Jump to content

What prevents cheating in PBEM now


Recommended Posts

Since you bring up the topic of "facial micro expressions"

I also use this as a means as to judging someone, funny that you should mention how it has scientific studies to back its concepts. I have found there are plenty of people who understand these traits and know how to act in the presents of others to send or give a certain message, but that they are basically in the state of a con and are trying to manipulate the person they are dealing with. So in short, I find this is a less reliable way to learn about someone than to just invite them to sit down or to go out and play some games with them.

I can tell what type of sells person someone will be by playing a little poker or a game of monopoly with them over any other method I have ever found.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 108
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Ok, time for some step by step analysis so i can rest assured ive made myself clear.

I see that noob is still at it.

"still at it"...the implication there is that im doing something i should have stopped doing, which is a subtle way of saying to the community that enquiring and testing peoples assumptions is in some way a negative thing if its done by someone that has criticised "slysniper"

That is one way of stating it, I like to think of it as some type of self appointed policing of the forum, he is here to rid the world of any possible mis-understandings that could be posted on the forum from such as the likes of myself.:rolleyes:

Thats true, there are many ways of stating the same thing, all of the which say something about the speaker, in your case you interpret my arguements in such a way as to make me sound like some sort of forum Taliban and you use a mocking tone to infer that what i say is trivial and done for self aggrandisement, which makes it obvious that you are still annoyed at me for arguing against you but cannot carry on with the arguements central points so you are now resorting to subtle name calling and character denegration which in my book means ive won the original arguement, but i knew that anyway, im just suprised you are still chewing on it, just accept defeat gracefully and dont demean yourself with churlish responses.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok, time for some step by step analysis so i can rest assured ive made myself clear.

"still at it"...the implication there is that im doing something i should have stopped doing, which is a subtle way of saying to the community that enquiring and testing peoples assumptions is in some way a negative thing if its done by someone that has criticised "slysniper"

Thats true, there are many ways of stating the same thing, all of the which say something about the speaker, in your case you interpret my arguements to make me sound like some sort of forum Taliban and use a mocking tone to infer that what i say is trivial and done for self aggrandisement, which makes it obvious that you are still annoyed at me for arguing against you but cannot carry on with the arguements central points so you are now resorting to subtle name calling and character denegration which in my book means ive won the original arguement, but i knew that anyway, im just suprised you are still chewing on it, just accept defeat gracefully and dont demean yourself with churlish responses.

I will tell you not to trust me and that "yes" I could be trying to cheat right now. All my trickery to try and make you look foolish, with my methods to try and not confront the topic. As you would have it, we need to get to the real issue. Thus may I ask what that really is ???:confused:

If it is about learning to read humans, judging what others are like, being able to understand anothers charector. There is no pure science for it.

The police use profiling, it is likely one of the in dept methods as to how you break down and make conclusions about another human being. but will there be those that fall outside the rules of the concepts formed. Yes.

So no matter how one human judges another, which I will add we all do, there is always flaws to the methods used. So once again I will live with the fact that I can misjudge someone by what I might see as I observe them playing games, but I still will hold to the fact that I beleive it is one of the best methods I know as to finding a persons true natural traits.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Since you bring up the topic of "facial micro expressions"

I also use this as a means as to judging someone

Well why didn't you say that in your original statement ?, but it seems to convenient that you now say that you also use it just "after" i happened to mentioned it :)

funny that you should mention how it has scientific studies to back its concepts. I have found there are plenty of people who understand these traits and know how to act in the presents of others to send or give a certain message, but that they are basically in the state of a con and are trying to manipulate the person they are dealing with

If you are saying that the study of micro expressions could allow the expert to con people that would be true, but as most people either do not notice or cannot read micro expressions one does not need to be an expert in the science unless one wanted to con someone that was.

So in short, I find this is a less reliable way to learn about someone than to just invite them to sit down or to go out and play some games with them.

How do you know the science of micro expressions as a tool for deception detection "isnt" as effective as going out with someone or playing someone at a game ?

What tests did you do to find that out ?

(i like how you have added "going out with a person" to your tools of detection)

I can tell what type of sells person someone will be by playing a little poker or a game of monopoly with them over any other method I have ever found.

