Conquer Club

Accused
Donelladan

The accused are suspected of:

Conducting Secret Diplomacy
Other: Spurious Report

Game number(s):

Game 19885763

Comments:
In the link below (quoted for context) Donelladan reported rockfist for deadbeating, which did not take place.
In addition, he also reveals in C&A post that rockfist is his target in an Assassin game. A fact that he does not post in the game chat, nor links to his C&A post for the in game group to be made aware. He then answers questions in the chat generically, hiding the fact in chat that rockfist is his target.
This allows anyone in game who pays attention to C&A to have knowledge that isn’t readily available in the game chat as is required by rules.

viewtopic.php?f=5&t=233691

He also posted on rockfist wall more than just “please see X game chat”

rockfist wrote:Don wrote this on my wall, which is more than asking me to read game chat...


https://www.conquerclub.com/game.php?game=19885763
why are you missing turns in this game ? are you planning to deadbeat ?

User avatar
by Donelladan
on Sat Jun 27, 2020 2:00 pm

Donelladan wrote:Accused:

rockfist

The accused are suspected of:

Other: Deadbeating assassin game

Game number(s):

Game 19885763

Comments:

rockfist already missed 2 turns in the game above, while he was playing in other games at the same time.
for example his last missed turn :

2020-06-26 21:33:23 - rockfist missed a turn

while he played twice in the timeframe this game :
Game 20090190

2020-06-25 23:52:14 - rockfist received 2 troops for holding ?

2020-06-26 17:42:28 - rockfist received 2 troops for holding ?

and once in this one

Game 20090184

2020-06-26 15:24:17 - rockfist received 3 troops for 10 regions

( those are just 2 example of the multiple games rockfist played while he missed in the assassin game)

rockfist only has 2 regions and has now close to no chance to win the game, he is therefore deadbeating it.

But because it is an assassin game it means that when he deadbeat his assassin will have a new target. Making it more difficult for him to win the game.

He is my target.

That's all true and he did try to obfuscate who is target was in the game, which I would have no problem with, except he posted it in a thread.

lol.
Seriously what's your problem IcePack ? Are you still mad at me because I got the resign button implemented ?

That one is hell of a spurious report.

1. SD rule

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.

There was no diplomacy involved in that comment so it doesn't hold. IMO it was a mistake to include it (though anybody coming across that report would have probably assumed done filled the report because rockfist was his target anyways).

2. Spurious report
Even though the deadbeating didn't occur in the end, given the evidence provided there was grounds to suspect rockfist was intentionnally deadbeating (and also there's no way of knowing whether the preemptive report had the desired effect of having him not deadbeat)

ZaBeast wrote:1. SD rule

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.

There was no diplomacy involved in that comment so it doesn't hold. IMO it was a mistake to include it (though anybody coming across that report would have probably assumed done filled the report because rockfist was his target anyways).

2. Spurious report
Even though the deadbeating didn't occur in the end, given the evidence provided there was grounds to suspect rockfist was intentionnally deadbeating (and also there's no way of knowing whether the preemptive report had the desired effect of having him not deadbeat)

1. Knowing targets in an assassins game and posting it in the forum while being generic in the game is an important aspect of that game being discussed outside game chat. In the past it’s been said even on the wall you can’t note or ask questions beyond “go see this game chat” is allowed. He stated his intent was to force rockfist to play, that should have been done in game chat, and directed rock from the wall to read it.

2. You can’t report someone for doing something before it happens. It’s 100% spurious. This isn’t the minority report movie, looking into the future on alleged future abuses. Rockfist has to actually do something to put himself there, and didn’t include 5 instances to back his claim. Spurious. As I said above, if you want to force him to play before he deadbeats, wall message / in game message is the only way. A C&A report isn’t the place to force someone to play their turn, it’s where you file complaints against someone who broke rules. Rockfist hasn’t broken the rule

Donelladan wrote:That one is hell of a spurious report.

I agree, your report is spurious. I’m glad you also agree that you shouldn’t be posting targets in Assassin games.

2020-07-01 20:30:04 - Donelladan: I didn't reveal it in this game because it's not something I think people should do in an assassin game

Yet you felt comfortable posting it outside of game chat, which is even worse.

Secret Diplomacy? Game information was posted outside of game chat, so this, in my opinion, is a case of Secret Diplomacy. Hey, it happens every now and then. Hindsight is 2020. Should have posted the C&A report in the game chat but we live and we learn. It doesn't appear malicious, more forgetful or careless.

Hasty/Impatient Report? Sure, no violation of rules had yet been committed when the C&A Report was made. Not really Spurious, imo. Would you consider this report to be Spurious?

diabolical!!!

