"Cheating"

[Moraelin]

Reading a few messages around here got me wondering. Why's "cheating" regarded as such a supreme shame, anyway? It looks like some people would rather admit murder than that they "cheat" in a stupid single-player game. Why?

I mean, I've seen quite a few messages starting with "I wouldn't have tried to cheat myself, but..." and then the author proceeds to complain about the saved random seed. If you don't cheat, why is it your problem? Heck, if you didn't try to cheat, how do you even KNOW that the seed is saved?

So let me be the first one who says that I WOULD have cheated. Now NORMALLY I don't do it with save and reload, because it's boring. Normally I go for a trainer instead. But WTH, Civ 3's combat produces such wild results that it almost begged a reload.

Yes, I cheat like a pig in over half the games I play. In fact, one of the reasons I've learned Z80 and then 8086 assembly was to hack into games with a debugger and give myself infinite funds, lives or whatnot. That was back before cheat codes and "trainer creator" programs became standard. I have like a couple dozen "trained" ZX Spectrum games under my belt, and almost as many on the PC.

So why's it such a shame? Why's it even called "cheating"? In a single player game it's "cheating" whom? Myself? If that's "cheating", then puting more sugar or cream in my morning coffee is "cheating". And I'm sure someone could argue that Real Men can drink their coffee black, just as it is argued that Real Men can try and try again just to beat a stupid game. Yes, they can, but some of us find it more fun otherwise. If I like my coffee with more sugar, it's between me and myself. If I like my games easier, it's between me and myself.

In fact, I'll go even further and say: if I even need to use a cheat, it's not MY failure, it's failure on the part of the developpers. They failed to entertain me. Their minimum difficulty level, if they even had difficulty levels at all, was not low enough.

[SixArmedMan]

I wouldn't say it's so much a shame but rather, a sense that you're getting some kind of unfair advantage over the computer and thus, taking the challenge out of the game. If there's no challenge, then there's no fun. So then what's the point of playing? Apparently, the game is too easy for some people that cheating WOULD take the fun out of playing.

Then again, there's really no fun if you don't cheat anyways so...

Umm... What was the question again???

[GodSpawn]

That's all fair enough. It's up to each individual how they want to play.

[Libertarian]

In speaking for myself on this matter, let me first assure you that I won't presume to impose my own moral standards on another man. I will follow the moral code I choose. And if another man chooses another, then his choice is between him and his God or conscience, so long as his choice in no way abridges mine.

That said, I will judge, however I see fit, the moral code that he has chosen. Though I won't begrudge his choice, I might still condemn it. Not him — IT. That is, it might not be a choice I would make for myself. Likewise, I expect him, while not necessarily adopting my own point of view, to respect me, if not my viewpoint.

I view cheating, like any other matter of morality, through three primary ethical models: charity, noncoercion, and self-interest. These three mirror my overall worldview, which is a customized blend of Christianity, Libertarianism, and Objectivism.

As I see it, the one whom a man defrauds when he cheats is the most important person in his life. As the sole steward of his unique moral journey, when he chooses to cheat, he chooses to lie to himself, to deprive himself of reality, and in so doing defrauds his own conscience.

He who cannot be trusted for the little things cannot be trusted for the greater things. If he cheats in Civ, then he cheats in golf as well, and indeed in every facet of his life, for the same rationalization that is used to reconcile his cheating with his ethics can easily be made to accomodate how he deals with other people — those who are less important, less critical, less significant in his own life than himself.

The same character trait that dismisses any concern over cheating can as easily dismiss any concern at all. Whether he's cheating at a game, cheating on a test, or cheating to breach a contract, a man who cheats has, in my view, decided that he is worthless. I cannot trust such a man to judge me as anything greater than himself.

That's how I see it. Your mileage may vary.

(edited to correct syntax)

[Solver]

Moarelin, I can say that I will never want to play multiplayer with you already.

Yes, it's up to everyone how to play, but where TF is fun if you cheat?

