Such regulation should ideally be independent, but unfortunately it rarely is truly independent which means that sometimes things may get suppressed when perhaps they should not be and visa versa.It is already regulated very heavily.
The issue is not just with cheats, and cheats rely on loop holes and bugs in the main - fix those and the cheats would stop working. Unfortunately, it is not as easy as that in all cases.Too much time and hassle, just bin the cheats by automated processes wherever possible.
Automated detection tools are not necessarily infallible, but if you can detect the cheat then you should be able to fix the issues that allow cheating to occur.
Naming and shaming is never fine, there is no excuse for it. For starters, the person engaging in namshaming (for short) may be exasperating a problem rather than being part of the solution.Naming and shaming is fine anywhere other than here except when its malicious. The cheats are the problem not talking about them.
As for cheating, if you know of an actual means of cheating then it should be reported to FD essentially as a bug. No software developer is infallible, and it is near impossible to 100% guarantee that any software system of sufficient complexity is without bugs. If you "suspect" an individual of cheating, then there is a means for reporting them without engaging in namshaming.
This particular thread is about griefing though, and suspected griefers should be reported - the same goes for any observed suspected EULA/ToS breach.
Last edited: