The Official Clan Sitting Rules (Old Version)

[josko.ri]

Perhaps I should put in a definition of vacation. The term "vacation" is being used to cover any extended absence from the site where you would require a sitter. Edit I have added a definition to the rules on the 1st page.

what needs to be clarified is a Vacation is not you going on holidays (although it may be). A Vacation is an extended absence from CC.

That is correct, we don't care if you are in the Bahamas, moving house or stuck in a tree. Any extended period of time during which you can not play the game is a site vacation as it were.

You just gave me new idea where will Moonchild be next time when he will need sitting

(joking ofc)

[JBoy]

I feel like you are overcomplicating this, anybody on your team should be able to fill in for you as needed for work, sickness etc. They should post their name in the chat. The clan leader also should have the option, because we don't have access to everyone's pw. .If people in your clan are taking your turns without permission, leave the clan. Who cares if the imaginery player on the opposing team is the real imaginery player or a substitute player ?...Don't be so serious about something that's supposed to be a casual distraction from the real world.

[Evil Semp]

I understand why a time limit of one hour for emergency sitting has been proposed, but it also potentially excessively burdens a sitter. The 3 am example has been mentioned before; that is a very valid concern. Waking up in the middle of the night to take a friend's turn when there is a reasonable expectation that it would be missed, and could have been sat earlier at a more convenient time, is not fun.

This seems to be a recurring comment in this thread. Nobody is telling you to get up at A.M. to take turns for a team mate. You make that choice. If YOU HAVE NOT BEEN contacted by the account holder to take their turn then you don't know that they won't be taking their own turn. Give the account holder the right to take their turn with just over an hour of time left. Remember this is stated to be emergency coverage. If your clan mates turn expires at 4 A.M. but you go to bed at 10 P.M. would you be taking his/her turn? Give the player the allotted amount of time to take their own turn.

Regular account sitting can CONTINUE AS NORMAL.


May I suggest to all posters to read or reread the original post before posting. This thread would be 4 pages long if there weren't any tldnr, sorry if this has been said before. No wonder it is tldnr.

[catnipdreams]

I understand why a time limit of one hour for emergency sitting has been proposed, but it also potentially excessively burdens a sitter. The 3 am example has been mentioned before; that is a very valid concern. Waking up in the middle of the night to take a friend's turn when there is a reasonable expectation that it would be missed, and could have been sat earlier at a more convenient time, is not fun.



This seems to be a recurring comment in this thread. Nobody is telling you to get up at A.M. to take turns for a team mate. You make that choice. If YOU HAVE NOT BEEN contacted by the account holder to take their turn then you don't know that they won't be taking their own turn. Give the account holder the right to take their turn with just over an hour of time left. Remember this is stated to be emergency coverage. If your clan mates turn expires at 4 A.M. but you go to bed at 10 P.M. would you be taking his/her turn? Give the player the allotted amount of time to take their own turn.

Regular account sitting can CONTINUE AS NORMAL.


May I suggest to all posters to read or reread the original post before posting. This thread would be 4 pages long if there weren't any tldnr, sorry if this has been said before. No wonder it is tldnr.

I have read every word that has been posted in this thread.

Perhaps I did not make the context clear about the 3 a.m. comment. I understand that it is not an issue for normal account sitting. However, what about the case where a totally reliable teammate is about to miss a turn at, say, 8 pm their time. It's under an hour, emergency sitting is fine, and so on. While the emergency sitter is taking that turn, s/he notices that several other games have low clocks, expiring in the middle of the night. It is also well known that this particular teammate goes to bed at 10 pm, and would normally play these games with low clocks before going to bed. At 11 pm, the emergency sitter checks on those low games, and finds that they still have not been played, and the AWOL player has not responded to communication attempts. A reasonable person would (a) be concerned for the welfare of their friend, and (b) want to take those turns for their friend, as there is a reasonable expectation that they will be missed. I think we could call this the AWOL situation. Again, if sitting is transparent, I don't see a problem with allowing this. It's rare that this would happen; I'm thinking perhaps once or twice a year? If it is discovered that this is happening several times a week/month, then appropriate action can be taken.

