jdbush chapcrap [noted]

[chapcrap]

First of all, don't put quotes around something like I said it unless you're going to give an exact quote and not what you think you remember the quote was.

Having passwords isn't account sharing. Account sharing is dependent upon the activity on the accounts. Just because passwords are known, does not mean I'm hopping on anyone's account whenever I feel like it. That does not happen. If it did, I agree with you that it should be punished. But, it's like king a said, if someone is in danger of missing a turn, that's when it's ok. And if you look back, I was not paying attention to his account 24/7. I was alerted to his low time by someone who was a teammate of his in a game.

Clearly, I'm not logging in whenever I feel like it. And, if was I did was against the rules, it would have been more than noted. So, I don't think quoting NS or king achilles or anyone else is necessary. When there is a ruling in place, you can see what the rules are.

[jgordon1111]

I cant believe this is still going,after KA has made his ruling,Flow you want your points back invite me to 4 1vs1 games and see if you can get them back,will that make this better?

[Lindax]

Since this is still going anyway: What's with the higher standards for TeamCC Members? Does that not apply anymore?

And having passwords is pretty much the same as "account sharing", because the "activity on the accounts" often can't be measured. Not to mention the fact that the only "activity" should be taking a turn when in danger of missing it.

Lx

[crispybits]

First of all, don't put quotes around something like I said it unless you're going to give an exact quote and not what you think you remember the quote was.

Having passwords isn't account sharing. Account sharing is dependent upon the activity on the accounts. Just because passwords are known, does not mean I'm hopping on anyone's account whenever I feel like it. That does not happen. If it did, I agree with you that it should be punished. But, it's like king a said, if someone is in danger of missing a turn, that's when it's ok. And if you look back, I was not paying attention to his account 24/7. I was alerted to his low time by someone who was a teammate of his in a game.

Clearly, I'm not logging in whenever I feel like it. And, if was I did was against the rules, it would have been more than noted. So, I don't think quoting NS or king achilles or anyone else is necessary. When there is a ruling in place, you can see what the rules are.

First of all - I did exactly what I just did here, and find your post and hit the quote button. Care to look back to the first page, second last post before you accuse me of something I didn't do....

You have the password and you are able to log into someone else's account whenever you feel like it. You felt like it at this time because you got a message saying happy was low on time. But that shouldn't be a 24/7 option for you over weeks and months, that should be something that only happens when happy knows he is going away (on holiday for instance, like he did 2 months before this thread started) and changes to a temporary password. If between all the quotes from senior staff saying that the sharing of permanent passwords and using them whenever you feel like it, and not just during a defined holiday/break sitting period, is abuse and you STILL don't get it... I despair.

Ignoring jdbush's account, because there's nothing here to implicate it (as in no explicit admission that he permanently has happy's password and wasn't handed it by you to take the turn in this game), then at the very least happy's account is permanently shared, and is a (semi-)multi of your own. And that is only going by the admissions you and happy have made yourselves in this thread.

[chapcrap]

Since this is still going anyway: What's with the higher standards for TeamCC Members? Does that not apply anymore?

And having passwords is pretty much the same as "account sharing", because the "activity on the accounts" often can't be measured. Not to mention the fact that the only "activity" should be taking a turn when in danger of missing it.

Are there different rules for TeamCC? I didn't think so. And having passwords isn't account sharing. Nice try. If it was, a lot of people would be in trouble.

First of all - I did exactly what I just did here, and find your post and hit the quote button. Care to look back to the first page, second last post before you accuse me of something I didn't do....

Well, that's not what you did. Let me show you:

(which nullifies your "it's only NS, he's no authority" as he's been backed up as correct BY an authority)

See, that's not how I said it. You put something in quotations, like I said it that way and I didn't. I choose my syntax, I don't need you goofing it up.

You have the password and you are able to log into someone else's account whenever you feel like it. You felt like it at this time because you got a message saying happy was low on time. But that shouldn't be a 24/7 option for you over weeks and months, that should be something that only happens when happy knows he is going away (on holiday for instance, like he did 2 months before this thread started) and changes to a temporary password. If between all the quotes from senior staff saying that the sharing of permanent passwords and using them whenever you feel like it, and not just during a defined holiday/break sitting period, is abuse and you STILL don't get it... I despair.

No, I get it. You're just wrong. I understand that you think you're right, but you clearly aren't. As I already told Lindax above, if it were a lot more people would be in trouble. There are a lot of examples of this happening and C&A being aware and it hasn't been punished because it's not account sharing. I'm sorry you have a misconception of the rule.

Ignoring jdbush's account, because there's nothing here to implicate it (as in no explicit admission that he permanently has happy's password and wasn't handed it by you to take the turn in this game), then at the very least happy's account is permanently shared, and is a (semi-)multi of your own. And that is only going by the admissions you and happy have made yourselves in this thread.

No multis, no sharing. I'm sorry you aren't getting your way, but it's just not against the rules.

[crispybits]

OK I apologise, although "NS isn't an authority round here" and "it's only NS, he's no authority" seem pretty much paraphrases with identical meaning to me.

As for the rest, it's clear we're going to have to agree to disagree, but I'd be curious to know where you think the line is that makes this different from illegal account sharing. Because I view account sharing as something along the lines of "more than 1 person permanently having the permanent login details to the same account and both/all of those people use these details on a regular (but not necessarily frequent) basis". It seems pretty clear to me that there must be a limited duration and temporary password from the quotes from both NS and king a, and that permanent arrangements like this are what are frowned upon and considered abuse of the sitting system.

