Account Sitting Abuse - josko.ri [warned]

[lord voldemort]

More importantly, what I fear is going on behind the scenes here (and possibly in other clans too) is this player (and other players) are probably logging in and leading the strategy in games that they are not even in.

And the accusation snowballs once again. Seriously, enough of the "I bet they're doing this too, even though I can't prove it". Remember the statement about "baseless accusations in C&A will be punished"? I'd love to see that enforced.

well i definitely think this is the case...
i have the unique perspective of being an ex hunter that can just see how bad clan babysitting and account sharing is...
sure i get a good portion is legit...
but there are players who use and abuse account sitting.
And i know for a fact it happened in a good portion of the top clans

[drunkmonkey]

More importantly, what I fear is going on behind the scenes here (and possibly in other clans too) is this player (and other players) are probably logging in and leading the strategy in games that they are not even in.

And the accusation snowballs once again. Seriously, enough of the "I bet they're doing this too, even though I can't prove it". Remember the statement about "baseless accusations in C&A will be punished"? I'd love to see that enforced.

well i definitely think this is the case...
i have the unique perspective of being an ex hunter that can just see how bad clan babysitting and account sharing is...
sure i get a good portion is legit...
but there are players who use and abuse account sitting.
And i know for a fact it happened in a good portion of the top clans

That's great. Make another C&A post about it, and bring plenty of evidence along.

[lord voldemort]

lol i would if i still had access to the multi hunter tools
That and it would require blatantly giving away the ways hunters work

[jpcloet]

More importantly, what I fear is going on behind the scenes here (and possibly in other clans too) is this player (and other players) are probably logging in and leading the strategy in games that they are not even in.

I'm trying to not post in here, but I will try to correct misled statements best I can. One of the best things about clans is that you have teammates who can teach you new strategies or recognize a move that you may not have considered. I have personally asked for a teammates advice here and there whether it be via a sunny game or via an image in a foggy game. I personally don't have an issue with clan members helping each other with strategy, even if it is in games they are not in. The excesses you are inferring to, to me is more about the spirit of clan wars rather than site law.

[lord voldemort]

More importantly, what I fear is going on behind the scenes here (and possibly in other clans too) is this player (and other players) are probably logging in and leading the strategy in games that they are not even in.

I'm trying to not post in here, but I will try to correct misled statements best I can. One of the best things about clans is that you have teammates who can teach you new strategies or recognize a move that you may not have considered. I have personally asked for a teammates advice here and there whether it be via a sunny game or via an image in a foggy game. I personally don't have an issue with clan members helping each other with strategy, even if it is in games they are not in. The excesses you are inferring to, to me is more about the spirit of clan wars rather than site law.

this can be achieved without logging in though...
back in the day before you had snaps you used to print screen and post in forums...why not do the same here for strat advice?

[danryan]

More importantly, what I fear is going on behind the scenes here (and possibly in other clans too) is this player (and other players) are probably logging in and leading the strategy in games that they are not even in.

I'm trying to not post in here, but I will try to correct misled statements best I can. One of the best things about clans is that you have teammates who can teach you new strategies or recognize a move that you may not have considered. I have personally asked for a teammates advice here and there whether it be via a sunny game or via an image in a foggy game. I personally don't have an issue with clan members helping each other with strategy, even if it is in games they are not in. The excesses you are inferring to, to me is more about the spirit of clan wars rather than site law.

this can be achieved without logging in though...
back in the day before you had snaps you used to print screen and post in forums...why not do the same here for strat advice?

I'm with jpcloet on this. I see no problem with jumping on to look at a position and give advice, it's essentially the exact same thing as taking a screenshot and posting it but quicker. It is completely different than taking the turn yourself when the sittee is available to take their turn.

Btw, I have no dog in this fight at all, but after numerous complaints about behavior like this I at least would pause to reflect on the complaints and see if perhaps I should change the approach to sitting. We frequently have joked with opponents when a sitter has to take a turn, because of the perceived advantage given when a top player sits for someone else. That joke can quickly become sour if it's systematic.

[Chuuuuck]

More importantly, what I fear is going on behind the scenes here (and possibly in other clans too) is this player (and other players) are probably logging in and leading the strategy in games that they are not even in.

I'm trying to not post in here, but I will try to correct misled statements best I can. One of the best things about clans is that you have teammates who can teach you new strategies or recognize a move that you may not have considered. I have personally asked for a teammates advice here and there whether it be via a sunny game or via an image in a foggy game. I personally don't have an issue with clan members helping each other with strategy, even if it is in games they are not in. The excesses you are inferring to, to me is more about the spirit of clan wars rather than site law.

