
King_Herpes wrote:Exactly why you keep your trap shut and keep your eyes on your own games. People get way too involved in other players affairs, fabricate large piles of paranoid nonsense and then other people get reprimanded for no particular reason. My brother had nothing to do with this crud Bruce. Nice work my ass.
Night Strike wrote:If you have a complaint with your personal block, open an e-ticket. Posting here won't help you become unblocked.
king achilles wrote:In this situation, playing in team games where you know each other's password, or you know your teammate's password is too much of a convenience and could also mean sharing of accounts. With this knowledge that you know all these passwords, the temptation of playing team games or even non team games with these accounts, whether the real owners are aware of what you already know or not, could also mean that you could log in to these accounts at any time and play in two or more accounts at the same time in one or several games, thus the purpose was already turned into gaining a tactical advantage and no longer just for avoiding missing turns.
Therefore, I have no choice but to put a block on these accounts mentioned below, including yours, because of your access to them. These blocks may also involve other accounts as well.
All may appeal through the e-Ticket and we shall deal with it individually. If there are still accounts not mentioned below, I suggest that you change your password and avoid using someone to babysit your account who already has access to a large number of other accounts.
Are you aware of the fact that instead of blocking Max's access to their accounts, they did not just block Max playing with them, but blocked all of them from playing eachother? Sure, Max and Paddy playing together is obviously prone for abuse, but why shouldn't for instance KingOfGods and 300spartans be able to play against or with eachother? Clearly they went over the top because there are no features in place to restrict Max to his own account.Night Strike wrote:KA pretty clearly put it in his post if people had read it. Bolded for emphasis.
king achilles wrote:In this situation, playing in team games where you know each other's password, or you know your teammate's password is too much of a convenience and could also mean sharing of accounts. With this knowledge that you know all these passwords, the temptation of playing team games or even non team games with these accounts, whether the real owners are aware of what you already know or not, could also mean that you could log in to these accounts at any time and play in two or more accounts at the same time in one or several games, thus the purpose was already turned into gaining a tactical advantage and no longer just for avoiding missing turns.
Therefore, I have no choice but to put a block on these accounts mentioned below, including yours, because of your access to them. These blocks may also involve other accounts as well.
All may appeal through the e-Ticket and we shall deal with it individually. If there are still accounts not mentioned below, I suggest that you change your password and avoid using someone to babysit your account who already has access to a large number of other accounts.
lancehoch wrote:Frop, the reason that the block was put into place for all the accounts was that max had the ability to play a team game for two other accounts at the same time thereby abusing the account sitting rules.
I beg to differ, because I'm slowly running out of facepalm pics. You just earned yourself another one.Night Strike wrote:Frop, I'm pretty sure access couldn't be blocked for max to access those accounts without Busting them. But that would have caused even bigger problems.
And mods get things better than most of you realize.
Don't you think an option to prevent babysitting abuse like that should be inherent to the site, instead of wasting precious time and effort on failed options like the medals and the ratings? Now all the inadvertently abused players have to suffer the consequences for one man's actions and the fact that the service they paid for isn't provided. Also, those aren't random pictures, they represent my thoughts and emotions.Night Strike wrote:Frop, the other players were placed on blocks with each other because maxatstuy has access to their passwords. Therefore, he could put two of those players into a game with each other to take points off someone else.
Also, there's not a need for random pictures in this thread.
each player is responsible for their own accounts. If they give their passwords to a player that abuses the rules than they had nobody but themselves to blame. The block on all players is legit especially when I got a good feeling this was a group effort, not just a single player. I am still waiting to see which parties were involved because I dont think it was an isolated incident. Perhaps not all of them, but probably half of them.Frop wrote:Don't you think an option to prevent babysitting abuse like that should be inherent to the site, instead of wasting precious time and effort on failed options like the medals and the ratings? Now all the inadvertently abused players have to suffer the consequences for one man's actions and the fact that the service they paid for isn't provided. Also, those aren't random pictures, they represent my thoughts and emotions.Night Strike wrote:Frop, the other players were placed on blocks with each other because maxatstuy has access to their passwords. Therefore, he could put two of those players into a game with each other to take points off someone else.
Also, there's not a need for random pictures in this thread.
If that's the case they should inform us accordingly and not let Max take the dive alone.JOHNNYROCKET24 wrote:each player is responsible for their own accounts. If they give their passwords to a player that abuses the rules than they had nobody but themselves to blame. The block on all players is legit especially when I got a good feeling this was a group effort, not just a single player. I am still waiting to see which parties were involved because I dont think it was an isolated incident. Perhaps not all of them, but probably half of them.Frop wrote:Don't you think an option to prevent babysitting abuse like that should be inherent to the site, instead of wasting precious time and effort on failed options like the medals and the ratings? Now all the inadvertently abused players have to suffer the consequences for one man's actions and the fact that the service they paid for isn't provided. Also, those aren't random pictures, they represent my thoughts and emotions.Night Strike wrote:Frop, the other players were placed on blocks with each other because maxatstuy has access to their passwords. Therefore, he could put two of those players into a game with each other to take points off someone else.
Also, there's not a need for random pictures in this thread.

sounds like you did everything correctly. Hopefully they will unblock your account for you if the information you provided is accurate. I would scan your IP and if I dint see you making moves for another account than I would unblock you but thats not in power.Prankcall wrote:JR you are possibly the biggest conspiracy theorist out there.I asked Max to finish 1 speed game not take any of my turns just finish that 1 doubles speed game.As soon as I logged back on I changed my account password not for fear Max might abuse it but because I am slightly paranoid myself.So him finishing that one game for me qualified me for a block.How great this site is.Guaranteed to make me keep buying premium
Well lock it then!!!!!lancehoch wrote:As has been previously stated more than once in this thread, if you disagree with the ruling, open an eticket. Nothing will be handled by posting in this thread. When the etickets have been closed you can post your results a mod may post all of the results. But again, nothing posted in this thread will affect the ruling.
GTFO Hulmey, we'll discuss the verdict as we see fit. Go have one of your own threads locked.hulmey wrote:Well lock it then!!!!!lancehoch wrote:As has been previously stated more than once in this thread, if you disagree with the ruling, open an eticket. Nothing will be handled by posting in this thread. When the etickets have been closed you can post your results a mod may post all of the results. But again, nothing posted in this thread will affect the ruling.
Forum rulesFrop wrote:GTFO Hulmey, we'll discuss the verdict as we see fit. Go have one of your own threads locked.hulmey wrote:Well lock it then!!!!!lancehoch wrote:As has been previously stated more than once in this thread, if you disagree with the ruling, open an eticket. Nothing will be handled by posting in this thread. When the etickets have been closed you can post your results a mod may post all of the results. But again, nothing posted in this thread will affect the ruling.