[Symmetry]

Since this is still going anyway: What's with the higher standards for TeamCC Members? Does that not apply anymore?

And having passwords is pretty much the same as "account sharing", because the "activity on the accounts" often can't be measured. Not to mention the fact that the only "activity" should be taking a turn when in danger of missing it.

Are there different rules for TeamCC? I didn't think so. And having passwords isn't account sharing. Nice try. If it was, a lot of people would be in trouble.

First of all - I did exactly what I just did here, and find your post and hit the quote button. Care to look back to the first page, second last post before you accuse me of something I didn't do....

Well, that's not what you did. Let me show you:

(which nullifies your "it's only NS, he's no authority" as he's been backed up as correct BY an authority)

See, that's not how I said it. You put something in quotations, like I said it that way and I didn't. I choose my syntax, I don't need you goofing it up.

You have the password and you are able to log into someone else's account whenever you feel like it. You felt like it at this time because you got a message saying happy was low on time. But that shouldn't be a 24/7 option for you over weeks and months, that should be something that only happens when happy knows he is going away (on holiday for instance, like he did 2 months before this thread started) and changes to a temporary password. If between all the quotes from senior staff saying that the sharing of permanent passwords and using them whenever you feel like it, and not just during a defined holiday/break sitting period, is abuse and you STILL don't get it... I despair.

No, I get it. You're just wrong. I understand that you think you're right, but you clearly aren't. As I already told Lindax above, if it were a lot more people would be in trouble. There are a lot of examples of this happening and C&A being aware and it hasn't been punished because it's not account sharing. I'm sorry you have a misconception of the rule.

Ignoring jdbush's account, because there's nothing here to implicate it (as in no explicit admission that he permanently has happy's password and wasn't handed it by you to take the turn in this game), then at the very least happy's account is permanently shared, and is a (semi-)multi of your own. And that is only going by the admissions you and happy have made yourselves in this thread.

No multis, no sharing. I'm sorry you aren't getting your way, but it's just not against the rules.

Dude, this kind of obfuscation is what got you into this trouble. Just be clear about what you're doing behind the scenes so that everyone in the game knows what's happening.

As a mod you shouldn't just be enforcing the rules, you're kinda considered to be the kind of player that doesn't exploit their grey areas.

[happyfeet]

Dude, this kind of obfuscation is what got you into this trouble. Just be clear about what you're doing behind the scenes so that everyone in the game knows what's happening.

As a mod you shouldn't just be enforcing the rules, you're kinda considered to be the kind of player that doesn't exploit their grey areas.

again you say something stupid. congrats!!!

[chapcrap]

@crispy, see the CoF case. That's sharing.

Dude, this kind of obfuscation is what got you into this trouble. Just be clear about what you're doing behind the scenes so that everyone in the game knows what's happening.

As a mod you shouldn't just be enforcing the rules, you're kinda considered to be the kind of player that doesn't exploit their grey areas.

I was very clear about what I did. I didn't lie, deceive, tell half truths or anything. So, maybe stop trying to twist this into something it's not.

I'm not exploiting anything. But, as someone who doesn't play games, you probably wouldn't understand that.

I'm done talking about this here. There clearly weren't any rules broken. Have a discussion in the discussion forum if you like.

[Symmetry]

@crispy, see the CoF case. That's sharing.

Dude, this kind of obfuscation is what got you into this trouble. Just be clear about what you're doing behind the scenes so that everyone in the game knows what's happening.

As a mod you shouldn't just be enforcing the rules, you're kinda considered to be the kind of player that doesn't exploit their grey areas.

I was very clear about what I did. I didn't lie, deceive, tell half truths or anything. So, maybe stop trying to twist this into something it's not.

I'm not exploiting anything. But, as someone who doesn't play games, you probably wouldn't understand that.

I'm done talking about this here. There clearly weren't any rules broken. Have a discussion in the discussion forum if you like.

I have no power whatsoever to twist this into anything it is not. I couldn't if I tried.

It is what it is, and the mods made a decision.

At this point I can only justify my responses, and i do so out of courtesy. I want to justify my posts, and to point out that they were ultimately correct.

You behaved in a dodgy manner, but didn't strictly break the rules.

That seems like a very fair ruling.

[jefjef]

mmm mmmm <cough>.. I have something to say. If it has been mentioned and dealt with already I am sorry but I am a busy leader in Grepolis nowadays.

It's my understanding that in order for a non-volunteer (mod) to take turns for a volunteer (mod) then the mod rights have to be suspended before a non-mod sitter can access the account.

In other words - only mods can sit for mods OR mod rights get suspended for sitting purposes by a non-mod.

Or does this guideline not apply to tourney directors?

Have a happy CC day!

[jgordon1111]

No one took a MODs turn in said game as far as I am aware,non MOD took turn for non MOD.

[jefjef]

No one took a MODs turn in said game as far as I am aware,non MOD took turn for non MOD.

See! This is what happens when I make an ass out of me!

Nevermind me - I'll go hang out in Grepolis.

Carry on!

[jgordon1111]

No one took a MODs turn in said game as far as I am aware,non MOD took turn for non MOD.

See! This is what happens when I make an ass out of me!

Nevermind me - I'll go hang out in Grepolis.

Carry on!

LOL then you have joined an elite club here on CC,most posters in the forums do it regular.

The elite part is you recognized it. You know how many dont.