Conquer Club

Noone is debating (for the most part) that Scapula cheated (at the least violated the rules) but it is wrong to say you can't do this, but if you do you have to cough up 25 dollars, then you can stay. it should be either you can't or you can, or why not stop pretending and make people pay a cheaters tax.

Scapula wrote:natty_dread and Evil Semp,

I would never expect to pursuade everybody of my viewpoint but thank you for your input on this. It's good to debate this issue succinctly and with such clarity.

Whether a Premium Member or not, I'd be happy to give you both a game sometime if you like? Oh and Evil Semp, I'll play it on whatever map you like. Your choice. As you'll see from my games history mate, I play on a variety of maps, contrary to your earlier given reason for setting up a second account.

So, what do you say?

Set up a game and invite me.

I wasn't saying that was why you started the second account but it is the reason some do.

Ok, this is a pretty long thread, I didn't read it all, but I will side with Scapula here. Look at it this way:

If they'd caught him BEFORE he'd bought premium, then he could have bought premium and had 1 year premium for 25$. He bought premium, and now they want him to pay for it again, now costing him 50$ for 1 year (+2 weeks apparently, that he had it before). That seems unfair in and of itself.

On the other hand, he paid, and the cheating was not malicious. It wasn't intentional, and it certainly wasn't used to hurt the site. I, for one, will not renew my premium if the site decides it is going to extort money from people on technicality. That IS what this is, no? Technically he has 2 accounts, but in practical terms, only one is of any importance. The one he uses now. If I were scapul, I'd say piss off CC. just because you have the legal right doesn't mean you should. Legal≠moral.

Mr adams, it was intentional, creating that 2nd account, but definitly not malicious. Althought I too have already came to that conclusion that I will not be renewing my premium. Not that I believe the mods care, its not their pocket. But I won't be renewing next year simply to recoup the ill gotten gain from robbing scap..he's wrong, but wrong dosent make it right to steal. Which is exactly what this is. And with that I'm done with this thread. Sorry scap, even though I was rallying for the ban earlier I see all that they care about is your 25 dollars. Best of luck

Opinions are like arseholes, indeed...

You guys who are all huffed up about "intent", and "giving the little guy a break"... how do you judge someone's intent over the internet? How do you know he isn't bullshitting all of you?

Note that I'm not saying this is the case here, but someone could well create a second account, then when he's busted, post a sob story on CC to rally peoples' sympathies on his side. It's easy to portray CC as this evil corporation that is only out to take your money. But look it from a practical point of view.

If CC would now allow Scapula to "get away with" creating the second account, it would be a precedent and they would have to do it with every other multi who comes crying "I didn't know it was wrong and I didn't cheat!!!" How would CC determine, over the internet, which of those who break the rules really did have an "intent" to cheat and who didn't?

If there's a rule against multiple account use, it needs to be the same to everyone, no exceptions.

Lastly, about the point that "CC is just robbing the guy by making him buy premium again"... it's a proper punishment for creating multiple accounts. The reasons for doing this are a bit more complicated than just "extorting money from the poor players"...

Firstly, like already said, it's better than the alternative, which would be never letting them play again. At least now the players are given a second chance. No one even forces him to buy premium again, he can stay as a freemium.

Secondly... when a freemium is busted for multiple accounts, he gets guested and can only play again by buying premium. The reason for this is that CC can more easily track who the user is by the billing information, so asking them to buy premium is a necessary precaution - it's a sort of parole: you commited a crime once, but you do this thing so we can keep an eye on you and we let you back on the streets.

Now, since freemiums are asked to buy a premium before they can even play again... should the ones who were already premium before getting busted get away with nothing? If that was the case, then CC would indeed be discriminating against the freemiums - they would be sending the message "get yourself a premium and we don't care how you act"... I think it's a fair punishment.

It's not a technicality. A site like this needs to take a strict approach to multiple account use, to ensure the enjoyment of the user base. I'm glad they are doing so. And giving the offenders second chances is very generous... on many other sites, it's permaban for the first offense, no questions asked!

Evil Semp wrote:

thebest712 wrote:well I just would do rule like this, if you play only on one account, the second account gets deleted/blocked/inactivated if they still can play on first, if they play on both= bust

So someone plays for several months, learns how to play some of the harder maps, starts a new account so he can get more points early. That sounds fair to me. NOT.

I didnt read the rest, but, I say the second account becomes inactive, don't I
edit: a warning can be sent then

Evil Semp, I'd love to set up a game and invite you but sadly, I can't. I'm only allowed to play four games at a time.

natty_dread, what do you think of this? The rules state that game chat must be in English or a language that all players can understand, but in a game between me, a Croatian & a Portuguese, I said hello to them both in their mother tongue.

