The Mysterious Masked Multihunter..... Revealed

[MrBrick]

Originally posted by Redissal
If my bank manager is sacked because they've broken the law I expect (and will get) a public trial where I will learn exactly what they did.


Perhaps if you make the entire multihunting process transparent, tell us exactly what a multihunter can and can't do, what information they can get about a planet (password / fleet composition / tag / online status ?), what is logged and when it is checked, by whom, and how often, then people will be more satisifed. If you're not prepared to do that the best way to dramatically increase the players' confidence in the process is to forbid multihunters from playing the game. Sure that doesn't remove the conflict of interest entirely because they have friends who still play, but it goes a very long way. This was all discussed in round 4 and a descision made by Spinner. I don't understand what's changed.

"This is what we check on to obtain evidence of cheating, make sure you avoid the following whilst cheating"

[K-W]

Originally posted by WipeOut
You try to define their degree of professionalism by pointing out lack of transparancy, neglecting the obvious (and in my opinion, more important) accomplishment. Ranting on about a mistake they made (and that I agree with, they made a mistake) is simply unfair, as instead of this rant, they deserve some credit for their efforts. You have to see the bigger picture.

I give them credit. I pay them money. I've thanked PA crew before. You dont really have a point here. The fact that they do a job does not make them above scrutiny.

If they aknowledged that this was a mistake, i would be mostly satisfied.

[MrBrick]

Originally posted by MrBrick
He was neither untrained or unchecked. We do know what can go wrong, and attempt to stop things going wrong, believe it or not.

As I said previously, I am perfectly in tune with what your thoughts are, and agree that we have made a mistake in certain places. It doesnt change the fact that the Team is better off than ever with Parracida as a member.

[WipeOut]

Originally posted by K-W
I give them credit. I pay them money. I've thanked PA crew before. You dont really have a point here. The fact that they do a job does not make them above scrutiny.

If they aknowledged that this was a mistake, i would be mostly satisfied.

It is a matter of perception, if Parra's job would have been hindered by revealing himself, which I cannot judge myself (can you?), I think it would have been justifyable to do as he did.

And they did admit having made a mistake...

[Eventh]

Originally posted by MrBrick
"This is what we check on to obtain evidence of cheating, make sure you avoid the following whilst cheating"

"If you check enough things, cheating will not be an option". I guess it will never happend

but you can reveal some information without making cheating easier. if you make the admin log public, we would know who got closed and by who.. and it would aslo be more interesting to report people because we can see who gets closed and who gets punished..

[K-W]

Originally posted by WipeOut
It is a matter of perception, if Parra's job would have been hindered by revealing himself, which I cannot judge myself (can you?), I think it would have been justifyable to do as he did.

And they did admit having made a mistake...

Fine someone explain to me why parra had to be hidden to enhance the multihunting.

[WipeOut]

Originally posted by K-W
Fine someone explain to me why parra had to be hidden to enhance the multihunting.

That, I'd like to know myself as well, but is probably not going to be answered, as it would probably reveal compromising information about the methods they use.

[Redissal]

Originally posted by MrBrick
"This is what we check on to obtain evidence of cheating, make sure you avoid the following whilst cheating"

I didn't mean to imply it was a viable solution to the problem. For that reason and many others. The only practicical solution I see is that multihunters should not play.

[K-W]

I dont think theyve claimed that it was the case. From what I gleen his reason for being hidden was to avoid this hooplah before he did his work.

[Tempestuous]

I dreamt that one day the PA crew would listen to what we wanted.

I dreamt that one day they'd admitt it when they made a mistake.

I was simply optomistic.

[MrBrick]

Originally posted by Tempestuous
I dreamt that one day they'd admitt it when they made a mistake.

I was simply optomistic.

I believe I did. I think I quoted it on this page.

Originally posted by the secret hunter himself
I hid things so I could build up something, had I not hidden then I would have never been able to, because every action I would make would be scrutinized and compared to my past and explained in ways to fit the persons personal opinion, at least now I have facts to present.

[Tempestuous]

Originally posted by MrBrick
I believe I did. I think I quoted it on this page.

I only saw an excuse.

