Kiron Conqueror - Abuse or Legal play?

[KraphtOne]

Game 8553895
Game 10765409

hmmm, one of these things is not like the other...

but yeah you're awesome...

The other players chose not to coordinate---in the face of K & X's open diplomacy. Who's fault is that? The other 6 players.

[Funkyterrance]

and re: underlined, if you believe that speculation and angry mobs is a good way of enforcing and creating rules, then you believe in #2 and forego the benefits of #1.

Nobody is acting angry-mobbish BBS. This whole thing is just insulting is all.
Just because a shady practice is not written word for word in the rules doesn't mean it's not cheating. If someone comes up with a hack that alters the dice are you going to argue that it's not stated in the rules that you can't do so and therefore the points gained from said hack should remain? No, that would be ridiculous.

Given these constraints, we have that vague "abuse of the game" rule

It's vague for a reason. Its vague so that it can be applied to any obvious cheating and people don't have to hire a lawyer over the details. It's a safety measure to ensure that when someone is caught cheating they can't worm their way out of it by a technicality.

(1) We can establish new rules for determining collusion because:

(a) I support the rule of law--i.e. equality before the law.
(b) Clearer rules diminish the possibility of perverse incentives (e.g. Conqueror Corruption).
(c) Clearer methods of prosecution reduce costs (e.g. 15 pages of this thread) and reduce the chance of accidentally enforcing injustice.[/list]

This just doesn't work here BBS. There would be too much time dedicated to making new rules every time someone comes up with new and creative ways to cheat. While the system is being "perfected"(pipe dream) as you suggest, dishonest players will continue to screw up the scoreboard. This has happened in the past and as a result there are quite a few players in the hall of fame who really shouldn't be there. Basically it's not enough to just change the rules, there has to be some adjustment to the record for the outcome to be fair. I'm not sure how I feel about a ban but there must be some sort of point reset and absolutely the conqueror medal needs to be removed.

(2) or we can say, 'f*ck that' and appeal to the Ban Hammer.

I want more of #1 and less of #2, so that these entanglements can be somewhat reduced in the future.

If your worry is that these guys will be banned by the authoritarian regime then why not start a thread based on that? Focusing on this point here just seems like going off on a tangent.
As far as the entanglements being reduced in the future it's arguable that banning these players could be just as, if not more effective than what you are proposing. The message for future players will be: Don't cheat or you'll get shamed and banned.

[BigBallinStalin]

Game 8553895
Game 10765409

hmmm, one of these things is not like the other...

but yeah you're awesome...

The other players chose not to coordinate---in the face of K & X's open diplomacy. Who's fault is that? The other 6 players.

I'm pretty serious about this. I've noticed two people openly coordinating in some of my games, but I don't go to the fora to contribute to the Ban Hammer agitation.

If I couldn't convince other players to counter an alliance through OPEN DIPLOMACY, then I need to (a) get better at marketing that plan, or (b) foe people (which many here do), or (c) spend time talking to people to convince them to do (a) and to stop being so emotional.

We should work on changing the rules of this place, instead of acting like some mob.

(1) We can establish new rules for determining collusion because:

(a) I support the rule of law--i.e. equality before the law.
(b) Clearer rules diminish the possibility of perverse incentives (e.g. Conqueror Corruption).
(c) Clearer methods of prosecution reduce costs (e.g. 15 pages of this thread) and reduce the chance of accidentally enforcing injustice.



(2) or we can say, 'f*ck that' and appeal to the Ban Hammer.

I want more of #1 and less of #2, so that these entanglements can be somewhat reduced in the future.

Are you one of those #2 users? I hope not because it won't help to solve these problems in the future.

[BigBallinStalin]

and re: underlined, if you believe that speculation and angry mobs is a good way of enforcing and creating rules, then you believe in #2 and forego the benefits of #1.

Nobody is acting angry-mobbish BBS. This whole thing is just insulting is all.
Just because a shady practice is not written word for word in the rules doesn't mean it's not cheating. If someone comes up with a hack that alters the dice are you going to argue that it's not stated in the rules that you can't do so and therefore the points gained from said hack should remain? No, that would be ridiculous.

The underlined isn't relevant. The route to #2 foregoes the benefits of #1. I hope you acknowledge that.