Jdsizzleslice wrote:Secret Diplomacy? Game information was posted outside of game chat, so this, in my opinion, is a case of Secret Diplomacy. Hey, it happens every now and then. Hindsight is 2020. Should have posted the C&A report in the game chat but we live and we learn. It doesn't appear malicious, more forgetful or careless.

Hasty/Impatient Report? Sure, no violation of rules had yet been committed when the C&A Report was made. Not really Spurious, imo. Would you consider this report to be Spurious?

I agree it happens, and Don should get a warning like the rest of them. Whether it was accidental, malicious, forgetful or careless, the result is the same (a warning if it’s his first offense).

No violation of rules had yet OR STILL HAVE YET TO BE committed by rockfist. So in this case, Don is the only one violating the rules. Spurious is defined as false or fake, so it 100% meets that. Unless rock misses 3 turns in a row and deadbeats, the intentional deadbeating accusation is 100% spurious. It wasn’t he posted it hasty and then rock desdbeated. He admitted it was intentional to force rock to play. Thus, was more of a diplomatic / force his opponent to do what he wants (play) move then a serious C&A report.

Not sure about your other case, at first glance doesn’t appear to be similar at all. But not really interested in discussing / reviewing other cases, just providing evidence for this one. Thanks

IcePack wrote:

Jdsizzleslice wrote:Secret Diplomacy? Game information was posted outside of game chat, so this, in my opinion, is a case of Secret Diplomacy. Hey, it happens every now and then. Hindsight is 2020. Should have posted the C&A report in the game chat but we live and we learn. It doesn't appear malicious, more forgetful or careless.

Hasty/Impatient Report? Sure, no violation of rules had yet been committed when the C&A Report was made. Not really Spurious, imo. Would you consider this report to be Spurious?

I agree it happens, and Don should get a warning like the rest of them. Whether it was accidental, malicious, forgetful or careless, the result is the same (a warning if it’s his first offense).

No violation of rules had yet OR STILL HAVE YET TO BE committed by rockfist. So in this case, Don is the only one violating the rules. Spurious is defined as false or fake, so it 100% meets that. Unless rock misses 3 turns in a row and deadbeats, the intentional deadbeating accusation is 100% spurious. It wasn’t he posted it hasty and then rock desdbeated. He admitted it was intentional to force rock to play. Thus, was more of a diplomatic / force his opponent to do what he wants (play) move then a serious C&A report.

Not sure about your other case, at first glance doesn’t appear to be similar at all. But not really interested in discussing / reviewing other cases, just providing evidence for this one. Thanks

I do agree with an earlier point, that a wall message stating this could be a C&A report if said player deadbeated the game would have been the better route here. Or, a post in the game chat with that message with a wall message to check the game chat.

However, the previous C&A case I reference is different in the nature of the discussion of the report, but the initial report (and the subsequent ruling to follow) is very similar to this one. A player had been accused of deadbeating to alter the outcome of a game against the C&A poster, but the player in the end wasn't kicked from the game, so he was cleared. That report wasn't defined as spurious, and neither should this one. Not because of previous precedent, but because a claim for a grievance theoretically could be made, even if it is 100% unsubstantiated (due to the player not being kicked from the game for deadbeating).

I could be off-base here, but this is what I see when looking at what has happened.

This is the most childlish one i saw so far. Kudos

Thanks, wasn’t really looking for your opinion though. I didn’t make the initial report nor was I the one to break the rule(s). Move along if you don’t have evidence to add.

@moonshiner.......what do you expect to have happen here .

Donelladan is a long time member of cc club with 22363 games completed.. one game is effected by a slip of intel on an assassin filing a c@a report on a deadbeat, i get he didnt post the fact his assassin was the one deadbeating but really man this is a personal attack on him via a game your not even in . the game logs if read can show the players targets .where does the secret diplomacy come from ? are you saying he is throwing a game or he is working with another or just the fact in the report filed he stated his target ???

even if he did mess up its a one of out of 22k games and zero will happen to him, clear thing here is its someone you dislike and are wasting mods time with frivolous reports that occurred in a game your not even part of.


zeus111

Long time members can break rules, so not sure what his game count or any of that matters. Where did I personally attack him? He tried to bring up irrelevant personal issues, but I’ve stuck to facts here and posting evidence as required.

The game logs can show targets sure. But that doesn’t change SD requirements. People have been warned for saying barely anything beyond “check the chat in game X” something tiny and insignificant being added, and still get warned. So again, what it was is nearly irrelevant as well, same as his position in the game, whether or not I’m in it, whether or not it’s game changing. All irrelevant to the matter here.

