Blitzaholic wrote: multis or cheats will not be on this list
if that is your policy you need to remove Sky T as although what he did was not as bad as some, it was deemed to be cheating by the multi hunters and resulted in him being blocked from playing with his 2 regular trips partners.
Don't now why people on here don't like being cooks, remember under siege: A former SEAL, now cook, is the only person who can stop a gang of terrorists when they sieze control of a US Navy battleship.
Blitzaholic wrote: multis or cheats will not be on this list
if that is your policy you need to remove Sky T as although what he did was not as bad as some, it was deemed to be cheating by the multi hunters and resulted in him being blocked from playing with his 2 regular trips partners.
if his play was deemed by cheating as you say, post the comments in here, cause i dont recall that, but i could be wrong.
Blitzaholic wrote: multis or cheats will not be on this list
if that is your policy you need to remove Sky T as although what he did was not as bad as some, it was deemed to be cheating by the multi hunters and resulted in him being blocked from playing with his 2 regular trips partners.
if his play was deemed by cheating as you say, post the comments in here, cause i dont recall that, but i could be wrong.
sully800 wrote:
yorkiepeter wrote:how long is this gonna be pending for? it devalues the entire ranking system
Sorry, I didn't realize this was still floating around as pending.
They were never officially warned before, though I also thought we made it clear in the first thread that they were bending the rules. Account sitting when someone is not going to miss their turn is abuse of the babysitting privileges simply to give your team and advantage. And it is not allowed.
KA officially warned them when this thread was first created. I'll check on it in a few weeks and if it looks like they are still doing this they will be blocked. I don't want to have to resort to such measures since this would be such a lame form of cheating
OK the above post by Sully said "Account sitting when someone is not going to miss their turn is abuse of the babysitting privileges simply to give your team and advantage. And it is not allowed." He indicated they got a warning not to practise this "lame form of cheating" again and they would be blocked if they did.
So the outcome was they got a warning to stop this "lame form of cheating" - I agree it is not as serious as being a multi or doing what Krusher did but what they were doing was cheating - so if your rule is "multis or cheats will not be on the list", then he needs to be removed however if you were to change your rule to more minor, lame types of cheats/cheating are allowed then he should remain but under the rule as you currently have it worded he should be dropped.
Don't now why people on here don't like being cooks, remember under siege: A former SEAL, now cook, is the only person who can stop a gang of terrorists when they sieze control of a US Navy battleship.
Blitzaholic wrote: multis or cheats will not be on this list
if that is your policy you need to remove Sky T as although what he did was not as bad as some, it was deemed to be cheating by the multi hunters and resulted in him being blocked from playing with his 2 regular trips partners.
if his play was deemed by cheating as you say, post the comments in here, cause i dont recall that, but i could be wrong.
sully800 wrote:
yorkiepeter wrote:how long is this gonna be pending for? it devalues the entire ranking system
Sorry, I didn't realize this was still floating around as pending.
They were never officially warned before, though I also thought we made it clear in the first thread that they were bending the rules. Account sitting when someone is not going to miss their turn is abuse of the babysitting privileges simply to give your team and advantage. And it is not allowed.
KA officially warned them when this thread was first created. I'll check on it in a few weeks and if it looks like they are still doing this they will be blocked. I don't want to have to resort to such measures since this would be such a lame form of cheating
OK the above post by Sully said "Account sitting when someone is not going to miss their turn is abuse of the babysitting privileges simply to give your team and advantage. And it is not allowed." He indicated they got a warning not to practise this "lame form of cheating" again and they would be blocked if they did.
So the outcome was they got a warning to stop this "lame form of cheating" - I agree it is not as serious as being a multi or doing what Krusher did but what they were doing was cheating - so if your rule is "multis or cheats will not be on the list", then he needs to be removed however if you were to change your rule to more minor, lame types of cheats/cheating are allowed then he should remain but under the rule as you currently have it worded he should be dropped.
i follow the CC guidelines and trust sully, if he got a score reset or plays like this again or any find out, yes i could take him off, but since cc never reset his score, it would not be fair for me too, agreed?
Blitzaholic wrote: multis or cheats will not be on this list
if that is your policy you need to remove Sky T as although what he did was not as bad as some, it was deemed to be cheating by the multi hunters and resulted in him being blocked from playing with his 2 regular trips partners.
if his play was deemed by cheating as you say, post the comments in here, cause i dont recall that, but i could be wrong.
sully800 wrote:
yorkiepeter wrote:how long is this gonna be pending for? it devalues the entire ranking system
Sorry, I didn't realize this was still floating around as pending.
