Possible solution to the cheating issue. 2 types of accounts

+1 :+1:


That would be a good solution, “my game” would let them ride solo on their own so they can do 315w / 5.2w/kg for 750km like the user I flagged yesterday.

These kinds of fake riders are a disincentive.

I don’t see how anyone could be satisfied with a fake 40 or 45min time on ADZ. Yes you got the time but you still know it’s fake and you don’t have the ability to do it for real.


I’m old enough to have played early ‘death match’ video games in the days of Duke Nukem and early Jedi Knight games. There were ‘god mode’ cheats that let you run around invincible with unlimited ammo and blah blah. And while I never understood why you’d want to do that, so long as people weren’t trying to use those cheats in multi-player games, there wasn’t a problem. So a completely isolated sandbox Zwift where you could plug in whatever weight you wanted, plug in a set wattage and just sit back on your bike and watch your avatar zip around, where you could fly, sprout bat wings, whatever–make it like a bike-based Second Life, lol. That would be fine by me. Just so long as none of that could be brought over to the shared Zwift game world with the rest of us.

Sounds like fan watching a rider with elite watts while drinking beer on the sofa after your ride

Right? But if that’s what people want–making all of this easier and simultaneously less rewarding, I wouldn’t have a problem with it.

I would absolutely prioritize this as way below just about anything else in Feature Requests, including the better skin color for bald people request and my Silly Walk request. But I’d be okay with it eventually happening :slight_smile:

IDKFA and IDDQD for the win!

And no, I don’t have grey hairs, not yet. :wink:


Any chance of a name related to that soft drink some of us like so much ? :wink:
If yes i flagged and reported “it” multiple times…. Zwift just don’t care :roll_eyes:


You mean like Coca-Cola, yes! I do drink far too much of that.

I just checked my screenshot and confirmed it was who you suspected:

These folk should be booted out as far away as possible.

Riding 19 hours with still 325w, he’d win the TDF on his own!

1 Like


1 Like

Yep Cola is what we drink… :wink:

It’s just stupid, spending crazy amounts of money and time on riding ( Zwift ), trying to be serious about things, I feel slightly stupid seeing something like this happen constantly without Zwift taking action :thinking:

It’s not like I requires much code to implement an auto detection of something like this :roll_eyes:



Would the more “gamified” rides still upload to strava? I would think not otherwise the strava segments would get all messed up. But then if the gamified rides don’t upload to strava … did they really happen? :slight_smile:

1 Like

In fairness, a lot of the Strava segments are are already messed up, due to the longstanding bug of high speeds in small meetups where keep riders together have been checked.

I guess I’m not close enough to the top of any of them that I would have noticed :slight_smile:

1 Like

Even without those bugs, there are going to be a lot of weird placements on Strava due to Keep Together functioning properly. I’ve been halfway up a KQOM multiple times in the past and had the tail end of a Keep Together group come shooting past me as they got pulled along to keep up with the main bunch that was now speeding down the backside. I don’t much care, Keep Together is a great tool and Strava leaderboards don’t mean much to me. But that happens all the time on shorter climbs (Legsnapper, for example)

So there is already lots of cheating whether it’s intentional or the data sent to Strava from keep together rides? Sounds like all the arguments against a game account are, as I said pointless. It’s already happening so having two different type of accounts would basically change nothing in game for those not interested in racing. If you don’t like cheaters then don’t play in the game world. There would be cheaters and they can do what ever that want. If you don’t like that then use a competitive account. Allowing zwift the ability to monitor those accounts that value fair play and ignore the rest.

1 Like

Makes about as much sense as anything Palahniuk actually wrote. (edit to add the intended :smiley:)

I’m just not a big Palahniuk fan. And no offense to those who are (and your post was good too, I should have included a smiley in my reply :slight_smile:). I just don’t like his stuff. It reads as ‘fake deep’ to me, like he’s throwing a bunch of vague nihilism or overreaching skepticism at the wall and seeing what sticks. ‘Everything is an illusion’ can make some amount of sense (at least internally) when it’s supported by a framework like Hindu metaphysics, but it seems more like Chuck is taking something more like Cartesian skepticism and moving past the ‘we can’t know’ to ‘I do know, and what I know is that it’s all fake’. It seems to me like Palahniuk’s fans make more sense than he himself makes–they read his stuff, which to me comes across as shallow, and they insert ideas into it that he himself didn’t have.

But I don’t like Tarantino’s work all that much either, for some of the same reasons. They both come across as the kids who are smoking in the bathroom to try to seem cool. I actually think Tarantino is himself pretty funny, and I greatly appreciate his love of filmmaking as an art form. Filmmaking, real filmmaking where people are trying to do more than just blow up fast cars, doesn’t have much stronger of a supporter than Tarantino. I just don’t like a lot of his own stuff all that much. I don’t ‘hate’ it, and I see why other people like it, I just don’t. Some of my good college friends were Tarantino fans, and Palahniuk fans too, and we’d often sit down over beer and try to convince each other of how terrible/great they both were :smiley:

1 Like

I’m not sure there’s a hard line between Schopenhauer’s stuff and the Wachowskis. I liked the first Matrix movie, but the general premise is nothing you can’t trace back to Plato (to whom everything else in philosophy is ‘a footnote’, at least according to Whitehead), by way of Descartes most famously, but through plenty of others too, including Kant. There is a note of ‘hopeless suffering’ in those movies that Schopenhauer might have appreciated, but it’s counteracted by the very notion in the films that there might be some way out of it. And that way out in the movies isn’t art and beauty, as Schopenhauer would claim. It’s leather and guns :slight_smile:

The ‘real world’ in the Matrix is absolutely knowable in a way that Schopenhauer’s noumena is not. His noumena was knowable to us, but only indirectly. Had the Wachowskis done what they should have done and have everyone, machines included, realize that they can’t know whatever the ‘ultimate real world’ is, and then they all gave up and started painting and making music together, Agent Smith would likely just have turned into Schopenhauer himself and headed to the nearest rave. But the sequels just disappointed on any level other than shoot-em-up.

Zwift is a mild analogy for the phenomena-noumena distinction, but no one is separated from the non-zwift world around them when we’re zwifting. It’s not any different in that way than playing Super Mario Brothers. To be clear I do think that our minds extend beyond our bodies–part of my mind is in the phone sitting next to me right now, in that it holds memories for me, and can be used for perceptive purposes. But I’m not relocating the bulk of my mind anywhere when I play zwift. And if by questioning realism you’re talking about skepticism of the external world, you don’t need zwift for that, and it doesn’t even help. Just read Descartes Meditations again. Zwift isn’t particularly special in an interesting metaphysical sense.

This is off topic. Time to close this one.