If people want to cheat in this tournament, let them. They're lamers, and will only prove themselves to be more so when they get caught and DQ'ed. I'm sick of this debate, no offense to anyone... I will state here and now that ALL of my scores are, and, if I choose to play, will be 100% legal; and I give my word to that effect. If I want to break a world record, I will do so on the actual machine. I'm only here to have fun and pit myself against the other great gamers of the world. Anyone cheating on MAME at MARP is only kidding themselves, because as a community, we know who's playing fair and who isn't--and we know who's scores are earned and who's aren't. You aren't fooling anyone by cheating, and when MAMEnet rolls around, we'll see very quickly who will and won't be welcome here anymore.

Sincerely, Q.T.Quazar

-- Q.T.Quazar (qan@home.com), October 15, 1999

Answers

I'll vote for what QT said. :)

-- Dave Kaupp (info@kaupp.cx), October 15, 1999.

I appreciate the spirit of Q.T.Quasar's comments, but if cheating is not fought it eventually drowns out the sincere efforts. Yes, it's imossible (or very nearly so) to get rid of all methods, but we have to stomp out what we can. A "champion editon" of MAME - even an imperfect one - is a neccesity.

Aqua

-- Aquatarkus (aquatarkus@digicron.com), October 15, 1999.

I agree with Aqua. Also since several of the cheating methods are currently undetectable I challenge QT's claim that "we know who's playing fair and who isn't". So you can't really know who you are pitting yourself against. I'm not sure how this MAMEnet will work when it rolls around but if it can solve some of these problems I'm all for it.

-- Tim Morrow (tjmorrow@bigpond.com), October 16, 1999.

I was under the impression that the latest build of MAMEnet (as available from Arcade@Home) already worked. I was actually in a pretty advanced stage of planning to play some games with someone using MAMEnet soon. Doesn't it work yet? Has anybody tried it? Or does anybody want to play some games with me using it? :-)

Ben Jos.

-- Ben Jos Walbeehm (walbeehm@walbeehm.com), October 16, 1999.