Conquer Club

According to http://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=239&t=96734&start=15 , let it be known that you and a friend or family member can set up accounts/use current accounts and legally engage in secret diplomacy and/or multi-account use. As long as 50% of your games are not played together in 3+ standard/term/ass games. If y'all are paying members and/or are lovers, then that seems you have even better chances of not being punished.

Also 1v1 games seem to be allowed, which can easily be used for point dumping (which they will also fail to address properly--most likely, of course). Also, same IPs were not addressed in this issue, so that can most likely be done as well legally.


So once again, you and a friend can legally engage in secret diplomacy and/or multi account use as long as you follow the model done by ohso_cute and that sv-whatever-rich3z guy.

This is TRUE because the CC-mod community for the C&A forum of Joke-Justice has failed to properly administer justice and uphold the law; therefore, that case can be used to support anyone's similar "illicit" methods of gameplay.

Please fully read the link above to understand exactly what I'm talking about and to avoid needless questions and to prevent any confusion.

Also, this is the first page of that. Within is the first case that was shot down, so I provided more evidence which wasn't even properly addressed: http://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=239&t=96734

MAKE 'EM SAY UGGHHH! UGGHHH, NAH NAH NAH NAH! NAH NAH NAH NAH!

sigh

king achilles wrote:These players could be family members or friends. Considering the number of games these two have already played, and the first time they have been reported after all that, I may be needing more than this game to warrant a possible block for them. For now this is noted. You can give them the appropriate ratings for a most likely secret diplomacy.

Not everything in c&a is as cut and dry as what it appears. King A decided there wasnt enough evidence so it was noted. Starting threads like this will only lead to trolling and spaming and the like.
If you have a problem with a decision the appropriate method is to pm a c&a mod/king a
or submit an e-tickey

I've PM'ed the mods involved and await their response.

As of now, ohso_cute and richsz3's now-legal method of gameplay involving secret diplomacy and multi-use is allowed, so feel free to mimic this and gain many points! It's LEGAL!

it has set a precedent! and has thus become case law for jurisprudence domain that be ConquerClub.com

I must notify my clerk to xerox all files pertaining to People V. BigBallinStalin forthwith!

Only the Supreme Mod Court can overturn this malfeasance and it doesn't seem likely being that only two of the seven are multi hunters. Perhaps we can nominate another multi hunter to the podium once King Sam has to retire due to chronic diarrhea.

mibi wrote:multi hunter

Sounds intense.


I'll take it!!!



Seriously.

mibi wrote:it has set a precedent! and has thus become case law for jurisprudence domain that be ConquerClub.com

I must notify my clerk to xerox all files pertaining to People V. BigBallinStalin forthwith!

Only the Supreme Mod Court can overturn this malfeasance and it doesn't seem likely being that only two of the seven are multi hunters. Perhaps we can nominate another multi hunter to the podium once King Sam has to retire due to chronic diarrhea.

I love the BS, thank you, I've been waiting for someone to say something like this! Hahah, classic stuff!

I've just talked to king achilles. The ruling is still standing; therefore, if you emulate richsz3 and ohso_cute's method of gameplay, you can legally engage in secret diplomacy and multi account use. If you live in the same residence, you can even use the same computer!

Of course, I'm not advocating cheating! I'm merely making the CC community aware of a legal way of grabbing points currently provided by the blunderings of a few select mods in handling a certain C&A case.

Exactly how much Evidence does 1 NEED!!!!. Enquiring minds however do wonder.

BigBallinStalin wrote:If you live in the same residence, you can even use the same computer!

Is that a surprise?

BigBallinStalin wrote:I've just talked to king achilles. The ruling is still standing; therefore, if you emulate richsz3 and ohso_cute's method of gameplay, you can legally engage in secret diplomacy and multi account use. If you live in the same residence, you can even use the same computer!

Of course, I'm not advocating cheating! I'm merely making the CC community aware of a legal way of grabbing points currently provided by the blunderings of a few select mods in handling a certain C&A case.

That was quick.

I've still to receive anything but silence in re of my E-Tickets and Optimus Prime pm.

But hey. I'm a convicted colluder of unsanctioned gaming. So that is to be expected.

Thank you Ball for your attempts to assist those who we rely on to provide us a FAIR and HONEST gaming site for us to enjoy!