[chapcrap]

Now this a clean slate, we are moving forward. We must all adhere to site rules.

A clean slate for breaking previous rules?

Really?

I'm ok with the rules and whatever we need to do, but giving out some kind of blanket immunity for people who have been breaking site rules is absurd.

[Lindax]

Now this a clean slate, we are moving forward. We must all adhere to site rules.

A clean slate for breaking previous rules?

Really?

I'm ok with the rules and whatever we need to do, but giving out some kind of blanket immunity for people who have been breaking site rules is absurd.

For once I agree with chap.

Lx

[Funkyterrance]

Now this a clean slate, we are moving forward. We must all adhere to site rules.

A clean slate for breaking previous rules?

Really?

I'm ok with the rules and whatever we need to do, but giving out some kind of blanket immunity for people who have been breaking site rules is absurd.

What did you have in mind? Stripping of medals? If so, I'm fine with that. Better yet, reset the clan standings and start with a truly clean slate.

[Keefie]

Now this a clean slate, we are moving forward. We must all adhere to site rules.

A clean slate for breaking previous rules?

Really?

I'm ok with the rules and whatever we need to do, but giving out some kind of blanket immunity for people who have been breaking site rules is absurd.

and raising C&A reports based upon things said in this thread is just petty and vindictive

[HardAttack]

Re: Chariot of Fire[pending]es

Postby king achilles on Sun Jul 22, 2012 2:31 pm
Apparently, ES has got some real life stuff to attend to so I will close this case instead.

After further ...

24 hours/day for as long as you want, nor is it for people who will intentionally not take their turns so that their account sitter or clan mate can take the turn for them.

It is not a 24/7 responsibility of anyone to look after the games of their friends or clan mates as this can be seen as account sharing where more than one person is already freely logging in to one account whenever these people want to.

You can only....

For your own good, please do take note of this:

Howdy folks.

Until we get some sort of sitting feature, we feel we have no choice but to bring in some Clan Sitting Rules. We are aware that this may cause a stir. But please ...

Ok The Rules

What has to happen.

...

2, Emergency cover may only be given if the person really is in danger of missing a turn. Therefore a turn can only be covered if there is an hour or less left on the clock. But steps must be taken to contact the player before hand.

...

The CD team.

Maybe i am missing something, but i see a huge confliction in between two approaches.
I m not speaking of cases, consequences, however speaking of mainlines, approaches.
At one side we have got KA bringing red highlighted part, that is telling (it is how i see it, maybe i m interpreting this wrong and if so correct me pls) no matter we see our clan mate is close to miss a turn or not, let him/her miss it. Since we will not have the pw of player, since we should not have the pw as rule/s states, then we never will be able to cover turns cos we are not informed to sit by the player who is about to miss the turn...

If so, then what is it in green highlighted section ? How are we going to be sitting to cover emergencies ? Since we will not have passwords, then how are we going to cover turns in danger of missing ? Cos those turns in danger of missing happens not planned, due to urgencies, unplanned, so player didnt know he needed a sitter then didnt send a pw to sitter, didnt ask sitter to sit and so...

I see a major difference in two approaches here, want to share with community and want to see if i am missing something...
Which one is correctt ?
With all my respect,
HA.