Given these constraints, we have that vague "abuse of the game" rule

It's vague for a reason. Its vague so that it can be applied to any obvious cheating and people don't have to hire a lawyer over the details. It's a safety measure to ensure that when someone is caught cheating they can't worm their way out of it by a technicality.

Gee, really? Why not invest time in clarifying the means of enforcement? That's pretty much my stance here.

(1) We can establish new rules for determining collusion because:

(a) I support the rule of law--i.e. equality before the law.
(b) Clearer rules diminish the possibility of perverse incentives (e.g. Conqueror Corruption).
(c) Clearer methods of prosecution reduce costs (e.g. 15 pages of this thread) and reduce the chance of accidentally enforcing injustice.[/list]

This just doesn't work here BBS. There would be too much time dedicated to making new rules every time someone comes up with new and creative ways to cheat. While the system is being "perfected"(pipe dream) as you suggest, dishonest players will continue to screw up the scoreboard. This has happened in the past and as a result there are quite a few players in the hall of fame who really shouldn't be there. Basically it's not enough to just change the rules, there has to be some adjustment to the record for the outcome to be fair. I'm not sure how I feel about a ban but there must be some sort of point reset and absolutely the conqueror medal needs to be removed.

It's not just about changing the rules. It's about changing "the rules for determining collusion." Determining collusion. Determining collusion.

I agree with your last sentence, which may attain #1, (b), so in a sense you actually agree with me. Heyyy!


If the community can create scripts which can do some serious statistical 'lifting', then why shouldn't we encourage the development of some script which can be used to determine if collusion is or is not occurring?

That's one of the points with this discussion. Surely, you wouldn't outright reject tapping into the market of coders here?

[Funkyterrance]

I agree with your last sentence, which may attain #1, (b), so in a sense you actually agree with me. Heyyy!


If the community can create scripts which can do some serious statistical 'lifting', then why shouldn't we encourage the development of some script which can be used to determine if collusion is or is not occurring?

That's one of the points with this discussion. Surely, you wouldn't outright reject tapping into the market of coders here?

I think we do agree about this for the most part BBS because I think you are a sensible person. However, playing the devils advocate on this one is going to rub me the wrong way for obvious reasons, mainly the obvious nature of this case.
I have no objection to coding the game to try to prevent this sort of thing from happening again but I feel that is something that goes without saying? However, priority one I believe is to clean house. Do I think a ban is extreme? Probably. Would I rather a ban than nothing be done at all? Probably.
When I get the impression that the focus is being turned away from the colluding parties and onto the other players in the mentioned games or even the game itself I've got to object because the other players in the games don't necessarily realize that Kiron and his fellow "colluder" are pals beyond the scope of the one instance in the one game. If you played with these guys on a regular basis and you noticed a pattern(which does exist) then yeah, you're obligated to join forces against these guys but if you are looking at the game as you would from the perspective of one that doesn't assume automatic collusion between these guys then you can see how it's unfair.

[BigBallinStalin]

Quasi-Defendant's Closing Remarks

(1) I wanted some of us (including lurkers) to focus on finding solutions that attack the fundamental problems here. Although A statistical approach seems cost-prohibitive (3rd Par.), I implore some entrepreneurs to address my concerns and the concerns of others, so that a good script for highlighting possible collusion can be created.

(2) Most of the opposition to K&X is too focused on Open Diplomacy itself. I've already addressed this concern here (second paragraph), so any superficial defense based upon open diplomacy alone should be thrown out.

Without sufficient evidence, a punishment against them establishes the disincentive of coordinating through open diplomacy with friends, acquaintances, or perhaps even strangers in any free-for-all CC game. We should recognize the consequences of this perverse incentive.

(3) Most importantly, some have a good case for punishment because they suspect inconsistencies between openly diplomatic plans and allegedly covert plans. IF in any of their games, K&X enact a plan contrary to their openly stated chat, then the collusion becomes clearer. With this in mind, the #3 argument against K&X becomes superior to the "open diplomacy only" cases.

Mr Changsha shifted the gears correctly,
I'm highly skeptical of any statistical analysis for good reasons.
X's defense is lacking (and somewhat elsewhere).
KraphtOne was close, but it lacked explanation (to his defense, he may have been complementing some else's post which I missed).

