FPC Case #362

Discussion about fairness-stuff. Advices of breach of rules and so on.

Moderators: systemmods, fairplaymods

Gipfelstuermer
Posts: 1513
Joined: Wed Jul 13, 2011 10:43 am
Location: Weltenbummler
Contact:

FPC Case #362

Post by Gipfelstuermer » Sat May 04, 2019 12:49 pm

To be shared with everyone after a final decision has been made by lesossies. I leave it in uncommented but I reserve the right to resign.

FPC Advisors
Tukhtahuaev: Warning; Fine 2,500,000; No Ban
RideforMoney: Warning; Fine 3,000,000; No Ban
Gipfelstuermer: Warning; Fine 5,000,000; No Ban
TrekkenRacing: Warning; Fine 500,000; No Ban
Hunsrueck: No Warning; No Fine; No Ban

FPC Dictator
lesossies: No Warning; No Fine; No Ban

Gipfelstuermer wrote:
Sat Jan 26, 2019 10:16 pm
The following case is presented with regards to Auxilium Torino.

Auxilium Torino is accused of using a multi-account (Boels Team) in 15 races.

The case is structured as follows:


A) The 15 consecutive races of Boels Team.
B) The VPN of Boels Team.
C) The relation to Auxilium Torino.
D) Boels Team fails to respond.
E) Auxilium Torino denies any relation.
F) Summary
G) Conducting Auxilium Torino's Defense
H) Proposed Penalty


A) The 15 consecutive races of Boels Team.
This is a complete list of Boels Team's Races up until today:
23.11.2018 GP Canyon de Chelly, 24h, /w Auxilium Torino
24.11.2018 Key Largo - Key West, 21h, /w Auxilium Torino
27.11.2018 Dalooni Reserve - Stage 1, 23h, /w Auxilium Torino
28.11.2018 Dalooni Reserve - Stage 2, 23h, /w Auxilium Torino
29.11.2018 Dalooni Reserve - Stage 3, 23h, /w Auxilium Torino
30.11.2018 Dalooni Reserve - Stage 4, 23h, /w Auxilium Torino
07.12.2018 Crawford - Montego Bay, 22h, /w Auxilium Torino
18.12.2018 Vamos a la Playa - Stage 1, 22h, /w Auxilium Torino
19.12.2018 Vamos a la Playa - Stage 2, 22h, /w Auxilium Torino
20.12.2018 Vamos a la Playa - Stage 3, 22h, /w Auxilium Torino
21.12.2018 Vamos a la Playa - Stage 4, 22h, /w Auxilium Torino
27.12.2018 Zanzibar Road Race, 22h, /w Auxilium Torino
11.01.2019 Palau Cycling Cup, 23h, /w Auxilium Torino
13.01.2019 Down Under Classic, 23h, /w Auxilium Torino
20.01.2019 East Falkland Classic, 24h, /w Auxilium Torino

Can this be random? It is simple mathematics: Assume that Boels Team joins C4F. He can only ride late evening (21h-24h). He rides 15 races, but we don't know on which day and which race. What is the probability, that he meets Auxilium Torino in one race? Auxilium Torino rode 53 of 115 possible races. So the probability is 53/115 = 46.1%. But what is the probability, that he meets Auxilium Torino 15-times in a row? It is approximately (53/115)^15 = 0.00089%. So clearly not a random thing.

B) The VPN of Boels Team.
It is evident, that Boels Team used a VPN / Browser to constantly change his IP in order to hide his identity. During one race, he used at least 4 different IP's from 4 different countries:

https://www.ipqualityscore.com/free-ip- ... .220.101.5
https://www.ipqualityscore.com/free-ip- ... 17.174.196
https://www.ipqualityscore.com/free-ip- ... .37.16.241
https://www.ipqualityscore.com/free-ip- ... 47.181.165

All at 100 - High Risk. Consequently, Boels Team is banned after providing no response to ingame-messages whatsoever.

