@Frank

So you're saying you would punish people arbitrarily based on who you personally like?

Exactly, Abge. Exactly what I hear.

I don't like Frank, all he does is post these horrible ideas. Can he be banned?

I just think the goal of this site should be to grow the game of Diplomacy as best as possible. In general, it does a great job of that, thanks to the hard work of guys like Oli, Alderian, Kestas, Figle, Ghost and Abge.

In this specific case, and a few others recently, I think the bizarre tone of the forum and overeager new mods harm the site as a place to enjoy and discuss the board game.

the mods are far from over-eager. If anything, they are under-eager

Have you ever been on any other online gaming site, Frank? These mods are as un-eager as any moderators I've ever been around. Compared to most sites, these guys are anarchists. They do practically nothing. It's a free site to say what you want. All you have to do is stick to the rules on the page.

I disagree obviously frank I'm sure you would enjoy it if every game you joined you were playing against one person controlling two countries. The mods keep that from being the case. I would rather see any single player banned no matter how fun he was to play.

@Abge: no, thats not what I'm trying to say. And I think you know that's not what I would do. I just think you should evaluate a player's worth more holistically and not just on whether he follows a narrow set of rules. I just don't really understand the point of banning "sarg". Even if his IP is banned, isn't that fairly easy to circumvent? (im asking honestly, i dont know much about computer stuff)

I also don't think we should ban the player I talked about earlier. I was just bringing him up as an example of the fact that multi-ing is hardly the biggest problem the site faces and that multiaccounters arent even the users who cause the most harm. Does that make any sense?

And if that were the reality of the situation, then I would agree with you. This was not a witch hunt by a power hungry mod. It was unanimous decision by the entire active mod team, including kestas. He was given numerous attempts to correct his behavior and refused to do so at every opportunity. He was a cheater. Honest players lost their time, points, and rankings because he refused to stop cheating at every opportunity he got.

@bo: no i've never been on any other online gaming site or internet forum. so maybe i don't have the best frame of reference here. Also, I have enjoyed nearly every game I've played on this site, including the 50+ that I've faced multis.

I haven't. You don't understand how pissed off I get when I think someone is a multi around me. It really sucks, especially in gunboat when you can do nothing about it.

I don't want to arbitrarily ban people. Simple as that. Each ban should be categorized, and not something like "Too dumb."

Frank, do you understand how silly you sound? This is a site on which people play diplomacy. How can you not understand that cheating at the game is just unacceptable?

But again, you avoid my question. WHO sets the standard for what is good?

@Frank

I've dedicated hundreds of hours volunteering to this site. By your standards, have I earned the right to cheat yet?

Yes abge exactly.

@abge: But does banning stop him from cheating more than not banning him? Lets say he makes a new account...within a few weeks, he'll be able to start playing in tourneys, passworded games, etc. On the other hand, if instead of banning him, you reset his GR and told everyone what happened, then he would forever be excluded from tourneys, leagues and good games probably. And he would always be mocked on the forum. Isn't that a better punishment?

To your second question -- no, there's no such thing as a right to cheat ex ante. But ex post, I think one's contributions to the site should be considered in the case. Obviously you have more information about this specific case but do you disagree with that premise?

But he will get banned, so that he countiually has to start over. He won't be able to finish any games, so the mangled joy of a cheater will be lost

Example: lets say you caught some guy who had just joined cheating in twenty or thirty ancient med live games over the course of a couple weeks. Wouldn't that be an easier decision to ban than if you caught Lando cheating?

Frank, if he is publicly shamed from enjoying the finer aspects of the site (tourneys, leagues, live games, etc), why would he not just make a new account in that case? It's the same as banning, except that he could theoretically bolster the new account with his shamed one.

Sorry, FD, didn't see your earlier question. The mods should set the standard.

Also they caught Lando cheating. He's reformed. Bad example, Frank.

what a surprise, all the best players on the sight are or were cheaters. I guess folks that don't cheat just have to deal with it.

Dubmdell: ideally you wouldnt let him make a new account. Not sure how possible that is, though. Anyway, I think players have certain attachments to their username and the social capital they've built up with that username. I don't think sarg would choose to start from scratch.

Frank, I was as new as new gets when I had my other account banned, and they gave me as much of a chance as they would have anyone. They said that I could either own up to it and get off with an appropriate punishment for the situation or say I didn't do it and allow them to investigate deeper. Of course, I did it, so I owned up to it. It's no different for any new player as it is an old player.

I am sure a lot of people here have broken the rules at least once (same boat as bo somewhat, though a little bit messier, won't go into details)

and what if you disagree with the mods? What if the mods think that not joining games should be bannable?

@dubmdell: I know, I was sort of making a job re: the Lando thing. But replace Lando with Barn3tt or rdrivera or jesuspetry and ask the same question.

Frank, the public shaming, if it led to his being kept out of invitationals et al, would ruin whatever social capital he had built up. There wouldn't be social capital to keep him attached to that username.

@Frank, I don't understand your claims of overeager new mods. Do you really think Abge, Fortknox, or Ye would let me or any other moderator go on a witch hunt or a banning spree? We all take a lot of time to discuss our actions and what kind of policies we are enforcing on the site. Kestas himself reviewed this case and agreed a ban was necessary. Over 150 games played on accounts besides his main one, dozens of games with his multi's. This has been happening since he entered the site, and is probably the worst case of cheating to date.

"But does banning stop him from cheating more than not banning him?"

Yes, it does.


"lets say you caught some guy who had just joined cheating in twenty or thirty ancient med live games over the course of a couple weeks."

No, because they do not necessarily know better, if they don't care after being confronted then they will be removed, but there is no reason not to give them a second chance if they are willing to reform. Players who have been here for a while know the rules, if they break them it's not because they don't understand, it's because they just don't care. Especially when it's the 2nd or 3rd time being caught.

@FD: I dont understand your last question. Is that some sort of zany hypothetical? If you disagree your mods, you should voice your opinions and hopefully get a discussion started that leads to positive change.

I know abge and kestas are very reasonable guys, and I hope that they will at least think about some of these issues going forward.