Cheating - post-hoc...call-out or let it go?

Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:

No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.

If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

**Ailaros**

Actually, I suppose I should clarify. How old was the person in question? It's possible that the person behaved as they did for no other reason than they were a teenager, in which case you sort of don't have many options but to reluctantly put up with some of it.

**Davor**

Ailaros wrote:
And there's a big difference between getting rules wrong and cheating. There's even a difference between really believing that you're right even when you're not, and cheating.

But the difference between ignorance and malice is pretty easy to spot. He could have acceded or 4+ed it. He could have looked up the rules in a store copy of the codex, or borrowed someone else's, or, if he didn't have access to either, then he could have acceded, or 4+ed it, or even gone to the internet to ask for a confirmation of the rules.

But what really sets it off is that he claims to play with this army regularly, and at tournaments. You don't have such a terrible understanding of your codex if you have that kind of experience.

That means either he has the experience, in which case he's cheating and he KNOWS he's cheating, and so you should never, ever play against the person, or it means that he doesn't have the experience, and is the kind of person who brags about skills he doesn't have, and brags about things he didn't do. While being a clueless idiot who foists wrong rules on people by nothing more than the size of his... ego.

Ignorance of the rules is fixable. Being a horrendous cock or an outright cheater, or any other such gaping personality faults isn't.

They say "don't feed the trolls" for a reason. Starvation really is the only cure.

If you want, you can give him perhaps one or, if you're feeling delusional, two or three chances to redeem himself, but it's very unlikely to have any effect. Worse, if you keep allowing him to behave the way he is while still getting the benefits of playing games and being sociable, it will be just that much more difficult to exorcise him later on.

Very well said.

**ALEXisAWESOME**

I don't find that statement fair. Are you inferring that they are cheating because they are teenagers, that all teenagers are cheats or that they are very *forgetful* and should get special treatment? I am 14 and I know my rules inside out as well as most of the other armies as well, and play the hardest *opinion* armies there are to play, being wood elves and dark eldar.

Anyway, you should of pointed it out, because it would seem silly to point it out now. If you play him again, then call him out. If you don't, be happy.

**ClassicCarraway**

Some tourney players change armies like most people change underwear, so its very possible that he did partake in several tournaments, just not with Necrons.

Heck, a local power gamer (don't think he actually plays in tournaments) has bought and then sold about 3 different armies in the last 6 months.

**Shas'O Dorian**

I'd bring it up next time you see him/her but be friendly about it. Maybe he/she really doesn't know.

I play DE (Started a few months ago) and until about 6 weeks ago thought splinter racks let me essentially TL all splinter weapons, not just Rfiles & psitols. Didn't notice until an opponent had pointed it out. Wouldn't have changed the game much I still had a hearty victory (9-4 iirc) but I had honestly thought that was how it worked and would never have realized it had he not brought it up.

**NuggzTheNinja**

Ailaros wrote:
Actually, I suppose I should clarify. How old was the person in question? It's possible that the person behaved as they did for no other reason than they were a teenager, in which case you sort of don't have many options but to reluctantly put up with some of it.

Around 40 I'd say. I don't think that this was unintentional given that regulars warned me politely about this individual, pointed it out to me afterward, and there is already an established reputation.

Some folks always seem to "misremember" rules in a way that benefits them. That's the kicker...

**troa**

If others warned you about it, I'd venture it was either intentional or he's reallllly bad at remembering(legitimately, some people have terrible memory). At that point, I'd bring your BRB with you and whip it out when things are wrong, and if he doesn't have his codex you may have to just say "no".

As for a tourny player knowing what they're doing always...We've seen instances where the most hard core, rules knowing, "it's written this way in the rules", tournament playing person in our local group gets rules wrong, even to the point of frustration that one just doesn't make sense(but is in fact a rule). The fact someone has played for a long time, or goes to tournies, does not mean their knowledge is infallible, which is where I think Ailaros has made some very strong statements without the knowledge of being there.

**Ailaros**

ALEXisAWESOME wrote:I don't find that statement fair. Are you inferring that they are cheating because they are teenagers, that all teenagers are cheats or that they are very *forgetful* and should get special treatment?

No, no.

What I mean to say is that maturity is an art that, like anything else, takes practice. Teenagers have less time and less practice. That's not to say that there aren't the naturally talented, or the quick learners, but you can't exactly take it for granted that all people at that age are. My comment was more about general slack cutting than to assume that any specific teenager (including yourself) is necessarily awful, though I can see now how what I wrote could easily be construed as such.

NuggzTheNinja wrote:Around 40 I'd say. I don't think that this was unintentional given that regulars warned me politely about this individual, pointed it out to me afterward, and there is already an established reputation.

...ouch...

I guess what's needed here is pity. Imagine how awful your life must have been, how how bad of mental health issues you must have (because, let's be honest... miniatures wargamming), or how much others have hurt you, or how badly failed you were taught social skills to be the kind of person that has a reputation of being a 40-year-old who cheats at toy soldiers games.

That said, pity doesn't necessarily lead to inclusion, or, well, I suppose anything else, really. If you want to make this person a pet project of yours, then by all means, but otherwise, if he's gotten to where he is, it's not terribly likely that he's going to ever be any different than the way he is now.

Unless you've got hours to spend and practice as a psychologist...