Jump to content
Alex

2/5/2020 - Major Announcement Regarding Enforcement of Game Rules

Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, Godwinson said:

I can tell you know nothing about Alex's 'policy' on the game. Blink was punished even though he shouldn't have been punished: he had played the game for a long time and benefited from nothing yet his nation was deleted. Speaking about what you know about would help make what you say more accurate. 

still was he not associated with a cheater? A cheater in which he bypassed the game mechanics with someone else sending aid and ON SAME IP

Edited by Sigma

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Codonian said:

I'm one of the few that have seen the most recent conversation you held with NPO in it's entirety, you handled the situation piss poor when it was CLEAR that he was asking you originally if that would be fine, to which you said it would be a mechanics issue, not a moderation one.

You're the god damn admin of the game, your gut reaction should be your official stance. 

I've posted the entire logs of that conversation for everyone to see, publicly. It's linked to in the official report document.

Again, even if that had been an official response, that question was asked in late November, 2 months after GPWC had already been formed and this had already been ongoing.

  • Thanks 1
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Moderation as a Weapon is never a good thing. Get off your high horse Alex. You okay'd their actions. said specifically it was a mechanics issue not a moderation issue.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All of these NPO people commenting. Cry me a river beotches 

I laugh at you ?

  • Haha 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Alex said:

I've posted the entire logs of that conversation for everyone to see, publicly. It's linked to in the official report document.

Again, even if that had been an official response, that question was asked in late November, 2 months after GPWC had already been formed and this had already been ongoing.

Okay so they asked 2 months after they did it... you're responding 5 months after they did it.

Amazing admin skills Alex.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I for one am glad another group was punished for breaking the game rules on so wide a scale, as I was glad when nova riata was smacked or multiple exploiters/cheaters was punished before this.

  • Upvote 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Alex said:

Even the timing of that screenshot doesn't make sense - GPWC was formed in August, that screenshot is from November. Aside from the fact that it's vague and does not state what specifically was going on in GPWC (and had been for 2 months), asking for permissions for breaking the rules after the fact isn't okay either.

So you're the only person around the game, who didn't see what happened the day the alliance appeared? Thousands of players appear, and you never think "I wonder what caused this..." -- when they later reach out, you're not telling them "You know, this really isn't OK..."

 

 

As I stated before, I wasn't a fan from the moment they appeared, as I knew they'd be skewering the balance of the game but this? This is worse. FAR worse.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Codonian said:

Okay so they asked 2 months after they did it... you're responding 5 months after they did it.

Amazing admin skills Alex.

Again, the question was asked theoretically. They didn't state "hey, we've been doing this specific thing, is it okay?"

Surely you can understand there's a difference between hypothetical, vague scenarios and specific events.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I haven't reviewed the information yet but if this is true 6 months seems like a lenient punishment considering the permanent bans that have been handed out in the past.

Why was that not the case here for such massive fraud? @Alex

  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Alexhow about my statements? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Alex said:

Again, the question was asked theoretically. They didn't state "hey, we've been doing this specific thing, is it okay?"

Surely you can understand there's a difference between hypothetical, vague scenarios and specific events.

Surely you can understand that if someone is asking about it, and you give them the "gut feeling" okay, you should PROBABLY get some clarification on the situation then, and not 3 months after that?

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Alex said:

Again, the question was asked theoretically. They didn't state "hey, we've been doing this specific thing, is it okay?"

Surely you can understand there's a difference between hypothetical, vague scenarios and specific events.

So you are saying this was a gut feeling, shouldn't you be held to that 'gut feeling' and be accountable for this 'gut feeling' since as an admin you should be held up to that word as the admin?

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Smith said:

I haven't reviewed the information yet but if this is true 6 months seems like a lenient punishment considering the permanent bans that have been handed out in the past.

Why was that not the case here for such massive fraud? @Alex

Wait, you think they will come back after 6 months? that's cute.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Alex said:

I wasn't responding to a claim about whether their was a violation or not (there was), this was a claim that the $850m / day figure was incorrect.

It was a response to a claim that they were not, in fact, generating $850m / day in taxes for NPO's offshore bank.

I'm sorry, but giving people access to a comic online that has no commercial value is not a rules violation.  If it is a rules violation, then sharing my vacation photos of my trip to Idaho last year or my Star Wars fanfic with members of my alliance exclusively would be a rules violation.  Playing as someone who essentially just farms money and resources for others is not a rules violation--not even if it is being done systematically.  Otherwise, you should be deleting a whole lot more people.

As I said, you are angry about your perception that the spirit of the rules were being violated.  That's no reason to harshly punish anyone.  If it really bugged you, change the rules instead.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Smith said:

I haven't reviewed the information yet but if this is true 6 months seems like a lenient punishment considering the permanent bans that have been handed out in the past.

Why was that not the case here for such massive fraud? @Alex

I am being lenient, because my intention is not to be partisan or to destroy NPO / their coalition.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you Alex for enforcing administrative action

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ahahaha finally, some justice!
Where's the smug now, NPO? ^_^
 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

See alex, my tips are never off.

;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • 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.