<< Back to Clans Forum   Search

Posts 1 - 9 of 9   
Clan League Ethics Committee Announcement #2: 12/10/2019 17:20:07

Level 63
Unfortunately we can't reactivate the old thread, so we'd like to link it at least, so you're able to check it out.

The Clan League Ethics Panel are currently aware of three unresolved cases that have been brought before us to reach verdict on. This post will be summarising those cases and our verdicts.

    Clan League 7

    Case: 101st (Platinum)
    Incident: Platinum shared his account details with ZeroBlindDragon who was confirmed to have gone on to play CL games on Platinum's behalf.

    Verdict: Our process has always been to uphold the rules that were in effect at the time of any incident brought before us. Significantly, CL 7 rules are not objectively verifiable anywhere in the public record. Further to that the incident was long enough ago that forcing retrospective action also serves increasingly more so as disruption to future CL than some form of late justice. As such, there will be no action taken, and this case considered closed.

    Clan League 9

    Case: Lynx
    Incident: There is an allegation that Hades had the remainder of his CL 9 games played by ZeroBlindDragon or perhaps some other player after Hades shared his account details. All involved in the allegation have denied CL games were played by anyone other than Hades himself, i.e. none have come forward with an admission to these allegations. Without better objective quality evidence that can in any way help to verify the allegations are true, the Panel is unable at this time to exact any punishment on those accused. The connected CL game links around the time in fact show CL games ending in Hades' boots which does the opposite and supports the narrative of Lynx players that Hades continued to play (and miss) his turns as and when he could.

    Verdict: Unless new evidence is brought forward that can support the allegations with some semblance of proof, there will be no action taken, and this case considered otherwise closed.

    Clan League 11

    Case: FCC (Photonic-Symmetry)
    Incident: Photonic Symmetry previously played CL using a different account (pw-ews) and is therefore violating the rule which requires the same account be used throughout CL. Having contacted the player, they did not deny their former identity and their narrative is that they lost access to the old account, hence creating a new one. The last seen dates on the old account back ten showed no activity which would contradict that narrative.

    Verdict: The Panel has decided there was no ill intent, or intended deception, yet technically a rule was broken. At most we could consider minimal punishment, however it was deemed unnecessary for what seems very certain to be a harmless case of lost account details. Providing the lost account remains inactive, there will be no action taken, and this case considered otherwise closed.

    N.B. The rule relating to this incident exists to restrict alts and to preserve the identities of individuals competing in CL. To that end, going forward the Panel proposes to leadership that CL accounts that are 'lost' can and should be reported if a player intends to play under a new account. A live register can be kept which detects activity, and can periodically be checked to confirm the 'lost' accounts have remained inactive. The Ethics Panel has a functioning example of such a register.

As always, these verdicts can be appealed to the Audit Panel.
Clan League Ethics Committee Announcement #2: 12/10/2019 19:57:56

Level 63
Shame on you, platinum. How can I ever take any of your stalling threads seriously now?
Clan League Ethics Committee Announcement #2: 12/10/2019 20:05:58

master of desaster 
Level 66
Lin and plat still got beef? Another uncalled for attack on plat by lin...
Clan League Ethics Committee Announcement #2: 12/11/2019 13:44:58

Level 62
I don't remember giving Zero affirmative consent to be inside me through this account.

That's my defense. It worked.
Clan League Ethics Committee Announcement #2: 12/11/2019 15:30:58

zażółć gęślą jaźń
Level 57
That was the most useful forum post I read this month. Good job guys.
Clan League Ethics Committee Announcement #2: 12/11/2019 23:44:00

Level 58
Actually all of this was resolved like half a year ago already.
Clan League Ethics Committee Announcement #2: 12/14/2019 06:45:26

Level 28
Iirc ChrisCMU mentioned that the panel wasn't informed about that account sharing and probably missed it when ZeroBlindDragon posted it on forums too.

@Plat: I don't remember giving Zero affirmative consent to be inside me
what's this?

Edited 12/14/2019 06:45:41
Clan League Ethics Committee Announcement #2: 12/17/2019 05:28:14

Level 61
I did not say that. I habe been very much out of the loop since i stopped running cl. I try to just let the new people run it and not say a lot.
Clan League Ethics Committee Announcement #2: 12/17/2019 05:35:05

Level 28
I can say %100 that was not allowed in CL7. We actually had a mail discussion with many leaders that discussed people taking over accounts at least 3 times. Plat was in there, I don't see a Lynx person in there, but I had Apollo on my panel for years, I would assume this knowledge was transferred.

I don't know how many forum discussions there were, but I assume many.

The rule was if someone went inactive, another clan mate that had not reached the template limit could take over, but it required letting us know. Mike did this for Latnox in GG that same season, and we were told.


Maybe I mixed up your comment.
Posts 1 - 9 of 9