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.

*looks at discussion of the social welfare state / individual vs government morality debate*

...How the hell did we get here?

Steps have to be taken at the tournament level for the integrity of this game. The last thing anyone wants to see is another Tony get away with being a tool.

It doesn't matter if this is a paid sport or not. In order to make the community better, organizers have to take steps to handle bad play. And I agree with his salty response. The other games should be audited.

 OrkaMorka wrote:
Especially if you consider it's actually pretty damn expensive for the state to legally kill another person.

Depends on the state. In most non-Western countries, it's dirt cheap. Way cheaper than incarceration.

Disclaimer: I haven't watched the video, so I don't know if this dude actually cheated or not, but that is neither here nor there. They shouldn't be banning him for life unless they are absolutely 1,000% fething positive he was intentionally cheating. Even a 1% chance of giving a lifetime ban to a player for genuine mistakes is bad for the community, as we can see in this thread. A much better response would have been to DQ him and dock all of his points. That way if he was intentionally cheating, he doesn't benefit from it, while at the same time sending a message to the other players that loose play is not going to get you anywhere. Being hung over from staying up late and drinking the night before is stupid and warrants a DQ, but not a lifetime ban IMO.

But I wanted to say this:

 jeffersonian000 wrote:
Public shaming does not act as a deterrent, the people that get away with whatever they get away with have a habit of always trying the get away with it regardless of consequences because it’s a habit they find beneficial. That’s why prisons and executions have never been a deterrent towards crime. The people that shaming works on already have habits that avoid potential shaming, just like most people avoid criminal activity because they don’t want to get caught.

Is right on the money. As someone who has done academic research into criminal justice, overly harsh punishments do absolutely nothing at all to deter crime.

Example: A government wants to stop people from speeding on a highway. Hundreds of thousands of people use this highway every day and they don't have the officers to properly patrol it, so they decide to catch one speeder per day and publicly execute them to make an "example" of them. Would the knowledge that there is a .001% chance of being caught and executed stop people from speeding? Absolutely not, because the chances of being caught are so low that people can brush it off and say "I'm not going to get caught, those people who did were just really unlucky". The chances of getting in an accident from speeding and dying from THAT are higher than that anyway.

No what really gets people to stop breaking the rules is CATCHING them, ALL of them, and giving them a moderate punishment. This is backed up by large amounts of criminal justice research. Would you really attempt to break the rules if you knew you had a 95% chance of being caught doing it?

Dishing out harsh punishments to the people who you manage to catch only makes the community "feel better" without actually doing anything constructive, and makes it impossible for said offender to redeem themselves or reform.

I guarantee you that there was a lot more "cheating" going on at this event then Mr. Harrison's little shenanigans. Why is it fair that they all get away with it and he is punished collectively for all of their sins? The only difference between him and them is that he was supposedly "caught" and they weren't.

Leo_the_Rat wrote:
Based on what others have said this person has been complained about at other events and, I presume, warned about his behavior. How many warnings do you get before you get punished? A lifetime ban is stupid on a lot of levels but at least the TOs made the effort to show that cheating is unacceptable and has repercusions.

Heresay is everything right? :(

 Primark G wrote:

Leo_the_Rat wrote:
Based on what others have said this person has been complained about at other events and, I presume, warned about his behavior. How many warnings do you get before you get punished? A lifetime ban is stupid on a lot of levels but at least the TOs made the effort to show that cheating is unacceptable and has repercusions.

Heresay is everything right? :(

It is known in the UK tournament scene.

Just so you know hearsay is testimony that goes to the truth of the matter at hand. That's not what I was saying. I'm saying that people have stated that the person who was banned had been caught/warned at other events. I'm not making a judgement as to whether he was or was not cheating. If I had gone to the TO and told him that "I heard other people say that the player was cheating". That would be hearsay.

The LGO TO felt/feels that he was cheating. He took action. Some of the basis of his actions may have been based on the players history. I don't know the TO or anything about the player other than what has been posted. However, I do support his action as I presume that he is correct in his assertion of cheating and cheaters should be banned.

 jeffersonian000 wrote:
Prisons don’t fix anything. Better social programs and a more robust economy fixes crime rates.

