Forums

HACKS SHOOTING 60 AT OAKMONT

• LizzieRossetti 1,545 Posts

  Fri, Jul 15 2011 11:43 AM

  No wait.

  If indeed there is a rule that I have disagreed to, that is, one that states we may not voice our opinions openly about such things as multi accounting, then the answer is simple, and furthermore overdue. Change the rule that discriminates against the vast majority of people here who are fed up with seeing their efforts urinated upon by the few (Who by the way, appear to be exonerated from following any particular set of rules). Change the rule so that honest dependable players can indeed come to the community for help ( Community Help- remember), and speak as they see fit without censure. Thats all I am saying. Mostly.

  Granted that if we all lived in a world ruled by Lizzie, whose own Father once remarked that her stand point was one slightly to the right of Genghis Khan, then multi accounters would simply be skewered to a wall by their genitals whilst upside down being covered in peanut butter about the eyes before releasing rabid and very hungry terriers upon them. However I am prepared to accept the current rules watered down as they are by concerns for human rights and other such nonsense, and even I have no problem or concern in that such rules are being carried out to the best of some very good peoples abilities. Yet to say we cannot speak of these things beggars belief, my belief in a game I have come to love. You can fall out of love too though.

  Lizzie xx

• WGTicon 12,511 Posts

  Fri, Jul 15 2011 12:53 PM

  Hi lizzie.

  I do not believe I said not to voice your opinions. I did say that knowingly breaking the rules will not be tolerated. I don't have an issue with this thread as a thread, I do have an issue when the person points out the names and knowingly doing so, which is against the rules.

  Also, when I do ask to know the name of the person (in private) and it's not given to me but then stated it doesn't matter.... Fine you can say so, again, it's not against the rules to state so, but then I can't even check out the complaint.

  As you know, no system is perfect and there are ways to game it. Obviously. But also, think about this, some folks who may appear doing so to you, may not be. They may not even be aware nor doing it on purpose or have nefarious means in mind. That's just 1 of the reasons why I asked for the name in private.

  :)

  -wgticon

• SgtDoodles 3,112 Posts

  Fri, Jul 15 2011 1:22 PM

  LizzieRossetti:

  what everr

  Nice one Liz.

  x)

• duffer66 700 Posts

  Fri, Jul 15 2011 1:44 PM

  Good one Lizzie. The mention of 1000 practice rounds can be food for thought, so why not record the amount of practice rounds one plays when they sign up for WGT. Just the number of practice rounds and not any other stats. This way the honest players can look at the amount of rounds these so called new players have actually played. Would be a dead giveaway for dual accounts.

• gsoup 2,929 Posts

  Fri, Jul 15 2011 1:45 PM

  wow!

  -G

• floppy131 87 Posts

  Fri, Jul 15 2011 1:52 PM

  I think Lizzie needs to come to the states and kick the Dem's and Repub's Butt's. God Bless it. Lizzie is totally right.

• Sanco 1,345 Posts

  Fri, Jul 15 2011 2:09 PM

  Lizzie, mia adorata.

  Your view makes perfect sense and I share it fervently also.

  I agree with Icon that we should report these individuals to them in private, I guess what they want to avoid is a mass witch-hunt in the fora.  What this type of approach prevents though, is the ability for members to alert others that may be unaware to the fact that a certain so and so could clean them up (or not) through unfair practices, thus allowing the fair members to apply their freedom of choice to play them or shun them accordingly.

  It's a hard one. But let me say that the socialist approach here is wrong. Now I better stop here as Icon does not know me and may not apply his benefit of the doubt rule with me should I step outside the rules :)

• WGTicon 12,511 Posts

  Fri, Jul 15 2011 2:57 PM

  Sanco:

  Lizzie, mia adorata.

  Your view makes perfect sense and I share it fervently also.

  I agree with Icon that we should report these individuals to them in private, I guess what they want to avoid is a mass witch-hunt in the fora.  What this type of approach prevents though, is the ability for members to alert others that may be unaware to the fact that a certain so and so could clean them up (or not) through unfair practices, thus allowing the fair members to apply their freedom of choice to play them or shun them accordingly.

  It's a hard one. But let me say that the socialist approach here is wrong. Now I better stop here as Icon does not know me and may not apply his benefit of the doubt rule with me should I step outside the rules :)

  I think you nailed it on the head. Let me give you one example:

  say we have a pro player who is level 85. from an outside pov, many bad thoughts come into mind....but what is the person just plays for fun and has no goal to be the best or compete with the best/ who I am I to decide how someone plays. As long as he/she does not break the rules or out to get others or few other elements we check, why should I do anything to them>?

  -wgticon

• SPINO1 5,394 Posts

  Fri, Jul 15 2011 4:24 PM

  As i said earlier icon, its pointless giving you names  .. i have no proof, what i wanted to know was how can a hack shoot 60 at oakmont in his 3 ever round, i understand why u dont want name posted all over the forums, we dont want childish name calling and such , i get it !!!. As i said in a previous post check out the scores for hack,ameteur comps. look at the top  5 in the leaderboard and run the rule over them ( or whatever it is you guys check for   ), also on the game set up up have a reputation option why isnt it good to use ????????????????? surely not difficult to give a player rating after a round or one hole if they quit (different subject i know), but hear all the time oh ive just played this guy whos a 75 avg and hes just gone whatever under par.

• WGTicon 12,511 Posts

  Fri, Jul 15 2011 4:37 PM

  I understand. I would rather you report all names to me though. It's part of my job. Of course, if we check and can't find anything, we won't do anything and if we will, we will take action. As long as this is clear and trust that I will do my best to check accounts, then feel free to message me 1 ,5, or 10 names a day.

  We had a sorta reputation tracking before (based on completed games)> It didn't work. The type of system you mention may work on paper but what is to stop MPC round and guy losing on last hole and say: if you don't cancel our round, i'll trash your reputation.

  We always wlecome ideas how to implement a system, but it's important to note that most users (and it's fine) only think about their own cause and fail to see big picture how it affects others or weaknesses the system has.

  -wgticon