Moderators: Multi Hunters, Cheating/Abuse Team





I think the issue is that the system may well be being abused in a general sense. Looking at the ratings left pages for DBo at least suggests that the OP is probably right to call attention to a possible abuse of the system:afroaction wrote:Just because you've received a bad rating from someone, doesn't mean it's abuse.
Rating abuse is so obvious I am just wondering why nobody report him before.
Tags: Secret Diplomacy
Response: we were only two. how can I have secret diplomacy with myself? you're a sore loser
Guess it's too much to askdeathcomesrippin wrote:Please provide at least 5 cases in which you believe there is ratings abuse.


2012-05-13 19:55:23 - DBo: Foe'd
2012-05-13 19:59:46 - SirBurninator: why foed?
2012-05-13 19:59:53 - SirBurninator: what did I do?
2012-05-13 20:00:59 - DBo: Attacking neutrals
2012-05-13 20:02:16 - SirBurninator: why can't you attack neutrals? that is the only way to take territories...
RDM21Tags: Secret Diplomacy
Response: we were only two. how can I have secret diplomacy with myself? you're a sore loser
Game 106009172012-02-27 05:27:31 - RDM21: gg
2012-02-27 05:37:23 - RDM21: oops... now you gotta work for it
2012-02-27 05:37:35 - RDM21: gg!
2012-02-12 07:41:33 - RDM21: GL
2012-02-12 07:58:08 - RDM21: GG DBo


There's currently nothing in the guidelines that normal peeps can look at to know how many examples need to be given. It's one of the secret guidelines that only mods and people who look at how this stuff gets dealt with can know about.agentcom wrote:I wonder if the OP will be happy now that donelladan did his work for him? Or does it have to be a moderator to do what the OP should have done to make him happy?
Thanks donelladan. Nicely done.
That's true that it's not in the guidelines. But usually someone pretty quickly comes along and explains it. That process I understand. What I don't understand is why so often there is hostility to the people that point out the need to back up the complaint that the ratings were actually undeserved/abusive. I just don't get why that's assumed to be the C&A team's job. I'd rather have them out hunting multis anyway!Symmetry wrote:There's currently nothing in the guidelines that normal peeps can look at to know how many examples need to be given. It's one of the secret guidelines that only mods and people who look at how this stuff gets dealt with can know about.agentcom wrote:I wonder if the OP will be happy now that donelladan did his work for him? Or does it have to be a moderator to do what the OP should have done to make him happy?
Thanks donelladan. Nicely done.
Cheating an Abuse Guidelines
You might have more traction than me on actually posting what's required of complainants.
How long does it take to look at a page of ratings? Some people are unneccessarily bureaucratic just for the sake of it. Click on the accused name, click on ratings left, job done.agentcom wrote:That's true that it's not in the guidelines. But usually someone pretty quickly comes along and explains it. That process I understand. What I don't understand is why so often there is hostility to the people that point out the need to back up the complaint that the ratings were actually undeserved/abusive. I just don't get why that's assumed to be the C&A team's job. I'd rather have them out hunting multis anyway!Symmetry wrote:There's currently nothing in the guidelines that normal peeps can look at to know how many examples need to be given. It's one of the secret guidelines that only mods and people who look at how this stuff gets dealt with can know about.agentcom wrote:I wonder if the OP will be happy now that donelladan did his work for him? Or does it have to be a moderator to do what the OP should have done to make him happy?
Thanks donelladan. Nicely done.
Cheating an Abuse Guidelines
You might have more traction than me on actually posting what's required of complainants.
That's all I was commenting on.
Do you genuinely believe that it isn't in the C&A team's job to make clear what is or isn't a valid complaint? I'm talking even before we get to the stage of the C&A team looking into it or dismissing it?agentcom wrote:That's true that it's not in the guidelines. But usually someone pretty quickly comes along and explains it. That process I understand. What I don't understand is why so often there is hostility to the people that point out the need to back up the complaint that the ratings were actually undeserved/abusive. I just don't get why that's assumed to be the C&A team's job. I'd rather have them out hunting multis anyway!Symmetry wrote:There's currently nothing in the guidelines that normal peeps can look at to know how many examples need to be given. It's one of the secret guidelines that only mods and people who look at how this stuff gets dealt with can know about.agentcom wrote:I wonder if the OP will be happy now that donelladan did his work for him? Or does it have to be a moderator to do what the OP should have done to make him happy?
Thanks donelladan. Nicely done.
Cheating an Abuse Guidelines
You might have more traction than me on actually posting what's required of complainants.
That's all I was commenting on.
This is one of the reasons we want the OP to do some of the leg work. They make a complaint and don't or won't back it up with facts. Say it only took five minutes to look up the facts. My question is why didn't you do that in the first place? Is your five minutes of time worth more than my five minutes of time?Campin_Killer wrote:That took about 5 minutes. But hell, I guess you cannot be bothered to look
True it isn't in the guidelines but then again how many people really read the guidelines? Common sense would be provide some proof when making a complaint.Symmetry wrote:There's currently nothing in the guidelines that normal peeps can look at to know how many examples need to be given. It's one of the secret guidelines that only mods and people who look at how this stuff gets dealt with can know about.agentcom wrote:I wonder if the OP will be happy now that donelladan did his work for him? Or does it have to be a moderator to do what the OP should have done to make him happy?
Thanks donelladan. Nicely done.
Cheating an Abuse Guidelines

