Account Sitting Abuse - josko.ri [warned]

[Incandenza]

I partially disagree with you. I think that any non ad-hoc sitting system is not going to satisfy I think a feature where you can acces someone else's account for games only where your logging in is accounted for in the gamechat, is something worthwhile.

It's an interesting concept, but I have doubts that it would be technically feasible. After all, how would the system be able to differentiate between someone sitting my account and me playing from a completely new IP? Just off the top of my head, I've logged onto CC from at least 25 (and prolly closer to 50) different places over the years I've been here. Plus my very limited grasp of programming leads me to think that it would be highly inefficient for the system to run automated IP checks every single time a player logs on.

[Dako]

Inca, I am most sure players will be forced to designate sitters in control panel and those guys will have a new tab (or page) for such games. So trading passwords will be illegal because you don't need to log into another account anymore.

This is unconfirmed info - that is just my own vision of the system.

[Incandenza]

Inca, I am most sure players will be forced to designate sitters in control panel and those guys will have a new tab (or page) for such games. So trading passwords will be illegal because you don't need to log into another account anymore.

This is unconfirmed info - that is just my own vision of the system.

That was substantially what Optimus proposed in the aforementioned trial balloon however long ago that was. I can think of a variety of problems with that plan, and IMHO it will lead to more missed turns, which seems like an outsized price to pay to curb a very small level of abuse.

[Chariot of Fire]

I seldom disagree with Incandenza, but on this occasion I do. It's regrettable that controls have to be considered, but without good governance unfortunately there are those who take advantage of other people's trust or goodwill (or simply those who don't really care because after all "this isn't real life it's just a game site"). We've heard that quoted a gazillion times, but it holds true that all those who don't say it actually do care. They want to enjoy their games, they expect a fair fight, and they don't expect to be playing a quad team of generals when they're facing a bunch of stripes. Abuse of this system has gone on from the day of its inception; whether in the form of multis, farming, playing with low ranks to enhance score, invite abuse, point dumping etc etc. Fortunately as the site has evolved it has developed measures to curtail or identify such abuse, but now - given the overwhelming rise in clan activity and competition - a new and ugly abuse has reared its head: that of the clan sitter, whose role is to dictate play and step in at any awkward moment to save the day and keep the clan machine rolling ever onwards. There's simply a lot more competition and a lot more at stake in clan society now than there ever was a year or two ago.

You can say that all a lock does is keep out honest people, but in the same breath it also deters anyone trying to get in. I would definitely be in favour of some sort of control or accountability so that for the most part the team you see on paper is the team you're going to play.

[HardAttack]

I just am not in agreement with you Si, on the accuasition you put over here about me.
If ever i did something wrong, it only can be the fact that i didnt wait 15 - 16 hours but took it right after blue...40 45 mins later...This is my bad.
Instead, i better should have told the exact plan and move to someone else, for example TheForgivenOne, Boner's team mate, then he would have done the same thing i did. What is different here ? My rolling instead TFO ? Or all the problem you have got is about the strategy i provided for my dear clan fellows ? Lol. If so, i let you know, i ll proudly do put comments, draw plans, road maps everytime. Why not, i send PMs, and putting my comments. Dont you ? What is so damn wrong with it ? We are a clan, and this is a game inside clan war. I simply am going to try to do my best for my fellows. Dont you think it is sort of devoition, why dont you respect but accuse me ?
You have no right to judge,the system,the structure, the way how our clan works. We are us, and no one from BOFM asking you how we should proceed, how we should work. Mind your own business maybe, play better and win a few more to win against us.

Why i dont know, right after you mentioned my name here, many PMs flowing over my inbox, full of records, games with links those telling/accusing/evidencing you to wear same shoes with me.
So, dont you think it is kind of irony accusing someone with the same fault(i am telling you, i dont see any fault but you say it is) you always do ?
If needed any of my defense for the case, i then will be around to put a real LONG post, just in case.
Try your best Si, try to corrupt me, and yes this is very respectable of yourself.
For the everyone's information, i am not the best player of BOFM.
This is sort of insult for the BOFM very valuable players in the roaster.
BOFM has tones of players to be recognized likely.
You were not such one, what happened to you my dear ?

[Chariot of Fire]

many PMs flowing over my inbox

Yeah I know. KORT are too chickenshit to post it themselves so they'll pass on their 'evidence' to someone else who can be their patsy. I don't really care mate to be honest. I'm leaving this site in 13 days and that will be that, so throw all the shit you like. I know who I am and I know how I've conducted myself for almost four years on this site and not for one f'in minute has the notion of trying to gain an unfair advantage ever entered my head. If I've sat for anyone it's because he or she has needed a sitter for genuine reasons - not because of incapacity to play a turn in a professional manner that might be advantageous to his or her position.