Yes but unless you have studied and become an expert at the science of micro expressions you cannot know that that science isnt as effective as playing poker or monopoly, and if it is you surely have an obligation to the scientific community and all the law enforcement agencies to put them right and teach them your knowledge.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I do not lack the things of confort, but find they bring no happiness other than when I can give them to others which lack or has needs that I am blessed not to burdoned with.

One thing you are not successfull at is sentence construction and coherency, i am going to copy this quote and use it in an art piece, it's so strange it has a twisted sort of beauty, like something a Dr Seuss character would say or the Mad Hatter from Alice in Wonderland.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In theory, you could load the turn you've created in your 'outgoing email' folder into your 'incoming email' folder and attempt to crack your opponent's password, having first established what it could be via a sophisticated spear phishing campaign/brute force password attack/remote key logger installation/sneaking-up-behind-him-and-looking-over-his-shoulder-while-he-types-his-password/powerful telescope and intricate system of mirrors.

Then you could see where and what his forces are.

Or you could cheat in QBs by buying up all those cheap American rockets before patch 1.01 comes out and adds the all important 0 to their cost. Or is being gamey different to cheating? Or is that bending the rules?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I will tell you not to trust me and that "yes" I could be trying to cheat right now. All my trickery to try and make you look foolish, with my methods to try and not confront the topic. As you would have it, we need to get to the real issue. Thus may I ask what that really is ???:confused

You could never make me look foolish and you have no trickery and the issue is your assertion that by playing a game or going out with someone is a better way of judging mendacity than the sciences of micro expressions and psychology.

If it is about learning to read humans, judging what others are like, being able to understand anothers charector. There is no pure science for it

There are a few sciences and disciplines that seek to explain human behaviour, and as sciences they are not perfect, but what they do do is to use the scientific method, and that is to set up tests for various theories and then present the results for peer review, however the real test of the efficacy of a personality profiling system is its practical use by law enforcement agencies so if you want to find a good system to try and work out if someone is cheating or lying im sure some basic research would show you what the police, FBI, etc are using.

So no matter how one human judges another, which I will add we all do, there is always flaws to the methods used. So once again I will live with the fact that I can misjudge someone by what I might see as I observe them playing games, but I still will hold to the fact that I beleive it is one of the best methods I know as to finding a persons true natural traits.

So because there is no "perfect" system you will opt for one of the least perfect systems even though there are better ones out there that have been devised, tested and used by cleverer people than you, unless you ?

Again i ask you, how do you know your method is one of the best unless you have tested "all" the methods, have you done that ?, because if you haven't your assertion is irrational.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well why didn't you say that in your original statement ?, but it seems to convenient that you now say that you also use it just "after" i happened to mentioned it :)

Yes, I must agree, very convenient of me

If you are saying that the study of micro expressions could allow the expert to con people that would be true, but as most people either do not notice or cannot read micro expressions one does not need to be an expert in the science unless one wanted to con someone that was..

I disagree with this statement, sorry I do not have resorces to point you toward but I recall reading that they have found that many street smart, low educated subjects demostrated a very high level of use in protraying signals that falsified intent. They also noted that those that demostraited these traits were normally leaders or organizers in their enviroment, that they had learned to use these things as a way to get others to do things in their behalf.

How do you know the science of micro expressions as a tool for deception detection "isnt" as effective as going out with someone or playing someone at a game ?

What tests did you do to find that out ?

(i like how you have added "going out with a person" to your tools of detection).

No test, sorry

Yes but unless you have studied and become an expert at the science of micro expressions you cannot know that that science isnt as effective as playing poker or monopoly, and if it is you surely have an obligation to the scientific community and all the law enforcement agencies to put them right and teach them your knowledge.

Great what a terrific concept, maybe I can start a new field, I have now found a whole new meaning as to why I am here, I have a obligation. I need to leave this machine and start right this minute.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One thing you are not successfull at is sentence construction and coherency, i am going to copy this quote and use it in an art piece, it's so strange it has a twisted sort of beauty, like something a Dr Seuss character would say or the Mad Hatter from Alice in Wonderland.

Oh, you perceive so well, I will have you know I barely ever past any English class, never could spell worth a darn. Too lazy to put my type into a word document first before putting it on the forum to spell check or hide my imperfections and really just do not care if my use of English is judged harshly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, I must agree, very convenient of me

At last we agree on something.

