Page 16 of 57 FirstFirst ... 6141516171826 ... LastLast
Results 151 to 160 of 562

Thread: Issues with stream sniping

  1. #151
    Quote Originally Posted by infam0usne0 View Post
    Here are some of my thoughts on this matter. Random thoughts.

    Stream sniping is the same in terms of gameplay advantage as being sat directly across from your opponent, getting up, walking around the table and looking at your opponents hand.
    The difference between stream sniping and doing this, is that it's easier to do without getting caught.
    There is also no rule against going to your opponents house during a match and looking through his window at his hand.

    Things can be done to prevent people stream sniping you. This is true.
    Just because things can be done to prevent people from stream sniping you, does not mean that it is your fault if you stream and someone cheats and looks at your hand.
    This is the same mentality as saying girls who wear short skirts deserve to be raped, or people wearing expensive clothes deserve to be mugged.

    The blame is and should always be with the person who desires to or does commit the wrongdoing. There is no question of if looking at your opponents hand is wrong or cheating.

    Just because it is easy to do and hard to punish it does not make it ok. If you find something and keep it you are breaking the law, theft through finding is a crime, just hard to catch and hard to punish. Many people do it, it is still a crime and still wrong.

    Collusion in any form is wrong, getting advice from stream chat about your plays is wrong, sitting with your team mates and sharing a screen is wrong. Someone doing something wrong does not make doing another wrong thing ok. Something being hard to catch and hard to punish does not make it ok.

    People who think that stream chat influences plays in any meaningful way are for lack of a better term, idiots and clearly don't watch streams. The delay is too great and streamers often don't check chat until after a play has been made. After a play has been made makes the comment post play analysis and this is fine.

    Yes if you are streaming an event and winning is important you should use a delay, a few people are not honest and some will take advantage of you if they can. It is a shame that people have to protect themselves and ideally they shouldn't have to, but the reality is that some people just don't care about what is correct.

    Something being easy to do, and hard to punish does not make it ok. Wrong is Wrong

    All situations are different, if they were the same exact situation it wouldn't be analogy. Stop shooting down people's arguments just by saying they aren't the same. They are just trying to highlight morality by showing you one situation and letting you apply common sense to the current and applicable one.
    By making that comparison in behavior in an online game that plays close to the edge but does not cross the rules of engagement, I hereby label you as: "Awful, bad, terrible person."

  2. #152
    Quote Originally Posted by plaguedealer View Post
    That same person is also probably talking with the twitch audience about plays.
    Why does that matter? 'Counter cheating' isn't a thing. This isn't a balancing act. If streaming is cheating, then we can have a second discussion about that, and punish streaming if we want to. Regardless of whether or not your opponent is cheating, you don't have the right to cheat yourself. One doesn't justify the other.

    And as long as we're making analogies, this is more like one player at a table waving his friend over and saying, "Look at this hand." The opponent obviously isn't invited to look. There's clear intent from a streamer that they want to allow parties to watch their game without disrupting the game. If the streamer explicitly invited their opponent to join stream, then I see no problem with it. But just because there's open entry doesn't mean the stream is for everyone. At least it isn't intended to be. And I think that in this issue, we should be looking at intent and trying to make things match up to the intent.
    In-game: Obsidian || Collector backer || Starting a guild for Newbies -- "The Cerulea Acadamy"
    Quote Originally Posted by Aradon View Post
    Cory is a man of unrelenting promises and optimism!

  3. #153
    A stream being open DOES in fact mean it's for everyone.

    That's what an open stream is. A stream everyone can watch.

    Why the hell are hairs getting split here? The better player of the game won. Case closed.

  4. #154
    Quote Originally Posted by schild View Post
    By making that comparison in behavior in an online game that plays close to the edge but does not cross the rules of engagement, I hereby label you as: "Awful, bad, terrible person."
    Clearly you misunderstood, i'm not saying that cheating is the same as rape or mugging. I am saying that the mentality of blaming the victim is outrageously silly, using extreme examples to highlight how obvious this is in a clear cut situation.

  5. #155
    Quote Originally Posted by Aradon View Post
    Why does that matter? 'Counter cheating' isn't a thing. This isn't a balancing act. If streaming is cheating, then we can have a second discussion about that, and punish streaming if we want to. Regardless of whether or not your opponent is cheating, you don't have the right to cheat yourself. One doesn't justify the other.

    And as long as we're making analogies, this is more like one player at a table waving his friend over and saying, "Look at this hand." The opponent obviously isn't invited to look. There's clear intent from a streamer that they want to allow parties to watch their game without disrupting the game. If the streamer explicitly invited their opponent to join stream, then I see no problem with it. But just because there's open entry doesn't mean the stream is for everyone. At least it isn't intended to be. And I think that in this issue, we should be looking at intent and trying to make things match up to the intent.
    You cant argue in a vacuum, the streamer is getting comments about his plays in chat. The streamer is making his hand available to the public knowing that nothing can be done to prevent the other player from using twitch.

  6. #156
    Quote Originally Posted by infam0usne0 View Post
    Clearly you misunderstood, i'm not saying that cheating is the same as rape or mugging. I am saying that the mentality of blaming the victim is outrageously silly, using extreme examples to highlight how obvious this is in a clear cut situation.
    I know what you were trying to do. I didn't misunderstand a damn thing. That sort of extreme hyperbole is repulsive and doesn't at all fit the situation here. Especially when there wasn't a victim here. There was a winner and an idiot. The idiot got what they deserved and learned a valuable lesson. The winner won.