KORT aren't going to want to try and defend themselves (or, more precisely, josko) in this thread for fear of being torn apart, so instead I have no doubt whatsoever they will try to deflect blame by pointing fingers at other people.

I'm sorry I brought up Game 9043129 in this thread. It actually deserves its own special place in a new thread directed at you.

Have a good day

[pascalleke]

I'm leaving this site in 13 days and that will be that

ur kidding right ....dont go

[HardAttack]

I'm leaving this site in 13 days and that will be that

ur kidding right ....dont go

exactly, go nowhere, stay with us...
we all love to f*ck with you...
i m typing PMs to you si, this is a game, and also this a game of battle,
please dont let the spirit of this game to dominate all over here around...
after all, you are not mine, and i am not your enemy...
you have always been nice to me...
so, if i ever hurt your feelings, you know i see no shame on this, i appologize from you my dear friend...
fyi, i never will be serious, or never will be talking shit about you, and i never did so...
no one around can say i did excluding some jookes i made around...

[keiths31]

Maybe for the time being, all sitting should be disallowed?

Not a good idea. I know I'd be demanding my money back.

Everyone uses sitters. I use sitters in my clan. I sit for clan members. It's only when they can't take their turns because they are out of town. Being sleepy, stressed or drunk is not a good excuse for getting someone to take your turns (taking drunk turns and watching the results within my own clan brings me a small level of enjoyment) I travel a lot for work and set up sitters in case the hotel doesn't have internet. If they do, I come online and cancel my sitting request. During the summer I go to my camp on weekends. Because of that I drop my game load, don't join new tournaments or join new challenges. I don't think it's fair for my sitter to be playing a few dozen of my games.

If the allegations prove to be true (and I trust the work put in by Bones and others) it is sad. Sad for two reasons. The first being that the win at all cost mentality of what is essentially an online game made for people to socialize and have a little fun. In the end the shiny medal next to your name isn't real. The second being for the people that are allowing themselves to be "bumped" for the "good of the Clan". Grow a set and take your own turns.

[Leehar]

I've been reading through this thread for a while now, and it's come across me that there is somewhat of a fundamental split in thoughts regarding clan gaming as a whole and sitting in particular. What I disagree most with however is the people who are coming and are saying unequivocally that you should 'take all your turns when you're logged on' or variants thereof (basically, you were on 14 hours ago so why didn't you take your turn then). There are a few ways to rebut that, but my simplest argument is that how can you guys assume to tell other people how to play their games ? And thats the biggest danger I see here, Serbia and others may have said that mass opinion may not change the outcome of this case as it based on the evidence displayed herein, but I'm more worried that it'll encourage admins etc to a mindset whereby they should start governing how you should start playing. It's fine for those of you who feel that is already the way to play, (all turns when immediately possible - and I'll counter the viability of that later), but I feel there is perhaps just as large a group that play the game differently but aren't commenting here because of the predominant atmosphere already engendered (and which is what I've always disliked about mass community 'democratic' trials and what I feel was wrong with what happened in the blitz witch-hunt etc, but thats something to discuss another day).

Going back to the arguments against going immediately, it's basically a 2-pronged approach, either that you have games that come before it and are taking those first, and otherwise, that you just prefer to wait as long as possible because it's a team game so you prefer to consult with your teammates . Again, this is where I believe the shift in mentality's come in, not to say either is right or wrong, but as HA mentioned, some believe that team are more about them playing together as a clan instead of a clan just being the sum of it's individual parts...

And then just an analogy on some earlier mentions, when you're playing 80 games+ and have only been able to clear them up to ~10/12 hours before going to sleep after a rough day in rl as well as cc duties, is it not understandable to have a sitter to take the turn if you can't wake up in time. I think some will agree with me when I say that CC burnout is a very real possibility, and is is it not understandable that sitters are needed to take turns in such instances where even if it's 'technically' possible for the account-holder to take that turn, it's unfeasible for them to do so (for whatever reason). Then lastly, another thing I think that needs clarification and is somewhat pertinent, distinguishing the need to avoid tactical disadvantage when taking a turn as opposed to looking for that advantage when doing so?

Just trying to bring up some points I feel are worth considering...

[jackal31]

I partially disagree with you. I think that any non ad-hoc sitting system is not going to satisfy I think a feature where you can acces someone else's account for games only where your logging in is accounted for in the gamechat, is something worthwhile.

It's an interesting concept, but I have doubts that it would be technically feasible. After all, how would the system be able to differentiate between someone sitting my account and me playing from a completely new IP? Just off the top of my head, I've logged onto CC from at least 25 (and prolly closer to 50) different places over the years I've been here. Plus my very limited grasp of programming leads me to think that it would be highly inefficient for the system to run automated IP checks every single time a player logs on.

This is a good argument and I think it ultimately comes down to an "honor system". Which, is what it was supposed to be in the first place right?

I have my moments where I travel, and at times, am able to log on and check my games. Last year, I went across a few states for a family funeral. I took my comp and worked with the wifi that was available in the hotel. Now, with this software, was it not supposed to allow me to participate in my account given my new location. If it posts my "new info", what does that solve? Also, there are other times when I use a completely different computer at a different location. So the offer of restrictions would not be good as it would look like I was "sitting" my own account from a software perspective. Either way, there is no proof of if its me or someone else unless I (or they) announce it in some way.

Sitting should be allowed, but not abused. The only way to enforce the rule, is to monitor it.

[Chariot of Fire]

Sitting should be allowed, but not abused. The only way to enforce the rule, is to monitor it.

Bingo! This is the crux of the matter. Unfortunately the method as it stands relies on an honour system of posting, e.g. "CoF for Slack_Harry", and what ultimately will result from this is a reluctance to divulge this information in future - for there is no obligation for one to do so. I have to give credit to josko for always being honest and open about the occasions he sat. The problem though - and the reason behind this report - is both the frequency and necessity with which he did it. Three challenges.....three objections, I mean come on. I wouldn't be surprised however if Bruce is now addressing his troops and telling them not to post such detail in gamechat, therefore we could be regressing into a 'Dark Age' of less information than has been enjoyed to date.

[SirSebstar]

I partially disagree with you. I think that any non ad-hoc sitting system is not going to satisfy I think a feature where you can acces someone else's account for games only where your logging in is accounted for in the gamechat, is something worthwhile.

It's an interesting concept, but I have doubts that it would be technically feasible. After all, how would the system be able to differentiate between someone sitting my account and me playing from a completely new IP? Just off the top of my head, I've logged onto CC from at least 25 (and prolly closer to 50) different places over the years I've been here. Plus my very limited grasp of programming leads me to think that it would be highly inefficient for the system to run automated IP checks every single time a player logs on.

If it works as I imagine it, then you get a seperate logging with only acces to the games. Something like
username...
ps...
sittee username...
and only fill in the sittee username when you are sitting.. or something

[ben.cleuch]

Just a couple of points from a complete newbie.
If on logging in you had to play/take your turn in all games, before logging off again. That would kill of the team games and more importantly to me the SoC training. In these games we post our thoughts/ plans daft ideas, for scrtiny and advice. That would have to stop.
Secondly it seems to me that CC must by now have a fairly good idea of the players who may be abusing the sitting sytem as it stands. I sugest that they run silent checks on the ip logging into/from the accounts of members who may be taking the piss out of the system.

Ok steps back and wait to be shot down.

[pascalleke]

Sitting should be allowed, but not abused. The only way to enforce the rule, is to monitor it.

Bingo! This is the crux of the matter. Unfortunately the method as it stands relies on an honour system of posting, e.g. "CoF for Slack_Harry", and what ultimately will result from this is a reluctance to divulge this information in future - for there is no obligation for one to do so. I have to give credit to josko for always being honest and open about the occasions he sat. The problem though - and the reason behind this report - is both the frequency and necessity with which he did it. Three challenges.....three objections, I mean come on. I wouldn't be surprised however if Bruce is now addressing his troops and telling them not to post such detail in gamechat, therefore we could be regressing into a 'Dark Age' of less information than has been enjoyed to date.

Thrue , but if u see it at this way , would josko not be just guilty of being to good/kind and not able to just say: NO , TAKE UR TURN URSELF and in this case then all those players to much relying on his kindness being guilty on this mather ?

[SirSebstar]

no, is such were the case it is account sharing abuse. Being too kind is hardly a defense. Its actions that speak louder then intentions. Actions were taking turns where nobody was in danger of missing turns, or people not taking their own turns so josko could take them.

Personally, i think is should be revised so this kind of thing is allowed, for the time being. I am swayed by fritz in this. Clans should have some measure of freedom in how they play their games, untill such a time as a sitter tool should be made availiable..

