What's the concept exactly? A trusted hacker put a hack, that means this hack can be trusted in terms of everything; that it works, that it will do what it says, that the hacker will respond to any issues (except extremely dumb ones if he doesn't want to), etc?

That being or not the concept, I'm not really too sure if this will be practical, I mean, I don't know if people even care that one person is "Trusted" in here or not, gotta make a survey about that, but even so I don't think this will really make much difference except maybe a very minority of people instantly vote up than down.

BINGO.

We'll be venturing down a scary path, and no amount of checks nor security can prevent everything.  I mean, SSL itself became vulnerable, so wtf.

This would be a small enough change that it would be quick and easy to implement, and it would be prior to scripting being available, which would give users time to adjust.

the trainer checks all hacks before application. The system has caught many mistakes made by some of our most valued members.

Many hacks are falsely voted down by the trainer automatically as well.

Such as if the trainer glitches out or gets more than one instance of it run.

Or if the hack was already applied and they try to apply it again => instant false downvote.

Speaking of: That flagged hacks banner is getting rather annoying. hacks are falsely flagged a lot because of the above mentioned conditions, yet the hacks still work perfectly fine. Or flagged because the user just doesn't know how to read and enables more than one hack that hacks the same values and is clearly marked to disable hack x and hack y when using hack z.


Though a way to prevent that would be to run checks for if hacks are already active.
One of my private trainers I made for certain people I encorporated a simple check to see if the hack is already active or not by doing a scan for the modified value first in an if statement. if modified value is found > hack already active. else scan for original value, if found > change to modified value. else if scan returns null > value not found, either game isn't open or game was patched.


Also a way to set conditions for the hack in the trainer...

example: only allow 1 of these 3 hacks to be checked at a time and allow the hack submitter to select which hacks can only be allowed 1 at a time.

Just some ideas for the content kitty :)