C) The relation to Auxilium Torino.
It is evident, that the simultaneous racing of Auxilium Torino and Boels Team was no coincidence. What is their relation? Some moves of Boels Team support that he was there to support Aux. On his second race, he received multiple negative fairplay comments. Other than that, he was always completely silent in race chat. His purpose was only to create sprints for Horacio Ortega and Carmen Kaleb, allowing him to start with 2x 94 sprinters and having additional support in the race. This was successful for Auxilium Torino on 23.11., 18.12, 21.12., 11.01. Some could argue, that the same is true for Coroncina, who benefited with sprint wins from Jaromir Janacek (91) on 07.12. and 20.01., but there is not enough evidence for this relation because Coroncina was not in every of the races mentioned above. Boels Team did not take any profit. No single sprint win or Palmares entry in 15 races. He professionally created sprints, but never sprinted professionally.

Could there be any other solution to the relation? Could it be a friend a friend or family member? A special relation, so this person always rides in the same race as Auxilium Torino? This question is answered in Auxilium Torino's response to this case. (See E))

D) Boels Team fails to respond.
Boels Team did not respond in any race chats or to any ingame messages. FPC has build the consent, that Boels Team unfair behavior is proven. Consequently, he got banned.

E) Auxilium Torino denies any relation.
Of course, we did not only contact Boels Team, but also Auxilium Torino to ask about the case. I quote the whole answer to give you all details, but I highlight the important part.
you can controll my pc if you want give some program yto make it, i don`t have nothing to do with what you accuse me, and i think you must check my pc

A little up to my words before...change de words, is not an Eqnuiry, this is an Inquisition!
If you just are needed an excuse to ban me, you don`t need some inexistent probe, do it!

Since one years i ask for clarity, somebody was alredy on the way with my pass and hacked my team( and some others )
for explain you can ask to Luques, because he resolved the problem, and ask to don`t say to nobody about the problem because he want to catch the guilty!

In several races in last 2 years my team was damaged, strange act happens while i play, and i ask more time for review my races to understand what was the "bug" or "problem", but i see that nothing happens...then this is probably the last chance that you have, you want me out? make it and enjoy!

I repeat, you can check my pc, give today every art of chance to enter in another pc, and hack some dates...is not really hard to control mine!
Ok, according to Auxilium Torino, he has nothing to do with Boels Team. So no friend, no family member, nothing. (It could have explained the 15 races together, but not the VPN of course.) The only possible conclusion is, that Boels Team is a multi-account. What follows in Auxilium Torino's response? Just countercharge. It is an inquisition and a conspiracy. Others manipulate him. Manipulate to ride the same races and let him benefit? Doesn't make sense.

F) Summary
Boels Team has been riding all 15 races in the same group as Auxilium Torino. It is evident, that this was no coincidence. It is evident, that Boels Team used a VPN to hide his identity. Neither Boels Team nor Auxilium Torino explained the situation. I can only draw the conclusion, that Boels Team was a multi-account of Auxilium Torino.

G) Conducting Auxilium Torino's Defense
Everybody has the right to receive a good defense. Can I defend Auxilium Torino? He is a long-time active player. He is a race designer. This is positive and to be considered, at least in a situation where we lack players and designers.

H) Proposed Penalty
We penalized Boels Team with a ban. We cannot leave Auxilium Torino without a penalty. Does it have to be a ban as well? Altough we don't want to ban people easily? A complete ban is too much because other multi-accounts also just received temporary bans. Auxilium Torino did not tell anything about his motive, but from the behavior I conclude, that it was just about making additional money. Not necessarily to destroy the game or anything. As such, I would rather support an extremely high fine instead of a temporary ban. This fine has to cover all his profit from this behavior plus a big penalty.

I will vote Warning, 5,000,000 fine and no ban.

Should we make this public? I leave this to you. There are two arguments to leave it within FPC: Firstly, we don't want to reveal too much about how we detect VPN. Otherwise this helps multi-accounts again in the future. Secondly, there were so many accusations, rumours etc. about Auxilium Torino and Coroncina before, that we do not necessarily want to recreate that huge discussion. However, a big argument to make it public is, that we usually make everything public because this allows to collect more evidence and to show that FPC is active. We do not really need more evidence here, but I as mentioned, I leave this decision to you. If you think, this should rather be public, I will make it public.

