rules wrote:Rule #1
NO multis
notice that it says "no multis", not "no multis unless they are in team games and the person that made them thinks its not cheating"
joshuabrandon/melgibson, [Busted]
Moderators: Multi Hunters, Cheating/Abuse Team
Forum rules
Please read the Community Guidelines before posting.
[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.]
Please read the Community Guidelines before posting.
[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.]
-
wcaclimbing
- Posts: 5598
- Joined: Fri May 12, 2006 10:09 pm
- Location: In your quantum box....Maybe.
- Contact:
-
Joshuabrandon
- Posts: 12
- Joined: Sun Jul 16, 2006 8:02 am
-
Joshuabrandon
- Posts: 12
- Joined: Sun Jul 16, 2006 8:02 am
ok let see...if i can slow this down for you...lets say people lived together and let see they stumbled accross this site...and lets say they liked it and both wanted to play...but for fear of cheating accusations they only played team games together....and any other games they played separetly...because its fair to assume even if they did not form an alliance it would only be natural for them to favor one another. So as to be above reproach they only played team matches together...not only is that fair...but would only be considered a multi by the strictest interpretaion of a multi and its really a mute point and a waste of breath to argue...as was stated before we didn't cheat so whats the complaint exactly...I believe the complaint originated from jaydog who was saying that since we both missed our turn because our computer was down that he was going to complain...which was a very gay thing to do especially since he won as a result of us missing...otherwise he would have lost
-
mightyal
- Posts: 280
- Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2006 12:33 pm
- Location: Banging the hag whilst Owl is busy banging hendy's mum
That is not a multi.lets say people lived together and let see they stumbled accross this site...and lets say they liked it and both wanted to play...but for fear of cheating accusations they only played team games together....and any other games they played separetly...because its fair to assume even if they did not form an alliance it would only be natural for them to favor one another. So as to be above reproach they only played team matches together.
"I do not feel obliged to believe that the same God who has endowed us with sense, reason, and intellect has intended us to forgo their use."
- Galileo Galilei
- Galileo Galilei
-
wcaclimbing
- Posts: 5598
- Joined: Fri May 12, 2006 10:09 pm
- Location: In your quantum box....Maybe.
- Contact:
-
nascarfan38124
- Posts: 305
- Joined: Tue Jun 27, 2006 9:20 pm
- Location: SoCal
-
reverend_kyle
- Posts: 9250
- Joined: Tue Mar 21, 2006 4:08 pm
- Location: 1000 post club
- Contact:
I see this bieng a big problem if they are tellign the truth because there ARE alot of people who play from the same IP.. for example owl and amanda are dating and they play from the same computer... and highborn and kylie .. does that mean that the yboth cant have accounts becasue of the same IP?
DANCING MUSTARD FOR POOP IN '08!
lol this thread is hysterical...look at the way they post...they type just like each other...its equivelent to having the same voice...not to mention schizophrenic...sound like multis to me...
Do you need an excuse to have a war? I mean, who for? Can't you just say "You got lots of cash and land, but I've got a big sword, so divy up right now, chop chop."
Terry Pratchet
Terry Pratchet
-
reverend_kyle
- Posts: 9250
- Joined: Tue Mar 21, 2006 4:08 pm
- Location: 1000 post club
- Contact:
mightyal wrote:That is not a multi.lets say people lived together and let see they stumbled accross this site...and lets say they liked it and both wanted to play...but for fear of cheating accusations they only played team games together....and any other games they played separetly...because its fair to assume even if they did not form an alliance it would only be natural for them to favor one another. So as to be above reproach they only played team matches together.
evil semp miss semp..
and there were a couple others i've seen.
DANCING MUSTARD FOR POOP IN '08!
-
ZawBanjito
- Posts: 379
- Joined: Mon Jan 23, 2006 12:25 am
- Location: Somewhere
People draggin the weirdest crap in the world into this. This entire complaint is based on minute analysis of what they're saying and how they're saying it. If they just shut up and never talked, nobody would have a single complaint, because there wouldn't be anything to complain about.
Anyway, I believe them. Or I believe we should give them the benefit of the doubt on this. Has precedent been set on an issue like this? Obviously a more refined definition of multi needs to be made. The super-legalistic interpretation people are supporting this claim on is not functional, since it reduces the entire "what is a multi" question down to "two or more accounts sharing a computer." It's really unrealistic to say that if you want to play Conquer Club - as striped down and simplistic a multiplayer game to play as there is on the internet - you and you alone must own your own computer. There should also be evidence of multi behavior, which there isn't here, except for one line someone dug up that suggests both accounts are accessed by one person, which they admit to. They're not otherwise gaming the system.
Otherwise, the only evidence gathered is: 1) They uh, claim to live in the same house and use the same computer. And incidentally be brothers. 2) They have similar writing styles. And incidentally they might be brothers. Who live together.
I agree that the "brother" claim is tired as hell, but it has to happen sometimes. There are a lot of people with brothers out there.
And getting someone else to play your turns when you're over at their house is what everyone does. It's bloody useful too. I've missed a hell of a lot of turns where I wished I could call up someone and say dude play the turn for me. In faaaaact, I know a certain moooooderator what done it just a few days ago, ehhehehehehe.
I'm a get in trouble for that, I worry...
Anyway, I believe them. Or I believe we should give them the benefit of the doubt on this. Has precedent been set on an issue like this? Obviously a more refined definition of multi needs to be made. The super-legalistic interpretation people are supporting this claim on is not functional, since it reduces the entire "what is a multi" question down to "two or more accounts sharing a computer." It's really unrealistic to say that if you want to play Conquer Club - as striped down and simplistic a multiplayer game to play as there is on the internet - you and you alone must own your own computer. There should also be evidence of multi behavior, which there isn't here, except for one line someone dug up that suggests both accounts are accessed by one person, which they admit to. They're not otherwise gaming the system.
Otherwise, the only evidence gathered is: 1) They uh, claim to live in the same house and use the same computer. And incidentally be brothers. 2) They have similar writing styles. And incidentally they might be brothers. Who live together.
I agree that the "brother" claim is tired as hell, but it has to happen sometimes. There are a lot of people with brothers out there.
And getting someone else to play your turns when you're over at their house is what everyone does. It's bloody useful too. I've missed a hell of a lot of turns where I wished I could call up someone and say dude play the turn for me. In faaaaact, I know a certain moooooderator what done it just a few days ago, ehhehehehehe.
I'm a get in trouble for that, I worry...
-
AndyDufresne
- Posts: 24935
- Joined: Fri Mar 03, 2006 8:22 pm
- Location: A Banana Palm in Zihuatanejo
- Contact:
