Conquer Club

Posted: **Fri Nov 21, 2008 1:32 am**

What happened to the competition for the last spot on the scoreboard?

Alangary is in the guest usergroup and there is no one with a score under 191

Does anyone know why Conquer Club banned those dozens of people? Some were paying customers too who purchased premium

Posted: **Fri Nov 21, 2008 12:25 pm**

can someone move this to Q&A or perhaps C&A (ahem)... thanks...-6cd

Posted: **Fri Nov 21, 2008 1:10 pm**

Goes under ban for intentionally throwing games.

Posted: **Fri Nov 21, 2008 1:18 pm**

Looks like Twill went through and banned them for potential scoreboard abuse and possibly throwing games to get that low.

Moved to Q&A.

Posted: **Fri Nov 21, 2008 9:31 pm**

Night Strike wrote:Looks like Twill went through and banned them for potential scoreboard abuse and possibly throwing games to get that low.

Moved to Q&A.

I played with alangary on my team...he wasnt trying to get 1 point, he was just that bad. Getting rid of about 100 people because they suck hardly seems right; many of the people paid for premium too, and just because they have less than 200 points doesnt mean that they were abusing any rule. It would be one thing if Twill individually reviewed each case, but judging by the amount of people banned, it looks like he was just abusing his power as an admin in order to get rid of anyone with a low score. Many of the people who were banned were trying to win and probably just never learned how to play

Since when is being a terrible player against the rules?

Posted: **Fri Nov 21, 2008 9:33 pm**

grimreaper.

Lowest I have seen.

*Edit: Had 71 points when he signed up for my tourny, has since gone up.

Posted: **Fri Nov 21, 2008 9:39 pm**

SuicidalSnowman wrote:grimreaper.

Lowest I have seen.

*Edit: Had 71 points when he signed up for my tourny, has since gone up.

has he been band if so that is absurd
but come on we know a few were cheating and trying to get to 1 i saw one a week ago at 1

Posted: **Fri Nov 21, 2008 9:42 pm**

Stephen Wayne wrote:
SuicidalSnowman wrote:grimreaper.

Lowest I have seen.

*Edit: Had 71 points when he signed up for my tourny, has since gone up.

has he been band if so that is absurd
but come on we know a few were cheating and trying to get to 1 i saw one a week ago at 1

How is it absurd? No one, I repeat, no one is that bad at the game. They can win against a cook and earn 100 points. one doodle game... dice... seriously, luck is such a big factor you can't lose 84 games and win none.

Posted: **Fri Nov 21, 2008 9:53 pm**

A long time ago I played with alangary on my team when he had a score of 60ish- it later went down to one point

2008-03-16 18:40:55 - maxatstuy [team]: go there in time
2008-03-16 18:41:20 - maxatstuy [team]: listen, I will give you instruction, interject if you like though
2008-03-16 18:55:35 - maxatstuy [team]: the important thing to note is that there are no cards, do not attack unless I tell you to, ok
2008-03-16 19:03:17 - maxatstuy [team]: deploy on venezuela and fort 2 from egypt to North africa
2008-03-16 19:03:24 - maxatstuy [team]: I will give you oz
2008-03-16 21:42:58 - maxatstuy [team]: build men
2008-03-17 01:56:10 - maxatstuy [team]: if we don't work as a team we will not win so please
2008-03-17 07:41:46 - Fruitcake: Good luck team 2, hi Alan, nice to see you again. I defended you in the forum btw.
2008-03-17 16:06:25 - maxatstuy [team]: Good Luck to you guys as well
2008-03-17 16:06:52 - maxatstuy: Good Luck to you guys too
2008-03-17 21:11:25 - maxatstuy [team]: why did you kill me?
2008-03-17 21:11:30 - maxatstuy [team]: wtf?
2008-03-17 21:11:42 - maxatstuy [team]: you were not supposed to take aussi
2008-03-17 21:11:47 - maxatstuy [team]: you just killed us
2008-03-17 21:12:00 - maxatstuy [team]: and you didn't fortify
2008-03-17 21:12:05 - maxatstuy [team]: bs
2008-03-17 21:12:43 - maxatstuy [team]: why is it so har to listen
2008-03-17 21:12:47 - maxatstuy [team]: hard*
2008-03-17 21:14:38 - maxatstuy: Good Game
2008-03-17 21:15:09 - maxatstuy: My partener just killed me so I think it is over
2008-03-17 21:15:13 - maxatstuy [team]: Bull
2008-03-17 21:19:33 - maxatstuy [team]: you do realize that I am on your team....not green...right?
2008-03-18 11:16:30 - Fruitcake: oh dear....
2008-03-18 16:16:32 - maxatstuy [team]: Do what you want...I would try for Siam not Western Australia though
2008-03-18 16:17:19 - maxatstuy [team]: or Breaking the 9 on South America.....DO NOT TAKE ANY OF MY PROPERTIES THOUGH
2008-03-18 17:00:19 - maxatstuy [team]: Please fortify though, that is where it allows you to move men at the end of your turn...I will really help
2008-03-20 16:00:44 - maxatstuy [team]: nice job
2008-03-20 16:00:50 - maxatstuy [team]: fortify though
2008-03-20 16:01:03 - maxatstuy [team]: that 6 on great britain can be used
2008-03-20 16:29:35 - maxatstuy [team]: forget about sa though, concentrate on oceania
2008-03-20 17:01:17 - maxatstuy [team]: if you fortify either mongolia to china or great britain to western Europe we will be in a much better position
2008-03-20 18:12:10 - Toads: Hey cake, let's double up to try and win the game! Blue is doing that good, no wonder about a Cook ranking!
2008-03-20 22:42:57 - maxatstuy: It is a doubles game
2008-03-20 22:43:25 - maxatstuy: he has been giving you all of his men since the game started
2008-03-21 09:29:29 - Toads: I think that u missed the point.It's not about the 24 hours.
2008-03-21 18:57:31 - maxatstuy: gg
2008-03-21 18:57:59 - Fruitcake: thnx yellow
2008-03-21 19:07:33 - maxatstuy: He never listened to one thing throughout the entire game...and never fortified