The following has posed a significant challenge to my defense of K&X:

donelladan is on the right track.
Tenebrus makes a good point.
Mr Changsha and Fruitcake's Mutual Respect of Distinguished Tacticians was moving, their stated criterion should not be ignored, and Mr C's statistical criticism is compelling.
kenington explains KraphtOne's Game 10765409

In defense of K&X, I cannot sufficiently refute those challenges. Nevertheless, until a sufficient case regarding #3 is clearly established, we should remain skeptical of K&X's alleged collusion. (I admit that I may have missed a complete #3 argument ITT).

[Funkyterrance]

(3) Most importantly, some have a good case for punishment because they suspect inconsistencies between openly diplomatic plans and allegedly covert plans. IF in any of their games, K&X enact a plan contrary to their openly stated chat, then the collusion becomes clearer. With this in mind, the #3 argument against K&X becomes superior to the "open diplomacy only" cases.

In an ordinary singles game it's understood that each person's goal is to win that particular game. An agreement that goes against this goal in any particular game has to be either SD over the course of at least one game or point dumping so either way it's against the rules.
See, it doesn't matter if the chat matches the plan of the game if the plan obviously shows one player paving the road for the other.

[Chariot of Fire]

Is it crystal meth that just makes someone write a load of bollocks?

[BigBallinStalin]

(3) Most importantly, some have a good case for punishment because they suspect inconsistencies between openly diplomatic plans and allegedly covert plans. IF in any of their games, K&X enact a plan contrary to their openly stated chat, then the collusion becomes clearer. With this in mind, the #3 argument against K&X becomes superior to the "open diplomacy only" cases.

In an ordinary singles game it's understood that each person's goal is to win that particular game. An agreement that goes against this goal in any particular game has to be either SD over the course of at least one game or point dumping so either way it's against the rules.
See, it doesn't matter if the chat matches the plan of the game if the plan obviously shows one player paving the road for the other.

This argument was already addressed, so I don't have to repeat myself or the arguments of others which countered this.

Is it crystal meth that just makes someone write a load of bollocks?

Does increased exposure to pollution in large cities cause an increase in logical fallacies?

[kentington]

(3) Most importantly, some have a good case for punishment because they suspect inconsistencies between openly diplomatic plans and allegedly covert plans. IF in any of their games, K&X enact a plan contrary to their openly stated chat, then the collusion becomes clearer. With this in mind, the #3 argument against K&X becomes superior to the "open diplomacy only" cases.

In an ordinary singles game it's understood that each person's goal is to win that particular game. An agreement that goes against this goal in any particular game has to be either SD over the course of at least one game or point dumping so either way it's against the rules.
See, it doesn't matter if the chat matches the plan of the game if the plan obviously shows one player paving the road for the other.

This argument was already addressed, so I don't have to repeat myself or the arguments of others which countered this.

Is it crystal meth that just makes someone write a load of bollocks?

Does increased exposure to pollution in large cities cause an increase in logical fallacies?

Game 10765409
That is the game that Kraphtone posted. To me it follows number threes argument. The first chat is Xiang asking for a truce from teal, but it seems like there was already an unspoken truce with Kiron (red) and xiangwang (grey).
They also mention that their plan is to be in the final three, which seems pretty standard, but they are always trying to both be in the final three and they will both backstab the third man out. I know they say that in chat at the end but it seems to be their plan every game, make sure it is them at the end.

[BigBallinStalin]

f*ck yea, kenington. I've added you to the list of those who pose "a significant challenge to my defense of K&X."

Oh, furthermore, if a pattern of that kind of behavior can be demonstrated (which may have been done ITT), this would sufficiently fulfill the criteria of evidence against K&X; therefore, we would have to all fully support their punishment--

--which may include temporary exile, stripping of their medals, some kind of point reduction, and removing that Conqueror title from him.

[Tenebrus]

The verdict is in, and it's a one week ban and a bar from playing together. I guess that the mods will get a lot of flak for that ruling, as it won't satisfy either side completely, but IMO it's a good, fair ruling with a very complicated and unclear fact pattern. Shame to have another conqueror under a C&A cloud but going forward I think the decision was the right one.

[Izual_Rebirth]

Sitting on the fence then...

[Qwert]

well kiron will going to activate hes third housemate now.

[kentington]

f*ck yea, kenington. I've added you to the list of those who pose "a significant challenge to my defense of K&X."

