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.
Maybe if this was posted in the
Ingame Moderation Discussion forum, you would see a reply from a mod. Otherwise, let them stay away from this forum. lol
There are actions that a sitter is responsible for, such as coordination violations, as well as when they purposely screw the account up. Anything else is fair game, and if it happens to you, it is your own fault for setting a bad sitter.
a few days ago on W40 I set the next in command (i was duke) as a sitter and a few days later my offensive villages were attacking my other villages and my defensive troops were on the way to someone on the rim because he found out I was trying to join a tribe we were at war with. I asked the people from the tribe I was chatting with not to reply, set the next in command as account sitter and i think a few minutes later got a reply from the people from the tribe saying "kk"
Is there anything against trying to destroying my villages because of this?
Yes, you could report the sitter for abusing your account. However, you are a colossal idiot for not deleting that mail, and frankly, you got what you deserved.
So, to you I say:
