Jump to content

Smurf tag.


Emperior
 Share

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, guerringuerrin said:

Now, because @G.O.A.T forced me to do this I will show you the few things I collected to prove I'm not WilsonWilson:

Needless to say I will do the same the day I see xaiki.
I think this is enough prove to ask @G.O.A.T to remove his claims. Are you agree @Philip the Swaggerless, @Darkcity @Player of 0AD, @Sevda, @Dakara?

Any logic based on geoloc or reverse DNS fails by design. Any claim should be de facto accepted...  @Stan`

But @G.O.A.Tseems also adding rumors... Phyzic has not played a single game since this mod is being developed (to be frank I know the rumor about @Player of 0AD). Unless replay metadata stores networking data. checking...

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Norse_Harold said:

You're not violating GDPR by collecting anonymous information about players. It's not personally identifiable. Don't worry about what rm-rf is saying about that. But, please, follow your own rules, as well.

@Norse_HaroldOf course he is. Please read carefully the links I posted in this thread. In any anon network capture, you have to hide the ip addresses, etc. And sanafur has to ask consent for the data he is storing from the end user. Read the popup before you connect to the lobby...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, rm -rf said:

Please read carefully the links I posted in this thread. In any anon network capture, you have to hide the ip addresses, etc. And sanafur has to ask consent for the data he is storing from the end user. Read the popup before you connect to the lobby...

Okay, I've read the links that you shared, in particular gdpr-info.eu. I found the excerpt that you mentioned about "online identifier", which articles say means IP address.

In fact, an IP address might or might not be personally identifiable information. It depends on whether the controller of the information has enough information to determine the natural person associated with the IP address.

"... applies to IP addresses. If the controller has the legal option to oblige the (Internet service) provider to hand over additional information which enable him to identify the user behind the IP address, this is also personal data."

Source: https://gdpr-info.eu/issues/personal-data/

Even if there were evidence of a criminal act against the data collector, I don't think that an ISP would hand over the identity of a person using an IP address to a data collector who is a civilian. Maybe the information could be obtained by the data collector during a trial in which the data collector was the plaintiff.

Anyway, the only time that an IP address is personal data is if the collector has access to other data that would reveal the natural person associated with that IP address.

Edited by Norse_Harold
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Norse_Harold said:

Okay, I've read the links that you shared, in particular gdpr-info.eu. I found the excerpt that you mentioned about "online identifier", which articles say means IP address.

In fact, an IP address might or might not be personally identifiable information. It depends on whether the controller of the information has enough information to determine the natural person associated with the IP address.

"... applies to IP addresses. If the controller has the legal option to oblige the (Internet service) provider to hand over additional information which enable him to identify the user behind the IP address, this is also personal data."

Source: https://gdpr-info.eu/issues/personal-data/

Even if there were evidence of a criminal act against the data collector, I don't think that an ISP would hand over the identity of a person using an IP address to a data collector who is a civilian. Maybe the information could be obtained by the data collector during a trial in which the data collector was the plaintiff.

Anyway, the only time that an IP address is personal data is if the collector has access to other data that would reveal the natural person associated with that IP address.

For a person to be identifiable, according to the GDPR, doesn't mean that you need to be able to fetch his full name (and birthdate...) from the data you have stored. It only means that he can be distinguished from other people.

"At its most basic form, whenever you differentiate one individual from others, you are identifying that individual. Any individual who can be distinguished from others is considered identifiable." (https://gdpr.eu/eu-gdpr-personal-data/)

Considering the accusation being that both usernames and IP addresses are collected, we would need to consider multiple kind of identifiers: the username, the IP address, or the pair (username, IP address). From what I've read, the username is enough by itself. But let's develop a bit:

What is an "online identifier" according to the GDPR? They provided in their website a non-exhaustive list containing IP addresses, cookie identifiers, RFID. (same source as above). But it is non-exhaustive, and from https://ico.org.uk/for-organisations/guide-to-data-protection/guide-to-the-general-data-protection-regulation-gdpr/what-is-personal-data/what-are-identifiers-and-related-factors/ we have a more detailed description:

"Other examples of online identifiers that may be personal data include:

  • MAC addresses;
  • advertising IDs;
  • pixel tags;
  • account handles; and
  • device fingerprints."

