Kirby pepe and Cereal

[Deleted User - 10528839]

Case by case as many have already said, it's a shame but don't forget the MODS tend to be players as well and everyone knows everyone these days. It is for sure punishable and in this case should be. Best of luck

 

[Mintyfresh]

I found this from an old support ticket



A sat account has to be played for it's OWN benefit, not for the benefit of the sitter, or other players. Sending troops out on long distance trips is clearly not for the benefit of the account.

It is forbidden to ask a sitter to clear a village for nobling when it is against the account owner's wishes. It is forbidden to pass on troop or building information about an account you are sitting, such as telling others that the troops have all been sent out on a long "farm run." Encouraging others to assist in breaking the rules is strictly prohibited, and will also result in a punishment for rules breaking.

Knowingly benefiting from another player breaking the rules will also lead to actions being taken against your account. If you think you have benefited from a breach of rules, you must report this.

Emphasis on the 'old' part of the ticket. Above no longer applies im afraid

Rules were changed a couple of years ago to put the onerous on the account requesting the sit rather than the account sitter for the consequences of the account sitting. Reason being was probably to cut down on the amount of work that the mods are required to do.

Its now the person who dared to trust someone and sent the sit request that is at fault rather than the one breaking the spirit if not the letter of the game rules

Gotta love the 'blame the victim' culture we got going on in TW

 

[Jason.Statham]

@Silens don't bother mate. Just write down their names and don't forget them. This tribalwars community is small, You'll be able to teach them a lesson on other worlds.

 

[ASHOKA1]

Gotta love the 'blame the victim' culture we got going on in TW

I got a bit confused here

Who is the victim here

Account sitter or the poor guy who trusted that account sitter

 

[Deleted User - 10528839]

The account owner, because he is at fault for trusting the sitter, according to the rules

 

[Slacker]

This issue can be easily solved.
Start banning people who gain directly from this behavior, Aka whoever got the village/s that got cleared, the amount of people willing to risk their account getting banned to gain advantage by this will drop to minimum.

 

[Ollee]

Or just do not give account sit to people you do not trust, but who am i to come up with these crazy suggestions

 

[ASHOKA1]

Or just do not give account sit to people you do not trust, but who am i to come up with these crazy suggestions

Fully agree with what you say

However giving some one you don't really know/trust ,account sit is a mistake

And misusing that account sit is a crime

So all I wanted is that person who made a mistake has suffered but the person who indulged in illegal criminal activity should be made to pay for it

Nothing more nothing less

 

[Ollee]

Well while i understand what you are saying, a "crime" in this sense would be breaking the rules, but there are no rules against this. There is even a specific warning message before you type in the name of the account who will sit you that mentions this.

Besides the point Ashoka is a dope character and i am hoping she appears in the next season of the Mandalorian

 

[Silens]

See the thing is simple.he was leader of kirby. If one cannot trust the leader of their tribe to sit, then there is no future of tw.
If it was few years ago, kirby would have been kicked and nobled out by now for this instead of a discussion about possible ban or not.

 

[Farrokhai]

Would be a shame not to take an opportunity to create a precedent here, given that the account sit request was initiated by the account who were, as mentioned, in a position of power indicating trust and coerced them into the sit.

You're warned about fraud over most transactions, does not mean a crime has not been committed should you fall victim to someone convincing you, but as Minty seems to have mentioned it could be from a side of less work for mods.

Shame to see it happen but as mentioned above, if the rules are dead set I guess we can only moan and not make the same mistake.

justiceforsilens

 

[ASHOKA1]

Well while i understand what you are saying, a "crime" in this sense would be breaking the rules, but there are no rules against this. There is even a specific warning message before you type in the name of the account who will sit you that mentions this.

Besides the point Ashoka is a dope character and i am hoping she appears in the next season of the Mandalorian

I understand rules were changed after w60 , when an account sitter disbanded rank 1 tribe few hours before the 90 days period of domination win.

My stance on this has been same throughout last 10 years or so ,more so after w60 when we had to wait another 90 days for the win.

However rules or no rules ,I don't believe it is right on the part of any account sitter to do such things.

 

[SwedishBlueCheese]

Kinda patetic that Olle is sitting here and defending it. Afraid to fight the swedes without pulling shady shit? We havent even started the war yet.

No wonder why a lot of DS members are in cereal if thats the culture you have

 

[Ollee]

I mean what does this have to do with the swedes? I don't even know who or what DS is ..

 

[I-AM-GROOT]

No wonder why a lot of DS members are in cereal if thats the culture you have

You have as many DS members in BITE wise guy.

 

[vekinator]

Or just do not give account sit to people you do not trust, but who am i to come up with these crazy suggestions

If we're going to go in way you suggest, no new member should ever leave sitt to their tribe leader cause there will always be chance they will do something like this and get away with it cause it's not breaking any rules.

It is easy to say ''don't put anyone you dont trust for sitter'' when you play this game for longer time and know who to trust. But what about new players? They should get sabotaged like this just because they put someone as a sitter who is a douche? Good way to get new people in this game gotta say.

 

[Fajah]

Sounds like Kirby been playing with Trex too many times

 

[Fajah]

You dont let just anyone sit your kids do you? Sure if a baby sitter killed your kids the government would prosecute the babysitter. But its not like you get your kid back....

 

[Definitely TreX]

Ticket sent.
Herz and revolutionary army have been reported as well for being party to the fraud.

Flex no zone was a party to this as well directly.
Probably that's how dirty cereal is.No wonder that's how account pushers are.

you begged me for invites and I didn't touch any of your accounts, gtfoh.


Also....

We’re associated to cereal? I didn’t know that
I’m much happier about my rim experience now

 

[Cassius au Bellona]

You dont let just anyone sit your kids do you? Sure if a baby sitter killed your kids the government would prosecute the babysitter. But its not like you get your kid back....

By that logic, you can only trust yourselve because you can kind of can't trust somebody to 100% that your account wont get trashed, kind of ironic to then have a account sitting function with no punishments for screwing an account, when it's tribal wars, and you are dependend on the tribe.

im not saying you should set a random sitter everytime it's needed, im saying that it's awful tw have no rules against this kind of behavior