Asunto: Season 68

There's no cheating here, no price boosting, no-one has gained an advantage and the admins have knowingly let it go for 12 years. A ban here is excessive.

Why do you assume so many things without knowing them? How do you know the admins "knowingly let it go"?

They were checked years ago for using same IP, they apparently said that they were different people using same IP.

Now after x years admins saw it as suspicious that user X writes from user Y account about his own team, using same IP on both teams - because it looked as if he forgot which account he was logged on. So they did a check on him/them, saw that he/they made 30+ transfers on 3 accounts while having same IP. That's a clear violation of rules, can't be much clearer.

As for "there's no cheating, no price boosting" - that's another thing that you just assume. We only see 30 completed transfers, but it is likely that there were much more bids to rise the price of players and simply a different team ended up buying the players and in 30+ cases there was nobody to overbid.

Anyway... 3 grown up men, using same IP address for 10+ years, logging on in eachother's houses at 11m+... come on.

And you talk about me making assumptions...

No offence but how would you know without full details Camus? If I sell a player nobody wants what would it sell for a new player comes in....£1? I think it's fair to say that £1 is normal price for players like that. None of those were sold for that, it was £11, £1,001 so there were inflated prices but minimally so it was not picked up. However, the fact is that it's in the rules that you cannot transfer players ion you have the same IP address and they have done it a huge amount of times. I really reiterate that I fought for the teams and to not be banned, but when Admins told me there were multiple internal transfers it really did destroy my argument. I have no interest in losing players in England....the more active the better. :)

I don't, no-one does and that's my point. Isn't it meant to be presumption of innocence? I can see multiple scenarios where someone just got banned for no good reason.

Again I'll make the point. You said they were investigated, but nothing was done over 12 years. So either

A) Someone decided there wasn't a problem
or
B) The admin are so incompetent that they looked at these clubs with the same ip but didn't bother to check transfers in over 12 years

Either way, if you don't apply the rules, you are giving tacit approval for them to be broken
"I've spoken to the staff, I've bought these players and nothing has been done. Guess it's OK". Hence the multiple transfers.

Admin duties are reactive rather than preventative. There has to be something to react to, and that's dubious reported transfers, or transfers that are significantly higher than you would expect them to be. None of these transfers would have been flagged up as there's nothing daft numbers wise from what I can see without seeing player skills. I think had there been a small number of transfers it would have been slap on the wrist. The other thing you can't see though is how often they bidded on each others players and didn't win the auction. The biggest problem with these is the duration of time and the volume.

This also speaking as ex admin like wdp (although my stint much shorter time than wdp).

If someone is looking to cheat, they're not going to effectively report themselves.
Are admin able to see who bids on who, but not necessarily wins the bid?
Is this case being judged retroactively? I'll give you an example

If Team A bids on Team Bs player, but they're not currently on the same ip, is that breaking the rules? Does it then break the rules later on if they do use the same ip? Do admin even have longterm data?

This specific case needs to be explained because it was allowed to go on for a long time without any action.

Admins can see full bid history. At one point mods could aswell although that was removed.

If Team A bids on Team Bs player, but they're not currently on the same ip, is that breaking the rules? Does it then break the rules later on if they do use the same ip? Do admin even have longterm data?

The rules state that if you share IP once, then don't buy each others players. Couldn't say how far back login data goes but I know there is a bit that shows common IPs.

So

1) Why ban now? What specifically was done this time that wasn't done before?
2) Have all 3 broken the rules? Because it seems like it was only 1 of them

Swamp were under the impression that everything was fine. The admin had been spoken to. They weren't trying to hide anything.
Banning all 3 is the nuclear option when a clear warning would have been far more appropriate.

And I've got to say, I'm far from happy that this has been done by some nameless admin who doesn't have the balls to show themselves. Admin need to be accountable.

The only thing I don't get in all this. You've got swamp who is married to someone related to shakespeare and Fenland is swamps cousin.

What are the actual odds of that setup and all living together for 12 years or so?

It's what borkos was getting at I believe.
(editado)

My dad has been using my Internet for 5 years. He doesn't live with me. People have weird setups.

I already explained, they were investigated before for shared IP addresses. The fact is that one posted about another team, this then raised suspicion and it then became obvious they had made many internal transfers. Admins look into things once something is raised or through a suspicious transfer as an example.

Oh and the last transfer between the sides was 14/08/2024. Again not a normal figure.
(editado)

So it turns out that our admin is an arrogant jumped up little authoritarian arsehole. No wonder he doesn't want to show himself here.

Don't you visit family and maybe use their broad band? I know I'm close enough to my family to do so.....

Correct... but back down a little...you have a position to respect ;)

I don't give respect when I don't get it. It no longer matters, I'm pretty sure I'll be quitting within the next 24 hours.