Guilt by association?

[Alex]

7 minutes ago, namukara said:

 

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

Lots of pics of your boyfriend holding the lengthy handwritten note required by the Verification process?

 

Regardless, if you create multis, you'll be banned as soon as you're caught. It's against the rules, whether you're Verified or not.

[alyster]

So did I understand it correctly? Blink and pooball live in different places (home IP). Assuming if they are different people Alex should see log ins from two different locations at exact same time over longer period of time. Should he not? Furthermore at update times during wars pooball and Blink should have simultanions online times, not switching one at first the other one later. Also bank logs for donations should show up with names. 

[Kevanovia]

Instead of jumping to the conclusion that Blink was a part of the exploit and using that assumption on grounds to ban him, I think the community would have better received the decision if you banned him solely due to him being unverified and not following the appropriate guidelines.

[True King]

5 minutes ago, Kevanovia said:

Instead of jumping to the conclusion that Blink was a part of the exploit and using that assumption on grounds to ban him, I think the community would have better received the decision if you banned him solely due to him being unverified and not following the appropriate guidelines.

Yeah, not sure if being verified with someone means if one cheats; both should expect a ban. (North Korea punishes the entire family for crimes of one, so not to extreme) Or there is a different lesson in this.

[Kevanovia]

4 minutes ago, Noctis Anarch Caelum said:

Yeah, not sure if being verified with someone means if one cheats; both should expect a ban. (North Korea punishes the entire family for crimes of one, so not to extreme) Or there is a different lesson in this.

[True King]

Just now, Kevanovia said:

The reason is unclear still, was it because they were related or didn’t verify did he get the ban. (Would either by themself have been enough)

[Dio Brando]

7 minutes ago, Noctis Anarch Caelum said:

The reason is unclear still, was it because they were related or didn’t verify did he get the ban. (Would either by themself have been enough)

It is a mixture of the reasons stated. The stronger argument against letting Blink play lies with the fact that Pooball wired him funds through an intermediary while both of them were unverified. This is a bannable offense. All the hub-bub about Blink knowing about Pooball's exploits - which I admittedly have been a part of - can not be conclusively proven.

Also, requesting lock @ mods. This topic has run its course.

[Hariff]

I think Pdunny's points were completely overlooked.

2 hours ago, PDunny said:

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.

200+ billion was cheated in and 300 million was given to Blink, as a loan with full proof. Blink took less than 0.0015% of the money, hardly significantly at all. If any foul play was actually taking place then transactions far larger than this would of taken place surely - it just seems absurd to me that you actually think this makes him guilty. He has been in TKR for over a year and we've seen enough pictures of him, his family and children along with even pictures of himself and pooball (no it wasn't a mirror photo) to be certain that he isn't a multi and that he was unaware of what was going on.

2 hours 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.

I don't think Akuryo should get banned for this, but without a doubt there is more reason for him to get banned. Innocent till proven guilty is the system that we use in the modern world, seems like Orbis is in the stone ages regarding this.

Blink clearly just wants to clear his name and reroll, if he was so fussed about money etc he would know there is no hope of getting his nation back and taken more than 0.0015% of the Nova Riata payday. I'm pretty sure he's even willing to show his real id and everything to prove it and so on your part, Alex, i think above all else this just looks bad for you. You have done something nobody was asking for and seemingly few people agree with and have made a dent into clearing up the 200bn+ that entered the market.

If someone wants to clear their name, with no real proof connecting them to the cheating (a loan means absolutely nothing in my eyes at least) and just reroll then I don't see what harm there is in letting this happen.

---

2 hours ago, Alex said:

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.

Surely this has also revealed an exploit to you. Regarding the unverified thing - I think despite them knowing each other it just shows flaws in the system. If two people worked at the same place but weren't aware of it and one of those players started a bank and then the other player asked for money, it would just look like a multi transaction. If anything this has just highlighted the issues, verification isn't a very well known thing, seems that most of the ban appeals in this subforum are regarding it (or the lack of it) so maybe a system to remind people to renew their verification or a tool that tells you to verify if someone else starts playing on your IP when you next log in after they signup/use ip for the first time. Seems like many failures have taken place as surely it shouldn't have even let a 300 million sum be sent and if it was sent then this should have been picked up on, just like the 200bil+ cash injection into the game...

edit 1:

tl;dr if you are going to ban Blink, which you shouldn't then the verification system needs significant reform to make it well known, highly utilised and efficient. Get more moderators/anti-cheat systems while you're at it as 200bil+ being added to the game shouldn't have gone unnoticed.

edit 2: Firstly not defending Pooball. Pooball didn't originally have bad intentions with the exploit from Niz's post that was a relay from him - link below - assuming this is all true, firstly you doubted him on something that you could literally see happen in the game and then when he messaged you again you didn't even reply to him. What kind of precedent does this display to someone who wants to report an exploit if somebody who didn't abuse it was ignored and it wasn't fixed then somebody who threatened to use it as blackmail and posted it all over the forums after sending it to you receives no punishment and gets a ton of attention. Not a very good one. I'm not trying to be overly critical but obviously I will be as there is good reason to be - the fact that such a massive cash injection wasn't noticed is just appalling.

 

Edited June 2, 2019 by Hariff
add tl;dr

[True King]

3 hours ago, Dio Brando said:

It is a mixture of the reasons stated. The stronger argument against letting Blink play lies with the fact that Pooball wired him funds through an intermediary while both of them were unverified. This is a bannable offense. All the hub-bub about Blink knowing about Pooball's exploits - which I admittedly have been a part of - can not be conclusively proven.

Also, requesting lock @ mods. This topic has run its course.

I appreciate the response back, but still think the thread should be locked after a final decision on the appeal by the mods or Alex. (Not just because people will begin arguing in circles if they continue now)

[Guest Elijah Mikaelson]

I do find it funny that so many have come out in support of Blink who without any question got funds from the cheated cash, maybe unknowingly I do not know but he still got them, it clearly states two nations who share an IP can not trade unless verified this does mean though banks also and I bet Blink asked pooball for the loan and no one else this in itself is enough for Blink to be banned, I disagree with Alex banning him  for knowing about the glitch (whatever you want to call it) as there is no way to prove that.

 

[Alex]

The appeal is denied, so I am locking the thread.