Conquer Club

Dangerous-Die wrote:Important lesson to learn here - - (that i am actually learning IRL myslef at this time) - if you work for a small business the bosses word is law. Weither the boss is right or wrong - - he/she is the one that can just say - - piss off - your history.DD

You half learned the lesson. The Boss always is right.

Plus side is that most people just moved up a spot on the scoreboard.

I take it was a perma ban? Since she was leaking information, correct?

tzor wrote:
Frankly I do not believe you. Your credibility has gone to zero as far as I am concerned. This has, on the other hand cemented this for me. This is offcially my last post. I am not comming back. Goodbye.

And go to hell.

yeah, and your cred went out the window when you posted 4 minutes after this in another thread...-0

this is worse then when they made off topic posts not count

tzor wrote:
Frankly I do not believe you. Your credibility has gone to zero as far as I am concerned. This has, on the other hand cemented this for me. This is offcially my last post. I am not comming back. Goodbye.

And go to hell.

Boo- fucking- hoo.
4 letters for you: GTFO

wicked wrote:Someone might want to inform those jackasses I had nothing to do with the creation of those troll accounts. The trolls were having a field day since I was gone, no other reason. Sure I laughed at them and chatted with them, nothing else I could do at that point. And the cheaters have always been there, evidenced by norse, albert, rocketry, & many many more and their complete lack of means to stop them.

Just something i found browsing.
Mainly for her defense.

ok, weird i just posted this and yet it's gone, so i'll do it again.

lack is in charge, that's evident, and that's ok, it's his site. but the simple solution to this is lack made this thread stating that wicked cheated/broke the rules, and for that has been banned. well it seems to me that the policy of this site has been to post openly the evidence of someone that has been caught red handed cheating/breaking the rules. so with that said, if lack wants this to go away, then post the evidence, he does not have to give away trade secrets to do this, he only has to post what he deems to be red handed evidence and that alone will vastly slow down the "revolution" or what ever you want to call it...

One more thing to add sorry.

wicked wrote:Even if a few people had seen what I posted and made other accounts, this by far pales in the comparison to the rampant cheating that has always gone on at CC and has nada to do with me. The number of new accounts created would be less than 1% of the current number of cheaters playing freely and openly on CC now.

She was found to be divulging secrets on how to get around some of the multi-hunting tools. This was a clear breach of the hunters' contract to which she had previously agreed. For that she was perma-banned.

lancehoch wrote:She was found to be divulging secrets on how to get around some of the multi-hunting tools. This was a clear breach of the hunters' contract to which she had previously agreed. For that she was perma-banned.

is there any evidence of this serious allegation?

hulmey wrote:is there any evidence of this serious allegation?

There is such a thing as a "need-to-know-basis". The admins know, the mods don't 100% know, and the community doesn't need to know.

In regards of this 'contract', did she actually sign it in person?

You would have to ask an admin or a hunter.

Night Strike wrote:

hulmey wrote:is there any evidence of this serious allegation?

There is such a thing as a "need-to-know-basis". The admins know, the mods don't 100% know, and the community doesn't need to know.

to be honest it is not my businness and i don't much care about the detail... But the community, due to the peculiarly public arena which we all cohabit, is a fickle beast. dismissing it as unimportant is not enormously helpful.. even if i do agree with the thrust of your post.

Night Strike wrote:

hulmey wrote:is there any evidence of this serious allegation?

There is such a thing as a "need-to-know-basis". The admins know, the mods don't 100% know, and the community doesn't need to know.

now you see there, this is one of those things that i completely disagree with. if that was the case then lack shouldn't have posted it at all then. he has invited this debate to carry on and create differences between everyone here that wants to have an opinion on the subject. Post the evidence or there will forever be speculation that this was just lack being vindictive and untruthful.......

I'm guessing lack posted it to be pre-emptive with the scenario compared to how things unfolded last week. This way, it was announced on his terms and no one else's terms.

In regard to the evidence, lack stated that there was a breach of the multi-hunting agreement and that confidential information about the hunting methods were spread. If the information is secret, why on earth would he share it with the public??? That would be foolish.

Night Strike wrote:

hulmey wrote:is there any evidence of this serious allegation?

There is such a thing as a "need-to-know-basis". The admins know, the mods don't 100% know, and the community doesn't need to know.

To add to what NS said I have seen part of the evidence and know it is real. Even without evidence, she is still a player on a private website and the website owner has the right to terminate any account at anytime for any (or no) reason without having to explain anything. Being part of this website is a privilege not a right.

hulmey wrote:To fuzzi ; working for a poker site, i know more about fraud and security than the multi hunters do themselves. Its very easy and only 2 brain cells needed

Maybe about fraud and security, but not about multi hunting

The Fuzzy Pengui wrote:

Night Strike wrote:

hulmey wrote:is there any evidence of this serious allegation?

There is such a thing as a "need-to-know-basis". The admins know, the mods don't 100% know, and the community doesn't need to know.

