Account Sitting Abuse - josko.ri [warned]

[Master Fenrir]

edit upgrading to 7.3 due to foggy conditions being Cristal clear

The only thing "cristal" clear is that CoF, and possibly other TOFU members, have fog hax that disable the setting when they're not in the game. I sense a new C&A thread in the making...

[Chariot of Fire]

what fog?

[Ace Rimmer]

from the gamechat which HA didn't think to load all of:

2011-05-29 12:20:22 - sonicsteve: CoF for Steve (he's on holiday til 6th June)
2011-06-06 04:08:15 - Chariot of Fire: U cd have broken teal from Abipon quite easily and used Tiwanaku to take C.Andes

so duh he has been looking at that game while sitting. Stop being a sore loser, HA.

[Chariot of Fire]

aww, I wasn't going to point it out to him.

At least it proves I wasn't in gamechat directing gameplay (as it happens to be a harmless comment made after the turn was taken).

[BoganGod]

any ruling expected this year? guess it takes a while to look back through every game played by members of kort for the past how many months? Initial report pretty open ended in naming names. Is that a tactic that is acceptable to use in the future. Are we to look forward to lovely reports along the lines of "Possible secret diplomacy, red and MAYBE everyone else in the game, except myself. Mods please check carefully, I shouldn't have lost". This could get very interesting, what ever the ruling will be setting precedent for the site. Here is hoping that there will be at least a 3paragraph detailed explanation of ruling when it happens. Thanks in advance, the Bogan divinity

[SirSebstar]

any ruling expected this year? guess it takes a while to look back through every game played by members of kort for the past how many months? Initial report pretty open ended in naming names. Is that a tactic that is acceptable to use in the future. Are we to look forward to lovely reports along the lines of "Possible secret diplomacy, red and MAYBE everyone else in the game, except myself. Mods please check carefully, I shouldn't have lost". This could get very interesting, what ever the ruling will be setting precedent for the site. Here is hoping that there will be at least a 3paragraph detailed explanation of ruling when it happens. Thanks in advance, the Bogan divinity

yes

yes

they might

see 3 paragraphs right there.. oops 4..

[king achilles]

There is no definite date for when a verdict will be issued as of yet.

We are giving the accused a chance to defend themselves or himself in which he gave a time frame for it.

Please, if you are only going to post on how to make the sitting feature better, or how to make improvements in account sitting, do so in the Suggestions forum. This is already 14 pages and not all of the posts here belong in this thread. While some of us may enjoy some of your spam/trolling/baiting/off topic posts and what have yous, we would really prefer that you put all of that elsewhere.

[Night Strike]

The accused has had 3 weeks now to post a defense, which is much more time allotted than most other cases that come to the C&A forum. Are we going to actually see a defense or are the accused trying to just ignore the thread hoping it will go away? Let's get a ruling on this so clans and others can get a better idea of what is considered legal account sitting.

[Bones2484]

The accused has had 3 weeks now to post a defense, which is much more time allotted than most other cases that come to the C&A forum. Are we going to actually see a defense or are the accused trying to just ignore the thread hoping it will go away? Let's get a ruling on this so clans and others can get a better idea of what is considered legal account sitting.

Or, is the defense in private which will not allow anyone else to actually see it and counter it?

Just in case it has been provided in private, I'd just like to state the following points of emphasis for the C&A team to consider:

- The 20 or so cases in the OP are from a total of three tournament/challenges. In the G1 challenge I checked every game, but for the TLO tournament and THOTA challenge I only looked at games in which josko was a part of. There are other games in these two that I did not look into to see if josko was taking turns.

- The cases in the OP are only the turns in which we felt abuse was happening. We deleted about 30 turns (again, only from those three tournament/challenges) from our listing in which we felt that legit account sitting was taking place by josko. This includes games for multiple players not included on the original report. Though, I have to say, 50 (30 legit + 20 abuse) turns over the course of around 80 games that josko was a part of is rather ridiculous... even if some of it is "legit".

- To give examples of how small a sample size this truly is, josko and Moonchild (who seems to be the main account josko takes turns for) have played 189 team games together. 35 of the 189 games are from the three tournament/challenges that I looked through and in those 35 games I found 8 games (23%) that I included in the OP. Extrapolating that over 189 games would give an estimate of 43 games of abuse. And this is for only one player, who knows how many games there are out there with numerous other teammates that I did not have the time/desire to do research on.

- If I want to take this further, though... I'll use the numbers stated above: 20 cases of abuse over 80 games. That's 25% (which is very close to the 23% calculated above for Moonchild). Josko has finished 323 team games. 25% of 323 would come out to 81 turns of abuse...