JP, then maybe you should not of posted in here if you are trying not to unless to correct a misled statement.

The definition of misled is "to lead into error of conduct, thought, or judgment."

I did not lead anyone in error. I did not state anything along those lines as fact, I simply said I fear it is happening and was trying to show a much broader picture of what the problem is here. I thoroughly thought out what I said and the message I was trying to convey. In fact, I could even vouch in instances in the past where my "fears" are known to be true because I have known several people at different times in my CC career who have admitted to doing this. This is not a C&A abuse report about this per say, but I feel it is on topic because I want the Admins/Hunters to think of all of the implications of the way the rules stand now and realize their ruling here could be a precedent for how things are interpreted in the future.

On top of that, you quoted one thing from my passage and called it "misleading" but you did not take the entire sentence in context.

are probably logging in and leading the strategy in games that they are not even in.

You only cared to talk about the fact that players are leading the strategy. However, the word "and" between "logging in" and "leading the strategy" implies that those two things TOGETHER make up my fears. Leading the strategy has nothing to do with why everyone thinks they are cheating by itself. It would be cheating because they are LOGGING IN for someone else to do it. That is abuse of having that persons password and taking advantage of their account. If they want to lead the strategy in that game through proper channels, from their own account, whether it be PMs, their own forums, or anything else, then I would have no problems with it.

Nothing about my post was misleading and I would greatly appreciate it if you wouldn't mislead others by changing the context of what I was saying.

[jpcloet]

So let me clarify then.

Are you concerned that

A) a player is using another player's account (in the game) to post strategy for that player but not playing the game
B) a player is using another player's account (in the game) to post strategy for that player AND playing the game
C) both A & B

[Chuuuuck]

So let me clarify then.

Are you concerned that

A) a player is using another player's account (in the game) to post strategy for that player but not playing the game
B) a player is using another player's account (in the game) to post strategy for that player AND playing the game
C) both A & B

C)

And to take it a little farther. I am concerned player's are using other player's accounts for any reason whatsoever than legitimate account sitting times when a player has to be away from a computer themselves for a period of longer than 24 hours.

[lokisgal]

simple fact of the matter loki..in a quick defence of myself...
I play in games in which i have proven to be great at in clan challenges...i dont need someone to hold my hand and play my turns...and the same goes for everyone in empire. we dont put people in games they dont know.
We do however use excellent communication and that results in alot of the time my games getting low...you know living on the opposite side of the world and all...
and a baseball game in australia is a lengthy exercise...its a full day of 3 games including warm up and cool downs and social functions to go with....
the point is...as i told you when this all went down...file a god damm report about me if you think im breaking the sitting guidelines.

LOL - lovo a baseball game is 9 innings. Im fully aware of how long warm ups and so on take as well as social functions. My entire family is involved in baseball in one form or another and Im not talking about little league...... In any case if you have time to log on every 12 hours which you were doing you had time to take your turns -nuff said
Im not rehashing this again Im just using it as an example of what I consider to be abuse. Dont protest to much that never works out well
abuse is abuse its up to the mods to look into all of these things and come up with new rules for this - its out of hand with many clans . I could care less about losing a game but I do feel unless there are extreme circumstances you take all your turns unless you know you will be gone for more than 24 hours.


Anyway this thread isnt about you I know . hard to believe isnt it
this was just brought up as an example.

[drunkmonkey]

Maybe I'm just blind, but where is the Account Sitting Abuse rule posted?

[HardAttack]

More importantly, what I fear is going on behind the scenes here (and possibly in other clans too) is this player (and other players) are probably logging in and leading the strategy in games that they are not even in.

I'm trying to not post in here, but I will try to correct misled statements best I can. One of the best things about clans is that you have teammates who can teach you new strategies or recognize a move that you may not have considered. I have personally asked for a teammates advice here and there whether it be via a sunny game or via an image in a foggy game. I personally don't have an issue with clan members helping each other with strategy, even if it is in games they are not in. The excesses you are inferring to, to me is more about the spirit of clan wars rather than site law.

this can be achieved without logging in though...
back in the day before you had snaps you used to print screen and post in forums...why not do the same here for strat advice?

I'm with jpcloet on this. I see no problem with jumping on to look at a position and give advice, it's essentially the exact same thing as taking a screenshot and posting it but quicker. It is completely different than taking the turn yourself when the sittee is available to take their turn.

Btw, I have no dog in this fight at all, but after numerous complaints about behavior like this I at least would pause to reflect on the complaints and see if perhaps I should change the approach to sitting. We frequently have joked with opponents when a sitter has to take a turn, because of the perceived advantage given when a top player sits for someone else. That joke can quickly become sour if it's systematic.

