Ladle Imposter

[Z-Man]

So wait, just I get this straight, Liz went in, impostered another player and actually played for another team? Looks to me like both Hoax and Liz should stop giving each other shit. Really. Dunno which of you is worse, but neither of you is in any position to scold the other.

Someone not involved or invested (i.e. not me, Liz or Hoax) should probably start a discussion/poll thread for disciplinary actions. I mean, at least some rules have been violated, and what are rules worth if you don't enforce them?

[gawdzilla]

Hey, I'm not scolding Hoax, I even said I would have stretched time too and tried to fool you Z-Man if I were him!

[apparition]

So wait, just I get this straight, Liz went in, impostered another player and actually played for another team? Looks to me like both Hoax and Liz should stop giving each other shit. Really. Dunno which of you is worse, but neither of you is in any position to scold the other.

Someone not involved or invested (i.e. not me, Liz or Hoax) should probably start a discussion/poll thread for disciplinary actions. I mean, at least some rules have been violated, and what are rules worth if you don't enforce them?

Yes, I think at least SOMETHING should be done, but what and how?

Are you asking for the community to create explicit rules and actions to be taken if they are broken or just settle the Ladle 35 issues on a one-time basis?

EDIT: Removed a lot of commentary about how to enforce rules. In any case, until rigid and explicit rules (and disciplinary action) are actually created and agreed upon, what can we expect? i.e. thread "What do you expect from your moderators?"

[Word]

proposal: in the future, a team with imposters on board loses by default. if you find that harsh, here's my reasoning:

a team leader is responsible for his team it's completeness. if an imposter infiltrated his team, that's the team captain's fault (because from now on he should know that there are imposters). if the team with the imposter wins, this win isn't legit, right? thus the match doesn't have to be repeated.

problem: unless it is found out before the game, i can't think of any way to let the other team advance belatedly and to keep the brackets reasonable.

consequence: hope that nobody imposters anyone, control your members' identity by checking their IPs/auth; when you've revealed someone as an imposter, kick him from your team and move on.

[Z-Man]

problem: unless it is found out before the game, i can't think of any way to let the other team advance belatedly and to keep the brackets reasonable.

Oh, that part is simple. The game they're currently in is aborted immediately. If it was in its first (alt: second) match, it's replayed, replacing the offending team with the team they last kicked out. Otherwise, the team they're currently playing just advances. I'm not saying the whole thing is a good idea, mind you.

For the rest, well, the tournament is community driven. Rules have been specified. No explicit punishment for violation was, so it is natural to assume punishment would be selected by majority vote of the non-involved teams, or a tribunal is selected. Or you collectively decide to sit on your behinds, shake your fists without actually doing anything this time and vote on how rules are enforced in the future.

[Word]

Or you collectively decide to sit on your behinds, shake your fists without actually doing anything this time and vote on how rules are enforced in the future.

that's what i'd do

[wildcat]

Why not just force players to authenicate for ladles? We already have to do that when we play on G5s server. This would solve the problem of alias teams and imposters.

[AI-team]

yes , that should be added to the ladle settings

[Word]

yes , that should be added to the ladle settings

You mean guidelines, don't you?

[AI-team]

No,
I was referring to "ACCESS_LEVEL_PLAY 15"

[Titanoboa]

ACCESS_LEVEL_PLAY 15

+1

Definitely something to vote on in the next quarterly, unless it's urgent enough to vote for ladle 36
(I might've lost track on when the next quarterly voting is, but I think it's pre-ladle 37 right?)

[fingerbib]

if the team with the imposter wins, this win isn't legit, right? thus the match doesn't have to be repeated.

Agreed. Personally I'm glad we went out in the first round, winning against anyone whilst we had an impostor in our midst would not have felt like a win at all.

Maybe having everyone auth before the match starts is the most simple solution. Ladles quite often run late and I can't see many team captains having time to get everyone into position, lock teams and check all their players IP's to make sure they're not fraudulent before a game is intended to start...unless doing so is much easier than I imagine.

[warclown]

If an impostor is found.. said impostor can't play next ladle. Easy. Done.

[Z-Man]

ACCESS_LEVEL_PLAY 15

Yeah, and even if they don't want to log in for some reason, the team leaders can still /op them if they checked their identity otherwise (IM/irc/being in the same house).

[Hoax]

Well just saying. People are crying over name changing yet theres impostering and playing for more than one team, seems inconsistent. Not like any of your matches were winner deciding finals though
Also I'm pretty sure a majority of the people who really didn't want to have the ladle on the 4th showed up anyway. Just like 'global mods' or whatever id prefer it if we didnt have to vote on the trivial bullshit that in the end no one cares about

Well Hoax I know were like buddies on the grid buttt you bring up a nice point about people playing for more then one team...

[7] .×] Liza --> Teammates: is mkay coming?
[8] .×] Hoax --> Teammates: no cba
[7] .×] Liza --> Teammates: kk
[7] .×] Liza --> Teammates: lets give up this is a waste of time
[7] .×] Liza --> Teammates: isnt it?
[8] .×] Hoax --> Teammates: spose
[7] .×] Liza --> Teammates: okay
[8] .×] Hoax --> Teammates: or u just wana play
[7] .×] Liza --> Teammates: i dont care
[8] Remote admin command by Hoax@forums: start_new_match
[8] New Match
[8] Resetting scores and starting new match after this round.
[8] .×] Hoax: lets just plai
[1] oT|Lizmatic: ?
[2] sine.oT: gl hf
[1] oT|Lizmatic: ok
<more glhf from oT>

That was from z-man chat log. seems to me since you and liza were only people, you were trying to find others, and Im pretty sure Unk lost to pru and this log was from Quarter Finals TX VS OT, also why in the world would liza randomly ask if mkay is coming? OR I could of just failed and now you can make fun of me if thats the case. Just saying its 4am here and I wanted to be Sherlock Holmes

A bit hypercritical if you ask me

I checked the server browser to see if there were any players so we could actually give oT a game & saw mkay in a serv; then I couldn't be bothered to go get him.
Yesterday when speaking to him I realised he'd obviously just finished a match with unk so even if we were like do you want to play for us (if oT didn't mind since he wouldn't have been on the board) he couldn't have anyway.
I will make fun of you later </3

Really. Dunno which of you is worse

Because getting the match restarted with half as many players is the same..Sorry you got put in that position it was a joke that got taken seriously so we just took the opportunity



As for impostering it should be clarified if it's the teams responsibility to make sure their players are genuine or not which I think it should be.
So although liz has been naughty it has highlighted the issue at the small cost of unk feeling a lil dirty and words def getting beat 4 times
G5's fort seems to be the server everyone plays in atm and that requires auth. Making ladle servers authentication only to play wouldnt really be making players go out of their way