Conquer Club

Accused:

LiveLoveTeach
Captn B
ViperOverLord



The accused are suspected of:

Conducting Secret Diplomacy



Game number(s):

Game 17610793 (the evidence is in the chat from this game)
Game 17610794
Game 17610792

Comments:

It's fine to have three players gang up on me in a series of games, in fact I consider that a great compliment, but planning over Private Message is explicitly against the rules and I will not stand for that. This is very upsetting.

Here is another example of LLT's cheap tactics and bad attitude.

I recall being absolutely appalled by her saying the game wasn't decent because I didn't cooperate with her and the other opponent's truce to squeeze me out. LLT acted like she had an a priori entitlement to win... but then she ended up being killed off first, which put her in a huff and so she then gave me unfairly low ratings. That's what wasn't decent.

https://www.conquerclub.com/game.php?game=16781830

Generalissimo wrote:Accused:

LiveLoveTeach
Captn B
ViperOverLord



The accused are suspected of:

Conducting Secret Diplomacy



Game number(s):

Game 17610793 (the evidence is in the chat from this game)
Game 17610794
Game 17610792

Comments:

It's fine to have three players gang up on me in a series of games, in fact I consider that a great compliment, but planning over Private Message is explicitly against the rules and I will not stand for that. This is very upsetting.

2017-08-17 11:47:09 - Captn B: You may be thinking about the other game, which I asked two of you to check the log before your play. There is a specific game number in that pm.
2017-08-17 11:48:29 - Captn B: It was game 17610792. Not this one.

Asking someone to check the log is actually fine, as long as they don't discuss moves or tactics. Might be hard to prove that they discussed tactics in a PM. Unless you can prove the 3 of them are solely teaming up against you, it would be hard to prove.

Thorthoth wrote:Here is another example of LLT's cheap tactics and bad attitude.

I recall being absolutely appalled by her saying the game wasn't decent because I didn't cooperate with her and the other opponent's truce to squeeze me out. LLT acted like she had an a priori entitlement to win... but then she ended up being killed off first, which put her in a huff and so she then gave me unfairly low ratings. That's what wasn't decent.

https://www.conquerclub.com/game.php?game=16781830

This doesn't involve this case at all dude. This is about SD, not Ratings or you 2 getting into a disagreement about another game. I don't see how this is relevant at all.

TheForgivenOne wrote:

Generalissimo wrote:Accused:

LiveLoveTeach
Captn B
ViperOverLord



The accused are suspected of:

Conducting Secret Diplomacy



Game number(s):

Game 17610793 (the evidence is in the chat from this game)
Game 17610794
Game 17610792

Comments:

It's fine to have three players gang up on me in a series of games, in fact I consider that a great compliment, but planning over Private Message is explicitly against the rules and I will not stand for that. This is very upsetting.

2017-08-17 11:47:09 - Captn B: You may be thinking about the other game, which I asked two of you to check the log before your play. There is a specific game number in that pm.
2017-08-17 11:48:29 - Captn B: It was game 17610792. Not this one.

Asking someone to check the log is actually fine, as long as they don't discuss moves or tactics. Might be hard to prove that they discussed tactics in a PM. Unless you can prove the 3 of them are solely teaming up against you, it would be hard to prove.

Thorthoth wrote:Here is another example of LLT's cheap tactics and bad attitude.

I recall being absolutely appalled by her saying the game wasn't decent because I didn't cooperate with her and the other opponent's truce to squeeze me out. LLT acted like she had an a priori entitlement to win... but then she ended up being killed off first, which put her in a huff and so she then gave me unfairly low ratings. That's what wasn't decent.

https://www.conquerclub.com/game.php?game=16781830

This doesn't involve this case at all dude. This is about SD, not Ratings or you 2 getting into a disagreement about another game. I don't see how this is relevant at all.

I'm a character witness, duh.

I am very surprised by this accusation.

generalissamo, I thot we had good communication, and am surprised that you would levy such a complaint.

Here are the contents of the message I sent. There are no redactions or edits. The staff is welcomed to inspect ALL of my pm's to see if there has ever been ANY collusion in any of my games. There hasn't been. This is the date, timestamp, and contents of the message I sent, specifically referring to the exact game that I referenced in a different game, when bad-attituded LLT confused the whole issue: (The first line is the subject.)