[Moraelin]

Solver: I've already mentioned in a few places that I'm talking about "single player" games. MP is a whole different issue. And the fun is seeing what happens next, same as when watching a movie. It's probably different from YOUR idea of fun, but, hey, it just shows we're not identical people.

Libertarian: no offense, but methinks that there you have a case of not seeing the woods for the trees. It's just a stupid game, not reality, nor anything else. I've already stated in other places that I play a game just like I watch a movie. It's a way to pass the time away, not something to prove I'm superior or anything. Same as, say, watching a movie on DVD.

It's just entertainment. No more, no less. And some people seem to lose track of what the focus for entertainment is. The focus, for myself is: me having fun. _I_ am the one to be _entertained_. That's the whole reason why I buy a game or a movie on DVD, not just to inflate someone's sales figures. And if _I_ choose to maximize _my_ fun, without hurting anyone in the process, why is it something bad? Seems to me like it's only the sane approach. If I decide it's more fun for me to fast-forward over a boring part of a movie, then I WILL do that. Because again, the only reason I even watch the movie at all in the first place is to have fun, not to prove that I'm a Real Man who can endure through the boring sequences. Same with games, same with books, and same with any other form of entertainment.

Besides, I fail to see what does "morality" have to do with how I play the games, or with how I watch the movies. If I choose to fast-forward over some parts of a movie, what's "morality" got to do with it? Nothing. I'm not fast-forwarding anyone else's movie.

Methinks some people just confuse "morality", with some imaginary right to rule other people's lives.

[Solver]

Originally posted by Moraelin
Solver: I've already mentioned in a few places that I'm talking about "single player" games. MP is a whole different issue. And the fun is seeing what happens next, same as when watching a movie. It's probably different from YOUR idea of fun, but, hey, it just shows we're not identical people.

Sure. But if you cheat in SP, it makes you partially suspicious in MP. At least for me.

And yes, I've never used the cheats in other civ games, because *to me*, the FUN in Civ is challenge - having to compete with the others, losing a city or two, having them do something better than I do, not marching with Cavalry during the Bronze Age.

[Libertarian]

Methinks some people just confuse "morality", with some imaginary right to rule other people's lives.

Hmmm... Well, as I said plainly, I apply my own morality only to myself. I presume no authority whatsoever over you or your life. Again, your choices are between you and your God or conscience, not between you and me.

If a man wishes to cheat his own experience, it's not my problem — so long as I am NOT forced to have dealings with him that require trust.

(edited to correct spelling)

[Jodo Kast]

Well since we are selecting who we play 'Fantasy MultiPlayer', I choose not to play with either of ya because everytime I win this is what I will hear:

"You cheated!"

We are ALL still beta-testing this game, so I think it's GREAT if you push the game to it's limit. Don't do it if it scares ya!!

Let's see how you fair up against an enemy AI or human that does NOT hesitate to cheat, and you start the game at 50000 gold.

I think it's fair to say you won't release the best strategy until it's too late and my legionaries are pounding on your door.

[Moraelin]

Libertarian: I'm not even sure where the hey does the "trust" factor come in. Trust me with... what? With knowing better how I want to play the game?

I could be wrong, but your argument seems to be based mainly on the idea that "cheaters" somehow lie to themselves, shield themselves from reality, etc. That's actually false. I KNOW there are whole genres where my skills suck. I KNOW there are whole genres where I lack the patience and would get severely bored without a cheat. (Point in case: RPG's and doing hundreds of random battles just to survive in the next area.) Not only I know it, I'll freely admit it.

I just don't care. So some of my gaming skills suck. So what? So do my painting skills, music skills, mountaineering skills, acrobatic skills, lockpicking skills, and so on. Yes, I couldn't paint if my life depended on it, and I couldn't lockpick my way out of a wet paper bag. I KNOW that. I don't need to delude myself about any of that. So what? Those skills (mad gaming skillz included) are just a bunch of skills I've never really needed in the first place.

Again, I know very well when I suck at a game. Yep, there's no two ways about it. I royally suck at it. But I choose to play the game nevertheless. (As opposed to taking it back to the shop.) What IS morally wrong with that? No, really.

