prediction dodging hack. Like i rail him but he doesn't get hit. Its like he has a bot that dodges time.

Its like he has a bot that dodges time

a bot that dodges time.

oh lawwwwwwd.  Another person thinking that a dodge bot or the like, can be made.  There is no way a dodge bot can be made, at ALL.  quadz explained it best(http://forum.tastyspleen.net/quake/index.php?topic=14805.msg150825#msg150825) in this thread awhile back when golgo was on his tangent about people using dodge bots(lol).

Dodge bots can be made for DM. They would take in the client-side projectile data and could be effective on lower pings against RL, Magslug, GL, Hyper, Ion etc. However, when it comes to Railgun, it is physically impossible to dodge an attack. A rail being fired is one single event. It gets relayed from the attacker's client to the server, and by the time the victim of the attacker (the other client) sees the rail, the server already decided on whether or not the rail actually hit the victim. Bottom line: the person who's interest it is to dodge a rail is always the last one out of the three (2 clients 1 server) to get information on the Railgun firing event.

Unless you can bend light speeds/look into the future (is your ISP based inside a black hole? )  you cannot write any client sided mod that will automatically dodge a rail.

The only way to write a rail-dodgebot I can think of is to make a client that simply doesn't like to stand still and jitters around one area. This, however, is not effective enough to risk being labeled as a cheater for anyone IMHO

Real bottom line: you are correct. In this case, a dodgebot is impossible. Just explaining to the others why.

[Whirlingdervish]

1: My understanding was that douche-magic had asked about enabling autorecord back on March 8, 2013, and has ostensibly been willing to provide demos since?

So what's the story with the duel with Alpha? Did it take place after douche-magic turned on autorecord, but he refuses to post the demo?


2: "the presence of a known waller on the railz server every day has driven them away from this community and game."

Frags per month on railz has been declining for awhile, although March and April do look like outliers on the low side. (There's no corresponding dip on vanilla or dm for those months.)

So there's indeed a drop in railz activity for March/April.

What seems unusual, though, is if someone is hacking to the extent that players are leaving the server in droves, I'd traditionally have expected to hear more about it. Besides Alpha, I haven't been contacted on IRC, nor via forum PM's about recent hacking on railz. (I don't know what that means, other than it seems different from how it usually works.)

It may be worth running some metrics on the railz server logfiles, to see if keywords relating to "walling" trended up at the same time the population dipped.

Also, if anyone is reading this who has stopped playing railz in the past couple months because you felt you were being botted or walled, and you've been silent about it so far, please speak up here or at least send me a PM.


3. "Most people do not have a handful of incidents where they are aiming at people exactly through a wall and leading them for movement that cannot be seen. I have viewed hundreds of demos and yours always show this where others do not."

I've only watched a couple of douche-magic's so far (the ones I commented on a few weeks ago.) I'll watch a few more this weekend.


4. "Your mythical experience does not negate my easily verifiable claims about the hard coded visibility data in a specific .bsp that the vis check uses as it's sole method of figuring out what can and cannot be seen from any point on a map."

Just a technical point, but I don't believe sv_nc_visibilitycheck uses the Potentially Visible Set data in the BSP. I think it just runs some sloppy traces to check for occlusion along current line of sight.


5. "Nobody notices the tiny momentary effects of the vis check being engaged on a regular basis unless they are walling. It doesn't show in normal play, and like vae said it doesn't show unless you have a very poor connection which you do not."

I notice players blinking in and out around corners quite a bit on vanilla and dm. My netgraph is typically squeaky-clean, with about 45 ping. Maybe it's like a "once seen, can't unsee" thing. Haunted and I had discussed an approach to improve the vis check by adding some per-client persistence, so that models would no longer disappear the moment they were determined to be occluded, but would remain visible for a few more frames. (This doesn't compromise the vis check in a way that would help wallhackers, it just reduces some of the artifacting.)


Excelsior, or whatnot.

quadz

1: to the best of my knowledge he was asked repeatedly for a demo of a duel before the day that he publicly made some statement about recording all his demos from that point forward as an alibi. This is why nothing in his demo thread is actually the demo he references being asked for in post 1 of that thread. "As per Alpha's request I am now posting demos of my games to whoever wants them in efforts to expose my suspected wall hacking."

This was troll attempt #1, because Alpha's request was NOT for him to post demos of all future games. It was to post a demo of a specific past duel in which Alpha thought he was walling. Considering his constant use of stats and such to prop himself up it seemed probable to Alpha that he would also make demos to support his claims of greatness.

2: My evidence is anecdotal in some fashions and personal in others. Around the beginning of that period and until now I viewed many people in ts-live calling him a waller and leaving shortly thereafter, never to show back up with that alias while I saw it. On the other hand, I know players who do not want to play a known cheater, myself included, and have stopped regular attendance on the railz server due to his presence as they don't trust his "change of heart" was genuine. 

3: I've watched actual wallhacking demos from other players and not been able to find as many instances where someone is aiming thru stuff as those in many of magic's demos. By aiming through I generally don't mean exactly on someone with the xhair through a wall, but putting it near enough to enable the short flicking action that the majority of instagib players use in their aiming style. They get the xhair out in front or near the target, then snap to the spot they want the shot to go in a split second. For an insta player, what they are using as the basis for this pre-aiming manuever is usually obvious.

It's normal to aim slightly into the door frame as you enter a room if you think someone is on the right side of the room, obscured by the doorway. It's less normal to be apparently leading their movement while you do it, or correcting for their less predictable movements when out of sight.

The q2dm1nc demo shows this in spots:

during a frag near the end GK comes up the steps from water, and goes back down, then comes back up making multiple jumping noises as if he's doing a standard strafe jump run up the steps into mega room.

Magic leads gk as he falls back down on both tries even before gk is seen falling back down to the water area because instead of continuing into mega room on run up #2, he went to his left 90 degress and jumped out and down trying to get a clean shot. First fall was a mistaken movement, 2nd was intentional and totally different position and not seen, while sound would lead someone to believe he's coming straight up this time. Magic leads for the falling on both tho, even though sound would have you think he's coming up on #2 and make you aim quite a bit differently to predict his move.

4: I'll have to look at how it's coded. I've always thought that it based it on the already available vis data to avoid doing calcs on the shape of 3d spaces in realtime from a constantly changing point of reference.

5: I almost never see it with similar routing and the same client etc. It's usually on par with a slight lag spike for me, and not something I've ever noticed on railz maps due to their open nature and the lower entity load/faster server response.

[quadz]

i asked him for 2 specific demos. 1 demo was on q2rdm1, it was just me and himself, and things just didnt seem right you know. so i tested him a few times, and there were a few instances i would crouch along the hallway from the teleporter, he wouldnt spam any shots around corners but he would fire just before i came out from the corner, on purpose i stopped right before the corner and he fired a shot. I wish i had the demo.

Not sure if I've understood. Do you mean that you don't have the demo from your POV either?

[magic]

no i dont have the demos. he knows which ones i am talking about though

I don't actually.

How about you delete some more responses from this thread to help bend the communities opinion in your favor?

[Whirlingdervish]

funny... I recall the request for the demo he is asking for, and you talking to him about it in IRC.

I mentioned as much above. It's like you think you can lie with impunity.