Conquer Club

Accused:

Alexscelsus
eleni333

The accused are suspected of:

Conducting Secret Diplomacy


Game number(s):

Game 15669160


Comments: after Alex's prudish rudeness to me in Global Chat, I went on to her wall to write her a scintillating love note. Imagine my horror when I saw the following message from eleni333 on there:

you can have green. next turn ill move out ventura by killing red on bakerfeild.i want sonoma and s.f

And my overwhelming disappointment to click through to eleni's profile and see this message from Alex:

Hey, we're in Game 15669160 together. Just wanted to let you know I'll get out of your way if you give me a way out. I don't want us to wipe each other out in the first couple turns because we're on top of each other. Just let me know where you want me to move from by reinforcing out of my way and I'll move. Okay?

Alex was my Queen for several minutes.

Now, however, her unfeminine rudeness towards me and her unsporting conduct on CC has soiled her forever in my mind.

Please throw her to the wolves.

I didn't realize posting publicly on someone's wall was considered, what, punishable behavior? When I take an opponent seriously, I always check their wall. I also don't recall the rules saying anything about not doing that, though I haven't checked the rules since 2011. I'll have to take a look at what's been updated.


On a different subject, is there anything in the rules about chat to cover this comment?
"mrswdk: hey alex, sharpie in pooper"


Thanks.

Rule #2: No secret diplomacy

Any form of diplomatic discussion between opponents must only be posted in the game chat in English or in a language that all opponents understand. No other methods of communication may be used to hold diplomatic discussions between opponents including, but not limited to, the forum, the wall, Live Chat, or the inbox.

Personally I would consider the above comment a compliment. You should be flattered.

I was looking for it under the THE GAME tab for a while before noticing the tiny RULES link on the upper right. The way it's posted, it must always have been there and I just totally forgot. Thanks for pointing it out, mrswdk.

More than welcome ^3^

ladies , ladies , ladies, cant we all just get along?

i think they should make out.

Alexscelus wrote: I also don't recall the rules saying anything about not doing that, though I haven't checked the rules since 2011. I'll have to take a look at what's been updated.

you obviously never read the rules, then... secret diplomacy, etc... open and shut.. someone is getting a warning... that's how it goes and now you now...-Jésus noir

owenshooter wrote:

Alexscelus wrote: I also don't recall the rules saying anything about not doing that, though I haven't checked the rules since 2011. I'll have to take a look at what's been updated.

you obviously never read the rules, then... secret diplomacy, etc... open and shut.. someone is getting a warning... that's how it goes and now you now...-Jésus noir

No, it's not obvious, though thanks for highlighting the issue I see with this.

I played a fair bit of CC from 2009 to 2011, enough to think I knew what was up. I had some regular allies for team games and such, though I don't remember the clans being a thing, or Global Chat. Suffice to say, I was familiar with CC minus the tournaments and regularly used the wall and PMs to chat with players.

Then I left and played other games, with different rules. The most prominent in the last year has been Neptune's Pride, whose rules are about as opposite CC as it gets. Multi accounts aren't regulated, or even an issue because of how gameplay works. Alliances are completely up to the discretion of the players and their personal honor. Reputation is measured vaguely in victories and medals, paid for by other players. All messages are private unless you choose to include multiple recipients. The creator does not monitor any communications. Relations are tenuous and while alliances are critical to winning, betrayals happen all the time, making successful alliances all the more exciting.

I returned recently to a simple board game I used to play and didn't think to look for the rules. I already knew how to play and had had no problems in the past. There was no reminder to check them or other obvious hint to deter me from breaking any rules. I put a couple messages on opponents' walls, which seemed pretty forthright to me since it was public and all, hardly a secret alliance, and then mrswdk annoyingly called me out on it formally instead of just asking me about it. Likewise, the two "honest" players I contacted out of game said nothing about its illegality. Maybe eleni forgot, how should I know? But it's a freaking game, not a matter of life or death, and if the rules aren't posted blatantly, I don't think it's crazy to assume that some people may have reason to have forgotten them.