Oh, furthermore, if a pattern of that kind of behavior can be demonstrated (which may have been done ITT), this would sufficiently fulfill the criteria of evidence against K&X; therefore, we would have to all fully support their punishment--

--which may include temporary exile, stripping of their medals, some kind of point reduction, and removing that Conqueror title from him.

Right on brotha! I am all for the people having the ability to shun those who deserve it and not taking unnecessary action, but there are times when it is abused and people who have no way of knowing get involved and are given poor treatment because of lack of moderation.

[AslanTheKing]

lets say i want to play kiron/xiangwang gangbang style with one of my clanmates,
and one has to benefit from the other( gamethrowing)
even i want to throw the game there has to be the right playing order,
its no point that i have 4 spoils, reduce my troops -and my clanmate is not playing right after me ( so the player after me has to be my clanmate who kills me and gets the points.

other than that, u need to use some sort of information channel to discuss your strategay and moves,
this can be done through pm ( the chat is too obvious)
but if u use a pm, some day that will be the evidence the mods are gonna look at - so its not possible

u could discuss it at personal email

or have a nice cup of coffee ( sorry meant nice cup of dragon well green tea of course)
and talk personaly to your HOUSEMATE

i am really having great entertainment reading every page,

for my part i know how much of cheating brought this guys to their ranks,
but cheating maybe is the wrong word, its an alliance , unspoken secret diplomacy ,
and by practising it long enough it gets every game easier

( when risk was on facebook 2009 ( after it disapeared) i was so fed up playing with guys who used this style ( u know the patterns of the moves with time )
i opened up a second browser, logged in as my wife- and guess what? I KICKED THEIR ASS; BUT REALLY; IT WAS SOOOOO EASY )get the point?
for kiron and xiangwang
(here we are now, sooner or later i knew we will have this discussion,
first of all i mentioned what i think of this strategy
that was jan 2011
http://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=58&t=117940&start=45)

all worked fine, but if u reach a certain rank and points, things get difficult
( there might be so many playing maybe this style, but as long they are stuck between 1500 and 2500 - who cares? )

in my opinion, sorry kiron, i am just beeing very fair and honest here,
kiron should get a warning from CC,
and he has to give the Conqueror medal back
( then even Aslantheking has more medals than kiron )

and the overwhelming majority of CC players are not buying this crap

( if it looks too good, it aint )

"Bad reasoning as well as good reasoning is possible; and this fact is the foundation of the practical side of logic."
(Charles S. Peirce)

use your common sense guys

[Funkyterrance]

I'll post it in both threads pertaining to the topic:
It takes many games to make conqueror. So long as they are not all of the same sort (ahem: GLG) then it's all fine. Let's all be realistic, should any one of us become conqueror, we likely all have something in our past that could be brought up amongst the naysayers and detractors.

No need for this thread.

From what I can tell, the majority of people on this site are convinced that the only way to reach the level of conqueror is to cheat. Also, all those that have been conqueror are clearly mean and evil people.

why not just immediately ban players the very moment they reach #1 on the scoreboard?

That would solve things for everyone, right?

Hmm. Let's say for the sake of argument that I dunno.... Fruitcake become conqueror. That guy is clean as a whistle. There are non-dirty players out there but they just don't generally become conquerors because they have the insurmountable task of beating the scores of the cheap-o guys on an uneven playing field. That's the reality.

[eddie2]

i think the user group for the conqueror should now look at the recent players who have been busted for underhand tactics and removed from the group.. on doing this is the statement about the group i think these players should be named and shamed..

glg site banned for ranching and collected title by ranching newer players 2 site...

kiron for the reason just busted...

blitzaholic my personal opinion would be not to remove him as his abuse was to hold the title but he got it fair and square.

[BigBallinStalin]

The verdict is in, and it's a one week ban and a bar from playing together. I guess that the mods will get a lot of flak for that ruling, as it won't satisfy either side completely, but IMO it's a good, fair ruling with a very complicated and unclear fact pattern. Shame to have another conqueror under a C&A cloud but going forward I think the decision was the right one.

I'm pretty much satisfied with the ruling, and I've been the most skeptical ITT (aside from K&X).

What remains is finding a better way to prosecute people. Hopefully, people like CoH won't have to spend half their day making their case---when some substitute for more easily identifying collusion becomes available.


And @ eddie, whatever, dude. Start a new thread about Blitzaholic.

