Moderator: Tournament Directors

agentcom wrote:This is an obvious violation of tourney rules regardless of whether it's found to be a violation of site rules:
http://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewto ... 5&t=174462.
The first game listed is a TLO game against us. I don't know if this has been happening in their other TLO games, but I think there's enough here that this and possibly other games shouldn't count.
Lindax wrote:
Account Sitting Rule
Account sitting is allowed, as long as:
Note: If a player is going on holiday for example, he/she should notify the Team Captain and that player should not be assigned games for that period. In other words, account sitting is to be avoided when reasonably possible.
- It is done according to CC rules and guidelines
- It's done for team members only (if the sitter is participating in the tournament)
- It is announced in the chat for every turn taken
- It is announced in this thread if it is more than one turn (holiday, longer absence, etc.)
I am indeed aware of the issue and will look into it.agentcom wrote:Lx has been posting over there in the C&A, so he's aware of it. Probably thinking/talking to the team about how this should be resolved.
Even though italianipastido is not a team member of Pirlo, he was allowed to take that turn because he is not a member of any other team participating in the tournament. That is how the rule was meant.2012-06-11 17:38:55 - Pirlo: italianipastido for Pirlo
2012-06-12 12:39:36 - Benzorrr: tofu: as you guys just saw we had a non-teammate take a turn for pirlo. i'm not quite sure how that happened, but technically, it is against the rules. in the interest of fair play i wanted to inform you.
If we're trying to be honest here, CoF is probably the only person on that list that deserves a medal.DJ Teflon wrote:General Achievement Medals to be awarded to the following players for the First Team Shutout :
- Denise
- catnipdreams
- Chuuuuck
- Dako
- Chariot of Fire
- Pedronicus
![]()
![]()
Whatever you think, type of comments like this definitely are not in the place. at first, verdict is not done yet, at second (more important) 3 of those 6 players are not accused in C&A by any word. comment like this is pretty rude to them.Benzorrr wrote:If we're trying to be honest here, CoF is probably the only person on that list that deserves a medal.DJ Teflon wrote:General Achievement Medals to be awarded to the following players for the First Team Shutout :
- Denise
- catnipdreams
- Chuuuuck
- Dako
- Chariot of Fire
- Pedronicus
![]()
![]()


Let's refrain from getting into a discussion about this guys. I'm investigating the whole issue (as far as TLO is concerned), including this First Team Shutout and the GA Medals.josko.ri wrote:Whatever you think, type of comments like this definitely are not in the place. at first, verdict is not done yet, at second (more important) 3 of those 6 players are not accused in C&A by any word. comment like this is pretty rude to them.Benzorrr wrote:If we're trying to be honest here, CoF is probably the only person on that list that deserves a medal.DJ Teflon wrote:General Achievement Medals to be awarded to the following players for the First Team Shutout :
- Denise
- catnipdreams
- Chuuuuck
- Dako
- Chariot of Fire
- Pedronicus
![]()
![]()
I was part of the team that noticed this "rule violation." But it was actually me who misread the rule and informed Ben. Only after I went back to look at the rule again for the whole CoF thing did I notice that I actually misread the rule. So that one's my bad. Sorry to cause a momentary panic for my team and possibly you Lx. The part that you bolded is the critical clause.Lindax wrote:For now, I would like to clear up another issue about account sitting. Here's a quote from the game chat of Game 11177036:[/color][/b]Lindax wrote:
Account Sitting Rule
Account sitting is allowed, as long as:
Note: If a player is going on holiday for example, he/she should notify the Team Captain and that player should not be assigned games for that period. In other words, account sitting is to be avoided when reasonably possible.
- It is done according to CC rules and guidelines
- It's done for team members only (if the sitter is participating in the tournament)
- It is announced in the chat for every turn taken
- It is announced in this thread if it is more than one turn (holiday, longer absence, etc.)
Even though italianipastido is not a team member of Pirlo, he was allowed to take that turn because he is not a member of any other team participating in the tournament. That is how the rule was meant.2012-06-11 17:38:55 - Pirlo: italianipastido for Pirlo
2012-06-12 12:39:36 - Benzorrr: tofu: as you guys just saw we had a non-teammate take a turn for pirlo. i'm not quite sure how that happened, but technically, it is against the rules. in the interest of fair play i wanted to inform you.
Lx




well played HKMaster Fenrir wrote:Harem Kings vs. DYNASTY - Round 5 Final
S1: Game 11242190 - DYNASTY
S2: Game 11242199 - Harem Kings
D1: Game 11242214 - Harem Kings
D2: Game 11242229 - DYNASTY
D3: Game 11242239 - DYNASTY
D4: Game 11242250 - Harem Kings
T1: Game 11242273 - Harem Kings
T2: Game 11242294 - Harem Kings
Q1: Game 11242309 - DYNASTY
Harem Kings win 11-9

