Conquer Club

Accused:
Pixar
Nemrehs

The accused are suspected of:
Conducting Secret Diplomacy

Game number(s):
6191641

Comments:
First, I cannot believe that I of all people am asking CC to check into a rules situation, but. . .I read some of the following in Social chat, mentioned to them that is sounded like Secret Diplomacy (not deals, but exchange of info in a fog game not available to other players). One said it was not, other said "tell on us then". If someone explained why not to me, or they just admitted, and added post to game right away so all knew, fine, but I was told "talking in live chat about things that aren't shared with others (unless teammates?) was SD", so I am JUST CHECKING.

FYI, Notice the reference to my play "orchard tending", which has TWICE been checked into and NOT farming.

Social Chat 10/01/2010
14:35:21 ‹Pixar› http://www.conquerclub.com/gam...6191641
14:35:30 ‹Pixar› how many troops do u got nem?
14:36:29 ‹nemrehs1› enough
14:37:03 ‹nemrehs1› how many do you have?
14:37:23 ‹Pixar› more than u:)
14:37:35 ‹nemrehs1› are you sure?
14:37:55 ‹Pixar› ya actually i am
14:38:05 ‹nemrehs1› well...if you have more than 200...
14:38:27 ‹Pixar› yes i do
14:38:48 ‹Gen.LeeGettinhed› hey nem? isn't it secret diplomacy to discuss game outside game chat? unless teams?
14:39:24 ‹Gen.LeeGettinhed› unfair info exchange not available to others
14:43:27 ‹Pixar› tell on us then
14:43:27 ‹nemrehs1› david, hows your orchard tedning going?
14:43:39 ‹Gen.LeeGettinhed› business is legal and great

DH

We were joking and in no way did we disclose information to help any one of us win the game, that information is also false, i did not tell my army size at all. I checked the rules also and it said:
"Diplomacy includes, but is not limited to: proposing truces, negotiating alliances, and coordinating assaults."
We were not talking about a truce, we were not coordination assaults or anything. What we said is in no way breaking the rules, and it was just joking around, nothing serious

it was exchanging info....about a game that others were in.

it is like table talk at a euchre game. it isnt allowed.

i dont think you should get killed with a punishment, but maybe warned!

ronc8649 wrote:it was exchanging info....about a game that others were in.

it is like table talk at a euchre game. it isnt allowed.

i dont think you should get killed with a punishment, but maybe warned!

we didnt exchange any info though, we were joking....its impossible for any of us to have 200 armies

wow really... if david cant take a joke well he needs to get a job... he obviosly has nothin else to do in his life

Gen.LeeGettinhed wrote:Accused:
Pixar
Nemrehs

The accused are suspected of:
Conducting Secret Diplomacy

Game number(s):
Game 6191641

Comments:
First, I cannot believe that I of all people am asking CC to check into a rules situation, but. . .I read some of the following in Social chat, mentioned to them that is sounded like Secret Diplomacy (not deals, but exchange of info in a fog game not available to other players). One said it was not, other said "tell on us then". If someone explained why not to me, or they just admitted, and added post to game right away so all knew, fine, but I was told "talking in live chat about things that aren't shared with others (unless teammates?) was SD", so I am JUST CHECKING.

FYI, Notice the reference to my play "orchard tending", which has TWICE been checked into and NOT farming.

Social Chat 10/01/2010
14:35:21 ‹Pixar› http://www.conquerclub.com/gam...6191641
14:35:30 ‹Pixar› how many troops do u got nem?
14:36:29 ‹nemrehs1› enough
14:37:03 ‹nemrehs1› how many do you have?
14:37:23 ‹Pixar› more than u:)
14:37:35 ‹nemrehs1› are you sure?
14:37:55 ‹Pixar› ya actually i am
14:38:05 ‹nemrehs1› well...if you have more than 200...
14:38:27 ‹Pixar› yes i do
14:38:48 ‹Gen.LeeGettinhed› hey nem? isn't it secret diplomacy to discuss game outside game chat? unless teams?
14:39:24 ‹Gen.LeeGettinhed› unfair info exchange not available to others
14:43:27 ‹Pixar› tell on us then
14:43:27 ‹nemrehs1› david, hows your orchard tedning going?
14:43:39 ‹Gen.LeeGettinhed› business is legal and great

DH

Put in links :I

"Diplomacy includes, but is not limited to: proposing truces, negotiating alliances, and coordinating assaults."

to be honest they weren't discussing info to result in a tactical gain for either one of them and I think its fairly obvious it was harmless banter. Like trying to bluff in a texas hold em game by saying preflop that you have a high pair.