But please, if you'd like to accurately recite all the rules you've ever read in your life to prove whatever it is exactly you're trying to prove, go do it somewhere else because I don't give a damn.


If there are others like Owen who are on a warpath when it comes to this issue, then my suggestion is to do something about it other than blaming players who profess innocence. The point I did want to make is that if CC rules are changing, or at least being rewritten, and the rules are important, maybe they should be linked to from more than just the RULES in the upper right corner.
*When someone returns after a hiatus, they could receive an email reminder with the rules. Or there could be a button on player's pages so you can quickly send them a reminder of the rules if you think they aren't following them (including rating or whatever else).* Basically, I'm saying culpability should be reasonable and I don't know of any other games where it's important to check the rules again before you join back in after having been away a while. If it's a serious infraction that's easy to make, it should be more obvious it's a problem to help prevent it from happening instead of just accusing people of being LIARS, which some people do NOT appreciate, and thinking you've saved the world.

Those are some good suggestions. You should post them in the 'discussions' forum for a broader audience and discussion and due process consideration

ZornSlayer wrote:Those are some good suggestions. You should post them in the 'discussions' forum for a broader audience and discussion and due process consideration

Thanks, will do.

I think that everyone now know how to conduct diplomatic relations on this site at present.
The offenders in this case both have clean records and will receive a warning.

Case closed

Alexscelus wrote:If there are others like Owen who are on a warpath when it comes to this issue, then my suggestion is to do something about it other than blaming players who profess innocence.

what warpath am i on? trust me, honey, i just commented on an open and shut case... i even called what the punishment would be, a warning, since you were ignorant of the rule... soooo, i have no idea what you are trying to say here, but i didn't report you and i could care less about you, so how am i on any warpath? *eyes rolling out of my black jesus skull*...-Jésus noir

owenshooter wrote:

Alexscelus wrote:If there are others like Owen who are on a warpath when it comes to this issue, then my suggestion is to do something about it other than blaming players who profess innocence.

what warpath am i on? trust me, honey, i just commented on an open and shut case... i even called what the punishment would be, a warning, since you were ignorant of the rule... soooo, i have no idea what you are trying to say here, but i didn't report you and i could care less about you, so how am i on any warpath? *eyes rolling out of my black jesus skull*...-Jésus noir

Owen, the 1970s called, they'd like their patronising sexist attitudes back when you've finished with them...

owenshooter wrote: soooo, i have no idea what you are trying to say here

Sorry, you're totally right about my reply being disconnected from your statement. For some reason I thought you wrote 'banning', not 'warning'. Complete brain fog.

Owen, what sort of authority/role do you carry with the admins exactly? Are you some kind of official rep to help explain things?

clangfield wrote:Owen, the 1970s called, they'd like their patronising sexist attitudes back when you've finished with them...

ha!! i do apologize!! you must remember, i live in the south (austin, texas), and that is a completely normal and non-sexist thing to say to either sex... literally, my server called me "hon" last night... and the girl in the coffee shop i go to, calls me "sugar." just didn't even think of it being sexist, but i know living in the south isn't an excuse...

ZornSlayer wrote:Owen, what sort of authority/role do you carry with the admins exactly? Are you some kind of official rep to help explain things?

am i not allowed to comment on situations in C&A as others are allowed to do? i am sorry that 98% of the time, i am correct within the forum, it is just how it is... i have been banned enough times to be quite astute at the rules, and their many interpretations... as far as my role with the admins/mods, i am not at liberty to disclose... the black jesus has spoken...-Jésus noir

owenshooter wrote:you obviously never read the rules, then... secret diplomacy, etc... open and shut.. someone is getting a warning... that's how it goes and now you now...-Jésus noir

I smell a false prophet. "For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever practices good syntax in him shall not perish but have eternal life." "And we know that in all things God works for the good of those who love him, who have been called according to practicing good syntax for his purpose." Etc, etc.