Solver: if you really want to talk about MP, personally I think people who cheat in MP should be skinned alive. There is very little use for cheating in MP, except to ruin other people's fun, and sure enough that's what it's mostly used for.

But SP? It's not like the AI's whole day will be ruined because I cheated.

[Libertarian]

Moraelin,

I am neither your conscience nor your God. Your rationale is wasted on me. Pardon me, but I feel all icky... like I'm reading a man's diary.

As I already explained, I don't hold you to my standard. Nor do I think any less of you as a human being for having a different standard than I. And I do not think that the standard that I hold has any absolute superiority over the standard you hold.

Like you, I have my own moral journey. I cannot trust other men without first trusting myself. And I cannot trust myself if I cheat.

[Moraelin]

The whole point was that modifying a SP game isn't cheating in the first place. I'm not cheating anyone, nor telling any lies. It's all between me and myself, and me knows very well what myself is doing. (And viceversa)

But then, so be it. I never imagined (nor intended) I'd convert everyone to the One True Faith (TM). You play games your way, I play them my way.

[Libertarian]

It's all between me and myself, and me knows very well what myself is doing.

[...closing door... ...washing hands...]

[Moraelin]

Well, I guess it does however answer my question. (Why do people avoid admitting that they're "cheating" in a SP game.) NOW I understand. Thanks.

[Akka]

Originally posted by Libertarian
He who cannot be trusted for the little things cannot be trusted for the greater things. If he cheats in Civ, then he cheats in golf as well, and indeed in every facet of his life, for the same rationalization that is used to reconcile his cheating with his ethics can easily be made to accomodate how he deals with other people — those who are less important, less critical, less significant in his own life than himself.

The same character trait that dismisses any concern over cheating can as easily dismiss any concern at all. Whether he's cheating at a game, cheating on a test, or cheating to breach a contract, a man who cheats has, in my view, decided that he is worthless. I cannot trust such a man to judge me as anything greater than himself.

Ok, as long as I'm still able to read english, I can sum up what you said here with : "someone who cheats in Civ3 is untrustworthy". You even extended it saying that the same lack of self-pride that allows him to cheat in Civ3 could allow him to cheat on exams, contracts and makes him consider he's worthless.
I'm just wondering : are you mentally sick, mad, or just joking ?

If he cheats in Civ, then he cheats in golf as well, and indeed in every facet of his life, for the same rationalization that is used to reconcile his cheating with his ethics can easily be made to accomodate how he deals with other people

Already quoted, but had to quote it again just to be sure that I was reading it well and it was not going from my imagination.
So if I have the mental pattern that allows me to cheat in a SP game, I have the mental pattern that allow me to cheat, lie and deceive in any other task ?
Seems that's YOUR mental pattern that has some flaws.

If a man wishes to cheat his own experience, it's not my problem — so long as I am NOT forced to have dealings with him that require trust.

God, I'm so glad that most people don't have the same sick reasoning. I cheat like a whore in all SP games. I can't even remember a SP game where I have NOT cheated. So well, I'm not trustworthy.

Especially funny for me considering that I put most of my pride in the trust that others can put on me - and I don't know anyone that can tell rightfully about me that he's trust was not well placed.

Sure. But if you cheat in SP, it makes you partially suspicious in MP. At least for me.

And yes, I've never used the cheats in other civ games, because *to me*, the FUN in Civ is challenge - having to compete with the others, losing a city or two, having them do something better than I do, not marching with Cavalry during the Bronze Age.

Same paranoic maniac as Lib ?
Watched too much X-files ?
My personnal fun in SP is the adaptability of the game. I enjoy from time to time a challenging game where I'll have to put all my will and skills to win. I enjoy as much an easy game where I can crush the AI easily. I don't have any hesitations about changing my civ to make it an uber-civ nearly invincible if this can be fun for me. If this makes me suspect in your eyes for MP, well, I think I won't miss playing with you then

[Moraelin]

Guess some people just can't tell the difference between a game and reality after all, that's all. Much as I've argued against the ideas that "games give people homicidal ideas", when you see someone arguing with a straight face that he can't trust me because of the way I play SP games... kind of makes you wonder. Maybe some people do have a blurred border between phantasy and reality, after all.

