C&A Suggestion

[Kotaro]

Concise description:

• In the C&A forum, many people abuse the reporting tool to get other they play against [noted]. Just recently, this topic came up, and here's a great quote from the thread started to support how ridiculous the problem is:

viewtopic.php?f=5&t=80418

... I doubt there will be proof... I just wanted to put their names out as probable cheaters...

Specifics:

Add to the template, requiring people to provide some sort of evidence at the start of the thread. There are many forms of evidence, from checking their hometown, to their online times, to how they take their turns. People are constantly posting topics to simply get back at their opponents, and getting them [noted], for the only reason that they're upset for how the game is going and that they're not winning. The C&A has become a bitching ground for kids that lose and want easy revenge. If it's required, and perhaps even a warnable offense, to post crappy C&A reports for no reason other then that the post lost, it will limit the amount of bullshit reports that pop up and get [noted].


This will improve the following aspects of the site:

• Look through the C&A forum. A shit ton of people report multi's because they're losing, and never bother to even look at the profiles and realize "f*ck, one of these guys is in Germany, and the other is in America, so unless he's superman, he can't be a multi, I'm just being a dumbass and getting innocent people in trouble because I suck at this game".

[lancehoch]

Kotaro, I have actually been looking into changing the form a little. If you want, post a new form in the quote code and I will look into it.

[AndyDufresne]

And we are actively discouraging frivolous reports.


--Andy

[superkarn]

And we are actively discouraging frivolous reports.

I don't read the C&A section that often. But my brother was one of the victims. He was reported and got banned. Later he was cleared, but by then he had lost interest in coming back here.

How are you guys discouraging the frivolous reports?

[king sam]

One suggestion would be to do a customary sanity check on all users that are requesting the mods time to search for the truth in an accusation that they post.

This IMHO will help alleviate the exact thing that Kotaro is referring to.

At least 75% of the posts that come in their are from users that either didn't agree with the outcome of the game or are looking for revenge cause of things said or done in that game.

If each poster knows that he will have an IP check on his account before he posts he should hold off on using the system for his own personal gains.

Or better yet don't let it be known and do it anyways and go on a multi busting hunt.

Regards,
King Sam

[lancehoch]

If each poster knows that he will have an IP check on his account before he posts he should hold off on using the system for his own personal gains.

Or better yet don't let it be known and do it anyways and go on a multi busting hunt.

If you only know how many times the person that creates a thread in C&A gets busted, you would be astounded. We do check the users who make threads in C&A, but I am not sure what you mean by a "sanity check". Do you want a mod to look at a user's posts/games to see if they are likely to be retaliating/whining? I think that would take a lot of time and result in a similar situation to when KA was spending 20 hours a week on feedback instead of investigating/busting multis. Right now I think the best change that can be made to C&A is the creation of a new form that is easier for the average user to use/understand. It does not have to incorporate player/game tags, it just needs to be a little easier to follow than:

<DELETE ME>
PLACE THE NAME OF THE ACCUSED IN THE SUBJECT LINE!!!

Replace or delete any xxxxxxx with the appropriate information.
Delete any accusations or entries which do not apply.

Be sure before you accuse someone!
</DELETE ME>

Accused:

xxxxxxx
xxxxxxx
xxxxxxx



The accused are suspected of:

Being Multis
Conducting Secret Diplomacy
Severe PM Abuse
Other: <Explanation>



Game number(s):

[game]xxxxxxx[/game]
[game]xxxxxxx[/game]
[game]xxxxxxx[/game]
[game]xxxxxxx[/game]



Comments:

[king sam]

If you only know how many times the person that creates a thread in C&A gets busted, you would be astounded. We do check the users who make threads in C&A, but I am not sure what you mean by a "sanity check".

No that's what I meant by a sanity check, that posters in there get their account run through the IP wash as well as those they have accused. And the reason why I say that is cause I imagine a high % getting busted. Didn't know this was enforced.

Right now I think the best change that can be made to C&A is the creation of a new form that is easier for the average user to use/understand. It does not have to incorporate player/game tags, it just needs to be a little easier to follow than:

And I disagree here, the form that is required to fill is not hard to figure out at all. Maybe implement a status that without a correctly filled submission will result in no action done on the mod's part

• will help clean up the forum
• alleviate most of the whiny posts in there, cause they poster got beat
• free up your time from searching accusations that hold no leverage

I would be more then willing to stop my help by changing and correcting them if this was followed.

