Sentinel's evidence is more than enough in most cases, on the rare occasion it's not, the player that was banned has provided their own evidence for appealing their ban.
Minecraft PC IP: play.cubecraft.net
Thanks for taking the time to explain how it used to work and how it changed though, staff should consider being more clear and direct about some cases like you are doing with sentinel, it helps us a lot more to understand what’s going on and that you’re not being lazy (I know for a fact that you and Crazyman aren’t/weren’t lazy because the staff chat was always filled with messages of Crazyman needing help with detections, but i’m just one of the few who knows how it worked in the staffteam). An anticheat is tons of hard work and I respect you deeply for still being a developer around here, as I can imagine that it’s far from fun.
Or maybe the mods could be granted special perms so that they could enter a youtube link in the 'normal' appeals site? (So you wouldn't have to create another website)
It could look something like this: (From a mod's perspective)
Could that be a possibility?
Staff can already undo Sentinel bans and then apply a new ban with the evidence, whether or not we want to allow Staff to do so is up to @Camezonda and @AnimalTamer1
If you don't want people to feel pressure then simply make it so you can't see who voted what, that's literally the only thing that makes people feel pressure in the first place
,
Sentinel Appeals
Currently I am the only Staff member here at CubeCraft that is allowed to go through Sentinel Appeals. Sentinel has changed a lot and is constantly changing on a weekly basis. Our Staff weren't taught correctly how to deal with Sentinel Appeals so appeals were denied when they should've been marked as a False Positive or left so that I (or the old dev) could look into them more thoroughly. There were also times where the players that were super obvious in-game would be marked as a False Positive when they really shouldn't have been, simply because of the player claiming 'lag' and their ping being ~200ms (or > 1,000ms which isn't proof of 'not cheating'). That's not our Staff's fault, that's the previous developer's fault for not training our Staff members correctly and not checking up on them every now and then to make sure that everything is fine. A lot of these punishments to this date have been undone - so no need to worry about people staying banned when they shouldn't have been, most have been sorted out already.
Whilst I improve and add onto Sentinel, I update a guide for our Staff so that when I'm in the position of being able to train specific staff members to deal with these correctly, then I can do and they'll be a able to deal with the appeals again. The number of appeals we get weekly have drastically dropped, when I took over the project, each weekend we'd get at least 700 appeals but now over a weekend we get about 100 on average, of which is a huge drop and most of those people claim the following:
False Positives
False Positives have always only been able to be looked into by the development team that are currently working on the Sentinel project of which is currently me, but previously was CrazymanJR. Due to the fact that I am the only person that deals with Sentinel Appeals right now, I'll know which appeal that was marked as a false positive needs to be looked into more or just simply accepted. It is extremely rare that once marked as a false positive, that the player won't be unbanned.
Since I changed the approach to Sentinel Appeals in general, the number of false positives that span over a week have drastically changed, just like the number of appeals we get a week. Fixing false positives and improving detections decrease the false positive ratio - wow who knew?! There's most definitely still a few false positives that sit inside of Sentinel (like there is for literally every anti-cheat) and I'm working on them whenever I can.
One of the common ones right now is some specific butterfly and jitter clicking techniques. Whilst we do allow both clicking types, there is a small chance that you will get banned by the anti-cheat for doing so, of which can occur on other servers too, not just us. I don't like that at all, so whenever I get time, I will be updating the specific detection that's causing the false positive whilst maintaining a good banning ratio instead of just letting people get away with the use of auto clickers depending on their settings.
...hopefully this clears stuff up.
Sentinel Appeals
Currently I am the only Staff member here at CubeCraft that is allowed to go through Sentinel Appeals. Sentinel has changed a lot and is constantly changing on a weekly basis. Our Staff weren't taught correctly how to deal with Sentinel Appeals so appeals were denied when they should've been marked as a False Positive or left so that I (or the old dev) could look into them more thoroughly. There were also times where the players that were super obvious in-game would be marked as a False Positive when they really shouldn't have been, simply because of the player claiming 'lag' and their ping being ~200ms (or > 1,000ms which isn't proof of 'not cheating'). That's not our Staff's fault, that's the previous developer's fault for not training our Staff members correctly and not checking up on them every now and then to make sure that everything is fine. A lot of these punishments to this date have been undone - so no need to worry about people staying banned when they shouldn't have been, most have been sorted out already.
