Morals of account sitting

[DeletedUser]

Morals of account sitting

I was wondering if you account sat someone because they wanted to join your tribe and you discovered they had no troops but a good village .

Is it immoral to give that information to a tribe mate?, so they could noble them , for having a lack of troops

Would this constitute a breaking of game rules? or is it just a moral judgement?

MQ

 

[DeletedUser]

I do not think you would be breaking any game rules by disclosing that information but morality is in the eye of the beholder. If you sat an account and it had troops that you sent on a suicide cross world journey then had someone in your tribe noble it that would be considered abusing the account and a break of the rules. I have seen 3 accounts banned for using such tactics when the account holder sent in a ticket.

Myself, I would hold onto that information and then give it 30 days or so before I attacked it. If, at that point, the village is still devoid of troops that is the players problem and not a moral issue anymore.

 

[DeletedUser]

I don't think so. If they had troops, they wouldn't be in this situation.

 

[DeletedUser52584]

If they've got a Noble worthy village and no troops in it you're screwing over your tribesmate by not telling him to go noble it. In fact if you could noble it yourself you probably should. There's no excuse for having like 2k (Probably noble worthy, depending on your area because barbs stop growing at 2k) and not having any troops. I mean I make way more money farming than from my mines, so not only does this guy make less money and have no troops to help you, but even if he gets to 10k or whatever he decides to hit before stopping the point whoring, it'll take another week for him to make a nuke in it, like a month to make a defensive village out of it. (unless he's going all spears/hc or something).

If your both at like 500 points and your buddy wants to farm it I still say he should go for it.

I don't think so. If they had troops, they wouldn't be in this situation.

Exactly

ON an added note, I also think you're obligated to leave something in their profile that mentions you were there and I think they're obligated to leave it there since you were nice enough to sit their account

 

[DeletedUser]

You let somebody account sit you, you better know who's account sitting you.
In a previous world, my leader would recruit players from enemy tribes... Part of the recruitment process was to have him sit them, so he'd just log in and start wreaking havoc on their forums. Eventually he got a baron and well... got quite a few disbands in.

I think that is the sitter's fault for sitting the enemy duke to their account. The enemy duke acquires an account this way, why shouldn't he wreak havoc?

 

[DeletedUser52584]

You let somebody account sit you, you better know who's account sitting you.
In a previous world, my leader would recruit players from enemy tribes... Part of the recruitment process was to have him sit them, so he'd just log in and start wreaking havoc on their forums. Eventually he got a baron and well... got quite a few disbands in.

I think that is the sitter's fault for sitting the enemy duke to their account. The enemy duke acquires an account this way, why shouldn't he wreak havoc?

I think he'd be a poor duke if he didn't cause a little chaos. Or a lot if he could.

 

[DeletedUser]

I think he'd be a poor duke if he didn't cause a little chaos. Or a lot if he could.

Their duke surprised us by being active :icon_eek:
So he noticed what was going on, quickly checked to see who was causing it, realized the dude was being account sat and got rid of him... they didn't recover from that though so...

 

[DeletedUser]

I say there is no moral obligation to the player who allowed his account to be sat. If an account is not being played smartly then it is up to the player to get it in shape or risk being nobled out. Additionally, if said player is stupid enough to allow his account to be sat knowing that he has no troops then he can't complain when his account starts getting nobled. He probably wouldn't survive long enough to make a difference in the world anyhow.

 

[DeletedUser]

The rules on account sitting abuse are quite explicit. The sitter is not allowed to purposely destroy or damage an account. However, seeing that an account has no troops in it and telling someone else to noble it is not considered damaging the account. They same sort of information could be learned by simply scouting the player.

As for the tribe wrecking, I personally am against such tactics. I prefer to use the information I can get from the forums, maybe post a panicked post in there, but I don't clear the forums or dismiss players. Not because it's against the rules, because it's not, but because I don't do it.

The issue of the morality of any of these actions is something to be decided upon by the individual. Obviously, not everyone is going to agree as to whether they are moral or immoral. It is up to you to play the game in the way which you feel is right. Be prepared for others to do things you wouldn't approve of, though, otherwise you will just set yourself up in the long run.

 

[DeletedUser]

I don't think so. If they had troops, they wouldn't be in this situation.

Hence my quote to the definitive question posed by the player who opened this thread that can be answered.

"Would this constitute a breaking of game rules?"

"I do not think you would be breaking any game rules by disclosing that information but morality is in the eye of the beholder."

As for you 'lete' players responding you would cause all sorts of havoc and chaos given the opportunity to do so. Would you also peel gum off park benches and 'recycle' it by sticking it in your own mouth and chewing away?

Oh, sorry, that last part relates to the moral issue of the post and is just my opinion.

 

[DeletedUser52584]

The rules on account sitting abuse are quite explicit. The sitter is not allowed to purposely destroy or damage an account. However, seeing that an account has no troops in it and telling someone else to noble it is not considered damaging the account. They same sort of information could be learned by simply scouting the player.

As for the tribe wrecking, I personally am against such tactics. I prefer to use the information I can get from the forums, maybe post a panicked post in there, but I don't clear the forums or dismiss players. Not because it's against the rules, because it's not, but because I don't do it.