[WipeOut]

Scenario:

Germania, you are in the current top 10 as a player, and your galaxy is ranked 12th. You are GC of your galaxy, there is one player in your galaxy ranked 14th.

It is getting close to the end of the round where the people start using their saved recources to make the leap to the top spot...

Parra is multihunter, he announced this at the start of round 9.5...

A bloke, in the galaxy ranked 11th, and ranked 7th, where you are ranked 8th, cheats. You discover this, and come up with evidence and send this to Parra and his team.

The one player in your gal, who is ranked 14th, happens to get closed the moment you send your email to Parra. You didn't know (or didn't want to know at that point) that your galaxy mate cheated.

Due to this, your galaxy falls to rank 24....

The guy you reported is a former member of Titans...

The guy that got closed in your galaxy is Eclipse...

-end of scenario-

Imagine how you would scream and shout if this would have happened.

Yes, I can see the reasoning behind Parra not revealing his funcion.

[MrBrick]

Originally posted by Tempestuous
I only saw an excuse.

I freely admit that we have made a mistake, though I still believe that the mistake made is justifiable.

A means to an ends, if you will.

This doesnt make it any less a mistake, naturally. Another steep arc in a learning curve perhaps, or not. It can only be judged by individual opinion. If the decision made then, is wrong now, then so be it. We can but tell you our reasons, explain it's benefits and allow the community to voice it's opinion.

I dont expect PA Team's redemption. Nor do I expect you to leap to our defense.
I think you have seen the real aim of these actions, and would hope that you see the final result, which is a better hunting team. Whether kept secret or not, ParraCida is a trustworthy person, and thus has been given this role.

[K-W]

Hmm MrBrick I read that post 3 times it still doesnt make sense. You say you made a mistake, then you say you didnt.

Do you think reversing your previous policy and placing someone with a conflict of interest as a multihunter was a mistake?

Do you think it was a mistake to conceal the identity of a multihunter, when clearly it is something that your customers care about?

[Salt]

I personally feel the biggest mistake was to reverse the policy without announcing it. This begs the question: Are all multi-hunters allowed to play PA now or was this just a special case?

Once again the complete lack of professionalism and forethought seems to rear its ugly head in PA.

[MrBrick]

Conflict of Interest issue :

You say that everyone has natural bias, therefore always has an unavoidable conflict of interest. See your analogy of scientists. All they can do is what their "customers" expect from them to the best of their abilities. Thus trust comes into play. Parra is trusted. And thus the circle of argument will continue.


Mistake Issue - You cannot know you have made one until have it has happened. In this case, we have kept a "secret" which has now been outed, and cause issues. However, the overall outcome of our decision has been an extended period of development and improvement to the PA Hunting team, and therefore the game, thus becoming a justifiable "**** up" in my opinion.

Again, I will say that it doesnt make PA Team right, nor does it make you wrong. If anything, I would like to think that it demonstrates that good can come even from mistakes.

I'll be brutally honest, and say "We try our best, and that's the best we can do".

Mistakes will be made again no doubt, but I'm sure we 'll get things right too.

[Razorback]

Just a question, was the 2 rounds para did hunting r9+r9.5 or also r8 ?
I mean just a simple reasoning for that question, if an alliance has a multihunter onboard it can simply check things faster. We have seen some of the "weird" closings in r8 and r9 where a team member checked an account and closed it within 30 minutes (i.e. webangel attacking in r8 twice closed planets) while the "normal" player has to wait for weeks without beeing sure if actions are taken.
This gives an alliance an advantage. Simply from the faster accessability of pa ressources. not even to mention the earlier named "warnings" to buddies of how to prevent the "flags" of beeing caught. Or even the chance of getting alot of intel.
Im not saying with any word thats the case for para but i really question pacrews sanity on appointing players, even topplayers to help out with sensitive info.

What in the case of para really strikes me is the avoiding of public spotlight on him. I dont think you believe us selling the story of the loneranger who wants to uncover himself after he saved the world. Basically the fingerpointing was intended to be avoided. Because you certainly exspected the upraor if players found out a topplayer now admins the game and checks on things.
Im not saying Para did anything of this, but lets imagine para would just check one alliance especially, using his alliance arbiter access to just check on all those coords who are lets say "eclipse". Im sure he would find cheaters and thats fair and square but this would be instrumentalised for his own alliance, like i.e. the r8 fang story or the ldk accusations. So his alliance would gain from it in some way.
And please try to cut the **** about how save your system is and how everything is logged, you and i both know how easy it is for someone who has a buddy in the team to get things checked - looked after. 30 minutes ? without any report email or any bull****ting. Then its closed and deleted if found guilty.

