3 ms·

Let me make sure I'm understanding you correctly and give you a chance to clarify if I am misunderstanding (instead of immediately assuming the least charitable

Let me make sure I'm understanding you correctly and give you a chance to clarify if I am misunderstanding (instead of immediately assuming the least charitable interpretation). Are you suggesting that cheaters in video games (not played in a competition for money, just playing casually) should suffer career, travel, and social consequences in the real world away from the game?

ygaf 8y ago
Well, online recreation is as real as online discussion. There's people on the other end etc. On the other hand, if a kid spoils a game in a real-world playground, we don't give criminal records for that. On the other other hand, a game company is being harmed when you spoil their games.
bovermyer 8y ago
Yes, that is what I'm suggesting. Primarily as a deterrent, rather than a punishment. And the usual stipulations about minors being treated differently than adults apply.
Karunamon 8y ago
Why should they not? Should antisocial and deceptive behavior like this be flatly ignored “because it’s just a game”?
- Avamander 8y ago
  Cheating in a game should always and only be dealt with by the game company itself. Having some real-world consequences what is quite literally meaningless is absurd the very least. Following that train of thought, should we start punishing people who cuss behind their consoles, PCs or phones? That's also "bad" and "not conducive to the society". Oh and let's not forget, if people lose more than just the satisfaction of winning when someone steals their win with cheats I'd say they also have issues they should deal with. In addition to that cheating in games has been a common first step towards a good career in the field of cybersecurity, if they'd been punished irl for cheating I'm quite certain they wouldn't be working in that field - do we really want to go on figuratively or literally slapping children for what really are just minor deviations from the regular? Your train of thought is similar to those who think zero-tolerance policies are a good idea - punishment on it's own never is.
  - Karunamon 8y ago
    >Having some real-world consequences what is quite literally meaningless is absurd the very least. "Quite literally meaningless" is a massive stretch. At the very least, you're opening yourself up to legal hilarity (it's not cost effective to pursue individual cheaters beyond terminating their accounts generally, but then again, bot makers have been sued) - the reason this is a thing is that you're ruining the service for others. Oh and let's not forget, if people lose more than just the satisfaction of winning when someone steals their win with cheats I'd say they also have issues they should deal with. Please don't presume to tell other people what they should and should not find important. And if cybersecurity people can't learn without ruining other people's limited downtime, perhaps we need less cybersecurity people.
    - Avamander 8y ago
      > At the very least, you're opening yourself up to legal hilarity So the only reason it is meaningful somehow is because it's somehow legally meaningful? That's both a bad argument for something to have irl consequences and I heavily doubt it's correct. > Please don't presume to tell other people what they should and should not find important. I didn't say what people should find important or not, it's how important some game in someone's life should be. I think what I was trying to say is that noone likes bad losers and sometimes losing is character-building. Better meet people who cheat you in a pretty meaningless game rather than in real life for the first time. > And if cybersecurity people can't learn without ruining other people's limited downtime You always have offline games. > perhaps we need less cybersecurity people Maybe we need less salty gamers.
- cuckcuckspruce 8y ago
  We punish antisocial and deceptive behavior when it has a material effect on people - damages to property to clean up, bodily injury, lost wages, etc. Losing in a video game does not lead to those things. You're playing a game. Next you'll say that if someone slips themselves an extra $500 as the banker in Monopoly they should be waterboarded for committing grand larceny.

ygaf 8y ago

Well, online recreation is as real as online discussion. There's people on the other end etc. On the other hand, if a kid spoils a game in a real-world playground, we don't give criminal records for that. On the other other hand, a game company is being harmed when you spoil their games.

bovermyer 8y ago

Yes, that is what I'm suggesting. Primarily as a deterrent, rather than a punishment. And the usual stipulations about minors being treated differently than adults apply.

Karunamon 8y ago

Why should they not? Should antisocial and deceptive behavior like this be flatly ignored “because it’s just a game”?

Avamander 8y ago
Cheating in a game should always and only be dealt with by the game company itself. Having some real-world consequences what is quite literally meaningless is absurd the very least. Following that train of thought, should we start punishing people who cuss behind their consoles, PCs or phones? That's also "bad" and "not conducive to the society". Oh and let's not forget, if people lose more than just the satisfaction of winning when someone steals their win with cheats I'd say they also have issues they should deal with. In addition to that cheating in games has been a common first step towards a good career in the field of cybersecurity, if they'd been punished irl for cheating I'm quite certain they wouldn't be working in that field - do we really want to go on figuratively or literally slapping children for what really are just minor deviations from the regular? Your train of thought is similar to those who think zero-tolerance policies are a good idea - punishment on it's own never is.
- Karunamon 8y ago
  >Having some real-world consequences what is quite literally meaningless is absurd the very least. "Quite literally meaningless" is a massive stretch. At the very least, you're opening yourself up to legal hilarity (it's not cost effective to pursue individual cheaters beyond terminating their accounts generally, but then again, bot makers have been sued) - the reason this is a thing is that you're ruining the service for others. Oh and let's not forget, if people lose more than just the satisfaction of winning when someone steals their win with cheats I'd say they also have issues they should deal with. Please don't presume to tell other people what they should and should not find important. And if cybersecurity people can't learn without ruining other people's limited downtime, perhaps we need less cybersecurity people.
  - Avamander 8y ago
    > At the very least, you're opening yourself up to legal hilarity So the only reason it is meaningful somehow is because it's somehow legally meaningful? That's both a bad argument for something to have irl consequences and I heavily doubt it's correct. > Please don't presume to tell other people what they should and should not find important. I didn't say what people should find important or not, it's how important some game in someone's life should be. I think what I was trying to say is that noone likes bad losers and sometimes losing is character-building. Better meet people who cheat you in a pretty meaningless game rather than in real life for the first time. > And if cybersecurity people can't learn without ruining other people's limited downtime You always have offline games. > perhaps we need less cybersecurity people Maybe we need less salty gamers.
cuckcuckspruce 8y ago
We punish antisocial and deceptive behavior when it has a material effect on people - damages to property to clean up, bodily injury, lost wages, etc. Losing in a video game does not lead to those things. You're playing a game. Next you'll say that if someone slips themselves an extra $500 as the banker in Monopoly they should be waterboarded for committing grand larceny.