Gipfel

lesossies<22:51>: insult case has been closed with a fine
lesossies<22:50>: the case is for me closed
Gipfelstuermer<15:07>: More than months without a decision, lesossies.
Gipfelstuermer<20:59>: please
Gipfelstuermer<20:59>: Decision -> 1.May
Trekken Racing<08:31>: that also why i gave him a high fine
Gipfelstuermer<21:32>: viewtopic.php?f=16&t=6947
Gipfelstuermer<21:32>: leso, you can also take into account the next insult-case when you put in the fine...
Gipfelstuermer<13:10>: If you prefer, I can make the case public afterwards as well.
Gipfelstuermer<13:09>: Would be good to have a balanced decision from lesossies now.
Gipfelstuermer<12:02>: Thanks, Trekken.
Trekken Racing<06:53>: Maybe I can write it here, warning yes, fine 500k, ban no
Gipfelstuermer<23:35>: so, lesossies, please allow 4. decision by Trekken or put the fine yourself
Trekken Racing<13:42>: I can't vote for a fine here. Maybe it was already here before I got member. Don't know if somebody can give me permission to vote.
lesossies<21:39>: I need a 4. decision. I personaly cannot, sorry.
Gipfelstuermer<20:19>: So, please, lesossies, take the right decision. Otherwise people will avoid playing 22/23/24h (actually some already avoid it because of the insults and suspected multi-cases.)
Gipfelstuermer<20:18>: Agreed, Luques!
Luques<23:19>: Am I sure about this case, actually no, but there are so many similar cases where he is always there that at the end a fine is deserved, and pretty sure he used Tor in the past as well
Luques<23:15>: well, honestly as I wrote in the forum, he is costantly dancing on a dangerous line, he thinks he is over the rules as it shows also the last case where he calls retarded other players
lesossies<16:20>: right ask Luques
RideforMoney<09:13>: let's look for Luques
RideforMoney<09:13>: For me , there is clear there is a link. And btw, it's auxi.. after the "mafia" thing, he is the kind of people who's able to do this..
RideforMoney<09:13>: Bah.. ask luques
Gipfelstuermer<21:24>: So can somebody else take the decision? Or you close the case without a penalty?
lesossies<12:45>: the fault is not evident enough for me. I cannot take a decision
Gipfelstuermer<15:48>: You don't know what?
lesossies<13:40>: I dont know
Submitter: Gipfelstuermer
GIP MASTERPLAN
Gameplay: Flexible Min-Tact. Improve Sprint System. Windkante.
Marketing: Re-attract old players. Advertisement. Social Media.
New Players: Fair Start Budget, New Tutorial.
Fairplay: Improve FPC features, Fair Prize Money Disribution.

scorpsche
Posts: 257
Joined: Wed Feb 14, 2018 11:50 am
Contact:

Re: FPC Case #362

Post by scorpsche » Sat May 04, 2019 1:12 pm

Interesting, thanks for sharing.
TeamSWE - Best team in the universe!

Robyklebt
Posts: 9986
Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2010 6:50 pm
Contact:

Re: FPC Case #362

Post by Robyklebt » Sat May 04, 2019 4:10 pm

Were all the other FPC members ok with you posting their comments from the internal chat?

Making the whole case public=Good.
Posting what different people said or voted for... if with their explicit consent=Good. Without=bad.
Kraftsystemrevision! Include the distance!
Basics reform: Give blue a chance!
Don't punish bugusers. We all have to use bugs, since most of them are declared as "features"!

lesossies
Site Admin
Posts: 1945
Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2010 10:49 am
Contact:

Re: FPC Case #362

Post by lesossies » Sat May 04, 2019 10:13 pm

1. the snapshot of the FPC votes for case 362:
Image
2.
Hunsrück was not sure
luques gave no fine too
I too not

For me it was 3 to 3
3.
FPC dictator is an insult that I cannot accept.

4.
luques should decide what should happen.

As I am not interested to stay in the FPC, luques should from now on gives the decided fines.

Hunsrueck
Posts: 1794
Joined: Wed Oct 05, 2011 5:22 pm
Contact:

Re: FPC Case #362

Post by Hunsrueck » Sat May 04, 2019 10:18 pm

Idéfix wrote:
Sat May 04, 2019 4:33 pm
Thanks for the transparency job, Gip.

