timogl & maremmano [noted]

[bamage]

Accused:

• maremmano
• timogl

The accused are suspected of:

• Severe PM Abuse

Game number(s):

• Game 2356714

Comments:
By his own admission in an accusation he has filed against me -- viewtopic.php?f=5&t=55779 -- , maremmano has received PMs from timogl regarding our game. it may be that these PMs were unwanted, and I have asked maremmano -- in the public game chat -- to publish those PMs ALONG WITH HIS RESPONSES. If he does that and it is clear that he did not respond, I will withdraw his name from this accusation.

However, the following response conveyed useful information from maremmano to timogl...

"so i think i will wait a little to see what's happening. tryn to stay in north america" <-- this was a PM from maremmano to timogl.

There are other examples, plus more that has not been provided.

[Maremmano]

....

ridiculous!

[bamage]

Then post the PMs you admitted you exchanged with him.

[bamage]

Here's what maremmano posted in response to my request that he publish his PMs related to that game...

about timogl's messages:
i'm sorry...i've lost them! i've just his last message and all the messages i've sent him in our "post relation". i tought that i have, but i don't, 'cause i deleted everithing axcept the last one, in with i suppesed there were all the history. sorry.
if there is any interest in this, i can let u read what i have:

--------------------------------
--------------------------------


Re: that game

Sent at: Mon Jul 07, 2008 6:18 pm
by Maremmano
blue didn't make any mistake!
i have to resist now...'cause everybody want me to die!!!
so i think i will wait a little to see what's happening. tryn to stay in north america

* Quote timogl

Re: that game

Sent at: Mon Jul 07, 2008 6:04 pm
by timogl
its obvious what blue is thinking, why else would he put his army where it can't attack you? he got helped out, of course, by the pink making a tragic attack from africa to south america.

i don't want you to tell me what you are going to do next, it doesn't matter. anyway, i know what you're going to do. you are going to put north america back together and sit strong on greenland. there is no advantage in attacking now. if blue had put his army where it could attack, different story. but he is figuring you and he will get all the weak players out, and then fight it out. you have more bonus, of course. it might depend on who takes africa first. you might even take africa instead of north america i guess. blue could beat you to it, but it looks like he is going to go ahead and cripple the pink. it is a big mistake on his part, he had you on the ropes before, and should have gone right on pressing it. pink? green? not a factor in the game, not at all.
Re: that game

Sent at: Mon Jul 07, 2008 5:56 pm
by Maremmano
ok, we are not making an alliance or similar things...but i'm not so sure it is safe what we are doing now.

in any case: how do u know what blue is thinking? ...i'm afraid of u!!! i'm afraid u want me to tell u what i'm goin' to do next... and i'm wondering u did it with the other players too...
am i paranoic??? may be!
in any case, pls, let go onm with this discussion after the game is finish, or after one of us is die!
ok?
bye
Re: that game

Sent at: Mon Jul 07, 2008 5:26 pm
by Maremmano
blue is goin' to win u think?
if u are sure about it, why don't u tell it in the common chat?
we can't go on speacking here, it's too danger: for me and for u (secret truces are forbidden!!!)!
let's play and let's chat there...and if u really think what u told me now, explain it and do whatever u think it is right to do.
maybe we'll wirte our considerations after this game is finished ok?
bye!!!
Re: that game

Sent at: Mon Jul 07, 2008 8:37 am
by Maremmano
...i'll see how u'll play.
i'm not hangry. i'm furious!
your excuses are not enough now. if u want to let me think u are sorry for true, make me understand it in the game...playng, not with words.

see u there,
good luck!
Maremmano_

He says he has "lost" some of the PMs.

It seems, from this, taht maremmano was trying to cut down on the PMs but that timogle wasn't. Either way, there is an issue here.

[Bones2484]

He says he has "lost" some of the PMs.

It seems, from this, taht maremmano was trying to cut down on the PMs but that timogle wasn't. Either way, there is an issue here.

I fail to see one bad thing in those PMs. Get over it.

[bamage]

You didn't read it closely. Or you're trying to get the moderator to gloss over it.

1. This isn't ALL of the exchange... just what maremmano could find.
2. maremmano started this by accusing me and timogl of a secret truce, based on the fact that timogl was trying to establish one with him.

Either add something of value, or stfu.

[Bones2484]

You didn't read it closely. Or you're trying to get the moderator to gloss over it.

1. This isn't ALL of the exchange... just what maremmano could find.
2. maremmano started this by accusing me and timogl of a secret truce, based on the fact that timogl was trying to establish one with him.

