Conquer Club

I'd like to know if there's precedent of the account sitter being punished for an abuse while the account holder is not held responsible.

Yes. Many times.

Please, tell me more.

What are the requirements for such a ruling?

Rodion wrote:Please, tell me more.

What are the requirements for such a ruling?

Just post your case in the Cheating and Abuse forum if you feel it is worth being looked it, and I'm sure it will be reviewed accordingly.

Account sitters are only allowed to take your turns to make sure you don't miss any. They are not pinch hitters to be used to step in for strategic advantages (Like on maps you don't know).

They are NOT allowed to create any games on your account OR join any non-tournament games for you.

They are NOT allowed to forum post as you while sitting your account. Same goes with pm and wall other than game related questions with partners.

If they mess with your account at all like your avi/sig/friend-foe list and personal account stuff that could also be considered abuse.

In other words. Most anything other than taking turns is abuse.

What I asked is: is this abuse necessarily punishing both the holder and the sitter? Is it possible only the sitter is punished? In which circunstances? Have a link to a precedent on that?

Thanks!

Rodion wrote:What I asked is: is this abuse necessarily punishing both the holder and the sitter? Is it possible only the sitter is punished? In which circunstances? Have a link to a precedent on that?

Thanks!

viewtopic.php?f=239&t=129678

precedent, only sitter warned.

Thank you, Jake!

The above example is an account of Account Hijacking, in which case the sitter does get in trouble.

If the Account holder is letting the sitter on solely for the purpose of strategic advantage in games, point gain, etc., then it is treated as the next level of Major/Severe infraction as noted in the Community Guidelines'
I do hope this clears up any other questions that you have, Rodion.

-rd

rdsrds2120 wrote:The above example is an account of Account Hijacking, in which case the sitter does get in trouble.

If the Account holder is letting the sitter on solely for the purpose of strategic advantage in games, point gain, etc., then it is treated as the next level of Major/Severe infraction as noted in the Community Guidelines'
I do hope this clears up any other questions that you have, Rodion.

-rd

Hell no! The sitter in question made a pretty dumb move! He attacked me in a no spoils build up game with no real purporse. Besides, the sitter if FOEd by me and he probably knew that.

I was just thinking he didn't follow guidelines because the holder had around 100 turns to make (some with less than 2 hours remaining), yet he decided to play my game (which had 22+ hours remaining), so we can clearly say the holder was not in danger of losing the turn.

Am I right?

Rodion wrote:

rdsrds2120 wrote:The above example is an account of Account Hijacking, in which case the sitter does get in trouble.

If the Account holder is letting the sitter on solely for the purpose of strategic advantage in games, point gain, etc., then it is treated as the next level of Major/Severe infraction as noted in the Community Guidelines'
I do hope this clears up any other questions that you have, Rodion.

-rd

Hell no! The sitter in question made a pretty dumb move! He attacked me in a no spoils build up game with no real purporse. Besides, the sitter if FOEd by me and he probably knew that.

I was just thinking he didn't follow guidelines because the holder had around 100 turns to make (some with less than 2 hours remaining), yet he decided to play my game (which had 22+ hours remaining), so we can clearly say the holder was not in danger of losing the turn.

Am I right?

No. Doesn't matter how much time. When I sit for someone from day X to day Y I will usually take all turns that are up (Depending how many turns and if I need a break) 100 games is a LOT to sit. He may have just made a mistake. I know after running hours of turns they all start to look the same and color confusion can set in. It's possible that he took turns on maps he knows and likes before the others. I do that sometimes. Let the ones I don't like or know sit while I take care of the others.

But even if he did do that intentionally it wouldn't be sitting abuse. It could be considered attempted intentional game throwing but that would be really really hard to prove. Now if he kept on doing it then yes.

jefjef wrote:

Rodion wrote:

rdsrds2120 wrote:The above example is an account of Account Hijacking, in which case the sitter does get in trouble.

If the Account holder is letting the sitter on solely for the purpose of strategic advantage in games, point gain, etc., then it is treated as the next level of Major/Severe infraction as noted in the Community Guidelines'
I do hope this clears up any other questions that you have, Rodion.

-rd

Hell no! The sitter in question made a pretty dumb move! He attacked me in a no spoils build up game with no real purporse. Besides, the sitter if FOEd by me and he probably knew that.

I was just thinking he didn't follow guidelines because the holder had around 100 turns to make (some with less than 2 hours remaining), yet he decided to play my game (which had 22+ hours remaining), so we can clearly say the holder was not in danger of losing the turn.

Am I right?

No. Doesn't matter how much time. When I sit for someone from day X to day Y I will usually take all turns that are up (Depending how many turns and if I need a break) 100 games is a LOT to sit. He may have just made a mistake. I know after running hours of turns they all start to look the same and color confusion can set in. It's possible that he took turns on maps he knows and likes before the others. I do that sometimes. Let the ones I don't like or know sit while I take care of the others.

But even if he did do that intentionally it wouldn't be sitting abuse. It could be considered attempted intentional game throwing but that would be really really hard to prove. Now if he kept on doing it then yes.

This isn't entirely true either. When sitting someone else's games, you're supposed to take them only when someone is in danger of missing a turn.

Rodion - if you suspect foul play, like I said, feel free to open up a C&A and elaborate there. Potentially throwing games may or may not be the case, but it's always better to check 'just in case'.

-rd