Conquer Club

Posted: **Thu Aug 02, 2012 11:23 pm**

Accused:
jdbush
chapcrap

The accused are suspected of:
jdbush was directed by chapcrap to take a turn for a member of the opposing team(happyfeet). (See attachment)
No indication was left in game chat by jdbush nor chapcrap that the turn had not been taken by happyfeet. (See game chat)

Game number:
Game 11441863

Comments:
Other: jdbush ignored the instructions left by happyfeet's teammate and instead made a move which strongly benefited the other team. This poor move turned a highly probable kill of chapcrap into very unlikely kill which ended up failing.
(Some more detail on this move: jdbush(Taking turn for happyfeet at chapcraps request) did not follow the plan laid out in team game chat. The plan (which was fairly obvious) was to kill chapcrap and use the cards to win the game by deploying on Mexico City to yield 7v3 to take Bogota from chapcrap. (~86% chance of success) The remainder of chapcrap would have been easily taken out on Flow520's turn with a set trade in. Indeed, the set trade in did easily take out the rest of chapcrap, but the 3 troops on Bogota which were to be taken by happyfeet remained.)

Game Chat:

2012-08-01 11:04:11 - Flow520 [team]: I think we need to take out red before he trades
2012-08-01 11:37:01 - happyfeet [team]: green?
2012-08-01 14:55:29 - Flow520 [team]: I dont know if we can get green in time
2012-08-01 15:38:48 - happyfeet [team]: snap :: 6~?0㘳◉㚰ᖩ⧍㙎㚱อᨭ䚮㫑䚱䕒ᦱ
2012-08-01 19:52:34 - Flow520 [team]: yes, 3 card set
2012-08-02 18:14:30 - Flow520 [team]: I guess take bogota, then fort Darak to Madrid so I can try and take out red with my set.
2012-08-02 20:28:02 - Flow520 [team]: Please dont miss your turn.
2012-08-02 20:52:55 - happyfeet [team]: helloe
2012-08-02 20:53:29 - Flow520 [team]: Phew, glad you could make it : D
2012-08-02 20:53:57 - Flow520 [team]: try to take bogota so I cat try to take out red
2012-08-02 20:54:02 - happyfeet [team]: some one else is playing lol
2012-08-02 20:54:18 - happyfeet [team]: hmm...i dont know who it is
2012-08-02 20:54:41 - Flow520 [team]: Doe that mean someone else can not follow directions left in game chat?
2012-08-02 20:55:41 - happyfeet [team]: i guess lol
2012-08-02 20:55:49 - Flow520 [team]: Wait, did chapcrap take your turn?
2012-08-02 20:56:05 - Flow520 [team]: Who is this?
2012-08-02 20:56:12 - happyfeet [team]: no he wouldnt
2012-08-02 20:56:18 - happyfeet [team]: this is happy now
2012-08-02 20:56:23 - happyfeet [team]: i just got on
2012-08-02 20:56:43 - happyfeet [team]: and someone who thought i was getting close must have taken my turn
2012-08-02 20:57:00 - Flow520 [team]: Ugh, that move killed our chances.
2012-08-02 20:57:09 - happyfeet [team]: chap might of had someone do it since i was getting close on time
2012-08-02 20:58:18 - Flow520 [team]: Would that someone have also told chapcrap to take Mumbai because I had the card?
2012-08-02 20:59:39 - Flow520 [team]: Oh well, odds are bad, but it is the only move worth doing.
2012-08-02 21:01:34 - Flow520 [team]: I'm kind of upset at this. Whoever took your turn did the move that was most benificial to the other team.
2012-08-02 21:02:35 - Flow520 [team]: I think there was foul play here. Your opinion please.
2012-08-02 21:03:33 - Flow520 [team]: snap :: 7~?0㘲◉㚰ᧉ▩☩㘭ඩ㙍䚩㖨䚱㨱㚱
2012-08-02 21:10:04 - jgordon1111: GG all
2012-08-02 21:30:15 - happyfeet [team]: i found out who it was
2012-08-02 21:30:26 - happyfeet [team]: jdbush
2012-08-02 21:31:09 - happyfeet [team]: who isnt very good
2012-08-02 21:31:55 - happyfeet [team]: sorry about that i wouldnt have missed and it does suck

: Picture of jdbush's profile showing chapcrap solicited jdbush to take a turn for a member of the opposing team (happyfeet).