Lindax wrote:Team Sweden,
In the games for round 7, once again some players failed to join their games on time. Belgian Blue failed to join a triples game and alstergren failed to join a doubles, a triples and a quads game. This resulted once again in forfeited games worth 9 points out of 20, basically giving the win to the opponents team.
This is the third time. I can see it happen once, but 3 times in 7 rounds simply shows that you guys are not interested and don't take this tournament serious. It also shows utter disrespect to the other teams and players, as well as the Tournament Organizer.
After the second time I sent the Team captain. Lufsen75, a pm warning him that if the team would do this once more it would be removed from the tournament. So, hereby Team Sweden is removed from the TLO 2012 IV tournament.
Lx





Thanks, that makes it 12-8 though.uckuki wrote:Round 5
Beef Leftovers vs Tutti Frutti 11:9
S1 Game 11242183 Iceland - Beef Leftovers
S2 Game 11242194 City Mogul - Tutti Frutti
D1 Game 11242206 Forbidden City - Tutti Frutti
D2 Game 11242222 Berlin 1961 - FOED
D3 Game 11242234 Archipelago - Beef Leftovers
D4 Game 11242245 San Marino - Beef Leftovers
T1 Game 11242265 Chicago - Beef Leftovers
T2 Game 11242286 Vancouver - FOED
Q1 Game 11242304 Caribbean Islands - Beef Leftovers
Night Strike wrote:In reply to a complaint filed by The Reds team:
In regards to the TOFU situation, I don't have any idea how Lindax could have justified the decision that account sitting abuse didn't occur in his tournament games, especially when C&A hasn't even reached a verdict. Furthermore, it seems like the team clearly violated the rules of this tournament, which are even stricter than the site's rules. Although I think having the only punishment to the team being a warning is incredibly light given the situation, it's Lindax's choice how to discipline the teams that break the rules since there is no set punishment scale or disqualifying factor within the tournament rules.
That being said, I think it would have been much more prudent to wait until an official C&A ruling was announced before announcing the tournament punishment. In light of that, I hope the decision to not punish the team for the violations will be considered after a formal verdict is announced, especially if it ends up in strict punishments/bans for the accused. Even more so because it could affect the ability of the team to compete in the tournament.

Of course you have no idea I could justify my decision, because you never asked me. Don't you think that if somebody files a complaint it would be the correct thing to do to ask me first how I got to my conclusions and decisions? Another example of leadership in the tournament department failing miserably....Night Strike wrote:In reply to a complaint filed by The Reds team:
In regards to the TOFU situation, I don't have any idea how Lindax could have justified the decision that account sitting abuse didn't occur in his tournament games, especially when C&A hasn't even reached a verdict. Furthermore, it seems like the team clearly violated the rules of this tournament, which are even stricter than the site's rules. Although I think having the only punishment to the team being a warning is incredibly light given the situation, it's Lindax's choice how to discipline the teams that break the rules since there is no set punishment scale or disqualifying factor within the tournament rules.
That being said, I think it would have been much more prudent to wait until an official C&A ruling was announced before announcing the tournament punishment. In light of that, I hope the decision to not punish the team for the violations will be considered after a formal verdict is announced, especially if it ends up in strict punishments/bans for the accused. Even more so because it could affect the ability of the team to compete in the tournament.

Lindax wrote:Not to mention the fact that you didn't even have the decency to send this to me by pm, I had to find out here in the public thread.
It would have been posted in the thread even if I had sent it in PM. As I mentioned to Lindax in a new PM, I didn't originally PM him about the complaint because when I looked at it, I quickly decided that I wasn't going to overturn the decision. I was mostly just waiting to see if C&A ruled before I weighed in on this thread. If C&A had ruled and I felt a different punishment could be necessary, I would have asked for further information.drunkmonkey wrote:I agree, very poor form to call Lindax out in public like that, especially when he has no obligation to punish any players in the tourney based on a pending C&A report. I'm also not surprised.
How? Four of our six players aren't named in the report, so why would it? We only need four to play.Night Strike wrote:...after a formal verdict is announced...it could affect the ability of the team to compete in the tournament.