Whilst anything but malicious, and I'm really ever so sorry for it, but this gesture of friendship was in breach of the rules.

Do you think I should be punished for this also? Perhaps I should pay another $25?

Scapula wrote:Evil Semp, I'd love to set up a game and invite you but sadly, I can't. I'm only allowed to play four games at a time.

natty_dread, what do you think of this? The rules state that game chat must be in English or a language that all players can understand, but in a game between me, a Croatian & a Portuguese, I said hello to them both in their mother tongue.

Whilst anything but malicious, and I'm really ever so sorry for it, but this gesture of friendship was in breach of the rules.

Do you think I should be punished for this also? Perhaps I should pay another $25?

Any form of diplomatic discussion between opponents must be posted in the game chat in English or in a language that all opponents understand

Scapula wrote:Whilst anything but malicious, and I'm really ever so sorry for it, but this gesture of friendship was in breach of the rules.

No, it wasn't.

Scapula wrote:Evil Semp, I'd love to set up a game and invite you but sadly, I can't. I'm only allowed to play four games at a time.

natty_dread, what do you think of this? The rules state that game chat must be in English or a language that all players can understand, but in a game between me, a Croatian & a Portuguese, I said hello to them both in their mother tongue.

Whilst anything but malicious, and I'm really ever so sorry for it, but this gesture of friendship was in breach of the rules.

Do you think I should be punished for this also? Perhaps I should pay another $25?

Awwww.

Seriously, stop whining. You didnt follow the rules and now you pay the price. Chalk it up as a lesson learned! Also read Nattys post a few times, he makes very good points!

Evil Semp wrote:

Namor wrote:

Scapula wrote:... I want to answer a point by Namor. I can't find the old account anywhere...

Firstly, here is your old account, Jimi, which you can see, has been accessed on 10th March. The account is currently inactive, which is apparent by the fact that 'Guests' is the only usergroup available (but that is probably only since being kicked for rule violation). It would be nice if one of the mods could shed some light on this, if only so that this discussion can be conducted on fact, rather than speculation.

Scapula signed into the jimi several days after they were busted as multi's. That just proves he knew the log in information. Yes you can still log in after a bust but you are not able to use any of the features like an active account. Free accounts are inactive after a bust. Premium accounts lose their premium and become free accounts. Accounts that are not used for over 30 days get dropped off the score board but they are still active accounts.

Namor wrote:Secondly;

Scapula wrote:... I do think it's wrong that the sanctity of the Multiple Account rule is diminished simply by paying another $25...

Scapula has a valid point here.

The purpose of letting someone back in is to give them second chance which Scapula has been given by still being a free account.

Namor wrote:* EDIT *
BTW, I haven't voted yet. I'd rather wait for all of the facts (but at the moment I'm leaning toward Yes).

I hope this answered your questions.

Yes, it did... thank you. I wasn't aware that there are so many reasons for cheaters opening a second account. Although Scapula's reason was one of a few genuine mistakes, I can see how difficult it would be for the hunters to determine the intent.

Since reading of the many other reasons for cheaters setting up a second account, I can fully understand the sites approach. Although, I think it's a shame that individual cases such as this, can't be resolved by quietly slapping the guys wrist and reimbursing his fee. That said, I can also understand how it could create more work for those volunteers that hunt the cheats down.

So Scapula, based on a number of factors from both sides, my vote is now NO. Although I believe your acount of things, I think you will have to accept that you broke an agreement you made, when signing up.

thebest712 wrote:yip, rule one is a stupid rule

It's really not a stupid rule. However, much like many school rules, it is implemented in a black-and-white manner that really isn't appropriate.

natty_dread wrote:

thebest712 wrote:

natty_dread wrote:

thebest712 wrote:yip, rule one is a stupid rule

You'd let everyone have as many accounts as they want?

nope its just take way to striktly

Well either it's enforced in all cases or not at all. It can't be halfway, that would be stupid and unfair.

I'm afraid I must disagree. Would it be more work to do so? Of course. However, in a situation like this one is being claimed where that other account isn't playing any games and hasn't been used in AGES...common sense should prevail.

Scapula wrote:Members such as Evil Semp, Woodruf, natty_dread & Ijex seem to believe in a zero tolerence approach when it comes to the Multi Account rule

Actually, I don't. I just recognize that is how it is handled here. Though I will admit that in the vast majority of cases, I do agree with it.

Evil Semp wrote:

Namor wrote:

Scapula wrote:... I want to answer a point by Namor. I can't find the old account anywhere...