[therev1957]

I am equally disgruntled with the state of affairs.
The fat bloated clans with the do-or-die stance towards wars, rule-bending, etc. need to unwrap their egos from their online gaming experience. There are certain clans out there that I have much respect for due to their skills combined with integrity. For example: The Pack. I have had the privilege of playing with some of these guys and they are stand-up players. This was way back when I started playing and I was looking for a clan. I played with their leaders and they were not sketchy a bit and I am pretty critical of this sort of thing lol. Nobody told me what to do, we discussed. I'm not meaning to go off on a tangent, just want to make it clear that I'm not irrationally and randomly attacking the more competitive clans, just the ones who smell fishy. It's pretty obvious to someone not completely wrapped up in their clan standing who is dirty and who is not. I don't trust the bloated fatty clans, they didn't get that way playing the straight and narrow. I can't see any other way to make them change than by force since they are obviously blinded by the ambition to win wars.

i had the opposite experience with them.

they were constantly logging into my account to take turns when i was online. it got so bad i changed my password and did not inform them so they refused to use me in any more games.

Well you know greenoaks it got to the point that the people in the pack didn't want to play with you because you had time to post in the forums but no time to discuss your turns or even play them!

Example:
Game 8374967 2011-02-28 16:43:15 - greenoaks missed a turn
Game 8639756 2011-03-19 20:21:37 - greenoaks ran out of time (not paying attention in a war game and not ending his turn)
Game 8634025 2011-03-14 12:17:20 - greenoaks missed a turn

[greenoaks]

the cheating was so rampant that my flag was changing midturn

[IcePack]

Now this a clean slate, we are moving forward. We must all adhere to site rules.

A clean slate for breaking previous rules?

Really?

I'm ok with the rules and whatever we need to do, but giving out some kind of blanket immunity for people who have been breaking site rules is absurd.

and raising C&A reports based upon things said in this thread is just petty and vindictive

Not when they don't understand or care to follow the existing rules or continue to push how the practise is somehow "ok". Then follows it up w several requests to post a C&A on them.

IcePack

[therev1957]

the cheating was so rampant that my flag was changing midturn

LOL you even had to to watch your flag change (which I highly doubt happened) but not take your turns?

[Funkyterrance]

Maybe i am missing something, but i see a huge confliction in between two approaches.
I m not speaking of cases, consequences, however speaking of mainlines, approaches.
At one side we have got KA bringing red highlighted part, that is telling (it is how i see it, maybe i m interpreting this wrong and if so correct me pls) no matter we see our clan mate is close to miss a turn or not, let him/her miss it. Since we will not have the pw of player, since we should not have the pw as rule/s states, then we never will be able to cover turns cos we are not informed to sit by the player who is about to miss the turn...

If so, then what is it in green highlighted section ? How are we going to be sitting to cover emergencies ? Since we will not have passwords, then how are we going to cover turns in danger of missing ? Cos those turns in danger of missing happens not planned, due to urgencies, unplanned, so player didnt know he needed a sitter then didnt send a pw to sitter, didnt ask sitter to sit and so...

I see a major difference in two approaches here, want to share with community and want to see if i am missing something...
Which one is correctt ?
With all my respect,
HA.

I think this is a very good point but I think that the admins are trying come up with something, anything that will work in the meantime while they formulate a more long term solution. I agree though that there is something of a contradiction in the two statements. The thing is the first statement was made some time ago and the second was made in light of recent events so it's not entirely fair to put them in the same context. I would say that for now the second one is the one you can go by but that's just me.

[mkcummins]

Well done, CD's. Thank you for taking the initiative and policing the clan world. These rules are simple and easy to follow. You have EMPIRE's commitment to continue to conduct ourselves in a respectable manner and adhere happily to these guidelines.

cheers

[greenoaks]

the cheating was so rampant that my flag was changing midturn

LOL you even had to to watch your flag change (which I highly doubt happened) but not take your turns?

midturn, do you understand the word. i'm in games and being told they are foeing me because my flag is changing while we are playing.

the Pack were what many of us here hate. 3 or 4 players playing all games themselves or through puppet accounts.

[agentcom]

OK, I hate it when people do this but tl;dr ... at least not the last few pages. But if what was included up to page 14 is any indication it seems people are starting to repeat themselves. I have a couple of thoughts, which also are somewhat repeats of what's been said.