And even more precise: "An individual’s social media ‘handle’ or username, which may seem anonymous or nonsensical, is still sufficient to identify them as it uniquely identifies that individual. The username is personal data if it distinguishes one individual from another regardless of whether it is possible to link the ‘online’ identity with a ‘real world’ named individual."

Spoiler

The source here is the UK GDPR but it doesn't differ from EU GDPR wrt. identifiers https://www.gdpreu.org/differences-between-the-uk-and-eu-gdpr-regulations/ "The UK’s GDPR uses a common format with the EU’s original legislation. This means it’s pretty much identical. To remain GDPR compliant, those working with information systems must follow the same rules as the EU’s GDPR lays out."

Here the username collected are tied to account created in 0AD lobby, which fits the description.

What about IP addresses? (by themselves): I have to say that the EU GDPR website is not very clear on the subject. It is true that multiple people can hide behind the same IP address. For example, it can cover an household. But even the ISP can't precisely identify one user behind an IP address, at best it identifies an household, and even that is unreliable because of potential wifi sharing, or perhaps hacking. From what I remember, that detail has proven to be important in court, invalidating some proofs featuring IP addresses. But then, why again was the IP labeled as "online identifier"? Maybe because it does discriminate users most of the time even if not 100%? Maybe because they wanted to voluntarily leave some doubt to make it easier on the court, for them or for service providers.

 

On another note, WFG had to get GDPR compliant, and they don't collect more meaningful identifiers than usernames or IP address (ask @elexishow much effort he put into the GDPR compliance). Some more info in https://trac.wildfiregames.com/wiki/UserDataProtection

 

That said, this doesn't mean GDPR can be applied in this situation, maybe this part (from my first source) can be debatable:

"Furthermore, the GDPR only applies to personal data processed in one of two ways:

  • Personal data processed wholly or partly by automated means (or, information in electronic form); and
  • Personal data processed in a non-automated manner which forms part of, or is intended to form part of, a ‘filing system’ (or, written records in a manual filing system)."
Edited by Feldfeld
  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, guerringuerrin said:

In other thread I asked @G.O.A.T to remove xaiki and wilsonwilson as my smurf names since they are not me. He didnt answer neither removed. 
I repeat it again in loud voice: THIS ACCOUNTS ARE NOT MINE and if someone keeps accusing me of that he must SHOW ME THE PROOF AS HE SHOULD DO IN ANY CIVILIZED ENVIROMENT

It seems like anybody con acuse someone of smurf without giving those proof and we are ok with it. Not a big deal, right? Well, is it a big deal to me.

I've being force to answer questions of 0ad friends asking me if I was using this 2nd and 3rd account. People who I respect and I care about what they think about me are now wonder if i'm not fooling them with lies. And I can notice how the paranoia atmosphere is getting bigger. I don't want to be dramatic. I still think this is just a minor issue and it's better not to give him too much attention or ourself will get it bigget than it is. But this questions happened. And I feel bad for that.

Also this @G.O.A.T sent me a private message with "smurf tag" as topic in a clear reference to my intervention in this thread with only a banana. In a clear intention of harras me or being rude because my way of think about this  "big issue".
And then he didn't tell me anything else.

Also who is this @G.O.A.T in lobby? It seems he can use a disguise but we can't? What rights he has to do that? Maybe he uses this nickname, I never saw him online. So I won't go further and ask what is his real name on Lobby. Or maybe I should apply the same principle and ask him to prove everybody he is not using multiple accounts.

Now I'm being forced to prove myself as a non smurfer and not the other way around. I don't know how we turned around the Principle of Innocence and here some people believe they have the right to accuse someone and -again- not give ANY PROOF to sustain his accusations.

Ddosing has being a worse problem and I know few people getting involve and working hard trying to catch ddosers or even creating mechanism to avoid it. And most of the time these people were very careful in terms of sharing his suspicions with everybody in clear responsabile attitude about his claims and actions. I also  never seen a ddos wall of shame...

About the big issue for the pro players. I want to ask you in good faith. How many times you have lost rating in 1v1 against a smurf? How many games were ruined because one smurf came and turn upside down the balance you tried to make?

