Gen.LeeGettinhed - gross abuse and farming [closed]

[Tisha]

People could try looking at games before they join them, and say hey, this looks complicated.. or hey, it's freestyle, and NOT join

[the.killing.44]

People could try looking at games before they join them, and say hey, this looks complicated.. or hey, it's freestyle, and NOT join

"if you lose, you only lose a few points...but I lose many"

[hwhrhett]

People could try looking at games before they join them, and say hey, this looks complicated.. or hey, it's freestyle, and NOT join

"naw, its ok, ill teach it to you, it will be fun"

[Tisha]

People could try looking at games before they join them, and say hey, this looks complicated.. or hey, it's freestyle, and NOT join

"if you lose, you only lose a few points...but I lose many"

and they probably would, if they won.
they can't see the settings of the games they are joining or that his rank is higher than theirs? when you see someone with a higher rank, you should assume they can some what play and are not going to roll over and let you win... specially when you are newer and don't know that points can really be a false indicator of how someone plays..

it only took me joining a few games before I started noticing game settings... people just need to pay attention

I'll teach you, doesn't mean I will let you win..

[hwhrhett]

I'll teach you, doesn't mean I will let you win..

im not sure if what he has done is punishable or not, it is a technique that has been around forever, and i have been taken by promises of teaching a new map by several people in the past, that had no interest in teaching anything once the game had started... seems like it fits well into the gross abuse of the game. like a cc version of con-men.

when the king of nigeria had taken all of my money i too was told that it was all kosher... i was gonna learn all about the big world of nigerian financial magic!!

[king sam]

This has been a behind the scenes case that we have all been looking at and talking about since we got it in mid October.

i probably wouldn't have admitted that it takes you over a month to make a decision about something like this...

This is a case that obviously skirts the precedent that has already been set by "farming", which is why we have been reviewing it in its whole entirety to make a collective decision to bring forth to the community that will hopefully be just and fair for all. Whatever that decision is will 100% of users agree? No. But if it makes this place continue to be an enjoyable place for all then that's what it will be.

I would appreciate the honesty in the fact that I was told this wasn't just getting thrown to the side, however deliberated by several sets of eyes to form a conclusion that is best for everyone.

DH,
Almost always when a wrongful accusation presents itself in C&A you can say that the originator is damaging that persons reputation and is in a sense "making the community less enjoyable" for them. However this is something you cant avoid. The ruling for "making the community less enjoyable" comes in place when you have users that are deliberately time and time again going out of their way to bash others.

If SH continued to solicit others to come in here against you, post on your wall, send threatening PM's, bash your name in game chat, troll and undermine you in the forums or continue to make C&A claims about you to hinder your gaming experience then that would fall under this category. If you have proof of this, and mind you a few examples aren't enough, it would need to be substantial then please come forth with this and that will be addressed. But if this is just about your pride being hurt cause someone called you out on a rule that they thought you were violating then that's all that it is.

The fact that you feel the need to post your oppositions rank and games played total obviously is a sign that one can perceive that what your doing is wrong and your trying to justify that it isn't, so you cant get upset when someone thinks that it is and says something about it.

The ruling will be done hopefully sooner then later, and I'm sure the E-tickets will flow, regardless of which way the ruling sways.

King Sam

[jefjef]

Isn't the official CC stance on farming as to pertaining to ?. Do they not say everyone else is fair game?

If DH was Mr. popularity would this even be in C & A?

Is this being pursued for personal vendetta's and an attempt to broaden farming rules?

Were we not all noobs the first times on maps we had never played and did not most of us play against someone experienced an said map?

This is barely even frivolous and Seems to be vindictive.

[the.killing.44]

Isn't the official CC stance on farming as to pertaining to ?. Do they not say everyone else is fair game?

Which isn't the point of the accusation.

If DH was Mr. popularity would this even be in C & A?

Yes. If someone had basically all of his games—at least the entire first page—private freestyle 1v1s against noobs, I'm pretty sure everyone would be reported.

Is this being pursued for personal vendetta's

No.

and an attempt to broaden farming rules?