If anyone really wants to go over the moral implications of what I do in a game, vs what I do in reality, how about:

1) How about all the people who think it's perfectly ok to starve a city to size 1 and/or to bombard a defenseless city to size 1? Would you trust THOSE? Is THAT kind of morality any better? (Correct answer: it's probably just as irrelevant as SP "cheating", because it only happens in a game.)

2) Heck, how about all the people who play only conquest games, because "culture and diplomacy are boring"?

3) How about the people who play a thief in an RPG? (Or the ones who bought the two Thief games.) I have or had thief characters in many games, including online ones. Only stole from npc's, but nevetheless. Does that mean you need to watch your pockets around me In Real Life? Doesn't THAT morality seep into the real world too? (Correct answer: not really, since IRL I strive to be as close to "lawful good" as possible.)

4) How about the people playing White Wolf's Vampire RPG's? (Either table-top or the PC game.) Would you trust those? How do you know they won't bite your neck?

5) What about people playing "evil" characters in games? Heck, I seem to remember whole games where it wasn't even possible to be anything but evil. Dungeon Keeper. Syndicate. Would you trust that kind of morality?

6) How about people who deliberately bounce into walls in driving games? And there seem to be a lot of those. I remember one game which tried to discourage pinball driving, by massively losing speed when you touch a wall. Guess what? A bunch of sites gave it bad reviews because the AI (who correctly brakes for the curve) isn't slowed down as much as someone who ploughs directly into the wall, a la Gran Turismo. Or how about those who power-slide through all corners, because that's what works in the game? Would you trust those enough to give them a driver's license?

The point is: we all do things in games that we wouldn't do in real life. A lot of those are exploiting the game system, too, or border on that. (Sort of poor man's cheating, from within the game.) Deal with it.

[facistdictator]

OK first I want to give a big thumb's up to Moraelin, and Akka Li Vil, for being as far as I can tell the only normal people on this post. If these guys make you fell sick with their so-called unmoral ethics, then let me tell you a little about myself so you can go ahead and vomit. My idols in life are Adolf Hitler, Alexander the Great, Vlad Teppes, Joseph Stalin, Julius Caesar, Benito Musolini, Ivan the Terrible, Ghengis Khan, Rasputin, and Black Beard the pirate. Now your probably saying why, well to me all these individuals I can relate to in a certain way. All of them had a vision of what they wanted in life and did what was necessary to make that vision materialize. Most of us go through life believing and doing what others have already taught and did, and by following these already made principles we can achieve a some what modest success. But if you compare that type of success with the success these men achieved by not following but creating new ideas and controlling those around them, man I get excited just thinking about it. Now that's what I call real power. Whether your intentions are good or evil, making them a vision of reality on a global scale is almost a god like being. OK now that's over let me tell you I love cheating in games, drinking beer, cursing, getting revenge on my enemies, having thoughts of chopping people up who have wronged me severely in life with a sharp axe, naked women, money, fame, and most importantly power! Sorry for the long post just thought I would pass some of these other forms of energetic thought to those who see where im coming from. Moraelin and Akka Le Vil im proud of you two. The few standing against the many on what they see as right, now that's real leadership quality.

[Libertarian]

This discussion has taken a fascinating turn.

Those who do not cheat were asked why. The answer was given, with carefully emphasized disclaimers that those who do not cheat make no moral judgment as to the choice made by cheaters. The moral judgment, it was explained, was made about the principle, and not the people. It was painstakingly explained that we hold only ourselves, and not other men, to the principles that we choose.

Thus, the question was answered.

Lo and behold, there arose an appeal! But let me explain why I don't think this is cheating, etc. Obviously, if it isn't cheating, then it is irrelevant to the question, which was about cheating. (See thread title.) Upon the seemingly guilty conscience calling out for special waiver, it was once again emphasized that the moral choices a man makes are his own, and that no one holds in judgment the man who makes them.