Either add something of value, or stfu.

Actually, Maremmano's post says nothing about a secret alliance between he and Tim. Only Tim trying to get information out of him. Read it again.

But if you can point out EXACTLY where Tim said anything about an alliance in private, then please do so.

Just because I don't agree with you or Maremmano's ridiculous claims doesn't mean I'm not adding something of value... only something you don't want to hear.

All I see here is you throwing a fit because you were wrongly accused. Instead of just letting it die (which it obviously would have) you decided to make an issue out of it and throw an accusation back at Maremmano.

[bamage]

Bones,

They are ABSOLUTELY discussing the game. Tim is ABSOLUTELY saying what's on his mind, what he thinks is an intelligent course of action, what he is thinking in terms of other players' layouts, and expressing his opinions to just one player. You do realize these are all PMs, right? Also, you do realize that this is just what maremmano says he could find, and admits that some of it is deleted?

Bones, you're noisy, and the noise is confusing. Your (questionable) opinion was not asked for, nor wanted. The moderator is going to look at the PMs here, as well as the deleted PMs, and he is going to make a decision that completely disregards your chatter, so stfu. It's players like you that make this whole process more difficult for the moderator. Are you trying to set some posting record or something? Do it somewhere else.

bamage

[Bones2484]

Bones,

They are ABSOLUTELY discussing the game. Tim is ABSOLUTELY saying what's on his mind, what he thinks is an intelligent course of action, what he is thinking in terms of other players' layouts, and expressing his opinions to just one player. You do realize these are all PMs, right? Also, you do realize that this is just what maremmano says he could find, and admits that some of it is deleted?

Bones, you're noisy, and the noise is confusing. Your (questionable) opinion was not asked for, nor wanted. The moderator is going to look at the PMs here, as well as the deleted PMs, and he is going to make a decision that completely disregards your chatter, so stfu. It's players like you that make this whole process more difficult for the moderator. Are you trying to set some posting record or something? Do it somewhere else.

bamage

Calm down there turbo. Being so defensive is exactly why you will never get people on your side and people are telling you to stop whining.

I am well aware of these being PMs. What I am not aware of is where Tim is saying a word about secret alliances. If you look, Tim even says "i don't want you to tell me what you are going to do next, it doesn't matter" in one of the PMs. That sure makes it look like he's trying to break the rules.

Mann is a new player to this site. He doesn't know what, fully, is allowed to be said in PMs. He does know that secret alliances are not allowed which is evident by this: "we are not making an alliance or similar things". Again, this proves even more that the two of them were not forming a secret alliance.

What, exactly, are you trying to prove here? That two players are discussing how a game was going in a PM? Sure that's shady and should be reflected in how you rate them. But against the rules? Hardly.

Furthermore, do you really think moderators have the ability to look at PMs? They can't even view current ones let alone ones that are deleted/lost.

And last time I checked, this is a public forum. I am free to say whatever I want here provided I remain on topic.

Just for your reference, here is the rule on Secret Diplomacy:

Any form of diplomatic discussion between opponents must be posted in the game chat in a language that all opponents understand. Diplomacy includes, but is not limited to: proposing truces, negotiating alliances, and coordinating attacks. Secret diplomacy can be hard to prove, but if you suspect it you should leave the players in question appropriate ratings. If you feel certain about players engaging in secret diplomacy consider reporting them in the Cheating & Abuse Reports forum by posting a new topic.

Feel free to point out EXACTLY where this was happening in the PMs that were posted. As far as I can read, Mann freely admitted that they were NOT making an alliance.

[bamage]

You obviously need to have the last word.

1. Maremmano accused me of engaging in secret diplomacy with timogl based on his experience with timogl trying the same thing with him. This is maremmano's claim.
2. He acknowledges that the PM chain is incomplete.
3. Timogl is conveying information about his plans (via who he thinks are threats, etc.) to JUST one player.

Okay, get your last word, then stfu. Get a job. Read the news. This doesn't concern you. Your opinion is meaningless to me.

[Bones2484]

You obviously need to have the last word.

1. Maremmano accused me of engaging in secret diplomacy with timogl based on his experience with timogl trying the same thing with him. This is maremmano's claim.
2. He acknowledges that the PM chain is incomplete.
3. Timogl is conveying information about his plans (via who he thinks are threats, etc.) to JUST one player.

Okay, get your last word, then stfu. Get a job. Read the news. This doesn't concern you. Your opinion is meaningless to me.

