Conquer Club

lanyards wrote:Owned.

--lanyards

I never ticked any box nor saw these before joining CC. Saw something about multi's! Anyways, i really doubt that would stand up in a court of law but CC has one thing going for it, who is gonna bother with trying to get 25 bucks back!

It's on the Rules page hulmey, whether you agreed to it or not when signing up.

Night Strike wrote:It's on the Rules page hulmey, whether you agreed to it or not when signing up.

Owned again.

--lanyards

Night Strike wrote:It's on the Rules page hulmey, whether you agreed to it or not when signing up.

I think thats quite naive! In the UK and most developed countries customer's have consumer rights. If its on the rules page but they were never made to acknowledge it when signing up, then CC is acting illegally! IE, tick the box to agree to the T&C's.

lanyards wrote:

Night Strike wrote:It's on the Rules page hulmey, whether you agreed to it or not when signing up.

Owned again.

--lanyards

God your dumb and you know nothing about your rights!

hulmey wrote:

Night Strike wrote:It's on the Rules page hulmey, whether you agreed to it or not when signing up.

I think thats quite naive! In the UK and most developed countries customer's have consumer rights. If its on the rules page but they were never made to acknowledge it when signing up, then CC is acting illegally! IE, tick the box to agree to the T&C's.

Here we go again.

The way I see it, you have two options:

1) Leave the site and sue for your consumer rights (and see how far that gets you).

2) Put some of these ideas down in a coherent manner and make a post in the Suggestions Forum. That's what that forum is for. Use your tirade for something productive and progressive instead of bashing CC (like you seem to do on a weekly or bi-weekly basis).

I feel that I should provide a disclaimer that these comments were more community member based and not moderator based.

Night Strike wrote:

hulmey wrote:

Night Strike wrote:It's on the Rules page hulmey, whether you agreed to it or not when signing up.

I think thats quite naive! In the UK and most developed countries customer's have consumer rights. If its on the rules page but they were never made to acknowledge it when signing up, then CC is acting illegally! IE, tick the box to agree to the T&C's.

Here we go again.

The way I see it, you have two options:

1) Leave the site and sue for your consumer rights (and see how far that gets you).

2) Put some of these ideas down in a coherent manner and make a post in the Suggestions Forum. That's what that forum is for. Use your tirade for something productive and progressive instead of bashing CC (like you seem to do on a weekly or bi-weekly basis).

I feel that I should provide a disclaimer that these comments were more community member based and not moderator based.

Number 1 would very well fit in with the attitude most commonly displayed by this Administration! Number 2 I wouldnt need to suggest anything coz i hardly think its worth $25, I was merely expressing a valid opinon.

i use my tirade to further my clans progress, it drives 'em banana's!

Night Strike wrote:

hulmey wrote:

Night Strike wrote:It's on the Rules page hulmey, whether you agreed to it or not when signing up.

I think thats quite naive! In the UK and most developed countries customer's have consumer rights. If its on the rules page but they were never made to acknowledge it when signing up, then CC is acting illegally! IE, tick the box to agree to the T&C's.

Here we go again.

The way I see it, you have two options:

1) Leave the site and sue for your consumer rights (and see how far that gets you).

2) Put some of these ideas down in a coherent manner and make a post in the Suggestions Forum. That's what that forum is for. Use your tirade for something productive and progressive instead of bashing CC (like you seem to do on a weekly or bi-weekly basis).

I feel that I should provide a disclaimer that these comments were more community member based and not moderator based.

Owned!

hulmey wrote:Number 1 would very well fit in with the attitude most commonly displayed by this Administration! Number 2 I wouldnt need to suggest anything coz i hardly think its worth $25, I was merely expressing a valid opinon.

i use my tirade to further my clans progress, it drives 'em banana's!

If you don't want to propose a fix to your complaints, then stop complaining. Many of us members are tired of hearing complaints about how terrible CC is and how CC is going to get sued for this and that. If you know so much about rights and suits and all of that legal stuff and see somewhere the site may be in risk, then it would be in your best interests to help fix the problem.

Night Strike wrote:

hulmey wrote:Number 1 would very well fit in with the attitude most commonly displayed by this Administration! Number 2 I wouldnt need to suggest anything coz i hardly think its worth $25, I was merely expressing a valid opinon.

i use my tirade to further my clans progress, it drives 'em banana's!

If you don't want to propose a fix to your complaints, then stop complaining. Many of us members are tired of hearing complaints about how terrible CC is and how CC is going to get sued for this and that. If you know so much about rights and suits and all of that legal stuff and see somewhere the site may be in risk, then it would be in your best interests to help fix the problem.