SJ

They were quite effective when we hung people in public (and they soiled themselves in front of the whole town with their tongues bugging out) and when we had chain-gangs walking down the highway in July.

Humiliation has its merits, that's why we name the cheaters publicly.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Leo_the_Rat wrote:
Based on what others have said this person has been complained about at other events and, I presume, warned about his behavior. How many warnings do you get before you get punished? A lifetime ban is stupid on a lot of levels but at least the TOs made the effort to show that cheating is unacceptable and has repercusions.

An even better question is how someone like that gets this far, anyway.

 Adeptus Doritos wrote:
They were quite effective when we hung people in public (and they soiled themselves in front of the whole town with their tongues bugging out) and when we had chain-gangs walking down the highway in July.
Humiliation has its merits, that's why we name the cheaters publicly.

Wow, just... wow. If you actually believe this unironically it makes me seriously question the content of your character. Public humiliation is schoolyard bullying level garbage that doesn't belong in any kind of civilized criminal justice system, and don't even get me started on the court of public opinion name-and-shame lynch mobs for when people think the "system" hasn't gone hard enough.

The Salem witch trials sure did a good job of stopping those witches didn't they.

w1zard wrote:
Wow, just... wow. If you actually believe this unironically it makes me seriously question the content of your character.

I honestly don't care what you think. Hit the 'report' button if it bothers you. I like how you said believing it makes me a bad person, but not wrong.

w1zard wrote:
The Salem witch trials sure did a good job of stopping those witches didn't they.

You mean that extremely isolated event that was universally condemned by everyone outside the immediate area? Even the other churches?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

w1zard wrote:
[
Wow, just... wow. If you actually believe this unironically it makes me seriously question the content of your character. Public humiliation is schoolyard bullying level garbage that doesn't belong in any kind of civilized criminal justice system, and don't even get me started on the court of public opinion name-and-shame lynch mobs for when people think the "system" hasn't gone hard enough.

Straw man argument (since you edited).

At no point did I mention anything about persons having an unfair trial or being executed by angry mobs. Please construct a relevant rebuttal.

I'm not going to start with you. I seriously don't think I can have a logical discussion with someone who genuinely believes that public hangings, forced labor, and psychological abuse (which is what public humiliation is) are justifiable forms of criminal justice.

w1zard wrote:
I'm not going to start with you. I seriously don't think I can have a logical discussion with someone who genuinely believes that public hangings, forced labor, and psychological abuse (which is what public humiliation is) are justifiable forms of criminal justice.

I appreciate you sparing me the waste of time, then.

Leo_the_Rat wrote:
Just so you know hearsay is testimony that goes to the truth of the matter at hand. That's not what I was saying. I'm saying that people have stated that the person who was banned had been caught/warned at other events. I'm not making a judgement as to whether he was or was not cheating. If I had gone to the TO and told him that "I heard other people say that the player was cheating". That would be hearsay.

The LGO TO felt/feels that he was cheating. He took action. Some of the basis of his actions may have been based on the players history. I don't know the TO or anything about the player other than what has been posted. However, I do support his action as I presume that he is correct in his assertion of cheating and cheaters should be banned.

Okay then what you are basically saying is that if you read it on the internet it must be true. Remember that Abe Lincoln literally said "You can fool some of the people some of the time but you can't fool them all every time."

Yes it would make them stop breaking the law, totally, and I can prove it tomorrow if you want. Because the human mind has been scientifically proved to be ill suited to handle this kind of situation (low probability and high risk). I read something about it just yesterday

w1zard wrote:


The Salem witch trials sure did a good job of stopping those witches didn't they.

I haven't seen any witche since then, have you ?

I don't think it's a Warhammer tournament's job to try to rehabilitate anyone. The also shouldn't have to let someone into their tournament if they think that person is a cheater. As other people have said, these aren't professional athletes. Yes, that means the standards can be lower - there's no drug test to worry about - but it also means a lifetime ban from a single tournament doesn't mean a whole lot. You're not banning a 40K player from his livelihood. He doesn't have to go on TV and apologize to the world.

