VAC banned by a Valve employee! - Games

[QUOTE=FHamster;21865257][b]Because not all servers disapprove of it, therefore he may not be banned. [/b] To be honest, if it were my server on Empiresmod, I would first talk to him. If he was an asshole I'd permaban him. If he wasn't depending on my mood I'd either give him a temp ban, or let it slide but make sure he doesn't do it again. Furthermore this is not an argument about whether or not he deserved a ban, its about whether Valve employees can utilized VAC to manually ban who they deem fit. Your trolling at the end of your posts make me want to not argue with you.[/QUOTE] this is why server hosts can toggle vac security on and off vac [b]detects hacks[/b]. it's not 100% effective, this is why there are people like Valve employees. hahaha 0wned

[QUOTE=Jessesmith1;21865294]this is why server hosts can toggle vac security on and off vac [B]detects hacks[/B]. it's not 100% effective, this is why there are people like Valve employees. hahaha 0wned[/QUOTE] You have completely ignored my post earlier in this page. I will not answer you.

[QUOTE=FHamster;21865358]You have completely ignored my post earlier in this page. I will not answer you.[/QUOTE] :smug:

The way you got caught and banned may be a bit un-conventional but it's still completely fair

[QUOTE=Spawndex;21865485]The way you got caught and banned may be a bit un-conventional but it's still completely fair[/QUOTE] No it's not.

[QUOTE=Jessesmith1;21865294]this is why server hosts can toggle vac security on and off vac [b]detects hacks[/b]. it's not 100% effective, this is why there are people like Valve employees. hahaha 0wned[/QUOTE] this isn't hack but a mere loophole within sourcemod. in essense, all he did was play with a few console commands. he doesn't deserve a vac ban for that.

[QUOTE=Owner3;21865675]this isn't hack but a mere loophole within sourcemod. in essense, all he did was play with a few console commands. he doesn't deserve a vac ban for that.[/QUOTE] regardless of what it is it functions just the same as a speedhack, and he's using it to gain an advantage. that's what hacks do. it's [i]cheating[/i].

[QUOTE=Jessesmith1;21865712]regardless of what it is it functions just the same as a speedhack, and he's using it to gain an advantage. that's what hacks do. it's [i]cheating[/i].[/QUOTE] except this was basically through console commands, an exploit of a source plugin. you cannot say what he did is on the same level of say, an aimbot. anybody could use a glitch in the game (like the infinite engineer buildings a few days back) to gain an advantage, but should they really be vac banned because of it? no, it was a fault in the coding of the game. similarly here, it's a fault in the coding of the plugin.

Fairness is not an issue. Fairness is determined by the server owner and his set of personal rules and moral standing. The Valve employee imposed his beliefs in a server not owned by him or Valve. That is admin abusing without being admin.

[QUOTE=ColinSSX;21865283]Oh shit, looks like I'm going to have to stop doing this on furry servers...[/QUOTE] I love you. Though I'm a furry myself, when one of you comes on the server, I just light up like the sun. One time, on the Furry Pound, a guy came on and was using the source mod exploit on an arena map and every time he would catapult himself off the ledge and die. [editline]12:02AM[/editline] Also, this was what I was getting at. It was unfair to the server owner that he was VAC banned, not the person cheating.

They said they're still not lifting the ban, I told them how to fix it though, maybe they will. making sv_cheats stuck to 0 on non-listen servers.

[QUOTE=Owner3;21865675]this isn't hack but a mere loophole within sourcemod. in essense, all he did was play with a few console commands. he doesn't deserve a vac ban for that.[/QUOTE] However, it is in the EULA that deliberately recreating a bug that gives you an advantage counts as cheating. It is this way with nearly every game there is. Edit: As far as previous comments about the vagueness of the term 'cheating' just because some server hosts are fine with it doesn't make it 'not cheating' I think the perfect example is house rules in DnD. You may play a campaign where you don't have to choose your spells in the morning like normal to save time. Its not 'cheating' since the GM allowed it, but if you go to somebody else's game, if you tried to pull that the new GM may not agree and the GM has the final say in the matter. In the end it is Valve that determines the definition of cheating and how they will deal with the punishment.