I'm sure most of us needs just a few games, three as much to realize someone is a smurf. Most of the case we doesn't even need to play to realize. We see one new name coming to our game and we can ask one or two simple questions to realize if this new name is brand new or if he has experience. 

Some people say this is an issue for new players because they are deceived by pro smurf who ruin his games. I don't believe this is an issue for new players. They mostly are full of energy and wants to learn.  U know what is a big issue for new players? Harrasing, bullying, being called "noob, cosmic, piece of sh*t, full-trash" U know what is an issue for many no white-caucasic-european-hegemonic people? Being called favela, banana republic, sudaka, nig*g*a: being called spaniard sh*t, for example. Xenophofia, toxicity, ddosing.

Those are big issues if we want to get involve with something. And I can keep on with the big issues: performance problems, lag problem, convincing people to use community-mod that we all know the benefits it has; lack of developers getting involved in the projects; whole game balance problems. 

Then, if some of you wants to go further with this mod, and thinks this could be a great help to improve balancing and all you have said in this thread. All right, go on, this is a free world.

BUT I need to ask you all: don't acuse me or anybody of being a smurf, or having another accounts without giving proof. It's not right and it's unfair to force people to prove his innocence.
Now I ask particulary to @G.O.A.T to remove those claims about me or to show the proof to everybody, here in the thread, as he should do in any modern trial.

Now, because @G.O.A.T forced me to do this I will show you the few things I collected to prove I'm not WilsonWilson:
Needless to say I will do the same the day I see xaiki.
I think this is enough prove to ask @G.O.A.T to remove his claims. Are you agree @Philip the Swaggerless, @Darkcity @Player of 0AD, @Sevda, @Dakara?


Also I wish you to know I don't have nothing personal against any of you or anyone who finds this mod a good idea. Particulary you @Philip the Swaggerless you were always kind to me and I never saw you behaving toxic or something like that. I'm telling this to you just in case. Same applys to @Darkcity and @Player of 0AD they also teach and give advices in a good manner, but just in case, I've added this explanation to you and not being missunderstood.
Cheers and long live to zero ey-dee

1617128584_Gamelist-3.thumb.jpeg.0196ce81e1cdad46af48e54eed26cf92.jpeg
image.thumb.png.f9ba6c5f095c2b14988c5ebede3d3d6c.png1064772174_Gamelist-2.thumb.jpeg.882e740cd145c541105b52bf3494d98f.jpeg

 

 

923904048_Gamelist-1.thumb.jpeg.dff79bb4b0fa87697c03e82f1be24c2c.jpeg
image.png.779e12cf3ff02e85dd637550d22de18e.png

smurf it very little issue compare orther issue like ddos or noob bashing.

this topic deserve a delete  and she is false for half of name in the list. 

--

I assume that I have already used other accounts out of simple desire or simple madness, I have never pretended to be a beginner. In addition, I don't particularly shine in team games and if I come with an account at 1800 odds I can be certain in hours of uncrowded play to play 1 vs 3 in a 4 vs 4 game. So with a smurf at 1500 point I make games much more balanced for everyone.

I also made a second account for a cousin (account shared with him) because we find it funny, we have an almost similar level. And if you don't like it, I piss you all off. Give us lessons and we will not forget your 4th dose of vaccine and complete your application for the los golemos energy pass

 

Edited by Dakara
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@guerringuerrinbest would be just private msg to me, having too many  notification I almost overlook your post :banana:I will review your request. Patience with me. 

@DakaraWould you mind to provide that shared account name? I would be blessed to enhance my personal notes.

@hyperion What a democratic country for sure :) In my country we don't have such mess. but still, no judge no prison right? 

 

Motto of this discussion  could be:
If you throw a stone at the geese, the one that feels it squeals most

  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, G.O.A.T said:

@guerringuerrinbest would be just private msg to me, having too many  notification I almost overlook your post :banana:I will review your request. Patience with me. 

@DakaraWould you mind to provide that shared account name? I would be blessed to enhance my personal notes.

@hyperion What a democratic country for sure :) In my country we don't have such mess. but still, no judge no prison right? 