So I added a link Picture of jdbush's profile showing chapcrap solicited jdbush to take a turn for a member of the opposing team (happyfeet).

[Edit: Added link to attachment.]

Posted: **Fri Aug 03, 2012 12:09 am**

if happyfeet had missed his turn you would have lost or someone took his turn and you lost.
=
same outcome

+

there is no requirement to announce in chat that you are taking someone's turn.

Posted: **Fri Aug 03, 2012 12:33 am**

greenoaks wrote:if happyfeet had missed his turn you would have lost or someone took his turn and you lost.
=
same outcome

Please read the post carefully before responding. Specifically, please see the game chat. happyfeet was posting comments in team chat timestamped before his turn time expired. He expressed confusion as to who was taking his turn. happyfeet was not going to miss his turn. happyfeet said as such in game chat.

Posted: **Fri Aug 03, 2012 12:40 am**

I'm sorry that jdbush made a bad move. I had no idea what any plan was and didn't direct him on how to take the turn in any way. The three of us (jdbush, happyfeet, and myself) are all friends in RL. Because happy was going to miss turns (I was alerted to this by agentcom), I took some turns for him. He had two games against me that I could not take turns for, so, since our mutual friend was online at the time, I asked of he could take 2 turns for happy and he did.

First of all, there was no collusion here to get me a win. If you want the points back, I'll gladly play you.

Second, you do not have to announce that you are sitting for anyone.

Third, happyfeet said he wouldn't have missed that turn, but he was cutting it real close and he would have missed other turns of they weren't taken. I didn't even contact jdbush until the turn was down to 25 minutes left.

Fourth, jdbush might have jacked up the game or plan, I don't know about that, but you still trying to kill me and leaving me weak for my partner to take out is why you lost, IMO.

Anyway, happyfeet knows that we wouldn't have screwed him on purpose, so this is just ridiculous. I don't have anything to hide about it, so if anyone has questions, ask away.

Posted: **Fri Aug 03, 2012 1:19 am**

Is this not the whole account sitting issue. It looks as though you were not asked to account sit but you have an arrangement to do it as and when i.e. when the clock gets low?

Posted: **Fri Aug 03, 2012 2:15 am**

hmsps wrote:Is this not the whole account sitting issue. It looks as though you were not asked to account sit but you have an arrangement to do it as and when i.e. when the clock gets low?

Agree with this. I don't think it was intentional abuse but king a specifically said that this type of thing:

2012-08-02 20:56:43 - happyfeet [team]: and someone who thought i was getting close must have taken my turn

goes against the spirit of account sitting.

Posted: **Fri Aug 03, 2012 4:14 am**

Dibbun wrote:
hmsps wrote:Is this not the whole account sitting issue. It looks as though you were not asked to account sit but you have an arrangement to do it as and when i.e. when the clock gets low?

Agree with this. I don't think it was intentional abuse but king a specifically said that this type of thing:

2012-08-02 20:56:43 - happyfeet [team]: and someone who thought i was getting close must have taken my turn

goes against the spirit of account sitting.

Let me preface this by saying that I don't play team games, so perhaps there is some aspect of team play that I am overlooking. However, isn't the situation of "there are only 25 minutes left of his turn" the WHOLE POINT of account sitting? I mean...you can't wait until the 25 minutes are up, obviously...

Posted: **Fri Aug 03, 2012 6:20 am**

It goes against the spirit of account sitting? :roll:

I'm pretty sure that's exactly what account sitting is. And, as this was clarified by king a in the mod forum this week, taking turns for someone is not against the rules. When someone is in danger of missing a turn, it is justified. Turns would have been missed in other games had I not stepped in. Sorry that this game got screwed up for happyfeet and Flow, but this is not abuse in any way. And, I sure happyfeet will say as much. I mean, how long would you like me to wait before taking turns? 30 seconds left?

