Joana D,Arq & jbomberman [Warned]

[Silent Hysteria]

Accused:
[player]Joana D,Arq[/player]
[player]jbomberman[/player]

The accused are suspected of:
Conducting Secret Diplomacy

Game number(s):
Game 4018970

Comments:
Most of the game they were strictly speaking another language. Now this would not have bothered me at all except for the fact that neither one of them were defending against each other. To me this does not add up. I personally just hope I am being paranoid, but people cheat.

EVIDENCE:
After being confronted in game this was the response of [player]Joana D,Arq[/player]:
2009-01-23 11:31:05 - Joana D,Arq: lolol dont be like that !!... we were joking. came on we have to had some vantage gived by the language dont you think??
2009-01-23 11:34:00 - Joana D,Arq: but if we say that we dont do it any more, we meet
2009-01-23 11:38:37 - Joana D,Arq: and besides, it is easy to discover what we said
2009-01-23 11:38:49 - Joana D,Arq: just google it

[SirSebstar]

Its real simple really.
2009-01-16 12:11:37 - Joana D,Arq: rosinha vamo-nos aliar por agora? o k dizes?
This is a request for an alliance. Since its in a foreign language that not everybody knows, its a clear violation of the CC rules.

[Silent Hysteria]

I thought that it was but wasn't really sure.

Thank you for clarifying it. I appreciate it.

[SirSebstar]

np

[Silent Hysteria]

Evidence added to original post.

[Silent Hysteria]

Anyone have any info on the status of this?

[SirSebstar]

It is not closed so you will have to give the hunters some time. It's generally busy,, but they will get to this case. Ofcourse there might be some difficulty. Secret Alliances are tricky. Since the case is not closed and no hunter has sproken, you can assume they will, eventually. Give it a week more..

[Silent Hysteria]

I know. I just figured it was an obvious clear case and they would have just gotten it out of the way quick.

[Joana D,Arq]

Hello I 'm joana and early call not much to this post and wanted to come defend me, but I think now that Silent boy is a little abuse. I do not know about the jbomberman, but all the games that I have played and won fairly and thit was the first time I tried to make alliance with someone in a game with no teams, so I did not know the rules ,and also knew that we were going against the rules, we stopped doing it. and it does not give him the right to always be calling us cheaters !! in the game and here in the forum he is making this a personal thing, it seems that is the end of the world (he should feel threatened in any way, I do not know) it is just a game!...
This does not appear I am not sorry for the offense committed or anything, if I not respected the rules, even without knowing, I pay for it, but all this only to say that the silent if he does not have anything else that better to do that to chase me, find samething! grow up silent and let the hunters do there work.

[SirSebstar]

I am continually amazed by the people who, once accused, tell the accuser they should get a life since it’s only a game. As if that would somehow make that rules do not apply to them, and basically they did they right thing anyways because they won fair and well in cahoots, but thats besides the point......
Just a generalisation ofcourse

[Joana D,Arq]

I am continually amazed by the people who, once accused, tell the accuser they should get a life since it’s only a game. As if that would somehow make that rules do not apply to them, and basically they did they right thing anyways because they won fair and well in cahoots, but thats besides the point......
Just a generalisation ofcourse

Listen, I wrote or bad or you do not understand me .... where do I say that the rules did not apply to me?!? I made the mistake and I am willing to pay for it! The Silent did what had to do, made the complaint, all very well. what upset me is what he did after that. he insist in call me cheater! cheater to me is who does it with intent and several times, which is not the case,this is why I wrote this post.

[SirSebstar]

Okay, lets call it semantics.
You admit you went against the rules. He called you a cheater.
mmm. Yup, I fail to see how he could not make that call....

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/cheater

Yup, depriving someone of e.g. points by the use of deceit or fraud could be contrued as cheating.

Now, its real easy. You have, or should have read the rules. Ignorence is not really a defence here. Therefor what you claimed you did, goes against CC rules. You engaged in an practice that is not only frowned upon, but actually against the writen rules. Doing such a thing is therefor considered cheating. You might not like the denomination, but you should not argue if someone puts such a label on your actions. Now I assume it will indeed take the hunters some time to sort this out. Based on the suggestive chatcomments and explenation a block or severe warning might at least be appropriate. Luckely I am no hunter, so it is not my call.
I wish you better luck with your future games.
SirSebstar

Function: verb
Etymology: cheat
Date: 1590
transitive verb
1: to deprive of something valuable by the use of deceit or fraud
2: to influence or lead by deceit, trick, or artifice
3: to elude or thwart by or as if by outwitting <cheat death>
intransitive verb
1 a: to practice fraud or trickery b: to violate rules dishonestly <cheat at cards> <cheating on a test>
2: to be sexually unfaithful —usually used with on<was cheating on his wife>
3: to position oneself defensively near a particular area in anticipation of a play in that area <the shortstop was cheating toward second base>
— cheat·er noun
synonyms cheat , cozen , defraud , swindle mean to get something by dishonesty or deception. cheat suggests using trickery that escapes observation <cheated me out of a dollar>. cozen implies artful persuading or flattering to attain a thing or a purpose <always able to cozen her grandfather out of a few dollars>. defraud stresses depriving one of his or her rights and usually connotes deliberate perversion of the truth <defrauded of her inheritance by an unscrupulous lawyer>. swindle implies large-scale cheating by misrepresentation or abuse of confidence <swindled of their savings by con artists>.

[Joana D,Arq]

thanks SirSebstar I can't say it better....

"1 a: to practice fraud or trickery to violate rules dishonestly"

it was not in porpose, not dishonestly.
I rest my case...

[Silent Hysteria]

:rollseyes:

[SirSebstar]

Well silent, I have to atmit. I mean, he said he went against the rules. He made an alliance in a foreing language, but he did not know it was against the rules to make secret aliances so you cant really hold that against him. After all he did not mean to get caught, eh win by use of a secret alliance eh he never meant to have a secret alliance and we are misreading everything anyways

[Silent Hysteria]

Yeah. He was only joking anyway you know. He thought it was his right to use his ability to speak a different language than everyone else to use it to his advantage.

I honestly don't really care anymore cause he just got tooled in the game it happened in and someone else eliminated me so he didn't get my points.

A warning and a ban from playing with [player]Jbomberman[/player] ever again would satisfy me.

[lancehoch]

Sorry this took so long. [player]Joana D,Arq[/player] and [player]jbomberman[/player] have been warned to keep diplomatic discussions in English if not everyone in the game understands Portuguese.

[Silent Hysteria]

No worries.

They don't get banned from playing with each other?

[SirSebstar]

I did not (really) expect it. Blocked from playing with a partner requires a larger amount of abuse. Just think of the warning as an, we keep an eye on you, if you screw up again you are in serious trouble.

[Silent Hysteria]

I did not (really) expect it. Blocked from playing with a partner requires a larger amount of abuse. Just think of the warning as an, we keep an eye on you, if you screw up again you are in serious trouble.

A RL buddy of mine was blocked from playing with another of our friends for having an alliance. Even though in the beginning of the game they stated that they were real life friends and they would probable not be attacking each other that much. I just figured it was standard practice.

[SirSebstar]

if those friends would share the same ip adres, yes that would more likely result in a block. Each case has different aspects however. And those guide the outcome

[Silent Hysteria]

We'll they both live in different towns, so I don't think they have the same IP.