To be perfectly honest i doubt the site would ever get sued for $25 but the rules are full of bullet holes and have no Terms and Conditon's that prevent it from being sued! But again wwhats the point for $25. Im sure lack knows this and thus why he doesnt bother with the T&C's

I realize the thread has gone away from the poll at the top, but I just want to give my vote here since none of the options are quite right. There is no way that I am going to intentionally gain from point dumping, but I say let those that want to. As others have pointed out before me, the way a point system like this one works is that they will eventually be sent back to their true spots. If anyone plays competitive chess, then it is similar to that. A high rated player may have a losing streak, thereby sending a handful of people into higher rankings, but they will eventually settle back to the points that represent their skill level by playing other games.

When I started this thread I was curious as to what the community thought of point dumping, and of the people who profit from it.
I am shocked to read that there is a ban and a stripped premium as a penalty for this. (This was not my intent)
However, I still have not heard anything about what the penalty for profiting from this was. (Tit for TAt as they say.) If a person joins a bunch of games, that they know are point dump games, shouldn't the profit from these games be taken away.? You can`t punish the dumper, and then ignore the people who actively participated.
There have been a few cases in recent history, where a person dumped players points, and that person was not the account owner.
What happens to the people who saw the dump and took full advantage of it? If there is no penalty for the profiteers, it makes it pointless to give out punishment to the dumper.

How can they ban someone for point dumping, (taking away the option of rebuying premium,) but then allow multiplayers to rebuy it time and time again. There is a huge double standard occurring in conquerclub. While spike was banned, others like bBurandt deadbeat just as many games and is now sitting with a score of 22...this is ridiculous. I have no problem with the mods enforcing a rule they find important to the conquerclub community; however, if they are going to give a punishment as extreme as the one given to spikeboat, they should at least show consistency instead of clearly giving preferential treatment to lower ranks who cant do as much damage by point dumping.

if you are curious as to what other example I am referring to, click on the link

http://www.conquerclub.com/player.php?m ... ndt&sort=D

maxatstuy wrote:How can they ban someone for point dumping, (taking away the option of rebuying premium,) but then allow multiplayers to rebuy it time and time again. There is a huge double standard occurring in conquerclub. While spike was banned, others like bBurandt deadbeat just as many games and is now sitting with a score of 22...this is ridiculous. I have no problem with the mods enforcing a rule they find important to the conquerclub community; however, if they are going to give a punishment as extreme as the one given to spikeboat, they should at least show consistency instead of clearly giving preferential treatment to lower ranks who cant do as much damage by point dumping.

if you are curious as to what other example I am referring to, click on the link

http://www.conquerclub.com/player.php?m ... ndt&sort=D

I saw him doing that, and i'm sure that other cc's players also did. But no mods did.

Was he banned and just bought premium back again?

Btw, Spike has contacted me via his girlfriends cc account. He says that he logged in and was unable to use the control panel (inbox etc..). Ever since he has been banned, he has been trying to contact cc to get his situation resloved and is clearly sorry for the deadbeating that he did. Can we get a mods views on his situation please? Other than the deadbeating, he has had no run-ins with cc law and is a very dedicated member to this site. I think that spike deserves a second chance.

poo-maker wrote:

maxatstuy wrote:How can they ban someone for point dumping, (taking away the option of rebuying premium,) but then allow multiplayers to rebuy it time and time again. There is a huge double standard occurring in conquerclub. While spike was banned, others like bBurandt deadbeat just as many games and is now sitting with a score of 22...this is ridiculous. I have no problem with the mods enforcing a rule they find important to the conquerclub community; however, if they are going to give a punishment as extreme as the one given to spikeboat, they should at least show consistency instead of clearly giving preferential treatment to lower ranks who cant do as much damage by point dumping.

if you are curious as to what other example I am referring to, click on the link

http://www.conquerclub.com/player.php?m ... ndt&sort=D

I saw him doing that, and i'm sure that other cc's players also did. But no mods did.

Was he banned and just bought premium back again?

Btw, Spike has contacted me via his girlfriends cc account. He says that he logged in and was unable to use the control panel (inbox etc..). Ever since he has been banned, he has been trying to contact cc to get his situation resloved and is clearly sorry for the deadbeating that he did. Can we get a mods views on his situation please? Other than the deadbeating, he has had no run-ins with cc law and is a very dedicated member to this site. I think that spike deserves a second chance.

I think the ruling came down from Andy- so maybe he could respond here as to why the punishment was so severe.

Not only that, a player has no right to defend himself and also explain his side of the story....YOur just terminated and then people create multi's to explain themselves and thus make the situation worse and oh i told you he was a bad egg from his peers! things could be done more professionally. hope night stirke dont read this and say im negative again!

hulmey wrote:Not only that, a player has no right to defend himself and also explain his side of the story....YOur just terminated and then people create multi's to explain themselves and thus make the situation worse and oh i told you he was a bad egg from his peers! things could be done more professionally. hope night stirke dont read this and say im negative again!

true, if often seems like people get banned without listening to their explanation - for instance mc lor's family, according to him had accounts but he was banned before he could say that.

richardgarr wrote:I noticed tonight that spikeboat decided to point dump. He managed to lose over 1000 points in less then 20 minutes.
I was really surprised to see a few players join many of his games and take advantage of the free points.
I was wondering if those players are proud of there ability to gain points through this manner.
The players chuck D, SlickChrisDruler and OOGA BOOGA, as well as guinniboy seemed to have gained the most from spikeboats point dumping.
Does this not constitute gross misconduct and abuse. Or is this simply a few players who saw an opportunity to gain an unwarranted jump in rank , and they should be applauded for this behaviour?

