Stream/Record proof cheat?

[Kradau]

oh lol and howd u know someone uploaded?

yah u kinda dont.

[GoldLeader]

Originally Posted by eCyler

There is no "normal detection". If a cheat gets bans due to the AC knowing what to look for, it's a detection. I don't care how you define words for yourself to suit your purposes in your own little made-up world. You yourself said uploading to EAC leads to a detection. Thus:
Gatorcheats has not been detected less than every other cheat on this platform.


Which you yourself, correctly I may add, equated to a detection before. At least stick to your bullshit. No use talking with a self-contradictory kid, I'm out

You got so salty over a reality. Point is no one (not me at least) said anything against your ESP cheat. Did they detect it twice by themselves? Then, no offense, you're a worse coder than GatorCheats, worse, not bad on absolute terms. That's all. LOL
I don't bend words for my purposes, a detection is a detection, how it happens is another thing, get over it sir.
Bye

Originally Posted by Kradau

oh lol and howd u know someone uploaded?

yah u kinda dont.

Depending on what's in the code, a dev can. That's all you reseller need to know.

[Kradau]

lmaoo no u cant know that. just if someone said that "ok i uploaded cheat" which happens often with pubg cheats when ***** sellers get greedy and fight each other .

Just too funny when you see those pics in QQ Groups "" or some **** and the file)))

cause its not like EAC will tell u. i mean yeh when they sigged the cheat you can know it is. But else? It can be also without someone uploading it. As said, this fact is unproven and i dont see a point defending it as well. Just say detected and done.

[eCyler]

Originally Posted by GoldLeader

Point is no one (not me at least) said anything against your ESP cheat.

Sadly, you did. By stating that Gator had less detections than me. Which, still, is not true

Spreading lies is just bad behavior. In case you forgot your own words, as you did before:

and has had less detections than any other public hacks out there

This is still a wrong statement. No idea how you still think you can defend this. You trying defies all logic and just proves how blind to reason you are, blinded by fandom or whatever it is that's driving you.

[GoldLeader]

Originally Posted by eCyler

Sadly, you did. By stating that Gator had less detections than me. Which, still, is not true

Spreading lies is just bad behavior. In case you forgot your own words, as you did before:

This is still a wrong statement. No idea how you still think you can defend this. You trying defies all logic and just proves how blind to reason you are, blinded by fandom or whatever it is that's driving you.

Man, for a coder you sure aren't too smart... Think whatever you want, but those are very different cases, and deep down you know it, but it hurts you to admit it 'cause that means you're code was worse... lol

Think whatever you want, I'm done with this. Have a good day 😅

[eCyler]

Originally Posted by GoldLeader

Think whatever you want, but those are very different cases

I'm sure the banned users care about the reason of the banwave

Anyway, still a factually false statement, no matter how you evade it

[GoldLeader]

Originally Posted by eCyler

I'm sure the banned users care about the reason of the banwave

Intelligent customers do, i'd rather stay on a provider who was detected for his code once instead of twice, no matter if i got banned twice like other providers.

Originally Posted by eCyler

Anyway, still a factually false statement, no matter how you evade it

Still not false, his cheat wasn't detected by EAC, was submitted to EAC. Then again, think whatever suits your ego the most.

[Kradau]

The only source you get your information from, Mr. GoldLeader is from your cheat provider. Does your cheat provider have reason to lie about detections to look better? Yes, very muchas.

idk why you take such things that some said once as granted.

[GoldLeader]

Originally Posted by Kradau

The only source you get your information from, Mr. GoldLeader is from your cheat provider. Does your cheat provider have reason to lie about detections to look better? Yes, very muchas.

idk why you take such things that some said once as granted.

A provider wouldn't ban 99 people and offer refunds to them unless he's pretty sure one of those is a spy. Would you refund at the very least 99x199 bucks unless you were sure? For the sake of math, it's almost 20k bucks.
No reason to lie about that issue, would be stupid to support a lie with a possible loss of 20k...

You go in any freakin post about Gator sayin he's a scammer, and yest he's always been more than willing to refund all those people, switch them or sort them any other possible way, while he could have simply kept the money and disappear, rebrand or whatever and would have won any paypal dispute LOL.
So much for a sammer huh?

[eCyler]

Originally Posted by GoldLeader

Intelligent customers do

Ah, no true scotsman, aye?

his cheat wasn't detected by EAC, was submitted to EAC

While a submission to EAC, in your own words, leads to:

It will get detected for sure, instantly.

I'm sorry, it's kinda hard to follow your logic here. So was it a detection or wasn't it? Which of your statements is the one I ought to take seriously? Or do you feel like introducing yet another self-contradicting assertion?

[GoldLeader]

Originally Posted by eCyler

Ah, no true scotsman, aye?

Never said i was scottish, i don't get the reference or whatever, don't care.

Originally Posted by eCyler

I'm sorry, it's kinda hard to follow your logic here. So was it a detection or wasn't it? Which of your statements is the one I ought to take seriously? Or do you feel like introducing yet another self-contradicting assertion?

You can play dumb however and for how long you want. I don't care either.
How a cheat gets detected is the important part. If EAC doesn't need any help to detect your cheat, because its protocols are strong enough to recognize harmful code, your code sucks. If EAC needs a third party to send him a copy of the software and cracks it, then provides to modify its protocols to find the harmful code, it's a pretty different story, and you can try tell people otherwise, but smart people won't fall for it. This will be my last reply, i've lost much time with your ego LOL.

[Kradau]

Originally Posted by GoldLeader

A provider wouldn't ban 99 people and offer refunds to them unless he's pretty sure one of those is a spy. Would you refund at the very least 99x199 bucks unless you were sure? For the sake of math, it's almost 20k bucks.
No reason to lie about that issue, would be stupid to support a lie with a possible loss of 20k...

You go in any freakin post about Gator sayin he's a scammer, and yest he's always been more than willing to refund all those people, switch them or sort them any other possible way, while he could have simply kept the money and disappear, rebrand or whatever and would have won any paypal dispute LOL.
So much for a sammer huh?

for the claim "offered refund", there was too much people complaining about the downtime .

[eCyler]

Originally Posted by GoldLeader

i don't get the reference or whatever, don't care.

Doesn't surprise me one bit. You should look it up, might prove useful in your, undoubtedly still very long, life

[GoldLeader]

Originally Posted by eCyler

Doesn't surprise me one bit. You should look it up, might prove useful in your, undoubtedly still very long, life

Looked it up, just out of curiosity, and it's not like i'm too young, it's just that i don't live there. Anyway, no fallacy here, if you think the two things are the same or that a serious person/customer will prefer a code that gets detected easier, then the fallacy is just in your ego/brain.

P.S. I'm well over 30yo, just saying.

[Kradau]

Ok, grandpa.