[drunkmonkey]

We get it. You didn't look at all of KoRT's games, but from your research, you can assume josko cheated in most of them.

Yes, the defense has been sent privately. The only people who need to "see and counter it" are the admins & multi hunters. There's been enough hearsay and guessing games for one thread. The peanut gallery has been entertaining, but you guys will just have to find something else to keep yourselves busy for now.

[Night Strike]

So are you all too scared that your defense won't hold up to public scrutiny and are rather hoping that it all gets swept under the rug?

[thebest712]

We get it. You didn't look at all of KoRT's games, but from your research, you can assume josko cheated in most of them.

Yes, the defense has been sent privately. The only people who need to "see and counter it" are the admins & multi hunters. There's been enough hearsay and guessing games for one thread. The peanut gallery has been entertaining, but you guys will just have to find something else to keep yourselves busy for now.

it will come public I think

[Serbia]

So are you all too scared that your defense won't hold up to public scrutiny and are rather hoping that it all gets swept under the rug?

This. Obviously. Those who have nothing to hide, hide nothing.

[sjnap]

Potto

[drunkmonkey]

So are you all too scared that your defense won't hold up to public scrutiny and are rather hoping that it all gets swept under the rug?

If you don't feel the C&A team is capable of doing their job, that's something you should bring up to the admins. I'm sure they'll ask for your insight should they run into any problems.

[niMic]

So are you all too scared that your defense won't hold up to public scrutiny and are rather hoping that it all gets swept under the rug?

Did you miss the part where the defense has been sent in? If the C&A team feel like making it public, I'm sure they will. Until then, perhaps you should take it easy.

[Rodion]

The accused has had 3 weeks now to post a defense, which is much more time allotted than most other cases that come to the C&A forum. Are we going to actually see a defense or are the accused trying to just ignore the thread hoping it will go away? Let's get a ruling on this so clans and others can get a better idea of what is considered legal account sitting.

Or, is the defense in private which will not allow anyone else to actually see it and counter it?

Just in case it has been provided in private, I'd just like to state the following points of emphasis for the C&A team to consider:

- The 20 or so cases in the OP are from a total of three tournament/challenges. In the G1 challenge I checked every game, but for the TLO tournament and THOTA challenge I only looked at games in which josko was a part of. There are other games in these two that I did not look into to see if josko was taking turns.

- The cases in the OP are only the turns in which we felt abuse was happening. We deleted about 30 turns (again, only from those three tournament/challenges) from our listing in which we felt that legit account sitting was taking place by josko. This includes games for multiple players not included on the original report. Though, I have to say, 50 (30 legit + 20 abuse) turns over the course of around 80 games that josko was a part of is rather ridiculous... even if some of it is "legit".

- To give examples of how small a sample size this truly is, josko and Moonchild (who seems to be the main account josko takes turns for) have played 189 team games together. 35 of the 189 games are from the three tournament/challenges that I looked through and in those 35 games I found 8 games (23%) that I included in the OP. Extrapolating that over 189 games would give an estimate of 43 games of abuse. And this is for only one player, who knows how many games there are out there with numerous other teammates that I did not have the time/desire to do research on.

- If I want to take this further, though... I'll use the numbers stated above: 20 cases of abuse over 80 games. That's 25% (which is very close to the 23% calculated above for Moonchild). Josko has finished 323 team games. 25% of 323 would come out to 81 turns of abuse...

Statistically, the problem with small sample sizes is that they're usually not accurate and, as such, can't be used to induce the "bigger picture".

Legally, as the accuser, the onus of proof is yours. You can't take a small sample size and "extrapolate" it. If you think there's more abuse in games you didn't check, you have to check them and find them.

[Timminz]

The accused has had 3 weeks now to post a defense, which is much more time allotted than most other cases that come to the C&A forum. Are we going to actually see a defense or are the accused trying to just ignore the thread hoping it will go away? Let's get a ruling on this so clans and others can get a better idea of what is considered legal account sitting.

Or, is the defense in private which will not allow anyone else to actually see it and counter it?

Just in case it has been provided in private, I'd just like to state the following points of emphasis for the C&A team to consider:

- The 20 or so cases in the OP are from a total of three tournament/challenges. In the G1 challenge I checked every game, but for the TLO tournament and THOTA challenge I only looked at games in which josko was a part of. There are other games in these two that I did not look into to see if josko was taking turns.

- The cases in the OP are only the turns in which we felt abuse was happening. We deleted about 30 turns (again, only from those three tournament/challenges) from our listing in which we felt that legit account sitting was taking place by josko. This includes games for multiple players not included on the original report. Though, I have to say, 50 (30 legit + 20 abuse) turns over the course of around 80 games that josko was a part of is rather ridiculous... even if some of it is "legit".