May CC always remain cheat free!

41games

It's hard to imagine the third wheel of a three player game getting a fair shake when the other two are husband and wife. But it's equally surprising that two players can actually play so many games together without attracting suspicion.

It is without a doubt peculiar to see a pair of players create so many 3 person games.

I'm amazed (having read the thread) that they weren't blocked. Truly amazed. Is it right that they were playing in fog games together from the same computer? C'mon CC! This is basic...

However, I can believe that they weren't purposely cheating. They enjoy playing games together, they don't believe they are playing in an unfair manner...however, one would have to be rather lacking in awareness to not see how it was possible that a player might subconsciously treat their wife/very good friend differently in a game. It is for this reason that I don't join standard games with my friends.

I would also just add that I am fairly sure that the reason for this ruling is that it would be an absolute pain in the arse to enforce the 'blocked' judgement site-wide. How can CC regulate all the various couples, best friends and all the rest of it from playing against each other in standard games? They can't. They rely on our own intrinsic sense of honour with regards to these matters...good luck with that CC!

Yet in a case that is so blatant, with so many 3 player games (for while it one thing to join an 8 man with your wife... the lucky girl ), it is entirely an other matter to play a threesome. That just reeks of board manipulation.

*edit* the best course of action from now on would be for those concerned to keep an eye on their games. Report them again, as soon as they play the same trick, and the hunters will have to review it on the basis of them already being noted. They would have a hard time not adding the block in that case.

So the ruling was given because it is impossible to actually enforce a 'you can't play with your relatives' rule. I'm pretty sure that's the case, having seen a fair few of these in C and A end up in the same position. However, this one was SO blatant that I am surprised they didn't put a 'quiet block' on these two.

Mr Changsha wrote:I'm amazed .................that's the case, having seen a fair few of these in C and A end up in the same position. However, this one was SO blatant that I am surprised they didn't put a 'quiet block' on these two.

Agreed, at least something more damning then a mere "noted."

But I'm not too worried because they'll get caught eventually. They've got a long history that the CC-mods continue to purposely overlook.


As for playing with good friends on standard games with other unknowns: it's fun, but yeah I avoid them due to so on and so forth... That's just how it is and it can't be helped.


"I would also just add that I am fairly sure that the reason for this ruling is that it would be an absolute pain in the arse to enforce the 'blocked' judgement site-wide. How can CC regulate all the various couples, best friends and all the rest of it from playing against each other in standard games? They can't"

Of course they can't! I agree, but due to their significant history of screwing over SO many other fellow conquer clubbers, they deserve punishment. I'm not against playing with friends in standard games, but in regards to this particular case their game history says it all--from the log times, silenced strategies, etc. So it's just amazing given so much evidence and key examples in a few games and much of the same examples in all their standard games, they've been let off the hook so easily.

The CC-mods involved just don't want to contradict themselves on this matter, which is why they deftly avoided the key points and stuck to their original, weak decision. For them to revert decisions would make the CC-mods involved look unfair and INCOMPETENT. Which is completely understandable.

Hey, if a happy married couple agrees to engage in multiple 3-ways then who are you to tell them they're cheating?

King_Herpes wrote:Hey, if a happy married couple agrees to engage in multiple 3-ways then who are you to tell them they're cheating?

True, but how would you feel if you met a boy and a girl in a bar, thought you were going to engage in a perfectly regular 'meeting of common minds' threesome and then, once you got your kit off, the chap announced "Oh by the way old chap, we're married."?

You can't answer questions with questions Mr. C

King_Herpes wrote:You can't answer questions with questions Mr. C

Actually you can. In fact the most wise often answer questions with questions as a means of illustrating their position and provoking further thought and discussion. If a person of an opposing viewpoint can be encouraged to think through a relevant question posed to them there is a better chance of changing their mindset.

Doesn't always work. Some are unwilling to change their viewpoints regardless of valid reasoning's presented to them. These type will ignore questions posed to them and stick to their original position regardless.

I could blather on, but who would listen?

You can't reinforce another persons question with a question before the original question is answered Jim.

JimRocky wrote:

King_Herpes wrote:You can't answer questions with questions Mr. C

Actually you can..............

I could blather on, but who would want to listen?

Good question.