Statement from TEP

[Revall]

All I know is that Todd lost a Delegate election to Aelitia and now Aelitia, whom NationStates Moderation says is not multying, is in The Rejected Realms accused of multying, and Todd is Delegate again. Funny how that works.

Oh gosh Cormac went there! Jesus Whale must be turning in his grave.

This gentlemen, is why Cormac is the most interesting man in gameplay.

[Todd McCloud]

Hi, all.

Let me preface by saying I didn't want the delegacy. I realized during the election that I wasn't supposed to "win", and that is still true today. We needed someone new. I hoped for someone new. I want to ensure The East Pacific remains a bastion of freedom, democracy, and enlightenment, so it is prudent to me that others can take our wonderful region and carry on as a leader in the gameside and roleplay community that surrounds NS.

Earlier this week, I was in a talk about those who we have been disappointed over through the years. I mentioned Halc, but I did so biting my tongue. I was made aware of this issue and other issues, and if I felt I could speak my mind, I would have brought this issue to light. I've seen the evidence, both stuff that has been brought to trial and stuff I assume is coming to trial, and it's not good. He didn't need to do this stuff to get where he could have gone in TEP. I say this not as a Conclave member but as an administrator on our forums. Obviously, the Conclave will conduct a trial and judge accordingly, and impartial as our judiciary is, they'll recommend a sentence if he is found guilty.

I've read comments and heard chatter that we or specifically I somehow wanted this. That's not the case. Anyone who loves this region would never want this. I am comforted that those who know me understand that. This week has been awful, and you know me - I like to joke and lighten the mood. I like to see folks happy overall, even if it's at my expense. I don't mind that in this game. But I can't really spin this one. I'm disappointed. When we drafted the Concordat, I never thought we'd end up using that clause. I never dreamed I'd be the guy in the middle of such a transition.

Between this, Prussia retiring, McStooley and the chatter from those who didn't know what was really going on, and this, well, it's been a rather taxing year. Here's to hoping 2017 will be better for us all. In the meantime, as promised, I will act only as a placeholder in this. If Aelitia is found innocent, I and others will work to restore him. If he's guilty, I will abide by the Conclave and help the new delegate, whoever he or she may be. I will wrap up the improvement drive to clear that out of the way as well.

I thank our allies and their understanding and unending support. I also thank our region - this is a very tough time and people still remained on point and focused. We did this legally as a region, and it's because of the integrity and talent of everyone in TEP that things aren't worse. I also thank everyone for their understanding. This is not easy.

In the meantime, sit tight. TEP's government will sort this out and rule accordingly. It's just best right now to wait and have faith.

- Todd.

[Shadoke]

<snip> I recognize that defenders are very fond of a one size fits all approach<snip>

Um, hey there buddy,

All around raider, former-independent guy here. On multiple issues I have been directly against Tim and other defender opinions, but blanketing this as a defender way of thinking isn't solving anything. I support Tim's sentiment completely here.

[East Malaysia]

particularly its forum administration are "Todd McCloud and his clique," yes.

You do realize that you have no clue what you are talking about, right?

[Reploid Productions]

All I know is that Todd lost a Delegate election to Aelitia and now Aelitia, whom NationStates Moderation says is not multying, is in The Rejected Realms accused of multying, and Todd is Delegate again. Funny how that works.

Minor correction. We do not have sufficient on-site evidence to conclude that there is multying going on at this time. That is a far different thing from "X is not multi-ing." Subtle but very important distinction there, though if one of my colleagues worded it ambiguously in the #themodcave or in a response to a GHR, my apologies for the confusion. The available evidence to us at this time is not sufficient to make a ruling on.


~Evil Forum Empress Rep Prod the Ninja Mod
~She who wields the Banhammer; master of the mighty moderation no-dachi Kiritateru Teikoku

[Calvinistan]

<modly snip>

And to further clarify, while there was (in our eyes as the board adminsitration) ample evidence to act on TEP's forum, that isn't acceptable evidence on NS which is why we're here.

