Conquer Club

OK, can we look at this a different way? The admins used the multi rule, which arguably doesn't apply. Under this rule the gang of four can get back in if they pay and promise, commonly referred to as the pp process. If the admins had used the trolling rule or the disruption of forum rule, then they could have banned the gang of four without the pp process recourse.

Because there is so much confusion about the rule, can't we compromise. Let them back in with a promise and not the pay, then clarify the rule so that it requires the member to identify themselves when using another member's account (babysitting).

king achilles wrote:As what have been said before, Dancing Mustard, Skittles, Snorri and Simon Viviant have all been busted and not perma banned as what most of you thinks. They can come back as a premium member anyway.

A case was brought to us through a support ticket and it was conveyed to the attention of an admin. They were found to have done something that has an equal consequence of being a multi account.

There is the public forum and there are PRIVATE forums. The details of the case need not be publicized but we should always respect each clan's private forum. Their actions were deemed very wrong and they were busted for it.

As what it says in the Forum Guidelines:
Trolling (including multiple postings, spam, abusive content, and specific attempts to cause chaos, disruption or headaches to the community members or staff)

and as what the rules states:

Conquer Club reserves the right to suspend accounts and cancel Premium Memberships, with or without warning, of those players who are deemed to have violated the rules.

They shared their accounts and trolled into a private forum to deceit and confuse the members in that clan. If you can find ways to get around the system, you will also be accountable for it once caught.

Thank you for that clarification. Under that logic, then certainly prowler deserves the same treatment. His activity was reported repeatedly using the button on the posts. He did exactly the same thing.

mpjh wrote:

king achilles wrote:As what have been said before, Dancing Mustard, Skittles, Snorri and Simon Viviant have all been busted and not perma banned as what most of you thinks. They can come back as a premium member anyway.

A case was brought to us through a support ticket and it was conveyed to the attention of an admin. They were found to have done something that has an equal consequence of being a multi account.

There is the public forum and there are PRIVATE forums. The details of the case need not be publicized but we should always respect each clan's private forum. Their actions were deemed very wrong and they were busted for it.

As what it says in the Forum Guidelines:
Trolling (including multiple postings, spam, abusive content, and specific attempts to cause chaos, disruption or headaches to the community members or staff)

and as what the rules states:

Conquer Club reserves the right to suspend accounts and cancel Premium Memberships, with or without warning, of those players who are deemed to have violated the rules.

They shared their accounts and trolled into a private forum to deceit and confuse the members in that clan. If you can find ways to get around the system, you will also be accountable for it once caught.

Thank you for that clarification. Under that logic, then certainly prowler deserves the same treatment. His activity was reported repeatedly using the button on the posts. He did exactly the same thing.

Also, could you ban me? I've used my old account to post I believe three times in the past. Thanks in advance.

OK

YOUR BANNED

now stop posting

I'm posting this at the request of Skittles!.

Skittles! and Simon let DM and Snorri go onto their accounts to post in the civil discussion group clan forum thingy to show that they can, infact, act civil (as the clan has double standards). Skittles! also wants me to add that he hasn't played a game in over a month.

I don't see anything wrong with that. As a clan leader myself, I have to resign myself to the fact that who ever is using a certain persons account (who happens to be in my clan) will not always be the exact person I let in. If I'm uncomfortable with that and feel that the person will not use good judgement, or I feel that the users posts are somehow inappropriate, I can simply remove them from the clan at any point in time that I see fit.

hecter wrote:I'm posting this at the request of Skittles!.

Skittles! and Simon let DM and Snorri go onto their accounts to post in the civil discussion group clan forum thingy to show that they can, infact, act civil (as the clan has double standards). Skittles! also wants me to add that he hasn't played a game in over a month.

I don't see anything wrong with that. As a clan leader myself, I have to resign myself to the fact that who ever is using a certain persons account (who happens to be in my clan) will not always be the exact person I let in. If I'm uncomfortable with that and feel that the person will not use good judgement, or I feel that the users posts are somehow inappropriate, I can simply remove them from the clan at any point in time that I see fit.

Uh oh, now hecter's in on it. This is a classic case of five people with five accounts. We'd better just ban the whole site.

good point.