[Razorback]

P.S. you ask us for faith in your decisions and you admit even yourself that you did mistakes and that the "multihunter" crew was kept in the darkness about their new buddy.
And still you cant explain why it was done or give any logical reasoning.
I think pa gambles alot on the trust and faith level while displaying more and more they are corrupt (Prince) and unprofessional.
Without trying to insult you, but might not be the best idea, simply to work on this major flaw again and to get things more "open" and "professional".
I think with some paint you could do much better and have more support then just with showing more and more how many ****ups you do (the ticks not stopping in time etc).

[Common Tater]

good work and good luck in the next round parra, too bad i never got the roids from your friend ahh well.. good luck to PaX at any rate.

[Wishmaster]

all will have the same problem as parra has, so I dont c why parra is less suited for the job than any other...
Let us just be glad somone wanna do the job.And slap us whne we cheat:-)

(btw parra: u f*cked an attack for me this round..recalled at eta 5 u tw*t:-) )

[ParraCida]

Focht:

I hid things so I could build up something, had I not hidden then I would have never been able to, because every action I would make would be scrutinized and compared to my past and explained in ways to fit the persons personal opinion, at least now I have facts to present.

I believe that is a logical explaination, I wanted a chance to build up a rep, to create some trust. Had I used my real nick I don't believe I would have gotten that chance.

To answer your question, no I never was a multihunter in Round 8, I started in round 9.0. Those 'coincidal' launches you speak of were simply the result of me telling people that I just handed over lockhead's login to zeus.

On your issue of a multihunter being able to give friends inside tips and special treatment, that is always the issue. None of my friends knew I was a multihunter so I certainly couldn't have told them, but the bigger issue comes down to trust ofcourse. So far I don't believe any of the hunters have done anything to betray that trust, all of them have shown nothing but dedication to their task and only reinforced the trust put in them by doing their job quite excellent. As we can see here it's imossible to keep anything a secret, so how fast would it be known that any admins would play favorites or tipped their friends off?

[ParraCida]

Originally posted by Common Tater
good job parracida!
of 5:5:1 not sure if i am correct.
how did your friend at 58:2:11 (kiwiland)

wheesh of 3 attacks on that planet which was inactive for some time suddenly sprang to life once more and got fleet protection from only one planet out of gal..out of cluster. but anyways
good job on the covering fleets wish you were able to help them with the other inbound hostiles as fast as you were with mine lol.

That is Ragazzi, I have complete logs of me asking and him sending defense, I also defended him on numerous occassions, hes a rl friend of mine that I've met during a PA meet.

[Razorback]

Why would you have to build up a reputation if multihunters werent playing at all ?? that makes no sense.

To counter your point prince incident was last round, so i wouldnt believe everything i read of how trustworthy the ppl are.
Im not sure you deserve all this cutting but how it was done was simply poor and unprofessional.
P.S. that someone abuses his powers must not be always visible and well known,

[ComradeRob]

The one thing that confuses me about this is how someone managed to think that this was a good idea, considering what happened last time a top player was also a multi-hunter.

For those who didn't play then, this was the case of Moridin in round 4. Moridin was a long-standing PA Crew (as it was called back then) member, having been part of PA Crew since the end of round 1 (in which he finished #1).

In round 4, he was doing very well, with a top 10 planet at the time. However, he happened to hit a planet which was closed moments after his launch, and resulted in him capping a large number of roids for very little losses. It was never proved that he used inside information about closures to attack a planet moments before it was closed, but it raised serious questions about the ethics of players also being multi-hunters.

After a very long debate, the decision was taken that multi-hunters should be forced to choose between multi-hunting and active play. This was a step towards greater 'professionalism' within PA Crew, and almost everyone supported it.

To put it very simply, ParraCida being a multi-hunter in r9.5 breaks the rule which has stood for almost two years. The fact that his identity was hidden also made sure that nobody found out about this until it was too late .