He earned his rank...it was not intentional

Posted: **Fri Nov 21, 2008 9:59 pm**

It seems that they've taken my suggestion seriously.

Subject: Rank below cook needed - Waiter - POLL !

Timminz wrote:How about we call the new rank "Perma-banned"? Anyone below, say, 300 points can't play anymore. I doubt you'll find anyone below that, who hasn't been losing intentionally anyway.

Posted: **Fri Nov 21, 2008 10:03 pm**

Timminz wrote:It seems that they've taken my suggestion seriously.

Subject: Rank below cook needed - Waiter - POLL !

Timminz wrote:How about we call the new rank "Perma-banned"? Anyone below, say, 300 points can't play anymore. I doubt you'll find anyone below that, who hasn't been losing intentionally anyway.

Just to clarify, I dont believe that everyone banned was innocent, but certainly not everyone of the dozens of people banned were guilty and I find it wrong that Twill would ban people without considering each case individually. It is a nice depiction of how little he cares about customer rights that he would take away peoples premium membership without even reviewing the games he is claiming were intentionally lost.

Posted: **Fri Nov 21, 2008 10:19 pm**

maxatstuy wrote:
Night Strike wrote:Looks like Twill went through and banned them for potential scoreboard abuse and possibly throwing games to get that low.

Moved to Q&A.

I played with alangary on my team...he wasnt trying to get 1 point, he was just that bad. Getting rid of about 100 people because they suck hardly seems right; many of the people paid for premium too, and just because they have less than 200 points doesnt mean that they were abusing any rule. It would be one thing if Twill individually reviewed each case, but judging by the amount of people banned, it looks like he was just abusing his power as an admin in order to get rid of anyone with a low score. Many of the people who were banned were trying to win and probably just never learned how to play

Since when is being a terrible player against the rules?

It was no where near 100 people; it was closer to 20, if even that many. I have no clue what Twill did or did not review, but each person who was banned is able to submit an e-ticket to be reinstated if they actually want to be here to play the game.

Posted: **Fri Nov 21, 2008 10:26 pm**

Night Strike wrote:
maxatstuy wrote:
Night Strike wrote:Looks like Twill went through and banned them for potential scoreboard abuse and possibly throwing games to get that low.

Moved to Q&A.

I played with alangary on my team...he wasnt trying to get 1 point, he was just that bad. Getting rid of about 100 people because they suck hardly seems right; many of the people paid for premium too, and just because they have less than 200 points doesnt mean that they were abusing any rule. It would be one thing if Twill individually reviewed each case, but judging by the amount of people banned, it looks like he was just abusing his power as an admin in order to get rid of anyone with a low score. Many of the people who were banned were trying to win and probably just never learned how to play

Since when is being a terrible player against the rules?

It was no where near 100 people; it was closer to 20, if even that many. I have no clue what Twill did or did not review, but each person who was banned is able to submit an e-ticket to be reinstated if they actually want to be here to play the game.

Everyone knows that etickets dont work, I was busted and never even received an email or pm informing me of what rules I broke. There were many people busted; more than 20, because 3 people were at 1 point and there was others at 4 etc.

Posted: **Fri Nov 21, 2008 10:45 pm**

Since you obviously don't believe me, there were 12 accounts banned for excessively low points. I just counted them. IF there were any others, they would have been busted for being multis, but I doubt that's the case.

