Viewing Thread:
"Vhayste - cheating?"

I wrote a very long walkthrough recently (which hasnt been posted yet) and was looking through the latest walkthrough entries. Vhayste has blatantly copied and pasted about 6 walkthroughs. I know I cant really talk, but just double checking that copying and pasting a walkthrough is cheating. Can someone please confirm that he is?

Ok. Honestly didnt mean it to look like that....just shows how intelligent you are :-)

Next time I will do this.
Hope to write another bfv walkthrough like this soon.

Really you should just put in your walkthrough that you have used information from somewhere and include a link, that way it doesn't just look like you have ripped off more things and hoped to get away with it.

Chippxero wrote:
> I didn't see this thread if i had i would have posted this
> earlier.
>
> originally i was going to let the staffies deal with this, but i
> think he has some cheek posting this thread when he has been
> ripping off other sites every time.
>
> Nickgreens latest walkthrough has a fair amount of information
> copied and pasted from the offical site.
>
> I did report it to the staffies but i guess they let him get
> away with it. Although personally i think if any of the
> walkthrough isn't yours it should be able to win.
>
>
> nick greens walkthrough
>
> Offical
> site
>
> Check the bottom of his walkthrough and the bottom of the
> official page. there are parts stolen most of the way through
> it.
>
> As for Vhayste he can't win anyway as he lives in the
> Philippines.



Thanks for spotting this, but I know an awful lot about this game. Honestly =D I did refer to the official website for help with the last few weapons only because I didnt know what else to put (both sets of weapons e.g. assault, do the same sort of job on both teams and so I didnt want to write the same thing over and over)

Sibs wrote:
> Think Chip meant this (there were two 'http://'s in his link):
>
> click
> here

Congrats dude, I saw your name and you're a winner. :)

Thanks for clearing things up guys, specially to you, sir Spoonbeast. Im really afraid that such accusations can hurt my hard earned reputation and I humbly apologise if what I did actually created such commotion.

But please let me just post here like I normally would on other sites; Im not after the prize and Im sure Im not eligible anyway. I just wanted to share my knowledge. :)

Kawada: I haven't anything got anything yet and I don't expect anything, anyway. Sorry buddy ;)

Well it was last week, so it shouldn't have been sent yet. Better send another email and fast. Better still plaster it all over the website board or in the stickys.

spoonbeast wrote:
> your link doesn't work.

ops, yeah fixed it now.

personally i just think it's bad that considering how long a walkthrough seems to take to get on the site in the first place, staffies aren't checking that they have been copied, and then they are awarding GADs to ones that are.

I've only ever posted like two walkthroughs and I have to agree a lot of work goes into them. My Hitman:Blood Money one took forever and a day to write and I was absolutely thrilled that it was awarded a GAD. I sympathise with everyone who spends the age to write them only to find they're work appearing elsewhere. Vhayste, basically that's why some people are jumpy here when finding work. I believe that you worked hard and I congratulate you on any prizes win with them. Somehow, £30 isn't quite enough for the immense amount of work - but it's better than a poke in the eye. I'm grateful for anything really :D

As I'm a member here, I refuse to allow it appear anywhere else than on freeola (see, I love this place), without prior consent. If it does appear, I could imagine things getting nasty - especially if people were benefitting off it in a monetary (sp) sense.

And I would like to say thank-you to a Mr Whitcombe who left me feedback from the Hitman walkthrough. Actually made my day that I helped somebody out and they took the time to tell me so, as well as give some alternative methods. Cheers!

Think Chip meant this (there were two 'http://'s in his link):

click here

your link doesn't work.