This seems to be a re-occurring situation on CC. Was wondering what peoples thoughts are on this.

let lack or the mods know, investigate it, if so he was guilty, this is considered cheating

Who cares about points?

mightyleemoon wrote:Who cares about points?

You god Sir should be ashamed of yourself. What in gardstudly are you driviling on about. Points are the most important thing on this site, well , this place would fall into anarchy without them. Good heavens!

hulmey wrote:

mightyleemoon wrote:Who cares about points?

You god Sir should be ashamed of yourself. What in gardstudly are you driviling on about. Points are the most important thing on this site, well , this place would fall into anarchy without them. Good heavens!

are you a multi of KLOBBER?

richardgarr wrote:When I started this thread I was curious as to what the community thought of point dumping, and of the people who profit from it.
I am shocked to read that there is a ban and a stripped premium as a penalty for this. (This was not my intent)
However, I still have not heard anything about what the penalty for profiting from this was. (Tit for TAt as they say.) If a person joins a bunch of games, that they know are point dump games, shouldn't the profit from these games be taken away.? You can`t punish the dumper, and then ignore the people who actively participated.
There have been a few cases in recent history, where a person dumped players points, and that person was not the account owner.
What happens to the people who saw the dump and took full advantage of it? If there is no penalty for the profiteers, it makes it pointless to give out punishment to the dumper.

I don't know how the hunters/admins exactly handle this type of situation, but I'm guessing your best chance to get some sort of penalty handed down would to do some research and fill out a C&A report. In it you should include the player who point dumped, the games, and list all the players with how many points each of them gained. Not only could that save a bunch of time for the admins to track down, but it might lead to more equitable punishments.

poo-maker wrote:Btw, Spike has contacted me via his girlfriends cc account. He says that he logged in and was unable to use the control panel (inbox etc..). Ever since he has been banned, he has been trying to contact cc to get his situation resloved and is clearly sorry for the deadbeating that he did. Can we get a mods views on his situation please? Other than the deadbeating, he has had no run-ins with cc law and is a very dedicated member to this site. I think that spike deserves a second chance.

If he is still playing games and has an issue, he can submit an e-ticket. If he's forum banned, he won't have access to his Inbox (and I believe Control Panel).

hulmey wrote:Not only that, a player has no right to defend himself and also explain his side of the story....YOur just terminated and then people create multi's to explain themselves and thus make the situation worse and oh i told you he was a bad egg from his peers! things could be done more professionally. hope night stirke dont read this and say im negative again!

They can fill out an e-ticket to have their case reviewed. This applies to all players who are busted, blocked, forum banned, or had premium removed.

Night Strike wrote:
I don't know how the hunters/admins exactly handle this type of situation, but I'm guessing your best chance to get some sort of penalty handed down would to do some research and fill out a C&A report. In it you should include the player who point dumped, the games, and list all the players with how many points each of them gained. Not only could that save a bunch of time for the admins to track down, but it might lead to more equitable punishments.

I am still wondering what the penalty was for the people who took full advantage of this?? Surely you cannot expect the person point dumping to fill out a complaint. The admin obviously penalized spikeboat, and that tells me they know of the abuse, so where is the rest of the punishment for those people on the receiving end.?

poo-maker wrote:Btw, Spike has contacted me via his girlfriends cc account. He says that he logged in and was unable to use the control panel (inbox etc..). Ever since he has been banned, he has been trying to contact cc to get his situation resloved and is clearly sorry for the deadbeating that he did. Can we get a mods views on his situation please? Other than the deadbeating, he has had no run-ins with cc law and is a very dedicated member to this site. I think that spike deserves a second chance.

Just to note: spike has been in contact with more than one mod, myself included. He has been directed to make all further comments via the eticket system. I cannot comment on that as I have no access to the etickets. To answer the other big question brought forth: three users were warned for taking advantage of the situation.

lancehoch wrote:

poo-maker wrote:Btw, Spike has contacted me via his girlfriends cc account. He says that he logged in and was unable to use the control panel (inbox etc..). Ever since he has been banned, he has been trying to contact cc to get his situation resloved and is clearly sorry for the deadbeating that he did. Can we get a mods views on his situation please? Other than the deadbeating, he has had no run-ins with cc law and is a very dedicated member to this site. I think that spike deserves a second chance.

Just to note: spike has been in contact with more than one mod, myself included. He has been directed to make all further comments via the eticket system. I cannot comment on that as I have no access to the etickets. To answer the other big question brought forth: three users were warned for taking advantage of the situation.

Who were the other 2 users?