In a perfect world:
A new reason to have again those 2 thoughts:
- what does Huns do in FPK? Sorry, but imho, not the fairest himself ;-)
- again huge failure in the management of this game :'-( If managers have no time/motivation/energy to do things properly, let's give the hand, guys! Not easy as a baby, (and of course bad parents don't give their baby to other parents^^).

In our world:
This won't change the pleasure to play this great game, it's sad for the given image and open door for new and new cases... but won't change much about the game itself.
Don't be discouraged, Gip :-)
Please little dog tell me why i´m not fair? Because i was not sure that Aux did cheating or have a second team and so i dont vote?

Hunsrueck
Posts: 1794
Joined: Wed Oct 05, 2011 5:22 pm
Contact:

Re: FPC Case #362

Post by Hunsrueck » Sat May 04, 2019 11:20 pm

Idéfix wrote:
Sat May 04, 2019 10:27 pm
Hunsrueck wrote:
Sat May 04, 2019 10:18 pm
Idéfix wrote:
Sat May 04, 2019 4:33 pm
Thanks for the transparency job, Gip.

In a perfect world:
A new reason to have again those 2 thoughts:
- what does Huns do in FPK? Sorry, but imho, not the fairest himself ;-)
- again huge failure in the management of this game :'-( If managers have no time/motivation/energy to do things properly, let's give the hand, guys! Not easy as a baby, (and of course bad parents don't give their baby to other parents^^).

In our world:
This won't change the pleasure to play this great game, it's sad for the given image and open door for new and new cases... but won't change much about the game itself.
Don't be discouraged, Gip :-)
Please little dog tell me why i´m not fair? Because i was not sure that Aux did cheating or have a second team and so i dont vote?

The screenshot of Leso and your answer "no vote" does not correspond with Gipfel's review of votes. It's not the same thing that voting for "no ban no fine", and not voting :)

But I have a strange feeling now, who tells the truth about the votes? Leso and you, or Gip?
In all cases, the case written and described by Gipfel makes no doubt imho, but I am not in FPK, so your collective choice is ok.

I would finish with a last point: there is a snake on your bed. Your wife says "kill him!" Would you answer you are not sure that the snake is dangerous? If you kill him, it's a huge mistake, you might have killed an innocent snake! If you don't kill him and it kills your wife, it's also a huge mistake, your non-action would have killed an innocent woman. If you don't kill him and it doesn't kill your wife, he may come back every night.
What would be your choice?
I dont vote and the screenshot from Leso is right. But tell me why i´m not fair and dont should be in the FPC? Because i have a different meaning then the others? Pfff..... again why i´m unfair?

Gipfelstuermer
Posts: 1513
Joined: Wed Jul 13, 2011 10:43 am
Location: Weltenbummler
Contact:

Re: FPC Case #362

Post by Gipfelstuermer » Sat May 04, 2019 11:53 pm

Idéfix wrote:
Sat May 04, 2019 10:27 pm

But I have a strange feeling now, who tells the truth about the votes? Leso and you, or Gip?
After more than 3 months waiting, "no vote" is "no fine, no ban" in FPC decisions. That is especially true after lesossies writes "I need a 4th decision" and then after Trekken takes a 4th decision, there is still "no vote" and for lesossies "case is closed".

In that sense, FPC dictator is really only meant as a description, no insult. If other FPC members need to wait months for decision and only lesossies decision counts, then technically this is no judgement of multiple but only of one person.

I accept that decision but need to make it public for transparency and the future of this beautiful game.
GIP MASTERPLAN
Gameplay: Flexible Min-Tact. Improve Sprint System. Windkante.
Marketing: Re-attract old players. Advertisement. Social Media.
New Players: Fair Start Budget, New Tutorial.
Fairplay: Improve FPC features, Fair Prize Money Disribution.

