[foal]

It's about risk vs reward. If the risk for cheating or allowing cheating is small (i.e. the consequences not particularly significant) then the deterrent is also small (scruples not taken into account).

I didn't answer your question, because it made no sense within the context of the discussion.

[ QUOTE ]
Do you honestly think AP doesn't regret this? Really, do you think they're sitting there saying "Ha, well that worked out awesome guys, let's wait it out a little bit and then bust out the super user accounts again!"

[/ QUOTE ]
I never claimed AP was happy that they got caught. Nor did anyone else. You're attacking a straw man.

Similarly:

[ QUOTE ]
I don't really see what AP has "gained" from this

[/ QUOTE ]
No one is claiming AP gained from this. It's weird that you put "gained" in quotes. Who are you quoting?


[ QUOTE ]
If there's a built in incentive against cheating, even if mild, then there's never a rational reason to cheat.

[/ QUOTE ]
[img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img] This is completely false.

[ QUOTE ]
(as long as the bad outweighs the good,)

[/ QUOTE ]
Bingo. That's why the incentives against cheating cannot be merely mild, they must be strong enough to outweigh the profits that cheating can bring.