Either way though, the form is not the problem

Regards,
King Sam

[lancehoch]

And I disagree here, the form that is required to fill is not hard to figure out at all. Maybe implement a status that without a correctly filled submission will result in no action done on the mod's part

• will help clean up the forum
• alleviate most of the whiny posts in there, cause they poster got beat
• free up your time from searching accusations that hold no leverage

I would be more then willing to stop my help by changing and correcting them if this was followed.

Either way though, the form is not the problem

If the form is not filled, we put a [No Form] tag on the thread. We generally do not act on threads without the form because it encourages use of the form. I do not think people filling out the form will alleviate the "whiny" posts, they still do get made by people who do fill out the form. Also, you and I may agree that the form is not hard to understand or fill out, but people continue to not fill it out, so it seems that something could be made easier for the average user to understand.

[king sam]

Also, you and I may agree that the form is not hard to understand or fill out, but people continue to not fill it out, so it seems that something could be made easier for the average user to understand.

Maybe so but it seems that all you will be doing is making more work for yourself in checking games and references to attain a goal of whether suspected users were in violation of rules and at the same time open the door for every player who doesn't feel justified with the outcome of the game to throw an accusation in the air for vindication.

Maybe some form of C&A forum ban for abusers of the system like those who waste others time would be more appropriate here.

Like that which is set in place for the abandoned tournament offenders found here, or along those sorts.

[Woodruff]

Right now I think the best change that can be made to C&A is the creation of a new form that is easier for the average user to use/understand. It does not have to incorporate player/game tags, it just needs to be a little easier to follow than:

Easier? Egads...it's awfully easy as it is. Frankly, it's simply laziness that causes people not to fill out the form in MOST cases.

I REALLY don't think "making the form easier" would be a good thing, as it would actually be a detriment to your job as an investigator, not to mention for folks like king sam who like to help others with filling out the form...without the game/player tags in there, I think it adds a burden unnecessarily.

I AM glad to hear that an auto-IP-check is being done on thread initiators, as well.

[Kotaro]

What the hell are you guys talking about?

Whether or not the form is filled out correctly doesn't matter. As we've seen time and again, King Sam is willing to help out people and do the form, if it's a bit wrong. The point of this thread is not to change the form, although that may be needed, but it's too apply a requirement to the form that they provide a reasonable explanation for the report. The quote from my first post shows the attitude of some of the posters; they know there's no proof, but they want these people noted, so that future cases will have harsher punishments. I'm sick of reading...

There's not enough evidence here to make anyone look guilty, but this is noted for future reference...

When the gameplay looks just fine, and the people are completely innocent. Evidence can be in a variety of ways, but hell, people post retaliatory C&A reports all the time. There needs to be repercussions for when people post out of malice, because it's utter bullshit. Posting out of retribution AND getting it seriously looked at is crap.

We need something along the lines of "Provide EVIDENCE that these people are doing what they are accused of. Each case of Secret Diplomacy will be looked into, and if it's found that they are simply playing the game, the report will be completely discarded. Furthermore, if it is found that you are posting out of anger or retribution, a warning may be issued to your account".

No one cares if they miss a link or two, and those that do, are the trolls, and no one gives a damn about them. If people are truly interested, they'll take a second out of their "busy schedules" and find the game with the given information. Maybe other possible punishments for habitually posting completely unfilled out forms, as long as they're EXTREMELY bad, such as one i saw before where the entire thing was blank, but only after proving that it was habitually happening, and only if it's really bad. Not using the links doesn't mean shit, and there's no reason why people should be forced to use them. Hell, people like King Sam, who is apparently proving my theory of "once LOD, always scum" theory wrong and being a decent individual and helping teach guys, and there will always be people around like that to be super helpful (I hope you damn Team CC's are taking not of King Sam, you'd be foolish not to ).

[oVo]

There are many forms of evidence, from checking their hometown, to their online times, to how they take their turns.

It seems that while those things may be suspicious, they can also be circumstantial. Isn't it possible to rout an IP so that the actual provider location isn't known? Online times, hometown and even odd tactics are not always guarantees of foul play. I've been in plenty of games that have the appearence of impropriety all over them, but doubt anyone was actually cheating.

...requirement to the form that they provide a reasonable explanation for the report

I agree that a who, what and where should be included in every report before it is seriously considered,
just to make it as simple as possible for the hunters to check it out.