Jump to content

Guilt by association?


Blink
 Share

Recommended Posts

Given the particulars here, I don't see why he'd lie if he were innocent.

 

As Alex said, he did lie multiple times here.

 

He's not to be trusted. Case Closed

Edited by Machiavelli
  • Downvote 1

Screenshot_2018-12-26-00-42-07-578_com.discord098.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Dio Brando said:

If it was put through a middle-man, it remains almost the same deal, really. 

The alliance banking rules are very discretionary; let's say, a sister and a brother share a network, are verified, and run a bank together. Should this be strictly forbidden by the rules?

 

The moment you get into alliance banking, the standard of jurisprudence clearly becomes intent. The rules state that "using banks to circumvent trading restrictions on same network" is banned. But is it necessarily an attempt to circumvent? What if, say, Ard14 had granted the loan instead?

.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If people are going to donate money and invest thousands of hours into the game; think people would be more comfortable if bans were an extreme thing & not handed out due to someone not reverifying in time or because you can’t trust cheaters to admit it; so presumed guilty.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Inst said:

The alliance banking rules are very discretionary; let's say, a sister and a brother share a network, are verified, and run a bank together. Should this be strictly forbidden by the rules?

 

The moment you get into alliance banking, the standard of jurisprudence clearly becomes intent. The rules state that "using banks to circumvent trading restrictions on same network" is banned. But is it necessarily an attempt to circumvent? What if, say, Ard14 had granted the loan instead?

No, if they were verified it wouldn't matter. They'd be allowed to send each other things, too.

Pooball meant to grant Blink the loan. If he did it himself, it would have been against the rules. If he gave it via a middle-man, it was circumvention. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Inst said:

The alliance banking rules are very discretionary; let's say, a sister and a brother share a network, are verified, and run a bank together. Should this be strictly forbidden by the rules?

 

The moment you get into alliance banking, the standard of jurisprudence clearly becomes intent. The rules state that "using banks to circumvent trading restrictions on same network" is banned. But is it necessarily an attempt to circumvent? What if, say, Ard14 had granted the loan instead?

I agree intent should be considered. I would like to think on others if they were to appeal a ban due to breaking that rule and they were able to prove that they were in fact not a multi that the ban would be lifted. If this is the reason for the ban and there is jurisprudence for this to be the case than establishing that blink and poo are not the same people should suffice to lift the ban.

 

If the reason for the ban is that Blink assisted in cheating, than just stick with that story. I would think that had Blink truly been an accomplice to this that he would have taken a lot more than 300M and definitely not ask his brother if they had 300M that he could borrow. That just doesn't make sense to me as a reasonable person. I can understand the desire to be strict when it comes to cheating but I also believe that Blink has proven himself as a valuable member of the community, that he and Poo are different people and I think that the fact that he requested a 300M loan from NR is evidence that he likely was not aware of the situation.

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Them being a multi is irrelevant. Being unverified and circumventing trade limitations and this action's status as breaking the rule does not depend on your status as a multi, merely on your being on the same net-work.

  • Like 1
  • Downvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Dio Brando said:

No, if they were verified it wouldn't matter. They'd be allowed to send each other things, too.

Pooball meant to grant Blink the loan. If he did it himself, it would have been against the rules. If he gave it via a middle-man, it was circumvention. 

Verification is a pain in the ass and they forgot to renew the verification.  The intent behind the verification and transmission restrictions is to prevent players from spawning multis and giving each other money. This intent has not been violated.

 

In any case, I'm gone, let the professionals handle the appeals.

1 minute ago, Dio Brando said:

Them being a multi is irrelevant. Being unverified and circumventing trade limitations and this action's status as breaking the rule does not depend on your status as a multi, merely on your being on the same net-work.

Strictly speaking, the behavior is bannable, but does not require a ban given the circumstances. Once again, I'm out; let Schirm or whoever make the appeal. #unbanBlink2019

  • Upvote 1

.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Dio Brando said:

Them being a multi is irrelevant. Being unverified and circumventing trade limitations and this action's status as breaking the rule does not depend on your status as a multi, merely on your being on the same net-work.

For the majority of the time they're not on the same network though, only when they're at work, so it's the being a multi that'important here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Dio Brando said:

No, if they were verified it wouldn't matter. They'd be allowed to send each other things, too.

Pooball meant to grant Blink the loan. If he did it himself, it would have been against the rules. If he gave it via a middle-man, it was circumvention. 

So if verified and I got my brother playing, we could trade, etc. Although if we do a trade after it expires, that is a ban & if he were to ever get tempted to cheat; also a ban?

Would them having renewed their verification matter or make him just as guilty for the association? Thanks for anything you can clarify on that.

So how much did Blink benefit from this multi billion dollar scam he was involved? If got banned for a small loan and that proving he was complicit would be lulz.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, KillzBob said:

from what Alex said the guy broke the rules anyway by trading unverified  sounds simple to me 

Yeah, but they were verified and it just expired. So they already showed proof (unless verification requires none); so seems harsh for that.

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can we please lock this thread? Isn't this supposed to be a no-discussion forum? Let Blink get TKR FA to do appeals in back-channels. More efficient than us talking BS.