Whilst I improve and add onto Sentinel, I update a guide for our Staff so that when I'm in the position of being able to train specific staff members to deal with these correctly, then I can do and they'll be a able to deal with the appeals again. The number of appeals we get weekly have drastically dropped, when I took over the project, each weekend we'd get at least 700 appeals but now over a weekend we get about 100 on average, of which is a huge drop and most of those people claim the following:
- "I didn't know that it was punishable so you should unban me"
- "My friend got access to my account and played a prank on me"
- "My account was stolen" (although the person appealing IS the person that got banned verified via IPs)
- "apwdjkwa78d hawed 3wjf 7uywyfuw4e89f" (no joke, some are just random characters or swear words to reach the minimum character limit)
- "I am innocent blah blah blah" (but they're most definitely NOT innocent)
- but on the rare occasion, a user that's given a useful appeal message and has genuinely got falsely banned, gets marked as a False Positive.
False Positives
False Positives have always only been able to be looked into by the development team that are currently working on the Sentinel project of which is currently me, but previously was CrazymanJR. Due to the fact that I am the only person that deals with Sentinel Appeals right now, I'll know which appeal that was marked as a false positive needs to be looked into more or just simply accepted. It is extremely rare that once marked as a false positive, that the player won't be unbanned.
Since I changed the approach to Sentinel Appeals in general, the number of false positives that span over a week have drastically changed, just like the number of appeals we get a week. Fixing false positives and improving detections decrease the false positive ratio - wow who knew?! There's most definitely still a few false positives that sit inside of Sentinel (like there is for literally every anti-cheat) and I'm working on them whenever I can.
One of the common ones right now is some specific butterfly and jitter clicking techniques. Whilst we do allow both clicking types, there is a small chance that you will get banned by the anti-cheat for doing so, of which can occur on other servers too, not just us. I don't like that at all, so whenever I get time, I will be updating the specific detection that's causing the false positive whilst maintaining a good banning ratio instead of just letting people get away with the use of auto clickers depending on their settings.
I have no idea where you got that mindset, that's just completely wrong and has been ever since I took over the project. What happened before, I can't comment on because that wasn't me and the anti-cheat has changed A LOT since then.
...hopefully this clears stuff up.
Yes, your comment definitely cleared up a lot. I have another question though. Look, at the moment, when you get banned by Sentinel, the anticheat, you will get a ban for 7 days.
Yes, this cheater flies and uses some other cheats such as KillAura. An obvious user of cheats, right? And guess what. My report was denied because sentinel already banned the dude.
It's great that Sentinel works in 1.8 (and bans hackers after 10 games xd), but hackers should be punished more severely. This guy gets away with a ban duration of only one week while he could be banned for a month! (Not looking at the fact that this is probably an alt)
And this happened to me like 8 times this week only (and it has probably happened a lot more to others.). So my question is: What if there would be a possibility for moderators to edit a cheater's punishment if there is obvious evidence of them cheating. For example: When someone gets banned by sentinel and a report from another player gets looked into by a moderator, and there's evidence of the user with regards to cheating, they wouldn't be banned for 1 week but for 1 month, because according to the rules, someone who's been banned by a moderator (or someone else with another role in the staff team) will be banned for 1 month. (I think I've explained this enough, but I wanted it to be crystal clear. If it's not, please ask me and I will try to explain it again.)
So now you might be thinking: "Why should this be implemented?"
But what if evidence could be added to the appeals site? Yes, indeed, cheaters would get the punishment they deserve; a ban for one month followed by a permanent ban. But now take a look at this video.
It's great that Sentinel works in 1.8 (and bans hackers after 10 games xd), but hackers should be punished more severely. This guy gets away with a ban duration of only one week while he could be banned for a month! (Not looking at the fact that this is probably an alt)
And this happened to me like 8 times this week only (and it has probably happened a lot more to others.). So my question is: What if there would be a possibility for moderators to edit a cheater's punishment if there is obvious evidence of them cheating. For example: When someone gets banned by sentinel and a report from another player gets looked into by a moderator, and there's evidence of the user with regards to cheating, they wouldn't be banned for 1 week but for 1 month, because according to the rules, someone who's been banned by a moderator (or someone else with another role in the staff team) will be banned for 1 month. (I think I've explained this enough, but I wanted it to be crystal clear. If it's not, please ask me and I will try to explain it again.)
So now you might be thinking: "Why should this be implemented?"
- Cheaters would get their rightful punishment.
- Players who are willing to cheat would think twice because of the punishments they could get. Right now, they probably think things like "I'll just cheat in 1.8 man. Sentinel doesn't work well and the sentinel bans only last for 1 week, so after a very short period I can use the account again to have 'fun'!". But 1 month is actually quite a lot of time, so users could be prevented from cheating because of the punishments.
- Players start to dislike the 1.8 platform because of the cheaters. You could play 4 games and you'd be guaranteed to see and experience the power of at least one cheater (if you are lucky enough).
