[These cases have been closed. If you would like to appeal the decision of the hunter please open a ticket on the help page and the case will be looked into by a second hunter.]
It seems you are assuming someone who habitually enters games with a freemium (or possibly even 'for' a freemium) and then takes a majority of that player's turns doesn't know right from wrong, which is why your analogy was misplaced. Am I to send a PM to that player, with whom I'm not corresponding (guess you missed that part), and alert him to his possible wrongdoing? Does that make it all better? If a player is deliberately seeking to gain an advantage why shouldn't it be investigated and, if necessary, punished?
Paul's not my friend, he's yours, thus I can understand your defence of him. What I fail to grasp is why you've made this a personal attack on me. There's nothing dishonest or underhand (if anything it's most certainly not underhand when it's overt) in filing a C&A report. Not when the author has what he feels are sufficient grounds and evidence.
Since you seem to think that being a witness doesn't justify commenting on a person's behavior: who do you think you are doing it here?
This makes no sense. Whose behaviour am I commenting on? You seem to be the one who has come in here intent on character assassination without any justification.
Highest position #5 (18 Nov 2010) General 4,380pts (11 Dec 2010)
You're commenting on Paul's character. Do you not remember where you are, or the implications of opening a thread here? They are all about his behaviors. I also didn't come here to "assassinate" anything, and my justification is clear. I caught that you aren't communicating with him, but you really should have. That's my justification for calling you out, and if all these character witnesses do anything, it is illustrate that Paul listens to advise, tries to always be upright, and certainly didn't need an official proceeding to fix any wrongdoing he may or may not have accidentally been doing. You rushed for the public eye, again, and somehow continue to justify not giving a human dignity of privately ensuring they are informed, simply because you are within the letter of the law. I painted the picture for you in different terms, and you saw it as unfair there, and now only seek to distance yourself so you can soothe your ego that you were right not checking first. I'm fully aware you will continue to believe so, even if Buddha, Christ, Kant, the Dalai Llama, and any other great moral authority pointed it out otherwise, so i'll just leave it here, assuming you can kindly not imply I'm somehow in the wrong for similarly questioning your behavior as you question Paul's by opening this thread.
I'm 100% posting, at the moment, whenever someone pm's me a link to a cry for attention at someone else's expense. If there are other's you'd like me to be aware of, just shoot them my way. I'm happy to demonstrate consistency. Nice red herring to get away from what we were discussing, by the way. Questioning my infrequent posts does nothing to change your obvious lack of respect for courtesies to those who may be accidentally infringing on your perfect world order.
The only lack of courtesy is that which you are affording me.
I know you are highly opinionated, and you need everything to fall within your little ideal
a dirty smear tactic just to make yourself look holy
Very unclassy
Your cosnsequentialist, pessimistic philosophy
You assume the worst in people; don't assume they will change unless you get a big enough stick, and don't assume there is justification beyond your hastily drawn suspicion
its obvious the behavior ISN'T changing
its dishonest, or at least underhanded, to go rat him
your self-centered, close-minded moral philosophy, and lack of civility or respect for boundaries
your obvious lack of respect for courtesies to those who may be accidentally infringing on your perfect world order
Are there any more that I'll need to report? Seriously, give it a break, at least from the incessant flaming.
Highest position #5 (18 Nov 2010) General 4,380pts (11 Dec 2010)
19. Can I let another player take a turn for me when I am away from the game?
Players are allowed to account-sit for others as long as they are not opponents within the game. It is common courtesy to announce in game chat that another player will take your turn(s) during your absence. Babysitters should only do what is necessary to take the turn(s) and should not interact with the community, start or join new games (except for ongoing tournaments). Furthermore, you should only take another player's turn if they are in danger of missing a turn, not for the purpose of gaining a tactical advantage.
Althought we don't think PaulatPeace intended to break any rules, the above rule has been broken by him. Joining games for Draganator (no tournament), sitting for Draganator while not in danger of missing a turn (many times) is not allowed. PaulatPeace has been warned for Account Sitting Abuse