User avatar
Pokemon Club
Posts: 3184
Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2011 1:37 pm
Contact:

Re: FPC Case #362

Post by Pokemon Club » Sun May 05, 2019 12:02 am

Need to adapt how work FPK maybe

scorpsche
Posts: 257
Joined: Wed Feb 14, 2018 11:50 am
Contact:

Re: FPC Case #362

Post by scorpsche » Sun May 05, 2019 12:31 am

Obviously this post from Luques was wrong or what Leso is telling here is wrong.
Screenshot 2019-05-05 at 00.07.00.png
Screenshot 2019-05-05 at 00.07.00.png (63.85 KiB) Viewed 7501 times
Last edited by scorpsche on Sun May 05, 2019 11:30 am, edited 1 time in total.
TeamSWE - Best team in the universe!

auxilium torino
Posts: 3102
Joined: Sun Feb 21, 2010 1:21 am
Contact:

Re: FPC Case #362

Post by auxilium torino » Sun May 05, 2019 12:34 am

i say it to you, you can check my pc, you have the mode to do it, i have nothing to hide, and strange that i am so idiot to use a multi and i make a sure win every time 15 race 15 win , wow...
he ride 15 times and i win 15 times, great
Allenatore Italia - Manager Dainese OG 10 bronzo TTT
Manager SantiNelli WC 10/10 argento TT
Manager SantiNelli WC 3/11 6/11Oro TT
Allenatore Italia WC 9/11 Oro RR
Non contare mai il numero dei tuoi avversari... affrontali!
Multi hostes, multus honor

ProTour-Team
Posts: 758
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 11:26 pm
Contact:

Re: FPC Case #362

Post by ProTour-Team » Sun May 05, 2019 5:09 am

lesossies wrote:
Sat May 04, 2019 10:13 pm
2.
Hunsrück was not sure
luques gave no fine too
I too not

For me it was 3 to 3
3.
FPC dictator is an insult that I cannot accept.

4.
luques should decide what should happen.

As I am not interested to stay in the FPC, luques should from now on gives the decided fines.
so gip, rfm, tuk and trekken vs huns is 3vs3? if you add yourself it isnt. and even if you add luques who said himself that he isnt part of the fpk, it still isnt. but obviously you still feel like your own vote is the one that makes the difference or even the only one that really counts, has always been this way..
so please just give those rights to luques. if you want and are actually able to stay in the fpc as just a member on the same level as all the others thats up to you, but at least my opinion about that is pretty clear.

about huns i am pretty much on the same page as ide, even if you feel like in this case and in all the other cases with aux everything has just been coincidences - i am sure as a fpc member you didnt just forget all of those - you could add something to the discussion and not only not vote at all. but for the case itself thats the same, so if the fpc feels like thats an issue they can hopefully deal with that on their own

schappy
Posts: 343
Joined: Mon Mar 29, 2010 11:10 pm
Contact:

Re: FPC Case #362

Post by schappy » Sun May 05, 2019 7:03 am

I Hope everybody understand my english.

In my opinion it is really good to Show how they work in the fpc. At lebst i want to say in this case, Nobody has a evidence to say auxi is guilty. That is the fact to say no Fine and no ban. In my opinion the fpc can only speak out a Fine with clear facts.
Hate me more for my opinion.
I´ve got the magic in me

Robyklebt
Posts: 9986
Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2010 6:50 pm
Contact:

Re: FPC Case #362

Post by Robyklebt » Sun May 05, 2019 9:18 am

Snakes and rapes.
What's next in the stupid arguments department? Death penalty, how there never has been anybody wrongfully executed? Oops.
Kraftsystemrevision! Include the distance!
Basics reform: Give blue a chance!
Don't punish bugusers. We all have to use bugs, since most of them are declared as "features"!

team fl
Posts: 5009
Joined: Tue Mar 02, 2010 10:43 am
Contact:

Re: FPC Case #362

Post by team fl » Mon May 06, 2019 8:20 am

My opinion about this:

1. I think it is good to discuss the way the FPC works and how it may be improved.

2. I think it is not good to openly display FPC members' votes without consultation.

3. The case is not clear at all, as in my view, the "evidence" does not show the accused guilty "beyond reasonable doubt". Besides that, I also think that Aux is doing shady stuff in this game. But believing and thinking and feeling is not enough.

