Quote:The arguments you have presented before, and have continued to present revolve around every piece of evidence being coincidental, having good game sense, as well as in some clips throwing the idea of cheating out of the window due to locking onto parts of the hit-box other than the head/center-mass.
Objectively speaking, if I am a cheater, these clips are evidence that actually show the possibility of me playing unfairly. If I am innocent, every clip will be a coincidence that was mistakenly thought to be an evidence. I am basing my arguments on logic and trying to look at the situation from both points of me being a cheater and being innocent.
About the possibility of me using aimbot. Evidence “?”:
These are images the last frames of every flick that I made to people in the first evidence. You can get them by watching the evidence frame-by-frame and waiting until the linear movement of the mouse stops.
The first flick lands above the guy that is probably sitting under the stairs and totally misses the model of the player.
This picture is for the estimated position of the RU under stairs. The orange square represents the head area:
Second flick to the right side area of RU, there are no evident “sticking” (my crosshair doesn’t sit on the same bone as I am moving to the left) and I can’t surely say where I am aiming as the red dot is too big, but you can judge yourself by looking at this.
The green dot is the approximate center of my crosshair. The yellow line is the approximate position of the RU’s right leg. I am either aiming at the edge of the model or completely missing the flick.
Evidence “??”. The last frame of every suspicious flick there.
Every flick completely misses the model of the player behind the building.
Didn’t include breakdown of the following mouse movement in the clip because it’s simply me looking around the teammates.
I didn’t lock on a single model in both clips, except probably the RU outside in "?" that was in clear line of sight. That's why I believe I cannot be accused of using aimbot in both clips.
About the probability of me using ESP, which I am not totally disregarding. Evidence “?”.
Thinking logically, there is a chance that a hacker wouldn’t be very careful and could accidentally flick to the enemy behind the wall assuming he was outside. But in the case I use wallhack, why do I:
- Notice the RU outside so late? It would be a very visible square on the screen.
- Not prioritize the RU outside as a target but rather flick to a guy that is much further and could not be visible with ESP from the beginning of the evidence.
Additionally, almost a full second passes before I decide to flick to the building. Which means - I would have plenty of time to actually check my targets before trying to aim at anyone.
I am implying that it is very strange and unlikely for a wallhack user to behave like this in the evidence. If I were to look for ESP boxes of the players, I would have paid attention to the actual targets that I am aware of and would have flicked to the RU outside immediately after seeing him.
My explanation here is that the first suspicious flick to the RU inside is pure coincidence, because this part of the wall is not a rare one to look at. And the strange nature of this moment can be described by looking at any gameplay footage of mine (my first appeal with 13 videos or the one posted below as a original for "??"). Most of my mouse movement is fast and lacks smoothness. It was just a random crosshair placement that made me look suspicious because of me cutting it off with the second flick to the RU outside. And my mouse would have stayed on the wall if there wasn’t a second RU on the right.
Also, here is an example from the gameplay that I recorded previously that explains my flick to the RU outside.
Here in the “example” my mouse movement seems very sharp and interrupted, because the moment I flicked to the wall to check the left side of the roof I had noticed the enemy running in the doorframe. So I switched to them right away. The “?” represents a similar situation, where one of my mouse movements is immediately followed by the second flick.
Also, my reaction to the RU outside is late because I am checking rooftops for enemies and not paying attention to the ground.
So, there are two possible scenarios:
- me using ESP and doing several very illogical and unlikely decisions considering that I am aware of the enemy positions.
- me not being a cheater and randomly looking at the wall in the direction that I am heading to, where the enemy appeared to sit.
I don't think this evidence can properly show whether I am cheating or not.
Watch from 2:16. I’ve already provided an explanation for every flick done here in my previous appeal. First flick is made so I can jump to the side with D+Space. Then it is just me trying out the new sensitivity that I set before exiting the building. Every flick here has a reason and shouldn't raise questions.
Quote:All evidence and rebuttal relies on 1 one of three things as a counter-argument to the evidence we have presented.