E-tickets do work. If they didn't, you wouldn't have any new usergroups. That Gang of Forum who were busted for posting in private usergroups on each others' accounts were dealt with because someone sent an e-ticket (did you ever see a thread accusing them in the C&A forum??). If you don't like the e-ticket system, propose a new one.

Posted: **Fri Nov 21, 2008 11:01 pm**

Night Strike wrote:Since you obviously don't believe me, there were 12 accounts banned for excessively low points. I just counted them. IF there were any others, they would have been busted for being multis, but I doubt that's the case.

E-tickets do work. If they didn't, you wouldn't have any new usergroups. That Gang of Forum who were busted for posting in private usergroups on each others' accounts were dealt with because someone sent an e-ticket (did you ever see a thread accusing them in the C&A forum??). If you don't like the e-ticket system, propose a new one.

Let me rephrase then; etickets do work in theory, but not when the person reviewing and handling the eitickets does not believe in customer service, as Twill does not.

Posted: **Fri Nov 21, 2008 11:13 pm**

maxatstuy wrote:
Night Strike wrote:Since you obviously don't believe me, there were 12 accounts banned for excessively low points. I just counted them. IF there were any others, they would have been busted for being multis, but I doubt that's the case.

E-tickets do work. If they didn't, you wouldn't have any new usergroups. That Gang of Forum who were busted for posting in private usergroups on each others' accounts were dealt with because someone sent an e-ticket (did you ever see a thread accusing them in the C&A forum??). If you don't like the e-ticket system, propose a new one.

Let me rephrase then; etickets do work in theory, but not when the person reviewing and handling the eitickets does not believe in customer service, as Twill does not.

If an e-ticket deals with a block or bust, it is automatically handled by someone higher up. In your case, Twill made the initial decision, so a review had to be done by lack. Once that took place, Twill told the rest of us mods that it was no longer in his hands and had to be taken care of by lack. So you're right, it's not fair for the judge to also run the appeals court, and that's why things are reviewed by another person. There's no need to accuse people of things when you don't know all the facts around how things actually work.

Posted: **Fri Nov 21, 2008 11:25 pm**

Night Strike wrote:
maxatstuy wrote:
Night Strike wrote:Since you obviously don't believe me, there were 12 accounts banned for excessively low points. I just counted them. IF there were any others, they would have been busted for being multis, but I doubt that's the case.

E-tickets do work. If they didn't, you wouldn't have any new usergroups. That Gang of Forum who were busted for posting in private usergroups on each others' accounts were dealt with because someone sent an e-ticket (did you ever see a thread accusing them in the C&A forum??). If you don't like the e-ticket system, propose a new one.

Let me rephrase then; etickets do work in theory, but not when the person reviewing and handling the eitickets does not believe in customer service, as Twill does not.

If an e-ticket deals with a block or bust, it is automatically handled by someone higher up. In your case, Twill made the initial decision, so a review had to be done by lack. Once that took place, Twill told the rest of us mods that it was no longer in his hands and had to be taken care of by lack. So you're right, it's not fair for the judge to also run the appeals court, and that's why things are reviewed by another person. There's no need to accuse people of things when you don't know all the facts around how things actually work.

I do however know that no justification was ever given, so while my name was libeled throughout the forum with crap about me being a cheat, no evidence was ever presented that would explain why my premium was stripped. Similarly, these people who are now banned are accused of intentionally dropping their score when (I am sure) there was no individual review on each person, so people who my be innocent are now accuse of being a cheater when their only problem was not knowing how to play.

Posted: **Fri Nov 21, 2008 11:27 pm**

This thread seems rather productive at answering these sorts of questions, so I will pose one of my own.

Why did Twill make the busts in the first place? We have 3 multi hunters already, and they deal with secret diplomacy as well, so why not points abuse?

Posted: **Sat Nov 22, 2008 7:32 am**

maxatstuy wrote:
Night Strike wrote:Looks like Twill went through and banned them for potential scoreboard abuse and possibly throwing games to get that low.

Moved to Q&A.

I played with alangary on my team...he wasnt trying to get 1 point, he was just that bad

he sucked on purpose
no one can get below 150 while trying to win games

Conquer Club

Low Ranks

Low Ranks

Re: Max wondering where his competition went

Re: Low Ranks

Re: Low Ranks

Re: Low Ranks

Re: Low Ranks

Re: Low Ranks

Re: Low Ranks

Re: Low Ranks

Re: Low Ranks

Re: Low Ranks

Re: Low Ranks

Re: Low Ranks

Re: Low Ranks

Re: Low Ranks

Re: Low Ranks

Re: Low Ranks

Re: Low Ranks

Re: Low Ranks