First, the 1 hour rule should probably be expanded, but at the very least there need to be exceptions. Exception 1: An emergency in which the sitter has been informed that turns need to be taken should be treated the same as any pre-arranged absence. Exception 2: Once a player comes within the 1 hour rule and after efforts have been made to contact that player, sitting should be permitted at the minimum levels necessary to ensure no missed turns. If only one player has their password and that player is going to bed, this means they could clear 8 hours or so. Exception 3: After a player has missed a turn, he is considered in a state of emergency and the other exceptions apply. Exception 4: Other exceptions handled on a case-by-case basis, e.g., Goranz' posts about being in a different timezone.

Just thought of this: change "vacation" or whatever it says now to "prearranged absence, e.g., vacation"

I'm not sure how I feel about the fact that I can't play some other turns while I'm away. Sometimes, as a favor to my sitter, I try to clear the easy turns or the turns in games that are already decided to decrease the sitter's gameload. I understand how this could be abused, so I get why the rule is as it is, but I'm not terribly happy about not being able to help my sitter out while he's helping me.

Last thought is that people seem to be forgetting that these rules apply to clan wars only. It's not going to get you a C&A post (I would hope) if you break these rules. It's not going to affect how you sit for clanmates (or others) in non-clan games.

Oh and I would also like to point out that the whole "all top clans do such-and-such" doesn't seem to be true. The takeaway that I got from reading posts from people in "top clans" is that most of them do things differently, but generally try to be honest and fair. It will be nice to standardize these things, though, so everyone is on the same page.

[hopalong]

love the rules - simple, straightforward, clear.

not sure what motivated the need for these rules, but i presume it was a minority of individuals finding loopholes on an ongoing basis; that should be the focus for any rule - limit cheating. all these "what if ... " situations are a distraction to the the real conversation to be had: how to prevent whatever motivated these "new" rules in the first place.

exceptional situations will always happen ... if they keep happening, they aren't exceptional, or the rules need to be revisited.

looking forward to moving forward!

[therev1957]

the cheating was so rampant that my flag was changing midturn

LOL you even had to to watch your flag change (which I highly doubt happened) but not take your turns?

midturn, do you understand the word. i'm in games and being told they are foeing me because my flag is changing while we are playing.

the Pack were what many of us here hate. 3 or 4 players playing all games themselves or through puppet accounts.

Greenoaks, I have been with the clan since the beginning...I have never taken anyone's turn unless 1. I was asked to sit their account or 2. it was under an hour and I couldn't get a hold of them. And that goes the same for them taking my turn!

[HardAttack]

OK, I hate it when people do this but tl;dr ... at least not the last few pages. But if what was included up to page 14 is any indication it seems people are starting to repeat themselves. I have a couple of thoughts, which also are somewhat repeats of what's been said.

First, the 1 hour rule should probably be expanded, but at the very least there need to be exceptions. Exception 1: An emergency in which the sitter has been informed that turns need to be taken should be treated the same as any pre-arranged absence. Exception 2: Once a player comes within the 1 hour rule and after efforts have been made to contact that player, sitting should be permitted at the minimum levels necessary to ensure no missed turns. If only one player has their password and that player is going to bed, this means they could clear 8 hours or so. Exception 3: After a player has missed a turn, he is considered in a state of emergency and the other exceptions apply. Exception 4: Other exceptions handled on a case-by-case basis, e.g., Goranz' posts about being in a different timezone.

Just thought of this: change "vacation" or whatever it says now to "prearranged absence, e.g., vacation"

I'm not sure how I feel about the fact that I can't play some other turns while I'm away. Sometimes, as a favor to my sitter, I try to clear the easy turns or the turns in games that are already decided to decrease the sitter's gameload. I understand how this could be abused, so I get why the rule is as it is, but I'm not terribly happy about not being able to help my sitter out while he's helping me.