And finally, an acknowledgment that the question was answered.

End of thread? Huh-uh. No, now it has become necessary to morally judge those who choose NOT to cheat! We are pond-floating scum who cannot comprehend ethical principle, while those who cheat are heroes and men of great wisdom!

It truly is to laugh. Ha!

I'll try this one last time, in plainer English, and if it fails, I'll leave you to lick the wounds of your conscience and concern myself no more with you.

Cheat if you want to. I couldn't care less. But do NOT burden ME with your choices. I don't want to play with you. I have made choices of my own.

[Moraelin]

Jesus, Libertarian... You still don't read the messages before answering, do you? You've switched sides in the "whiners vs fanboys" war, but in the end you've stayed the same flamer as ever.

Dig THIS: The question NEVER was "why don't you cheat?" That is NOT my question, and that is NOT my problem. If you don't want to cheat, sure, go ahead and play the game in whatever way you darn please. NONE of us "cheaters" will bother judging you for what you do with a SP game. That's between you and yourself, and is none of my concern. I won't tell you how to play a game.

Yes, that was my whole point: As long as it's between you and the game you've bought, do what you will.

To sum it up, the questions were:

1) Why is it called "cheating" in the first place, since I'm not cheating anyone but the AI?

2) Why is being a "cheater" in a SP game regarded as the worst possible shame by some people? Why the need to point fingers?

3) Why do "cheaters" feel a need to hide that fact? It's not like we did anything wrong to anyone, in the first place.

I've reordered them a bit, but those were the original points.

And you've answered... what? Went into a whole "amateur psychonalysis" fit, and regardless of that disclaimer you proceeded to pass judgement on PEOPLE, not on PRINCIPLES. That disclaimer was noted, but looked fundamentally out of place with the rest of the message. It was as out of place as a watch stappled onto a fish. Sorry, the moment you say that someone has low self esteem, is a liar, and shouldn't be trusted... it looks to me like you've judged a PERSON and found him guilty already.

And it looked downright surrealistic. You're judging a person based on... what? On how they play a single-player game. And on some pre-conceived (and fundamentally wrong) notions of what their goals and motivations are. Well, excuse me while I'm amazed.

The ONLY thing that you've indirectly answered is question 3. Answered it very convincingly, I might add. Yep, it's because of such self-appointed judge-and-jurry bigots that we need to hide.

There were countless valid answers to question 2 and Solver actually had a very good one. Yes, there IS rampant cheating in MP, so there's reason enough to be concerned. I can respect that. I've quit whole games because of rampant MP cheating, so I fully understand Solver's point. I can even relate to it.

And, as far as I can tell, noone even tried to answer question 1.

[Elucidus]

Wow! This is fun.

Game: activity engaged in for diversion or amusement.

That is the definition, correct? A distraction meant for one's enjoyment? Well, if someone enjoys a game more by cheating, what is the harm? Yes, multiplayer...this game can't even do multiplayer so that is not even a consideration.

To derive trust from someone because of actions in a game is ludicrous. I don't cheat that often in games, but you know what? Sometimes, I just want to blow things up and cause havoc. A buddy of mine, who has more integrity than anyone I know, cheats all of the time in SP. You know what? I trust him with my life; even more so I trust him with my son's life and have many times. In fact integrity is one of my core values and something I hold with the highest regard.

Does cheating mean I am the bringer of the seventh sign or something? No, I like to pretend. Imagination. I like to relieve stress. I like to kick the crap out of the computer because it just got done wiping the floor with my butt.

Don't give me any of that, non-judging crap either. What you wrote is like saying, "With all do respect" and then insulting the person (see example below). Or better yet, outright insulting them and then saying you mean it in the best possible way or you are complementing them or something.

Sir,

With all do respect you are the ugliest, most ignorant ball of dirty earwax I have ever met.

I am sure if you come back and read this you will just ensure everyone that you were not judging anyone...

Judge: to form an opinion about through careful weighing of evidence and testing of premises

Hmm...that doesn't fit; there was no careful weighing involved, let's try another.