Firstly, here is your old account, Jimi, which you can see, has been accessed on 10th March. The account is currently inactive, which is apparent by the fact that 'Guests' is the only usergroup available (but that is probably only since being kicked for rule violation). It would be nice if one of the mods could shed some light on this, if only so that this discussion can be conducted on fact, rather than speculation.

Scapula signed into the jimi several days after they were busted as multi's. That just proves he knew the log in information.

Very interesting. Thanks, Semp.

thebest712 wrote:well I just would do rule like this, if you play only on one account, the second account gets deleted/blocked/inactivated if they still can play on first, if they play on both= bust

The problem with this is someone can "fix their crappy score" right quick by creating a new account.

Commander62890 wrote:I feel that many of those who create a new account and upgrade to premium on it (while not playing a single game on the old account) have no intention to break the rules. Therefore, these people should be informed of their mistake, have the new account closed, and have the premium applied to their first account. If it happens again, then they are stripped of their premium.

I agree. But they should always be reuqired to use their original account, for the reason I just mentioned above.

Commander62890 wrote:But I am looking at it from an intent point of view - he made a small mistake; he didn't mean to break the rules.

I agree with your general point on this. However, not in this case...it seems Scapula did log into the other account after they were busted as multis.

jefjef wrote:What I don't understand is why you are allowed to still use Scapula account. Jimi was the first one and made in 2007. Normal procedure is the original is allowed to be used and bought back in on and the newer one/s are guested.

Agreed. I don't understand this either.

Woodruf: That's fine by me. I'll play as Jimi or Scapula. I don't care. All I want to do is play. What I'm really annoyed about is that an honest mistake has cost me fifteen quid which I handed over in the first place as a nice gesture of my appreciation.

Conquer Club can refund me my money and never hear from me again. They have that choice open to them.

As for you JelleR, there's really no need to be so condescending. So far, this has been a very reasonable discussion between a group of reasonable people. Please don't spoil it.

Woodruff wrote:

natty_dread wrote:Well either it's enforced in all cases or not at all. It can't be halfway, that would be stupid and unfair.

I'm afraid I must disagree. Would it be more work to do so? Of course. However, in a situation like this one is being claimed where that other account isn't playing any games and hasn't been used in AGES...common sense should prevail.

Exactly. There's no reason why there can't be different rules for different situations.
It would just take a little more work and a slight loss of revenue.

Woodruff wrote:

Commander62890 wrote:But I am looking at it from an intent point of view - he made a small mistake; he didn't mean to break the rules.

I agree with your general point on this. However, not in this case...it seems Scapula did log into the other account after they were busted as multis.

Yes, that is unfortunate evidence against Jimi/Scapula.

But - and it seems like you'll probably agree with me on this - Despite the fact that Scapula should have known better and was clearly breaking a very good CC policy, he should still be awarded a second chance.

In this specific case, with the second account upgrading to premium and no recent games being played on the first account, a two-strike penalty system should be instituted.

He has not played any games on his first account (Jimi) for a long time.
Just tranfer the premium there, "guest" the second account (Scapula), and give him one more chance.
If it happens again, he loses his premium.

It may seem to some that I am asking for undue lenience, but I don't think I am.
I am positive that some absurdly high proportion of the offenders would not commit the same crime again.

Just because a rule has existed for a long time does not that mean it cannot be undone. CC should not feel a need to stand by a rule just to maintain the idea that it is always right. If a rule needs to be altered slightly, it should be done.

thebest712 wrote:well I just would do rule like this, if you play only on one account, the second account gets deleted/blocked/inactivated if they still can play on first, if they play on both= bust

The problem with this is someone can "fix their crappy score" right quick by creating a new account.

I think this is misunderstood again, this is not allowed, you stay on your first account, but when making a new account the new accounts becomes inactive and he can go back on first, and gets a warning.

Guys- Scapula did break the rules, but should he have to pay $50 to play again? I mean can the mods not just ban him from playing the players he has played against in the past? that seems to be a generally fair punishment. Now as for scap there was no malicious intent, the mods could just give him his original account back, delete this one, and give him his premium back. Problem solved.

Namor wrote:Yes, it did... thank you. I wasn't aware that there are so many reasons for cheaters opening a second account. Although Scapula's reason was one of a few genuine mistakes, I can see how difficult it would be for the hunters to determine the intent.

Since reading of the many other reasons for cheaters setting up a second account, I can fully understand the sites approach. Although, I think it's a shame that individual cases such as this, can't be resolved by quietly slapping the guys wrist and reimbursing his fee. That said, I can also understand how it could create more work for those volunteers that hunt the cheats down.

So Scapula, based on a number of factors from both sides, my vote is now NO. Although I believe your acount of things, I think you will have to accept that you broke an agreement you made, when signing up.