The issue of the morality of any of these actions is something to be decided upon by the individual. Obviously, not everyone is going to agree as to whether they are moral or immoral. It is up to you to play the game in the way which you feel is right. Be prepared for others to do things you wouldn't approve of, though, otherwise you will just set yourself up in the long run.

Well clearing the forum is kind of a d-bag thing to do and it'd only happen if someone with privs was stupid enough to let you sit. Problems with this are:

If you let someone sit your account not from your tribe and you dont get privs removed you're an idiot.
If your duke gave you privs and you're too stupid to realize letting someone from a different tribe sit you WHILE YOU HAVE PRIVS is a bad idea then it's the Duke's fault too.

Dismissing goes along those same lines. While I would never do something like this when it happens I'm not disgusted by the player who abused the sitting, I laugh at the idiot who gave account sit to the guy who caused all the trouble.

 

[DeletedUser]

Dismissing goes along those same lines. While I would never do something like this when it happens I'm not disgusted by the player who abused the sitting, I laugh at the idiot who gave account sit to the guy who caused all the trouble.

That I can agree with even within ones own tribe. Before I was part of council on another world I would often sit a Dukes or Barons account. Of course they would temporarily remove the privs from that account until that Duke or Baron ended the account sitting.

 

[DeletedUser]

The rules on account sitting abuse are quite explicit. The sitter is not allowed to purposely destroy or damage an account. However, seeing that an account has no troops in it and telling someone else to noble it is not considered damaging the account. They same sort of information could be learned by simply scouting the player.

I'd agree, logically this is not sitting abuse, the player being sat knew of the risks, if they didnt then they are pretty stupid.
I'm a Duke and i sit current and prospective members, if i dismiss a member for not being up to scratch, not maintaining their account then if my tribe nobles then i could get banned - the only reason for dismissing would be a bad account right?

However i have been told that this is an "underhand and illegal actions" and can result in a perma ban, so based on that i'll have to look at whether i can sit any members ever again. - However the same sourse suggests that a player sitting another player and emptying the village so it can be nobled is inside of the rules...

I'd appreciate a Mod's/Elders view on this, cause its kind of a grey area.

 

[DeletedUser]

I'd agree, logically this is not sitting abuse, the player being sat knew of the risks, if they didnt then they are pretty stupid.
I'm a Duke and i sit current and prospective members, if i dismiss a member for not being up to scratch, not maintaining their account then if my tribe nobles then i could get banned - the only reason for dismissing would be a bad account right?

However i have been told that this is an "underhand and illegal actions" and can result in a perma ban, so based on that i'll have to look at whether i can sit any members ever again. - However the same sourse suggests that a player sitting another player and emptying the village so it can be nobled is inside of the rules...

I'd appreciate a Mod's/Elders view on this, cause its kind of a grey area.

Did you hear that from an in-game mod?

Honestly, what I have heard and seen from in-game mods both in-game as well as on the forums say that it is not illegal to noble someone if you have sat their account and know their troops. It is illegal if you send their troops away and noble them, though. Of course, that is only for active players. If the player has quit, it is ok to use the troops up and then noble the account.

 

[DeletedUser]

I would agree with you. thats why i would like a mod's view on this. cause it appears to be the exact oposite is the case - and that does kinda make sitting a player to ensure they are up to scratch a slight mine field.

Still i hope i can be proved wrong.

Dal

 

[DeletedUser]

Dallock

However i have been told that this is an "underhand and illegal actions" and can result in a perma ban, so based on that i'll have to look at whether i can sit any members ever again. - However the same sourse suggests that a player sitting another player and emptying the village so it can be nobled is inside of the rules...

geez!! a tad harsh for sitting someone to see if they were good enough to join your tribe.
i guess i will be second guessing on sitting anyone ever again .

 

[DeletedUser]

Dallock

geez!! a tad harsh for sitting someone to see if they were good enough to join your tribe.
i guess i will be second guessing on sitting anyone ever again .

Apparently it is a law passed down by god, and could not be challenged...

Dal

 

[DeletedUser]

Wow.. So sitting a player, figuring its basically crap, then later nobling him out means a perma ban? Lol there goes 25% of the TW players. So, my 0,02 on that would be: Total bullshit.

Everybody knows the risks of having somebody you dont know sit your account (or at any time with any player for that matter), but in this case ignorance is being awarded with your attacker getting banned. This would also mean that nobody can ever sit an account to see if they're worth joining your tribe, cause the risk of a ban would be too great if they're not.

Would love to get contradicted on this tho, as i see ignorance prevail over skill if this is the case.

 

[DeletedUser]

Obviously this isnt important enough to have a Mods view.

/me goes off to report W42's dukes and Barons for sitting violations.

......

 

[DeletedUser]

I am interested in a mod's opinion on this, seeing as it is a major part of the game. Anyone with half a braincell could abuse this. when is a mod going to comment on this thread?
To me the rule reads as it is illegal to sabotage someones account whilst sitting them. If once the sitting is ended the account is the same as before the sit and that village goes on to be nobled, then surely the account sitter cannot be held responsible. It is upto every player to make his/her own decisions on whether to be account sat and therefor how can the sitter be held reponsible.