I agree with dan and jpcloet in this.
There is no problem logging in account to see what is going on in foggy games, write comments etc.
Taking turn for em is something different.
Player A and B in same clan. Player A is playing a clan war game and asking for comments from player B for a particular game.
There are ways to make it.
1/The simplest way which is less time consuming is Player B logs in the Player A's account, then makes comments under the name of Player A.
2/If you take the longer way, player A takes a snapshot, copies it, visits photobucket to upload it, then copies the link and sends a PM...
Several PMs comes and goes, what cards you have got, your team mates has got etc...
Then player B makes anotoher post in which pictures a plan, draws a road plan...
Then player A takes the turn...
These both cases are same...If you are gonna say case 2 is fine but not case 1 then i really would like to ask what is the difference ?
If not, if you say case 1 wrong, then you should say case 2 is wrong too i guess.

[Chariot of Fire]

Maybe I'm just blind, but where is the Account Sitting Abuse rule posted?

Through the letterbox of KORT HQ

[Rodion]

viewtopic.php?p=3185833#p3185833

Bones, can you explain how you got that information?

It's hard not to think of it as a witch hunt when you were only able to design your accusation with information that you shouldn't have since you are not a mod.

Furthermore, if you want this to be a due proccess, I also request that you explain the source of your possible future "arguments" before you make me waste time looking for something that I can't find (since I don't have access to the mod forum and, apparently, you somehow do).

[SirSebstar]

Maybe I'm just blind, but where is the Account Sitting Abuse rule posted?

comminity guidelines. look for it in the forums top links

[Rodion]

Maybe I'm just blind, but where is the Account Sitting Abuse rule posted?

comminity guidelines. look for it in the forums top links

SirSebstar, Monkey and I were actually wasting our time on a fool's errand. We were looking for a paragraph that we would never be able to find because it is in the mod forums (check my Q&A post you answered).

[Night Strike]

http://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=3185833#p3185833

Bones, can you explain how you got that information?

It's hard not to think of it as a witch hunt when you were only able to design your accusation with information that you shouldn't have since you are not a mod.

Furthermore, if you want this to be a due proccess, I also request that you explain the source of your possible future "arguments" before you make me waste time looking for something that I can't find (since I don't have access to the mod forum and, apparently, you somehow do).

Doesn't KORT have several moderators in the clan? Shouldn't they too be aware of the rule and realize that the actions of their clan members are breaking those rules?

[Bones2484]

http://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=3185833#p3185833

Bones, can you explain how you got that information?

Sure, it was sent to me when I asked for specifics on what could be classified as Account Sitting Abuse in my discussions with moderators.

I have no intentions of sharing private messages that I have had, though, unless anyone from the Cheating/Abuse Team would like me to privately do so by using the report a PM functionality.

Furthermore, if you want this to be a due proccess, I also request that you explain the source of your possible future "arguments" before you make me waste time looking for something that I can't find (since I don't have access to the mod forum and, apparently, you somehow do).

I have no idea what you are referring to by "future arguments", but if you want links that you can find, try anything in the help section. In particular, Question 17:

You can, with the stipulation that the account babysitter is not your opponent in any current game. It is common courtesy to announce in game chat that another player will take your turn(s) during your absence. Babysitters should only do what is necessary to take the turn(s) and should not interact with the community, start or join new games (except for ongoing tournaments). Furthermore, you should only take another player's turn if they are in danger of missing a turn, not for the purpose of gaining a tactical advantage.

"Account Sitting Abuse" is also called out as a major infraction in the Community Guidelines at the top of the forum.

What I had sent to me is only a clarification of the above and aren't different rules. It's just greater definition and clarification to the terms, specifically "tactical advantage", so you cannot claim ignorance that this is unknown territory that was being broken.

[karelpietertje]

I was unable to find the bolded quote in the opening post of this thread anywhere. Why can't somebody just post a link?
Surely you cannot be accused of being a cheater based on guidelines that are not even public?

[Night Strike]

I was unable to find the bolded quote in the opening post of this thread anywhere. Why can't somebody just post a link?
Surely you cannot be accused of being a cheater based on guidelines that are not even public?

Actually, yes you can, because the rules clearly say you can't sit an account for a tactical advantage. I believe waiting so long to get advice for your games that the person giving the advice then has to take your turn for you is the definition of a "tactical advantage".

By the way, if you want to verify the existence of the rule, you should ask one of the moderators who are a member of your clan. They can not only verify that it exists, but that it existed well before the actions KORT is accused of in this thread.

[Bones2484]

They can not only verify that it exists, but that it existed well before the actions KORT is accused of in this thread.