Posted: **Fri Aug 03, 2012 7:44 am**

I had no idea this had happened until I saw this report, But the thing is most players who have someone sit their accounts generally agree that if they get between 30 min to an hour on the timer,the account sitter takes the turn.

All clans as far as I am aware have this in place, as do alot of non clan players.

Chap couldnt take the turn as it would have been a conflict of interest in the game,therefore if happy had missed the turn the same out come would have happened.

The card turn in was at the point that no one had big stacks and a good roll was game end.

Odds are I would have got happy on my turn anyway,the previous round I put my troops in a postion to do this.

It is what it is Flow,I dont think anyone intentionally threw the game.

Posted: **Fri Aug 03, 2012 9:37 am**

Chaps a good honest player. I know they all know each other in RL and chap obviously wouldn't play the turn of a game he was the opponent. Below 30 mins....

Seems like a report is being made for them skiing things right? I don't see any abuse here. If jdbush didn't make a great move and ur upset that's not exactly chaps fault. He's RL friends with both chap and happy, I don't see why he'd sabotage his friends (happy) turn.

IcePack

Posted: **Fri Aug 03, 2012 11:10 am**

chapcrap wrote:It goes against the spirit of account sitting? I'm pretty sure that's exactly what account sitting is. And, as this was clarified by king a in the mod forum this week, taking turns for someone is not against the rules. When someone is in danger of missing a turn, it is justified. Turns would have been missed in other games had I not stepped in. Sorry that this game got screwed up for happyfeet and Flow, but this is not abuse in any way. And, I sure happyfeet will say as much. I mean, how long would you like me to wait before taking turns? 30 seconds left?

Well king a said to listen to what Night Strike said, who said this: Source

Night Strike wrote:This right here is the completely FALSE mentality that gives rise to all of these stupid clan-sitting cases and blatant rule violations. You do NOT have the right to have someone else's password 24/7 in case they MIGHT miss a turn. Account sitting is supposed to only be used when people know ahead of time that they will be away from the computer and can change their password to a temporary one for the duration of the account sitting. Jumping into everybody's turns simply because they might miss is utterly ridiculous. A missed turn is literally not the end of the world. If you lose a game or clan war because of it, then so be it. Breaking the rules to have someone jump on your account anytime they want is not worth it. If Chuck was missing too many turns and becoming a liability in the clan war, then why did you keep putting him in those games? You deal with the problem when the next set of games become available, not when you have their password and can log in any time you feel like it. It's that mentality that every single game must be won at all costs (including breaking the rules) that has caused so many people to make clan wars completely intolerable to everybody else who doesn't adhere to that fundamentally flawed philosophy.

Posted: **Fri Aug 03, 2012 11:36 am**

Dibbun wrote:
chapcrap wrote:It goes against the spirit of account sitting? I'm pretty sure that's exactly what account sitting is. And, as this was clarified by king a in the mod forum this week, taking turns for someone is not against the rules. When someone is in danger of missing a turn, it is justified. Turns would have been missed in other games had I not stepped in. Sorry that this game got screwed up for happyfeet and Flow, but this is not abuse in any way. And, I sure happyfeet will say as much. I mean, how long would you like me to wait before taking turns? 30 seconds left?

Well king a said to listen to what Night Strike said, who said this: Source

Night Strike wrote:This right here is the completely FALSE mentality that gives rise to all of these stupid clan-sitting cases and blatant rule violations. You do NOT have the right to have someone else's password 24/7 in case they MIGHT miss a turn. Account sitting is supposed to only be used when people know ahead of time that they will be away from the computer and can change their password to a temporary one for the duration of the account sitting. Jumping into everybody's turns simply because they might miss is utterly ridiculous. A missed turn is literally not the end of the world. If you lose a game or clan war because of it, then so be it. Breaking the rules to have someone jump on your account anytime they want is not worth it. If Chuck was missing too many turns and becoming a liability in the clan war, then why did you keep putting him in those games? You deal with the problem when the next set of games become available, not when you have their password and can log in any time you feel like it. It's that mentality that every single game must be won at all costs (including breaking the rules) that has caused so many people to make clan wars completely intolerable to everybody else who doesn't adhere to that fundamentally flawed philosophy.

First, NS isn't an authority here.