1: Perfect game-play
2: The cheat engine must be "Bad"
3: All pieces of evidences are coincidental
1. I used the phrase “somewhat experienced” in the first appeal as I had no clue what I got banned for.
2. I don’t think any aimbot would totally miss the player’s model and flick to the area near the guy. And ESP can’t be bad, it simply shows the positions of the enemies.
3. In the case of a person being falsely banned for cheating - every piece of evidence against them is either coincidental or poorly examined.
Quote:And in one clip having locked onto a player through a teammate, firing and then killing said teammate, which does not eliminate the possibility of cheating.
Regardless of any and all coincident or "convenient" explanations, you locked onto multiple players, multiple times.
I've never said that teamkilling instead of hitting the enemy removes the posibility of cheating.
Well, "??" evidence appeared to be a coincidence after all despite me looking at several people there. What removes the possibility of other evidence being coincidental as well? Considering they were gathered not over a span of few days (I suppose).
+1 I haven't had much of a chance to reply to these considering every time one appears it gets denied before I get to it. My personal opinion on this whole situation is that evidence appears to be extremely coincidental. I could understand if there were more than two clips that supposedly were so damning that they were shown to the public for proof but the two that were selected can be written off as coincidences. Ghoul has provided thorough explanations to each of these clips. Not only that but I've known Ghoul since the old c13 I have never seen him be sus, I've been on ranger while he was on rebel sniper and vice versa, it has always been an even fight never one of us dominating the other. I find it weird and unlikely that he would start hacking out of the blue recently when he's been playing for so long and in that amount of time when we would be against each other no sus shots were ever hit. Ultimately I don't believe that Ghoul is hacking or has ever hacked I was there when Ghoul first joined the server and I've been around ever since. I have never thought Ghoul to be a hacker and I still do not believe he is. Dare I say that this might be similar to the whole Boo situation that happened in the past.
Continuing to argue that it's coincidental evidence on and on changes nothing about this ban appeal.
All that happens each time are people jump to his defense, including previously community banned members and other people in his friend group. It's hard to see any of their words as true as they can easily be spun as putting a good cent in on his name, when it ultimately changes nothing.
It was said that the ban wouldn't be lifted the last ban appeal you wrote, and there's hardly anything that's changed between this appeal and the 2nd one you wrote.
and you also continue to include gameplay clips that hardly provide anything to the appeal, they're effectively worthless in the entirety of an appeal, save for very few cases. and were also stated to not be included in further appeals :p
Side note :
why are all of your clips uploaded to like 4 different YT channels?
(1 May 23 at 5:47pm)Hong Kong Wrote: Continuing to argue that it's coincidental evidence on and on changes nothing about this ban appeal.
All that happens each time are people jump to his defense, including previously community banned members and other people in his friend group. It's hard to see any of their words as true as they can easily be spun as putting a good cent in on his name, when it ultimately changes nothing.
It was said that the ban wouldn't be lifted the last ban appeal you wrote, and there's hardly anything that's changed between this appeal and the 2nd one you wrote.
and you also continue to include gameplay clips that hardly provide anything to the appeal, they're effectively worthless in the entirety of an appeal, save for very few cases. and were also stated to not be included in further appeals :p
Side note :
why are all of your clips uploaded to like 4 different YT channels?
I can surely call the second evidence “??” a coincidence because I have the original video for it. Regarding the “?”, I state two possible situations here and then it is up to the staff team to decide which is more likely to happen.
I had to post a third appeal because in the previous one my points regarding the “?” evidence were completely ignored. I’ve yet to see why the idea of me using esp and having several illogical and unlikely moments there is accepted over possibility of me just looking at the building. And for some reason, in his message Kowalski makes general statements and still refers to some points made by another person in google document, while stating that it was completely disregarded.
There were no problems for Boo to include some gameplay clips that were not original videos of the evidence, but rather examples. Every clip of mine captures the whole screen, which would make the cheats running there visible. All of them were not recorded on purpose to justify myself, but rather spontaneously when I got some good sniping moment or were confused by the guy surviving the hit. I use them because knowing that I am not cheating there, you can see a very similar pattern of the mouse movement that could resemble the one in the evidence (refer to the “example” video).