You could always donate small amounts of money to [email]jagger.estep@gmail.com[/email] through paypal if you want to help me get TF2 when it goes on sale for engineer update, so i can play again

[QUOTE=Galdon;21866772]However, it is in the EULA that deliberately recreating a bug that gives you an advantage counts as cheating. It is this way with nearly every game there is. Edit: As far as previous comments about the vagueness of the term 'cheating' just because some server hosts are fine with it doesn't make it 'not cheating' I think the perfect example is house rules in DnD. You may play a campaign where you don't have to choose your spells in the morning like normal to save time. Its not 'cheating' since the GM allowed it, but if you go to somebody else's game, if you tried to pull that the new GM may not agree and the GM has the final say in the matter. In the end it is Valve that determines the definition of cheating and how they will deal with the punishment.[/QUOTE] Valve has no say in my server. Where VAC ends in checking the client's game files to detect any tampering, my reign as supreme dictator of all events in my server begins. Valve is not GM. I am. Valve's EULA on cheating is a claim, allowing them to claim their right to punish who they deem are cheaters. Likewise, my server, and most other servers have their own claim to their power over what goes on in their server. It is contested ground. However, I believe the serverowner holds more weight when it is their money and owns the server and houses the game. Thus when a server's rules say "Respect all admins" or "Admins have final say" it means untrusted Valve employees have no say and no power over what goes on in the server.

[QUOTE=Jag;21866833]You could always donate small amounts of money to [email]jagger.estep@gmail.com[/email] through paypal if you want to help me get TF2 when it goes on sale for engineer update, so i can play again[/QUOTE] Oh please, go buy your own copy. Going and getting yourself banned is hardly a reason to get free cash to buy games with. There are plenty of webcomic and flash game designers who are constantly broke and they provide much more to the entertainment of others than you do. [QUOTE=FHamster;21866972]Valve has no say in my server. Where VAC ends in checking the client's game files to detect any tampering, my reign as supreme dictator of all events in my server begins. Valve is not GM. I am. Valve's EULA on cheating is a claim, allowing them to claim their right to punish who they deem are cheaters. Likewise, my server, and most other servers have their own claim to their power over what goes on in their server. It is contested ground. However, I believe the serverowner holds more weight when it is their money and owns the server and houses the game. Thus when a server's rules say "Respect all admins" or "Admins have final say" it means untrusted Valve employees have no say and no power over what goes on in the server.[/QUOTE] Except that he indicated he joined a 'random' server, so he does not know the rules of it. That server most likely does respect valve employees as authority figures. Not to mention we get all the information on this incident from a bias source so you can assume many details condemning him would be left out or glossed over.

Don't you think that is a little inappropriate? Causing all this bickering, then asking for money? I'm not saying its entirely fair that they VAC banned you, but surely you knew what the consequences of exploiting any valve game is. Yes it may have not been normally detected by VAC, but why risk it? You must have known there was some chance of this happening.

[QUOTE=Galdon;21866981]flash game designers who are constantly broke and they provide much more to the entertainment of others than you do.[/QUOTE] I'm a flash game developer and I know many flash game developers and let me tell you that the ones who provide entertainment are far from broke.

That's pretty messed up, honestly. You weren't using an actual program hack, right? Just an exploit in the game? Sometimes Valve makes me mad :rant:

Can't believe this argument is still going on. It's reasons like this (but not the only reasons) that some developers are disabling dev consoles, removing dedicated servers, and just not supporting PC's entirely. Even "macros" or just "custom binds" are seen by some developers as cheating. This is another reason why there is so much clampdown - they want PC gamers to play the game with the restrictions they define. You couldn't set up a macro on your 360 console for example. Valve are not so restrictive, and in fact you should be thankful they even allow sourcemod at all. The whole reason VAC exists is to prevent cheating, by way of external modification. Sourcemod is precisely external modification, but Valve realised its intention and did not block it. Abusing it, ESPECIALLY as a client, is still cheating.

[QUOTE=subenji99;21867360]Can't believe this argument is still going on. It's reasons like this (but not the only reasons) that some developers are disabling dev consoles, removing dedicated servers, and just not supporting PC's entirely. Even "macros" or just "custom binds" are seen by some developers as cheating. This is another reason why there is so much clampdown - they want PC gamers to play the game with the restrictions they define. You couldn't set up a macro on your 360 console for example. Valve are not so restrictive, and in fact you should be thankful they even allow sourcemod at all. The whole reason VAC exists is to prevent cheating, by way of external modification. Sourcemod is precisely external modification, but Valve realised its intention and did not block it. Abusing it, ESPECIALLY as a client, is still cheating.[/QUOTE] The Valve employee imposed his beliefs in a server not owned by him or Valve. That is admin abusing without being admin. Valve has no say in my server. Where VAC ends in checking the client's game files to detect any tampering, my reign as supreme dictator of all events in my server begins. Valve is not GM. I am. Valve's EULA on cheating is a claim, allowing them to claim their right to punish who they deem are cheaters. Likewise, my server, and most other servers have their own claim to their power over what goes on in their server. It is contested ground. However, I believe the serverowner holds more weight when it is their money and owns the server and houses the game. Thus when a server's rules say "Respect all admins" or "Admins have final say" it means untrusted Valve employees have no say and no power over what goes on in the server. Dedicated servers is a selling point. There are advantages and disadvantages of letting people host dedicated servers, however you must realize Valve does not own these servers. Being lax on the their engine allowing sourcemods and custom servers and server material is something I respect about Valve though.

