20-06-2005 09:00									#1
	UN Amendment #3: Espionage Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

quote: Option 1 (as proposed by CBR): 0.2.2 - Allowed Memberships Description: Each forum will be allowed to determine the requirements for membership of its team as it sees fit. However, a person may only be a member of one team at any given time. A double membership is automatically considered out-of-game espionage. If the involved teams prove that they didn't have knowledge of the irregular action due to differences in nickname/name, only the individual should be punished. Purpose: To disallow the use of out-of-game espionage and prevent anything that resembles out-of-game espionage. Verdict: Double membership is strictly prohibited and doing so is a violation of this rule. Punishment Level: Red (Ejection – Personal or Team) 0.4.2 - Intentional Espionage Description: Any out-of-game espionage in any form is strictly prohibited. Definition: Trying to hack the secure team forum(s), continuously logging team chat channels, inserting moles in an opponent's team, hacking screenshots or savegame upload location, or any other action considered espionage as determined by the game staff Verdict: doing any of the above as determined by the game staff is a violation of this rule. Punishment Level: Red (Ejection – Personal or Team) Option 2: Do not amend the ruleset in this way. Vote now!

	20-06-2005 09:41									#2
	Support Apolyton

Agreed.

	20-06-2005 09:44									#3
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

I think the second red passage is already that way?

I suppose yes. It's up to the admins to determine what is good evidence.

	20-06-2005 10:10									#4
	Get a bigger avatar today!

So, if I'm in the Poly channel and two people stumble in and spill some beans, I am breaking the rules by reporting what they said?

Needs amending.

	20-06-2005 10:18									#5
	Suffering from ads?

It is a bit messy.

	20-06-2005 11:10									#6
	Full PM-box? Change here!

I think there's already another rule that says the admins can rule on just about anything they want as far as violations of gameplay. So, this really doesn't give them any more power per se. It just makes the team that submitted this rule feel better about possible espionage.

So, I vote yes.

	20-06-2005 11:16									#7
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

yes - but it could be worded better

	20-06-2005 13:54									#8
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

heavy punishment for everyone doing this kind of things

	20-06-2005 14:40									#9
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

Yes

	20-06-2005 22:34									#10
	Increase Your PM Length

How do you prove that you had no knowledge of an individual's spying actions?

Glad to see I'm finally not alone in voting no for a CBR amendment.

	20-06-2005 22:36									#11
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

quote: How do you prove that you had no knowledge of an individual's spying actions?

That is the problem. Word it better and I might vote yes.

	21-06-2005 00:47									#12
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

The "proof" could be seen by an admin as they have access to our forums. Asking for proof though is like asking for proof of innocense. The actual burden is to prove guilt, not innocense and the admins are capable people who, no doubt, know this to be true.

	21-06-2005 05:33									#13
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

quote: Originally posted by BigFree The "proof" could be seen by an admin as they have access to our forums. Asking for proof though is like asking for proof of innocense. The actual burden is to prove guilt, not innocense and the admins are capable people who, no doubt, know this to be true.

yes it is

	21-06-2005 07:12									#14
	Suffering from ads?

quote: Originally posted by notyoueither So, if I'm in the Poly channel and two people stumble in and spill some beans, I am breaking the rules by reporting what they said? Needs amending.

No, that falls under Human Intelligence, a whole different animal than what the rule deals with. The rule deals with someone joining a team while they are on another team AS a DIFFERENT screen handle.

Now, if someone DOES want to shoot thier mouth off AND they are on another team AND we DON'T have contact with then, then yes, you should atleast tell them to go somewhere else OR be quiet, because we don't know them. Then and onlt then are you to NOT report what you had heard, as that would be a violation on our part. But, WE can report to he Admins about the Infraction.

The change sounds good

E_T

	21-06-2005 08:19									#15
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

quote: Originally posted by notyoueither So, if I'm in the Poly channel and two people stumble in and spill some beans, I am breaking the rules by reporting what they said? Needs amending.

That's called stupidity.

	21-06-2005 11:03									#16
	Suffering from ads?

quote: Originally posted by E_T No, that falls under Human Intelligence, a whole different animal than what the rule deals with. The rule deals with someone joining a team while they are on another team AS a DIFFERENT screen handle. Now, if someone DOES want to shoot thier mouth off AND they are on another team AND we DON'T have contact with then, then yes, you should atleast tell them to go somewhere else OR be quiet, because we don't know them. Then and onlt then are you to NOT report what you had heard, as that would be a violation on our part. But, WE can report to he Admins about the Infraction. The change sounds good E_T

Unfortunately, that's not what it says.

It does say something about dl's, and then it launches into a litany of crimes that have nothing to do with dl's.

I could be lit in neon pink as 'notyoueither is a Consul and he is right here in this Poly channel', but if I were inactive and simply reviewing what had been said while I was at work, I would be guilty of a rules infraction that warrants banning from the game.

It needs adjusting.

	21-06-2005 11:19									#17
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

quote: Originally posted by BigFree The "proof" could be seen by an admin as they have access to our forums. Asking for proof though is like asking for proof of innocense. The actual burden is to prove guilt, not innocense and the admins are capable people who, no doubt, know this to be true.

And people like Lucky have been known to tie well intentioned admins up in knots, twirl them around their fingers, and then bounce them off the back board.

Having good admins is no reason to invite bad rules.

	21-06-2005 11:21									#18
	Support Apolyton

Why should we be guilty of stupidities on other teams' part? Punshiment should only be when we deliberately seek unethical information from other teams, not when other teams screw up.

	21-06-2005 11:27									#19
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

Then the rule should say that. It bans hacking, which is good, and listening on public channels, which is bad.

Tell me how joining an open channel and listening should ever be a bannable offence?

	21-06-2005 12:06									#20
	Increase Your PM Length

Well, if you knew that channel was the wrong channel, then it's a no brainer as to why it is wrong. If someone joined our channel, that was not authorized to do so, it would be them breaking the rules not APO.

As long as we reported that they did so, we would not be punished regardless of what they said. The same can be said if they came to our public forums and ranted off a bunch of info that they should not have.

What this rule specifically deals with is that it pushes the onus onto a team that "knowingly" admited another memeber from another team with the intent on gleaning information for this team. I mean this does not even have to happen like this for theri to be nefarious actions happening. A member of another team could easily obtain one of our team's members email address and then send the "espionage" to him completely unbenknownts and also completely untracable if they had their witts about them.

My point is, each team cannot stop other teams member's (of their own for that matter) from cheating or otherwise discerning inapproriate information to other teams. What a team can do, is identify a person that is giving the "espionage" and then report him to the admins ASAP.

Heck, if someone really wanted to pull a number they would not even bother trying to join the other teams forum. Every act of espionage needs at least two parties. One to commit the espionage and one to accept the information.

And to answer you question specifically nye, the rules do state "...continuously logging team chat channels."
So, as long as the instance of accidently logging into the wrong was not a continous occurance, then no real punishable offense has taken place.

	21-06-2005 13:02									#21
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

quote: Originally posted by notyoueither Then the rule should say that. It bans hacking, which is good, and listening on public channels, which is bad.

Hacking is good?

	21-06-2005 13:04									#22
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

Btw, my point is basically simple: let's say, for example, that another team accidentaly sends us an e-mail or a PM meant for someone else revealing sensitive information.

Should we share that info or not? Did we deliberately obtain that info? Nope. Is it our fault other teams goofed big time? Nope.

	21-06-2005 15:16									#23
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

Mz I think the clause means that "banning any and all hacking" is good.

	23-06-2005 04:38									#24
	Put an end to popups!

Yes - though wording could be improved.