To add to what NS said I have seen part of the evidence and know it is real. Even without evidence, she is still a player on a private website and the website owner has the right to terminate any account at anytime for any (or no) reason without having to explain anything. Being part of this website is a privilege not a right.

hulmey wrote:To fuzzi ; working for a poker site, i know more about fraud and security than the multi hunters do themselves. Its very easy and only 2 brain cells needed

Maybe about fraud and security, but not about multi hunting

while i agree with you about this being a private site and lack being in charge and all that, that's not the point of this. While i tend to believe that you have seen the evidence, and that lack would not act maliciously, that is how it looks because of the way he posted this and the way it's being portrayed here in the forum. He does not need to post trade secrets or anything like that, there are ways around that, for gawd sakes, he runs the site, i'm pretty sure he knows how to post the evidence with out posting trade secrets. All i said was that posting the evidence would squelch all the talk about him lying about the evidence, it's a simple solution. as simple as that.....

peanutsdad wrote:while i agree with you about this being a private site and lack being in charge and all that, that's not the point of this. While i tend to believe that you have seen the evidence, and that lack would not act maliciously, that is how it looks because of the way he posted this and the way it's being portrayed here in the forum. He does not need to post trade secrets or anything like that, there are ways around that, for gawd sakes, he runs the site, i'm pretty sure he knows how to post the evidence with out posting trade secrets. All i said was that posting the evidence would squelch all the talk about him lying about the evidence, it's a simple solution. as simple as that.....

I doubt it would squelch the "uprising" because there is no way to post the evidence of her giving the secrets without actually showing them. If he really showed what she said then everybody would know what to do. If he showed everything but the actual secrets then people would say it proves nothing. It's pretty much a lose/lose situation for lack (in my eyes) for what the community will think. I think everyone just needs to accept it and let it go...complaining isn't going to change what she did nor what was done to her.

tzor wrote:Frankly I do not believe you. Your credibility has gone to zero as far as I am concerned. This has, on the other hand cemented this for me. This is offcially my last post. I am not comming back. Goodbye.

And go to hell.

Good! And, as we sometimes say in America, Don't let the door hit you in the ass!

peanutsdad wrote:

Night Strike wrote:

hulmey wrote:is there any evidence of this serious allegation?

There is such a thing as a "need-to-know-basis". The admins know, the mods don't 100% know, and the community doesn't need to know.

now you see there, this is one of those things that i completely disagree with. if that was the case then lack shouldn't have posted it at all then. he has invited this debate to carry on and create differences between everyone here that wants to have an opinion on the subject. Post the evidence or there will forever be speculation that this was just lack being vindictive and untruthful.......

Are you kidding me ? It's non of your business.... accept it and move on. It's not like you have a say in the matter nor is it worth [debating].

peanutsdad wrote:while i agree with you about this being a private site and lack being in charge and all that, that's not the point of this. While i tend to believe that you have seen the evidence, and that lack would not act maliciously, that is how it looks because of the way he posted this and the way it's being portrayed here in the forum. He does not need to post trade secrets or anything like that, there are ways around that, for gawd sakes, he runs the site, i'm pretty sure he knows how to post the evidence with out posting trade secrets. All i said was that posting the evidence would squelch all the talk about him lying about the evidence, it's a simple solution. as simple as that.....

The thing is, the only evidence of her posting is the posting of "trade secrets". I have only seen the "redacted" version of the evidence. But I do believe lack. I know there is not much I can say to convince anyone, but I will try.
What does lack have to gain from lying about this? He lost one of his best employees/volunteers. And now he claims that she is trying to trash the site that he created. If he is telling the truth, she should be banned, does anyone disagree? If he is telling the truth, and she was distributing information then the site would have been in ruins if he did not act. If he is lying, then people will revolt, and the site will go to hell. Clearly he was put in a tough place, but it was not his doing. The actions of one person forced his hand. If this was your site, given the situation of wicked no longer being a mod and threatening to pull the site down 'bit' by 'bit', would you have acted any differently? I doubt it.

EDIT: Damnit fuzzy, you beat me to it.

Christ's sake, this whole thing is ridiculous.

Scott-Land wrote:

peanutsdad wrote:

Night Strike wrote:

hulmey wrote:is there any evidence of this serious allegation?

There is such a thing as a "need-to-know-basis". The admins know, the mods don't 100% know, and the community doesn't need to know.

now you see there, this is one of those things that i completely disagree with. if that was the case then lack shouldn't have posted it at all then. he has invited this debate to carry on and create differences between everyone here that wants to have an opinion on the subject. Post the evidence or there will forever be speculation that this was just lack being vindictive and untruthful.......

Are you kidding me ? It's non of your business.... accept it and move on. It's not like you have a say in the matter nor is it worth [debating].

nope not kidding at all, Lack made it everyones business when he posted it. As far as moving on, i have no problems with that, it doesn't affect me whether wicked is here or not. as for what's worth debating, that's up to the people that want to talk about it now isn't it. While i personally, am actually leaning towards the fact that Lack acted correctly and justly, especially after talking with Fuzzy about it, the fact is, while i can leave it alone, i doubt a lot of the others out there will, but i've been wrong before.