Perhaps.

Were we not all noobs the first times on maps we had never played and did not most of us play against someone experienced an said map?

Mostly. However, a vast majority of us were not lured into a private game by an experienced player.

[stahrgazer]

Hi, jefjef
Since I'm the original poster, I feel the most qualified to answer your questions about the motivation behind this thread.

Isn't the official CC stance on farming as to pertaining to ?. Do they not say everyone else is fair game?.

I'm not sure about that... I see a hedge in the beginning of the rule that says, "Includes but is not limited to." What does that mean? If "consistent farming of new recruits" isn't the limit, what is the limit?
If someone throwing a bunch of games into the open game forum, a come-one-come-all, let's play on this map I like, is considered to fall within those "includes but is not limited to" scenarios, then what else falls within that?
The rulings on those instances said that the people making those open games are making them in sufficient quantities that lots of lower ranks eventually join them, as they grab the first open slot and want to play.

If "they want to play," and "they'll grab the first open slot" applies to random setting up of games, why doesn't it apply to someone who systemically seeks lower ranks to play? It may, it may not. I'd like to know.

If DH was Mr. popularity would this even be in C & A?.

As far as I know, David is "Mr. Popularity."

Is this being pursued for personal vendetta's and an attempt to broaden farming rules?

I have no reason to have a personal vendetta against David. I have no power to "broaden" farming rules. It is, however, as I think I just explained, my attempt to get admin to clarify "gross abuse" that may or may not be farming.... the "is not limited to" side of what those rules include.

Were we not all noobs the first times on maps we had never played and did not most of us play against someone experienced an said map?

Sure, and that's not my concern here. My concern is the active lure part. Again, if making a ton of random games is considered "luring" (from those other rulings, it's luring because eventually some of those games will float to the top where lower ranks will grab the first game they see) then, is deliberately, systemically, tempting lower ranks, making that the predominant way you play, a gross abuse of the game?
I'm going to emphasize here, that when I reviewed his games, I didn't see a case where a high rank made "a couple" of games to teach lower ranks a lesson about CC, "look before you leap," or even a benevolent teaching of maps like is done in the SoC. I saw what looks more insidious.
At that point, I had to consider whether to report a friend for potential abuse. I'm a "principles first," gal, I began declining any games DH was inviting me into and then, yes, I reported a friend.

This is barely even frivolous and Seems to be vindictive.

No. David's nasty retorts are vindictive and untrue; my original and follow-on posts are a reasonable inquiry into whether CC deems this behavior to be a gross abuse of the game, farming, or, "perfectly legal, everyone give it a try!"

As David pointed out, I had backed him in his earlier battle with whether he was cheating or not. A primary reason is, at the time, he was freemie. Being freemie, it seems perfectly reasonable that one takes the comers in live chat, hoping for rt games. That has changed; he won a premium account a while back, yet his tactics of systemic luring seem to be the same or worse, with the exception, which he frequently points out in his game chats, that he waits until the new recruit is no longer a ? but a cadet or slightly higher. He is still primarily careful to ensure that whom he plays, whichever rank, is unfamiliar with the map and/or settings.

As DH pointed out, he was a friend of mine, for whom I even made a special avatar, then remade it to his preference; hardly evidence of "vendetta."

His game history, combined with comments he makes at times in game and live chat, looks fishy enough to make me wonder; and now, there's no longer the excuse of, "but he's freemie, give him a break." His tactics are now obviously an active choice he's making, when other options exist for him.

The question is, are these tactics a legal choice per CC?

David admits what he does, laughingly refers to his choice of tactics as "orchard tendering" - plucking the low-hanging fruit. He believes he is perfectly within the legalities of CC rules to do what he does.

I'm not sure. Hence, this thread. We'll all find out together.

[stahrgazer]

As for those condemning the mods for taking their time... Please stop.

I brought this to C&A forum because the e-ticket disappeared from my ability to check on it before a ruling had been tendered, not to rush them into making hasty rulings.