This is ridiculous. Snorri and DM were by far the most entertaining posters on this website. Even simon viavant and skittles were nice guys who don't deserve a perma-ban. This website has banned so many great members my sig is out of room. Cant they just get warnings for account sitting abuse?

or be banned from posting in the offending forum which (by definition) most of us haven't seen?

(So that by definition most people who have an opinion have not been offended)

Frigidus wrote:

hecter wrote:I'm posting this at the request of Skittles!.

Skittles! and Simon let DM and Snorri go onto their accounts to post in the civil discussion group clan forum thingy to show that they can, infact, act civil (as the clan has double standards). Skittles! also wants me to add that he hasn't played a game in over a month.

I don't see anything wrong with that. As a clan leader myself, I have to resign myself to the fact that who ever is using a certain persons account (who happens to be in my clan) will not always be the exact person I let in. If I'm uncomfortable with that and feel that the person will not use good judgement, or I feel that the users posts are somehow inappropriate, I can simply remove them from the clan at any point in time that I see fit.

Uh oh, now hecter's in on it. This is a classic case of five people with five accounts. We'd better just ban the whole site.

Dude there's like 10,000 people on the site with 10,000 accounts! The sheer horror!

Ditocoaf wrote:

king achilles wrote:As what have been said before, Dancing Mustard, Skittles, Snorri and Simon Viviant have all been busted and not perma banned as what most of you thinks. They can come back as a premium member anyway.

A case was brought to us through a support ticket and it was conveyed to the attention of an admin. They were found to have done something that has an equal consequence of being a multi account.

There is the public forum and there are PRIVATE forums. The details of the case need not be publicized but we should always respect each clan's private forum. Their actions were deemed very wrong and they were busted for it.

As what it says in the Forum Guidelines:
Trolling (including multiple postings, spam, abusive content, and specific attempts to cause chaos, disruption or headaches to the community members or staff)

and as what the rules states:

Conquer Club reserves the right to suspend accounts and cancel Premium Memberships, with or without warning, of those players who are deemed to have violated the rules.

They shared their accounts and trolled into a private forum to deceit and confuse the members in that clan. If you can find ways to get around the system, you will also be accountable for it once caught.

Oh, they're certainly guilty of trolling. But trolling generally has a day-ban, not a "bust (permaban unless you pay)".

But you don't really know who was trolling on which account, which is the crux of this entire issue. Yes, trolling is an escalating warning/vacation/ban offense, but it's pretty clear that using other players' accounts to troll is something more than that.

In regards to Prowler, I don't know if a complaint was ever filed via an e-ticket or a thread in the C&A forum about illegal clan entry. He might have gotten his information from a person already within the clan and then posting the "intel" he got from them. I think the admins are now looking into it (I and others brought it to their attention).

By the way hecter, you aren't supposed to make posts for people who are forum banned or busted.

Iliad wrote:

Frigidus wrote:

hecter wrote:I'm posting this at the request of Skittles!.

Skittles! and Simon let DM and Snorri go onto their accounts to post in the civil discussion group clan forum thingy to show that they can, infact, act civil (as the clan has double standards). Skittles! also wants me to add that he hasn't played a game in over a month.

I don't see anything wrong with that. As a clan leader myself, I have to resign myself to the fact that who ever is using a certain persons account (who happens to be in my clan) will not always be the exact person I let in. If I'm uncomfortable with that and feel that the person will not use good judgement, or I feel that the users posts are somehow inappropriate, I can simply remove them from the clan at any point in time that I see fit.

Uh oh, now hecter's in on it. This is a classic case of five people with five accounts. We'd better just ban the whole site.

Dude there's like 10,000 people on the site with 10,000 accounts! The sheer horror!

I've been thinking about it, and the number of accounts on the site and the number of people who use it must be in an almost perfect 1:1 ratio! This is horrifying!

Night Strike wrote:By the way hecter, you aren't supposed to make posts for people who are forum banned or busted.

Here it comes!

I don't think this helps.

mpjh wrote:I don't think this helps.

Are you quite sure?

No I am not sure of anything, I don't own the site, I just play games here and use the forum for distraction while waiting my turn, but there does seem to be some unnecessary confusion here. It seems a public warning and rule clarification would have been more productive as opposed to the current situation.

Night Strike wrote:

Ditocoaf wrote:

king achilles wrote:As what have been said before, Dancing Mustard, Skittles, Snorri and Simon Viviant have all been busted and not perma banned as what most of you thinks. They can come back as a premium member anyway.