Evil Semp wrote:This is one of the reasons we want the OP to do some of the leg work. They make a complaint and don't or won't back it up with facts. Say it only took five minutes to look up the facts. My question is why didn't you do that in the first place? Is your five minutes of time worth more than my five minutes of time?Campin_Killer wrote:That took about 5 minutes. But hell, I guess you cannot be bothered to look
Just because he has a page/s of all 1's doesn't make it abuse. Maybe he only rates the real bad players.
True it isn't in the guidelines but then again how many people really read the guidelines? Common sense would be provide some proof when making a complaint.Symmetry wrote:There's currently nothing in the guidelines that normal peeps can look at to know how many examples need to be given. It's one of the secret guidelines that only mods and people who look at how this stuff gets dealt with can know about.agentcom wrote:I wonder if the OP will be happy now that donelladan did his work for him? Or does it have to be a moderator to do what the OP should have done to make him happy?
Thanks donelladan. Nicely done.
Cheating an Abuse Guidelines
Most folk provide some proof- the question is how much should be provided, surely?Evil Semp wrote:This is one of the reasons we want the OP to do some of the leg work. They make a complaint and don't or won't back it up with facts. Say it only took five minutes to look up the facts. My question is why didn't you do that in the first place? Is your five minutes of time worth more than my five minutes of time?Campin_Killer wrote:That took about 5 minutes. But hell, I guess you cannot be bothered to look
Just because he has a page/s of all 1's doesn't make it abuse. Maybe he only rates the real bad players.
True it isn't in the guidelines but then again how many people really read the guidelines? Common sense would be provide some proof when making a complaint.Symmetry wrote:There's currently nothing in the guidelines that normal peeps can look at to know how many examples need to be given. It's one of the secret guidelines that only mods and people who look at how this stuff gets dealt with can know about.agentcom wrote:I wonder if the OP will be happy now that donelladan did his work for him? Or does it have to be a moderator to do what the OP should have done to make him happy?
Thanks donelladan. Nicely done.
Cheating an Abuse Guidelines
Fair enough.Symmetry wrote:Most folk provide some proof- the question is how much should be provided, surely?Evil Semp wrote:This is one of the reasons we want the OP to do some of the leg work. They make a complaint and don't or won't back it up with facts. Say it only took five minutes to look up the facts. My question is why didn't you do that in the first place? Is your five minutes of time worth more than my five minutes of time?Campin_Killer wrote:That took about 5 minutes. But hell, I guess you cannot be bothered to look
Just because he has a page/s of all 1's doesn't make it abuse. Maybe he only rates the real bad players.
True it isn't in the guidelines but then again how many people really read the guidelines? Common sense would be provide some proof when making a complaint.Symmetry wrote:There's currently nothing in the guidelines that normal peeps can look at to know how many examples need to be given. It's one of the secret guidelines that only mods and people who look at how this stuff gets dealt with can know about.agentcom wrote:I wonder if the OP will be happy now that donelladan did his work for him? Or does it have to be a moderator to do what the OP should have done to make him happy?
Thanks donelladan. Nicely done.
Cheating an Abuse Guidelines
Common sense doesn't say that 5 examples are needed in some cases. Why not 2? or 4? or 6?
The guidelines should be their to guide people. If they don't read them, fair enough, but if the info on how to make a valid complaint is absent, then it it seems unfair to dismiss complaints once they have been made on the basis of unwritten rules that the complainant had no way of knowing about.
Indeed, it makes the complainant look bad, whereas they have stuck to the strict guidelines as laid out.

I agree, but I do think that the rules should be clear as to what constitutes proof. The sad fact is that a first time complaint will think you have magical powers, and of course there's nothing in the guidelines that talks about proof.Evil Semp wrote:Fair enough.Symmetry wrote:Most folk provide some proof- the question is how much should be provided, surely?Evil Semp wrote:This is one of the reasons we want the OP to do some of the leg work. They make a complaint and don't or won't back it up with facts. Say it only took five minutes to look up the facts. My question is why didn't you do that in the first place? Is your five minutes of time worth more than my five minutes of time?Campin_Killer wrote:That took about 5 minutes. But hell, I guess you cannot be bothered to look
Just because he has a page/s of all 1's doesn't make it abuse. Maybe he only rates the real bad players.
True it isn't in the guidelines but then again how many people really read the guidelines? Common sense would be provide some proof when making a complaint.Symmetry wrote:There's currently nothing in the guidelines that normal peeps can look at to know how many examples need to be given. It's one of the secret guidelines that only mods and people who look at how this stuff gets dealt with can know about.agentcom wrote:I wonder if the OP will be happy now that donelladan did his work for him? Or does it have to be a moderator to do what the OP should have done to make him happy?
Thanks donelladan. Nicely done.
Cheating an Abuse Guidelines
Common sense doesn't say that 5 examples are needed in some cases. Why not 2? or 4? or 6?
The guidelines should be their to guide people. If they don't read them, fair enough, but if the info on how to make a valid complaint is absent, then it it seems unfair to dismiss complaints once they have been made on the basis of unwritten rules that the complainant had no way of knowing about.
Indeed, it makes the complainant look bad, whereas they have stuck to the strict guidelines as laid out.
Is it that hard for cammin_killer to post some proof to get us started? If I go to the ratings left page a look at two rating and find nothing wrong with them how many more should I look at? I look at three ratings and find one that I don't agree with how many more should I look at. Just because killer doesn't agree with his rating that doesn't automatically make the other ratings abuse.
We do the same thing with SD. Tell us why you think there was SD. The third player only attacked me. Maybe with the drop you were in countries he wanted.
I guess what I am saying is "don't just throw poop on the wall and see how much will stick."