We could do with a new game

Stubble · Post by **Stubble** » Fri Aug 21, 2015 7:44 pm

May I ask how you are so confident?

cp999 · Post by **cp999** » Fri Aug 21, 2015 9:13 pm

cool wrote:Games back on menus , that rings a key , oops I mean a bell

Stubble wrote:I see that all just falling under an umbrella of pragmatism. Whilst it is great to be able to hold your moral bar a little higher and say that you would never do that, if that could have made you some cash - for the amount of real world risk involved, it would've been worth it.

Lets face it, from an outside point of view, they probably think you're doing something anyway. It is always the results that breed the suspicion.

"Pragmatism" - yes, but I would have thought another pragmatic view would be, ignoring any moral questions, people who have been reasonably successful with either fruits or quizzes have acquired a certain level of assets, and if you were caught on CCTV or by the landlord doing something as dubious as that, he calls Plod and default assumption is going to be that you acquired your assets in that manner or some other dubious way. I don't think that's a very clever risk to take, relatively small amount of cash involved in the long term compared to the possible consequences.

Stubble · Post by **Stubble** » Fri Aug 21, 2015 10:00 pm

I'm sorry to disagree, not in principle: just from my experience. In a perfect world we would maybe see this sort of thing happening, but it doesn't.

People have been caught drilling into machines, with the profits of their crimes on their persons on in their car - not yet converted to property or even deposited in the bank: even if they are prosecuted they receive that money back. It's ridiculous, but the proceeds of crime legislation are rarely used for what is regarded as petty amounts.

Yes, you can choose to stay within your own moral quadrant; and I certainly do. However, I do so knowing that I am costing myself money, and that the real risks involved are very small.

Stubble · Post by **Stubble** » Fri Aug 21, 2015 10:04 pm

From a legal standpoint: there certainly isn't a law which directly relates to Power Abuse of gaming machines. In order for it to be established that this act is definitely criminal, I would suggest that it would have to be proven that the defendant knew that this would advantage them. Given that this would involve the company concerned admitting that their security is so easily beaten, I find it unlikely that enough evidence could be brought forward to show that was the case. I would suggest that we do not confuse what is immoral with what is illegal. The two things are quite different.

Topical2009 · Post by **Topical2009** » Fri Aug 21, 2015 10:44 pm

To return momentarily to the start of this thread, I actually played the new version of Pub Quiz this week - you remember, the new version which is Part 1 of the process which is going to bring back the glory days to the machining industry. And who wouldn't be drawn by the promise of a small tag on the old logo saying "NEW"? Well, I hate to dismiss the new dawn out of hand, but blimey, "underwhelming" doesn't even begin to describe the experience. Maybe real experts can tell a difference in the questions, but I certainly couldn't. I wait with interest to see whether this results in Joe Public crowding round the Paragon once more (you can probably guess what result I'm expecting). Bring on Part 2!

quizard · Post by **quizard** » Fri Aug 21, 2015 11:26 pm

Stubble wrote:From a legal standpoint: there certainly isn't a law which directly relates to Power Abuse of gaming machines. In order for it to be established that this act is definitely criminal, I would suggest that it would have to be proven that the defendant knew that this would advantage them. Given that this would involve the company concerned admitting that their security is so easily beaten, I find it unlikely that enough evidence could be brought forward to show that was the case. I would suggest that we do not confuse what is immoral with what is illegal. The two things are quite different.

So if you found you could steal goods from a vending machine by switching it off/on you would consider that perfectly legal and the owners own fault for have such an insecure machine? LOL

If you physically interfere with the normal function of gaming machine to fraudulently make a financial gain you are committing an offence. This is covered by the general law on theft and fraud. There doesn't need to be a specific law for this particular modus operandi. And simply because something is easy to do, and difficult to prove in court does not make it legal. We all know very well what the motivation of people who do it is. You have gotten away with it in the past and will continue to get away with it in future, but please spare us the fantasy that it is anything other than criminal behaviour.

muddle · Post by **muddle** » Sat Aug 22, 2015 12:53 am

Yes,anyway as I was saying,we need a new game.We've obviously all got too much time on our hands if we can spend so much time composing long posts about the moralities,legalities and possible consequences of various actions! Interesting stuff though:I have to say I can't recall ever being aware of an 'emptier' for quizzies,although my memory could be failing me,which would be a little worrying.I'm defining 'emptier' here as a method of potting all the cash other than becoming so good at a game that you can keep on winning,or a game not being hard enough in the first place.Thinking about it,I suppose there were a couple of games in the past that had a bug allowed you to play for free (although one of them,TOTP2 I think,was so tediously slow to win on I stopped making use of it).Oh,and there was the Connect 4 sequence,I suppose you could call that an emptier.Ok,my memory was failing me lol.And I did make use of the return to a fiver jackpot on the early version of Pointless.But apart from all those examples.... I can understand cp keeping totally schtumm about anything he'd discovered,I would do the same.But The Chase has gone now,so you can spill the beans lol.
As regards Topical's comments on 'new' Pub Quiz,that's what I think too.But to end on a positive note,I've found 4 pubs this week that have put a quizzy back in,and amazingly,2 that have put a second one in.Obviously that nowhere near negates the number I've found missing this last year or so,but it's a little something.