Judge: to form an estimate or evaluation of; [especially] : to form a negative opinion about

That on is good, but this fits even better.

Prejudge: to judge before hearing or before full and sufficient examination

Ah, much better. Full and sufficient examination! You cannot determine someone’s ethics and morals until you examine the person's life and actions. Not actions in a video game. Oh, and saying you cannot trust someone because he cheats on a game is determining their ethics and morals, and making a judgment based on that determination.


Oops, sorry guys I went a little bit further than I intended. I meant to just say, "Its a game, many people use games to do things they can not/would not do in real life. A way to break away from real-life if you will."

So happy gaming, however it is you decide to game.


Oh and Libertarian,

You need to relax and get off that high horse. No one is better than you and you are no better than anyone else. If you remember that, then maybe your future posts won't sound so holier than thou and asinine. Could you sound any more degrading? Let's see you try...I know you can.

[Skanky Burns]

Originally posted by Moraelin
And if _I_ choose to maximize _my_ fun, without hurting anyone in the process, why is it something bad

My sentiments exactly!!

Cheating in multiplayer is bad, as it decreases others enjoyment.
Cheating in comparison games is also bad, for similar reasons.

Cheating in SP is fine, if thats what entertains you.
Simple as that.

[Jerk]

I have no problem with people who cheat in single player games of any sort. I do not cheat in Civ but I am one of the first to look up codes for a first person shooter because I lack the patience to redo levels over and over again. I do like to get through them so I can continue to follow the plot of the game and find out what happens. This does not automatically make me a cheater at everything else I do in life but if you wish to safeguard yourself by making that assumption I will not lose any sleep.

I have no problem with people who cheat in Civ 3 as long as they do not:

1) Whine about imbalances in the game. How can you talk about balance when you deliberately upset the balance by cheating.

2) Complain about a weak AI. If you are cheating and find it too weak then don't cheat. (duh!)

3) Save/Reload but claim it's not REALLY cheating. If you do that to avoid a loss then you already cheated and have tainted the results of your entire game. I don't care if one of the wild game bonus resources came to life and destroyed your entire tank army. It is CHEATING if you reload to avoid it. Claiming it is not makes you a cheater and a liar. I'd hate to play multiplayer with people who do this even if they do not do it in the MP game itself. If a person is going to get so bent out of shape about losing a battle just imagine how long their turns are going to take in multiplayer.

4) Claim to not cheat and/or boast about their 'success'. This also applies to those who use the editor to do something like massively increase the abilities of one race and then always play that race. Modding to give just yourself an advantage is cheating too. It's fine if you do that as long as you admit you have altered the conditions of the game to give yourself the advantage. Obviously if you do not discuss the game with anyone then you don't need to go around informing people you cheated. I just hate running into people that claim to be the worlds greatest at ____ (almost to the point of mocking those who don't instantly have the success they did) but conveniently leave out the fact that they cheated their way through it.

I have to retract my intial statement: "I have no problem with people who cheat in single player games of any sort." I have a problem with people who get puzzle type adventure games, buy the walkthrough, and follow it step by step. This is particularily true when they are 'too busy' with that game to go out and catch a movie or couple of drinks. I just don't understand the point of doing that.

[Moraelin]

Your points are excellent, Jerk. I'll aggree with every single one of them. (Mostly including the one about following a walkthrough step by step, in adventure games. The last adventure I've bought took under 5 hours to finish on the first try anyway, and with a walkthrough I highly suspect it would have ended like an hour and a half. Not quite the way to get the most out of your money. But then again, if someone gets their kicks that way, it's not really my problem.)

And yes, you won't see me debating the balance or AI of most single player FPS games or RPG's. (I'll almost invariably cheat the money -- and only the money -- in RPG's, so I don't have to redo random battles a gazillion times to buy the next set of armour and weapons. It's not like it's even possible to lose those random battles anyway, so they end up just boring.)

