Moderators: Multi Hunters, Cheating/Abuse Team
SirSebstar wrote:Could you like use real words instead of no for know.. Also the teamchat was like right on the bottom of the page. how hard is that to miss. Apparently not hard enough.. sig.
Also this appear to be the first time you encountered gamechat
2009-01-26 16:07:34 - dickied: i guess i can play
So that was right in the middle of your teamgame. I assume you can read PM's, and therefor you should have responded. Lacking such responses when requested is very much an not nice thing to do. I do not blame psteijn for asking if you can be checked out. Next time be more careful. I'll be a score of players have put you on their ignore (read foe) list already. Stupidity is not easely tolerated here, although I am not so sure why...lol
CPTMO wrote:psteijn
Please do not send me PM's requesting for my friends on cc to back off of you in this thread. You once again in your PM said to let the mods investigate dickied. You seem to forget that you have accused ME of cheating and lying not just dickied. You made your accusations with little to no proof and you did it with 1/2 thought in mind. It is obvious that you are unfamiliar with how cc works as you have limited knowledge of the game. You made your frivolous accusation which will be easily cleared when the mods get to it. You have to live with the consequences of your actions. I would make a suggestion that you think twice about reporting people who have played over 1000 games on cc with the limited proof that you provided. I don't cheat and I don't lie. I have no need to employ such tactics to win my games. I am not going to ask you to do the honorable thing by apologizing to me and my mates in this thread once it is clear. I don't expect you to have that kind of honor and common decency. Take this as a lesson learned. I have not placed you on my foe list as I hope to have the opportunity to play against you again in the future to show you that regardless of who you team up with I can still win, but there will be no further reason for you to PM me.
lancehoch wrote:Hey guys, come on. Knock it off. Just because we have not gotten to this thread yet does not mean that you guys can all go nuts.
psteijn wrote:I have been trying to think of the best way to end this thread on a civil tone and at the same time take away the soap-box that some people seem to have taken from my thread. If you have the time, can you please respond one more time to the thread in C&A telling people that you do not mind the administrator investigating dickied?
Of course if you do not agree with this take no action or even forward this PM to stahrgazer and owen; I'm sure that they will know what to do with it.
Thanks,
~Peter Steijn
PS - Does BSS condone behavior like stahrgazer's on the forums?
stahrgazer wrote:My initial response in that forum was yes, in defense of a fellow I find honorable: CPTMO. In addition, that response answered some questions that pjsteijn posed: Specifically, how to fix things so that he did not have to play with random ick players.
In return for that, I saw pjsteijn accuse members of the BSS who'd supported CPTMO of tainted opinion, and accuse non-members who'd also supported CPTMO, of "inane" opinion.
These are not examples of creditable accusations. Frankly, it pissed me off to be indirectly accused of lying on behalf of anyone. Damn right I got on a 'soapbox' about it. Then, when I posted an (admittedly irritated, as was obvious) post to suggest the dude keep his mouth shut rather than fling erroneous accusations against anyone who disagreed with him, I was told I was flaming, which I did not do. I came close, yes.
But hell, no, I don't rescind what I said: It all stands, including the part where I've suggested pjsteijn get his momma to shut his mouth for him, since he obviously cannot.
Now, if pjsteijn wishes to make the public apology to those who simply disagreed with his illogical findings; thank (me and others) for giving him the information on foelist; admit that to call another poster's post "inane" and such was uncalled for... then, and only then, would I rescind anything I've said in public or here.
lancehoch wrote:Hey guys, come on. Knock it off. Just because we have not gotten to this thread yet does not mean that you guys can all go nuts.
Jeff Hardy wrote:stahr, just because someone is your friend it does not mean they are automatically innocent and just because you believe someone to be innocent it does not give you the right to troll the thread and jump on everyones backs.
i have no idea if they have cheated, nor do i care but the mods will make the right decision without you trolling the thread.
psteijn wrote:damn, you are crazy.
I've seen no apology to CPTMO.
I've seen no apology to those non-BSS he attacked simply because they supported CPTMO.
I've seen no thank-you for my ORIGINAL post which supported to the point of answering how to use foelist and make private games (which fixes both his problem with dicked AND lets him pick and choose partners for the future, thus avoiding more 'dickied's).
Instead, I see a crybaby (that's a flame, pjsteijn, now you know what a flame from me looks like) upset because his table got turned on him; his so-called 'evidence' against either dickied OR CPTMO goes to nil when you look at the numbers of games pjsteijn has played with freemie players.
If pjsteijn wants to move his topic to a flame about a player who didn't do so well: dickied, I'd still say that pjsteijn's latter behavior seems as bad if not worse.
The nastiest I got was to suggest pjsteijn's momma could shut his mouth for him; my childish rant in return for his childish series of posts. And that post was only made AFTER pjsteijn attacked every one of CPTMO's offenders, sheep or not (that he later 'edited' to make it look like those "ignore those remarks" were part of his first post does not change the fact that he added that black mark on Black Sheep and other CPTMO offenders after-the-fact.