[kentington]

The verdict is in, and it's a one week ban and a bar from playing together. I guess that the mods will get a lot of flak for that ruling, as it won't satisfy either side completely, but IMO it's a good, fair ruling with a very complicated and unclear fact pattern. Shame to have another conqueror under a C&A cloud but going forward I think the decision was the right one.

I'm pretty much satisfied with the ruling, and I've been the most skeptical ITT (aside from K&X).

What remains is finding a better way to prosecute people. Hopefully, people like CoH won't have to spend half their day making their case---when some substitute for more easily identifying collusion becomes available.


And @ eddie, whatever, dude. Start a new thread about Blitzaholic.

King Achilles and the C&A Team did a good job on this one. If anyone is upset about the results, then please think about it carefully because there is a lot more to it. It isn't the same as GLG or blitzaholic, and he is no longer Conqueror and the medal has been removed, according to some in the C&A thread. I support their decision and think it is justified.

[DoomYoshi]

The verdict is in, and it's a one week ban and a bar from playing together. I guess that the mods will get a lot of flak for that ruling, as it won't satisfy either side completely, but IMO it's a good, fair ruling with a very complicated and unclear fact pattern. Shame to have another conqueror under a C&A cloud but going forward I think the decision was the right one.

I'm pretty much satisfied with the ruling, and I've been the most skeptical ITT (aside from K&X).

What remains is finding a better way to prosecute people. Hopefully, people like CoH won't have to spend half their day making their case---when some substitute for more easily identifying collusion becomes available.


And @ eddie, whatever, dude. Start a new thread about Blitzaholic.

King Achilles and the C&A Team did a good job on this one. If anyone is upset about the results, then please think about it carefully because there is a lot more to it. It isn't the same as GLG or blitzaholic, and he is no longer Conqueror and the medal has been removed, according to some in the C&A thread. I support their decision and think it is justified.

Unless they can provide a specific example of what was done wrong and why this penalty is associated with that injustice, then this is not a good decision. What they have done is caved to the mob mentality and added confusion to the overall mix without providing anything for rational beings to attach to. Now, I realize that technically humans aren't rational, but I would like to be able to program my spambot to be able to play this game without breaking the rules. How can I do that? They still haven't answered the question.

Squirly's suggestion is best.

[kentington]

The verdict is in, and it's a one week ban and a bar from playing together. I guess that the mods will get a lot of flak for that ruling, as it won't satisfy either side completely, but IMO it's a good, fair ruling with a very complicated and unclear fact pattern. Shame to have another conqueror under a C&A cloud but going forward I think the decision was the right one.

I'm pretty much satisfied with the ruling, and I've been the most skeptical ITT (aside from K&X).

What remains is finding a better way to prosecute people. Hopefully, people like CoH won't have to spend half their day making their case---when some substitute for more easily identifying collusion becomes available.


And @ eddie, whatever, dude. Start a new thread about Blitzaholic.

King Achilles and the C&A Team did a good job on this one. If anyone is upset about the results, then please think about it carefully because there is a lot more to it. It isn't the same as GLG or blitzaholic, and he is no longer Conqueror and the medal has been removed, according to some in the C&A thread. I support their decision and think it is justified.

Unless they can provide a specific example of what was done wrong and why this penalty is associated with that injustice, then this is not a good decision. What they have done is caved to the mob mentality and added confusion to the overall mix without providing anything for rational beings to attach to. Now, I realize that technically humans aren't rational, but I would like to be able to program my spambot to be able to play this game without breaking the rules. How can I do that? They still haven't answered the question.

Squirly's suggestion is best.

There were specific examples of secret diplomacy all through this thread and the C&A thread. I don't believe they caved to the mob. They were presented to the C&A team and the decision they made shows they feel it was sufficiently showing secret diplomacy.
Are you asking them to present the straw that broke the back or all of their discussions on the subject?
Basically, if you play fair people will respect you.

[Mr Changsha]

One must wonder about the sequence of events around all this. If kiron and xiangwang had not so overtly cheated in those last games, and so kiron actually hit conqueror a month or so later, would the same storm have been created? Or do we as a community prefer to wait until a player reaches conqueror before we demand action and so the last few games made no difference either way? Many of us knew before all of this that their playing records were suspect, yet it seems that it was the final push for the title that caused our collective outrage and the determination in some to comb through their total record.