Second, he's right about one thing, I don't have a right to have it. But, I do have the information because happyfeet wanted me to have it. So, what's your argument? That I didn't need happy's pw? Ok. What's that have to do with this? What rule do you think I broke?

Posted: **Fri Aug 03, 2012 11:51 am**

Hey relax, I'm not your enemy. I'm just saying in particular reference to the quote by happyfeet that he did not request account sitting, rather someone took it on their own initiative to watch his games and preempt his ability to take his own turn.

Here is a king a quote:

Let me remind that Account sitting is only for situations where the player is in danger of missing his turn. It is not for the purpose of safeguarding someone's games, 24 hours/day for as long as you want, nor is it for people who will intentionally not take their turns so that their account sitter or clan mate can take the turn for them. It is not a 24/7 responsibility of anyone to look after the games of their friends or clan mates as this can be seen as account sharing where more than one person is already freely logging in to one account whenever these people want to. You can only take this too far.

Posted: **Fri Aug 03, 2012 12:20 pm**

Dibbun wrote:Hey relax, I'm not your enemy. I'm just saying in particular reference to the quote by happyfeet that he did not request account sitting, rather someone took it on their own initiative to watch his games and preempt his ability to take his own turn.

Here is a king a quote:

Let me remind that Account sitting is only for situations where the player is in danger of missing his turn. It is not for the purpose of safeguarding someone's games, 24 hours/day for as long as you want, nor is it for people who will intentionally not take their turns so that their account sitter or clan mate can take the turn for them. It is not a 24/7 responsibility of anyone to look after the games of their friends or clan mates as this can be seen as account sharing where more than one person is already freely logging in to one account whenever these people want to. You can only take this too far.

That's fine. I don't really disagree with king achilles there. I don't think this falls into that. He was in danger of missing his turn. And I wasn't watching his account 24/7. Someone brought it to my attention that he was in danger because they were his teammate in a game.

This is not some crazy sitting scheme or anything like that. No one tried to sabotage anything. Flow is just mad because the sitter made a bad play and didn't read chat.

Posted: **Fri Aug 03, 2012 3:02 pm**

Ok, I was not aware that unannounced account sitting was permissible. Thus, the problem is not that jdbush didn't state that they were taking the turn or that they made a bad move.

The problem is in fact that chapcrap was involved in the taking of an opponents turn.
Happyfeet should have been allowed to miss his turn (even though it would not have been missed because the game chat shows happyfeet was there to take it). That would have been preferable to chapcrap being involved.

I would have been ok with loosing the game if my teammate had missed their turn. However, instead my opponent was involved and consequently we lost.

I know chapcrap only had the best intentions, however he did meddle with an opponents turn.

Posted: **Fri Aug 03, 2012 3:38 pm**

Flow520 wrote:I know chapcrap only had the best intentions

True.

Flow520 wrote:however he did meddle with an opponents turn.

False. I did absolutely nothing with the turn. I didn't take it. I didn't look at your cards. I didn't look at your chat.

Flow520 wrote:The problem is in fact that chapcrap was involved in the taking of an opponents turn.
Happyfeet should have been allowed to miss his turn (even though it would not have been missed because the game chat shows happyfeet was there to take it). That would have been preferable to chapcrap being involved.

That's your opinion. The actual problem is, if happyfeet had a problem with his sitter, then he could file his own report. He knew everything that happened. Why do you think it is that he didn't file a report? Or cuss me out? Or punch me in the balls? I've seen him do it to friends before, he'd do it to me if I deserved it, I'm sure of it.

Posted: **Fri Aug 03, 2012 4:47 pm**

Happyfeet should have announced that other, higher ranked players would be taking his turns. I don't see any way to legitimately punish other people abusing an account as it's essentially untraceable.

I would say that CC shouldn't be playing accounts of other members that he knows personally. Playing extra accounts without notifying other players that suddenly they're facing a much higher level opponent than they started with?

Seems like a no-no.

Pretty much as if you made a bet with a mate for one on one basketball, and he subbed himself off for Kobe Bryant.

Posted: **Fri Aug 03, 2012 4:52 pm**

Symmetry wrote:Happyfeet should have announced that other, higher ranked players would be taking his turns. I don't see any way to legitimately punish other people abusing an account as it's essentially untraceable.