- To give examples of how small a sample size this truly is, josko and Moonchild (who seems to be the main account josko takes turns for) have played 189 team games together. 35 of the 189 games are from the three tournament/challenges that I looked through and in those 35 games I found 8 games (23%) that I included in the OP. Extrapolating that over 189 games would give an estimate of 43 games of abuse. And this is for only one player, who knows how many games there are out there with numerous other teammates that I did not have the time/desire to do research on.

- If I want to take this further, though... I'll use the numbers stated above: 20 cases of abuse over 80 games. That's 25% (which is very close to the 23% calculated above for Moonchild). Josko has finished 323 team games. 25% of 323 would come out to 81 turns of abuse...

Statistically, the problem with small sample sizes is that they're usually not accurate and, as such, can't be used to induce the "bigger picture".

Legally, as the accuser, the onus of proof is yours. You can't take a small sample size and "extrapolate" it. If you think there's more abuse in games you didn't check, you have to check them and find them.

There's no need to extrapolate at all. 20 games with sitting abuse is far too many, no matter how big the sample size is.

[Bones2484]

Statistically, the problem with small sample sizes is that they're usually not accurate and, as such, can't be used to induce the "bigger picture".

Legally, as the accuser, the onus of proof is yours. You can't take a small sample size and "extrapolate" it. If you think there's more abuse in games you didn't check, you have to check them and find them.

There's no need to extrapolate at all. 20 games with sitting abuse is far too many, no matter how big the sample size is.

Agreed. I was told by an Administrator of this site before I posted this in C&A that the account sitting would be okay if it happened "once or twice under extreme conditions". The simple fact that I could find this happening 20 times in a "small sample size" (as you freely admit), is clear grounds for abuse. There is no way get around that fact.

[Chuuuuck]

I am not trying to be supportive of either side here, although I am very interested in the topic and have stated my opinion for the best interest of clans and the site in general a few times.

However, I do believe that the C&A hunters should make the entire defense public for it to be picked apart by the court of public opinion. If speculation or anything else starts happening then they should keep it on topic and ask people to stick to facts, however, they should give the public a chance to review and acknowledge the defense. I think this because this site does not go out and actively look for cases of abuse on their own, they leave it up to the community as a whole to bring cases to them, then, in addition to that, they leave it up to the community to amount evidence against the accused for them to punish someone. It makes absolutely no sense that you rely on the community to come up with all of the evidence, but then you don't let them see the defense to make their argument against it. Pretty one sided if it is not made public, you show the accused the accusations against them and all of the evidence, but you don't provide the accusers the defense and the chance for rebuttal.

[Foxglove]

However, I do believe that the C&A hunters should make the entire defense public for it to be picked apart by the court of public opinion.

The problem here is that the public is neither fair, nor balanced, nor free of malice - especially in regard to the people involved in this report.

The CC "court of public opinion" is a kangaroo court. For proof of this, please review any previous high-profile post in the C&A forum.

(Edit: Also, please review the usefulness, thoughtful contributions, and carefully considered judgement and evaluation of the facts presented in the post immediately following mine.)

[eddie2]

rofl this thread is funny

[Serbia]

I completely agree. You want to talk about legality, and compare this to a court of law - where do you ever have a prosecution make a public case before a judge, only to get sent out by the judge so the defense could be made in secret, then called back in only to be told of the judgement? That's ridiculous.

Chuuuuck is right on target.

[eddie2]

However, I do believe that the C&A hunters should make the entire defense public for it to be picked apart by the court of public opinion.

The problem here is that the public is neither fair, nor balanced, nor free of malice - especially in regard to the people involved in this report.

The CC "court of public opinion" is a kangaroo court. For proof of this, please review any previous high-profile post in the C&A forum.

(Edit: Also, please review the usefulness, thoughtful contributions, and carefully considered judgement and evaluation of the facts presented in the post immediately following mine.)

lol let me see ah the blitz case was it not for the fact of several players picking apart blitzs statement that got the case down to a correct ruling

[drunkmonkey]

I completely agree. You want to talk about legality, and compare this to a court of law - where do you ever have a prosecution make a public case before a judge, only to get sent out by the judge so the defense could be made in secret, then called back in only to be told of the judgement? That's ridiculous.

Chuuuuck is right on target.

You want to compare this to a court of law? Where do you ever have the defense present their case, and then the judge allows all the local children in to run around the courtroom and rattle off their nonsensical take on the evidence?