.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Inst said:

Can we please lock this thread? Isn't this supposed to be a no-discussion forum? Let Blink get TKR FA to do appeals in back-channels. More efficient than us talking BS.

People talking changed Alex’s way of dealing with it after the first thread to being a lot more heavy handed, so I dunno.

Edit: Although I do realize Alex is needing to make tough decisions, so I don’t want to seem hard on him. Just think if people posted made him go one step to far with the bans, letting him know to maybe step back one of them is good for the game.

Edited by Noctis Anarch Caelum
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If the reasoning is that Blink was aware of the exploit, knew they were cheating and attempted to use it to profit themselves than Akuryo should be banned as well for attempting to embezzle and profit from it as well (by their own admission).

 

If the reason is that Blink is his brother and that was a level of retribution towards Poo, that's a pile of horse manure. 

 

If the reason is that Blink and Poo transferred money without being verified, I think once a verification can be submitted, Blink should be unbanned.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Administrators
54 minutes ago, namukara said:

Your verification procedure is awful, I will not sugarcoat it. I couldn't do it, nobody with any sight impairments could do it, and not going to lie, anybody who for very legitimate reasons doesn't want to share a personal picture with someone they don't know couldn't do it. I'm very willing to set up a voice chat with Alex, Blink and Pooball if all parties wish to prove that they're not the same person should you want that.

Verification is optional. No one is required to be Verified, even people playing on the same network. However, if you're not Verified, you have to follow the Game Rules, which strictly state no form of helping / aiding / trading / etc. is allowed.

49 minutes ago, Inst said:

Put another way, some verified / non-verified players play in the same alliance. The alliance bank becomes extremely ambiguous as cheating; i.e, if both players bank into the alliance bank, and the alliance distributes aid to both of them, is that cheating? In some cases, I know verified players end up being in different alliances to avoid this grey area.

Generally, no. I understand that alliances distribute funds and have policies wherein funds are taxed and redistributed and whatnot.

However, using alliance banks as a workaround to avoid the automatic trade restrictions is a violation of the rules. And we know from the screenshot that they were working together to help each other, while on the same network, un-Verified.

29 minutes ago, Dio Brando said:

No, if they were verified it wouldn't matter. They'd be allowed to send each other things, too.

Pooball meant to grant Blink the loan. If he did it himself, it would have been against the rules. If he gave it via a middle-man, it was circumvention. 

It would have been impossible for him to do it himself given the automatic restrictions. Unless you're Verified, you'll get an error message if you try to withdraw funds from an alliance bank to another nation on your same network. They used a middleman nation to run the transactions because he wouldn't have been able to do so himself. And from the screenshot, we know exactly what the intention was.

  • Upvote 2
  • Downvote 3

Is there a bug? Report It | Not understanding game mechanics? Ask About It | Got a good idea? Suggest It

Forums Rules | Game Link

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not gonna lie, I find the verification procedure seriously concerning from a data protection standpoint. With how easy it is to find waaaaaaay too much information than I'd be comfortable sharing with someone I didn't know from a picture, I don't think it's fair or reasonable to expect people to provide several pictures of themselves.

1 minute ago, Alex said:

Verification is optional. No one is required to be Verified, even people playing on the same network. However, if you're not Verified, you have to follow the Game Rules, which strictly state no form of helping / aiding / trading / etc. is allowed.

Generally, no. I understand that alliances distribute funds and have policies wherein funds are taxed and redistributed and whatnot.

However, using alliance banks as a workaround to avoid the automatic trade restrictions is a violation of the rules. And we know from the screenshot that they were working together to help each other, while on the same network, un-Verified.

It would have been impossible for him to do it himself given the automatic restrictions. Unless you're Verified, you'll get an error message if you try to withdraw funds from an alliance bank to another nation on your same network. They used a middleman nation to run the transactions because he wouldn't have been able to do so himself. And from the screenshot, we know exactly what the intention was.

Have Pooball and Blink merged in the months between enitially verifying then?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, PDunny said:

If the reasoning is that Blink was aware of the exploit, knew they were cheating and attempted to use it to profit themselves than Akuryo should be banned as well for attempting to embezzle and profit from it as well (by their own admission).

 

If the reason is that Blink is his brother and that was a level of retribution towards Poo, that's a pile of horse manure. 

 

If the reason is that Blink and Poo transferred money without being verified, I think once a verification can be submitted, Blink should be unbanned.

Scheduled upvote, and once again, close the damn thread.

.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Administrators
1 minute ago, PDunny said:

If the reasoning is that Blink was aware of the exploit, knew they were cheating and attempted to use it to profit themselves than Akuryo should be banned as well for attempting to embezzle and profit from it as well (by their own admission).

 

If the reason is that Blink is his brother and that was a level of retribution towards Poo, that's a pile of horse manure. 

 

If the reason is that Blink and Poo transferred money without being verified, I think once a verification can be submitted, Blink should be unbanned.

