Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2010-07-28/Valve Anti-Cheat

Where is the dispute?
Talk:Valve_Anti-Cheat

Who is involved?

 * Tom Edwards (talk)
 * Vaypertrail (talk)

What is the dispute?
Vaypertrail (currently) claims that a primary source is being used to make interpretative statements, and also that primary sources recorded by unrecognised people cannot be used since there is "no way to verify" whether or not they have been edited. This is the edit in question.

What would you like to change about this?
Vaypertrail's argument has moved into subjective territory that cannot be objectively countered. I would like it to close with the help of a disinterested third party.

How do you think we can help?
I would like a third opinion on Vaypertrail's most recent claims, which are:

"You are analysing the primary source yourself, which is not straight forward information. In this case, there is no way to verify if the videos or chat logs are unedited as they are from unknown persons."

The video is here, the chatlog is here and here.

Mediator notes
I have analyzed the video and forums. The people in the forums seem to be discussing a valid issue, and the forum doesn't appear to be altered, however because we don't know who these people the sources are not reputable. If you are able to find out who created the discussion and the video, and if they were reputable then they are valid third party sources. I hope this helps. --Alpha Quadrant (talk) 22:50, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

Discussion
I'm not a mediator, I was just looking through the cases and I agree with Tom Edwards, of course you can tell that it's real. It obviously hasn't been edited and furthermore, there are posts about it on the valve forums which have people discussing it as a real issue. In my opinion, Vaypertrail is being unnecessarily overly uptight. --Javsav (talk) 02:39, 1 September 2010 (UTC)