This is all I can say about this. Scapula is NOT being completely upfront about everything. We have enough things available that I can not and will not disclose, but if I did I think 99% of his supporters would change their minds.

Evil Semp wrote:Scapula is NOT being completely upfront about everything. We have enough things available that I can not and will not disclose, but if I did I think 99% of his supporters would change their minds.

I suppose it's hard to argue Scapula's case publicly if we don't know all the facts.

But how about this: let's say that there was no further information.

In all future cases such as this (that don't have secret Multi-Hunter facts), give the players a slap on the wrist and don't confiscate their money after the first offense.

Scapula wrote:Woodruf: That's fine by me. I'll play as Jimi or Scapula. I don't care. All I want to do is play. What I'm really annoyed about is that an honest mistake has cost me fifteen quid which I handed over in the first place as a nice gesture of my appreciation.

Conquer Club can refund me my money and never hear from me again. They have that choice open to them.

As for you JelleR, there's really no need to be so condescending. So far, this has been a very reasonable discussion between a group of reasonable people. Please don't spoil it.

Cmon now. First you ask Semp to invite you for a game and then you go "Sadly I cant because Im not premium". The link there is obvious.

Also, your whole "great injustice" spiel is just nonsense (even posting on peoples walls!). Own up to your mistakes. The rules are very clear. You could have just contacted the site owners and explained your situation before you created a second account and ticked the "I will only ever have one account" box. Debating whether its a fair rule after you agreed with it is idiotic and I will call it as I see it.

Commander62890 wrote:

Woodruff wrote:

Commander62890 wrote:But I am looking at it from an intent point of view - he made a small mistake; he didn't mean to break the rules.

I agree with your general point on this. However, not in this case...it seems Scapula did log into the other account after they were busted as multis.

Yes, that is unfortunate evidence against Jimi/Scapula.

But - and it seems like you'll probably agree with me on this - Despite the fact that Scapula should have known better and was clearly breaking a very good CC policy, he should still be awarded a second chance.
In this specific case, with the second account upgrading to premium and no recent games being played on the first account, a two-strike penalty system should be instituted.
He has not played any games on his first account (Jimi) for a long time.
Just tranfer the premium there, "guest" the second account (Scapula), and give him one more chance.
If it happens again, he loses his premium.
It may seem to some that I am asking for undue lenience, but I don't think I am.

I actually don't agree, but it's ONLY because of the door this opens up for folks who want to have a
"start over chance" on the site, making their previous losses, poor winning percentages and "learning the maps" go away. Because of that reason, I don't think that Scapula should be able to keep his premium. IF he hadn't logged in to his account and ONLY BECAUSE of the long time span that would have elapsed since he had been here previous to that, I would agree with you.

Commander62890 wrote:Just because a rule has existed for a long time does not that mean it cannot be undone. CC should not feel a need to stand by a rule just to maintain the idea that it is always right. If a rule needs to be altered slightly, it should be done.

Absolutely.

thebest712 wrote:

Woodruff wrote:

thebest712 wrote:well I just would do rule like this, if you play only on one account, the second account gets deleted/blocked/inactivated if they still can play on first, if they play on both= bust

The problem with this is someone can "fix their crappy score" right quick by creating a new account.

I think this is misunderstood again, this is not allowed, you stay on your first account, but when making a new account the new accounts becomes inactive and he can go back on first, and gets a warning.

This situation clearly shows that is not the case.

No idea why this guy felt the need to spam my wall since I don't remember even playing with him.

I voted No which was mainly on the basis that he seems to be spamming random walls after creating multiple accounts.

First of all, you agreed to never make another account when you signed up. If you could not log in, you could have hit the "I forgot my username or password" button. If you tried this several time and could not get an email, or if your email-validated password/username was denied, you could have filed a complaint or sent an email to the CC owner(s). Those sections are clearly seen in the "Help" section, which you would notice if you looked at the tabs on top of the page. As for thier "Allowing you to make as many accounts as you want if you can pay for it", I doubt they do that. But if they do, that is thier right to let you pay for continual membership as they are a private entity. They are actually being generous letting you keep even one of your accounts. I suppose it is questionable whether they have the right to keep your money, as i believe CC does not specify whether or not you can get your money back if your Premium Membership id taken away before it expires, so if you want to take them to court over $25, go ahead. But logically, morally, and legally, I do not believe CC has done anything wrong (Other than the previously mentioned no refund (possible) fault). I shall vote NO.
Edit: sorry for my many typos, my keyboard is slippery.

Valykrie wrote:my keyboard is slippery.

You need to buy more tissues.

sonicsteve wrote:

Valykrie wrote:my keyboard is slippery.

You need to buy more tissues.

They're not slippery anymore, thank you.
Back on-topic now everyone