Howdy Schnook. I am back. I was accused of Multi accounting by Chrisp, because me and my best friend (this used to be his account but he is on a different site now) happen to log on at basically the same time (Chrisp still doesn't believe me but I am not gonna argue this here) I am fine with some random dude taking what should have been, he did the tactic I told him to do and it worked, so I am gonna do the same thing in the two games I got drawn for Germany in. And thank you for argue the point that I won the game not the new guy.

And I am still telling you, I didn't cheat.

Ohh, Cody wants me to tell you. The site playdiplomacy.com sucks. He is going to keep searching for a new site though

"I was accused of Multi accounting by Chrisp, because me and my best friend (this used to be his account but he is on a different site now) happen to log on at basically the same time"

For some reason, I doubt that's the full story.

I sent the full story to multiple mods now! Plus if there was cheating, it has been stated by figlesquidge best: I noticed the accounts in question are in none of the same games.

My point was I doubt Crisp accused you solely because you 'happen to log on at basically the same time'

Listen all we know is the thing is settled now, I am on my friends account, and he kicked some serious ass in that game!

Apparently from what he is telling me. He played Italy like a card :) I taught him well

BTW, for reference. This is now my account because my friend is on a different site. I used to be Jon Tinsley, the other account that got banned.

Are people allowed to "take over" a friend's account/points, why not start your own account like everyone else?

Do mods have to end games with cheaters the same way for every game or is it that difficult to use a little judgement and if the cheater is at 16 supply centers that game can be drawn with survivors versus if the cheater has one center (obviously not very good at cheating!) then the game can go on?

MM, where do you draw the line?

At a minimum, the banned country should not be allowed to have a new player take over. The integrity of the game is shot.

Again Schnook, if the banned country had only 2 SCs, would there be any harm in letting someone take it over?

Because, as I explained to many mods Dingleberry and MadMarx, Knights Dawn was my original account. It was going down hill and my friend wanted to join so I gave him the account and created Jon Tinsley. About ohh, three days ago both got banned. Knights Dawn was playing said game (Schnook, this game was entirely an honest game. Italy just sucks at telling when he is getting played.) Figle made me a deal saying that if I was multing (which I am not) I could choose an account. Chrisp still thought it was suspicious banned them both, Cody left, this account was doing better, and he lived up to Figles promise.

He was so close to victory too... Budapest and Edinburgh...

Sorry, meant Vienna and Edinburgh

Whatever. You cheated and got caught. Spin it anyway you want.

Sorry. I think this was the reason that the games are paused when people are banned but that also seems to cause problems. I believe in the new version, games will no longer pause when there's a ban, but I also remember hearing about an option set up at the start of the game for whether or not CD's in the game are allowed to be taken over or whether they are simply left to rot.

And Jon, I absolutely do not believe you. You might be good buddies with Cody, but I do not believe that the two of you would be together within minutes on the same computer every day, and at all hours. Every time you gave an explanation, I would point out a flaw in your explanation with some data that I had, and you would return with a revised explanation.

I could either take Occam's Razor and say, ok, this is entirely symptomatic of a multi accounter, or accept your house of cards explanation that stops short of a conjoined twin. I'm only letting you keep that one account because it's typical policy to let you keep one account, though you did continue to deny it. I was hoping that you wouldn't be so naive as to trumpet the fact around the forum, because that was entirely unnecessary, but I suppose that was too much to expect.

i just cant stand the whole double/triple/quadrupal posting that people from that middle or high school do. This isnt a real time chat...its a forum. Make you posts complete so that you dont take up more room than necessary since this site takes longer to open a thread depending on its post count.

@Chrisp you raise an interesting point, are conjoined twins allowed top play?

Allowing conjoined twins to play seems logical. I can't imagine they'd like each other enough to team up.

Yes, but it would require some more substantial evidence, and they'd have to refrain from metagaming. I'd imagine it might be difficult to get in orders without the other one seeing.

Would it be possible to add an option where, when a player is banned, the other players have the option to vote for a draw before the CD country can be taken over? Maybe give them the length of the turn phase to vote, after which the votes are reset and the game is either drawn or play continues?

i don't think CD countries get to vote

That was the point Rador

sorry, i guess you were asking for a longer period?

No, I was suggesting a period immediately after the ban where the CD country cannot be taken over. So, a player gets banned, the remaining players have to decide if they want to continue the game or draw. Only if they choose to continue can someone then take over the CD country.

Ironically, he's at my house until I leave for Cali.