That said, it's worth noting that a lot of the winning strategies in games are in fact exploiting loopholes in the game system. Even if it's not using codes or any external programs, it's still abusing the program. (If in a more intelligent way.) E.g., attacking with some conscript unit that will do some damage and retreats, and then finishing them off with an elite unit just to get a leader and finish your wonders with him, IS exploiting the game system. E.g., planting forest and then cutting it down all around the city, to get tens of extra shields every other turn, was an even more obvious pre-patch exploit. E.g., making a row of tanks so the AI walks past them and takes ZOC damage before even reaching the city, is exploiting the AI. E.g., giving the AI a deal that it doesn't need at all (like right of passage when you're on the opposite tip of the continent, or saltpeter when it already has modern infantry), just because you know it's dumb enough to value it too much and that it will stay in an MPP with you for ever rather than lose the worthless resource, is again exploiting the AI. E.g., exploiting the alliance-happy pre-patch AI to make everyone fight everyone else, including their allies' allies, while you reap all the benefits, wasn't any better either.

Civ 3 shipped with enough such exploits to make cheat codes unnecessary, but in the end... does it really mean I didn't cheat? Maybe "I exploited the game" isn't any better than "I cheated", after all.

[Libertarian]

Oh and Libertarian,

You need to relax and get off that high horse. No one is better than you and you are no better than anyone else. If you remember that, then maybe your future posts won't sound so holier than thou and asinine. Could you sound any more degrading? Let's see you try...I know you can.

Well, lessee...

-----

There's this:

In speaking for myself on this matter, let me first assure you that I won't presume to impose my own moral standards on another man. I will follow the moral code I choose. And if another man chooses another, then his choice is between him and his God or conscience, so long as his choice in no way abridges mine.

And this:

I am neither your conscience nor your God.

And this:

As I already explained, I don't hold you to my standard. Nor do I think any less of you as a human being for having a different standard than I. And I do not think that the standard that I hold has any absolute superiority over the standard you hold.

And this:

The answer was given, with carefully emphasized disclaimers that those who do not cheat make no moral judgment as to the choice made by cheaters. The moral judgment, it was explained, was made about the principle, and not the people. It was painstakingly explained that we hold only ourselves, and not other men, to the principles that we choose.

-----

High horse? I think people on high horses are the ones too far away from the page to read its contents.

-----

Incidentally, it's quite easy to make pigs fly. Simply redefine "fly" to mean "wallow in mud".

[Elucidus]

Originally posted by Libertarian

[...closing door... ...washing hands...]

What happened to that? Hands still dirty?

As the sole steward of his unique moral journey, when he chooses to cheat, he chooses to lie to himself, to deprive himself of reality, and in so doing defrauds his own conscience.

Isn't that the point of a game?

Also, I don't believe cheating in a single player game makes one defraud his own conscience or any of that other crap.

He who cannot be trusted for the little things cannot be trusted for the greater things.

This is judging a person not a choice. Albeit, you are judging them based on a choice. In fact this is calling a person who cheats at a video game a liar and a person with absolutely no integrity what so ever. Which goes against this:

That said, I will judge, however I see fit, the moral code that he has chosen. Though I won't begrudge his choice, I might still condemn it. Not him — IT.

Also, that doesn’t even make any sense. You won’t look upon their choice with disapproval but you will declare it reprehensible, wrong, or evil. How can you say something is wrong without looking upon it with disapproval?

And this, this is crazy. You first group cheating at a video game with lying, stealing, and possibly fraud or grand larceny (breaching a contract). You called someone who cheats at a video game a liar, and a worthless person (as I’ve already stated). Again, attacking the person not his moral choice. You also act like cheating at one thing is the same as cheating at another, there are different levels of cheating, the ones you mentioned are a good example of this. Your comparisons are like saying if you’ve been in a fistfight before than you are a murderer. They are both violent acts, but one is more extreme than the other. Heck with that look on life, if you speed you are breaking the law. If you break the law then you are a criminal. If you are a criminal then you are capable of any criminal act. Cheating in a game is not like cheating on your taxes. The world is not black-and-white; there are a lot of grays in-between. These comparisons you make are called faulty logic, which one, I don’t know off-hand, maybe ad hominem. This is another faulty logic comparison-

The same character trait that dismisses any concern over cheating can as easily dismiss any concern at all. Whether he's cheating at a game, cheating on a test, or cheating to breach a contract, a man who cheats has, in my view, decided that he is worthless. I cannot trust such a man to judge me as anything greater than himself.