4. Any comparison with real life cases or situations is stupid. Apples and oranges...

5. It is up to the game owners to change things. Or give people the power to do so who will. It works for the calender, it works for the NC, so far it doesn't work for the FPC yet. Maybe leso giving the power to Luques works? Does he have the time to deal with this stuff?
I didn't mean to say it. But I meant what I said.

ProTour-Team
Posts: 758
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 11:26 pm
Contact:

Re: FPC Case #362

Post by ProTour-Team » Mon May 06, 2019 11:05 am

team fl wrote:
Mon May 06, 2019 8:20 am
3. The case is not clear at all, as in my view, the "evidence" does not show the accused guilty "beyond reasonable doubt". Besides that, I also think that Aux is doing shady stuff in this game. But believing and thinking and feeling is not enough.
so during 2 months he rode 15 races all together, including tours - every single one of them with aux. afterwards he doesnt ride at all for multiple months and doesnt even care enough about his team to respond to fairplay messages, rode every race with various VPNs and seemingly never wrote in the racechats. how more obvious could a case get before you wanna fine the team already controlling multiple VPN teams instead of only banning his multis?

team fl
Posts: 5009
Joined: Tue Mar 02, 2010 10:43 am
Contact:

Re: FPC Case #362

Post by team fl » Mon May 06, 2019 11:44 am

ProTour-Team wrote:
Mon May 06, 2019 11:05 am
team fl wrote:
Mon May 06, 2019 8:20 am
3. The case is not clear at all, as in my view, the "evidence" does not show the accused guilty "beyond reasonable doubt". Besides that, I also think that Aux is doing shady stuff in this game. But believing and thinking and feeling is not enough.
so during 2 months he rode 15 races all together, including tours - every single one of them with aux. afterwards he doesnt ride at all for multiple months and doesnt even care enough about his team to respond to fairplay messages, rode every race with various VPNs and seemingly never wrote in the racechats. how more obvious could a case get before you wanna fine the team already controlling multiple VPN teams instead of only banning his multis?
Facts are:

- Boels team rides races after 21:00,
- Auxilium Torino rides races after 21:00

-> Auxilium Torino rides very often. In November, December and January he rode 26, 26 and 27 races. I think it is highly likely that another team that prefers the same time will meet Auxilium Torino in races, eventually. Even if you don't ride very often. So the fact that Boels team, who rode 15 races in the same time span, met Auxilium Torino in night races, is not very surprising nor suspicious as a fact alone.

- Boels team used VPN.

-> So did other teams (besides Aux). Using a VPN is easy enough. And Boels team was banned accordingly. That alone, again is not suspicious as a fact alone.

- Boels team did not communicate at all.

-> Well, this could mean a lot, but it is not, again, as a fact, evidence for a connection to Auxilium Torino. And why should he care about this case? He has been banned anyway after all.

- Boels team did ride for a bunch sprint even it was not likely that he wins it.

-> Auxilium Torino did profit from this behaviour 4 (!) times. Also here, I don't see the Connection out of 15 races by Boels team and 79 (!) races from Aux in the same time span. Other teams did profit as well, btw.

Gipfelstuermer came to this conclusion:
It is evident, that the simultaneous racing of Auxilium Torino and Boels Team was no coincidence.
From what I know from prosecution and from being a GM for a long time in another much bigger browser game: This is not clear evidence. There is no clear (!) connection between the two teams otherwise whatsoever. Maybe a suspicion, but no clear evidence. And that's what I mean by "evdence beyond reasonable doubt", as there may be other logical and plausible explanations for Boels teams' behaviour.

And the fact that most of the ones who want to see Auxilium Torino punished have personal reasons against him as well, does not help for finding a definitive (and fair) verdict.
I didn't mean to say it. But I meant what I said.

scorpsche
Posts: 257
Joined: Wed Feb 14, 2018 11:50 am
Contact:

Re: FPC Case #362

Post by scorpsche » Mon May 06, 2019 12:14 pm

Funny - more text but less (valid) arguments FL.