[Myrth]

We asked the Moderation team to investigate this for us, giving them all of our evidence. They confirmed they shared a IP address on NS, but because it was a phone IP address, it wasn't actionable. Our evidence was inadmissable on NS because it's still technically offsite evidence.

So, the way he's been avoiding detection in our eyes is just using his phone which apparently isn't as strictly enforced compared to residential addresses, while being much more brazen about it on TEP because he didn't expect us to have that level of scrutiny. I understand the usual mod team policy on phone IP addresses, normally, yes, two totally unrelated people can share a phone IP address, but given everything else to us it was far too coincidental.

Knowing more about the way the game detects UN multis than most, I can assure you that the IP address is but one small tool in the box. If there were any devices/connections genuinely being shared between accounts in the game, it is quite difficult to cover up unless you know what the game uses.

[Glen-Rhodes]

Knowing more about the way the game detects UN multis than most, I can assure you that the IP address is but one small tool in the box. If there were any devices/connections genuinely being shared between accounts in the game, it is quite difficult to cover up unless you know what the game uses.

Their replies to TEP suggest that there's actually very little going on behind the scenes than IP checks. We have a case of somebody being a proved multi-er, and yet NS can't seem to detect it. Perhaps Gameplayers have been strategically mislead into how sophisticated NS tech actually is.

[Ever-Wandering Souls]

Knowing more about the way the game detects UN multis than most, I can assure you that the IP address is but one small tool in the box. If there were any devices/connections genuinely being shared between accounts in the game, it is quite difficult to cover up unless you know what the game uses.

Their replies to TEP suggest that there's actually very little going on behind the scenes than IP checks. We have a case of somebody being a proved multi-er, and yet NS can't seem to detect it. Perhaps Gameplayers have been strategically mislead into how sophisticated NS tech actually is.

Would say it's more saying that a lot of their tech is less applicable to mobile than PC. Limitations. From what you might call *extensive* WA experience, I've seen a lot of false alarms that can't have been picked up on IP alone. Hints dropped seem to point at using info from your machine, as well as location and usage patterns, among other less hinted at things. As noted here already, mobile IP is far less personal and in many cases far more likely to change than your PC's IP, and if you rarely ever log into your multiing nation then usage patterns won't have a lot of history. As reppy made sure to note, it's not that they have no evidence that there's a multi in this case, is that in this particular case they don;t yet have enough to definitively rule one way or the other using on site evidence alone, and thus will, as they should, err on the side of "not guilty."

[Calvinistan]

We asked the Moderation team to investigate this for us, giving them all of our evidence. They confirmed they shared a IP address on NS, but because it was a phone IP address, it wasn't actionable. Our evidence was inadmissable on NS because it's still technically offsite evidence.

So, the way he's been avoiding detection in our eyes is just using his phone which apparently isn't as strictly enforced compared to residential addresses, while being much more brazen about it on TEP because he didn't expect us to have that level of scrutiny. I understand the usual mod team policy on phone IP addresses, normally, yes, two totally unrelated people can share a phone IP address, but given everything else to us it was far too coincidental.

Knowing more about the way the game detects UN multis than most, I can assure you that the IP address is but one small tool in the box. If there were any devices/connections genuinely being shared between accounts in the game, it is quite difficult to cover up unless you know what the game uses.

I have a idea about the way the system works, the issue seemingly is that many of these checks work fine for a PC environment but are of limited use on mobile devices.

If I was to wager on it, I'd say many of these systems were designed before mobile usage was a major factor.

[Ashatwe]

Knowing more about the way the game detects UN multis than most, I can assure you that the IP address is but one small tool in the box. If there were any devices/connections genuinely being shared between accounts in the game, it is quite difficult to cover up unless you know what the game uses.

Their replies to TEP suggest that there's actually very little going on behind the scenes than IP checks. We have a case of somebody being a proved multi-er, and yet NS can't seem to detect it. Perhaps Gameplayers have been strategically mislead into how sophisticated NS tech actually is.

That is a very interesting observation to make.