bubbles · Post by **bubbles** » Sat Aug 22, 2015 8:23 am

why don't you quizzers get a team together and try to get on eggheads?! maybe call yourselves "the doom and gloom merchants"?!

how do you lot tend to do on quiz shows on tv, quite often go the whole program knowing almost every answer?

cool · Post by **cool** » Sat Aug 22, 2015 8:57 am

Getting a team of SWP players together foor a quiz show, that would be pointless. 3 people who at times were pro's formed part of a team to take on the eggheads and failed.

Stubble · Post by **Stubble** » Sat Aug 22, 2015 9:05 am

quizard wrote:So if you found you could steal goods from a vending machine by switching it off/on you would consider that perfectly legal and the owners own fault for have such an insecure machine? LOL

If you physically interfere with the normal function of gaming machine to fraudulently make a financial gain you are committing an offence. This is covered by the general law on theft and fraud. There doesn't need to be a specific law for this particular modus operandi. And simply because something is easy to do, and difficult to prove in court does not make it legal. We all know very well what the motivation of people who do it is. You have gotten away with it in the past and will continue to get away with it in future, but please spare us the fantasy that it is anything other than criminal behaviour.

Yes you are quite right, but having seen this road trodden before, the problem comes in proving that you switching it off and on had anything to do with you then winning. You must remember that these games are MADE for financial loss/gain, and to the layman proving what could/should happen in any given scenario would be almost impossible. I suppose you could decompile the software, or ask for the source code to be made available to show a fraud was taking place: but this would involve the company itself and they will be unwilling to participate.

You seem to be taking personal offence at what is just an observation on how the law deals with these situations. I am not justifying this behaviour, I am just telling you how these things go down once they are reffered to the police. People get away with this stuff; and they get away with far worse stuff. It's just the way the law works in this country!

cp999 · Post by **cp999** » Sat Aug 22, 2015 9:38 am

Hmm, possible that a situation might arise in which an enterprising policeman might think of getting CCTV from all nearby pubs with the same machine, and hey presto, same person has been plugging in those bars, and with the same result. That would at least fashion a reasonable inference that there was some intent/motivation/knowledge in the action. Possible, but unlikely.. experience suggests some of Her Majesty's Constabulary aren't terribly bright.

Stubble wrote: Yes, you can choose to stay within your own moral quadrant; and I certainly do. However, I do so knowing that I am costing myself money, and that the real risks involved are very small.

Agreed, this is my position also.

cp999 · Post by **cp999** » Sat Aug 22, 2015 9:42 am

muddle wrote:I'm defining 'emptier' here as a method of potting all the cash other than becoming so good at a game that you can keep on winning,or a game not being hard enough in the first place.

I do include getting "too good" at a game, because it reduces the game to the point where winning virtually every game and thus emptying it is as natural as walking. However, there's also other cases, where all you have to be is reasonably good at a game and that takes you so far, but a bit of lateral thinking provides scope to go miles further.

muddle · Post by **muddle** » Sat Aug 22, 2015 10:22 pm

cp999 wrote:I do include getting "too good" at a game, because it reduces the game to the point where winning virtually every game and thus emptying it is as natural as walking. However, there's also other cases, where all you have to be is reasonably good at a game and that takes you so far, but a bit of lateral thinking provides scope to go miles further.

Agreed - I was going to question what you meant by lateral thinking,but when I did a bit of thinking myself,I realised there's been a few games over the years where,combined with being reasonably good,tactics have been useful.

cool · Post by **cool** » Sat Aug 22, 2015 10:32 pm

I dont think our morality is a constant , the greater the desperation the lower the morality although there will always be greedy bastards around.......

Filched from one of my few remaining books 'Morality is a private and costly luxury' H B Adams.

If it had meant that I didnt have to go back to having a mainstream job I would probably succumbed to some skullduggery , Ive just been fortunate.

bubbles · Post by **bubbles** » Sun Aug 23, 2015 12:25 am

anyone got any videos showing their prowess on quizzies? i'm a little intrigued to see something impressive?!