They were never officially warned before, though I also thought we made it clear in the first thread that they were bending the rules. Account sitting when someone is not going to miss their turn is abuse of the babysitting privileges simply to give your team and advantage. And it is not allowed.
KA officially warned them when this thread was first created. I'll check on it in a few weeks and if it looks like they are still doing this they will be blocked. I don't want to have to resort to such measures since this would be such a lame form of cheating
OK the above post by Sully said "Account sitting when someone is not going to miss their turn is abuse of the babysitting privileges simply to give your team and advantage. And it is not allowed." He indicated they got a warning not to practise this "lame form of cheating" again and they would be blocked if they did.
So the outcome was they got a warning to stop this "lame form of cheating" - I agree it is not as serious as being a multi or doing what Krusher did but what they were doing was cheating - so if your rule is "multis or cheats will not be on the list", then he needs to be removed however if you were to change your rule to more minor, lame types of cheats/cheating are allowed then he should remain but under the rule as you currently have it worded he should be dropped.
i follow the CC guidelines and trust sully, if he got a score reset or plays like this again or any find out, yes i could take him off, but since cc never reset his score, it would not be fair for me too, agreed?
i gave him an asterix. he was warned many times to stop and he refused. now he is blocked with playing with his 2nd and 3rd account and his score will tumble.
JR's Game Profile Spoiler
Highest Score- 3969
Highest Place- 1st
Highest Rank- Conqueror
Total Medals Won- 157
6 time Wac-a-Mod Champion
June 2014 Monthly Challenge Winner
August 2020 Monthly Challenge Winner
i follow the CC guidelines and trust sully, if he got a score reset or plays like this again or any find out, yes i could take him off, but since cc never reset his score, it would not be fair for me too, agreed?
as do I on both counts but not all cheats not even all convicted multis get resets, in my opinion you either include cheats or not - it does not bother me, but what does bother me is having a policy that you are leaving cheats out and then having one included. I hope and believe SkyT will not cheat again but that does not change the fact what he did was determined to be cheating by the multi hunters and in fairness a huge percentage of the cc community would agree with this determination.
Don't now why people on here don't like being cooks, remember under siege: A former SEAL, now cook, is the only person who can stop a gang of terrorists when they sieze control of a US Navy battleship.
you realize the more you post pretending that you dont care about what you did and that you got caught... just goes to show how much it did mean to you
it really is fun watching you work so hard at it...but you may want to consider growing up some day...
I'm Spanking Monkey now....err...I mean I'm a Spanking Monkey now...that shoots milk Too much. I know.
Blitzaholic wrote: multis or cheats will not be on this list
if that is your policy you need to remove Sky T as although what he did was not as bad as some, it was deemed to be cheating by the multi hunters and resulted in him being blocked from playing with his 2 regular trips partners.
if his play was deemed by cheating as you say, post the comments in here, cause i dont recall that, but i could be wrong.
sully800 wrote:
yorkiepeter wrote:how long is this gonna be pending for? it devalues the entire ranking system
Sorry, I didn't realize this was still floating around as pending.
They were never officially warned before, though I also thought we made it clear in the first thread that they were bending the rules. Account sitting when someone is not going to miss their turn is abuse of the babysitting privileges simply to give your team and advantage. And it is not allowed.
KA officially warned them when this thread was first created. I'll check on it in a few weeks and if it looks like they are still doing this they will be blocked. I don't want to have to resort to such measures since this would be such a lame form of cheating :roll:
OK the above post by Sully said "Account sitting when someone is not going to miss their turn is abuse of the babysitting privileges simply to give your team and advantage. And it is not allowed." He indicated they got a warning not to practise this "lame form of cheating" again and they would be blocked if they did.