- Users who report cheaters are discouraged by the fact that their reports don't get handled. Imagine this situation: You have just started a new account on the reporting website and you report 10 cheaters. You're very proud of the good thing you've done to the server. But then, the next day, when you take a look at the reporting website you see "Closed, closed closed, closed, etc.". You've got to understand that people don't like to report cheaters if the moderation team keeps closing their reports. (No offense to the moderation team btw). This is a very small thing in the process of punishing cheaters but I think it should not be underestimated, because you, the managers and other people with a very important role in the team when it comes to punishing cheaters, need us, the reporting members of the community, as a fundamental part of your circulation against cheaters. And there is a certain part the circulation that I'm missing, which is the following. First, you start up your reporting account and report people. Your reports get handled and your confidence grow- Wait, do the reports get handled? No! It's so important that there is at least a small sign of approval from the moderation team because otherwise users stop reporting! Would you want to always have your boss to tell you that you're always ruining your job while you actually mostly deliver amazing work? Of course not. Like I said, this is a very small part in the process of punishing users with illegal modifications but yet so important.
When I did the sentinel appeals there was indeed no guide so most of us literally looked at ping and if it was a decent appeal message with maybe some useful information for Crazyman, that’s how I got that mindset :p.
Thanks for taking the time to explain how it used to work and how it changed though, staff should consider being more clear and direct about some cases like you are doing with sentinel, it helps us a lot more to understand what’s going on and that you’re not being lazy (I know for a fact that you and Crazyman aren’t/weren’t lazy because the staff chat was always filled with messages of Crazyman needing help with detections, but i’m just one of the few who knows how it worked in the staffteam). An anticheat is tons of hard work and I respect you deeply for still being a developer around here, as I can imagine that it’s far from fun.
I know absolutely nothing about developing and stuff and I'm probably wrong here but isn't it just possible to create a different appeals site for the moderators which is connected to the normal appeals so that, if one of the mods enter a username, they can enter a youtube link which gets 'pasted' into the appeals website?
Or maybe the mods could be granted special perms so that they could enter a youtube link in the 'normal' appeals site? (So you wouldn't have to create another website)
It could look something like this: (From a mod's perspective)
Could that be a possibility?
It's most definitely possible, but what I meant by "we do not have the developer resources" is that we don't have a web developer to do that.
Don't know if what I am about to say is possible or if it will be the best solution, but there should be a way to implement this suggestion without the need of website developers/adding links of evidence to appeals. Can't you give permissions to your moderators to remove Sentinel bans and replace them with the ban from the staff member (that includes evidence of the user cheating)? The report would get accepted, the cheater gets their well deserved punishment, and you won't waste time with their appeals, but leave them to the moderators.
Or a combination of it something that makes it clear someone got caught both trough sentinel and video evidence, so staff knows that this person doesn’t appeal based on the video but based on both sentinel and the video evidence.
Staff can already undo Sentinel bans and then apply a new ban with the evidence, whether or not we want to allow Staff to do so is up to @Camezonda and @AnimalTamer1
Yeah, which is what I meant by giving them permissions to do it. As I said, that's how you can have this suggestion implemented without the need of website developers. So I really hope that Camezonda and AnimalTamer1 will decide to make this a thing!
Them being able to do it is one thing, but is it a good use of time is the real question. A moderator could spend 5 minutes changing a Sentinel ban to a ban with evidence for an account that has already been banned (and will most likely not appeal anyway because they've moved on to the next alt). Or, they could ban another 5-10 active cheaters in the same time by spectating games.
I don't want people's votes to be influenced by other votes. I want people to give their own opinion on my suggestions and don't want them to be influenced by someone else's. (So that's why you can't change your vote and view the votes before you have voted.)
That's ridiculous. The replies above have changed my mind and I want to change my vote
That's not ridiculous, it's my way of posting suggestions. I will enable you to change your vote for today only.
Just a little bit corrupt if you ask me. Having discussions about your suggestion is basically made redundant because once we voted, it's locked and no way for us to change our minds, even after discussions which are literally meant to change other people's minds, but guess it doesn't matter ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
If you don't want people to feel pressure then simply make it so you can't see who voted what, that's literally the only thing that makes people feel pressure in the first place
If I'd be corrupt I'd pay you to vote yes on my suggestions lol. And you've got a point: Opinions have to be changed by discussing but if you want to change your vote you can contact me anywhere. But I'm sorry, I will keep using this method.
Similar threads
- Poll
Latest posts
-
-
All Networks Yet Another Game Idea- Blockwars Voxels- Latest: jamesthesignificant
-
-
-