Last thought is that people seem to be forgetting that these rules apply to clan wars only. It's not going to get you a C&A post (I would hope) if you break these rules. It's not going to affect how you sit for clanmates (or others) in non-clan games.

Oh and I would also like to point out that the whole "all top clans do such-and-such" doesn't seem to be true. The takeaway that I got from reading posts from people in "top clans" is that most of them do things differently, but generally try to be honest and fair. It will be nice to standardize these things, though, so everyone is on the same page.

Having clan mate's pw, is it right or wrong ? A clan mate well very probably can play clan games, and non-clan games as well.
According to your lines, since non-clan games are going to be dealt in CA, but guess what, say some clan ppl has the pw for emergencies in clan war games and this pw, having it becomes a rule violation when it is non-clan game/s. So, are we going to ask ppl in clans not to play non-clan games ? If we are gonna allow clan players to play non-clan war games, then how are we gonna have their pw to sit to cover emergincies in clan war games ? Since having pw is rule violation it says...

[uckuki]

don't we have enough rules and regulations in real life, with cameras, comps
and whatever following our every move?? is the goal to make cc less fun and
more by-the-book place, with dice police checking our every turn?
the more rules and regulations the less fun and interesting cc will be.
I mean people talk about account sitting like it's doping at the Olympics.

how about this rule: take it easy.

[agentcom]

Having clan mate's pw, is it right or wrong ? A clan mate well very probably can play clan games, and non-clan games as well.
According to your lines, since non-clan games are going to be dealt in CA, but guess what, say some clan ppl has the pw for emergencies in clan war games and this pw, having it becomes a rule violation when it is non-clan game/s. So, are we going to ask ppl in clans not to play non-clan games ? If we are gonna allow clan players to play non-clan war games, then how are we gonna have their pw to sit to cover emergincies in clan war games ? Since having pw is rule violation it says...

I'm not entirely sure what you mean here. It's not a violation of the rules (as far as I know) to have someone else's password. There are some actions that are bad enough that they are considered account sitting/sharing abuse. These clan-specific rules are stricter than those, so what may violate these rules doesn't necessarily violate site rules. And if it doesn't violate site rules, there would be no reason for a C&A report. Given this, people can continue to sit for others in non-clan games, the same as they always have. That's all I was saying.

For the clan games, having the password is again not a violation in itself. You just have to follow the new rules or else you risk forfeiting a game or whatever punishments are decided upon by the clan leadership.

However, this does pose interesting questions for folks whose sitters are not part of their clan or not part of the clan world at all.

[eddie2]

what he is saying nicky is that king achilles has already said in a thread that players are not allowed to hold onto other players passwords, but clan moderators are saying in these rules/discussions that you can do this, so is there going to be a conflict here where players are following rules allowed by clan moderators then someone gets pissed off and opens a c and a report.. will the players get a busted/ noted/ warned because they are breaking a site rule ???

like i have said love the idea of new rules, just think they need to be clarified more because they are vague like a lot of rules. So as they stand just now you do not know what you can or cannot do properly.

[Bruceswar]

what he is saying nicky is that king achilles has already said in a thread that players are not allowed to hold onto other players passwords, but clan moderators are saying in these rules/discussions that you can do this, so is there going to be a conflict here where players are following rules allowed by clan moderators then someone gets pissed off and opens a c and a report.. will the players get a busted/ noted/ warned because they are breaking a site rule ???

like i have said love the idea of new rules, just think they need to be clarified more because they are vague like a lot of rules. So as they stand just now you do not know what you can or cannot do properly.

King A has never said it was illegal to hold another person's password. King A has always said be careful who has it and also that you are responsible for what they do while on it. Moral of the story is choose your sitters wisely.

[HardAttack]

well said bruce, got the clear idea now then.
having pw is not the rule violation but it comes to be rule violation at the stage in use...
got it.


agentcom, eddie2 well described my point, so i didnt answer...but the last post from bruce made it very clear i guess removing the fogs away from my mind.