But seeing as this thread already has people foaming at the mouth for a punishment I will consort with the rest of the team and come back with the ruling...

Pending

king sam wrote:to be honest they weren't discussing info to result in a tactical gain for either one of them and I think its fairly obvious it was harmless banter. Like trying to bluff in a texas hold em game by saying preflop that you have a high pair.

But seeing as this thread already has people foaming at the mouth for a punishment I will consort with the rest of the team and come back with the ruling...

Pending

thats exactly what we were doing david takes things to serious if u ask me

Gen.LeeGettinhed wrote:Accused:
Pixar
Nemrehs

The accused are suspected of:
Conducting Secret Diplomacy

Game number(s):
6191641

Comments:
First, I cannot believe that I of all people am asking CC to check into a rules situation, but. . .I read some of the following in Social chat, mentioned to them that is sounded like Secret Diplomacy (not deals, but exchange of info in a fog game not available to other players). One said it was not, other said "tell on us then". If someone explained why not to me, or they just admitted, and added post to game right away so all knew, fine, but I was told "talking in live chat about things that aren't shared with others (unless teammates?) was SD", so I am JUST CHECKING.

FYI, Notice the reference to my play "orchard tending", which has TWICE been checked into and NOT farming.

Social Chat 10/01/2010
14:35:21 ‹Pixar› http://www.conquerclub.com/gam...6191641
14:35:30 ‹Pixar› how many troops do u got nem?
14:36:29 ‹nemrehs1› enough
14:37:03 ‹nemrehs1› how many do you have?
14:37:23 ‹Pixar› more than u:)
14:37:35 ‹nemrehs1› are you sure?
14:37:55 ‹Pixar› ya actually i am
14:38:05 ‹nemrehs1› well...if you have more than 200...
14:38:27 ‹Pixar› yes i do
14:38:48 ‹Gen.LeeGettinhed› hey nem? isn't it secret diplomacy to discuss game outside game chat? unless teams?
14:39:24 ‹Gen.LeeGettinhed› unfair info exchange not available to others
14:43:27 ‹Pixar› tell on us then
14:43:27 ‹nemrehs1› david, hows your orchard tedning going?
14:43:39 ‹Gen.LeeGettinhed› business is legal and great

DH

just asking do you have anything on your agement other then word that may not be currect?

caymanmew wrote:

Gen.LeeGettinhed wrote:Accused:
Pixar
Nemrehs

The accused are suspected of:
Conducting Secret Diplomacy

Game number(s):
6191641

Comments:
First, I cannot believe that I of all people am asking CC to check into a rules situation, but. . .I read some of the following in Social chat, mentioned to them that is sounded like Secret Diplomacy (not deals, but exchange of info in a fog game not available to other players). One said it was not, other said "tell on us then". If someone explained why not to me, or they just admitted, and added post to game right away so all knew, fine, but I was told "talking in live chat about things that aren't shared with others (unless teammates?) was SD", so I am JUST CHECKING.

FYI, Notice the reference to my play "orchard tending", which has TWICE been checked into and NOT farming.

Social Chat 10/01/2010
14:35:21 ‹Pixar› http://www.conquerclub.com/gam...6191641
14:35:30 ‹Pixar› how many troops do u got nem?
14:36:29 ‹nemrehs1› enough
14:37:03 ‹nemrehs1› how many do you have?
14:37:23 ‹Pixar› more than u:)
14:37:35 ‹nemrehs1› are you sure?
14:37:55 ‹Pixar› ya actually i am
14:38:05 ‹nemrehs1› well...if you have more than 200...
14:38:27 ‹Pixar› yes i do
14:38:48 ‹Gen.LeeGettinhed› hey nem? isn't it secret diplomacy to discuss game outside game chat? unless teams?
14:39:24 ‹Gen.LeeGettinhed› unfair info exchange not available to others
14:43:27 ‹Pixar› tell on us then
14:43:27 ‹nemrehs1› david, hows your orchard tedning going?
14:43:39 ‹Gen.LeeGettinhed› business is legal and great

DH

just asking do you have anything on your agement other then word that may not be currect?

