I'm assuming from this, we would need to code all of this. By this happening, I foresee lag, which is already a problem for some users. I don't understand the point where you state "User disconnects after receiving message: This is a fail of the test." I'm guessing that means if they don't respond and they leave, they "failed"? Also, if the user crashes, it is quite possible and happens quite often to a lot of users.

 

First of all Afk Users. This could easily be a problem from both sides. 1) If a player was chatting in global and goes afk shortly before a mod PM's them to do the hack test it may look to the staff like an attempt to avoid staff. The fact is, the only people on the server discouraged from going AFK without warning are staff. The players have the right to go afk whenever, and for however long they want to.

Secondly, I would never assume a player doing /ignore on a staff member is a 'hack alert.' As @vengfulbacon has stated there is nothing wrong with a player doing /ignore on a staff member. We aren't going to remove their right. Most players who do /ignore on a staff member have generally good reasons and considering the number of staff it isn't too hard to get help that doesn't involve that particular staff member. Maybe that staff member and you have bad history. Maybe that staff member is simply being a little too chatty today and is taking up chat so much you can't see anything. Its not really right to judge someone based on that. Authority does not mean that someone cannot ignore you. I can ignore the cops, not saying its a good idea, but it isn't illegal to ignore them (note the rule/legal consequences depending on why they are paying attention to you are completely separate from your decision to ignore that person).

Also, ignore bypass would be something that the Devs would likely have to code.

User disconnects after being sent the test. This should not be taken as a fail in any situation. We cannot stop someone from logging off and call it 'justice'. You have to consider the circumstances that all of us might face from both sides. 1)What situations could actually happen to cause this? 2)How are the actual hackers going to use that to excuse their behavior? Then we also have to consider what is more important to the community? Is it more important to ban 100 people for hopes of finding 1 guilty one regardless of the innocents banned? Or is it more important to not ban 100 people regardless of the guilty that go free?

I'd rather have a system that is innocent until PROVEN guilty. Not a system that relies on a concept of guilt until proven innocent.

Revanrose6

 

I couldn't agree more with this. This line is exactly the reason I wouldn't support this. +1

 

I like the idea but there could be a few builders that didnt know what to do and didnt say anything

 

Out of all the hacking clients huzuni may be the most sophisticated, but the majority of the hacking clients I have installed are good at each thing. Remember that hacking clients are mostly used in PvP and PvP hacking is what people use them for. Huzuni is an allround client, not a PvP focused client. And I know there are many clients that are focused on PvP and they're good.

So stopping people from using huzuni, and the other clients you mentioned, will not make their hacking any less effective. It won't even affect anything.
Like I said earlier, a spot check is not going to work with hacking clients. There have been many PvP servers who once used spot checks and stopped using them because the clients evolved to bypass these spot checks. It's a matter of adding something new in the case of most clients.

I'll repeat myself again. Maybe 40% of the hackers use huzuni, we don't actually know, but if they do then this spot check suggestion will drastically decrease the amount of people who use huzuni. Like revan and I already said, people will simply use a client that bypasses the spotcheck. And even with the clients you mentioned, you can bypass it with some effort.

So as I said before, this won't work.

 

Why don't we just add it where you get instabanned after 30 minutes of inactivity? That's all that will happen if this is implemented.

 

I know you stated almost all responses were going towards flame war territory, but my post was not unprofessional at all. I simply made the shortest response as to why the suggestion wouldn't work, but instead the op made an assumption that I didn't read when he didn't even know what I was talking about and how it makes this suggestion not work. In fact, it seems that he is only waiting for negative responses towards this suggestion just to point out people's ignorance or reading comprehension skills even when he's just presented with a simple alternative that has worked in the past.

Just saying.

 

There's a second best, a third best. You seem to rate huzuni very highly, however, in usage I myself rate it lower than others. I've used these clients, I keep them up to date, I test them. See what features they have and how they look. It's how I can recognize hacking so easily.

There are BETTER clients than huzuni, they are just LESS POPULAR.

And huzuni does not have every fucntion all the hacking clients have combined. And even if it did, it's a good allround client. Many clients excel at little things. Like one of the clients I use has an amazing flymod, but a horrible tracer. The other one has amazing features for PvP, but is horrible at anything else. And huzuni doesn't compare with any of those, because huzuni doesn't excel at anything in specific. It has the feature, most of them are good, but they're far from great.

So please, stop bringing up huzuni. That's not the problem. The problem is all the hackers, not the client they use.

 

Zecrux... You seem to think so highly of this....

 

Thank you for posting this...

 

MY OPINION IS RIGHT, EVERYONE IS WRONG. STOP PROVING ME WRONG OR I'M GOING TO STOP RESPONDING.

 

I am just completely wrong?
And how would you know? have you compared all the clients yourself? Because I have.

 

I think he ran out of comebacks so he just said I'm done cus I can be