If you check my history in the forums, you'll see I consistently detest hasty rulings or rulings made on premises that do not hold up to logical analysis. Flame Wars is an example; I don't care for flaming and could frankly care less that that part of the forum was removed, but the reason they gave was illogical, so I vehemently protested the decision on that basis.

I much prefer admin taking its time to gather facts and deliberate rather than make hasty rulings. I hope that whatever response they give will provide good rationale for whichever decision they make.

[jefjef]

Quality response stahr. Thank you.

[MrMoody]

The rulings on those instances said that the people making those open games are making them in sufficient quantities that lots of lower ranks eventually join them, as they grab the first open slot and want to play.

Could you link any rulings you believe say this? I for one can't remember a single ruling about "lots of lower ranks".

[Bruceswar]

The rulings on those instances said that the people making those open games are making them in sufficient quantities that lots of lower ranks eventually join them, as they grab the first open slot and want to play.

Could you link any rulings you believe say this? I for one can't remember a single ruling about "lots of lower ranks".

There is not one at all. There is however rulings on feudal about ?'s joining games. No other rulings.

I repeat if you want a massive witch hunt then proceed with this case. CC will in effect be a terrible place for about 6 months with everybody trying to turn in every supposed farmer in CC. This place will be overflowing with farming accusations. Anybody who has ever been to live chat can just see this is more sour grapes from a rotten apple.

[stahrgazer]

Anybody who has ever been to live chat can just see this is more sour grapes from a rotten apple.

I think you should take a good close look at the brownspots you're showing, Bruce, by consistently trolling my threads simply because you choose to disagree that anyone should question things from time to time....

While at it, take another look at the "it's not personal" you claimed here earlier when I accused you of making your statements your personal vendetta against me.

My questions always have some merit; rather than look at "hmm, it has some merit whether I agree or not," you have consistently chosen to disparage me.

Shame on you!

[stahrgazer]

The rulings on those instances said that the people making those open games are making them in sufficient quantities that lots of lower ranks eventually join them, as they grab the first open slot and want to play.

Could you link any rulings you believe say this? I for one can't remember a single ruling about "lots of lower ranks".

Substitute "new recruit" and you'll find some.

[Bruceswar]

The rulings on those instances said that the people making those open games are making them in sufficient quantities that lots of lower ranks eventually join them, as they grab the first open slot and want to play.

Could you link any rulings you believe say this? I for one can't remember a single ruling about "lots of lower ranks".

Substitute "new recruit" and you'll find some.

New recruit and low rank are too different things.... That is like saying under age sex... and teen sex... one is illegal and one is not...

[stahrgazer]

New recruit and low rank are too different things.... That is like saying under age sex... and teen sex... one is illegal and one is not...

Actually, that depends on the country and its laws; and even within say, the United States, which age is illegal varies. What they do in that instance is give an age, or an age gap, for the various punishments. For example, two seventeen year olds in a state where legal age is 18, are not condemned to the degree a 40 y.o. would be condemned with the same 17; yet in both cases, the act is illegal.

Why don't YOU point out some threads where "abuse of the game includes but is not limited to..." is clearly defined.

If you can do that, the mods who are reviewing this will have an easier time making a ruling on this one.

Is this a potential CC-changing thread? Maybe, maybe not. Could it mean we have more cheaters out there than I may have found? Sure! Could it mean that some who may be suspected aren't cheating after all? Of course! This thread could even mean that Gen.LeeGettinhed gets cleared; that his orchard tendering is declared "legal" and that might eliminate some of the behind-the-scenes muttering. Would a ruling like that mean more people might take up "orchard tendering?" Why not, if it's legal and that's the way they want to score points?

But we're still down to "is it, or is it not, legal?"

It's still a reasonable question.

Edit: Offering (with thanks to the person who pm'd it to me) evidence that I am not the only one wondering what "gross abuse of the game" means. As someone states in the thread, the clause had not yet been used in farming cases.
http://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=102620.

Yet. Until now. So CC has something that they can use to clarify. Shame on me for asking? Nah, shame on those who think one shouldn't ever ask questions.