I would say that CC shouldn't be playing accounts of other members that he knows personally. Playing extra accounts without notifying other players that suddenly they're facing a much higher level opponent than they started with?

Seems like a no-no.

Pretty much as if you made a bet with a mate for one on one basketball, and he subbed himself off for Kobe Bryant.

Obviously once again you have spoken about something you know very little if anything about.

Try reading what has happened before you post an inaccurate troll.

Posted: **Fri Aug 03, 2012 4:56 pm**

wow, this is retarded to file a report about. yes, chap helped me cover my games. however, i know he would not ever play any games that we are opponents. I went on vacation in june and chap is my main sitter; and many times i am playing against him in games. he asked others in our clan to cover games for me in which we were against each other. in this situation i was down to 15 mins and got on to see my turn being taken. i wasnt for sure who it was at the time since i knew it was not chap. so, i simply asked chap if he knew who it was and he told me. jdbush is a real life friend and i trust him with my account. once i found out who it was i reported it to flow which i didnt need to do. anyways, a bad turn by a sitter is not a crime or cheating. yes, im not thrilled about it myself that we ended up lossing the game. but i never got another turn so i could say that flow missed played and simply weakened chap for his own teammate to take him out. so, really he could have played his turn different. he should be mad at himself for miss playing. maybe next time he will ask his partner for help.

Posted: **Fri Aug 03, 2012 4:56 pm**

jgordon1111 wrote:
Symmetry wrote:Happyfeet should have announced that other, higher ranked players would be taking his turns. I don't see any way to legitimately punish other people abusing an account as it's essentially untraceable.

I would say that CC shouldn't be playing accounts of other members that he knows personally. Playing extra accounts without notifying other players that suddenly they're facing a much higher level opponent than they started with?

Seems like a no-no.

Pretty much as if you made a bet with a mate for one on one basketball, and he subbed himself off for Kobe Bryant.

Obviously once again you have spoken about something you know very little if anything about.

Try reading what has happened before you post an inaccurate troll.

I'm not sure what your criticism is. I'll PM you with details if you want, but the issue of account sitting will always be one of the major bugbears.

Posted: **Fri Aug 03, 2012 5:22 pm**

Symmetry wrote:Happyfeet should have announced that other, higher ranked players would be taking his turns. I don't see any way to legitimately punish other people abusing an account as it's essentially untraceable.

I would say that CC shouldn't be playing accounts of other members that he knows personally. Playing extra accounts without notifying other players that suddenly they're facing a much higher level opponent than they started with?

Seems like a no-no.

Pretty much as if you made a bet with a mate for one on one basketball, and he subbed himself off for Kobe Bryant.

1) happyfeet wasn't subbed by a higher ranked player.
2) ChapCrap is happyfeets main sitter, and again they aren't facing a much higher level opponent. Perhaps you should look at players involved here....
3) Therefore since it wasn't a much higher ranked subbing for happy, it wasn't being subbed "with Kobe".

Details matter.

Posted: **Fri Aug 03, 2012 5:25 pm**

IcePack wrote:
Symmetry wrote:Happyfeet should have announced that other, higher ranked players would be taking his turns. I don't see any way to legitimately punish other people abusing an account as it's essentially untraceable.

I would say that CC shouldn't be playing accounts of other members that he knows personally. Playing extra accounts without notifying other players that suddenly they're facing a much higher level opponent than they started with?

Seems like a no-no.

Pretty much as if you made a bet with a mate for one on one basketball, and he subbed himself off for Kobe Bryant.

1) happyfeet wasn't subbed by a higher ranked player.
2) ChapCrap is happyfeets main sitter, and again they aren't facing a much higher level opponent. Perhaps you should look at players involved here....
3) Therefore since it wasn't a much higher ranked subbing for happy, it wasn't being subbed "with Kobe".

Details matter.

Yes, you're right, and I was wrong. Apologies, and thanks for the correction IP.

Posted: **Fri Aug 03, 2012 5:27 pm**

Flow520 wrote:2012-08-02 20:58:18 - Flow520 [team]: Would that someone have also told chapcrap to take Mumbai because I had the card?