I have no idea where you’re getting game throwing from, never mentioned it and it makes no sense. It’s not a frivolous report, and not wasting mods time (but thanks for trying. Seems like you and don are the ones trying to make it personal, I haven’t commented at all on don, what I think of him, or anything of the like.

@ moonshiner secret diplomacy requires 2 ppl is why i asked if it was game throwing . game count matters to show history of the accused past play on site now lets look at this lil nugget... IcePack on Sun Jun 28, 2020 1:53 pm You’ll also need a minimum of 5 other instances . do you have 4 more games or is this a one of . and again what do you expect to happen here .. as the report stands one game out of 22k games he reveled his target in a game out side of game chat.

fact the game does not effect you its easy to see its a personal attack on him but why is the question . he wont get anything past a noted or a warning seems pointless to even file it . you dont have to say anything this action screams loud enough

it would be taken more as a non personal shot if the game in question effected you but as your not in the game listed in this case ill ask ya what the faak do you care

icepack wrote; What I’m saying isn’t nonsense, the C&A regularly says you need 5 instances to report such things and have action.

zeus111

With your own logic, this C&A case doesn’t impact you. Why do you care, is it personal?

IcePack wrote:With your own logic, this C&A case doesn’t impact you. Why do you care, is it personal?

as a close to ten year in member i care about the site i guess i try and help if i can post more then most regarding c@a issues and can see this for what it is

nice dodge of the questions above ....

is this one game or is there 4 more according to you ya need 5 incidences.


happy canada day all !!!!

be well moonshiner !

this is a joke

Secret Diplomacy does not require five instances. It’s a different violation than deadbeating.

zeus111 wrote:

IcePack wrote:With your own logic, this C&A case doesn’t impact you. Why do you care, is it personal?

as a close to ten year in member i care about the site i guess i try and help if i can post more then most regarding c@a issues and can see this for what it is

nice dodge of the questions above ....

is this one game or is there 4 more according to you ya need 5 incidences.


happy canada day all !!!!

be well moonshiner !

this is a joke

Fast posted by rockfist. He is correct, different issues have different thresholds. It’s not rocket science. I’m not accusing don of the same thing as he accused rockfist, or yes, I would have needed 5. Pretty simple

rockfist wrote:Secret Diplomacy does not require five instances. It’s a different violation than deadbeating.

can u pls show us the copy of your rule book specifically the page on the number of games needed to post in the c@a forum

the C&A regularly says you need 5 instances to report such things and have action.

and how is this case secret diplomacy .


point is one game is all thats needed more games effected should equal harsher punishment but no where does it say a specific game number is required to post in c@a.

dos it not take 2 members to conduct secret diplomacy ???????????/

No it doesn’t take two members. One can post on someone’s wall or in the forum and talk about an ongoing game and get reported by someone else.

IcePack wrote:Thanks, wasn’t really looking for your opinion though. I didn’t make the initial report nor was I the one to break the rule(s). Move along if you don’t have evidence to add.

Can't say i care that you were looking for my opinion or not tbh. You posted on a public forum were people discuss issues.
This response of yours just shows how ill intended you are. I would hate to see this kind of behaviour be encouraged or we will see reports even for not having our nails polished in the future.

i-andrei wrote:

IcePack wrote:Thanks, wasn’t really looking for your opinion though. I didn’t make the initial report nor was I the one to break the rule(s). Move along if you don’t have evidence to add.

Can't say i care that you were looking for my opinion or not tbh. You posted on a public forum were people discuss issues.
This response of yours just shows how ill intended you are. I would hate to see this kind of behaviour be encouraged or we will see reports even for not having our nails polished in the future.

C&A has a rule about keeping commentary out of it. If you wanna joke about spurious reporting, perhaps you should consider dons report. If that’s the atandard of posting something that MIGHT happen, then pretty much every round limit game someone can post round 19 to “force their opponent to play how they want and just in case they suicide against me” before they ever do. It’s ridiculous.

You post C&A reports for things people do, not might do, not think they will do, not to force them to do something, or anything else. Broken rules that’s already taken place.

You aren’t “discussing the issues”, your post was just aimed at belittling me for my case. (Or attempting to) I’m not sure how any of that equates to “ill intent” besides you again coming in here not adding anything to the discussion and trying to belittle the case, without addressing any points of the case itself or adding anything.

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.

For educational purpose, for those who don't seem to understand the meaning of secret diplomacy.

@IcePack, it's of course personal, don't pretend it isn't.
And definitely spurious. Can't even grasp how you'd think I could be warned for SD here.
FYI, I don't have any grudge against you ( don't even know what you have against me ), and I'd be willing to discuss thing between us anytime you want. Or just play you in a regular game if you wish to unfoe me.