Donelladan wrote:Speaking of real multi, people having 2 account at the same time. I am 100% behind you. Speaking of someone coming back 4 years later and never playing the 2 account at the same time, no it doesn't matter.
What about 2 years? One year? Six months? Three months? One week? One day?
Where should the dividing line be between "2 account at same time" versus, "I got tired of" or "lost access to" old account so create a new one? It's generally easier to maintain one solid line than it is to let people push on it, because if 4 years is okay, then some other amount of time is okay too.
Might be better, though, if CC made a firm stance about deleting inactive accounts after x period of time like many gamesites do. They might have less problems that way.Donelladan wrote:Well if he had several account, then this is understandable. I am just wondering why then ka only said "Busted with DIE MOSCA" and not "Busted with DIE MOSCA and .... and .... ".
CC notoriously does not provide all details for some other user's infractions. We may not trust CC about it, but frankly, its not much of our business if it's not our account.
If it was for multiple accounts but the others are inactive, we're back to what we discussed prior paragraph.
If it was for multiple accounts and more than one are active, it might be nice to see the list but again we're back to "is it really our business if it's someone else's account?"
Donelladan wrote:If actually old members coming back are receiving better treatment that what I thought they are, then everything is fine.
Sometimes existing members aren't treated very well depending on the mod so why should members coming back be treated any better?
I still maintain that, like the rule or not, the rule of "do not create a second account, instead contact us to get your original account back," is there, and being there, it's fine if CC wants to say, "You're busted, so if you want to play play on your original account and you'll have to buy membership to do it."
Sounds like you're saying that with one alternate dead free account and a new active premium account that gets busted and, per your idea, the mems on the new account should be transferred to the one CC dictates should be used..
Okay, so what if instead of 1 old free/1 new premium we found 1 old free/3 new premium.... Should the mems of the 3 new premium be transferred to the original if they get busted without having to pay extra? No? What if the dude says, "One was my girlfriend's one was my brother's but neither of them play anymore so I was playing them all." No? Yes? What if it was just one extra that really was the girlfriend's, should CC transfer the extra membership to the dude who is playing?
Or just say: You're busted, pay again to play... which is sort of what they do now.
Bottom line: I agree that maybe CC should permanently delete inactive accounts after some period of time and that may cut out some of the hassle.
But when, according to the info on the case of the 4 year account (which is recent so I figure that's what's being referred to)... the guy tossed off being investigated by saying, "I'll just create another new one if this gets banned." It doesn't usually pay to give the arresting cop the finger as he's frisking you
I usually don't ring in on the side of "the establishment" but in this case, I happen to agree that it's fair to charge the guy for premium again if he wants to keep playing at all. On the other hand, I agree with what I think is your idea, that CC start deleting too-dusty accounts.
.
