Adjustments to exclude specific games from GOTM results

[Moonsinger]

Originally posted by col
I think that one of the imain ssues here is that staff are reluctant to reveal the full extent of the kind of analyses that GOTM games are subject to. This would make it easier for unscrupulous players to exploit the mechanisms and avoid showing up on the radar. I fully understand why the GOTM staff do not wish to place such evidence in an open forum.

That is exactly why I do not seek to see the evidence against her. I think it would bring more harm than good, just like the reload counter had spoiled some of my fun. Before I came to play the GOTM, I used to reload my game a lot and I do mean a lot. I didn't reload to get a better outcome, but I like to gloat at my handiworks. Every time I had a few minute break from work, I would load my game up to look around...sometimes, I just ordered a worker to plant a tree because it would make the landscape around my capital look nicer, then I saved my game and went back to work. That goes to show how obsessed I was about my game. Of course, if I still do that nowadays, I'm sure everyone would think that I'm a cheater or worst, I would lose my job or it would be the end of my career because I'm so addicted to this silly game. Therefore, I don't have ill feeling toward anyone with the unusual low TPS (turn per session). I'm quite please to hear that Cracker & GOTM staffs didn't make their decision strictly based on the TPS count alone.

Btw, I hope my TPS isn't so bad these days. I have been trying very hard to stay off the radar by playing the GOTM only when I think I have at least 3 hours of consecutive playtime.

Equally players have no means to judge for themselves the guilt or otherwise of the accused and therefore cries of persecution and vindictiveness can be difficult to reject.

In the end, I guess it comes down to - do you trust the GOTM staff to be fair and objective about this or not. Players of the stature of Cracker , Aeson, Creepster, Tzurce, Phil Martin, Borealis, Zagnut, Rufryder and others have not reached their conclusions without a lot of discussion, a heavy heart and much sadness.

Well according to her, she believes that Cracker has a personal thing against her. Therefore, the evidence that presented to the GOTM staffs and all the mods at CivFanatics had been carefully selected by Cracker to make her look guilty. On another word, she believes that Cracker just show them only what he wanted them to see. Well, that sounded like one of those conspiration theory to me; however, I do not think that was the case. For what I have heard so far, the evidence was collected and presented by Aeson, not by Cracker. Since Aeson is one of the most honorable member around here and he has abosolutely no gain in doing this, I can't possibly think that he has anything against her. Therefore, I believe Cracker when he said that it's the saddest thing he had to do and if he had other alternative, he wouldn't have done it.

This is truely a very sad incident that we have to deal with. It has done nothing good but to divide us and to create enemy among us. On one hand, I give Ribannah the benefit of the doubt because let me put it this way: she is either innocent or she is mentally challenged because after all these months and after all these warnings from Cracker, she hasn't changed a bit. On the other hand, I completely trust that the GOTM staffs have overwhelming evidence against her. However, I can help but wondering ... sometimes, a goose does walk like a duck, does act like a duck, does quack like a duck, does dance like a duck, ...., but it may not be a duck. It's truely a very sad situation and I'm really torn and I don't know what else to say.

 

[alamo]

I am amazed at the tremendous amount of tolerance the mods have shown for this topic.

If I were mod I would have resorted to drastic measures by now. Let the interested parties bandy it about in personal emails.

I guess it's not really about civ anymore, but a case study on the tangled web of antagonistic human behaviors.

Even if there were some human mistakes in the process, the mods are showing penitence by allowing this to go on ad-naseum.

Maybe it's time for other people to show some remorse.

There I go - talking to a brick wall again.

 

[Smirk]

Originally posted by Renata
Their reason is the need to keep their methods of detection secret: most of the games have relatively few means with which to prove even blatant cheating, and those means have to be guarded if they're to be of any use in preserving the integrity of the competitions.

I don't buy that line of reasoning. If there are methods to discover and they have discovered them, then there is nothing stopping anyone else from discovering them. I think this case may just be an example of someone doing stuff that perhaps many other can or may do and just not covering her tracks or doing it on a more obvious scale.

I think in this specific case the integrity of the community is more important than the integrity of the detective methods, in that a poor showing of "justice" can hurt more than the any loss that may happen if they were to show real evidence of wrongdoing.

Note I put justice in quotes because this is not justice, this is a judgement of the gotm staff, justice implies certain rights to the accused highest among them being the right to defend themselves and clear evidence of wrongdoing. Neither of these are present so the only real question is do you trust cracker and staff more than Ribannah. The obvious answer to this should be cracker and staff (unless you personally know Ribannah) because she like many who play here are just nicks to many of us. This is the advantage they have and a disadvantage to the rest of us since any one of us could be the next Ribannah. This is what creates dissent and this is what could potentially harm the community.

And secondly if cracker believes what he says that most people play honestly then letting is know the evidence wouldn't matter to the bulk of us. I think knowing the parameters and boundaries would do more to curb cheating, then hiding them and the later entrapment with them.


I also don't like the later statements of what she did afterwards, I can well imagine she is angry, guilty or not. This is natural behavior and to bring this up to support the initial cheating statements isn't just or right. If you treat someone with disrespect it should be natural to get that in return, if you treat someone like a child they will act like a child. My point, cutting off her right to defend herself created what appears to be the largest problem. I see no problem with moderator action on her posts if she stepped over the line. Sheesh, I've had moderator action on quite a few of my posts and I came no where near the line of rules for these forums, so it can't be a question of unwillingness of the moderators to moderate (some in fact seem overzealous in this regard ).

 

[DaviddesJ]

Originally posted by Smirk
I don't buy that line of reasoning.

Honestly, I don't think it matters what you "buy". It's a good and necessary reason.

If there are methods to discover and they have discovered them, then there is nothing stopping anyone else from discovering them.

Explaining exactly what tests you do, makes it much easier for cheaters to avoid those particular tests. It's that simple.

Furthermore, it seems that the staff made it pretty clear over a period of several months what needed to change, and the person in question wouldn't make those changes. I have no way of knowing whether that's because the player was too attached to cheating, and couldn't give it up, or whether that's because the player really felt unable to change for other reasons. But whatever the reasons, it seems clear to me that there was a lot of communication about what the problem was and what needed to be done about it, and the player didn't do that. Insisting that every detail of the staff's methods and evidence be revealed doesn't do anything more except help the people who want to cheat and not get caught.

There are also only about two people posting here who really want to see more evidence. The staff seems willing to discuss the data privately, so I think those two people should take it up directly with the staff.

I think this case may just be an example of someone doing stuff that perhaps many other can or may do and just not covering her tracks or doing it on a more obvious scale.

So what? You're saying they should ignore it because there might be other people cheating too? That makes no sense to me.

 

[whb]

Perhaps the bigger issue with Ribannah is not so much evidence as stigmatisation?

When I first read the announcement from Cracker, two things struck me as important:
* Her name had not been kept secret
(Cracker had not mentioned it, but since a diff of the the game-submissions and game-results on other threads was inevitable, its revelation was bound to happen)
* Cracker had gone to great lengths to describe the seriousness of the situation and that it had been a weighty decision. While this reassured us of Cracker's professionalism, it had the side-effect of making the statement a greater damning of Ribannah's character.

I do not mean to denigrate Cracker or any of the other staff in this -- the first was inevitable because of the submission-confirmation mechanism; the second was a very hard call to make on an emotive issue, and might well have been the right choice to make too (being only an observer, I don't know).

Given that a number of members of the community (eg Sirp, ltcoljt) have become quite so concerned by the seeming harshness of the action however, maybe the following could smooth things a little between the doves and the hawks:

1. Rather than attempt a Hapchetsut-like erasure of all Ribannah's past submissions in the GOTM, simply redistribute the medals. Give her the option of leaving her scores in the past GOTM lists, unranked.

2. Make it a fairly clear policy that continued "extreme luck" (including in guessing the map) can be a reason for rejection of a game from the GOTM as well as cheating, and that players who seem to be unexpectedly lucky may have their games withheld until their luck appears to return to normal.
That is, make it clear that it is the game that is rejected, not the player.

3. Make it clear that after a "cooling-off"/"wilderness" period of a few months, Ribannah would be welcome to quietly return to the GOTM, knowing that her games will be under scrutiny (just like everyone else's, but realising it is only human tendency to pay a bit more stringent attention to her games for a while)

Whaddayathink?

 

[ainwood]

I have a couple of points to add here:

1.) Cracker does a great job, as did Matrix before him. He heads up the team, devises the map for the GOTM, and generally helps to keep us organised and focused. He dedicates ridiculous amounts of his own time to this and for what? For the enjoyment of others. Nothing more, nothing less. Why would he want to ban people? Thats less to play the game that he has worked hard to put together. And it runs the risk of driving people away from the game. We have had a lot of discussion in the GOTM forum about how to keep players in the game, and get more playing. Think about the motives here.

2.) There are lots of ways of cheating, falling in to two (main) categories. One is exploits, which includes the banned exploits from the game, and reloading. The other is 'electonic' means - game file editing. We have developed ways of detecting if these happen, but if we release this info, people get better at concealing it. We will not make cheaters into better cheaters. If they only half cover themselves, then we can catch them. If they learn the art of concealment from us posting evidence against other players, then the whole community is worse-off.

3.) We work as a team. This is not Crackers banning of Ribannah (he was the one that gave her a second chance in the first place). This is the GOTM team's, and in part, the whole of the CFC team's banning of Ribannah. Cracker took as much convincing to finally put the ban in place as the rest of us did. It was not an easy decision for us to make. Given 6 pages of posts on the subject, do you think that the staff has found this a pleasant process?

I hope that there are several points to be taken from this: We, in the GOTM team will take on board peoples' concerns on how this was handled. Hopefully we never have to do something like this again, but if we do we may tweak how it was handled. I (personally) think it was handled as well as could be expected. Ribannah's name was withheld not to create suspicion, but to protect her as much as possible from embarrasment.. secondly, I hope that this ugly incident drives people away from cheating. We do not enjoy looking for cheaters.

 

[samildanach]

Finding it.......difficult.....must try to stay....awake... its no good...someone wake me.....when this thread is closed mmmm..lizzie...and joan too...oh thats good....what the_____?...Catherine get the Hell out of my dream! And take that pervert Ghandi with you!...

 

[Sirp]

If people want to question who to believe, consider which party is attempting to suppress evidence, and which is not. If Ribannah sent some PMs, then clearly it was an attempt to get around the suppression of evidence.

I consider whether or not Ribannah is banned to be of relatively little importance. CivFanatics has the right to choose who does and does not use its services however it wants.

CivFanatics, being a publisher (which it is, since any content carrier which moderates content is considered a publisher), has published material that defames an individual. CivFanatics claims it has evidence that proves these claims, but refuses to publish the evidence. It also refuses to publish replies to the accusations by the refused individual.

This is called defamation. If we were talking about something more serious than a computer game, it would likely qualify as libel, which is an illegal and prosecutable offense. Although it may not be illegal, it is unethical and immoral for a publisher to abuse its power in this way.

Cracker claims that he and the gotm staff are honorable people, but I disagree: honorable people do not commit dishonorable actions. I consider unsubstantiated defamation a dishonorable action, and thus I do not consider the gotm staff to be honorable people.

If a publisher publishes something that is defamatory or potentially defamatory, it should be substantiated with evidence. That the publisher says that it has multiple agents who concur that the defamatory statements are true is of no relevance. That the publisher claims that its agents are 'honorable' people, or that they are employed in certain occupations is of no relevance. That the publisher claims that it has a good reason for not publishing the substantiating material is of no relevance. (Short of having a suppression order from a judge). Whether the publisher is run on a for-profit basis by paid employees or by volunteers is also of no relevance.

It is also considered reasonable to publish a response from the defamed entity, in the same medium as the original material was published.

As such, I do not consider CivFanatics or its agents to be acting honorably or responsibly in this instance. Even if its claims about the person they are defaming are true, it is not responsibly publishing the evidence to corroborate the claims.

-Sirp.

 

[Sirp]

Oh and @Bamspeedy, I have no problem with you sending me private messages. I don't know why some people have big problems with not-explicitly-solicited private messages. If anyone wants to send me non-bulk PMs, that's fine.

-Sirp.

 

[DaviddesJ]

Originally posted by Sirp
Cracker claims that he and the gotm staff are honorable people, but I disagree: honorable people do not commit dishonorable actions. I consider unsubstantiated defamation a dishonorable action, and thus I do not consider the gotm staff to be honorable people.

Cracker said what they are doing, and he said why. He said what he can prove, and what he can't, and all of the reasons for his actions. Any conclusions you draw from the facts he stated are up to you. If you conclude Ribannah is a cheater, or if you conclude that cracker is a conspiratorial dictator, or if you conclude that some people just have too much time on their hands to argue about this stuff.

Whatever else you think, the GOTM staff seems to be clear and direct about what they are doing, and their reasons. Agree with those actions and reasons, or not. But I think it's silly to complain that they are defaming people, and also to complain that they aren't giving out enough inforamtion. Would you really have been happier if they said nothing at all, and just quietly started refusing certain players' submissions and removing their results? I don't see how that's better in any way, than saying openly what they are doing and why.

 

[Sirp]

What's so silly to complain about them defaming people? You don't think being accused of being a cheater is being defamed?

They have claimed they have proof that Ribannah is a cheater but they have not presented this proof. Cracker has told us he has proof, but he has not presented the proof. That is the entire point. Saying that someone is a cheater and that you can prove it, but refusing to actually present the proof *is* defamation. It is abuse of your power as a publisher.

It's not silly at all to claim they aren't giving out enough information: if you publish something that makes defammatory claims about someone, you should also publish proof, that is being an honest and honorable publisher.

Simply banning Ribannah and removing her results is not something I would consider a good idea, but at least then CivFanatics would not be abusing their power as a publisher.

-Sirp.

 

[ainwood]

Remember Sirp, that even in the judicial system (which this isn't), not all evidence is made available publically. Evidence should be shown to the person accused, not to the public at large when the reasons for not publishing it outweigh those for putting it into the public arena.

 

[DaviddesJ]

Originally posted by Sirp
They have claimed they have proof that Ribannah is a cheater but they have not presented this proof. Cracker has told us he has proof, but he has not presented the proof. That is the entire point.

That's exactly my point, too. He's said that the evidence is enough to convince the GOTM staff, and then he's said what they are going to do about that. This is all just true: he's telling you that he's convinced, and he is. Whether you are convinced that the player cheated, is your business.

If he made misstatements of fact (e.g., he said they had spent hundreds of hours investigating; if actually they didn't spend any time investigating but just made the whole thing up) that would be a big problem. But as long as everything he says is true, I simply don't see the problem.

 

[cracker]

Sirp,

I have to acknowledge that you have concerns about process that may be shared by some but that are not shared by others and that in the big picture are not the subject of this discussion topic.

There are limits within the process of tolerance and decorum that can be crossed when you begin to demand changes to the set of actions which have been discussed in great detail and then implemented with great caution and forethought. So far in the dialogue that has progressed, I have seen absolutely nothing that has failed to reinforce to me that the course of action that was chosen was the difficult but coirrect decision to make.

You have a open private avenue available to you to seek additional information if you desire to use that process. So far that has clearly not been your intent.

To emphasize to you the permanent actions that have been implemented in this case:

The games that have been found to be part of the set of invalid submissions have been removed from the records database and will not be restored. Because this issue is part of an ongoing pattern of behavior other games will not be accepted because quite simply this would demand that we continue to take away resources from supporting other members who have not demonstrated the ongoing patterns of conduct that produce invalid game submissions. We can support 60 to 100 additional players or provide additional informational support to an equal number of existing players with the same resources that have been required each month to deal with the ongoing analysis of these increasingly suspect games.

We have tested the process of privately withholding extremely suspect games with this individual and that produced a public tirade and disruption that counteracted any possible concerns for privacy and selfrespect. We tested the process of providing specific guidelines for acceptable submissions and countermanding policies in the discussion forums and these processes again failed with this individual.

In the event that a similar circumstance arises in the future, we will carefully and privately deal with the issue through contact with the individual concerned over a period of weeks and months. If more stringent actions are required it is unlikely that the behavior of the future individuals will require as strong a set of actions as were required in these particular circumstances. I am sure we will use the examples and events of this particular incident to help shape our future decisions.

The current set of actions will remain in place and Ribannah will not be returning to participate with us in any aspect of the games or community functions.

I am receiving strong signals that the issues related to this incident have been well discussed here. Your concerns about demanding a different process have been heard and you have covered each of your points at least one.

I believe it is time for us to move on to the issues that actually form the foundation of why our community exists and to let this unfortunate incident pass into its place in history.

You should step back at this point and make sure that if anyone else has questions or issues that they would like to raise that they should have a free opportunity to do so without contending with further repetition of the points that you have already attempted to prioritize in the discussion.

I you have additional concerns that you may not have yet aired here or if you would like to repeat or emphasize any points that you have already made, you may freely do so to me by email to gotm@civfanatics.net

 

[pman67]

Originally posted by cracker
I am receiving strong signals that the issues related to this incident have been well discussed here. You concerns about demanding a different process have been heard and you have covered each of your points at least one.

I believe it is time for us to move on to the issues that actually form the foundation of why our community exists and to let this unfortunate incident pass into its place in history.

I have to agree with cracker on this. Lets move on.

 

[Capt Buttkick]

I'd just like to make it clear that I for one, am not advocating that the gotm staff should necassarily produce evidence to the public (although I would find that too beneficial). My main point is that if this sort of thing happens again that the implied party is allowed to speak his or her mind.

That said, I'm ready to move on too.

 

[DaviddesJ]

Originally posted by Capt Buttkick I'd just like to make it clear that I for one, am not advocating that the gotm staff should necassarily produce evidence to the public (although I would find that too beneficial). My main point is that if this sort of thing happens again that the implied party is allowed to speak his or her mind.

I think that should be the case too. I think the player should be allowed to post a polite but firm disagreement with the decision, consistent with the forum rules. If such a message is submitted, I hope it can be posted here as a one-time statement.

I don't think the forum rules against insults and personal attacks should be waived, though, no matter how upset the player is.

 

[cracker]

I think that for any future first time offenders, that option can be strongly considered in good faith.

 

[scubagtr]

This is a free site to come and play all we want. Cracker and his team have done an outstanding job in all aspects of this site. I figure, if I don't like what is going on here, then I can leave and play the game somewhere else. It is not the staff's responsibilty to provide proof and argue with each disgruntled member to prove their case.

We choose to play here, meaning we choose to play by the rules and to allow the leadership to make the calls and manage this site.

I now have even more faith in the integrity of this site and its fairness. It takes alot of guts to make the choice that they have done. So I say let's just play the games and enjoy them and don't cheat.

Is Ribannah a cheater, we will never know the whole truth or every correspondence between her and the staff, but obviously something was wrong and now it is fixed.

But I will tell you this, my city "Ahmad de Ribannah" in the GOTM 20 keeps revolting on me, those punks They will never be happy.

Cracker, I support you and the staff, and certainly appreciate the not only the immense time you put into this site for our gaming pleasure, but also your professionalism when dealing with threads like this and the argumentative posters.

 

[Smirk]

Originally posted by DaviddesJ
Honestly, I don't think it matters what you "buy". It's a good and necessary reason.

Why wouldn't it matter? I'm of the opinion that a community creates itself, not any other entity. So everyone in that community is as important as the next, regardless weither they are in the majority or not. cracker and staff do a great job and contribute time to improve and adminstrate gotm, but I am not playing gotm because of any single entity on the staff.

Originally posted by DaviddesJ
There are also only about two people posting here who really want to see more evidence.

I think at the heart dissent on an issue is explicitly stating that it is not a "good and necessary reason". This point in particular has been proven false again and again, in everything from mainframe security to DVD copy protection, secrecy is not security.

The driving question that seems to me to be the main issue is if this happened to you, guilty or not, how would you feel, would you appeciate how it was handled? And if it were handled the same way would you then do similar things to what Ribannah supposedly has done, or what would you do?

Call it coincidence, but if you want to talk about a "pattern of behavior" lets describe the actions of a dictator, control of information and control of justice and laws. Having said that I will just let it lie as requested by cracker and hope, if there is a next time, I can feel better about the proceedings.