Discussion on Cheating [merged]

[Neimenljivi]

Just got a confirmation - account B was massing those in the beginning of the era who seemingly did nothing to account B.. They did farm account A, though. Coincidence? You decide.

~Jack

[S1eepy]

Does account A and account B claim to know each other IRL?

[Neimenljivi]

Does account A and account B claim to know each other IRL?

Account B is supposedly account A's friend. I haven't asked the accounts whether they know each other IRL. But I would suppose the answer would be a clear yes. Because, you know, that's the easiest way to excuse their activity. If the IPs matched, I am sure the excuse would have been the brother card

~Jack

[Sniperwax]

Due process is commendable and all except when it drives honest players crazy at first then eventually drives them away entirely. A good shepherd must put on his big boy pants and protect his flock from whatever vile threats lurk about. The only thing worse than glowing eyes staring at you from the darkness is knowing your guardian probably won't even notice you were taken and consumed.

[HippyFool]

Account A
Last login: 4-04-14 04:54:46
Previous login: 4-04-14 04:30:31
Account B
Last login: 4-04-14 04:56:13
Previous login: 3-04-14 04:47:34

Account A
Last login: 6-04-14 06:17:22
Previous login: 6-04-14 05:38:18
Account B
Last login: 6-04-14 06:17:47
Previous login: 4-04-14 06:13:03

Account A
Last login: 8-04-14 01:50:02
Previous login: 8-04-14 01:13:35
Account B
Last login: 8-04-14 01:48:19
Previous login: 8-04-14 12:54:48

Account A
Last login: 8-04-14 01:50:02
Previous login: 8-04-14 01:13:35
Account B
Last login: 8-04-14 01:48:19
Previous login: 8-04-14 12:54:48

~Jack[/color]

I would say that there is a 99% chance that these accounts are the same person.

And I didn't log into any of my multis last month, so it can't be me!

[Neimenljivi]

Keep the opinions coming guys. Lets hope the cheater is banned this era, otherwise we might get a response "there is not enough proof in this era" when the next era starts.

~Jack

[Ronon Dex]

The fact that neither player A or B has posted to attempt to defend themselves further incriminates them, they have made no effort to disprove their guilt.

If it were me being accused to being a cheater and possibly facing a ban, i'd be doing everything in my power to prove my innocence.

[Neimenljivi]

Well I think facts speak for themselves.. And that they know nothing they say will change the facts. Or that they are too confident about their cheating and don't think we're talking about them. What sadness me is the fact that admins won't, apparently, ban them as in their eyes a missing IP match is enough of a proof they aren't cheating. I am sure if their IP matched, they'd have been banned for a month now. If it only wasn't as easy to change one's IP as it is..

~Jack

[The Doctor]

Well I think facts speak for themselves.. And that they know nothing they say will change the facts. Or that they are too confident about their cheating and don't think we're talking about them. What sadness me is the fact that admins won't, apparently, ban them as in their eyes a missing IP match is enough of a proof they aren't cheating. I am sure if their IP matched, they'd have been banned for a month now. If it only wasn't as easy to change one's IP as it is..

~Jack

What facts? Nothing is factual, its all assumptions based on circumstance...

And I never said a missing IP match means they're not cheating. It just means we don't have enough proof for them cheating (if indeed they are).



I do see your point, however I can't punish someone based on a suspicion.

I have approached this report assuming that Account A and B are guilty (aka the same person), and that all I need to do is provide proof. Solid proof.
However, all I have is "Circumstances", which isn't enough to "convict" someone.

Reasonable doubt can't really apply here. You all talk about the risk of pissing someone off on the chance that they are really cheaters. Assuming said accounts are guilty, how do we know if they will back down and give up. They may act all innocent and be all "OMG why would you ban us, we did nothing wrong!". We'd be back to the burden of proof, but instead of looking for the proof of guilt, we'd be looking for the proof of innocence. And who knows, said parties may be innocent. We don't know. We would be going around in circles.

One last note: banning because a vocal minority is convinced someone is a cheater doesn't do justice to this community. It would create a dangerous and undesirable precedent.

[Neimenljivi]

Ok. Just don't expect any help from more experienced members of Q when you clearly don't listen to us.
Since you won't deal with this, we will.

And FYI, something you would have already known if you had any experience in Q, there is no solid proof in Q except for a confession from someone. Or an IP match - but they could always get away with it claiming it's their "brother".

Good luck catching any cheater that will confess they truly are cheating.

I will announce account A and B before I mass them which will be some time before the end of the era.
I also reckon there will be an outburst of multi accounts. Remember, you brought this on because the only "solid" proof you could get in Q is a confession and you won't get that. Ever. So I expect other people won't be banned either, unless they confess. But who knows, you might change your mind when it comes to someone who hasn't donated as much or hasn't been around as long. Congradz, you just opened the door to cheating, big time. It also tells a lot about how much you respect the Game Cops and their opinion.

~Jack

[S1eepy]

Don't overreact Neim.. Give him a chance.

1st point.
Purchasing or not purchasing SSs is not an issue here.

2nd point (as made before by many)
"Proof" is impossible to get.

I could make an account, claim its my brothers, and as long as I didn't give resources to my main account, use it to spy/mass/sab everyone. You could never "prove" it was not my brother doing all those things

3rd point
Whoever has the final say (Haz at the moment) has to make a decision (based on the evidence provided, as well as his own investigation) weather or not he thinks the person is guilty.

If its a definite Yes - ban both accounts
If its a definite No - tell us that - and we'll probably mass the people ourselves (and whine no doubt)

If its somewhere in the middle - take appropriate action
Remove a spy level from the main account.. or empty their bank (presuming its full ofc) and tell us action has been taken.

What you cant do, is hide behind "proof", and make no decision at all.

4th and most important point
No matter what the decision, Haz can expect help from more experienced members of Q, as we understand this is a tough decision (especially for his first issue to resolve)

Besides - at the end of the day, even if the allegations are true. The benefit gained is not as large as feeding used to be, and it is a lot of effort to put in to gain that benefit. Yes - its wrong, and shouldnt be allowed, but its so much smaller a benefit than it used to be. (eg Zaphor being able to raid mass UUs from friends accounts (not multis) to have double anyone elses army and be out of reach within the first 3 weeks, raiding was removed the era after that one)

[The Doctor]

If its somewhere in the middle - take appropriate action
Remove a spy level from the main account.. or empty their bank (presuming its full ofc) and tell us action has been taken.

My worry here is taking something from someone innocent... say someone reported another, who is completely innocent, but his account activity looks sketchy. A definite yes and a definite no don't apply.

Should I really be removing stuff as a "punishment", from a completely innocent account?

[S1eepy]

That depends how you define "innocent", even if you are not swayed sufficiently to believe this is a multi-account, and cant act under that breach of the rules, it is clear that there has been a systematic abuse of two accounts to benefit one main account.

So I believe that would fall under the purview of "feeding" - albeit less serious than directly giving Naq to each other all era. Hence a lighter punishment - not banning, but removal of the advantage gained on regular accounts.

The evidence presented here seems to be sufficient to prove this (although to reiterate - I have not personally verified any of it). and if any allegations were made in the future about other accounts, they would need to be backed up by a similar amount of evidence. Anyone accusing without enough evidence would have to risk receiving a similar penalty for the false accusation. At the admins discretion.

[Neimenljivi]

Account A was HippyFool and account B was Selina a.k.a. SkyFusion.

Now please keep in mind what you said. Don't suddenly change your opinion because of a name.

~Jack

[HippyFool]

...Of being the biggest jerk of all time.

Attack your own alliance mates in the final moments of an era?

Screw. You.