So how 'bout those Mets?

[Cainehill]

Yeh. Someone definately doesn't believe in "innocent until proven guilty", or "beyond a reasonable doubt". After all - hypothetically, it'd be more likely that the host or the person with the master password was doing any digital manipulation of game files.

Or that a bombastic flake with an obsession and a grudge was framing someone. All that is hypothetical - but juries have acquitted on less grounds.

Speaking of people with obsessions - Stormbinder, stop sending me private Messages. I have told you this before : anything you want to say to me, say in public instead of whispering in my ear.

[Zapmeister]

Someone definately doesn't believe in "innocent until proven guilty", or "beyond a reasonable doubt".

I certainly believe in "beyond a reasonable doubt", and that's where I find myself. The notion that Stormbinder would have the ability (no offense, Stormbinder) or motivation to fabricate files framing Norfleet is laughable.

What bothers me is the fact that Stormbinder has done so much work, resulting in such great benefit (assuming the popular conclusion is correct, which as I said seems beyond doubt) and yet is getting vilification instead of thanks. Puzzling and disturbing.

[Gandalf Parker]

What bothers me is the fact that Stormbinder has done so much work, resulting in such great benefit (assuming the popular conclusion is correct, which as I said seems beyond doubt) and yet is getting vilification instead of thanks. Puzzling and disturbing.

Are you really interested? Consider this...
Maybe its because most people dont feel that the end justifies the means. In this case the means would be the tone and threads we all had to put up with. Norfleet may have been the one in the wrong, but the way such things were presented left more people on Norfleets side than on Stormbinders.

[archaeolept]

well of course ends justify means. what else could?

which isn't to say that the general implied point about tone and presentation on storm's part isn't w/out a lot of merit.

otoh, we might wonder why there was seemingly so little interest on the part of "the powers that be" (Moderators, beta testers, etc...) in the norfleet phenomenon - its not like there wasn't a tide of complaints about the overpoweredness of clams, of VQ's, of castling; all originating specifically in these games. No one thought that where there was so much smoke there might be fire? It has been months since those first examples of norfleetian excess. But the response of many was just to insist that there couldn't be a problem, whether the problem turned out to be norf or game mechanics, and to not even pursue any investigation into the source of all these complaints upon their own initiative.

storm may well have been distasteful in his public pursuit of norfleet, but in the end his hounding actually gave results.

personally, i'm glad to know that castling and clamming are likely not such big problems as they originally appeared to those many of us who experienced their supposed effects first hand.

Considering this is coming from someone who 'Banned' Norfleet months ago, I would have to venture a guess that your mind was made up long before any 'proof' or 'hard work' was given. The problem with the bandwagon is it's always ready for more members, on their way to other places.

well, i believe zapmeister has actually played games w/ norfleet, unlike some others.

I'd have to say if Norfleet was cheating he either A.) Didn't give much credit to the people he was playing (considering his paranoia I'd not bet on this) or B.) Didn't care (that follows in with a conversation I had with him previous). Since it was such an obvious and easily trackable game that he was 'caught' in, on another's server, without hidden access to the game files, master password enabled, score graphs enabled, and others. If he really wanted to keep any sort of cheating on the down low, it would be uncommonly stupid to do it in an extreme that was not reasonably explainable with file proof.

Take it for what it's worth, but I doubt this 'situation' occured without cooperation from the perpetrator.

well, i believe zapmeister has actually played games w/ norfleet, unlike some others.

So have alot of others, though you may not care to consider that.

Also, if one cheats in one game, that must mean you cheat in every game from your very beginning to the very end, yes? Or more appropriately, if one has cheated, that means he has always cheated regardless of game(s)?

I'm not saying that he couldn't/wouldn't. But I doubt it could be said for every, *single* game.

[archaeolept]

I've played many games w/ norfleet. Unlike some who talk, I have experience of it. I have no vendetta against him, and actually have some fondness for him, but these apparent excesses are not new. your speculation that he set himself up to be caught, or something like it, is tenuous at best. perhaps he got overconfident, or bored, or took a calculated risk; or, most likely, to my eyes, could not not do it.

I've played games with him too, one under this name and a few under other names. Does that mean I can say that his clamhoarding and castling tactics are more/less abusive because I've seen them firsthand with/without cheating? Or does that mean that all those arguements from people who felt things overpowered are no longer valid at all because of the perpetuator was cheating and thus any arguements against him/them are tainted by cheating?

If he could not, not do it, as an obsession, I could see that maybe happening. Though from a logical perspective such a thing would more than likely be done in minute degrees in order to avoid detection from other players if he intended any serious sort of cheating.

For some reason, Calculated Risk doesn't seem fit when you consider the sheer numbers presented and their unfeasibility of explaining if one gets caught. Though it could be certain that overconfidance could play a part.

[Gandalf Parker]

otoh, we might wonder why there was seemingly so little interest on the part of "the powers that be" (Moderators, beta testers, etc...) in the norfleet phenomenon - its not like there wasn't a tide of complaints about the overpoweredness of clams, of VQ's, of castling; all originating specifically in these games. No one thought that where there was so much smoke there might be fire? It has been months since those first examples of norfleetian excess. But the response of many was just to insist that there couldn't be a problem, whether the problem turned out to be norf or game mechanics, and to not even pursue any investigation into the source of all these complaints upon their own initiative.

I thought you were smarter than that. Norfleet was in fact a well worn topic of discussion in the dominions developer forum. And in the shrapnel Moderators forum. Norfleet had sanctions against him and a watchful eye on his actions well before Stormbinder started being so loud. You sound like a high school kid who is mad that he doesnt know what goes on in the teachers lounge.