Moderators: Multi Hunters, Cheating/Abuse Team
drunkmonkey wrote:I'm filing a C&A report right now. Its nice because they have a drop-down for "jefjef".
You researched what I wrote on his wall, but did not follow through and check the game....had you, you would have found evidence to the contrary. Also, there was no correspondence back and forth between me and him. We never agreed to anything. So, I'd say it's pretty hard to cheat or team up secretly when only one person knows what's going on. You kind of have to be on the same page for it work, which we clearly were not. Best I can tell you, I was thinking out loud.jefjef wrote:shall we go after teal in our middle east game and then battle eachother???
by MNDuke
on Wed Oct 07, 2009 10:45 am
Game 5572960 from 9/13/09 - 10/18/09
Wolfpack
If this is not Secret Diplomacy than nothing is. This was not posted out of frustration or emotion. It was something that should have been in chat.
I didn't spend a whole 5 minutes to find a cheat on MNduke. I was researching the original complaint but sorry when I say this I had to share it.
It's commendable that you come to defend a friend. But to sling arrogance in our faces and IGNORE what this is is bullshit. Sorry I couldn't ignore it. I have nothing against MN. Heck I'm in a team game with him right now and supported his complaint in another thread.
But this is wrong. It is a cheat and he knows better.
Red in this case = marimorgrann2009-10-09 00:31:55 - MNDuke: teal I hope you do the right thing and go after red...he is clearly going to run away with this and we will both lose
2009-10-11 03:02:52 - MNDuke: you do realize teal that when red wins you lose more points
drunkmonkey wrote:I'm filing a C&A report right now. Its nice because they have a drop-down for "jefjef".
drunkmonkey wrote:I'm filing a C&A report right now. Its nice because they have a drop-down for "jefjef".
To me that implies communication between two parties. It was a one way communication. There was never any response or action taken regarding my lone statement. Granted it was a mistake, but nothing ever came to fruition. I would say we are in the grey zone and there is nothing clear cut about this.jefjef wrote:Rule #2: No secret diplomacy
Any form of diplomatic discussion between opponents must be posted in the game chat in English or in a language that all opponents understand. Diplomacy includes, but is not limited to: proposing truces, negotiating alliances, and coordinating assaults.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Acted upon or not. It was a proposal to ally and attack cyan. It was not in game chat.
Is that rhetorical? Of course not. I went to the US Virgin Islands and it did the opposite of make me a virgin. Don't tell Howard.MNDuke wrote:If going to church makes me a christian, does going to the garage make me a car?
MNDuke wrote:To me that implies communication between two parties. It was a one way communication. There was never any response or action taken regarding my lone statement. Granted it was a mistake, but nothing ever came to fruition. I would say we are in the grey zone and there is nothing clear cut about this.jefjef wrote:Rule #2: No secret diplomacy
Any form of diplomatic discussion between opponents must be posted in the game chat in English or in a language that all opponents understand. Diplomacy includes, but is not limited to: proposing truces, negotiating alliances, and coordinating assaults.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Acted upon or not. It was a proposal to ally and attack cyan. It was not in game chat.
If going to church makes me a christian, does going to the garage make me a car?
drunkmonkey wrote:I'm filing a C&A report right now. Its nice because they have a drop-down for "jefjef".
I'd say that its hard to determine that if what I stated here was proposing a truce. I could see how one could reach that conclusion as to that's what I meant. But on the other hand, I never said "truce", or "allies" or "let's not attack each other". You could argue that it was implied, but to say that's what I meant by such a statement could be reading into it. I'm just saying that its a little vague and open to interpretation as to what I meant. I think the meaning of this statement is unclear and if this is the best evidence against me, the case is weak at best and should be dropped unless something more incriminating is produced.shall we go after teal in our middle east game and then battle eachother???
by MNDuke
on Wed Oct 07, 2009 10:45 am
MNDuke wrote:I'd say that its hard to determine that if what I stated here was proposing a truce. I could see how one could reach that conclusion as to that's what I meant. But on the other hand, I never said "truce", or "allies" or "let's not attack each other". You could argue that it was implied, but to say that's what I meant by such a statement could be reading into it. I'm just saying that its a little vague and open to interpretation as to what I meant. I think the meaning of this statement is unclear and if this is the best evidence against me, the case is weak at best and should be dropped unless something more incriminating is produced.shall we go after teal in our middle east game and then battle eachother???
by MNDuke
on Wed Oct 07, 2009 10:45 am
drunkmonkey wrote:I'm filing a C&A report right now. Its nice because they have a drop-down for "jefjef".