What i have been telling people is that this banter is nothing more than banter, nothing of what we said was correct, and it has cause no advantage over each other.

The only way I see that this could be considered a transgression is if the troop count was truly in the 200 range. And only MAYBE even then.


So.. How many ya got? You can tell us. No one reads these things anyway.

jefjef wrote:The only way I see that this could be considered a transgression is if the troop count was truly in the 200 range. And only MAYBE even then.


So.. How many ya got? You can tell us. No one reads these things anyway.

Dude, i truly didnt have 200 at all...the game is almost over with anyway...i had two castles impossible for me to have 200 btw...thanks for actually supporting me

yes neither of us did and im bout to win anyways so it doesnt matter!

Gen.LeeGettinhed wrote:Accused:
Pixar
Nemrehs

The accused are suspected of:
Conducting Secret Diplomacy

Game number(s):
6191641

Comments:
First, I cannot believe that I of all people am asking CC to check into a rules situation, but. . .I read some of the following in Social chat, mentioned to them that is sounded like Secret Diplomacy (not deals, but exchange of info in a fog game not available to other players). One said it was not, other said "tell on us then". If someone explained why not to me, or they just admitted, and added post to game right away so all knew, fine, but I was told "talking in live chat about things that aren't shared with others (unless teammates?) was SD", so I am JUST CHECKING.

FYI, Notice the reference to my play "orchard tending", which has TWICE been checked into and NOT farming.

Social Chat 10/01/2010
14:35:21 ‹Pixar› http://www.conquerclub.com/gam...6191641
14:35:30 ‹Pixar› how many troops do u got nem?
14:36:29 ‹nemrehs1› enough
14:37:03 ‹nemrehs1› how many do you have?
14:37:23 ‹Pixar› more than u:)
14:37:35 ‹nemrehs1› are you sure?
14:37:55 ‹Pixar› ya actually i am
14:38:05 ‹nemrehs1› well...if you have more than 200...
14:38:27 ‹Pixar› yes i do
14:38:48 ‹Gen.LeeGettinhed› hey nem? isn't it secret diplomacy to discuss game outside game chat? unless teams?
14:39:24 ‹Gen.LeeGettinhed› unfair info exchange not available to others
14:43:27 ‹Pixar› tell on us then
14:43:27 ‹nemrehs1› david, hows your orchard tedning going?
14:43:39 ‹Gen.LeeGettinhed› business is legal and great

DH

Get a life

it would be secret diplomacy, perhaps if they even gave one real detail about the game...still its not a good idea to allow it...but that wasnt secret diplomacy...just secret joking...but still, unfair to the other players..

all communication should be in chat...because even subtle info...through joking is info

danfrank wrote:

Gen.LeeGettinhed wrote:Accused:
Pixar
Nemrehs

The accused are suspected of:
Conducting Secret Diplomacy

Game number(s):
6191641

Comments:
First, I cannot believe that I of all people am asking CC to check into a rules situation, but. . .I read some of the following in Social chat, mentioned to them that is sounded like Secret Diplomacy (not deals, but exchange of info in a fog game not available to other players). One said it was not, other said "tell on us then". If someone explained why not to me, or they just admitted, and added post to game right away so all knew, fine, but I was told "talking in live chat about things that aren't shared with others (unless teammates?) was SD", so I am JUST CHECKING.

FYI, Notice the reference to my play "orchard tending", which has TWICE been checked into and NOT farming.

Social Chat 10/01/2010
14:35:21 ‹Pixar› http://www.conquerclub.com/gam...6191641
14:35:30 ‹Pixar› how many troops do u got nem?
14:36:29 ‹nemrehs1› enough
14:37:03 ‹nemrehs1› how many do you have?
14:37:23 ‹Pixar› more than u:)
14:37:35 ‹nemrehs1› are you sure?
14:37:55 ‹Pixar› ya actually i am
14:38:05 ‹nemrehs1› well...if you have more than 200...
14:38:27 ‹Pixar› yes i do
14:38:48 ‹Gen.LeeGettinhed› hey nem? isn't it secret diplomacy to discuss game outside game chat? unless teams?
14:39:24 ‹Gen.LeeGettinhed› unfair info exchange not available to others
14:43:27 ‹Pixar› tell on us then
14:43:27 ‹nemrehs1› david, hows your orchard tedning going?
14:43:39 ‹Gen.LeeGettinhed› business is legal and great