Moreover: misrepresentation of the facts shown by Gipfelstürmer.
Facts are:
- Boels team rides races after 21:00,
- Auxilium Torino rides races after 21:00
No the facts are he rode ALL his 15 races with Aux which makes him together with the fact the he used VPN a multi - multi of Aux which is the only possible conclusion here.
...from being a GM for a long time in another much bigger browser game...
Ad hominem...try to discuss with arguments rather than "oh I'm someone special, trust me".

Honestly you want to go again down that route and just blow this thread up until someone will say: "Oh looks messy here, let's close it".
I don't think you want to convince someone - you really think your words will change opinion Ide, free, poke or me for e.g.?
You want to convince fpc?
Look fpc was already 4:1 convinced...

Everyone knows Aux & Coro along with their multies have been unfair for quite a while.
And we know that they have not been punished.
And we know now also why.
TeamSWE - Best team in the universe!

team fl
Posts: 5009
Joined: Tue Mar 02, 2010 10:43 am
Contact:

Re: FPC Case #362

Post by team fl » Mon May 06, 2019 12:22 pm

scorpsche wrote:
Mon May 06, 2019 12:14 pm
Funny - more text but less (valid) arguments FL.

Moreover: misrepresentation of the facts shown by Gipfelstürmer.
Why no valid arguments? Where is the misrepresentation?
No the facts are he rode ALL his 15 races with Aux which makes him together with the fact the he used VPN a multi - multi of Aux which is the only possible conclusion here.
And I wrote that here:
-> Auxilium Torino rides very often. In November, December and January he rode 26, 26 and 27 races. I think it is highly likely that another team that prefers the same time will meet Auxilium Torino in races, eventually. Even if you don't ride very often. So the fact that Boels team, who rode 15 races in the same time span, met Auxilium Torino in night races, is not very surprising nor suspicious as a fact alone.
So much about misrepresentation...
Ad hominem...try to discuss with arguments rather than "oh I'm someone special, trust me".
This is misinterpretation and "ad hominem" what you are doing. I presented my arguments. And then I added my view from my experience, which made a small amount of information of the whole posting. I think that's a valid thing, no?
Everyone knows Aux & Coro along with their multies have been unfair for quite a while.
That's exactly the point. We don't know. We think or we believe… at least in this case.


Anyway, I only answered to PTT who reacted on my first, very short Posting. So:
Honestly you want to go again down that route and just blow this thread up until someone will say: "Oh looks messy here, let's close it".
has been done rather by you by reacting to my answer... when I have not even adressed you or anything regarding you.
I didn't mean to say it. But I meant what I said.

LENNAO
Posts: 89
Joined: Sat Jul 23, 2011 12:36 am
Contact:

Re: FPC Case #362

Post by LENNAO » Mon May 06, 2019 12:28 pm

scorpsche wrote:
Mon May 06, 2019 12:14 pm
Funny - more text but less (valid) arguments FL.

Moreover: misrepresentation of the facts shown by Gipfelstürmer.
Facts are:
- Boels team rides races after 21:00,
- Auxilium Torino rides races after 21:00
No the facts are he rode ALL his 15 races with Aux which makes him together with the fact the he used VPN a multi - multi of Aux which is the only possible conclusion here.
...from being a GM for a long time in another much bigger browser game...
Ad hominem...try to discuss with arguments rather than "oh I'm someone special, trust me".

Honestly you want to go again down that route and just blow this thread up until someone will say: "Oh looks messy here, let's close it".
I don't think you want to convince someone - you really think your words will change opinion Ide, free, poke or me for e.g.?
You want to convince fpc?
Look fpc was already 4:1 convinced...

Everyone knows Aux & Coro along with their multies have been unfair for quite a while.
And we know that they have not been punished.
And we know now also why.
SWE?
For the first time I have to say that you just used this case to pull out the old chestnut that you have with FL ...
There ist no clear evidence about that it is his multi.
For me it looks like a multi of him, but I think aux isn't the only person on this game who plays only at "night".

There where probably some Italian multies via VPN in this game - there are banned - great.
And we dont know excactly why the havent been punished yet - you just think that they are getting protected - by whomever ...
The only thing i see here is that Luques did not have the balls to decide here and leso didnt want to decide and as he is the "dictator" (not negative) there is no penalty submitted - until now ...

Thanks Gipfel for providing some transparency!