So, we can only assume that the rule was reversed, and that the multi-hunters are no longer forced to stay away from active PA playing.

I think this opens up a big debate about the perceived neutrality of the multi-hunters. Whether or not Parra abused his position, I do not know. In the past, however, he has been a very partisan figure, someone who has taken sides in many alliance conflicts and has made many enemies within the game.

This is the problem - people have to feel that they can trust the multi-hunters, and PA Team in general. The presence of active players, people who might be attacking them or defending them right at that moment (Parra attacked me last round, for example, in a joint attack with several large LDK planets) in PA Team is cause for concern amongst ordinary players. They might feel that their reports are being ignored because of bias amongst the multi-hunters. And this causes people to lose trust in the multi-hunters, and that causes people to quit the game.

Please understand that I am not accusing ParraCida of bias, just as most people did not believe that Moridin abused his position in round 4. It's not about the specifics of the case, it's about the general principle. Most people believed that this issue had been decided in round 4 and were perfectly happy with the decision made back then. Personally, I have to conclude that it was a mistake to change this decision

[Razorback]

Seconded

[Tactitus]

Thirded

But it's a waste of time--you can't make these people learn from their mistakes. :/

[Queen DAX]

Well Mit was in my r9 gal and btw (not very good at it ) j/k just more or less inactive all the time from my point of view. I knew he was on the pa team from day one pretty much and from about 2 weeks in i suspected he was a multi hunter (go me \o/ ) he didn’t have a Hugh score nor was his online activity the greatest *note he was always doing stuff for pa. Coding i think it was + heh.
About 1/2 in tot he round i got told he wasn’t playing anymore Because pa rules were Pa Team members wasn’t suppose to have planets. Of course this wasn’t by him but his alliance who chose to defend him anyway.

My question is why is it some can have planets and some cant ?
I understand it pays to be a member of the community and play to get enough inf. to know who to watch and who not to.

But if a player is part of the pa team Shouldn’t he not forfeit his rights when it comes to be able to be declared a winner of the round independently or galaxy wise ?

When you work or are a family member of a big corporation lets use coke cola for example and you enter one of there contest
you can not claim the prize because all employees and family members are excluding in contest rules.

Something to look at when your operating a business.

this is not a dig at Mit being inactive or Parra being a multi hunter but more so on the standards in which this game is played and it ethics.

[Zo0f]

I dont think i could of said it any better than ComradeRob. Seconded.

[JonnyBGood]

Clearly (or at least clearly in my opinion) the task of multihunter is a very difficult one. What the PAteam need to do is weigh abilities versus liabilities in an extremely machiavellian fashion. If someone brings extra baggage to the team but are extremely good at their job then they will be granted extra privileges which others would not (some are more equal than others you know). Now currently the decision as to whether parracida's ability as a multihunter outweighs the fact he participates/has participated in the game at a high level, and all other such 'con's, lies solely with those in charge of PAteam. All we can do is recommend and suggest specific courses of action. One hopes that all rational arguments put forward are listened to and given due consideration based solely on the merits of each individual idea. However there is no guarantee, and unfortunately we do not have access to the level of information required to make a qualified judgement as to any of the multihunters' work.

Ultimately we are left with the choice of paying or not paying. Companies live and die on these decisions and it is their responsibility. We will see.

[MrBrick]

That, JBG, is what has happened.

ParraCida's "induction" has proved that the community opinion hasn't shifted. An experiment that has functioned. It was apparant that this was the case well before this thread appeared, with the reactions of globe's galaxy. After realising this we decided to abandon the idea of allowing hunters to play again, and return to the old ways in PAX.

Round 9.5 was a testing ground, and the test, to a degree, has functioned. The early unveling was never intended of course. Sorry about the lack of clarity in the earlier posts people, I was too involved in defending PA Team rather than explaining things.

Brick.

[Dave]

Originally posted by MrBrick

I could have given my best friend Dave 10000000 sentinels for the hell of it.

If Dave is in LDK or Eclipse or IPC, it wouldnt matter. I'd still be accountable for that action, caught and sacked.

Oh why did you never do that.

You meanie!