A case was brought to us through a support ticket and it was conveyed to the attention of an admin. They were found to have done something that has an equal consequence of being a multi account.

There is the public forum and there are PRIVATE forums. The details of the case need not be publicized but we should always respect each clan's private forum. Their actions were deemed very wrong and they were busted for it.

As what it says in the Forum Guidelines:
Trolling (including multiple postings, spam, abusive content, and specific attempts to cause chaos, disruption or headaches to the community members or staff)

and as what the rules states:

Conquer Club reserves the right to suspend accounts and cancel Premium Memberships, with or without warning, of those players who are deemed to have violated the rules.

They shared their accounts and trolled into a private forum to deceit and confuse the members in that clan. If you can find ways to get around the system, you will also be accountable for it once caught.

Oh, they're certainly guilty of trolling. But trolling generally has a day-ban, not a "bust (permaban unless you pay)".

But you don't really know who was trolling on which account, which is the crux of this entire issue. Yes, trolling is an escalating warning/vacation/ban offense, but it's pretty clear that using other players' accounts to troll is something more than that.

The thing is, they weren't trolling, on other people's accounts. What they were posting wouldn't have been considered trolling by any stretch of the imagination, if it weren't on someone else's account. They even asked the other tavernites whether they had been misbehaving lately, and the tavernites said "no"... the entire point of the process was to prove their ability to post rationally and civilly. It's a form of trolling, only because they pretended to be someone else in order to make that point.

Night Strike wrote:

Ditocoaf wrote:

king achilles wrote:As what have been said before, Dancing Mustard, Skittles, Snorri and Simon Viviant have all been busted and not perma banned as what most of you thinks. They can come back as a premium member anyway.

A case was brought to us through a support ticket and it was conveyed to the attention of an admin. They were found to have done something that has an equal consequence of being a multi account.

There is the public forum and there are PRIVATE forums. The details of the case need not be publicized but we should always respect each clan's private forum. Their actions were deemed very wrong and they were busted for it.

As what it says in the Forum Guidelines:
Trolling (including multiple postings, spam, abusive content, and specific attempts to cause chaos, disruption or headaches to the community members or staff)

and as what the rules states:

Conquer Club reserves the right to suspend accounts and cancel Premium Memberships, with or without warning, of those players who are deemed to have violated the rules.

They shared their accounts and trolled into a private forum to deceit and confuse the members in that clan. If you can find ways to get around the system, you will also be accountable for it once caught.

Oh, they're certainly guilty of trolling. But trolling generally has a day-ban, not a "bust (permaban unless you pay)".

But you don't really know who was trolling on which account, which is the crux of this entire issue. Yes, trolling is an escalating warning/vacation/ban offense, but it's pretty clear that using other players' accounts to troll is something more than that.

In regards to Prowler, I don't know if a complaint was ever filed via an e-ticket or a thread in the C&A forum about illegal clan entry. He might have gotten his information from a person already within the clan and then posting the "intel" he got from them. I think the admins are now looking into it (I and others brought it to their attention).

By the way hecter, you aren't supposed to make posts for people who are forum banned or busted.

Screw this site. You guys have to learn to get your priorities straight. Were these guys really harming the site in anyway way, shape, or form? No. I don't think you realize that you are hurting this place much more then you are doing good. Banning some of the most popular people on the website for babysitting abuse, which is something that usually gets a warning, is so stupid I can hardly believe your brain couldn't grasp how amazingly retarded it was.

NightStrike, You were by far my least favorite moderators and I would like you to know it. Twill, you just have to learn that if you ban a well known member for something trivial, you are hurting the site. From the rules that you guys have given today I should have been banned a long time ago. I have, posted for banned members, logged onto other peoples accounts without them knowing, and posted for someone else on accident. The reason I did it wasn't to cause harm to the site in anyway, it was because it was either an accident, or I didn't know it was against the rules.

As someone who knows exactly what they have done I have pronounced this verdict: utter bullshit.

Point number 1: This was not done profesionally. This was done because someone from the Fireside Tavern whined to the mods. And to add salt the admins had a knee-jerk reaction. Why? Because they didn't even check IP's. They just saw the accusations, maybe even skimmed something and then banned him. Without actually properly checking IP's.