So the outcome was they got a warning to stop this "lame form of cheating" - I agree it is not as serious as being a multi or doing what Krusher did but what they were doing was cheating - so if your rule is "multis or cheats will not be on the list", then he needs to be removed however if you were to change your rule to more minor, lame types of cheats/cheating are allowed then he should remain but under the rule as you currently have it worded he should be dropped.
i follow the CC guidelines and trust sully, if he got a score reset or plays like this again or any find out, yes i could take him off, but since cc never reset his score, it would not be fair for me too, agreed?
i gave him an asterix. he was warned many times to stop and he refused. now he is blocked with playing with his 2nd and 3rd account and his score will tumble.
from first impressions of sky's team play id say its unlikely he will fall very far. i wonder how much resentment is borne out against sky for this.. im sure wed all love to play dubs with a single account but its not that different to using msn to direct moves etc which EVERYONE knows happens frequently. when i was mentoring lower ranked players i did this, and although it is good etiquette not to do so a fair bulk of top team players direct lower ranks in this way.
had i been wise, i would have seen that her simplicity cost her a fortune
as a side note - this is exactly why we have some rank specifications for clan challenges. playing a captain and a private equates to playing two captains with half the score an awful lot of the time, which is as much an abuse of the point system as any other.
had i been wise, i would have seen that her simplicity cost her a fortune
I believe the difference between communication between two teammates, and actually playing both is monumental...
a team that can communicate well, even to the degree that one player is dictating all the moves, deserves to win... the other player still has to agree and execute correctly... but one player controlling the other eliminates this very important difference, and it is no longer a team...
there are many ways to communicate, msn, telephone, in person... but when someone takes over the other keyboard, it is completely wrong, especially on any kind of a long term basis.
I kind of think this is self evident.
I'm Spanking Monkey now....err...I mean I'm a Spanking Monkey now...that shoots milk Too much. I know.
I believe the difference between communication between two teammates, and actually playing both is monumental...
a team that can communicate well, even to the degree that one player is dictating all the moves, deserves to win... the other player still has to agree and execute correctly... but one player controlling the other eliminates this very important difference, and it is no longer a team...
there are many ways to communicate, msn, telephone, in person... but when someone takes over the other keyboard, it is completely wrong, especially on any kind of a long term basis.
I kind of think this is self evident.
the only difference is one of physicality. assuming i have someone low ranked who will willingly follow my every direction - and there are plenty of them - then the only actual difference comes in the form of an abstraction. logical fallacy i say!
had i been wise, i would have seen that her simplicity cost her a fortune
khazalid wrote:as a side note - this is exactly why we have some rank specifications for clan challenges. playing a captain and a private equates to playing two captains with half the score an awful lot of the time, which is as much an abuse of the point system as any other.
khazalid wrote: the only difference is one of physicality. assuming i have someone low ranked who will willingly follow my every direction - and there are plenty of them - then the only actual difference comes in the form of an abstraction. logical fallacy i say!
not all low rankers are like those you describe above in team games, i would be a fairly typical low ranked player and i would regularly question and often disagree with my higher ranked partners in doubles - i also tend to proposed ideas /suggestions for what I believe they should do too, so useing me as a typical low ranked example it would be wrong to stereotype / typecast us low rankers in the way you describe above.
Don't now why people on here don't like being cooks, remember under siege: A former SEAL, now cook, is the only person who can stop a gang of terrorists when they sieze control of a US Navy battleship.
I believe the difference between communication between two teammates, and actually playing both is monumental...
a team that can communicate well, even to the degree that one player is dictating all the moves, deserves to win... the other player still has to agree and execute correctly... but one player controlling the other eliminates this very important difference, and it is no longer a team...
there are many ways to communicate, msn, telephone, in person... but when someone takes over the other keyboard, it is completely wrong, especially on any kind of a long term basis.
I kind of think this is self evident.
the only difference is one of physicality. assuming i have someone low ranked who will willingly follow my every direction - and there are plenty of them - then the only actual difference comes in the form of an abstraction. logical fallacy i say!
I think its worth remembering that the abuse occured in freestyle triples and the object was not (as in sequential ) to communicate the best move but to perfectly time co-ordinate the moves of 3 players. In this instance it is certainly easier if one person takes all 3 moves !
can you give me the names DiM, I do want to give the map makers some credit in some form cause of their contributions on enhancing the site.
I was also hoping that someone could provide me info on the the 1st 5 map makers or top 5 map makers (this could be any involvement) of designer or solidifying or strengthening a map in any way.
could some one assist me with this and I could consider it, thx
ok here are the map makers. after the names there's the number of maps produced and the points they have.
when i did this list i considered each and everyone that contributed to a map and got his name on the map. even if he did just the graphics or just the xml. in the case of a revamp i considered both the revamp artist as well as the original artist.
actually here is the complete list, with the several new maps, i sure there may be some changes, can anyone let me know so i can give the credit due to who deserves it, ty
finally found it, geez, took forever ok DiM i may need help with new maps, the last ones and now this time