Ak
Sent: Tue Aug 15, 2017 6:58 pm
From: Captn B
To: ViperOverLord LiveLoveTeach
Game 17610792 Please see chat in this game before your turns. thx

Generalissimo, perhaps you should have the decency to ask, in the game, if we had violated any of the rules. Maybe something like: "You guys aren't talking secretly behind my back, are you? Cause, you know, that'd be against the rules, right?"

Something like that would have been addressed directly--or if hidden "diplomacy" WAS being perpetrated, then the response would probably have been ignored or engendered MORE secret discussions (easier to prove).

But you are being as childish as VOL, who I accused of being a teenager or a girl. lol Funny to now find out that LLT is a female, but was behaving well and unemotionally, while vol was being such a whiner! hahahaha

Anyway, staff, please look into it. There has NEVER been any secret collusion, on my part. With anyone. Ever.

general, grow up. You've lost cred in my book.

For someone being so sexist to accuse women of whining and being emotional, your post sure does seem whiny and emotional.

Greetings. Any C&A report concerning one of my team gets my attention.

I have read all the logs and chat from all the games submitted in evidence.

I see nothing apart from an admission from:

Captn B wrote:Sent: Tue Aug 15, 2017 6:58 pm
From: Captn B
To: ViperOverLord LiveLoveTeach
Game 17610792 Please see chat in this game before your turns. thx

I have also had this confirmed from LLT via chat, and have a forwarded timestamped message confirming the above is correct.

No one at this stage has suggested that any reply was made via PM.

Captn B, the wording of your message, "Please see chat in this game before your turns", is all fine.. IF EVERYONE in the game is included in the message.
In this instance, you have chosen to select/exclude people in the game... thats not cool... thats SD.
As soon as you excluded someone from your PM, thats it DONE, and then dragged all recipiants into a mess unknowingly.

Thorthoth wrote:I'm a character witness, duh.

TT.. seriously?
Are you still that butthurt from a game a year ago where 2 players outwitted you in deplomacy?, that you have to continue with this personal vendeta?
2016-08-14 03:35:04 - Thorthoth lost 23 points
Grow up and take a good sniff of reality.
Your personal feelings have been logged, as you are aware, so don't even go there.

There is an explicit reference to a private message communicating about the game. It is very simple.

2017-08-17 17:47:09 - Captn B: You may be thinking about the other game, which I asked two of you to check the log before your play. There is a specific game number in that pm.

Razorvich, Are you official? I mean, the words you wrote sound official, but, I mean, is yours an official investigation for the site?

If so, I had no idea that excluding anyone in a pm to check the game chat could be considered SD. If you're not working on behalf of the site, I would strongly question your interpretation of SD. In that it was important to me to have the others look at chat and didn't apply to one player, as far as urgency goes, then it is pertinent only to those I would send the message to, in that I wanted them to see the game chat before their turns.

That said, again if you are a site official, then be it known that I was the only one that did it. I had no idea that that would constitute a violation.

fyi, Those who I sent the pm to never responded to me via pm or wall. They never communicated back to me except in game chat. So if there is any action that should be taken, it should only go against me. Fair is fair. I sent the pm, not them.

Yet, as you said in your post, I did it unknowingly. I thot my actions were completely aboveboard and unimpeachable. I don't like cheating/cheaters and did not/do not intentionally cheat at all. That is not who I am.

Surely though, my message did not hamper the game at all, since the others did not agree with my suggestions. generalissimo was not injured by this in any way, in any game that we are playing.

Razorvich wrote:Greetings. Any C&A report concerning one of my team gets my attention.

I have read all the logs and chat from all the games submitted in evidence.

I see nothing apart from an admission from:

Captn B wrote:Sent: Tue Aug 15, 2017 6:58 pm
From: Captn B
To: ViperOverLord LiveLoveTeach
Game 17610792 Please see chat in this game before your turns. thx

I have also had this confirmed from LLT via chat, and have a forwarded timestamped message confirming the above is correct.

No one at this stage has suggested that any reply was made via PM.

Captn B, the wording of your message, "Please see chat in this game before your turns", is all fine.. IF EVERYONE in the game is included in the message.
In this instance, you have chosen to select/exclude people in the game... thats not cool... thats SD.
As soon as you excluded someone from your PM, thats it DONE, and then dragged all recipiants into a mess unknowingly.

