If you have a genuine concern email the mods at [email protected] (I think...it should be in the FAQ).

Alright. Also, Tantris, do leave me alone. You were quite rude in our past encounters and I'd rather not have things devolve into a slapfight in the forums. Thank you.

It's not like you and SohDjinn don't repeatedly join games and do the same thing I suspect this multi-accounter of doing.

Oh wait. You do. v_v

I don't believe I was rude to you at all. Just said I was looking forward to future games with you. You stopped playing a game, and CD'd on purpose with no proof and no real accusation. Kind of childish. It lessons the credibility of this accusation by a fairly large amount. And, I do look forward to future games with you in them.

Even if you have evidence that people join the same game and side with each other and yadda-yadda unless there is definitive proof, which the mods can provide that the people in question are multi-accounters it's very possible that they are just good friends who like to play diplomacy together. If you see the people in question sign on at very similar times or perhaps have very close User IDs then by all means raise hell, but until then please refrain from pointing fingers.

good friends who play together and become allies in their games is also against the rules. If you enter a game knowing you are going to be allies with another person in the game, that is bad.

While this meta-gaming debate is controversial and still goes on to this day it is not against the rules but instead, according to the FAQ's, "...Usually frowned on, but is acceptable in some cases and not seen as being as bad as multi-accounting". It is allowed but not really wanted or accepted by many. In any case it's not against the rules.

Weather the proof is rather light or overwhelming, the way to act is the same: email us at [email protected].

I do expect there to be "some" reason to be suspicious, don't waste our time.

I don't see any true difference between multi-accounters and friends who always ally. If friends are to play together they should make make private games or play annonymous with their friend (without telling each other who they are of course). Other than that, it will always be an issue.

It's also frustrating that there's no consensus on a rule for this, the mods really just use their good judgement, which is why the FAQ is vague. It is impossible for us to tell if a pair of accounts is a multi-accounter or people who are close enough to play from the same place, and the more two or more people play from the same place the harder it is to draw the line.

e.g. With Xapi's recent bannings I got an e-mail from someone who offered an explanation for why he might have been thought to have been a multi-accounter, but actually isn't. So in general we probably ban more people than are actually multi accounters I feel (but that those people should expect us to reach that conclusion and warn others of relations with people they're playing with)

I have to clarify that this person was, in the worst scenario, sharing a computer with someone who actually was multiaccounting.

I contacted the main account for explanations wich never came, and that was the reason for the ban.

This wasn't 14 people sharing a computer, this was 12 multis and at best two other people sharing IPs with the multi.

It is hard to draw the line, but I think the mods usually are very careful, so I don't think there's been many cases of wrongful banning.

This was a hard case, wich I consulted with other mods, and still screwed it up :P. I don't consider it likely to happen more than once.

I sent the mail with the names of the people and the 'evidence' I had found. Likely, it wasn't enough, but at least I reported the issue. It was the first time I've reported anyone, or even used these forums.

In the interest of fairness I will, of course, refrain from mentioning the names of those I suspect here. That's just rude.

Thanks PuppyKicker, that's the right attitude in these cases.

THAT is certainly appreciated.

vamosrammstein is a multi!

Vamosrammstein is currently sitting an account...

... I was joking Bob :P

Oh do we get to form a lynch mob again?:]

Damnit, that was ME who wanted to know if a lynch mob was forming.

Xapi; wasn't saying you screwed up btw, or that screwups can't/don't/mustn't happen, just that it's often hard to call

I have decided that because everybody is either a multi or metagaming, the only safe way to play is to create six new accounts...

I'll play a game with you, but only if you ally with me unconditionally and allow me to have all your SCs without questioning me:]

That may get tricky though because then how can I give one of my other accounts all of my SC's? Maybe we can just take turns giving each other SC's in games because that way the mods won't figure it out. :P

I am experiencing the same problem in this game gameID=14509.
Mauldinado, gfrid played all his games together and as allys.
Then Mauldinado allways wins.

They may be different persons, but it's impossible to play against people like this.
It destroys the concept of the game, when we play against friends in real life.

I agree, I play diplomacy often with my friends, (hard copy) and lots of the fun is in playing against people you know, not just resorting to the lowest common denominator. One of my best friends and I often stab each other because we love to beat each other, I think relentless alliance hurts the spirit of the game.

However, You also know how much you can trust someone you know, and that can make them valuable assets.

"I have to clarify that this person was, in the worst scenario, sharing a computer with someone who actually was multiaccounting.

I contacted the main account for explanations wich never came, and that was the reason for the ban.

This wasn't 14 people sharing a computer, this was 12 multis and at best two other people sharing IPs with the multi.

It is hard to draw the line, but I think the mods usually are very careful, so I don't think there's been many cases of wrongful banning.

This was a hard case, wich I consulted with other mods, and still screwed it up :P. I don't consider it likely to happen more than once."

I will vouch for the fact that:
1. There was clearly multiaccounting going on
2. There was no way whatsoever to distinguish the accounts of the two other people.

Forming an unbreakable or significantly stronger alliance with somebody you know simply because you know them is cheating. I normally contact people who are doing this asking them to stop, and then check up in a month or two's time to make sure that they actually have.

I have 32 games registred on my account.
I'd just like to share my experience with multiaccounters/metagamers.

Game1
I am playing Germany
England/France are metaplayers, with a history of games together
One player has quite a lot of points, the other are new
Result: The game is cancelled in 1904 something

Game2:
I am playing Russia
Turkey/Italy are metaplayers, with a history of games together
Both these guys had less then 100pts
Result: Game ends in a 4 Way Draw (I/T/R/G)
We accused them of metagaming, but in the end, the game was played to conclusion.

Game3:
I am playing Russia
Turkey/Austria are metaplayers, with a string of games together.
One player has just over 100pts , the other less
Result: Still playing

So I have had three experiences with this behaviour.
I find it as truly bad manners, as it wastes the time of seven people, including , of course , the "winners"

"good friends who play together and become allies in their games is also against the rules. If you enter a game knowing you are going to be allies with another person in the game, that is bad." -- Tantris
Certainly, for games started at the beginning, or for games joined in certain neutral situations, this is very bad. However, there are cases where any player who would join a game would try to ally with you, be they an invited friend or not.
On a related, but different, note, is inviting a friend to take over CD's in your games considered wrong? Obviously, I am assuming there is no intention to unduly ally here.