I still cannot understand how is it possible for me to get banned solely judging by these two clips posted, when the first one is not even a crazy and obvious aim-lock and or me snapping to the nocliping admin, but me rather simply looking at the building and then immediately flicking to the RU outside because that was the moment when I finally noticed it. The “??” evidence was fully disproven by me. So what am I still banned for?
Additionally, all of the recent declined permaban appeals for hacking (made in the last year) featured very strong evidence posted by staff and sometimes even in-depth analysis of it. In my case, there is not a single clip where you could surely say that I am hacking. Probably that could be because I am a very legit and experienced hacker that doesn’t make these types of mistakes like the previous guys? Then how come that I ignore the RU outside, look there for almost a second and still decide to go for the guy inside the building, despite having more than enough time to actually check enemy positions? If I were this bad at hacking, how is it possible that staff doesn’t have the same type of evidences that they collected for the previous cases?
Discord username: Ugh#2472
Steam ID: STEAM_0:0:172858912
Who warned/banned you? – Zyer/Quex
Date of Warn/Ban: 11.04.2023
Ban Length: Permanent
Warn/Ban reason: hacking
Why should we remove warn/ban?
I will be referring to the message posted by Kowalski in my second appeal.
Evidence "?" - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6YnHQqQxLc0
Evidence "??" - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lVhV14rRqc4
Message from Kowalski - https://www.definitivenetworksgmod.com/f...5#pid29465
Objectively speaking, if I am a cheater, these clips are evidence that actually show the possibility of me playing unfairly. If I am innocent, every clip will be a coincidence that was mistakenly thought to be an evidence. I am basing my arguments on logic and trying to look at the situation from both points of me being a cheater and being innocent.
About the possibility of me using aimbot.
Evidence “?”:
These are images the last frames of every flick that I made to people in the first evidence. You can get them by watching the evidence frame-by-frame and waiting until the linear movement of the mouse stops.
The first flick lands above the guy that is probably sitting under the stairs and totally misses the model of the player.
This picture is for the estimated position of the RU under stairs. The orange square represents the head area:
Second flick to the right side area of RU, there are no evident “sticking” (my crosshair doesn’t sit on the same bone as I am moving to the left) and I can’t surely say where I am aiming as the red dot is too big, but you can judge yourself by looking at this.
The green dot is the approximate center of my crosshair. The yellow line is the approximate position of the RU’s right leg. I am either aiming at the edge of the model or completely missing the flick.
Evidence “??”. The last frame of every suspicious flick there.
Every flick completely misses the model of the player behind the building.
Didn’t include breakdown of the following mouse movement in the clip because it’s simply me looking around the teammates.
I didn’t lock on a single model in both clips, except probably the RU outside in "?" that was in clear line of sight.
That's why I believe I cannot be accused of using aimbot in both clips.
About the probability of me using ESP, which I am not totally disregarding.
Evidence “?”.
Thinking logically, there is a chance that a hacker wouldn’t be very careful and could accidentally flick to the enemy behind the wall assuming he was outside. But in the case I use wallhack, why do I:
- Notice the RU outside so late? It would be a very visible square on the screen.
- Not prioritize the RU outside as a target but rather flick to a guy that is much further and could not be visible with ESP from the beginning of the evidence.
Additionally, almost a full second passes before I decide to flick to the building. Which means - I would have plenty of time to actually check my targets before trying to aim at anyone.
I am implying that it is very strange and unlikely for a wallhack user to behave like this in the evidence. If I were to look for ESP boxes of the players, I would have paid attention to the actual targets that I am aware of and would have flicked to the RU outside immediately after seeing him.
My explanation here is that the first suspicious flick to the RU inside is pure coincidence, because this part of the wall is not a rare one to look at. And the strange nature of this moment can be described by looking at any gameplay footage of mine (my first appeal with 13 videos or the one posted below as a original for "??"). Most of my mouse movement is fast and lacks smoothness. It was just a random crosshair placement that made me look suspicious because of me cutting it off with the second flick to the RU outside. And my mouse would have stayed on the wall if there wasn’t a second RU on the right.
Also, here is an example from the gameplay that I recorded previously that explains my flick to the RU outside.
