I think modifying your game is also cheating but not all. Removing bushes, transparent walls, removing weather effects, in my oppinion is.
But i can see how modifying colours / crosshairs or boosting up sounds would help visual / hearing impaired users, in acceptable proportions. Or simply to compensate and old game, by adding newer graphics for those that care about cosmetics. But this is my opinion based on thinking further then just myself.
By presenting the extremes in the poll it ends up being very misleading.
The opposite:
In example
http://forum.melee.org/beginner's-help-and-guides/mods-compatible-with-crpg-%28updated-sticky%29/ complete with making horses sound louder etc.
A dedicated thread updated hardly a year ago for compatible mods for crpg. Upvoted many times, and been given good reviews by a couple of admins... not a single complaint. And even stickied the post.
Either make a very straight forward list, of what is and what is not "cheating" and present it to the donkey for a thumbs up. Or stop accusing/blaming people for "cheating" since they have modified files.
You don't need someone to tell you when something is morally wrong. Modifying game files that result in an ingame advantage is morally/ethically scummy. It doesn't need someone to tell you that and have it written in the rules. Not having it in the rules sucks, but "common sense" rule should be enough. There are unwritten rules everywhere in life. You can break them, but you don't because you know its not right.
If everyone is on the same page more or less though game mods are fine. If we agree X is fine and people adopt it as the norm, I don't see a problem with that
So why wasnt the "common sense" rule applied to the thread i linked, when it created and updated several times? Instead it was praised by many players /admins and stickied. If it was against the "common sense" rule, then i believe action would have been taken back then. You think the admins/devs totally missed out on "morally/ehtically scummy wrong" about this, or simply didnt think it was?
Its easy to use you're interpetation of the "common sense" rule in attempt to give you're statement more leverage, and ontop of that, it is only conflicting with the current fact presented.
*edit* nor does excessive typing in some fancy colour, for whatever reason.