(This was meant in a humorous manor)

[Salt]

ComradeRob hit the nail on the head; that's the big thing.... perception. On the one hand you have Scouse praising the multi-hunters for their quick responses to his multi reports in another thread. He even got so lucky that 2 out of the 3 people he reported ended up deleted!!!! On the other hand you have someone who cheated on purpose and reported himself for two rounds running and was never closed.

Parracida could be the most unbiased person in the world....
Scouse might have just had two very blatant cheaters.....
KoRnNut's reporting himself may have slipped through the cracks...

Regardless of who is corrupt and what is mere coincidence you cannot shake the perceptions that people will inevitably draw from this sequence of events.

Ah, I see that you are now deeming it 'an experiment' to save face. Could not the same results have been reached without making pateam look incredibly unprofessional with a simple board discussion or poll on the topic?

[K-W]

Originally posted by MrBrick
Conflict of Interest issue :

You say that everyone has natural bias, therefore always has an unavoidable conflict of interest. See your analogy of scientists. All they can do is what their "customers" expect from them to the best of their abilities. Thus trust comes into play. Parra is trusted. And thus the circle of argument will continue.


Mistake Issue - You cannot know you have made one until have it has happened. In this case, we have kept a "secret" which has now been outed, and cause issues. However, the overall outcome of our decision has been an extended period of development and improvement to the PA Hunting team, and therefore the game, thus becoming a justifiable "**** up" in my opinion.

Again, I will say that it doesnt make PA Team right, nor does it make you wrong. If anything, I would like to think that it demonstrates that good can come even from mistakes.

I'll be brutally honest, and say "We try our best, and that's the best we can do".

Mistakes will be made again no doubt, but I'm sure we 'll get things right too.

This is what disturbs me. First you dont seem to understand the concept of a mistake. You have yet to actually state that this was a mistake without using doubletalk and saying it wasnt in the same post.


Since you blatently do not understand the scientist example I will try to explain it again. This is an experiment that is extremely well supported, it has been repeated many times.

Take groups of researches. Give them all indentical rats. Tell group one that thier rats are Maze Bright (means good at running mazes). Tell group 2 that thier rats are Maze Dumb. Have them all teach thier rats a maze. Group ones rats learn the maze faster than group 2's rats.

This phenomenom has been repeatedly demonstrated in other situations. This is why scientists use double blind tests where neither the person running the test doesnt know the objective.

The point is that perfectly good intentioned, intelligent, comeptetent people can subconciouly influence the results of thier work.

So it has absolutely nothing to do with trust. The simple fact is that people cant help it. That is why we remove conflicts of interest. You are correct that there are certain biases in all people, but you have to live with that baseline, that is by no means an excuse to allow obvious strong sources of bias.

That is tantamount to saying that since everyone lies sometimes we should put a pathological liar in an important public position. (not that anyone here is a liar, just pointing out your flawed logic.)

In the end rob stated it best. Its a matter of professionalism. There is no reason to have such a blatent conflict of interests. Its bad policy, and the fact that it was hidden makes it look even worse.

Round 9.5 was free, a test, fine, then I expect Parra to not play round 10 if he is going to keep his position. If he wants to play, then thank him for his great work. Let the community thank him, and find someone who is willing to take the position without having a planet.

[Petru]

Germ's just crying into his beer because one of "his side" wasn't picked.

Who better to catch sneaky players, than a former real player who knows what people do? As opposed to Joe Average pateam who hasn't had a huge amount of contact with "real" PA.

I was shocked when I learned it was him a while ago too, but I reasoned with why the choice was made.

I can see the logic behind the choice. I can see why people aren't happy with it. But I feel far safer knowing that a knowledgable player did/is doing hunting than a cloud cuckoo land person who's never played or never had contact with cutthroat PA players.

Noone is unbiased, it's a choice of 2 evils.

Parra doesn't do his job alone nor unmonitored or freehanded, there is a team and I can vouch for certain during 9.5 he was consistantly worried about accusations about his galaxy and consistantly asking other admins to maintain the watch on his own galaxy and yet again consistantly asking second, third and fourth opinions on decisions that would put his galaxy number one.

