USMC123

IDK what is going on cuz I'm drunk, but i back Hereno 100%

A lot of what you are saying here is why I was like, "either a) tell us more about the methods so we can believe that you know beyond a reasonable doubt, or b) set up an appeals process that is simple for nations affected by this." Because I cannot for the life of me figure out a way they could possibly know with such certainty that someone was breaking this rule without physically witnessing them do it.

Wat. Did you even look at the war screen before posting this? I'm guessing you didn't, which really isn't surprising.

Holy shit shut up already. We all want you to surrender just as much as Margrave.

Retirement is good. Be wary Rudy, lest they pull you back in... ( :( ) Purplemoon, I hope you bring SL back to its former glory and beyond.

In fairness, I wasn't warned for that thread, but I'm sure if I posted another, asking a related question, I would be. Keelah's response was pretty much the same bs they keep saying when someone asks about how they determine that. "It has to be apparent." Apparent to whom? And what defines apparent? And since when does apparent = beyond a doubt? Finally, why are they so adamant to refuse hearing out evidence of innocence. In the case of Walsh, per Xanth (who said he has seen the email from admin himself), Walsh was banned for operating multiple nations, and when Walsh offered to provide evidence the nations were operated by two separate people, he was apparently (see - apparent =/= certainty because I have not seen the communications myself) told he had to wait 6 months to appeal the ban.

Nah. I'm pretty sure he came out.

It may be his game yes, but it's pretty damn !@#$%* to change a rule to open the game up to more people, then turn around and turn it into a honeypot and start blindsiding people with bans, then refusing to even consider evidence that might point to a wrongful banning. e: It is still open, but if it's being handled at all like I've been told Walsh's is, the mods probably just forgot to close it.

I know this has been asked before and the mods and admins have refused to answer, but I believe we deserve some transparency on the procedures used to determine this. There have been several bannings of high profile CN players who have otherwise been upstanding members of this community for this rule violation (see the recent examples of Walsh and Sir Kiloist) and any offers to prove they are not breaking the rules are ignored. If there is to be a rule allowing multiple users to use the same network, we should be informed as to how mods and admins can ban players for breaking it with so much certainty that they are unwilling to consider appeals containing evidence of innocence. I have no idea how game moderators could possibly know if it is one user controlling multiple nations or multiple users controlling their own individual nations without some sort of illegal activity (i.e. hacking webcams, etc.). As it stands, I think anyone can see this rule is difficult to truly enforce, and there should be a easy appeals process for those caught foul of it, and I think the majority of CN members would agree. tl;dr How are you determining if one player is controlling multiple nations? If you are unwilling to tell us, why are you not allowing members to appeal these bans and restoring their nations if they prove they are not in fact controlling multiple nations? How can you enforce this rule with such certainty without physically witnessing a given offender break this rule?

Wow... Honeypots are fun aren't they?

People gave a lot of truth to you here, but this is the biggest one: If you needed to post this thread, you are not ready.

Wtf happened to Walsh?

lmfao. I am out of range for their entire coalition's NS.

Glad to have my name on this. My only regret is being way to big (that's what she said) to declare on anyone. :(

I find it hilarious that Methrage rallies against raiding AA's like GOONS like they are the devil, but is totally ok with backing up and allying with an "alliance" whose sole goal and ambition is to attack everything.

Rest in peace Milton. Have fun being a nerd and not getting nuked as much Sard (still nuke sard)

This is an ooc forum. You don't have fire off terrible propaganda. Lying to a noob is also not nice. Which is what your post is. Lies. Literally nothing is true.

You could have stopped this! Yes you! (But really I doubt it vOv)

I don't remember signing anything... I call shens. (Hi Fark)

Wow. I didn't even know you guys still existed, though that's likely due to my own inactivity and general assumption that virtually all old alliances are dead. E: congrats!

Rape jokes are funny and cool.

Honestly it's a tough choice between Methrage and Tywin. Sir Kindle would have also added some spice to the mix. Voted Methy.

Destroy Kindle.

Kindle is retarded. News at 11

No. What is stupid is looking at this case as a one off event. You entire reasoning here is based on the concept that this is a one off event and an honest mistake. Maybe if the Meth Head Coalition were noob leaders who hadn't been around Bob a long time and had never had something like this happen before, you'd have a point, but they aren't. There is no way Methrage and Co can possibly be this dumb and ignorant after being around here for so long and doing this over and over again.