[karel]

after reading this crazy thread i have decided to take up farming

[VampireM]

i skimped through this thread so im sorry if i missed someones post that this already covered...

i think this all comes down to one big question

At how much experience (games) does a player need to have before he/she is able to decide with enough experience that they are going to get creamed at a game on a specific map?

with that, When do players feel that getting beat up bad to see how a good player plays the map and learn with a Q &A after the game is worth the loss...

i feel what David is doing is toeing the line of farming, but he asked when is it not farming and its hard for a mod to give an answer off hand at an exact game where it is no longer farming.. he seems to be following the advice the mod gave him from his last warning.. So i believe it will be hard to get anything more then a new warning.. just my opinion

im very interested to see when a mod comes in with an answer to this one.. if ever..

Edit: i see the mods have been in this thread, and good for them taking on this case and not ignoring it since its not a clear cut case

[hwhrhett]

i feel what he is doing is toeing the line of farming, but he asked when is it not farming and its hard for a mod to give an answer off hand at an exact game where it is no longer farming.. he seems to be following the advice the mod gave him from his last warning..

yeah, but now that he has been given an exact demonstration of what he has done wrong, he is just towing that line, doing everything he can do to farm, without fitting the technical definition that has previously been set. wrong or not, i dunno, mods will decide...

My questions always have some merit; rather than look at "hmm, it has some merit whether I agree or not," you have consistently chosen to disparage me.

in bruces defense, this is probably the first time ive ever seen you say anything of merit... usually its just you angry at someone about something and dragging it out through the forums, but this time its....... hey.... wait a minute... ha ha, is this the same old pattern stahr?

[stahrgazer]

ha ha, is this the same old pattern stahr?

Actually, yes, sans the anger part. See my pm for amplification

[hwhrhett]

ha ha, is this the same old pattern stahr?

Actually, yes, sans the anger part. See my pm for amplification

if your referencing the pm that you sent to me, then you seem to be inferring that it is you just being angry over percieved verbal abuse from bruce and hoekstra... because thats what you said in the pm you sent me.....

[CreepersWiener]

David is friendly and I never played City Mogul before. You have to start somewhere, right? I lost, but most people that pick the game to play always look for the maps they are familiar with and know all the tricks. I enjoyed playing with David...this complaint is lame.

Gen.LeeGettinhed FTFW!

Also, I only played the one game with him, and since I lost our first game together, I expect him to accept a game offer from me as well. So, the whole farming issue is a moot point, as it is good form to always allow the loser of the game to challenge you to another map of their choosing.

[stahrgazer]

if your referencing the pm that you sent to me,

No on 2 counts.
1) I was referencing the pm I had yet to write, which you should now have.
2) I wasn't angry at either bruce or David, so if you inferred anger from my prior pm, you were incorrect. Of course, since DH has been warned for what he's said in here, if I had been angry, I was justified. I wasn't angry because I expected him to react as he did. Same for Bruce...I expected his responses. You see, Bruce has made a habit of trolling my threads or my posts in others' threads to discredit me, personally, often without adding anything of value for or against the item under discussion; since I expected it, his doing as expected didn't bother me.

[hwhrhett]

if your referencing the pm that you sent to me,

No on 2 counts.
1) I was referencing the pm I had yet to write, which you should now have.
2) I wasn't angry at either bruce or David, so if you inferred anger from my prior pm, you were incorrect. Of course, since DH has been warned for what he's said in here, if I had been angry, I was justified. I wasn't angry because I expected him to react as he did. Same for Bruce...I expected his responses. You see, Bruce has made a habit of trolling my threads or my posts in others' threads to discredit me, personally, often without adding anything of value for or against the item under discussion; since I expected it, his doing as expected didn't bother me.

i got your 2nd pm, and it too is all you complaining about being abused, but at the hands of the mods.

stop saying that its not a personal issue and then use personal issues to back it up, i think youve got a legitimate thread here, but your diluting it with your own personal anger issues. go ahead and respond that im wrong, i wont reply again.

p.s. i could actually do without the pms also..