accused - SD - exsisto & BVNK23 [CLEARED] KRK

by **GeneralAnestetic** on Mon Sep 19, 2011 9:31 am

Accused:

BVNK23
exsisto

The accused are suspected of:

Conducting Secret Diplomacy

Game number(s):

Game 9381828
Game 8304444

Comments:

In the second game listed the chat shows the two players know each other in real life, and they discuss calling each other on the telephone to discuss their strategy in what is a free-for-all game. that's clearly secret diplomacy right there & was unfair to the other players in that game.

in the first game listed, i didn't realize the two were friends who were going to make secret diplomacy against me, so i was okay when a stalemate developed in which i had the upper right bonus area, red had the upper left bonus area, and green had the lower right bonus area. then all of a sudden green left his border undefended against red and forted 150 armies to his border with me. the following turn he suicided his stack into mine, without even successfully breaking my bonus. this allowed red to walk in & break my bonus, which he did without breaking green's bonus or leaving any armies in green's area. these two friends are clearly working together and there's no discussion in the chat about it so it's clear they're discussing it on the telephone or via private chat. this is clear secret diplomacy depriving me & the other players of a fair game.

by **Karl_R_Kroenen** on Fri Sep 30, 2011 12:34 pm

exsisto = CLEARED
BVNK23 = CLEARED

Upon inquiring about the "phone call", it was determined that the accused are friends.
While the game chat post of "call me" might be viewed as damning and thereby be SD, CC isn't able to control external methods of communication, nor will an attempt be made.

F.A.M.O.

by **GeneralAnestetic** on Sat Oct 01, 2011 4:08 pm

that's ridiculous. no one says you can control external communication, but when they admit to doing so in violation of the rules in-game, that's a whole different story. and furthermore, you say nothing about their play in the other game, in which the in-game evidence shows they're clearly working together without any in-game chat.

by **GeneralAnestetic** on Sat Oct 01, 2011 4:18 pm

furthermore, let me quote:

Rule #2: No secret diplomacy

Any form of diplomatic discussion between opponents must be posted in the game chat in English or in a language that all opponents understand. Diplomacy includes, but is not limited to: proposing truces, negotiating alliances, and coordinating assaults. Secret diplomacy can be hard to prove, but if you suspect it you should leave the players in question appropriate ratings.

talking on the phone is a form of diplomatic discussion not posted in the game chat. yes, this would be hard to prove, but when they ADMIT to it, that's the proof right there. how you can not give them at least a warning is ridiculous.

and it isn't just famo, which i'll do. they'll pull the same stunts on future opponents, who, like i was, won't be aware of what's going on.
this deserves at least a warning, and give me a break, a noted, for when they get caught at it again in the future.

by **Exsisto** on Mon Oct 03, 2011 12:55 am

GeneralAnestetic,

There is (as there often is in most situations) more to the case than you could realize. In short: in your first example game, ALL the players were close, real life, same city and same employment in some cases friends of ours for 20+ years. I am not going to get into all the details, that was all in my formal response, and I am not going to debate it here with you. The incident has been closed. In addition, had you taken the time to write in the game chat in the same style you wrote here, as oppopsed to screaming, PM'ing a third player with F-bombs and cussing at everyone, perhaps you would be viewed in a different light.

by **Exsisto** on Mon Oct 03, 2011 1:20 am

...and the General (hopefully) ends with this fine note in a PM to me...note the seriously massive difference between how he address admins vs. players...

rot in hell you retard cunt
Sent: Sun Oct 02, 2011 11:11 pm
From: GeneralAnestetic
To: Exsisto

at least you'll have your buddy with you there to bend over for you

by **chapcrap** on Mon Oct 03, 2011 2:02 am

Exsisto wrote:...and the General (hopefully) ends with this fine note in a PM to me...note the seriously massive difference between how he address admins vs. players...

rot in hell you retard cunt
Sent: Sun Oct 02, 2011 11:11 pm
From: GeneralAnestetic
To: Exsisto

at least you'll have your buddy with you there to bend over for you

Might want to flag that one.

by **perchorin** on Mon Oct 03, 2011 2:08 am

chapcrap wrote:
Exsisto wrote:...and the General (hopefully) ends with this fine note in a PM to me...note the seriously massive difference between how he address admins vs. players...

rot in hell you retard cunt
Sent: Sun Oct 02, 2011 11:11 pm
From: GeneralAnestetic
To: Exsisto

at least you'll have your buddy with you there to bend over for you

Might want to flag that one.

Definitely, just click on the "!" in the triangle on the upper right hand side of the pm. That should hopefully bring consequences for a player who just doesn't seem to learn.

by **Exsisto** on Mon Oct 03, 2011 2:12 am

Thank you, I didn't realize I could flag in that manner. I just did and hopefully he will go away. I feel sorry however, for past and future oponents of this player: GeneralAnestetic. For the briefest idea of what I mean, just check his 'ratings left' pages. I am sure I will get one as well, but if this is the end of it, I am relieved to be done of it.