Am I correct in thinking that the pieces are placed randomly in froglet ? It's just that I've noticed 2 of my games in the same tournament have what appears to be the same layout.. games 447881 and 447884

Oh drats!! hehe.. that explains it..

You are meant to jump the frogs, not the opponents LMAO

Is anyone else noticing lack of scores in their froglet games?

Because Myself and a couple of others are a thorn in the side of management LOL

We say what we feel and tell what we think, rather than say what others want us to say or say things to [bad language edited].....Brown nose

*edited to put my post right after editing by Harley to remove not swearing bad language...go figure*

Thanks. That's a wonderful resource, I'm thinking of timing out if the bug isn't corrcted in time but if such a possibility is available I wouldn't like to seem churlish.

Steve: Why do you think we'd pick you for the a-h of the week?

The tournament starting process has been acting very strange the past day or so.

Take for example my "Fast Start Froglet" tournament. Currenlty as I write this, #1-6 has started, #7 & #8 are in the waiting stage, and #9 has started (passing up #7 & #8)

& a couple of others are "stuck" in the waiting games section - will add this to Bug Tracker.

I disagree. I think the paid users here can expect to know what is done when someone not only opens an additional account but accepts a membership for that account. Like it or not, Long John played in a pawn tourney with his QWERTY account and won a membership. I think this IS a matter for all of us to know what is being done. It violates more than the user agreement. Or is there no teeth there?

Handling multiple accounts and possible multiple accounts is my problem and I am not going to discuss about it.

1) I agree with harley that you should let Fencer handle it. He knows about the problem, and will deal with it (if needed to be dealt with) in his own time frame. [If he takes too long, people complain. If he steps up and removed people & Fellowships quickly, people also complain. no win situation for Fencer!] He has always dealt with issues like this in the past, but sometimes it takes awile.

I actually have 2 test accounts that I have used: 001 & 002. 001 is the only that I mostly use, but had to have 002 one time when I was testing a bug which let pawns play in Fellowship tournaments. (fixed now). I don't even use these accounts for practice, just for trying to find bugs to keep Fencer busy! :-)

One thing am not assuming is that I personally know 3 people who have admitted to having multiple accounts without special permission, and this has been the case for a long time now. IMO it is not the impression that this site wants to make when the user agreement prohibits it.

I think one problem for Fencer is that he simply does not delete any accounts at all. There are hundreds of abandoned accounts here, and Fencer cannot delete them without making his membership ranks shrink, so deleting these multiple accounts is not in his best interest, and neither is kicking out a paying member. so even thought the user agreement prohibits it, my guess is that unless the user is proven to be using the accounts to boost their ratings, it is in Fencers best interest to ignore the breach of the agreement.

BBW..what is the moniker for that account, and are all the games you play with it against yourself (BBW) and unrated? Or do you play with two seperate "test" accounts against each other?

Is it acceptable for us all to have sperate accounts to play test games with? I think it is a great idea to be able to practice different game strategies, where you dont have to play a game to completion etc.... I think everyone should be able to play 'practice' games in this manner, just to make it fair for all members....

You're assuming a lot, IM! We should 'assume' that Fencer has things in hand and knows what he's doing.

So we should assume that even though there are many people who admitedly have multiple accounts without special permission, that it is still unacceptable to have them ourselves?

I would assume that either Fencer has dealt with the matter to his satisfaction and there are reasons the account has been left - or that Fencer is still dealing with it.

Yes, I was playing with a test account which Fencer knows about - which I don't play real games or real tournaments - and I even put in the description it is a test account. :-)

How did you test it BBW? Are you playing against yourself with two accounts? LOL

So, Harley, if we are not entitled to know what is being done, then all we can do is assume, and since people with more than one account are still here, and all their accounts are still here, we must assume that nothing has been done about them. If nothing is being done, then what is keeping others from doing more of the same?

In reply to: ughaibu (Backgammon bug - swap dice)

As a note, if you swap dice on your very first turn, it then thinks it's the opponents turn (Bug)

But if you do pass it, even if the opponent swaps, it will stay their turn. (I was playing and already tested that the other day.) The original bug still needs fixed, but it should not go into any loop or anything.

IM, why do you keep calling me 'management'? I have no say in these matters. Fencer and Liquid alone are 'management'.

Stevie, yes, I guess it DOES depend who they are since you openly admit to having 2 other accounts and nobody rips you apart for them.

IM, if you report a bug then I agree you would be entitled to hear the outcome of that report. However if you report a misdemeaner then your part is done and you should let Fencer get on with his part. Plastering it all over every board doesn't help. Have a little faith.