Thorthoth wrote:I'm a character witness, duh.

TT.. seriously?
Are you still that butthurt from a game a year ago where 2 players outwitted you in deplomacy?, that you have to continue with this personal vendeta?
2016-08-14 03:35:04 - Thorthoth lost 23 points
Grow up and take a good sniff of reality.
Your personal feelings have been logged, as you are aware, so don't even go there.

It only seems dodgy because Captn B PM'd 2/3 of the players he was against. It's not really any different from walling someone because you want them to read chat in a multiplayer game before they play their next turn.

I didn't respond to the PM and you'll see that any "diplomacy" pretty much consisted of me telling CB he was full of sh** concerning his take on the game.

As for only messaging 2 of 3 to say look at chat, I don't know that that's any different than walling one person to say look at chat before playing (a routine occurrence). I guess I might classify it as cheap tactics though if I were doing a rating.

Razorvich wrote:Greetings. Any C&A report concerning one of my team gets my attention.

I have read all the logs and chat from all the games submitted in evidence.

I see nothing apart from an admission from:

Captn B wrote:Sent: Tue Aug 15, 2017 6:58 pm
From: Captn B
To: ViperOverLord LiveLoveTeach
Game 17610792 Please see chat in this game before your turns. thx

I have also had this confirmed from LLT via chat, and have a forwarded timestamped message confirming the above is correct.

No one at this stage has suggested that any reply was made via PM.

Captn B, the wording of your message, "Please see chat in this game before your turns", is all fine.. IF EVERYONE in the game is included in the message.
In this instance, you have chosen to select/exclude people in the game... thats not cool... thats SD.
As soon as you excluded someone from your PM, thats it DONE, and then dragged all recipiants into a mess unknowingly.

Thorthoth wrote:I'm a character witness, duh.

TT.. seriously?
Are you still that butthurt from a game a year ago where 2 players outwitted you in deplomacy?, that you have to continue with this personal vendeta?
2016-08-14 03:35:04 - Thorthoth lost 23 points
Grow up and take a good sniff of reality.
Your personal feelings have been logged, as you are aware, so don't even go there.

Raz is overstepping his bounds. His over-protective behavior towards 'his' mods and their wrongdoing is tiresome. I guess poisonous snowflakes also melt...There should be more open criticism, not less... and his suggestion that I'm upset about losing that game is disingenuous. What I didn't like was LLT's presumptive and petulant attitude about the game because she happened to lose. She was also the first to involve unfair ratings in to the mix as well.

Thorthoth wrote:

Razorvich wrote:Greetings. Any C&A report concerning one of my team gets my attention.

I have read all the logs and chat from all the games submitted in evidence.

I see nothing apart from an admission from:

Captn B wrote:Sent: Tue Aug 15, 2017 6:58 pm
From: Captn B
To: ViperOverLord LiveLoveTeach
Game 17610792 Please see chat in this game before your turns. thx

I have also had this confirmed from LLT via chat, and have a forwarded timestamped message confirming the above is correct.

No one at this stage has suggested that any reply was made via PM.

Captn B, the wording of your message, "Please see chat in this game before your turns", is all fine.. IF EVERYONE in the game is included in the message.
In this instance, you have chosen to select/exclude people in the game... thats not cool... thats SD.
As soon as you excluded someone from your PM, thats it DONE, and then dragged all recipiants into a mess unknowingly.

Thorthoth wrote:I'm a character witness, duh.

TT.. seriously?
Are you still that butthurt from a game a year ago where 2 players outwitted you in deplomacy?, that you have to continue with this personal vendeta?
2016-08-14 03:35:04 - Thorthoth lost 23 points
Grow up and take a good sniff of reality.
Your personal feelings have been logged, as you are aware, so don't even go there.

Raz is overstepping his bounds. His over-protective behavior towards 'his' mods and their wrongdoing is tiresome. I guess poisonous snowflakes also melt...There should be more open criticism, not less... and his suggestion that I'm upset about losing that game is disingenuous. What I didn't like was LLT's presumptive and petulant attitude about the game because she happened to lose. She was also the first to involve unfair ratings in to the mix as well.