I wouldn't play a pickup game against someone I suspected of cheating, and I'd rather play in a tournament that caught, named, and banned probable cheaters instead of keeping things secret.

 godardc wrote:
[spoiler]

I haven't seen any witche since then, have you ?

I know at least 2. Both in the area of the last witch trials in England.

Hooray for anecdotal evidence.

Although I suppose they're more Wiccan than your stereotypical witch that was hunted.

 godardc wrote:
I haven't seen any witche since then, have you ?

Hardest I've laughed on Dakka since Fem40k was a hot topic.

 Mozzyfuzzy wrote:

I know at least 2. Both in the area of the last witch trials in England.

Hooray for anecdotal evidence.

Although I suppose they're more Wiccan than your stereotypical witch that was hunted.

Well they didn't have twitter in England during your witch trials, so they probably didn't know who to go after.

But he did say 'witches', not 'people who you buy valerian root from'.

Pink Horror wrote:
I don't think it's a Warhammer tournament's job to try to rehabilitate anyone. The also shouldn't have to let someone into their tournament if they think that person is a cheater. As other people have said, these aren't professional athletes. Yes, that means the standards can be lower - there's no drug test to worry about - but it also means a lifetime ban from a single tournament doesn't mean a whole lot. You're not banning a 40K player from his livelihood. He doesn't have to go on TV and apologize to the world.

I wouldn't play a pickup game against someone I suspected of cheating, and I'd rather play in a tournament that caught, named, and banned probable cheaters instead of keeping things secret.

Again, I wasn't saying that it was the tourney's job to "rehabilitate" him or anything like that. All I'm saying is that unless they can 1,000% verifiably prove that he was cheating intentionally, that a lifetime ban is way overboard. I wouldn't like to attend a tournament who gave out lifetime bans to anyone they "suspected" of cheating because I'd be afraid of somehow screwing up and getting the life banhammer, it wouldn't be worth it. Getting DQed and losing all of his points would have been sufficient.

Hell, even at legit sporting events, athletes who test positive for steroids don't usually get lifetime bans unless it is a recurring issue. They are normally allowed to compete again once they test clean.

All I'm saying is that this whole concept of "be harsh to set an example" never really works, and just ends up being an injustice to the person being persecuted.

w1zard wrote:
Hell, even at legit sporting events, athletes who test positive for steroids don't usually get lifetime bans unless it is a recurring issue. They are normally allowed to compete again once they test clean.

Sporting events where athletes are generating millions of dollars to participate. Now, find a high school or college athlete that gets caught juicing and watch that little sports dream hit the toilet quick.

w1zard wrote:
All I'm saying is that this whole concept of "be harsh to set an example" never really works, and just ends up being an injustice to the person being persecuted.

I don't think a lifetime ban from something like a tournament for cheating is even 'harsh'. I do, however, think the humiliation from being labeled a cheater is justified.

 Adeptus Doritos wrote:


They were quite effective when we hung people in public (and they soiled themselves in front of the whole town with their tongues bugging out) and when we had chain-gangs walking down the highway in July.

Humiliation has its merits, that's why we name the cheaters publicly.

Are you certain about that?



What hangings and chain gangs did we institute since the 80s to bring the homicide rate down?

 Daedalus81 wrote:
What hangings and chain gangs did we institute since the 80s to bring the homicide rate down?

Since the 80's, we've improved crime fighting and prevention technology. (Also: Europe)

But when we got away from it, we cheated ourselves out of quality entertainment. Nothing more delightful than the family going to see the local pedo get strung up.

 Adeptus Doritos wrote:

 godardc wrote:
I haven't seen any witche since then, have you ?

Hardest I've laughed on Dakka since Fem40k was a hot topic.

 Mozzyfuzzy wrote:

I know at least 2. Both in the area of the last witch trials in England.

Hooray for anecdotal evidence.

Although I suppose they're more Wiccan than your stereotypical witch that was hunted.

Well they didn't have twitter in England during your witch trials, so they probably didn't know who to go after.

But he did say 'witches', not 'people who you buy valerian root from'.