I do however think you'd be bitching far less if someone from "your" camp was the secret hunter, and that's not just a flame to rile you up (as much as I would enjoy such a flame, but nm). Deal with it.

[ParraCida]

As Brick already said, the whole starting up of the multihunter program was in essence an experiment. The fact that the function of 'multihunter' was being reinstated was a huge step. With the last impression on the community being a rather negative one it was obviously done in great secrecy. At first only the creators knew about it, later in Round 9.5 I joined the PA Team. I was allowed to keep a planet simply because I firstly could under the guise of my hidden identity, and secondly because I was being tested myself. Round 9.5 had little meaning, it was a free round that was riddled with cheating beyond belief.

I won't have a normal planet next round, as it showed that it just isn't practical. Shame really, because I do enjoy a good game of planetarion, on the other hand I had retired anyway and I did want to be a multihunter because I felt there was room for improvement. And judging by last round, with an unprecedented amount of closures and some proactive rulechanges there certainly was some improvement.

And yes, its all about perception, but ofcourse that is always in the eye of the beholder. For instance, would it add a dimension that one of scouse's reports was in fact an ex alliance mate, someone I actually played several games of WC3 with at that time. And ofcourse, people always slip through the cracks, I cannot tell you the amount of mail we have gotten last round, it was simply overwhelming.

I can only uphold the fact that I believe that the hiding of my identity had its reasons, that my actions speak for itself (for instance, I launched on comradebob in an ldk (galmate asked if I had ETA 6 fleet) coordinated attack, anyone care to count the closed LDK planets last round?). The thing is that before anyone becomes something in the PA Team it means they have some sort of relation with planetarion, for multihunters the bias issue always stands ofcourse, more so then for any other position perhaps. So can any multihunter by definition be completely neutral? And, even though I may have made my share of enemies in my high planetarion days, but I also know that I had a reputation of perhaps having a big mouth on the boards, but never has anyone outright questioned my integrity.

And Germania, I had no conflict of interests, I had no interests, my alliance was dead, my friends retired. It was pure coincidence that I landed in an active galaxy, so I agree that it could be argued that later I had 'interests' this was not an issue when I was hired so to speak.

[Mordac]

So ParraCida was the reason so many got cought this round?

bjeff bjeff

[Queen DAX]

Originally posted by Petru
Germ's just crying into his beer because one of "his side" wasn't picked.

Who better to catch sneaky players, than a former real player who knows what people do? As opposed to Joe Average pateam who hasn't had a huge amount of contact with "real" PA.

I was shocked when I learned it was him a while ago too, but I reasoned with why the choice was made.

I can see the logic behind the choice. I can see why people aren't happy with it. But I feel far safer knowing that a knowledgable player did/is doing hunting than a cloud cuckoo land person who's never played or never had contact with cutthroat PA players.

Noone is unbiased, it's a choice of 2 evils.

Parra doesn't do his job alone nor unmonitored or freehanded, there is a team and I can vouch for certain during 9.5 he was consistantly worried about accusations about his galaxy and consistantly asking other admins to maintain the watch on his own galaxy and yet again consistantly asking second, third and fourth opinions on decisions that would put his galaxy number one.

I do however think you'd be bitching far less if someone from "your" camp was the secret hunter, and that's not just a flame to rile you up (as much as I would enjoy such a flame, but nm). Deal with it.

Petru I think personnel digs are a little low especially coming from a person like you who suppose to have some integrity. This has nothing to do with alliances nor Germ personal belief alone but many see it the same way.

A company who hold contest or gaming events with prizes or awards cannot have 1 person of it staff of any sort be allowed to be in a position which will allow them to receive the benefits of the prize it can be and will be taken as a rigged event when the most innocent are involved. Say you entered the lottery and the person who draws the ticket acutely pick his own ticket instead of yours ? would you not question every action that lead to it ? No one is saying that Parra cheated but what they are saying what is stopping him from not taking advantage of it if he got a whim to do it. If Planetarion the company behind it have any respect for the people who are purchasing there product they would take every mean to make sure all devices are set to make sure the game is fair. IM 100 percent for multi hunters we need more of them in my book. But if you take a job you take a certain responsibility with it. If that means not having a planet to do the job. Or one that cant be in a position of gain so be it.