And I have valid proof of that.

Point number 2: The whining was unbased in any way. Want to know why? Look at the Fireside Tavern. A supposed clan for fair and civil discussion, which however discriminated against atheists and left-wingers from the start. What happened is that only two or so atheists made into the clan, them being Skittles and Simon viavant. Haggis and Zeak also made it in. Now the mods in charge of accepting people rejected the likes of Me, Medefe, Juan, DM, Snorri.. They said that their records obviously show they can never post civilly. Then one of the atheists who was in Fireside Tavern, I think it was simon, proposed to let the atheists in, for only three days. This was rejected because they would "obviously spam and troll". This is when the plan was formed. DM posted on Reed's(Skittles!) account, snorri on Simon's for a month. That's right- an entire month.

Just before this month was over "Reed" and "Simon" asked whether their behavior was civil enough. All the others replied how it was very pleasant and very civil. And then it was revealed how it was snorri and DM posting under simon's and Reed's account, respectively. You should've seen the uproar. I could literally see the froth, coming out of their mouths, from my chair. People posted how they are putting people on ignore lists. Shortly after this fiasco ALL the atheists were removed. All of them. That left tonka as the only left-winger left in the group, and he quit soon after that.

And now it seems that one of the people in the Fireside Tavern had whined to the mods. And you know just how trigger-happy the mods are, around here. All 4 of them permabanned for a rule that does not even exist.

The whole point of letting DM and Snorri post as Skittles and Simon was to show that yes, we evil, amoral, uncivil atheists can debate in a completely civil and nice manner, the only reason we dont' do it here is because there is no point here. However the people inside the Fireside Tavern moved the goalposts yet again, throwing a tantrum about "deceit and lies".

Point number 3This rule does not exist. People account sit for each other. The multi rule is there to combat people making multiple accounts and obviously gaining an extra advantage. There is nothing in the rules about not being able to post under another person's account. It has been done before(see khaz posting under prowler's account). In fact people often post "Person A is the greatest" when they are Person A and account-sitting for Person B.

There is nothing in the forum guidelines. So don't even try to pretend you have pretext. You made up a rule to try to ban them, and permaban then on the spot.

Point number 4:This is inconsistent modding. People often post as other people when account-sitting and just in fun, generally. If someone other than DM and his friends had done it, they would've gotten away with it. A light warning at most.

Iliad wrote: Point number 2: The whining was unbased in any way. Want to know why? Look at the Fireside Tavern. A supposed clan for fair and civil discussion, which however discriminated against atheists and left-wingers from the start. What happened is that only two or so atheists made into the clan, them being Skittles and Simon viavant. Haggis and Zeak also made it in. Now the mods in charge of accepting people rejected the likes of Me, Medefe, Juan, DM, Snorri.. They said that their records obviously show they can never post civilly. Then one of the atheists who was in Fireside Tavern, I think it was simon, proposed to let the atheists in, for only three days. This was rejected because they would "obviously spam and troll". This is when the plan was formed. DM posted on Reed's(Skittles!) account, snorri on Simon's for a month. That's right- an entire month.

Just before this month was over "Reed" and "Simon" asked whether their behavior was civil enough. All the others replied how it was very pleasant and very civil. And then it was revealed how it was snorri and DM posting under simon's and Reed's account, respectively. You should've seen the uproar. I could literally see the froth, coming out of their mouths, from my chair. People posted how they are putting people on ignore lists. Shortly after this fiasco ALL the atheists were removed. All of them. That left tonka as the only left-winger left in the group, and he quit soon after that.

And now it seems that one of the people in the Fireside Tavern had whined to the mods. And you know just how trigger-happy the mods are, around here. All 4 of them permabanned for a rule that does not even exist.

The whole point of letting DM and Snorri post as Skittles and Simon was to show that yes, we evil, amoral, uncivil atheists can debate in a completely civil and nice manner, the only reason we dont' do it here is because there is no point here. However the people inside the Fireside Tavern moved the goalposts yet again, throwing a tantrum about "deceit and lies".

I've got to say that this had to be the funniest thing i've seen in a long time on this forum.

It was epic.

Snorri is outed.

"Snorri's ok. It would have been more obvious if DM or someone like that were doing it."

"Well, actually..."

:cackle cackle:

Iliad wrote:Point number 2: The whining was unbased in any way. Want to know why? Look at the Fireside Tavern. A supposed clan for fair and civil discussion, which however discriminated against atheists and left-wingers from the start. What happened is that only two or so atheists made into the clan, them being Skittles and Simon viavant. Haggis and Zeak also made it in. Now the mods in charge of accepting people rejected the likes of Me, Medefe, Juan, DM, Snorri.. They said that their records obviously show they can never post civilly. Then one of the atheists who was in Fireside Tavern, I think it was simon, proposed to let the atheists in, for only three days. This was rejected because they would "obviously spam and troll". This is when the plan was formed. DM posted on Reed's(Skittles!) account, snorri on Simon's for a month. That's right- an entire month.

Just before this month was over "Reed" and "Simon" asked whether their behavior was civil enough. All the others replied how it was very pleasant and very civil. And then it was revealed how it was snorri and DM posting under simon's and Reed's account, respectively. You should've seen the uproar. I could literally see the froth, coming out of their mouths, from my chair. People posted how they are putting people on ignore lists. Shortly after this fiasco ALL the atheists were removed. All of them. That left tonka as the only left-winger left in the group, and he quit soon after that.

Iliad, nice post, but you pointed out a large inconsistency within the arguments. Some people do make a post or two while they are account sitting to make funny comments, but that happens once, maybe twice. It was clear from your statement that they planned it and did the actions over the course of a month. That's pretty clear abuse in my eyes, and it appears most of the members of the Fireside Tavern would agree. And how would you know whether or not they checked IPs? The hunters and admins are smart enough not to bust players without having proof that they used multiple accounts.

Iliad wrote:Point number 2: The whining was unbased in any way. Want to know why? Look at the Fireside Tavern. A supposed clan for fair and civil discussion, which however discriminated against atheists and left-wingers from the start. What happened is that only two or so atheists made into the clan, them being Skittles and Simon viavant. Haggis and Zeak also made it in. Now the mods in charge of accepting people rejected the likes of Me, Medefe, Juan, DM, Snorri.. They said that their records obviously show they can never post civilly. Then one of the atheists who was in Fireside Tavern, I think it was simon, proposed to let the atheists in, for only three days. This was rejected because they would "obviously spam and troll". This is when the plan was formed. DM posted on Reed's(Skittles!) account, snorri on Simon's for a month. That's right- an entire month.

I'd just like to point out that I am deeply offended by the general idea that athiests are somehow not civilized enough to converse with supposedly high-minded religious folk. Athiests are the least trusted group in all of America, and that has shown itself clearly in the Fireside Tavern. I feel that they have discriminated, no, demonstrated hatred of athiests and athiesm. The fact that the Conquer Club staff supported the banning of four athiests after what can be likened to a sit-in proves that you are intolerant (if there was a word that meant religious "racism", I would use it).

Theism? Does that work?
EDIT: that was unintentional... :lol:
How about Deism...?

Frigidus wrote:

Iliad wrote:Point number 2: The whining was unbased in any way. Want to know why? Look at the Fireside Tavern. A supposed clan for fair and civil discussion, which however discriminated against atheists and left-wingers from the start. What happened is that only two or so atheists made into the clan, them being Skittles and Simon viavant. Haggis and Zeak also made it in. Now the mods in charge of accepting people rejected the likes of Me, Medefe, Juan, DM, Snorri.. They said that their records obviously show they can never post civilly. Then one of the atheists who was in Fireside Tavern, I think it was simon, proposed to let the atheists in, for only three days. This was rejected because they would "obviously spam and troll". This is when the plan was formed. DM posted on Reed's(Skittles!) account, snorri on Simon's for a month. That's right- an entire month.

I'd just like to point out that I am deeply offended by the general idea that athiests are somehow not civilized to converse with supposedly high-minded religious folk. Athiests are the least trusted group in all of America, and that has shown itself clearly in the Fireside Tavern. I feel that they have discriminated, no, demonstrated hatred of athiests and athiesm. The fact that the Conquer Club staff supported the banning of four athiests after what can be likened to a sit-in proves that you are intolerant (if there was a word that meant religious "racism", I would use it).

"Bigotry," is my descriptor of choice.

Would it now be appropriate to start a white-pride group in callouts? Seems like fair game to me.