1) I do think that Blink was aware of the exploit. As for Akuryo, I don't think it's fair to punish him based on some Discord screenshots. He had already prepared this huge dossier in Google Drive with all of the evidence of the exploit and how they were abusing it; I'm sure that if he could get pooball to say "okay you know about our cheat I'll send you half now shutup" that would be a smoking gun in the evidence file, it could be added to the dossier, and then reported to me.

Did Akuryo have such just intentions? I don't know. I can only judge based on what happened, and what happened is that he compiled all the evidence and then brought it to my attention. I'm not going to punish someone for revealing an exploit to me.

2) I'm not interested in any retribution towards pooball. I'm not personally upset about this, I imagine it started by accident that someone found this exploit, and then they abused it over an extended period of time which simply isn't fair. I think that the punishment fits the crime here, and I've been very careful to apply my punishments precisely and carefully, not broadly.

3) This is just further justification to be taken holistically that these two players (or one player with multis) was in violation of the rules, and also evidence for the fact that they were working together and helping each other even while they were in different alliances. I think it quite strongly supports my theory that Blink knew that pooball was running the exploit in the first place because it suggests that they were not operating completely separately and independently in any case.

  • Upvote 3
  • Downvote 5

Is there a bug? Report It | Not understanding game mechanics? Ask About It | Got a good idea? Suggest It

Forums Rules | Game Link

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Alex said:

I'm sure that if he could get pooball to say "okay you know about our cheat I'll send you half now shutup" that would be a smoking gun in the evidence file, it could be added to the dossier, and then reported to me.

This was exactly what the plan was from my end. Those resources had to go up in flames, the confession was quite literally the only piece of evidence we didn't own at that point.

  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Administrators
5 minutes ago, namukara said:

Not gonna lie, I find the verification procedure seriously concerning from a data protection standpoint. With how easy it is to find waaaaaaay too much information than I'd be comfortable sharing with someone I didn't know from a picture, I don't think it's fair or reasonable to expect people to provide several pictures of themselves.

Again, it's optional. I don't like the process either, but some people really want to play with their families and friends on the same network without any restrictions. Short of requiring more personal information (a copy of government issued ID, credit card information, etc.) a picture is relatively simple and works.

And again, it is optional. No one has to do it. Two or more people can play the game, from the same network, without ever being Verified. However, if you do so, you can't help each other. You can't trade with each other. You can't use alliance banks to send funds to each other. You can't do anything that would allow a person with multis to gain an advantage from.

  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 4

Is there a bug? Report It | Not understanding game mechanics? Ask About It | Got a good idea? Suggest It

Forums Rules | Game Link

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Alex said:

Again, it's optional. I don't like the process either, but some people really want to play with their families and friends on the same network without any restrictions. Short of requiring more personal information (a copy of government issued ID, credit card information, etc.) a picture is relatively simple and works.

And again, it is optional. No one has to do it. Two or more people can play the game, from the same network, without ever being Verified. However, if you do so, you can't help each other. You can't trade with each other. You can't use alliance banks to send funds to each other. You can't do anything that would allow a person with multis to gain an advantage from.

So if I was to set up a voice chat with both parties and you, would that set your mind at ease they're not the same person? Pictures can be messed with but I don't know anybody with the gift of being able to speak with two voices at the same time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Administrators
Just now, namukara said:

So if I was to set up a voice chat with both parties and you, would that set your mind at ease they're not the same person? Pictures can be messed with but I don't know anybody with the gift of being able to speak with two voices at the same time.

No.

First, setting up a voice chat everytime someone wants to verify would be extremely tedious and inefficient. I have no intentions of setting a precedent that that is an acceptable form of verification.

Second, it's not like by hearing their voices I can confirm their RL identities. If I had a multi, it would be pretty trivial to bug my brother to get onto a Discord voice chat and say a few words to clear me.

These reasons are why the Verification system is set up as it is, and why we require multiple Verifications (again, it would be pretty trivial to buy a friend to take a picture so I could get away with my multi account. It's less trivial to have them do it multiple times at regular intervals.)

  • Downvote 6

Is there a bug? Report It | Not understanding game mechanics? Ask About It | Got a good idea? Suggest It

Forums Rules | Game Link

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Alex said:

No.

First, setting up a voice chat everytime someone wants to verify would be extremely tedious and inefficient. I have no intentions of setting a precedent that that is an acceptable form of verification.

Second, it's not like by hearing their voices I can confirm their RL identities. If I had a multi, it would be pretty trivial to bug my brother to get onto a Discord voice chat and say a few words to clear me.

These reasons are why the Verification system is set up as it is, and why we require multiple Verifications (again, it would be pretty trivial to buy a friend to take a picture so I could get away with my multi account. It's less trivial to have them do it multiple times at regular intervals.)

 

I've got lots of pics of my boyfriend, I'm pretty sure I have enough to verify. Do I get a multi?

  • Like 1
  • Downvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can I invite someone with a referral link if we get verified? Think maybe I will invite my brother who likes these types of games to play if we can play together normally without a sudden risk of ban. Also guessing this an extreme case and normally bans wouldn’t go out over some of these things. Like being late reverifying.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Alex locked this topic
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and the Guidelines of the game and community.