Forcing access to accounts for troop counts

DeletedUser

Guest
Hi everybody,

A short while ago my partner in real life was "told" by her Duke that she "must" allow access to her account for troop count verification.
She pointed out that her account is private and that she would not give him access but that he should have her villages scouted. He then insited that she allow him access and told her that she would be dismissed if she did not.

I am aware, through my own experiences, that there is a current "fashion" on all worlds for this type of thing to happen and indeed it is commonplace for tribes to insist on access to tribemembers' accounts to check on troop levels and when meeting with resistance to then "force" compliance.

Just so that everybody is aware of the rules i am publishing this Support Request question on many world forums:

Hi,
According to this rule:

"Any attempt of phishing will be strongly punished. This includes phishing for account information (like passwords) and ingame information (like troop counts). "


According to this it is against the rules to "force" access to an account by blackmail or threat or by any method?

Thanks for your help,
Blue

Bandit Jul 07,2009 02:07
Hello BlueAvenger,

Yes it is. Blackmailing for anything is illegal.

Sincerely,

Kim/Bandit of the West
Tribalwars Support

In passing: I would also point out that insisting on access to someone's account before they join a tribe is also likely to be considered breaking the rules but as yet i have not checked it out.

I hope that from now on everybody will be aware of the rule and report any such "forcing" by raising a Service Request.
 

DeletedUser

Guest
for recruitment, it wouldn't be forcing since it would be listed. It would be a choice to join or not.
 

DeletedUser

Guest
I agree with the above, its perfectly legal to ask to see someones account through the account sitting system before they join a tribe. Obviously if they ask for the password its illegal, but otherwise its fine. Most good tribes do this.
 

DeletedUser

Guest
In that light, how do you deal with emergency sits once a potential spy is located, this restricts the skill requred for subtefuge if the spies are given an unfair advantage. Useless spies should not be given extra protection.
 

rossihunter2

Guest
i agree with this in general circumstances
i think anything that is allowed in game i.e. account sitting is ok - if there is a slight insistance there it is also ok - as long as it is account sitting and reasonable

i think regular requests or insistances is unreasonable and therefore should be dealt with but just a normal account sit every once in a while should be allowed - this is how a good tribe functions and weeds out the others

anything to do with account details or private information - even out of game private material - or passwords for other games is against the rules

this could also be counted as harrassment - cyberbullying at the extreme
phishing for account details is against the game rules and therefore is a bannable offence

all offences are as bad as each other - everything can have a worse-case scenario - somebody can have their whole account taken or lost under any breakage of the rules - just like in real life - a petty robbery can result in the death of someone else - so therefore the punishments should also be bannable at a moments notice

there should be no arguments against these rules

my opinion - subject to disagreement
but note the word my not anyone else's opinion
 

DeletedUser

Guest
From my post on the W29 forums. Hopefully this should help clear things up.

I found the above statement to be highly vague and misleading, so I feel a further look at what the support request response actually meant is highly necessary.

The OP states that the duke requested "access" to the account in question. This could imply either that the duke wanted the password to the account, or that the duke wanted to be temporarily set as an account sitter.

With respect to the rules, there is a significant difference between requesting these two types of "access". The OP's argument is correct in stating that it would be illegal for the duke to threaten a player into giving a password. The rules state that "Phishing or blackmailing players for passwords in any way is strongly forbidden". This strongly implies, if not outright states, that obtaining passwords through threats of force is illegal. This interpretation is confirmed by the support request, which states that it is illegal "to 'force' access to an account by blackmail or threat or by any method". Obtaining a password by threat is thus illegal, as it is clearly obtaining "access" to an account, and therefore is prohibited by the support request.

However, the OP seems to imply that for a duke to require "access" to an account through account sitting is also illegal, a belief the rules and support request offer scant evidence for. The OP says that "it is commonplace for tribes to insist on access to tribemembers' accounts to check on troop levels and when meeting with resistance to then "force" compliance." Since the OP says that "insisting on access to someone's account before they join a tribe is also likely to be considered breaking the rules", they undoubtedly consider this practice to be illegal. It is indeed commonplace for tribes to do this, obtaining access by means of account sitting. However, I have yet to see a tribe that checks troop levels by obtaining a password. Since this "commonplace" practice is considered by the OP to be illegal, it is clear that this message implies the practice of requiring account sitting by force is illegal.

The rules state that "Any attempt of phishing will be strongly punished. This includes phishing for account information (like passwords) and ingame information (like troop counts)." The rules only mention phishing as being an illegal method of obtaining ingame information. Since phishing is generally done through either staff impersonation or a spoofed web page, the rules in no way state that obtaining ingame information via threats would be prohibited. In fact, the rules state that "Threats and blackmailing of other players are allowed only if the context is entirely ingame". Using ingame threats to obtain ingame information, such as the troop counts an account sitting would reveal, is thus almost certainly permitted by the rules.

Unlike in the case of passwords, the rules offer no special protection against obtaining account sitting via threats, only stating that "It is not allowed to abuse account sitting. Account sitters that intentionally destroy or seriously damage an account they are sitting will be punished". Since obtaining troop counts via account sitting is hardly "intentional destruction" of the account, the rules imply no prohibition of it. The rules permit using ingame threats to obtain ingame information, and the rules give no special prohibition against doing so by demanding an account sitting, in contrast to the prohibitions they impose on demanding passwords. Thusly, the rules in no way imply that it is illegal to obtain an account sitting from a player via ingame threats.

The support request states that "it is against the rules to 'force' access to an account by blackmail or threat or by any method". As demonstrated above, this undoubtedly means it is illegal to obtain a password via threats, as the rules without clarification strongly imply the illegality of this. However, it is nowhere near clear that the illegal obtaining of "access" to an account is meant to include obtaining an account sitting. Since "access" could very well be limited in meaning to obtaining a password, and the rules the offer no evidence that obtaining an account sitting via threats is illegal, it is extraordinarily unlikely that this support request prohibits obtaining an account sitting by threat.

In summary: The rules and the above support request almost certainly demonstrate that obtaining a password to an account via threats is illegal, but utterly lack any persuasive evidence that using threats to obtain an account sitting is in any way illegal. Thus, it is almost certainly still permitted for tribes to require players to submit to account sitting.
 

DeletedUser

Guest
I had a troops count with a member in my tribe-Plague one W37, and a guy just said scout his villages, so I did not force him and just scouted it, because he can report the mail if you so forced any person or blackmail

King Ed
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top