He knows alot about cheating,thats for sure
Im also intreagued about this "not playing activly part", will be fun to see what he does next round (rules be damned)

[genosse27]

innocent!

nqp

[HobbieRogue4]

After reading all of what's been said, Rob's mention of Moridin in Round 4 resonates most soundly with me. Knowing now that the policy of a multi-hunter has changed from "shall not play the game" to "once again to play as actively as Joe Average" is frightening.

MrBrick, you say this was an "experiment" but it seems to me that it's been done (re: Moridin). It went badly, and it appears as this may very well be headed in the same direction, despite differences between Mori's and Parra's situations (namely, I've yet to see anyone accuse Parra of actually abusing the powers he was entrusted with).

On the same token, WipeOut is correct, and Petru (to a fashion; the whole "camp" debate ran its course as late as Round 4, and I don't want to read a rehashing ) as well, in that I think several people are bitching for the sake of bitching.

The only mistake committed that I see is allowing ParraCida to play and possess such "hands-on" influence over the game (compared to, say, moderators on the PA forums). What I don't see are a) accusations (which says a lot actually) that Parra abused those powers whatsoever and b) the logic behind saying he should have been "known" as being a multi-hunter. In fact, I hope they continue to be unknown. In hindsight, one can complain about not knowing Parra was a MH, but that's only because he was actively playing the game.

People make decisions in this game (Creators) that often don't see eye to eye with the rest of us (Players), but we obviously deal with it. In most cases, we accept it, because we all appear to still be playing. On that note, I'd like to see an apology for allowing ParraCida to actively play the game while at the same time being a potential threat to the stability of the game (the whole "conflict of interest" argument), and then move on.

Again, I'm glad someone is looking out for us. Imagine if the likes of another cheater were to win another round of Planetarion, or otherwise achieve a ranking they don't deserve.

[Kileman]

Can I be a multi hunter? :>

Im teh leet cheater catcherer and very experienced, and I wont even play a planet

Although im still Fury but that wont matter.... will it? It will balance out any 'bias' (real or imaginary) at least.

(serious post btw )
________
M3

[Ad0]

Well let me first say that I find this whole thing amazing, my first reaction is to say that anyone complaining about Multihunters having planets should really come into the real world. We live in a world where conflict of interests can and do happen and we have to rely on the integrity and honour of individuals in these situations. Parra has been put into the situation where he "could" abuse the power, and he has a top galaxy, but since when are the two automatically linked ?

Parracida has pretty much always been a top player of PA, some may say he is addicted, but whatever the reason ever since round 5 he has been in some capacity in the upper levels of the PA community, whether being a top player or top gal. This much is unrefuted.

You all astonish me that you thing than ANYONE would do the job of multihunter and do it well without a) a planet (thus any interest in the game as a whole) and b) getting paid. I dont know this personally but I imagine reading through hundreds of multireports, checking ip's logs i just a barrle 'o laughs. And we should be thankfull that someone is willing to put something back into the community and do it WELL.

I for one do have a conflict of interest here, one of my best friends is being lynched for doing nothing but a) playing his best at pa , b) giving something back to the community and c) upholding the trust that mrbrick and spinner no doubt have in him. But even though this conflict exists I can make this post in the knowledge that its correct even though the conflict exists.

Guys.... Grow up, conflict of interests happen all the time, some conerns are valid and vigilance is warranted, some people do betray the trust, but why dont we work on the principle of innocence before guilt here. In my view the PA team for ONCE have handled something relativly well, appointed someone who is capable of the task and has imoproved its efficiency, why not give them a break and let them police internally.

[Goatsemaster]

You don't consider yourself somewhat biased in this discussion, do you Ad0?

[Goatsemaster]

Originally posted by genosse27
innocent!

nqp

The real issue here isn't whether or not he abused his position. It's whether or not PAteam want to have another 'Moridin' situation. It obviously seems like they do.

[HobbieRogue4]

Originally posted by ******master
You don't consider yourself somewhat biased in this discussion, do you Ad0?

What in Christ's name does that mean?

Pardon, how is even remotely relevant to the discussion at hand?

[Goatsemaster]

Originally posted by HobbieRogue4
What in Christ's name does that mean?

Pardon, how is even remotely relevant to the discussion at hand?

