Why has top contributed for truck event been banned ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Plummy

First place had 18818 and second place had 18000

---

Sorry, didn't realize that she was under 17,280. Still, that's 4 days of non-stop play and perfect truck glitch execution every time, a statistical impossibility.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jerhunter44

Sorry, didn't realize that she was under 17,280. Still, that's 4 days of non-stop play and perfect truck glitch execution every time, a statistical impossibility.

---

Then surely the same applies to several other people on that board who are NOT willing to be checked out by sc

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Plummy

Then surely the same applies to several other people on that board who are NOT willing to be checked out by sc

---

And do not appear to have incurred a ban as far as I know although they went over the 18,000

I have tried to stay off this thread, but it just keeps rolling merrily along, with players pointing the finger at the OP and other players and calling them c h e a t e r s ----> WITH NO EVIDENCE <----

All this forum talk of "how many seconds between trucks" and "it is a statistical impossibility to X" judgements that have rained down upon these folks is NOT AT ALL RELEVANT to the OP and Plummy's initial question of why they were banned.

And I would point out that Nick took the OPs claims of innocence seriously enough to respond personally and publicly to them with a promise of an investigation -- he is therefore PRESUMING they are telling the truth about being banned unfairly, otherwise why waste time.

That presumption of an UNFAIR BAN has been sorely lacking from some forumers here. Does it make sense that a c h e a t i n g player would come here and ask for an investigation? In my experience, those who ♥♥♥♥♥ and get caught simply start new farms. Whether they change their ways or not, I have no idea.

I similarly have no idea if the OP and her friends have violated the TOS or not -- and neither do any of the forum finger-pointers. Only the OP and SC will have the facts. Only they will know what was done and how it was done.

If the OP and friends were breaking the rules, SC's investigation will show that and appropriate actions will be taken. If they were NOT breaking any rules, SC's investigation will show THAT, and appropriate actions will be taken.

In my opinion, the rest of us need to let that process play out and keep our uninformed opinions about any c h e a t i n g by any player who posts here to ourselves.

As always: CAPS for emphasis, not shouting.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PerkyCox

All this forum talk of "how many seconds between trucks" and "it is a statistical impossibility to X" judgements that have rained down upon these folks is NOT AT ALL RELEVANT to the OP and Plummy's initial question of why they were banned.

---

If it's impossible to do something without c-heating in some way, that would deserve a ban for doing it, wouldn't it? Which would be completely relevant, as it is the actual explanation. The ban would be for behaviour deemed not to be possible without third party software and/or exploits. The talk of timings and impossibilities are a way of PROVING that the behaviour was wrong, as it goes against what the game could allow on its own.

Also, just wanted to point out, OP is not the banned player. The banned player hasn't said a word in defence on the forums, AFAIK.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jerhunter44

If it's impossible to do something without c-heating in some way, that would deserve a ban for doing it, wouldn't it? Which would be completely relevant, as it is the actual explanation. The ban would be for behaviour deemed not to be possible without third party software and/or exploits. The talk of timings and impossibilities are a way of PROVING that the behaviour was wrong, as it goes against what the game could allow on its own.

Also, just wanted to point out, OP is not the banned player. The banned player hasn't said a word in defence on the forums, AFAIK.

---

Banned player has actually tried to join forum but we had issues with name we tried for hours.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Plummy

Banned player has actually tried to join forum but we had issues with name we tried for hours.

---

In fact I had the same issues trying to sign up on my phone ... All names were rejected . I only managed to join using my tablet instead .... A glitch maybe?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jerhunter44

If it's impossible to do something without c-heating in some way, that would deserve a ban for doing it, wouldn't it? Which would be completely relevant, as it is the actual explanation. The ban would be for behaviour deemed not to be possible without third party software and/or exploits. The talk of timings and impossibilities are a way of PROVING that the behaviour was wrong, as it goes against what the game could allow on its own.

Also, just wanted to point out, OP is not the banned player. The banned player hasn't said a word in defence on the forums, AFAIK.

---

WOW -- what an accusation disguised as a throwaway line!!

I think I read about this "logic" at the Salem Witch trials of the 1600s and at the US House UnAmerican Activities hearings in the 1950s.

If it's impossible (in our never-to-be-humble opinion) to do X, then if someone CAN do X, they c h e a t e d .

If you get a ban after doing X, Then it's for c h e a t i n g in pursuit of X (not because SC Software made a mistake).

If you don't defend yourself here for being accused of c h e a t I n g, then you must have c h e a t e d -- it could NEVER be that perhaps the banned player doesn't speak English.

I still don't see any EVIDENCE, but that's because we don't now and won't ever have ANY facts or proof HERE on the forum -- so I think we should stop accusing other players and acting like we know more than we do.

This is Rule 1 on the forum rules: http://forum.supercell.net/showthrea...-Rules-READ%21


Here are a set of rules for the forums. All members should read these before they begin posting:

1. We will not tolerate rudeness, insulting posts, personal attacks, harassment, name & shame, or purposeless inflammatory posts. Moderator and Staff decisions are final in these matters. Any abuse towards our Staff, Moderators and/or admins in any form will not be tolerated.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PerkyCox

WOW -- what an accusation disguised as a throwaway line!!

I think I read about this "logic" at the Salem Witch trials of the 1600s and at the US House UnAmerican Activities hearings in the 1950s.

If it's impossible (in our never-to-be-humble opinion) to do X, then if someone CAN do X, they c h e a t e d .

If you get a ban after doing X, Then it's for c h e a t i n g in pursuit of X (not because SC Software made a mistake).

If you don't defend yourself here for being accused of c h e a t I n g, then you must have c h e a t e d -- it could NEVER be that perhaps the banned player doesn't speak English.

I still don't see any EVIDENCE, but that's because we don't now and won't ever have ANY facts or proof HERE on the forum -- so I think we should stop accusing other players and acting like we know more than we do.

This is Rule 1 on the forum rules: http://forum.supercell.net/showthrea...-Rules-READ%21


Here are a set of rules for the forums. All members should read these before they begin posting:

1. We will not tolerate rudeness, insulting posts, personal attacks, harassment, name & shame, or purposeless inflammatory posts. Moderator and Staff decisions are final in these matters. Any abuse towards our Staff, Moderators and/or admins in any form will not be tolerated.

---

Lujain has tried to join but the Arabic has caused issues so I am her voice at the moment💪

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jerhunter44

If it's impossible to do something without c-heating in some way, that would deserve a ban for doing it, wouldn't it? Which would be completely relevant, as it is the actual explanation. The ban would be for behaviour deemed not to be possible without third party software and/or exploits. The talk of timings and impossibilities are a way of PROVING that the behaviour was wrong, as it goes against what the game could allow on its own.

Also, just wanted to point out, OP is not the banned player. The banned player hasn't said a word in defence on the forums, AFAIK.

---

/showthread.php/292672