AutoHotkey Community

evilC wrote: Multiplayer game, unfair advantage = bad.

I disagree with this on principle. I don't think our forum should be in the business of policing games. This is a scripting language

OK so i was away and unaware of this thread:
My 5 and a half cents as a site admin.
Cheating while unethical is NOT the problem.
We cannot possibly enforce a no malicious code rule. we just dont have the man power. All we can say is that we will investigate complaints of malicious code. remove it if we agree.
As to the question of cheat scripts. Out TOS plainly states we can remove anything we dont like for no better reason than a whim.
That said no one on this staff has abused that power that i am aware of. Plainly put, if you feel it reflects on us poorly then it does. everyone in the staff is been placed there because all of you have a sense of AHK righteousness. we dont all have to perfectly agree on these offences.
I do disagree with NNNIK on one important point. we must never weigh the effects of doing what is right against our user numbers. its the wrong metric. If AHK dies because of lack of interest in ethical uses then it is time for it to do so. I think we all know that wont happen. So to the staff i say in plain english.
Do what you feel is ethical on every post. If you feel like it reflects badly on AHK reputation, it probably does. If the OP does not post source it isn't valid for this site. simple as that.

tank wrote:OK so i was away and unaware of this thread:
My 5 and a half cents as a site admin.
Cheating while unethical is NOT the problem.
We cannot possibly enforce a no malicious code rule. we just dont have the man power. All we can say is that we will investigate complaints of malicious code. remove it if we agree.
As to the question of cheat scripts. Out TOS plainly states we can remove anything we dont like for no better reason than a whim.
That said no one on this staff has abused that power that i am aware of. Plainly put, if you feel it reflects on us poorly then it does. everyone in the staff is been placed there because all of you have a sense of AHK righteousness. we dont all have to perfectly agree on these offences.
I do disagree with NNNIK on one important point. we must never weigh the effects of doing what is right against our user numbers. its the wrong metric. If AHK dies because of lack of interest in ethical uses then it is time for it to do so. I think we all know that wont happen. So to the staff i say in plain english.
Do what you feel is ethical on every post. If you feel like it reflects badly on AHK reputation, it probably does. If the OP does not post source it isn't valid for this site. simple as that.

tank, I like the strong opinions you're taking. Gives everyone clear direction. Keep it up!

tank wrote:I do disagree with NNNIK on one important point. we must never weigh the effects of doing what is right against our user numbers. its the wrong metric.

There probably is no ethic when it comes to online gaming. Just about everyone with money can get an unfair advantage by buying better equipment or paying to win. The concept of online gaming is fundementally flawed ( at least if it isn't a turn based strategy game ).

nnnik wrote:

tank wrote:I do disagree with NNNIK on one important point. we must never weigh the effects of doing what is right against our user numbers. its the wrong metric.

There probably is no ethic when it comes to online gaming. Just about everyone with money can get an unfair advantage by buying better equipment or paying to win. The concept of online gaming is fundementally flawed ( at least if it isn't a turn based strategy game ).

This is veering off topic, but so long as a game is a one-time payment and not on a freemium, free2play, or pay2play+paymore2winmore model, then that monetary advantage doesn't exist. Though most people don't tend to risk bans through cheating in games they have to pay for.

Exaskryz wrote:

nnnik wrote:

tank wrote:I do disagree with NNNIK on one important point. we must never weigh the effects of doing what is right against our user numbers. its the wrong metric.

There probably is no ethic when it comes to online gaming. Just about everyone with money can get an unfair advantage by buying better equipment or paying to win. The concept of online gaming is fundementally flawed ( at least if it isn't a turn based strategy game ).

This is veering off topic, but so long as a game is a one-time payment and not on a freemium, free2play, or pay2play+paymore2winmore model, then that monetary advantage doesn't exist. Though most people don't tend to risk bans through cheating in games they have to pay for.