ProTour-Team
Posts: 758
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 11:26 pm
Contact:

Re: FPC Case #362

Post by ProTour-Team » Mon May 06, 2019 1:25 pm

i dont dislike the discussion here, but again luques isnt part of the fpc so 4 members voted for a fine, 1 voted against. even if leso still sees himself as a member it is 4vs2. if he doesnt wanna make a fool of the fpc and himself again...

lesossies
Site Admin
Posts: 1945
Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2010 10:49 am
Contact:

Re: FPC Case #362

Post by lesossies » Mon May 06, 2019 2:33 pm

1) 3, in my opinion, important members, luques, Huns and I were not sure if Aux was guilty or not.
It was for me enough to take this no-decision
and
2) I agree with team fls´opinion:
"1. I think it is good to discuss the way the FPC works and how it may be improved.
2. I think it is not good to openly display FPC members' votes without consultation.
3. The case is not clear at all, as in my view, the "evidence" does not show the accused guilty "beyond reasonable doubt". Besides that, I also think that Aux is doing shady stuff in this game. But believing and thinking and feeling is not enough.
4. Any comparison with real life cases or situations is stupid. Apples and oranges...
5. It is up to the game owners to change things. Or give people the power to do so who will. It works for the calender, it works for the NC, so far it doesn't work for the FPC yet. Maybe leso giving the power to Luques works? Does he have the time to deal with this stuff?"

3) I have no opinion about Tuktahuaev or Trekken (who seemed to have no vote right for this case, I dont know why but it was a fact).
Maybe, the 2 are great guys, I dont know, I didnt decide to put them in the FPC.
Maybe the FPC members should be accepted by a vote. Is it possible ? I dont know.

and last : Sorry, I cannot give a 3M fine if I am not sure.
There are little decisions where the case is simple and clear where a simple majority is OK.
Other, like ban p.a., should maybe need unanimity.

Luques has all the power to make all what he want, I think.
It is maybe better, he concentrates himself on more positive thing and goes out of the fire line ;)
An other one can play for him the "Blitzableiter"

ProTour-Team
Posts: 758
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 11:26 pm
Contact:

Re: FPC Case #362

Post by ProTour-Team » Mon May 06, 2019 2:47 pm

so 2 actual members of the fpc dont count for you while luq who isnt part of the fpc is an important member. but yet this still doesnt surprise me about you

lesossies
Site Admin
Posts: 1945
Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2010 10:49 am
Contact:

Re: FPC Case #362

Post by lesossies » Mon May 06, 2019 4:17 pm

I am working with luques, team fl and Huns since many years in some comitees and for different purposes.
The other are new in the job and it is the 1st time we work together.
This is the difference.

I am not sure if PTT is the right one to play the Chief Prosecutor.

And
There is only one guy by RSF (without Buhmann) who can change the decision and it is Luques.
If he does it, OK.
In any case, You have to accept it. He is the boss.

ProTour-Team
Posts: 758
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 11:26 pm
Contact:

Re: FPC Case #362

Post by ProTour-Team » Mon May 06, 2019 4:50 pm

well and i am more than sure you definitly shouldnt be Chief Prosecutor.

but for sure i would love to hear in which comitees and for which purposes you have been working on RSF in the last years to value the opinion of 2 guys who arent in the fpc more than those 4 guys who actually are in the fpc - honestly that argument just sounds amazing, what do you think why they were added to the fpc? if you actually thought about that at all..

but like i said, it isnt the first time you give a crap about the majority of the fpc as long as their opinion isnt the same as yours and as long as you think of yourself as the head of the fpc rather than just the executer it will remain this way.

scorpsche
Posts: 257
Joined: Wed Feb 14, 2018 11:50 am
Contact:

Re: FPC Case #362

Post by scorpsche » Mon May 06, 2019 7:10 pm

Everything d'accord with what free and Ide wrote here before.

One thing to add regarding the case itself:
Boels team was created rightaway after Doria, Fedex and Astense were blocked due to vpn usage.

As far as I know all vpn cases so far were related to Aux and this one the most evident.
Unless Luques tells us different, but please reveal all blocked cases.
TeamSWE - Best team in the universe!

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 11 guests