I wonder if without those last few games when kiron hit the conqueror title there would have been some general grumbling and the odd bit of unfocused sniping (which all conquerors pretty much face) but not the massive campaign of retribution some here have witnessed and others have happily enjoyed taking part in.

[Chariot of Fire]

One must wonder about the sequence of events around all this. If kiron and xiangwang had not so overtly cheated in those last games, and so kiron actually hit conqueror a month or so later, would the same storm have been created? Or do we as a community prefer to wait until a player reaches conqueror before we demand action and so the last few games made no difference either way? Many of us knew before all of this that their playing records were suspect, yet it seems that it was the final push for the title that caused our collective outrage and the determination in some to comb through their total record.

I wonder if without those last few games when kiron hit the conqueror title there would have been some general grumbling and the odd bit of unfocused sniping (which all conquerors pretty much face) but not the massive campaign of retribution some here have witnessed and others have happily enjoyed taking part in.

An attempt was made to discredit their uncanny ability to reap points a long time ago (http://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=239&t=103480&start=0&hilit=kiron) long before Kiron was nearing Conqueror, though after he had made a rapid rise up the scoreboard. Back then it was unknown that Kiron had so many housemates - and that xiangwang was one of them - so all the indicators led to him being a multi. Of this he was acquitted, yet the investigation should have delved deeper into the methods being adopted. I don't know of the procedures adopted by the C&A team, but if it's a simple IP check it's perhaps not enough. A thorough review of game logs has to be undertaken by someone who knows what they are looking at and what they are looking for. I did all that, back when that report was filed, and had enough evidence to prove collusion between the two accounts. I then proceeded to lose the entire lot as I had timed-out of CC when I hit 'Submit' and was so mad I let it be.

[Mr Changsha]

One must wonder about the sequence of events around all this. If kiron and xiangwang had not so overtly cheated in those last games, and so kiron actually hit conqueror a month or so later, would the same storm have been created? Or do we as a community prefer to wait until a player reaches conqueror before we demand action and so the last few games made no difference either way? Many of us knew before all of this that their playing records were suspect, yet it seems that it was the final push for the title that caused our collective outrage and the determination in some to comb through their total record.

I wonder if without those last few games when kiron hit the conqueror title there would have been some general grumbling and the odd bit of unfocused sniping (which all conquerors pretty much face) but not the massive campaign of retribution some here have witnessed and others have happily enjoyed taking part in.

An attempt was made to discredit their uncanny ability to reap points a long time ago (http://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=239&t=103480&start=0&hilit=kiron) long before Kiron was nearing Conqueror, though after he had made a rapid rise up the scoreboard. Back then it was unknown that Kiron had so many housemates - and that xiangwang was one of them - so all the indicators led to him being a multi. Of this he was acquitted, yet the investigation should have delved deeper into the methods being adopted. I don't know of the procedures adopted by the C&A team, but if it's a simple IP check it's perhaps not enough. A thorough review of game logs has to be undertaken by someone who knows what they are looking at and what they are looking for. I did all that, back when that report was filed, and had enough evidence to prove collusion between the two accounts. I then proceeded to lose the entire lot as I had timed-out of CC when I hit 'Submit' and was so mad I let it be.

Over the years there have been countless cases of real-life friends engaging in secret diplomacy that always seem to get away with it, as the CC-rule has always seemed to be 'real-life friends can play in large public standard games and we just have to trust that they are playing fairly...'

So we have to presume innocence in these cases. Yet I have always been deeply suspicious of any players that do this, in fact I naturally presume guilt, for it has always seemed to me that it is fundamentally dishonourable to play games on this basis. Private games are a different thing as all the players will probably be aware of the various relationships involved, it is real-life friends playing in public games that in my view should have been made against the rules many, many years ago.

Furthermore, we have to consider if there is a repeated pattern. Playing the odd public game with one's real-life friends might be considered 'a bit dodgy and should probably be avoided (warning)', however numerous games - especially if unusually high win rates are achieved - should lead to an immediate block. I disagree with you in that we should need to comb through the logs, the evidence is all there in the win rates.

I would like to see a line or two added to the rules of the game along the lines of "Please avoid playing public standard games with your real-life friends, as such play is unfair to the other participants in the game". Now this is not a new idea for me, I have made this point on more than one occasion, but I feel now would be a good time to make it again.