This, though…

In speaking for myself on this matter, let me first assure you that I won't presume to impose my own moral standards on another man. I will follow the moral code I choose. And if another man chooses another, then his choice is between him and his God or conscience, so long as his choice in no way abridges mine.

You presume no authority over anyone, yet you stand there and judge them harshly for cheating at a video game and make public your judgment. It seems you are so above any form of cheating you are talking down on everyone who has ever undertaken such a feat, regardless of the reason. This is "holier than thou" attitude, at least from my point of view. In fact the whole conversation is from a “high horse,” so to speak.

As I already explained, I don't hold you to my standard. Nor do I think any less of you as a human being for having a different standard than I. And I do not think that the standard that I hold has any absolute superiority over the standard you hold.

You don’t think any less of someone whom you hold to have no integrity what so ever? I find that hard to believe.

Incidentally, it's quite easy to make pigs fly. Simply redefine "fly" to mean "wallow in mud".

Hmm, that sounds like another faulty logic comparison.
Oh well, if you don’t like my definitions, you are welcome to look them up and see how accurate they are.

[Elucidus]

You know what? I will say just this. You say everything you quoted and I don’t deny that. My point is that you then proceed to judge and insult a person, because of his choice of how to play a video game. In fact, you question their very integrity. That is where I think of you as “holier than thou”. If you say to someone “I don’t judge you”, and then turn-around and judge them, that nullifies the non-judging statements. That is my point.

By the way you cannot question anything about a person without passing judgment on them first. Also in a conversation like this it is natural to judge people. I judged you based on this post, hence calling you “holier than thou”. I didn’t mean to judge you, I didn’t even realize I had judged you until now, but it happened. That is human nature. My personal judgment isn’t set in stone and after a few more intelligent conversations with you it will probably change, but again that is life.

Now, let me apologize if I insulted you or anyone else at all, as I didn’t mean for anything like that. I didn’t even mean to get defensive. I don’t think we are going to resolve our difference of opinion here, anyway, so I wish you the best of luck in you journeys through life. Talk at you later.

[Moraelin]

Hmm... Actually, after reading that stuff a couple more times, IF indeed he misunderstood the question to be "why don't you cheat?"... It IS possible that he was just trying to say that he couldn't trust HIMSELF if he as little as broke the rules in a SP game. And using the awfully wrong wording, but, hey, noone's perfect.

(Edit: And yes, I did find the wording to be quite insulting, too. Especially if you judge it as an answer to what was really asked. But again, I'm willing to admit that it was all a honest mistake.)

Either way, let's leave the whole matter be and stick to the topic for a change

[Pachabel]

To Cheat: to deprive of something valuable by the use of deceit or fraud.

Nuf said cause that certainly says it all.

[Elucidus]

What was the topic again? Oh yeah, why should cheating in a SP game with yourself even be called cheating? You're not really cheating anyone, you are just entertaining youself at no ones expense. I agree with that.

Although, we have to remember, we would have no bragging rights of beating a game if we cheated to do it.

Peace and have fun.

[down th' pub]

This is what Encarta had to say:

cheat [cheet ] verb (past cheat·ed, past participle cheat·ed, present participle cheat·ing, 3rd person present singular cheats)

1. transitive verb deceive somebody: to deceive or mislead somebody, especially for personal advantage

2. intransitive verb break rules to gain advantage: to break the rules in a game, examination, or contest, in an attempt to gain an unfair advantage

3. intransitive verb be unfaithful to somebody: to have a sexual relationship with somebody other than a spouse or regular sexual partner

4. transitive verb escape harm: to avoid harm or injury by luck or cunning

I thought 2 was particularly interesting.