 

Motto of this discussion  could be:
If you throw a stone at the geese, the one that feels it squeals most

Already in the list (Français) but eow is not me , my other old account is azerkeydovic but I don't play in team game only nomad and mod without economy 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@G.O.A.T I´ve already given proof to you. 

As I showed in my last post you assaulted me by private message with a banana and when I answered you never wrote me again.

Now you are using a banana again here. It seems to me like an open provocation. I ask you to explain to me what do you mean using a banana after I posted your private message with a banana and telling I took this as a provocation.

I don´t have to have patience with you. You insulted me before by private with no reason. You are accusing me without giving proof. I was forced to give explanations I don´t have to give to anybody because accusations YOU made. Furthermore you have no title here, you´re no moderator and no ones asked you to do what you are doing. Then, no one has to be considered with your witch-hunts method.

You still acusing me without proof in you public list. 

image.png.321f0711f05a5d3bcdd51a66cc600624.png

Edited by guerringuerrin
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@guerringuerrinyou should rather use reports to admin. @G.O.A.Tloves the mess he is creating (see the bananas) and his target is clearly not to make 0ad more balanced, more attractive or much adopted.. The fact you're pointed in a wall of shame without any proof is for my understanding an admin concern @Stan`

@guerringuerrinI even don't understand why you should give any proof. @G.O.A.T doesn't release any algorythm publicly. Then, for my understanding, sanafur has to prove you used multiple accounts; not the opposite. And again as found with TimidSmurf, sanafur's logic is based on IP which fails by design - nothing about your play or your behavior. And as highlighted by @Player of 0ADnow known as Phyzic, he also includes rumors in his list...

But we can agree on a few advises to @G.O.A.T. At first, he needs to follow networking training courses (and possibly legal ones too). Next, more important, if he loves 0ad, he must stop his mess.

Edited by rm -rf
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

G.O.A.T now lists the claim that WilsonWilson is guerringuerrin as "under review". There is also a new note at the beginning explaining that G.O.A.T does not claim that the information is correct, and that players should do their own research.

I agree, but it's not enough. Please have a higher standard of evidence for the accusations that you make. You saw how we refuted the claim that guerringuerrin is WilsonWilson. That should be part of the protocol.

Edited by Norse_Harold
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 01/09/2022 at 8:10 AM, G.O.A.T said:

This is funny, shared accounts leaked on this thread still not banned - hallowed by WFG team

Yesterday, user1 informed me that the leaked accounts are banned. I think that they have been banned for a while, but yesterday is when I was informed of it.

As for why it took so long for the accounts to be banned, it was necessary to update the Terms of Use to forbid account sharing and disclosing passwords. Then it was necessary for the new ToU to take effect, which happened when alpha 26 was released.

Clause 1b is the new clause that forbids account sharing and disclosing passwords.

Edited by Norse_Harold
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@G.O.A.T It's ok to keep the list since @Player of 0AD likes it. However, I would like you to put a justification or proof or even your logic for thinking that these 2 accounts are the same person. This will make your list much much more convincing and there will be a lot less angry arguments. Is my request reasonable?

For example, how did you come to the conclusion that weirdjokes in phyzic? Did you monitor his IP address or did someone snitch on him? If you add a sentence of explanation after everyone then the moderators will find your list much more useful and take actions. Currently, a list without any proofs is simple a weird joke. :D

What do you think? @Norse_Harold @Stan` @guerringuerrin @rm -rf @Dakara

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

P.S. I think there are 3 sources feeding GOAT's list:

1. He monitors the IP address of players in the lobby. When I forget to use a VPN, even the  most obsecure of my accounts that I have used only once got found out. But when I tunneled myself to Turkiye and Netherlands, my smurf accounts were given to other players. For example Hilal and Celal are my account and not berhudar's. (but those are from long time ago)

Furthermore, even the non-TG players and newer players who created second accounts were shown on the list, which enhances the suspicion, as no one would intentionally stalk every cosmic noob to look for signs of new accounts. 

2. Reports using personal messages (although I doubt there are many)

3. He joins the games as spectators or players and tries to grasp who is who based on playstyle. I'm still overjoyed that he thinks I am superPOSITION. Thank you for the approval!

 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think if the developers and the community feel that secondary accounts should be banned. 0.AD must reconfirm it. Otherwise we remove this rule and in the profile of the players it appears the year of creation of the account.