Well unlike the poor ladies of the witch trials who were probably just Roman Catholic, these actually have the knives, the pentagrams and such like.

So again, my anecdotal evidence is telling me that murdering a bunch of innocent women hasn't been that great in stamping out witchcraft.

QED whatever the original argument was.

What prevention technology? We have fewer police on the streets than ever.

Solving crimes got better. That has nothing to do with preventing them.

 Mozzyfuzzy wrote:

Well unlike the poor ladies of the witch trials who were probably just Roman Catholic, these actually have the knives, the pentagrams and such like.

So again, my anecdotal evidence is telling me that murdering a bunch of innocent women hasn't been that great in stamping out witchcraft.

QED whatever the original argument was.

Knives, you say? They got a LOICENSE for those knives, m8?

 Primark G wrote:

Leo_the_Rat wrote:
Just so you know hearsay is testimony that goes to the truth of the matter at hand. That's not what I was saying. I'm saying that people have stated that the person who was banned had been caught/warned at other events. I'm not making a judgement as to whether he was or was not cheating. If I had gone to the TO and told him that "I heard other people say that the player was cheating". That would be hearsay.

The LGO TO felt/feels that he was cheating. He took action. Some of the basis of his actions may have been based on the players history. I don't know the TO or anything about the player other than what has been posted. However, I do support his action as I presume that he is correct in his assertion of cheating and cheaters should be banned.

Okay then what you are basically saying is that if you read it on the internet it must be true. Remember that Abe Lincoln literally said "You can fool some of the people some of the time but you can't fool them all every time."

Then what you are saying is that unless you see it with your own eyes you don't believe. Newsflash Atoms exist.

You feel that the TOs overreacted. I don't. Neither means a hill of beans to the TO.

edit: Here is the true quotation that you are throwing around- "You can fool all the people some of the time, and some of the people all the time, but you cannot fool all the people all the time."

 Adeptus Doritos wrote:

 Mozzyfuzzy wrote:

Well unlike the poor ladies of the witch trials who were probably just Roman Catholic, these actually have the knives, the pentagrams and such like.

So again, my anecdotal evidence is telling me that murdering a bunch of innocent women hasn't been that great in stamping out witchcraft.

QED whatever the original argument was.

Knives, you say? They got a LOICENSE for those knives, m8?

One can only assume so.

 Adeptus Doritos wrote:

Well they didn't have twitter in England during your witch trials, so they probably didn't know who to go after.

As if social media mob mentality can determine who is genuinely guilty from who is the victim of a smear campaign.

 Adeptus Doritos wrote:

But when we got away from it, we cheated ourselves out of quality entertainment. Nothing more delightful than the family going to see the local pedo get strung up.

At this point, I'm starting to think you are just trolling for a reaction.

You would have actually hated the "olden days" of criminal justice. Most societies didn't even have prisons... the punishment for most crimes was usually a fine or a lashing, death was dealt out a lot more frequently than now but was still only reserved for the most serious of crimes. 90%+ of the time the perpetrator of a crime was never caught, and a lot of the time someone innocent was blamed.

w1zard wrote:
Disclaimer: I haven't watched the video,

They shouldn't be banning him for life unless they are absolutely 1,000% fething positive he was intentionally cheating.

You should watch the video.

They are a private entity and may refuse service for any reason, including the mere suspicion of cheating.

Dorito you need to chill bruh seriously.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

w1zard wrote:
Disclaimer: I haven't watched the video,

They shouldn't be banning him for life unless they are absolutely 1,000% fething positive he was intentionally cheating.

You should watch the video.

They are a private entity and may refuse service for any reason, including the mere suspicion of cheating.

Again, if tournaments start issuing lifetime bans to people they merely suspect of cheating, the 40k "professional" scene isn't going to be taken very seriously. It's too easy to bump a model, fudge a range measurement, forget a rule, or make a list mistake and then boom you're gone for good. Nobody will play, I know I wouldnt.

If you are concerned that they cheated but can't prove it 100% just DQ them and be done with it. No need to ban them for life over something that might have been an honest mistake.