By the way, hiddendragon, when I posted that suggestion that people take a look at The_Kaptan's games, I also immediately pm'd the Kaptan to apologize, and told Kaptan that if he disliked my bringing up his name (found by a random search of steijn-baby's games) I'd remove the post. The_Kaptan has not responded at this point.
CPTMO wrote:OK guys. Lets take the high road here. This is a frivolous claim against me and the mods will easily over turn this ridiculous claim. Dickied did not even know he had been accused. I pm'd him and he finally responded today. Lets go ahead and ease off of this thread and let the mods sort it out. After I am cleared which will take the mods a full 30 seconds to do we can move this to Flame Wars and can cut loose on this guy and his claims. I think we have said about all we can at this point anyway without irritating the mods any further.
Thanks for all of your support.
CPTMO
stahrgazer wrote:I'll know pj has both learned his lesson AND wants to put this thread on a higher note when he apologizes for his attack on CPTMO's defenders.
Something like this: "Well, okay, maybe I was a little hasty, maybe the evidence was a little shy, and the moderators will prove that. Meanwhile, I definitely should not have nastied at those who posted in support of CPTMO and for that, I apologize."
When I see something like that, I can then easily apologize for suggesting his momma make him see the light.
Darwins_Bane wrote:stahrgazer wrote:I'll know pj has both learned his lesson AND wants to put this thread on a higher note when he apologizes for his attack on CPTMO's defenders.
Something like this: "Well, okay, maybe I was a little hasty, maybe the evidence was a little shy, and the moderators will prove that. Meanwhile, I definitely should not have nastied at those who posted in support of CPTMO and for that, I apologize."
When I see something like that, I can then easily apologize for suggesting his momma make him see the light.
But even CPTMO himself said that he didnt even want to ask for an apology...so why are you on a witch hunt to get one?
stahrgazer wrote:Darwins_Bane wrote:stahrgazer wrote:I'll know pj has both learned his lesson AND wants to put this thread on a higher note when he apologizes for his attack on CPTMO's defenders.
Something like this: "Well, okay, maybe I was a little hasty, maybe the evidence was a little shy, and the moderators will prove that. Meanwhile, I definitely should not have nastied at those who posted in support of CPTMO and for that, I apologize."
When I see something like that, I can then easily apologize for suggesting his momma make him see the light.
But even CPTMO himself said that he didnt even want to ask for an apology...so why are you on a witch hunt to get one?
Blaming CPTMO was a mistake. A gentleman would apologize for it - at the least, once he gets his proof. The specific apology I meant, however, I've already stated:
"Meanwhile, I definitely should not have nastied at those who posted in support of CPTMO and for that, I apologize."
If you look back at the posts (yes, I'll repeat) my initial post was, yes, supportive of CPTMO but more, it answered, reasonably, specific questions pjsteijn posed about how to prevent from joining games with someone he's obviously not wanting to play anymore (foelist). That post went on to discuss the fact that making and joining only private games could minimize contacts like that in the future. Nothing at all wrong there. In return, pjsteijn "edited" some of his original posts to say "keep in mind all who posted are black sheep," implying that we would lie to support a clan member. When that was shown to be false, he went on to directly flame those who were not black sheep as well, while still not retracting that original indirect aspersion.. Apology for that is in order.
That flaming of people who simply spoke up in support should NOT be tolerated with "silence". Add that, the dude was pm'g people to tell them NOT to post supportive messages in the thread, in some cases threatening them if they did.. his continued nasty harrassments... these things do not show me someone who really wants to make amends because he erred. It seems to me that what he really wants is to 'win' by silencing others. That, to me, would keep CC in the gutter, and would not be "taking the high road" as some have suggested "silence" would enable.
scorpion86 wrote:Because it would be the right thing for him to do. He questioned CPTMO's integrity. Having the intestinal fortitude to admit this mistake and correct it would be the right way to resolve this.
dickied wrote:iam new and did not understand that there is a chat that you use i just played the way i thought i am not a cheater the only thing i am guily off is being stupid read for not reading the rules of how to ply when in a team game opps
Kotaro wrote:Wait a second.
You mean to tell me that not everyone who has a thread about them in C&A Is guilty?
What? THIS IS MADNESS! I DEMAND IMMEDIATE APOLOGIES FOR EVERY THREAD EVER CREATED WITH THE TAG [CLEAR] NEXT TO IT!!! NOW!!!
Get over yourself stahr. There will be no apologies.
gordon1975 wrote:psteijn has called dickied a multi,millertime has called dickied a dumbass,bbqpenguin has called dickied an idiot,the bro called dickied a retard,how about apologies for the new dude that only joined this site and is still learning the ropes,what a welcome to cc
Users browsing this forum: No registered users