    The mistake here is assuming the streamer that got sniped is a victim. He isn't. He's just terrible at the internet.

  7. #157
    Quote Originally Posted by infam0usne0 View Post
    Stream sniping is the same in terms of gameplay advantage as being sat directly across from your opponent, getting up, walking around the table and looking at your opponents hand.
    It's also the same, in terms of gameplay advantage, as if your opponent said "I'm going to show my hand to you now" then deliberately turned his cards to face you.

    The difference is that one is clearly wrong and the other clearly isn't. If you start from the assumption that watching a twitch stream is akin to circling behind the table, then yeah, "wrong is wrong,"; if you start from the assumption that your opponent is waving his hand in your face, then it's not wrong and not wrong.

    Not gonna get into the rape analogy, partly because that's a bit overblown, and partly because arguing that there's "victim blaming" presupposes that a wrong exists and has a victim, and that's like the whole argument here to begin with.

    And that's the limit of these analogies -- either they devolve into "not wrong is not wrong" or into "wrong is wrong" because each respective analogy takes as its starting point an analogous act that is either obviously wrong (peeking at a hand the owner is trying to hide) or obviously not wrong (looking at a hand that's been shoved in your face) and then says "that's just like this."

    From my perspective -- as someone who doesn't stream and doesn't watch streams -- "peeking" at your hand or "circling behind the table" would be someone taking active steps to invade privacy; hacking your game client to look at your hand, or yeah, actually hiring someone to sit outside the window of your house with a telescope and report your hand. Taking some overt action to invade privacy. I don't see that happening here because streamers pretty clearly can't claim a desire for privacy when they're broadcasting their hand. I don't see the question of "advantage" as really relevant; it's just a question of choice and privacy, and if you're choosing to be public, you're choosing to be public.

    For a legal analogy, look at the "public figure" concept in libel and slander lawsuits. Once you're a public figure, you've invited debate, and it's a lot harder for you to sue people for libel or slander. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_figure . I see twitch streamers as, essentially, public figures. You're putting yourselves out there to be looked at. Fame has a price, and one of those prices is that if you ask people to watch you, they're gonna do it. If you're Jerry Falwell, you can't sue Hustler for saying mean things about your mom.

    Or, for a more recent example, this guy : http://www.thedailybeast.com/article...n-225-000.html

    If you run for mayor, you can't get mad when people do a parody twitter account about you; you put yourself out there in public as Mayor. Similarly, if you're a streamer, you can't get mad people are watching your stream.

    I don't see that as "blaming the victim" because there isn't a victim; you're getting to be a public streamer, e-celebrity, whatever.

    Another good analogy is probably with paparazzi photographers. Paparazzi are assholes, but usually the photos they take are being taken in public places, so what they're doing isn't against the law, it's just the price celebrities pay for being famous. Sometimes paparazzi cross the line and invade people's homes or break actual laws -- and when they do, that's bad, and if someone actually came into your house or hacked your computer, that would be bad too and yes someone who did either of those things should be banned.

    But Angelina Jolie doesn't get to complain that someone watched her movie, and that's how a lot of streamer's complaints seem to me. You put yourself out there, that's your choice; don't complain because you got the attention you wanted.


    Quote Originally Posted by Aradon View Post
    And as long as we're making analogies, this is more like one player at a table waving his friend over and saying, "Look at this hand." The opponent obviously isn't invited to look. There's clear intent from a streamer that they want to allow parties to watch their game without disrupting the game. If the streamer explicitly invited their opponent to join stream, then I see no problem with it. But just because there's open entry doesn't mean the stream is for everyone. At least it isn't intended to be. And I think that in this issue, we should be looking at intent and trying to make things match up to the intent.
    That analogy would apply if it was a private, invitation-only stream, sure. And if someone hacked or social engineered their way into such a stream that might be cheating. But if it's public, it's public, that's what public means.
    Last edited by Hieronymous; 11-16-2015 at 09:47 AM.
    -------
    "Surprise"

  8. #158
    Quote Originally Posted by Hieronymous View Post
    It's also the same, in terms of gameplay advantage, as if your opponent said "I'm going to show my hand to you now" then deliberately turned his cards to face you.
    Wrong, you have to actively seek out a stream to look at that persons hand. This likens it much more to getting up and walking around the table. You have to take an action to see the hand it is not just available to you.
    You have to sit there and think, oh hey, i don't want to play this game fairly i will go and look at my opponents hand.

  9. #159
    The situation seems to be if you care about winning in the slightest, don't stream. That seems like a bad deal for the Hex in the long term.

  10. #160
    Quote Originally Posted by plaguedealer View Post
    You cant argue in a vacuum, the streamer is getting comments about his plays in chat. The streamer is making his hand available to the public knowing that nothing can be done to prevent the other player from using twitch.
    You absolutely can look at it in a vacuum. If you're caught cheating, saying, "He was cheating too" isn't going to get you out of trouble.

    As for 'nothing can be done,' well one could assume that taking advantage of the twitch service in a way the player didn't intend could be construed as against the spirit of the tournament. If it breaks the rules, you could reasonable assume that your opponent will respect the rules of the tournament. You might not be able to prevent the violation, but you could expect consequences after the fact.
    In-game: Obsidian || Collector backer || Starting a guild for Newbies -- "The Cerulea Acadamy"
    Quote Originally Posted by Aradon View Post
    Cory is a man of unrelenting promises and optimism!

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •