Subject: Rules

Maybe only somebody known personally by yourself can give you this security and still i keep some dubious


I know some guys personally and I would bet a lot that they won't do anything else.
Why should they do so?

Man, not all the users are evil and want to cheat...
Yes, not all, but a lot of them
that's your opinion.
I don't know any Swiss or German user who was banned and played for more than a year...
But maybe in Italy it's different, I don't know.

How do you know??

In past admins told it to community. The most part of cheaters are discovered in a few time, some need more investigation and some times more... :)

But polish people can do whatever they want with their teams?¿??

you exaggerate...

And if I know I can do it I will do it few times a week like many others and admis will have to much job to do

well, I wouldn't.
I'd logg in once or twice a weak, to the formation etc. and that's it.

It's a shame that some user would abuse it... (as you)

i don't.
Why can you log in others people's team and i can not?

I like your idea.

well, I wouldn't.
I'd logg in once or twice a weak, to the formation etc. and that's it.

It's a shame that some user would abuse it... (as you)

So what would you do if someone abuse it when you make it possible, and I never connect with my friends account and nobody ever connect with my account, but if you make it possible of course that some users will abuse it (like you)

Man, not all the users are evil and want to cheat...
Yes, not all, but a lot of them

that's your opinion.

Nope, these are numbers.


I don't know any Swiss or German user who was banned and played for more than a year...
But maybe in Italy it's different, I don't know.

Maybe some places are more honest than others, i don't want to discuss that ATM, but we need 1 only law for all over the world not 200 for each state.

So what would you do if someone abuse it when you make it possible, and I never connect with my friends account and nobody ever connect with my account, but if you make it possible of course that some users will abuse it (like you)

"making it possible" doesn't mean "make it possible easily"

And what's the interest of one having a second team, loging in twice a week, making no transfer, not writing anything in the forum etc.?

Well let's make an example:

I'm in holiday for 5 days, from Wednesday to Monday. On Wednesday a player of mine, which should play on Sunday, would get injuried. My brother sees that, why shouldn't he be able to change my set up?

Man, not all the users are evil and want to cheat...
Yes, not all, but a lot of them
that's your opinion.
Nope, these are numbers.
so give me the numbers if you got them... thx.


Maybe some places are more honest than others, i don't want to discuss that ATM, but we need 1 only law for all over the world not 200 for each state.

right, one law but with some space for special cases.

That's what I always liked at sokker and hopefully will always like:
noone bans you if you make one post off-topic in Swiss forum.
Noone bans you if you buy a player from a friend of the sokker meating
and finally you can even be away for let's say a month in the desert of australia or wherever and can still have your team alive and well trained after the holiday.

I like that kind of "freedome" (maybe there's a better word for that).
That's exactly the reason why I mainly didn't like hattrick.

In smaller nations it's quite familiar (as in Switzerland). The 20-25 user who write in the forum are known quite fast and some are even met at sokker meatings.

So why have bloody strong rules here so that maybe one of the most active Swiss user would have to quit?
I don't see any reason...

I think Senhor Castro hit the nail on the head when he proposed, that this is something that has come as a result of the history of Sokker. Poland was first and they have a way of doing things, and since this hasn't been redefined clearly, different nations have interpreted the rule differently. This is why Borkos007 is definitely not a cheater, and that the idea that the staff are favoring themselves or Polish players over others is nonsense - they have acted entirely in good faith whereas cheating is deliberately breaking a rule. As such the idea of punishment is not really fair.

But this is also a good time to get a look at the rules, which is why it is good that loop wrote, that the staff will take a look at those rules to make them more explicit.

What are the rules then supposed to say? To me, Borkos summed it up when he wrote:

I'm just helping, not playing with someone's account.

Well, that depends on how you define "playing Sokker". To me that is all about buying/selling players, setting tactics, changing training etc. - precisely the activities that you mention as being "small favors" as opposed to "playing with someone elses account". To me buying a player for another user or even setting his training would clearly be playing someone elses account.

I hope the problem is apparent: discarding a login by a friend as a mere triviality is dangerous. For every "broken leg" reason that is given in support of letting people log into each others accounts, I could give a "possible abuse" reason to counter it. I mean, while I was changing the training I could discover, that there were no coaches with high enough main skill, and that there was a cheap coach on the transfer list I could buy. And maybe I could also... etc.

And for the many supporters mentioning all kinds of grave reasons for allowing a friend to login (tornado, broken leg, world tour etc.) - how does buying players for each other fit into your argument of allowing login in emergency cases only? To me, buying a player is by no means an emergency and if I can't buy the player then tough luck. Knowing that I might be up against 10 potential buyers from one account that cover the transfer market 24/7, I could never compete.

What has that got to do with tornadoes and broken legs?

I know the answer - I just wanted to make it apparent that all the arguments for friend login are about losing the team entirely, and I think that is only small part of the picture.

My opinion? If you aren't able to log in to Sokker in 100 days (yes thats more than 3 months!!!), then maybe it's fair enough that your team is closed. Getting tactics and transfers right is your own responsibility, not something you can leave to others to execute for you. One team, one owner, one login.

With NT it might be a bit different as it is a "shared" team where many people would be affected by ehrm.... for example a very nasty meteor strike in the NT-coach's home. A solution could be to allow some sort of stewardship of the NT, so that the steward can assist in case the NT-coach is unable to log in.

IMHO, this all needs to be systematized so it's not just about being pals with the staff so you can get away with anything.

Thanks for reading this far.

cause

In the game it is forbidden:
- to own or to totally control more than one team

and when your brother login with your account he'll have TOTALLY CONTROL of your team


THIS IS THE TRUTH



then he can act fair but he can act also unfair (like people that confessed such shame behaviour)
(edited)

And what's the interest of one having a second team, loging in twice a week, making no transfer, not writing anything in the forum etc.?

I don't want second team like 99% of users, but just want you to say that loging on friends account and do nothing much and do something is is very hard to put the line between that, and that Darren solution is as 14 days inactive sounds great in that case.

If you go on holiday, you make team for two week, and than if you stay for month, your frined can logg few times and make some changes, and it is hard to abuse, cause it is very hard to be inactive for 2 weeks only to abuse some rule

So why have bloody strong rules here so that maybe one of the most active Swiss user would have to quit?
I don't see any reason...

I see best reason in discovering cheaters, much more difficult with that kind of operate :))

loro non capiscono :S