Observation(question is bellow): yellow(12 territories)/blue(8 territories)

chap had: Cairo, Lagos, Dubai and Bogota

Bogota neighbors:
friendly: Lima/Sao Paulo(green)
enemy: Mexico City(yellow)

Cairo, Lagos, Dubai neighbors:
friendly: Istanbul, Moscow(green)
enemy: Nairobi/Dakar/Cape Town(yellow) and Mumbai(blue)

My guess is that chapcrap and jgordon1111 were going after your elimination and didn't expected your set, tho I can not be sure since its hard to read from the game chat.

Something for thinking(both moves are defensive). Timezone: Central European Time Zone
2012-08-02 03:13:57 - jgordon1111 reinforced Bogota with 2 troops from Lima
2012-08-03 02:55:22 - chapcrap reinforced Lima with 1 troops from Bogota

Question: Why chap left 2 units on Bogota before he was eliminated by his teammate if he knew what cards you had? Risky according to me.

Can someone provide us with picture of the actual units distribution after happyfeet's problematic turn or something useful so we wont guess what was going on from game chat?

Posted: **Fri Aug 03, 2012 5:45 pm**

Perhaps a better course of action for chapcrap would have been to wall message happyfeet instead of an account sitter. It was not chapcrap's place to ask an account sitter to sit a game for another player. (Especially considering that chapcrap was an opponent in that game!) There is an absolute conflict of interest regardless of intentions.

Opinions aside, the facts are very clear. Chapcrap solicited someone to take the turn of his opponent. (See attached screenshot of jdbush's wall located in first post.) It's pretty direct meddling. This act (however well intentioned) had an adverse effect on the game.
Moreover, happyfeet (friends with chapcrap as claimed by both parties) made the comment that chapcrap has previously engaged in this behavior.

happyfeet wrote:he [chapcrap] asked others in our clan to cover games for me in which we were against each other

If happyfeet is correct, this is not chapcrap's first offense.

Posted: **Fri Aug 03, 2012 5:50 pm**

GoranZ wrote:Question: Why chap left 2 units on Bogota before he was eliminated by his teammate if he knew what cards you had? Risky according to me.

Can someone provide us with picture of the actual units distribution after happyfeet's problematic turn or something useful so we wont guess what was going on from game chat?

Is this relevant?

I'll paste my game chat here for you. There was probably more chat on our walls than in the game. I don't know why that is, but jgordon post on my wall (like the fort I asked about in chat). It's deleted now though, because I didn't want someone to see anything there. Here is the entire thing...pretty crappy chat really:

show

If you wanna know what I was thinking on my turn, I was thinking, 'I'll take the most advantageous tert for me.' I have no idea why I thought it was the one I took. I've played too many games since then and this is just a simple sunny game on Classic, so there wasn't years of thought going into the move or anything.

Flow520 wrote:
happyfeet wrote:he [chapcrap] asked others in our clan to cover games for me in which we were against each other

If happyfeet is correct, this is not chapcrap's first offense.

It's not an offense when it's what happy wants. :roll:

Conquer Club

jdbush chapcrap [noted]

jdbush chapcrap [noted]

Re: jdbush chapcrap

Re: jdbush chapcrap

Re: jdbush chapcrap

Re: jdbush chapcrap

Re: jdbush chapcrap

Re: jdbush chapcrap

Re: jdbush chapcrap [pending]

Re: jdbush chapcrap [pending]

Re: jdbush chapcrap [pending]

Re: jdbush chapcrap [pending]

Re: jdbush chapcrap [pending]

Re: jdbush chapcrap [pending]

Re: jdbush chapcrap [pending]

Re: jdbush chapcrap [pending]

Re: jdbush chapcrap [pending]

Re: jdbush chapcrap [pending]

Re: jdbush chapcrap [pending]

Re: jdbush chapcrap [pending]

Re: jdbush chapcrap [pending]

Re: jdbush chapcrap [pending]

Re: jdbush chapcrap [pending]

Re: jdbush chapcrap [pending]

Re: jdbush chapcrap [pending]

Re: jdbush chapcrap [pending]