I disagree with this statement, sorry I do not have resorces to point you toward but I recall reading that they have found that many street smart, low educated subjects demostrated a very high level of use in protraying signals that falsified intent. They also noted that those that demostraited these traits were normally leaders or organizers in their enviroment, that they had learned to use these things as a way to get others to do things in their behalf.

As for disagreeing with me you dont need resources, if most people could read micro expressions no one would ever be decieved, thats why its a science, because you have to work at it, there are some "naturals" that have the ability without formal training but they make up a tiny percentage of the population so the rest of us are relatively bad at discerning peoples real intentions and thats why we can be duped on a regular basis.

As for people that deliberately falsify intent they were called psycopaths and sociopaths once but those terms have been discarded for different forms of personality disorder like Histrionic Personality Disorder or Narcissistic Personality Disorder etc, most of the sufferers use deception to manipulate those around them, leaders are usually the rich ones.

No test, sorry

Well i knew that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In theory, you could load the turn you've created in your 'outgoing email' folder into your 'incoming email' folder and attempt to crack your opponent's password, having first established what it could be via a sophisticated spear phishing campaign/brute force password attack/remote key logger installation/sneaking-up-behind-him-and-looking-over-his-shoulder-while-he-types-his-password/powerful telescope and intricate system of mirrors.

Then you could see where and what his forces are.

Or you could cheat in QBs by buying up all those cheap American rockets before patch 1.01 comes out and adds the all important 0 to their cost. Or is being gamey different to cheating? Or is that bending the rules?

Stop trying to push the tread down these lines, sorry, but we have diverted from that topic long ago.

I just figured out a new title for this thread, "Thread Jacked"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh, you perceive so well, I will have you know I barely ever past any English class, never could spell worth a darn. Too lazy to put my type into a word document first before putting it on the forum to spell check or hide my imperfections and really just do not care if my use of English is judged harshly.

You should care because its hard if not impossible to understand what you are saying.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hmmm... good question. Is being gamey the same as cheating? I've done gamey things before (Last second flag rushes, come to mind), but I've never considered it cheating.

I guess it's gamey if you do it and win, but cheating if your opponent does it and you lose. ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hmmm... good question. Is being gamey the same as cheating? I've done gamey things before (Last second flag rushes, come to mind), but I've never considered it cheating.

I would say that the difference between gameyness and cheating is guilt, if someone cheats they know its wrong and would feel guilty if found out, if someone does something thats gamey they wouldnt think its wrong unless they were aware of a consensus in the community that dissaproved of it, so there wouldnt be any feelings of guilt, so put simply, if you do something that would make you feel guilty if it was exposed you are probably cheating :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not sure about guilt being used as an effective measure of the gamey-cheat-rule bending threshold. Some people are guilty of cheating and yet feel no guilt. Some people have a guilty conscience because they bent the rules in their favour to counter a gamey move by a known cheat.

It's complicated.

Now if you'll excuse me, I have a jeep and a wounded Sherman tank crew that need to do some flag capturing...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not sure about guilt being used as an effective measure of the gamey-cheat-rule bending threshold. Some people are guilty of cheating and yet feel no guilt. Some people have a guilty conscience because they bent the rules in their favour to counter a gamey move by a known cheat.

It's complicated.

Now if you'll excuse me, I have a jeep and a wounded Sherman tank crew that need to do some flag capturing...

I disagree, i dont think it is complicated, unless you have a personality disorder you will feel guilty cheating at anything, admittedly it might not stop you from doing the thing but the guilt will be there, its hard wired into us, there might be cultural differences in the things we feel guilt about but the feeling of guilt is universal.

So as games are defined by their rules, it stands to reason that gamers have to understand those rules to be able to play, and once those rules are understood guilt will come naturally with any breaking of them, and as rules are objective by definition the feelings of guilt will be as well.

Gameyness however is less so, in fact as Vanir said, gameyness is subjective, so unless gameyness is objectified by a gentlemans agreement a gamey act is a relatively guilt free act.

One common act of gameyness is the suicide mission, now as far as i know in WW2 it wasnt common for units to do suicide missions otherwise the Kamikaze tactics of the Japanese wouldnt seem so horrific, so if BFC could somehow program the AI to recognise a suicide mission and refuse to carry it out that would remove a lot of gameyness from the game :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...