> All this from someone who doesnt even run a server? (or so he has stated > recently)
I am not currently a public internet server owner/operator. > Have you read any of the posts? Yes, I have. Many thousands of them, actually. In fact, I've read over two years' worth of posts including all of the ones on this topic. > With all the other concerns that have arisen? Concerns are great, and the intelligent discussion thereof is welcome. The concern I have currently is that instead, we have name-calling, derisive comments, dogmatic arguments, etc. > I want cheat protection, but not at the expence of others. I'm sincerely interested to hear your proposal of a system that's 100% hack proof with a 0% chance of false positives that works 100% effectively. Life is a series of compromises. The maturing of the VAC and the advent of a centrally controlled permanent banishment for repeat offenders is purely a response to the cries of admins and users the world over. You don't have to participate. Instead you can tend to the "expence" of cheaters by running an insecure server. Valve is run by thinking individuals. If there is ever a major problem with the VAC or central banlist, don't you think they might react appropriately? Personally, I say a central banlist is a terrible idea. Instead, mark their CD-Key as invalid, blocking any chance of WON Auth, so that they cannot connect to any internet servers. You repeatedly break the EULA, you don't get to run the software as long as Valve can help it. More power to them. And by the way, if you're not new to these lists, you'll know that referring to me as a "Valve ass kisser" is ludicrous. -- Eric (the Deacon remix) _______________________________________________ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux
