Page 4 of 18
Re: Dancing Mustard Skittles Snorri Simon Viviant
Posted: Mon Nov 17, 2008 8:41 pm
by InkL0sed
From an email with Snorri:
Snorri1234 wrote:He basically made up a rule just to ban us.
Firstly, there is nothing in the rules about using someone else's account to post. The ruling is for playing games. None of us would've done this if it was actually against the rules.
Secondly, this should actually count as babysitting abuse. We are all different people who use the other's account to post. People have received a slap on the wrist or maybe a block for doing exactly this (in games that is, which makes it worse), but for us it suddenly means a perma-ban? Hell, what Twill is actually saying is that if I and DM played doubles and I took his turns for him effectively giving me two accounts to game with it is less worse! I mean, even if we were to acknowledge this new rule as suddenly true even though it only came into existence after we stopped posting for eachother, it still doesn't make any sense. We receive a perma-ban, not only from the forum but from the entire site? For something that only gives actual cheaters a slap on the wrist?
Re: Dancing Mustard Skittles Snorri Simon Viviant
Posted: Mon Nov 17, 2008 8:43 pm
by Ditocoaf
Twill wrote:LOL
ooooh conspiracy! it's soooo fun.
I'm glad Conquer Club is so important to you folks that it deserves such an outcry
"the 4" were simply busted for using each others accounts to post to the forum.
No conspiracy, no over arching plan to systematically ruin the world as we know it, just plain and simple busting.
I'm sorry to disappoint you, but they get treated the same way as anyone else. If we can prove that they are using more than one account for any purpose, they need to get busted as multis. We do it for everyone every time.
As with any free player, getting busted inactivates the account.
They did this to themselves, knowingly, blatantly and with dubious intent.
Sorry guys, shows over, move on, they can buy back or appeal if they want, just like anyone else.
Twill
There's never been an explicit rule against posting with someone else's account. The rule is about playing games with multi accounts, and you know it.
Nice straw man with the "conspiracy" nonsense, but you know that's not what we're saying. We're saying that the rules are enforced in such a way that makes this place incrementally less enjoyable every time you open your mouth.
Re: Dancing Mustard Skittles Snorri Simon Viviant
Posted: Mon Nov 17, 2008 8:53 pm
by Gregrios
I was under the impression that when you use someone else's account it was strictly for playing games, not posting.
Re: Dancing Mustard Skittles Snorri Simon Viviant
Posted: Mon Nov 17, 2008 8:56 pm
by GabonX
Actually the rule was about having multiple accounts in general. On top of that there have already been a number of people penalized for this kind of thing.
Also, how do we know that they weren't taking turns on each other's accounts? Seeing as they already broke one rule, there's really no guarantee that they weren't cheating in games too. Not penalizing this behavior opens alot of doors...
It isn't like the mods have some ulterior motive to bust these guys, they broke the rules and that's that.
Re: Dancing Mustard Skittles Snorri Simon Viviant
Posted: Mon Nov 17, 2008 8:58 pm
by InkL0sed
Gregrios wrote:I was under the impression that when you use someone else's account it was strictly for playing games, not posting.
I was under the impression CC gave out day-long bans before they went all perma on your ass.
Re: Dancing Mustard Skittles Snorri Simon Viviant
Posted: Mon Nov 17, 2008 8:58 pm
by Frigidus
GabonX wrote:Actually the rule was about having multiple accounts in general. On top of that there have already been a number of people penalized for this kind of thing.
Also, how do we know that they weren't taking turns on each other's accounts? Seeing as they already broke one rule, there's really no guarantee that they weren't cheating in games too. Not penalizing this behavior opens alot of doors...
It isn't like the mods have some ulterior motive to bust these guys, they broke the rules and that's that.
http://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=7785
Gee, must have missed that rule.
Re: Dancing Mustard Skittles Snorri Simon Viviant
Posted: Mon Nov 17, 2008 9:01 pm
by Ditocoaf
GabonX wrote:Actually the rule was about having multiple accounts in general.
they don't have multiple accounts!. There are four, separate people, and they each have their own, single separate account.
There is no rule against logging in to someone else's legitimate account (it's even allowed for account-sitting), as long as you don't play games together.
On top of that there have already been a number of people penalized for this kind of thing.
Also, how do we know that they weren't taking turns on each other's accounts?
There is no evidence of that, furthermore they were not in any games together
Seeing as they already broke one rule,
Only one of them
there's really no guarantee that they weren't cheating in games too. Not penalizing this behavior opens alot of doors...
The slippery slope argument is a fallacy.
Re: Dancing Mustard Skittles Snorri Simon Viviant
Posted: Mon Nov 17, 2008 9:10 pm
by clapper011
Re: Dancing Mustard Skittles Snorri Simon Viviant
Posted: Mon Nov 17, 2008 9:11 pm
by GabonX
Ditocoaf wrote:GabonX wrote:Actually the rule was about having multiple accounts in general.
they don't have multiple accounts!. There are four, separate people, and they each have their own, single separate account.
There is no rule against logging in to someone else's legitimate account (it's even allowed for account-sitting), as long as you don't play games together.
On top of that there have already been a number of people penalized for this kind of thing.
Also, how do we know that they weren't taking turns on each other's accounts?
There is no evidence of that, furthermore they were not in any games together
Seeing as they already broke one rule,
Only one of them
there's really no guarantee that they weren't cheating in games too. Not penalizing this behavior opens alot of doors...
The slippery slope argument is a fallacy.
Rule #1: No multiple accounts
Multiple accounts are discovered by routine scans and community cheating reports.
They are strictly forbidden whether or not they play in the same games.
http://www.conquerclub.com/public.php?mode=rules
It's not a fallacy or a slippery slope. The fact of the matter is that there is no way to stop people who share their account information from cheating, therefore people who break the rules and log on with other people's account (unless they are account sitting after reporting it to the admins) need to be dealt with accordingly. These aren't the first to be dealt with in this way and there's no reason to make an exception to the rule here.
Re: Dancing Mustard Skittles Snorri Simon Viviant
Posted: Mon Nov 17, 2008 9:12 pm
by Frigidus
Those are examples of people jumping accounts to avoid a ban. This is not the case here.
Re: Dancing Mustard Skittles Snorri Simon Viviant
Posted: Mon Nov 17, 2008 9:14 pm
by GabonX
Frigidus wrote:
Those are examples of people jumping accounts to avoid a ban. This is not the case here.
Rule #1: No multiple accounts
Multiple accounts are discovered by routine scans and community cheating reports.
They are strictly forbidden whether or not they play in the same games.
http://www.conquerclub.com/public.php?mode=rules
Re: Dancing Mustard Skittles Snorri Simon Viviant
Posted: Mon Nov 17, 2008 9:15 pm
by King_Herpes
Sorry to say boys, I'm not trying to be some goody two shoe's here but bickering won't fix a thing. Mark my word. If they want back in the Forum Sesspool then they are going to have to cough up a Jackson and an Abe. Until then just learn that this is all a huge source of revenue for a site that needs other income's to stay afloat. So let's "root root root for the home team" but first they have to buy themselves some peanuts and crackerjacks before anybody touches back down on home plate.
Re: Dancing Mustard Skittles Snorri Simon Viviant
Posted: Mon Nov 17, 2008 9:17 pm
by hecter
Notice how he got a nice shiny warning? Compared to immediately banning 4 valued posters.
Re: Dancing Mustard Skittles Snorri Simon Viviant
Posted: Mon Nov 17, 2008 9:18 pm
by clapper011
he did get busted as well, one of his friends bought him premium again....
Re: Dancing Mustard Skittles Snorri Simon Viviant
Posted: Mon Nov 17, 2008 9:18 pm
by GabonX
hecter wrote:
Notice how he got a nice shiny warning? Compared to immediately banning 4 valued posters.
4 valued posters that had previous warnings...
Re: Dancing Mustard Skittles Snorri Simon Viviant
Posted: Mon Nov 17, 2008 9:20 pm
by hecter
clapper011 wrote:he did get busted as well, one of his friends bought him premium again....
Yes, but he got a warning prior.
GabonX wrote:hecter wrote:
Notice how he got a nice shiny warning? Compared to immediately banning 4 valued posters.
4 valued posters that had previous warnings...
DM yes, he was quite the hell raiser, but the rest of them were fairly civil. And, I don't believe any of them got warned for this.
Re: Dancing Mustard Skittles Snorri Simon Viviant
Posted: Mon Nov 17, 2008 9:22 pm
by Frigidus
GabonX wrote:Frigidus wrote:
Those are examples of people jumping accounts to avoid a ban. This is not the case here.
Rule #1: No multiple accounts
Multiple accounts are discovered by routine scans and community cheating reports.
They are strictly forbidden whether or not they play in the same games.
http://www.conquerclub.com/public.php?mode=rules
That rule deals with game playing only. There is reason there is a seperate section for forum guidelines. Not only that, but since there are four people for four accounts whether they fall under this guideline in the first place.
Re: Dancing Mustard Skittles Snorri Simon Viviant
Posted: Mon Nov 17, 2008 9:25 pm
by Ditocoaf
I am well of the Max case...
he was actually using it in regards to games, potentially cheating, and he only was blocked from playing with the other player! the precedence of the max case shows a completely different standard being used.
GabonX wrote:Rule #1: No multiple accounts
Multiple accounts are discovered by routine scans and community cheating reports.
They are strictly forbidden whether or not they play in the same games.
http://www.conquerclub.com/public.php?mode=rules
Okay, pretend I'm going to use caps, because I hate caps lock but I really feel that this next thing deserves the emphasis:
Since when did "multiple accounts" mean anything other than "one user making more than one account"?
This idea that sharing passwords = multiple accounts is incredibly silly, and very very new.
GabonX wrote:hecter wrote:
Notice how he got a nice shiny warning? Compared to immediately banning 4 valued posters.
4 valued posters that had previous warnings...
Only one of them had been banned before.
Re: Dancing Mustard Skittles Snorri Simon Viviant
Posted: Mon Nov 17, 2008 9:31 pm
by clapper011
clapper011 wrote:Max did get busted as well, one of his friends bought him premium again....
Re: Dancing Mustard Skittles Snorri Simon Viviant
Posted: Mon Nov 17, 2008 9:32 pm
by GabonX
hecter wrote:
DM yes, he was quite the hell raiser, but the rest of them were fairly civil. And, I don't believe any of them got warned for this.
You don't get a warning for having multiple accounts. Having (and using) access to multiple accounts makes a multi.
Frigidus wrote:GabonX wrote:Frigidus wrote:
Those are examples of people jumping accounts to avoid a ban. This is not the case here.
Rule #1: No multiple accounts
Multiple accounts are discovered by routine scans and community cheating reports.
They are strictly forbidden whether or not they play in the same games.
http://www.conquerclub.com/public.php?mode=rules
That rule deals with game playing only. There is reason there is a seperate section for forum guidelines. Not only that, but since there are four people for four accounts whether they fall under this guideline in the first place.
No, it deals with having access to multiple accounts. You're trying to add the idea that it only refers to gameplay, when in fact it specifically states that it doesn't matter whether or not people play in the same game, for personal reasons. No where does it state that it only refers to gameplay and in fact it does state the opposite.
Ditocoaf wrote:
GabonX wrote:Rule #1: No multiple accounts
Multiple accounts are discovered by routine scans and community cheating reports.
They are strictly forbidden whether or not they play in the same games.
http://www.conquerclub.com/public.php?mode=rules
Okay, pretend I'm going to use caps, because I hate caps lock but I really feel that this next thing deserves the emphasis:
Since when did "multiple accounts" mean anything other than "one user making more than one account"?
This idea that sharing passwords = multiple accounts is incredibly silly, and very very new.
Using multiple accounts means you have multiple accounts whether or not you share them. I believe wilderbeast and his room mates are one example of a similar case. They were all banned for the record.
Re: Dancing Mustard Skittles Snorri Simon Viviant
Posted: Mon Nov 17, 2008 9:34 pm
by Frigidus
Ditocoaf wrote:
GabonX wrote:Rule #1: No multiple accounts
Multiple accounts are discovered by routine scans and community cheating reports.
They are strictly forbidden whether or not they play in the same games.
http://www.conquerclub.com/public.php?mode=rules
Okay, pretend I'm going to use caps, because I hate caps lock but I really feel that this next thing deserves the emphasis:
Since when did "multiple accounts" mean anything other than "one user making more than one account"?
This idea that sharing passwords = multiple accounts is incredibly silly, and very very new.
GabonX wrote:hecter wrote:
Notice how he got a nice shiny warning? Compared to immediately banning 4 valued posters.
4 valued posters that had previous warnings...
Only one of them had been banned before.
Oh Ditocoaf, logic doesn't matter when the mod squad wants someone (or, indeed, an entire type of someone) off their website.
Re: Dancing Mustard Skittles Snorri Simon Viviant
Posted: Mon Nov 17, 2008 9:37 pm
by Ditocoaf
GabonX wrote:Ditocoaf wrote:
GabonX wrote:Rule #1: No multiple accounts
Multiple accounts are discovered by routine scans and community cheating reports.
They are strictly forbidden whether or not they play in the same games.
http://www.conquerclub.com/public.php?mode=rules
Okay, pretend I'm going to use caps, because I hate caps lock but I really feel that this next thing deserves the emphasis:
Since when did "multiple accounts" mean anything other than "one user making more than one account"?
This idea that sharing passwords = multiple accounts is incredibly silly, and very very new.
Using multiple accounts means you have multiple accounts whether or not you share them. I believe wilderbeast and his room mates are one example of a similar case. They were all banned for the record.
that's it--can't hold back the caps lock anymore--NOBODY HAD MULTIPLE ACCOUNTS! THEY EACH HAD ONE ACCOUNT! ONE! SINGULAR! THEY EACH OWNED ONE, SINGLE, SEPERATE ACCOUNT! THEY DID NOT SHARE THEIR MULTIs, BECAUSE NONE OF THEM HAD ANY! NONE OF THEM HAD MORE THAN ONE ACCOUNT!
rules wrote:Rule #1: No multiple accounts
Multiple accounts are discovered by routine scans and community cheating reports. They are strictly forbidden whether or not they play in the same games. If you suspect certain accounts belong to the same person, please report it following the instructions at the top of the Cheating & Abuse Reports forum.
THERE WERE NEVER MORE THAN ONE ACCOUNT BELONGING TO THE SAME PERSON! NOT ONE ACCOUNT WAS FOUND TO BELONG TO SOMEONE WHO ALSO HAD ANOTHER ACCOUNT BELONGING TO THEM! EACH ACCOUNT BELONGED TO A PERSON AS A ONE-TO-ONE FUNCTION!
THERE
WERE
NO
MULTIPLE
ACCOUNTS!
I'm not saying this is a conspiracy. I'm not accusing twill of purposely targeting people. I am simply objecting that the rules are being enforced in an inappropriate, arbitrary, and unpredictable manner.
Re: Dancing Mustard Skittles Snorri Simon Viviant
Posted: Mon Nov 17, 2008 9:40 pm
by GabonX
Ditocoaf wrote:GabonX wrote:Ditocoaf wrote:
GabonX wrote:Rule #1: No multiple accounts
Multiple accounts are discovered by routine scans and community cheating reports.
They are strictly forbidden whether or not they play in the same games.
http://www.conquerclub.com/public.php?mode=rules
Okay, pretend I'm going to use caps, because I hate caps lock but I really feel that this next thing deserves the emphasis:
Since when did "multiple accounts" mean anything other than "one user making more than one account"?
This idea that sharing passwords = multiple accounts is incredibly silly, and very very new.
Using multiple accounts means you have multiple accounts whether or not you share them. I believe wilderbeast and his room mates are one example of a similar case. They were all banned for the record.
that's it--can't hold back the caps lock anymore--NOBODY HAD MULTIPLE ACCOUNTS! THEY EACH HAD ONE ACCOUNT! ONE! SINGULAR! THEY EACH OWNED ONE, SINGLE, SEPERATE ACCOUNT! THEY DID NOT SHARE THEIR MULTIs, BECAUSE NONE OF THEM HAD ANY! NONE OF THEM HAD MORE THAN ONE ACCOUNT!
rules wrote:Rule #1: No multiple accounts
Multiple accounts are discovered by routine scans and community cheating reports. They are strictly forbidden whether or not they play in the same games. If you suspect certain accounts belong to the same person, please report it following the instructions at the top of the Cheating & Abuse Reports forum.
THERE WERE NEVER MORE THAN ONE ACCOUNT BELONGING TO THE SAME PERSON! NOT ONE ACCOUNT WAS FOUND TO BELONG TO SOMEONE WHO ALSO HAD ANOTHER ACCOUNT BELONGING TO THEM! EACH ACCOUNT BELONGED TO A PERSON AS A ONE-TO-ONE FUNCTION!
THERE
WERE
NO
MULTIPLE
ACCOUNTS!
I'm not saying this is a conspiracy. I'm not accusing twill of purposely targeting people. I am simply objecting that the rules are being enforced in an inappropriate and unpredictable manner.
You're wrong. If two people share their accounts they both have two accounts, meaning they are both multis.
This was an example of four people having four accounts.
Re: Dancing Mustard Skittles Snorri Simon Viviant
Posted: Mon Nov 17, 2008 9:42 pm
by Frigidus
GabonX wrote:This was an example of four people having four accounts.
OH f*ck NO!!! GET THE PITCHFORKS AND TORCHES!!!
Re: Dancing Mustard Skittles Snorri Simon Viviant
Posted: Mon Nov 17, 2008 9:43 pm
by Ditocoaf
GabonX wrote:Ditocoaf wrote:NOBODY HAD MULTIPLE ACCOUNTS! THEY EACH HAD ONE ACCOUNT! NONE OF THEM HAD MORE THAN ONE ACCOUNT!
rules wrote:Rule #1: No multiple accounts
Multiple accounts are discovered by routine scans and community cheating reports. They are strictly forbidden whether or not they play in the same games. If you suspect certain accounts belong to the same person, please report it following the instructions at the top of the Cheating & Abuse Reports forum.
THERE WERE NEVER MORE THAN ONE ACCOUNT BELONGING TO THE SAME PERSON!
I'm not saying this is a conspiracy. I'm not accusing twill of purposely targeting people. I am simply objecting that the rules are being enforced in an inappropriate and unpredictable manner.
You're wrong. If two people share their accounts they both have two accounts, meaning they are both multis.
This was an example of four people having four accounts.
If I feed your dog one day, and I also own a dog, this does not mean I own two dogs. I am interacting with yours.