What about a better PC - a better Internet connection better mice and better keyboards. What about better sound systems that are able to filter certain sounds. What about brighter screens with better contrast.

guest3456 wrote:

just me wrote:nnnik, I think the actual job of the site owners and the staff is to prove how AHK benifits from permitting cheating scripts.

Features

• Automating repetitive tasks in online games (often in violation of said games' terms of service).

Source: AutoHotkey (Wikipedia)

Edit: Just noticed that the above has been changed on 2017-04-09 which is one day after I quoted.

I changed it when I saw your post

So a member of the AHK community decides how AHK has to be rated by wikipedia?

@nnnik: How many of the users in the 'total members' counter have been active within the last 6 month 8 or the last year, if you prefer? That's a number without significance.

tank wrote:So to the staff i say in plain english.
Do what you feel is ethical on every post. If you feel like it reflects badly on AHK reputation, it probably does. If the OP does not post source it isn't valid for this site. simple as that.

The task of a forum moderator is to enforce the forum rules. Problems which aren't covered by existing rules need at least a common agreement within the staff. Obviously, that's not the case with respect to gaming related contents. You're stating that each moderator should decide based on his individual ethics. I cannot agree. This would be some kind of arbitrariness.

Yes, what happened to Seidenweber...? :/
Also what just me said, it's true wikipedia doesn't get to dictate how we are. We are who we are. They talk about us, not us talking about them talking about us.... If I'm making any sense.
That being said, I will abstain from this and will go with whatever the final consensus is in the end. If there is one.

just me wrote:

guest3456 wrote:

just me wrote:nnnik, I think the actual job of the site owners and the staff is to prove how AHK benifits from permitting cheating scripts.

Features

• Automating repetitive tasks in online games (often in violation of said games' terms of service).

Source: AutoHotkey (Wikipedia)

Edit: Just noticed that the above has been changed on 2017-04-09 which is one day after I quoted.

I changed it when I saw your post

So a member of the AHK community decides how AHK has to be rated by wikipedia?

Wikipedia is an encyclopedia by consensus. The users create it and maintain it. I'm a user just like you are, and just like everyone else is.

I don't see what's the problem with me updating it?

14:59, 9 April 2017‎ 73.28.194.247 (talk)‎ . . (15,346 bytes) (-53)‎ . . (remove obvious bias)

I don't think that the whole passage "(often in violation of said games' terms of service)" can be called "obvious bias".

At best, "often" should be replaced by "sometimes".

just me wrote:

14:59, 9 April 2017‎ 73.28.194.247 (talk)‎ . . (15,346 bytes) (-53)‎ . . (remove obvious bias)

I don't think that the whole passage "(often in violation of said games' terms of service)" can be called "obvious bias".

At best, "often" should be replaced by "sometimes".

Any programming language is capable of creating scripts "in violation of said games' terms of service". There is no need to mention that. That's like putting on the C++ wikipedia page, "Often/sometimes used to create viruses and malware". That makes no sense

Just because a language is capable of something, doesn't mean that that kind of misuse defines it. I suppose we should list on the page for "screwdriver" something like "sometimes used to stab people in the stomach"

Within the context "Automating repetitive tasks in online games", it actually makes sense, as it would for other languages with this 'special feature'.

just me wrote:Within the context "Automating repetitive tasks in online games", it actually makes sense, as it would for other languages with this 'special feature'.

nnnik wrote:However AutoHotkey does not have any features to specifically cheat in games - it has features to manipulate already existing programs. This also involves cheating in games.

There are features to specifically cheat in games. These features would warrant the extra note here.

Though if it is no effort and we don't take any damage as a community then I have no argument against taking steps against the darker shades of the gray zone that cheating is.

Might be interesting in the context of AHK promotion: Hide AutoHotkey's process strings

Do we really need to allow topics like this? Clearly it's not to help any disabled persons, just out-right cheating (and lots of cheats):
https://autohotkey.com/boards/viewtopic ... 19&t=30316

I would say no, delete it.

Yeah this one is getting on my nerves too.

Same.

I support the removal of that thread.

kon wrote:I support the removal of that thread.

+1