Here in the “example” my mouse movement seems very sharp and interrupted, because the moment I flicked to the wall to check the left side of the roof I had noticed the enemy running in the doorframe. So I switched to them right away. The “?” represents a similar situation, where one of my mouse movements is immediately followed by the second flick.
Also, my reaction to the RU outside is late because I am checking rooftops for enemies and not paying attention to the ground.
So, there are two possible scenarios:
- me using ESP and doing several very illogical and unlikely decisions considering that I am aware of the enemy positions.
- me not being a cheater and randomly looking at the wall in the direction that I am heading to, where the enemy appeared to sit.
I don't think this evidence can properly show whether I am cheating or not.
Evidence “??”.
The original video of the clip with the whole screen captured (desktop recorded as well at 0:24 - 0:27).
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PxLH-uv7pnA
Watch from 2:16. I’ve already provided an explanation for every flick done here in my previous appeal. First flick is made so I can jump to the side with D+Space. Then it is just me trying out the new sensitivity that I set before exiting the building. Every flick here has a reason and shouldn't raise questions.
1. I used the phrase “somewhat experienced” in the first appeal as I had no clue what I got banned for.
2. I don’t think any aimbot would totally miss the player’s model and flick to the area near the guy. And ESP can’t be bad, it simply shows the positions of the enemies.
3. In the case of a person being falsely banned for cheating - every piece of evidence against them is either coincidental or poorly examined.
I've never said that teamkilling instead of hitting the enemy removes the posibility of cheating.
Well, "??" evidence appeared to be a coincidence after all despite me looking at several people there. What removes the possibility of other evidence being coincidental as well? Considering they were gathered not over a span of few days (I suppose).
Other: -
All that happens each time are people jump to his defense, including previously community banned members and other people in his friend group. It's hard to see any of their words as true as they can easily be spun as putting a good cent in on his name, when it ultimately changes nothing.
It was said that the ban wouldn't be lifted the last ban appeal you wrote, and there's hardly anything that's changed between this appeal and the 2nd one you wrote.
and you also continue to include gameplay clips that hardly provide anything to the appeal, they're effectively worthless in the entirety of an appeal, save for very few cases. and were also stated to not be included in further appeals :p
Side note :
why are all of your clips uploaded to like 4 different YT channels?
What he's saying kinda holds water ngl ngl
I can surely call the second evidence “??” a coincidence because I have the original video for it. Regarding the “?”, I state two possible situations here and then it is up to the staff team to decide which is more likely to happen.
I had to post a third appeal because in the previous one my points regarding the “?” evidence were completely ignored. I’ve yet to see why the idea of me using esp and having several illogical and unlikely moments there is accepted over possibility of me just looking at the building. And for some reason, in his message Kowalski makes general statements and still refers to some points made by another person in google document, while stating that it was completely disregarded.
There were no problems for Boo to include some gameplay clips that were not original videos of the evidence, but rather examples. Every clip of mine captures the whole screen, which would make the cheats running there visible. All of them were not recorded on purpose to justify myself, but rather spontaneously when I got some good sniping moment or were confused by the guy surviving the hit. I use them because knowing that I am not cheating there, you can see a very similar pattern of the mouse movement that could resemble the one in the evidence (refer to the “example” video).
I still cannot understand how is it possible for me to get banned solely judging by these two clips posted, when the first one is not even a crazy and obvious aim-lock and or me snapping to the nocliping admin, but me rather simply looking at the building and then immediately flicking to the RU outside because that was the moment when I finally noticed it. The “??” evidence was fully disproven by me. So what am I still banned for?
Additionally, all of the recent declined permaban appeals for hacking (made in the last year) featured very strong evidence posted by staff and sometimes even in-depth analysis of it. In my case, there is not a single clip where you could surely say that I am hacking. Probably that could be because I am a very legit and experienced hacker that doesn’t make these types of mistakes like the previous guys? Then how come that I ignore the RU outside, look there for almost a second and still decide to go for the guy inside the building, despite having more than enough time to actually check enemy positions? If I were this bad at hacking, how is it possible that staff doesn’t have the same type of evidences that they collected for the previous cases?