by Arama86n on Sun Oct 24, 2010 5:28 am
This was never about the person, it is all about the case.
To my understanding, farming cases against cooks & cadets etc have been thrown out with the explanation that CC's official definition of farming is targeting new recruits. Anyone with more than 5 games played is fair game.
Granted, the accused did not join games created by NR's, but he undoubtedly must have realized after the first ten games that the likelihood of future games on those settings would fill with only NR's was overwhelming. He then went ahead to create 80+ games on the settings. Yes ofc coarse negligence can be argued by the forum trolls, but everyone understands that this was done with intent. (I doubt even LMS would deny his intent, but simply state that he did not believe it against the rules, which might, sadly, be the case.)
If this gets thrown out it will be the case against which all other farming cases are measured. It would state that only by joining games with NR's are you guilty of farming., and that creating 80+ games with settings that will beyond all reasonable doubt fill almost exclusively with NR's is ok.
I truly believed that the C&A department would finally be compelled to put their foot down against farming. I truly believed that the evidence here would have to lead to a conviction, and a clear stance taking by the hunters that this sort of behaviour is unacceptable. I would not have bothered laying it forth otherwise.
Because of the huge evidence load this is not about whether he did it or not, this is about whether C&A deem it against the rules or not.