DH

Get a life

exactly obviously he has nothin better to do in his life except report peoplefor the dumbest things

AAFitz wrote:it would be secret diplomacy, perhaps if they even gave one real detail about the game...still its not a good idea to allow it...but that wasnt secret diplomacy...just secret joking...but still, unfair to the other players..

all communication should be in chat...because even subtle info...through joking is info

If this is true then CC would have to take it to the fullest extent: limit all conversation outside of game chat when playing a foggy game or sunny games for that matter. It would completely eliminate all conversation about games with more than two players from either the live chat or the forums. Anything could be considered subtle, anything could be considered a joke.

I hope they don't do anything to these two so that people can continue freely conversing harmlessly...freely joking without being limited by the powers that be.

Queen_Herpes wrote:

AAFitz wrote:it would be secret diplomacy, perhaps if they even gave one real detail about the game...still its not a good idea to allow it...but that wasnt secret diplomacy...just secret joking...but still, unfair to the other players..

all communication should be in chat...because even subtle info...through joking is info

If this is true then CC would have to take it to the fullest extent: limit all conversation outside of game chat when playing a foggy game or sunny games for that matter. It would completely eliminate all conversation about games with more than two players from either the live chat or the forums. Anything could be considered subtle, anything could be considered a joke.

I hope they don't do anything to these two so that people can continue freely conversing harmlessly...freely joking without being limited by the powers that be.

or they could be reasonable...and by all communication...obviously I meant all communication about the actual game...not any topic under the sun...unless you really thought I meant that....in which case..........
im sorry.

I do agree no punishment is in order...but this thread itself acts as a warning...and without a doubt...they came very close to breaking the secret diplomacy guidelines.... though I dont think they did at all..

AAFitz wrote:

Queen_Herpes wrote:

AAFitz wrote:it would be secret diplomacy, perhaps if they even gave one real detail about the game...still its not a good idea to allow it...but that wasnt secret diplomacy...just secret joking...but still, unfair to the other players..

all communication should be in chat...because even subtle info...through joking is info

If this is true then CC would have to take it to the fullest extent: limit all conversation outside of game chat when playing a foggy game or sunny games for that matter. It would completely eliminate all conversation about games with more than two players from either the live chat or the forums. Anything could be considered subtle, anything could be considered a joke.

I hope they don't do anything to these two so that people can continue freely conversing harmlessly...freely joking without being limited by the powers that be.

or they could be reasonable...and by all communication...obviously I meant all communication about the actual game...not any topic under the sun...unless you really thought I meant that....in which case..........
im sorry.

I do agree no punishment is in order...but this thread itself acts as a warning...and without a doubt...they came very close to breaking the secret diplomacy guidelines.... though I dont think they did at all..

I'm sorry for any confusion, I intended to indicate that all conversation about any particular game would have to be limited. I am not suggesting to limit all conversation of any type. I would think that there are times that players could converse about active games on a forum or on the live chat. They might say things like, "hey nice move taking out AAFitz in that 8 player game we are playing." In which case, someone coudl claim that there is some subtle sub-text in that statement and therefore the admins coudl conceivably limit this type of comment from the "legal" out-of-game-chat conversations.

I am hoping that they take no action on these two in this case and hoping that they do not limit conversation outside of game chat. Certainly, if someone is blatantly cheating with conversation outside of game chat, then treat it as such. but when two players are joking about having 200 armies? Come on. Lets leave it fun. Let people joke.

Queen_Herpes wrote:

AAFitz wrote:

Queen_Herpes wrote:

AAFitz wrote:it would be secret diplomacy, perhaps if they even gave one real detail about the game...still its not a good idea to allow it...but that wasnt secret diplomacy...just secret joking...but still, unfair to the other players..

all communication should be in chat...because even subtle info...through joking is info

If this is true then CC would have to take it to the fullest extent: limit all conversation outside of game chat when playing a foggy game or sunny games for that matter. It would completely eliminate all conversation about games with more than two players from either the live chat or the forums. Anything could be considered subtle, anything could be considered a joke.

I hope they don't do anything to these two so that people can continue freely conversing harmlessly...freely joking without being limited by the powers that be.

or they could be reasonable...and by all communication...obviously I meant all communication about the actual game...not any topic under the sun...unless you really thought I meant that....in which case..........
im sorry.