Many players who make secondary accounts do not do so out of bad intentions. A rule not understood is a rule rarely respected.
It is therefore necessary to better understand what bothers you in the use of secondary accounts. We are on the internet, a digital identity means nothing. Today I'm Dakara and in 2 months I can change my nickname.
Besides, is it possible or not possible to request the deletion of a 0AD account from the lobby?

---

Regarding this wall I don't really see the point, yes it's quickly fun to know who is hiding behind a secondary account. It's a little gossip, so ultimately useless information.

The only interest in knowing who owns a second account is if this account has very bad behavior. And in any case, the hosts are free to ban them from their game.
----

But frankly it's far from being the major concern on 0AD. The games are more and more elitist, the players disagree with each other and the ddos is always present (we even start to wonder if it's not just the game that bugs).

From my first games on 0AD so 2017 I used secondary accounts and I didn't do @#$% in my games.

What I think irritates people the most is the feeling of not seeing the names of known players, they are potentially on a secondary account. The lack of reference.

--

Insofar as the lobby is managed by USER1, he is the manager, he applies the rules he wants as long as they are written. But is it possible to change these rules? by making them softer or harder.

 

 

Spoiler

who is https://wildfiregames.com/forum/profile/36868-goat/ ? smurf account forum?

 

Edited by Dakara
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 23/01/2022 at 11:22 AM, Stan` said:

user1 is the last person. Dunedan was supposed to be a new one but I never managed to get him enough rights to make a change.

Who assigns these rights? and what are the tools of these moderators? Should they be accountable? Maybe we could add 1 or 2 trusted moderators. they must then be accountable for the information they consult or the accounts they ban etc.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, G.O.A.T said:

I made voting page, please provide me feedback. I feel so much hate here, show yourself publicly

 

@G.O.A.T I think you have already created enough mess in the community. It's time to stop sanafur and to stop acting as a little child. I would suggest to be very cautious about this behavior in real life because you cannot hide behind a second @G.O.A.T. @Stan`isn't it the right time to stop this thread and the wall of shame?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 22/10/2022 at 8:17 AM, Sevda said:

@G.O.A.T It's ok to keep the list since @Player of 0AD likes it. However, I would like you to put a justification or proof or even your logic for thinking that these 2 accounts are the same person. This will make your list much much more convincing and there will be a lot less angry arguments. Is my request reasonable?

For example, how did you come to the conclusion that weirdjokes in phyzic? Did you monitor his IP address or did someone snitch on him? If you add a sentence of explanation after everyone then the moderators will find your list much more useful and take actions. Currently, a list without any proofs is simple a weird joke. :D

What do you think? @Norse_Harold @Stan` @guerringuerrin @rm -rf @Dakara

 

 

Unfortunetly one missclick erased my whole answer to you. 

I keep my first opinion in this matter. This is not a community problem. It´s just a few op player's problem.

We don't even have TG rank points wich means the worst can be happen with an unknown players is realizing he's better than you expected and the next time you will know this.

I agree losing 1v1 ranked match against a smurf account it's unfair and should be prevented some way. I can understand frustration of someone who is trying hard to lvl up his rank points and got deceived by some smurf. But this is not the common case. Better use same tactic and play only with known accounts.

Considering the whole 0ad situation as game, we should be thinking in ways to make huge performance improvements, gui/lobby enhacements, creating some legal frame to use the money we have to pay some programmers or do something with that money so it doesn't just get devalued in some bank account, etcétera.... Showing account's age on profile it's the best effort-benefit ratio to void smurfs

Having this excellent open source game and how much potential it has to be the Worldwide Best RTS game in genre by far but it seems some weak points that can't be fixed make the whole project roaming in a dead end... Honestly it makes me feel kinda sad for the few people getting involved

On 22/10/2022 at 8:49 AM, Dakara said:

But frankly it's far from being the major concern on 0AD. The games are more and more elitist, the players disagree with each other and the ddos is always present (we even start to wonder if it's not just the game that bugs).

[...]

What I think irritates people the most is the feeling of not seeing the names of known players, they are potentially on a secondary account. The lack of reference.

Can't be more agree with you

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...