As SirSebstar pointed out to Rodion in the thread he linked to me:

That particular explenation has been established in 2009

Surely you cannot be accused of being a cheater based on guidelines that are not even public?

This is not a guideline. It's a clarification of a guideline. The guidelines that are listed at the top of the forums or in the Rule Book cannot (and should not) list every possible violation that anyone would ever come up with to skirt the rules. That would be an impossible task for anyone to try to put together.

But if you want links to the specific guidelines then here you go:

http://www.conquerclub.com/eticket/index.php - Go to question number 17
viewtopic.php?f=1&t=7785 - Do a search for "Account Sitting"

[barterer2002]

So I guess the real question is when is account sitting appropriate.

Lets start with the premise that as a site and business that CC recognizes that there will be times when players will be away for more than 24 hours at a time and will need to have an account sitter at some point.

that being the case I think we can all agree that someone who is away for X length of time should have a sitter. It keeps deadbeats from happening, it keeps games moving and it makes for a more enjoyable site.

Now, in general I'd contend that anyone who will be away for more than 24 hours should have the opportunity to have a sitter although I'd recognize that there are those who would opt for different times.

The question here though is a bit different. Personally I suspect that there are plenty of sitters who do exactly what josko is accused of but don't post that they're sitting and thus don't draw the ire of the opposition. That however is neither here nor there at the moment.

The question here then is when is it appropriate to sit for a player who is available to take their turn within the 24 hour period but for whatever reason does not. (And truthfully, for the most part whether that reason is strategy, drunkenness or exhaustion doesn't really matter either. They are, to my mind at least, all birds of a feather).

There are some who contend that it is never appropriate to do so and that doing it is cheating. Most players, I think, would let it go if it were an occasional thing but when it becomes more systematic it gets looked at.

Others clearly contend that its OK to take your teammate's turn any time they might miss as there is no tactical advantage. I would respectfully disagree. Part of the strategy of a team game is getting your discussions done within that 24 hour period so that the player who's turn it is can take their turn. I would also contend that there is certainly a tactical advantage to one player taking multiple turns. Obviously it will happen at times as its likely that when a player is gone for a week and is in a team game that their teammate will be covering for them but I'm contending that it shouldn't be done as a regular habit. To those who contend that there is no difference between Player A posting in the team chat what to do and actually doing it themselves I would say that they're wrong. Turns often are more fluid that simple instructions can be unless you want to go into a "if you take territory X with more than 10 armies left advance them and attack Territory Y, otherwise . . ." type of instruction. Finally, part of the team game is that you're playing against 2, 3 or 4 other individuals who are all capable of making their own errors and/or miscues regardless of how many instructions are out there. That's part of what a team is about and having the best player on the team take most of the turns defeats the purpose of that.

Let me be clear on this. I like most of the members of KORT that I've interacted with. I've never had issues with any of them and I don't think this is a witch hunt although I can see why they feel attacked. For my money, I disagree with the position that Rodion and josko appear to be taking that its OK to skip your turns in a game and allow your teammate to sit for you. It may be that CC comes back and says that its perfectly OK to do it as they've been doing but clearly some clarity is needed here as, from what I understand, this isn't the first time this issue has come up. At a minimum IMO, clarity is needed here as to whether this type of strategy is allowed within the confines of account sitting.

[SirSebstar]

At a minimum IMO, clarity is needed here as to whether this type of strategy is allowed within the confines of account sitting.

I guess we are going to find out by the time a verdict has reached.
At least bones thinks this should not be acceptable. I can see the rules explenation and see where that is comming from. it does look like josko might have gone overboard though...I do know clans are pretending to be different, and i basicly concur with that too. To me its a tough call, one i hope can be resolved by a clarification or exception and or software..

[karelpietertje]

I was just verifying that the bolded text was official, I'm not defending josko's case.

Bytheway, Night Strike, could you be a little less persistent in assuming that the rules actually have been broken? The verdict and even the defense have yet to come. I think everybody should try to be more neutral, but especially moderators.
It might still take weeks, and it kind of sucks for josko (and with him the rest of KORT) being assumed to be a cheater all that time.

[Night Strike]

Bytheway, Night Strike, could you be a little less persistent in assuming that the rules actually have been broken? The verdict and even the defense have yet to come. I think everybody should try to be more neutral, but especially moderators.
It might still take weeks, and it kind of sucks for josko (and with him the rest of KORT) being assumed to be a cheater all that time.

If I didn't think the rules had been broken, I wouldn't have assisted in writing the case that Bones put out in the first post. And since I don't moderate this forum nor am a Clan Director, I'm not acting as a moderator in this case and can post any opinion I want that is not breaking the forum guidelines. I do think the rules have been broken, so I have no reason to stay neutral.