Also, it truely IS a grey area when there are people who actually ADMIT to having multiple accounts, yet you (management) says it is UNACCEPTABLE! How can it be unacceptable and accepted at the same time?

depends who and what they are "alledged" to have done

The problem is that there have been reports to Fencer, but there have been no response to what, if any, action has been taken, I think that if I report a bug or problem,(including multiple account report) should be entitled to hear about any action tfrom that report, ie 'that report has been invewstigated, and there is not difinitive evidence, or it has been investigated, and found to be true, and such and such action has been taken, or this has been noted and is a situation with special circumstances' etc... Again, if we see what appears to be a breach of the rules, and we also see no consequences for this breach, then what is stopping everyone else from commiting the same violation?

OK...Just read your latest post Harley. Thanks for the clairification... The rule HAS been broken. Now if there are no consequences for a rule breach, it seems that would lead to more breaches.

Could you clairify for me please... are multiple accounts for one person prohibited, regardelss of whether or not they use them to cheat or if they are inactive? Thanks for any help :)

Its not a grey area. Read the user agreement, its quite clear, one account per person. Any more than one account is not acceptable. I don't find that a grey area.

What is not acceptable to me is ANY member being torn apart in public over numerous boards and a long time period for allegedly having more than one account.
If this is suspected, then it should be reported to Fencer and then left for him to deal with.

As members, we need to know what is acceptable and what is not acceptable....some subjects are obvious, but when there is a grey area ie multiple accounts, it is important for it to be clairified by Fencer or some other member of management. It is also absolutly a concern for you as a member of said management.

OK harley but it was a clever post. LOL

And just to reply directly to you, Bwild, multiple accounts is an appropriate subject for this board. (But not much of a conversation subject since the rules are simple - only ONE account per person.) But specific cases of where this rule has been broken is NOT a concern of the whole of BK.

Thats enough. I don't know anything about Long John and this alleged double account. I don't need to know because its not my business. Its none of your business either. If its been reported you can be certain that Fencer is dealing with it, or has dealt with it. There is no reason why he should post the sordid details to everyone. I would be grateful if you would delete your own posts here (the ones not concerning the subject).

They are ........"The management"

LOL

Stevie..arent they the "Brains of Brain King"?
U have any better names?

I agree with bwild harley... The members of this site do need to know if what it members are doing is acceptable, and if so is it acceptable for everyone, or are there special circumstances, or is it unacceptable. I personally am tired of hearing about it, and dont really care who has what accounts, or how they got them....but it is not going to go away until Fencer does something to make it go away.

There already is one. It's called The Cave.

With those three as jury, id be spending a fortune :o(

Me thinks a Bad behavior board is a brilliant idea.
Every week end a jury (Fencer, Harley and Kevin) decide who is the a-h off the week and he/she has to pay $ 25 as penalty.

Well..i thought (still do) that a-pass is brilliant too :(

Thats right id 7929 and 8129

I have the cahoonies to not lie about them :o)

big difference,longjohn...those accounts werent boosted by a prize tourny.

you mean Connor and Glenda?
LOL

pimple can moderate the "bad behaviour" board....he knows all about what it feels like to be banned for CHEATING!!

Family accounts Purple :o)
Just like the saprano's on here LOL

ooops sh...... oh pooh, sorry ;o)

Laughing at serious posts is very bad behavior Stevie!!! :)

LMAO

Why not a board called "Bad behavior".

There could all members who dont follow the rules be "nailed"..for example for using bad language, multiple accounts and of course the worse "crime" of all.. requesting auto-pass :)

I'm afraid I have to disagree.As a feature of BrainKing.com....only ONE account is allowed.unless I'm mistaken...this also has to do with the structure of BrainKig.com.
If one person is allowed to fool people and take advantage of the good will of prize tournies,designed to SUPPORT BRAINKING......then be kept "hush hush"...why not let everybody CHEAT!!!!

IMupChucKing and anyone else who has posted about this - I feel it is a matter that should be dealt with in private between LongJohn and Fencer. It certainly isn't a matter for this board. Whatever Fencer is doing about it doesn't need to be broadcast for public interest. I would appreciate no more posts about this matter. Thank you.

will you please do us all a favor, and weigh in publicly on the Long John / qwerty girl situation? It would be nice to put that subject to rest, one way or another...Thanks!

Good points Kevin... also, total number of moves definitly should not be used.....

nother unsuggested idead is to measure it by the amount of people who will sign up for a non prize tournament, that seems to be a good indicator of popularity.

The backgammon first roll bug is quite a problem. I've swapped dice and now the machine thinks I've lost the roll but if I pass the game to my opponent they'll probably also want to swap the dice and the whole palaver will continue ad infinitum.