Play The World

[Stormbinder]

Originally posted by Cohen:
I doubt Norfleet modifies the map to win ... he's strong too on Mosehansen games, where he've no access to the map!

However this is only my opinion ... I simply don't have fun winning by cheating, and usually expect the other to think like me (oh ... tell me I'm still a child ) ... well I know isn't always that way, but this gaming community seems serious.

I am not in your game but honestly I wouldn't be very surprised if Norfleet would do something along these lines. In our recent game "Ice and Fire" Norfleet's behavior was highly unethical, to put it mildly. He was also caught several times on straight lying and was forced to admit it. Frankly I was rather shocked since I didn't expect it from him.

[ May 24, 2004, 05:37: Message edited by: Stormbinder ]

[Zapmeister]

Norfleet's behavior was highly unethical, to put it mildly.

Gad, that's a pretty serious allegation, Stormbinder. Can you be more specific about the "highly unethical" behaviour?

If Norfleet has been cheating, and that can be confirmed from more than one source, then I may feel obliged to drop out myself.

[Norfleet]

Originally posted by Graeme Dice:
I'm dropping out actually, since I have no way of ensuring that you haven't modified the map file to your advantage, and I've just read in this thread that you've admitted to modifying the map file.

It's a known fact that the world map is known for its tendency for really crappy, nearly unplayable start locations in its default state.

All I did was go through and nostart the provinces that were stuck on islands and other such locations, same as the < 4 neighbors pass on Cradle. There is, in fact, nothing suspicious about this, since I PUBLICLY DECLARED THIS. If I was really going to cheat, why would I bother telling you about it? Be serious here.

The alternative being that some poor chump would surely wind up with an unplayable start, and in a game of this size, we'd be calling mulligans forever.

[Norfleet]

Originally posted by Zapmeister:
Gad, that's a pretty serious allegation, Stormbinder. Can you be more specific about the "highly unethical" behaviour?

I can clarify this quite simply in detail that Stormbind probably isn't entirely aware of.

The story is simple: Having created an alias a long time ago, I was recently drawn there by the declaration of a new game for "expert" players.

So I entered it using that preexisting board alias. Stormbind, of course, would like to believe I was pumping him for information, unknown to him, on the chat....as if I'd actually care that much about his secret plans. If he had bothered to tell me anything substantive, I'd have even offered him suggestions on how to improve his play. Now, of course, he'd like to throw a hissy-fit over the matter, as if I was somehow wrong to enter a game under an alias. He calls this circumstances surrounding it "unethical", although nowhere in my ethical code does is this behavior mentioned as such.

[Stormbinder]

Originally posted by Zapmeister:

quote:

---

Norfleet's behavior was highly unethical, to put it mildly.

Gad, that's a pretty serious allegation, Stormbinder. Can you be more specific about the "highly unethical" behaviour?

If Norfleet has been cheating, and that can be confirmed from more than one source, then I may feel obliged to drop out myself.

---

I stand by my words, and there are plenty of witnesses for it. I even have logs to prove it.

However I didn't say he was cheating (he could not possible do it since he was not directly in our game, his "Apprentice", as he called him, was).

I said his behavior was highly unethical and that he lied and admited it later. It's not the same as cheating though. But my respect for him as a player evaporated, so the cheationg would not surprise me as well. However as I said I have no idea if he actually cheated with map in your game or not.


I can provide all details completed with logs if you really like but frankly I would not rather dive into that sad mess again. We had 2 pages of discussion in our game related to it already on GoneGold MP forum, "Ice and Fire" thread.

[Zapmeister]

So I entered it using that preexisting board alias. Stormbind, of course, would like to believe I was pumping him for information, unknown to him, on the chat....as if I'd actually care that much about his secret plans. If he had bothered to tell me anything substantive, I'd have even offered him suggestions on how to improve his play.

Hmm, I see (I think). If my understanding of the situation is correct then I would also regard the behaviour as unethical. Correct me (and I'll apologize) if I'm wrong:

1) You were in a game with Stormbinder in which you used some name "A"
2) You conversed about that game with Stormbinder using a different name "B"
3) Stormbinder had no way of knowing A=B and you would have been aware of that, and could easily have rectified it ("I'm Norfleet, BTW")

The claim that you would have helped him if he'd said anything substantive is irrelevant, because:

1) It is only your judgement at this point that nothing substantive was in fact said.
2) Even if you had offered help which may or may not have helped him, you would still have had knowledge which you could not avoid (even if subconsciously) considering in your game plans.

All of this could simply have been avoided by a declaration of your identity.
Again, my apologies if I've misunderstood the scenario.

Now, of course, he'd like to throw a hissy-fit over the matter, as if I was somehow wrong to enter a game under an alias. He calls this circumstances surrounding it "unethical", although nowhere in my ethical code does is this behavior mentioned as such.

Well, judging from your signature and other comments, I'd say your ethical code leaves out lots of things. Many people regard this kind of behaviour as dishonest, at the very least.

[Norfleet]

Originally posted by Zapmeister:
1) You were in a game with Stormbinder in which you used some name "A"
2) You conversed about that game with Stormbinder using a different name "B"
3) Stormbinder had no way of knowing A=B and you would have been aware of that, and could easily have rectified it ("I'm Norfleet, BTW")

I could have. But it would have defeated the point of the exercise. I planned to save that for later.

The claim that you would have helped him if he'd said anything substantive is irrelevant, because:

1) It is only your judgement at this point that nothing substantive was in fact said.
2) Even if you had offered help which may or may not have helped him, you would still have had knowledge which you could not avoid (even if subconsciously) considering in your game plans.

Perhaps, except that I only asked him questions I already knew the answers to anyway.

All of this could simply have been avoided by a declaration of your identity.
Again, my apologies if I've misunderstood the scenario.

You have somewhat misunderstood the scenario: Namely, that the entire point of the exercise was to observe how they reacted to an alleged third party employing my strategy, and how quickly recognized it would be.

Many people regard this kind of behaviour as dishonest, at the very least.

I am not the only person to have entered games under an anonymous alias. I do not see anything unusual about this.

It is also irrelevant to the matter at hand, namely, the accusations that I have somehow modified the map to my advantage: Why would I bother doing that, then make any mention that the capability for even doing such a thing exists?

More importantly, Graeme wrote a post which immediately followed this declaration, which strongly suggests he was aware of this from the start: He joined anyway, and now suddenly, at the Last minute, he's decided to complain about it. If I didn't know him better, I'd say he was deliberately trying to trash the start of the game. But surely that isn't the case, and this is simply a misunderstanding that will be cleared up shortly and we can get the game rolling.

Otherwise, we may have to restart the game sign-up to drop him, rather than having a run-away AI.