[QUOTE=Galdon;21866772]However, it is in the EULA that deliberately recreating a bug that gives you an advantage counts as cheating. It is this way with nearly every game there is. Edit: As far as previous comments about the vagueness of the term 'cheating' just because some server hosts are fine with it doesn't make it 'not cheating' I think the perfect example is house rules in DnD. You may play a campaign where you don't have to choose your spells in the morning like normal to save time. Its not 'cheating' since the GM allowed it, but if you go to somebody else's game, if you tried to pull that the new GM may not agree and the GM has the final say in the matter. In the end it is Valve that determines the definition of cheating and how they will deal with the punishment.[/QUOTE] now i'm convinced this argument is going in circles. scroll up and see my last post.

[QUOTE=FHamster;21867420]Thus when a server's rules say "Respect all admins" or "Admins have final say" it means untrusted Valve employees have no say and no power over what goes on in the server.[/QUOTE] 2 problems here: Valve own the rights to their game, they can define what cheating in their game entails. Don't like it, disable VAC on your server. Server rules are just words, whereas Valve's Subscriber's Agreement is a legal document.

[QUOTE=LoLWaT?;21867108]Are you serious? Most of us here want you to get the fuck off of Steam... :downs:[/QUOTE] Yes I'm serious. People who know how VAC actually works (smart people, low percentage of FP) would feel sympathy over a ban which should have never happened. I would hardly call exploiting frowned upon by most people. I'm sure almost all of you who have TF2 did the engineer infinite building exploit, that was "cheating" in the same way using this sourcemod exploit is "cheating," but that didn't stop you from using it, now did it? If you did that exploit and a valve employee banned you, would you not feel that some people would want to help you get your game back? And how about if you have micspammed? What if there was a valve employee in the server you were micspamming in, so he VAC banned you for "ruining the game for others" by making them listen to your spam? (There is a way to not be on the mute players list.) Would that be a justified ban because the TOS says it is? Would you not feel that you didn't deserve that ban?

[QUOTE=Jag;21867819]Yes I'm serious. People who know how VAC actually works (smart people, low percentage of FP) would feel sympathy over a ban which should have never happened. I would hardly call exploiting frowned upon by most people. I'm sure almost all of you who have TF2 did the engineer infinite building exploit, that was "cheating" in the same way using this sourcemod exploit is "cheating," but that didn't stop you from using it, now did it? If you did that exploit and a valve employee banned you, would you not feel that some people would want to help you get your game back? And how about if you have micspammed? What if there was a valve employee in the server you were micspamming in, so he VAC banned you for "ruining the game for others" by making them listen to your spam? (There is a way to not be on the mute players list.) Would that be a justified ban because the TOS says it is? Would you not feel that you didn't deserve that ban?[/QUOTE] ok so you're saying we don't understand vac but you're the one who got vac banned twice :downs:

[QUOTE=Ai_Aizawa;21867934]ok so you're saying we don't understand vac but you're the one who got vac banned twice :downs:[/QUOTE] the first time was when I didn't know about VAC and how it works. The second time shouldn't have even happened. :downs:

I covered this argument before. Installing a Server Administration plugin on your CLIENT to access cvars intentionally BLOCKED by Valve for CLIENTS due to the potential for CHEATING DOES NOT EQUAL exploiting a programmer's mistake in handling arguments to one of the internal game's commands, which required no modification to the game in any way to accomplish.

[QUOTE=subenji99;21867614]Don't like it, disable VAC on your server.[/QUOTE] If VAC is a server option, then a VAC ban applies to servers that have VAC enabled, and so he is only banned from servers that choose to enforce VAC rules? If so, the OP's argument makes even less sense (if that is possible)

It's still an exploit and not a hack. VAC is supposed to be for hacks, not exploits. If a human can manually add VAC bans, the system is flawed, because you can't mistakenly inject some code into hl2.exe, or run an aimbot and use it. You can have an exploit mistaken for a hack by a human, though, because they think they see a hack.

[QUOTE=Jag;21868023]It's still an exploit and not a hack. VAC is supposed to be for hacks, not exploits.[/QUOTE] Using an external program to gain access to restricted data or interfaces is hacking. We've determined opensource to be an external program by definition, so, it is actually hacking.

[QUOTE=Galdon;21868013]If VAC is a server option, then a VAC ban applies to servers that have VAC enabled, and so he is only banned from servers that choose to enforce VAC rules? If so, the OP's argument makes even less sense (if that is possible)[/QUOTE] This is true. He is only banned from servers that are VAC secured. (The ones with the shield icon in the server browser)