Ad0 seems to be defending ParraCida for no other reason that he's his best friend. A bit like Germania seems to be attacking ParraCida for no other reason that he's not his best friend.

I don't mean to say that he has no right to defend him, but his position hardly seems objective. Keep in mind that in my opinion there's no point in rehashing r9.5 and what Parra may or may not have done in it. The interesting discussion here is whether a multihunter can/should play actively or not. And in that, Ad0 is quite clearly taking a biased stance because ParraCida is his friend. Of course, I also missed the point where he pointed this out, so it's pretty much void.

[Ad0]

Originally posted by ******master
Ad0 seems to be defending ParraCida for no other reason that he's his best friend. A bit like Germania seems to be attacking ParraCida for no other reason that he's not his best friend.

The real issue here isn't whether or not he abused his position. It's whether or not PAteam want to have another 'Moridin' situation. It obviously seems like they do.

No No, please read my origional post I STATED that there IS a conflict of interest here, that he is my friend and thus yes I am biased. My point is and there was a slither of irony in the post (not that I would expect anyone to see that), is that it is possible to have an opinion , be involved in a conflict of interest and STILL have a valid point, just as Parracida can be a multihunter have a top planet and have commited no wrongdoing and given the PAcrew no reason to doubt his integrity.

As for my reasons for defending parracida, in exception of the "he is my friend" argument, I happen to believe he is a trustable and honourable guy, and not someone who woudl abuse power to achieve top status. He gets top status whithout it so whats the need to abuse admin ?

As for the mordin situation I wasnt around then, but do you believe that Parracida's action go unchecked and untraceable by the PA crew ? do you believe that spinner would implement a set of tools with no method of accountability or event tracking ? please.....

(ahh you saw my point.. then 80% of this post is void)

[Mit]

Originally posted by Queen DAX
Well Mit was in my r9 gal and btw (not very good at it ) j/k just more or less inactive all the time from my point of view. I knew he was on the pa team from day one pretty much and from about 2 weeks in i suspected he was a multi hunter (go me \o/ ) he didn’t have a Hugh score nor was his online activity the greatest *note he was always doing stuff for pa. Coding i think it was + heh.
About 1/2 in tot he round i got told he wasn’t playing anymore Because pa rules were Pa Team members wasn’t suppose to have planets. Of course this wasn’t by him but his alliance who chose to defend him anyway.

My question is why is it some can have planets and some cant ?
I understand it pays to be a member of the community and play to get enough inf. to know who to watch and who not to.

But if a player is part of the pa team Shouldn’t he not forfeit his rights when it comes to be able to be declared a winner of the round independently or galaxy wise ?

When you work or are a family member of a big corporation lets use coke cola for example and you enter one of there contest
you can not claim the prize because all employees and family members are excluding in contest rules.

Something to look at when your operating a business.

this is not a dig at Mit being inactive or Parra being a multi hunter but more so on the standards in which this game is played and it ethics.

Round 9... hrm, i can't remember what happened then, oh yeah, i was with Dovey / Deven / Cypher / Elviz / Rookie etc - and wasn't inactive then.

Round 9.5 however, i don' tknow the gal well, i never got time to get to knwo anyone. At the start of the round, it was coding stuff i was doing, sorting out an IRC bot (not quite finished yet). But later on, when i took up the post of Multihunter, i gave up "serious" playing, left my alliance, left all the gal / cluster / parallel chans etc.

Personally, as a PA Team member, i don't think we should be forced not to play, granted, i can see certain members of PA Team shouldn't be allowed to play seriously (the hunters / admins), but we should still be allowed to have a planet and 'attempt' to play. Would you give up lots of your time to work voulenterily for PA, if u then weren't allowed to play?

Whether or not he mis-used his powers to gain an advantage is a bit of a moot point, after all this is just a game...

But even if he was 100% legit, and as honest and impartial as humanly possible... it looks suspicious seeing as the #2 gal (which i was a member of) had a ton of planets and resources deleted, which would have easily put us in first place.

I'm not saying he cheated, i'm just saying it looks bad... The example of a person selecting their own lottery ticket rings in my ears.

"Abstain from all appearance of evil." 1 Thess 5:22