[Fircoal]

And then just an analogy on some earlier mentions, when you're playing 80 games+ and have only been able to clear them up to ~10/12 hours before going to sleep after a rough day in rl as well as cc duties, is it not understandable to have a sitter to take the turn if you can't wake up in time. I think some will agree with me when I say that CC burnout is a very real possibility, and is is it not understandable that sitters are needed to take turns in such instances where even if it's 'technically' possible for the account-holder to take that turn, it's unfeasible for them to do so (for whatever reason). Then lastly, another thing I think that needs clarification and is somewhat pertinent, distinguishing the need to avoid tactical disadvantage when taking a turn as opposed to looking for that advantage when doing so?

I think that's a perfectly fine scenario for a sitter to be needed. If the person is TRYING to take all there turns but is unable to, why shouldn't they use a sitter? There isn't any technical advantage seen in this scenario. It's only because the person was unable to take his turns. Because all games are being treated the same, it's safe to assume that the person is just having problems and would like to do his games. A person in this scenario should probably lower the amount of games they have though.

[thebest712]

I think allot of people are doing the same as josko does and as you guys already doing it, maybe make a suggestion thread how make a rule on it or change the system

[Bones2484]

I think allot of people are doing the same as josko does and as you guys already doing it, maybe make a suggestion thread how make a rule on it.

Prove it.

I highly encourage you to prove that this is happening on a regular basis in other clans as well. Remember, we are not talking about account sitting when someone is away from the site. We are talking about account sitting abuse when someone takes a turn for another player that is clearly capable of taking their own turn.

Remember, baseless accusations made in C&A will be punished.

[thebest712]

I think allot of people are doing the same as josko does and as you guys already doing it, maybe make a suggestion thread how make a rule on it.

Prove it.

I highly encourage you to prove that this is happening on a regular basis in other clans as well. Remember, we are not talking about account sitting when someone is away from the site. We are talking about account sitting abuse when someone takes a turn for another player that is clearly capable of taking their own turn.

Remember, baseless accusations made in C&A will be punished.

I think this is about josko so Im not going to search for that,
but others will, don't worry.

[HardAttack]

I think allot of people are doing the same as josko does and as you guys already doing it, maybe make a suggestion thread how make a rule on it.

Prove it.

I highly encourage you to prove that this is happening on a regular basis in other clans as well. Remember, we are not talking about account sitting when someone is away from the site. We are talking about account sitting abuse when someone takes a turn for another player that is clearly capable of taking their own turn.

Remember, baseless accusations made in C&A will be punished.

How can you expect him to proove it then warning him forr his coming around without any good evidence.
Yes, he might have a search and maybe he might pick 2 3 examples. But we can not expect him to bring tones of names to proove it.
Yes i agree, his claim needs to be proven, but it also doesnt mean every unproven is out of reality.
Cristopher Columbus wasnt/couldnt be able to proove it, but he believed it there is a place to be there where now you are living at.

[Bones2484]

HardAttack. We're getting off topic, but I was responding to thebest's accusation of: "as you guys already doing it".

We in G1 are fully aware of what he is referring to and would welcome the chance to prove it wrong as we have evidence that the player in question was going to be away from the site and requested someone take a turn for him.

Anyways, let's keep this on topic. If KORT wants to accuse someone else, they can make a new thread.

[Night Strike]

I'm not a C&A mod, but I do believe conversations about what should or should not be included in an account sitting feature should be best posted in another forum. This thread is supposed to be about the josko case containing posts of either more evidence against or rebuttal evidence. Please keep the thread on topic.

[InsomniaRed]

I'm not a C&A mod, but I do believe conversations about what should or should not be included in an account sitting feature should be best posted in another forum. This thread is supposed to be about the josko case containing posts of either more evidence against or rebuttal evidence. Please keep the thread on topic.

In response to this, just for a reference, here is one of the latest Suggestions threads about account sitting features if you'd like to submit your opinion:
viewtopic.php?f=4&t=143460

[thebest712]

HardAttack. We're getting off topic, but I was responding to thebest's accusation of: "as you guys already doing it".

We in G1 are fully aware of what he is referring to and would welcome the chance to prove it wrong as we have evidence that the player in question was going to be away from the site and requested someone take a turn for him.

Anyways, let's keep this on topic. If KORT wants to accuse someone else, they can make a new thread.

Im sorry to be not clear.
the as you guys already doing it was referring to the suggestion.