/gets the last word

Obviously my opinion matters enough for you to keep responding. I have a job. Why do you think I have so much time to spend here? Telling me to "stfu" repeatedly sure is classy.

1. Maremmano falsely accused you of cheating because of the unprotected borders you shared with Tim and assumed that because he was talking to him out of game, so might you. Again, this was a false accusation and never would have stood even if you didn't start whining.
2. And he never says that Timm asked him for an alliance in private. In fact, he says the opposite.
3. Timm (in the PM posted) never says one word about his own plans. He only is making assumptions about what is going to happen in the game. I don't even see him saying one word about what Maremmano should do. In fact, he says that he doesn't want Maremmano to tell him.

I'll say it again. Rank them (or just Tim, I don't care) low in your Fair Play ratings. But as for cheating, I just don't see it, and I doubt it's happened.

[bamage]

lol...

Okay, you sound like a reasonable intelligent person. Does the following statement, made by maremmano, convey useful information to timogl?

"so i think i will wait a little to see what's happening. tryn to stay in north america"

Or... if two players do nothing more than agree, in a private message, that a third player is the greatest threat, does that constitute secret diplomacy? Most certainly, IMHO.

Bones, read maremmano's notes closely... you're seeing a bunch of responses by maremmano to things timogl is saying that we can't see. Here are two of those responses...

"i'm not hangry. i'm furious! your excuses are not enough now. if u want to let me think u are sorry for true, make me understand it in the game...playng, not with words."

Okay, timogl apologized for something, then committed verbally to some course of action. To his credit, maremmano rejected that as insincere, but he should have rejected that as cheating.

"blue is goin' to win u think? if u are sure about it, why don't u tell it in the common chat? we can't go on speacking here, it's too danger: for me and for u (secret truces are forbidden!!!)!"

Okay, here, maremmano felt that timogl crossed a line, and said so.

So, Bones, this is worth looking into, IMO. Don't you think? Perhaps you could weigh in with your opinion. I'd value your insight.

[lancehoch]

Hey guys. Just to let you know, the hunters are aware of this thread (as well as every other open thread). As a general rule, mods do not go into people's inboxes, for privacy reasons.

[Maremmano]

ok
than i consider closed this discussion.
anyway: let people explain before condemn!

in a frist moment i had the suspect that timogl was TRYNG to find a secret alliance withj me, but he always told me he didn't, going on talking about other's strategy and giving some suggestion to me (that i didn't follow!). as i had a doubt about him, i've not cancelled the last timogl's message, as i was sure it report the entire history of our discussion, but it was not.

than, as i saw something that seemed to me to be strange in the game, i supposed he tryed to do the same with bamage, with a different result. that's why i posted here.
i have to say that i hoped (as bamage did) that moderators could read PMs, deleted and undeleted, so that i could know the truth.
but is it is not possible, i have to say excuseme to all of u for the wasted time. next time i'll be more sure about any uncerrect behaviour before posting here.

AH...to bamage: when i told to timogl
"i'm not hangry. i'm furious! your excuses are not enough now. if u want to let me think u are sorry for true, make me understand it in the game...playng, not with words."
i was referring to our truce that was not respected. there is no mistery about it.

see u there,
bye

[king achilles]

Rule #2: No secret diplomacy

Any form of diplomatic discussion between opponents must be posted in the game chat in a language that all opponents understand. Diplomacy includes, but is not limited to: proposing truces, negotiating alliances, and coordinating attacks. Secret diplomacy can be hard to prove, but if you suspect it you should leave the players in question appropriate ratings. If you feel certain about players engaging in secret diplomacy consider reporting them in the Cheating & Abuse Reports forum by posting a new topic.

Next time, any discussion about the game should be said in the game chat. This is noted.

[timogl]

i only stated things in those pms that were perfectly obvious, to anyone. there were never any truces, agreements, what have you offered. it was not "diplomatic discussion." that is defined below. my pms did not have anything to do with truces, alliances, or coordinated attacks. nothing.

if i had a secret alliance with grey, why did i break his bonus?

if i had a secret alliance with pink, why did he break my bonus?

the pms are all there, the only one missing i think, is where i sent one to gray and apologized for breaking his bonus, when the thought we had a truce. i think we did have one, and i forgot about it, or i broke it on purpose. so i aplogized, because he was upset. it really doesn't matter. but if we had a truce (it was said we had that openly in game chat) and i broke it, how does that make me having a secret alliance with gray?

and this, i don't have a problem with

"Next time, any discussion about the game should be said in the game chat. This is noted."

other than, i think i should be free to disccuss a game in a pm, if there is no secret diplomacy.