I do agree no punishment is in order...but this thread itself acts as a warning...and without a doubt...they came very close to breaking the secret diplomacy guidelines.... though I dont think they did at all..

I'm sorry for any confusion, I intended to indicate that all conversation about any particular game would have to be limited. I am not suggesting to limit all conversation of any type. I would think that there are times that players could converse about active games on a forum or on the live chat. They might say things like, "hey nice move taking out AAFitz in that 8 player game we are playing." In which case, someone coudl claim that there is some subtle sub-text in that statement and therefore the admins coudl conceivably limit this type of comment from the "legal" out-of-game-chat conversations.

I am hoping that they take no action on these two in this case and hoping that they do not limit conversation outside of game chat. Certainly, if someone is blatantly cheating with conversation outside of game chat, then treat it as such. but when two players are joking about having 200 armies? Come on. Lets leave it fun. Let people joke.

I trust the moderators can tell the difference, but without a doubt, there is a fine line. These guys did nothing wrong...the warning is not that they did...but that they were close to the line.

AAFitz wrote:

Queen_Herpes wrote:

AAFitz wrote:

Queen_Herpes wrote:

AAFitz wrote:it would be secret diplomacy, perhaps if they even gave one real detail about the game...still its not a good idea to allow it...but that wasnt secret diplomacy...just secret joking...but still, unfair to the other players..

all communication should be in chat...because even subtle info...through joking is info

If this is true then CC would have to take it to the fullest extent: limit all conversation outside of game chat when playing a foggy game or sunny games for that matter. It would completely eliminate all conversation about games with more than two players from either the live chat or the forums. Anything could be considered subtle, anything could be considered a joke.

I hope they don't do anything to these two so that people can continue freely conversing harmlessly...freely joking without being limited by the powers that be.

or they could be reasonable...and by all communication...obviously I meant all communication about the actual game...not any topic under the sun...unless you really thought I meant that....in which case..........
im sorry.

I do agree no punishment is in order...but this thread itself acts as a warning...and without a doubt...they came very close to breaking the secret diplomacy guidelines.... though I dont think they did at all..

I'm sorry for any confusion, I intended to indicate that all conversation about any particular game would have to be limited. I am not suggesting to limit all conversation of any type. I would think that there are times that players could converse about active games on a forum or on the live chat. They might say things like, "hey nice move taking out AAFitz in that 8 player game we are playing." In which case, someone coudl claim that there is some subtle sub-text in that statement and therefore the admins coudl conceivably limit this type of comment from the "legal" out-of-game-chat conversations.

I am hoping that they take no action on these two in this case and hoping that they do not limit conversation outside of game chat. Certainly, if someone is blatantly cheating with conversation outside of game chat, then treat it as such. but when two players are joking about having 200 armies? Come on. Lets leave it fun. Let people joke.

I trust the moderators can tell the difference, but without a doubt, there is a fine line. These guys did nothing wrong...the warning is not that they did...but that they were close to the line.

and I hope they don't get a warning. I think even that action is going to call into speculation so many many other conversations. People could start to clam up and potentially people could also start accussing other members of cheating based off of simple jokes or nonsense..

the feeling from the staff is exactly what you guys have stated.

All chat about a game should be posted in game chat to allow all users the ability to read and interpret it for their own benefit. Obviously stuff will be talked about outside games, and a good rule of thumb to go with would be to not discuss an active game that you are in with someone else anywhere else besides the game chat because anyone can misconstrue it as a means to help players get ahead.

Its our conclusion in this case that is was friendly banter however to do diligence to all Pixar & Nemrehs have been reminded about the causes that can come out of situations like this and encouraged to be more careful with what information they talk/share about active games outside of the game chat.

Closed.

KS

So does this mean it's fine and harmless to talk about how many troops you have outside the game chat as long as you don't give an exact number?

magicc wrote:So does this mean it's fine and harmless to talk about how many troops you have outside the game chat as long as you don't give an exact number?

there's always one in every thread..

look you shouldn't be talking about a game with a user that you are in anywhere except chat. In this case it was deemed that no tactical gain was passed along to help either one above anyone else in the game so they were Cleared of wrong doing but informed that they should not get in the habit of doing this stuff, and that all it takes is a lil more data to be passed and they would be found guilty.

So if I were any of you I would not do it. It leads down the road of secret diplomacy.

KS