This. Is. Not. About. Ratings. Abuse.

This is SOLELY about Secret Diplomacy. Not about what she did in some random game with you. If you had some game where LLT conducted Secret Diplomacy, then this would be relevant. But it's not. You seem to be on a vendetta to persecute LLT instead.

I am aware of what the current charges are, but I do feel it both important and useful to make a record of any previous wrongdoing by the accused.

Thorthoth wrote:I am aware of what the current charges are, but I do feel it both important and useful to make a record of any previous wrongdoing by the accused.

It's honestly not though. It's completely off topic. Should I go into any C&A report about someone that I had a disagreement with to try and throw mud, even though my grief is irrelevant to what the current case is about? "Yeah Person X is being reported for SD, but that person once gave me a poor rating!!!!!"

If you don't like the rating, report it yourself. Go make a case that LLT is abusing the rating system. If anything was to be logged about LLT, it would be in correspondence with this case of Secret Diplomacy. Not the fact you got a rating you don't agree with.

Captn B wrote:Razorvich, Are you official? I mean, the words you wrote sound official, but, I mean, is yours an official investigation for the site?

I am quite sure it wasn't official, Razor isn't part of the C&A team.

But I agree with Razor, don't pm.
You should have wall them imo. Same effect but it's public, and it's ok to wall only some players and not all in the game.

At worst you'll get a warning, if it's an offense it's really minor, nothing to worry about.

Donelladan wrote:

Captn B wrote:Razorvich, Are you official? I mean, the words you wrote sound official, but, I mean, is yours an official investigation for the site?

I am quite sure it wasn't official, Razor isn't part of the C&A team.

But I agree with Razor, don't pm.
You should have wall them imo. Same effect but it's public, and it's ok to wall only some players and not all in the game.

At worst you'll get a warning, if it's an offense it's really minor, nothing to worry about.

However it's not ok to have a truce proposal on someone's wall.

Extreme Ways wrote:However it's not ok to have a truce proposal on someone's wall.

And since all we have is a game chat that says something along the lines of "come on guys there was a specific game number referenced in that PM" and the three players were also simultaneously attempting to gang up on me (again, I'm fine with that) - one could see how this is a concern.

If it's found to be nothing big, so be it. But it's worth ruffling some feathers in order to keep the integrity of the site intact.

We do allow players to post on opponents wall to look at chat. I think sending a PM would be considered the same thing. I am marking this CLEARED. I do suggest that you only wall post and not send PM's. I do agree with viper and suggest you rate accordingly.

I looked at the game logs and I did not see anything that looked like they were teaming up on the OP. When one player is in the lead in a game it is an obvious move to try to weaken him/her.

Thorthoth please do no bring your crusade against mods into this forum.

Razor please refrain from throwing mud at other players. It had noting to do with this report.

Seems like a good call. Messy stuff ES.

Generalissimo wrote:

Extreme Ways wrote:However it's not ok to have a truce proposal on someone's wall.

And since all we have is a game chat that says something along the lines of "come on guys there was a specific game number referenced in that PM" and the three players were also simultaneously attempting to gang up on me (again, I'm fine with that) - one could see how this is a concern.

If it's found to be nothing big, so be it. But it's worth ruffling some feathers in order to keep the integrity of the site intact.

Geez, dude. I attacked CB after he sent the pm (and called him out and had no coordination with him whatsoever). Do you like having your own made-up history? You may be thinking of the game(s) in which you were going for Indian Passage bonus (Southeast) at all costs, and I stood in your way in part. But even all of that was before the PM in question. Frankly, at this point you should be apologizing now that you're accusation has been shown to be baseless at least as far as I'm concerned.

Thanks for your wise (for the most part) approach and decision, ES.

However if pm'ing and walling are basically the same, then why would you suggest that they "rate accordingly." If walling someone to check chat is fine, then to be efficient and do two at once in a pm, with the same message is NOT "cheap tactics." Nothing hidden about it, nothing cheap about it, just more efficient because it was faster.

[Now, I'm gonna pm ES--and not everyone else in this thread--to get him to come look at this post. I don't believe that is a cheap tactic, is it?]

The case got cleared. You should probably stop making issues out of nothing when you're lucky it wasn't noted.

#nailedit