jghost7 wrote:Symmetry wrote:Players found guilty of cheating should be stripped of their medals
Looking at a few recent cases where players who have been cheating over a fairly sustained period of time have been caught out, there's a fair amount of consensus that the punishments are kind of light for premium players who cheat.
How this will benefit the site and/or other comments:
A minor thing, but if a player has been cheating to gain points, it seems fair that they be stripped of the medals they have. If they're good enough to earn them under fair circumstances, they'll win them back under fair terms.
This suggestion is aimed at premium players only, and thus proposing an unbalanced punishment system. It would have to be implemented universally if at all.
Symmetry wrote:deathcomesrippin wrote:Is it only multis you are worried about? The OP was kind of vague. All sorts of cheating can occur: If you are talking about multis, then that's one thing, but if you are talking about farming, then that's totally different. What cheaters do you mean?
Fair point, I was primarily thinking about people who used multis when I made the post. This coming off the back of a few threads in the C&A forum where people who had been regularly cheating with multi accounts kept their medals.
However I do agree with Lindax's points above.
This determination will be one of the main points of whether this has a chance to make it through. First thing that must be decided is what infractions specifically this suggestion would apply to. Trying to blanket this type of disciplinary action over all types of infractions would be ridiculous.
Secondly, you would have to have a fair way to determine what types and how many should be revoked. Once again, this seems like it would be a nightmare and a huge additional load to the C&A team to actually come up with hard numbers on affected victories and types.
There is a lot of disparity in opinions over what a fair use of this would be.
There is another issue with the implementation of this type of punishment. The fact that many of the "rules" are subjectively interpreted and standard definitions are avoided would create circumstances that would be unfair to the alleged rulebreaker. I would definitely not support any such measures to be imposed on any infraction that was not properly defined in the rules and the determination not subjective in any way, nor would I support the purely punitive measure as stated previously.
I think this suggestion needs to be more specific to have a true debate on whether to implement the suggestion.
What to punish and how.
There have been way too many cases ended unsatisfactorily to be comfortable with this potentially a blanket punishment.
agentcom wrote:If the choice (for ease of administration) was between stripped of all relevant medals or they status quo, I would vote for stripped of all medals and a point reset.
I would vote status quo if the rules interpretations were used currently, however if these were limited to specific instances with properly defined rules then maybe some consideration for a strip and a points penalty?
Don't let these guys buy back to their old level. As has been noted, this is far too light of a punishment. I would definitely support this for all multi accounts. There is no legitimate reason to have multis: Either you're gaming the system to gain points or you're playing games you want to without risking your points. For this, you should get a full point reset and stripped of all game medals.
The question will be harder with farming/ranching cases, especially as rules develop. Does someone who falls afoul of the "unwritten rules" of abuse of the system deserve to be stripped of their medals? Your answer to this will correlate to what you think is farming and how big of a problem it is.
Agreed thoroughly here. This is definitely among the most subjective of the rules. IE, -"Systematically Farming "New Recruits" may also systematically creating unappealing games that more savvy users avoid because of unpopular or niche game settings, thus luring New Recruits into stumbling into said games."- I can understand the desire to try to make things fair but saying I can't create a game type that I like without being labeled a 'farmer' and being subject to C&A discipline is kind of ridiculous not to mention vague. But this is only one example of many.
For flaming/baiting/bigotry, etc. abuse, maybe strip them of the less important but related medals of Ratings and General Contributions or Achievements. That's an appropriately mild punishment, I think.
I disagree here. Medal stripping just for the sake of medal stripping is just wrong.
For Freestyle turn abuse, maybe no points reset (or maybe still have that), but stripped of freestyle and team medals only. I don't know about the other settings.
I would love for you to expound here. I was looking for the rule for this but couldn't find it.
Just some thoughts I have. Oh, I'll put one more out there. I don't like adding much discretion to the C&A mods ruling abilities (causes too much confusion/animosity already), but there is a case to be made for allowing this as an instrument of discretionary punishment. Perhaps the true farmer, who is sending PMs to ?s and schooling them gets the point reset, ban/buyback option AND the medal stripping; whereas, someone who just set up a high percentage of games that happen to be joined by ?s gets some combination, but not all, of the above.
First part maybe if more defined rules appear. Second part not, see above.
Thanks,
J
ps
Lindax wrote:ljex wrote:this is an awful suggestion...i got a guilty verdict of game throwing...should i have been stripped of all my medals for this?
as a side note, i never threw any games so this would only have compounded the annoyance of being found guilty of something i didnt do
...
Lx
PS: Don't they all say they're innocent?
The problem is that some are ...
Which is why if some form of this is implemented, it should be strictly regulated and should be used with well defined rules that do not require subjectivity from the presiding mod.