[Ikania]

This is certainly concerning. God knows I see red flags everywhere when an elected delegate is ousted by the incumbent powers. However, I have a lot of faith in TEP, Todd, Bach and especially Hobbes who I know very well from Lazarus.

I'll wait for the evidence to emerge as it does, and if it turns out vindicating him, I have little doubt he'll be allowed to return to office in short order.

Also, Cormac, we all know you're too smart to take a stand against this kind of thing and not expect backlash. It's pure hypocrisy to criticize these actions when you did the exact same thing, except with zero evidence unlike this case, after a long smear campaign of character assassination against your opponent who has been vindicated time and time again. And now, with credible allegations and an ongoing mod investigation into multying with circumstantial evidence of election fraud, you're trying to argue that this is somehow less justified than your witch hunt tantrum to seize power which didn't even grant the victim a trial.

There is certainly a difference in circumstances, and that difference is that the temporary removal of Aelitia is fully justified with the presented evidence, and the legal institutions of democracy and a fair trial will be left fully intact. Can you say the same?

Best of luck to TEP. God knows Todd deserves a break.

[Myrth]

Knowing more about the way the game detects UN multis than most, I can assure you that the IP address is but one small tool in the box. If there were any devices/connections genuinely being shared between accounts in the game, it is quite difficult to cover up unless you know what the game uses.

I have a idea about the way the system works, the issue seemingly is that many of these checks work fine for a PC environment but are of limited use on mobile devices.

The technology the net works on is still universal.

[Calvinistan]

I have a idea about the way the system works, the issue seemingly is that many of these checks work fine for a PC environment but are of limited use on mobile devices.

The technology the net works on is still universal.

Many systems (such as browser cookie tracking) have had major revisions in the last few years and the mobile systems are majorly different than their PC counterparts.

Since MIP isn't commonplace yet, I don't see these issues going away anytime soon.

[Sedgistan]

We've looked into this case of alleged multying, and the evidence satisfies us that the investigation can be closed with no further action deemed necessary.

Additionally, speculation on mod tools is considered off-topic, and if continued will be addressed accordingly.

[Altmoras]

We've looked into this case of alleged multying, and the evidence satisfies us that the investigation can be closed with no further action deemed necessary.

Additionally, speculation on mod tools is considered off-topic, and if continued will be addressed accordingly.

I don't know if you're allowed to answer this Sedge, but was there any action taken in the first place? Aelitia and Isle of Farore are both still in the WA. And unless I'm completely off base here, "%NATION% was ejected from the World Assembly for rules violations" is generally the action applied if a player is found to be multying.

Moving along with this train of thought, a person couldn't be faulted for assuming that Aelitia and Isle of Farore are not the same person.

[Todd McCloud]

We've looked into this case of alleged multying, and the evidence satisfies us that the investigation can be closed with no further action deemed necessary.

Additionally, speculation on mod tools is considered off-topic, and if continued will be addressed accordingly.

I don't know if you're allowed to answer this Sedge, but was there any action taken in the first place? Aelitia and Isle of Farore are both still in the WA. And unless I'm completely off base here, "%NATION% was ejected from the World Assembly for rules violations" is generally the action applied if a player is found to be multying.

Moving along with this train of thought, a person couldn't be faulted for assuming that Aelitia and Isle of Farore are not the same person.

Well, that depends on if you ignore the evidence provided from TEP's forums. The mods don't us offsite evidence as a tool to remove nations from the WA, I'm told, so either he's just really careful at covering his tracks on NS or very lucky that he didn't use a matching home IP for his NS accounts.

[Sedgistan]

There's a limit to what I can say, but I will say that several of us have looked into this, and our conclusion is that we do not believe that multying is taking place, which is why both nations have been allowed to remain in the WA.

[Hobbesistan]

There's a limit to what I can say, but I will say that several of us have looked into this, and our conclusion is that we do not believe that multying is taking place, which is why both nations have been allowed to remain in the WA.

Just for clarification, this ruling is made without looking at offsite evidence at all?

[Glen-Rhodes]

Additionally, speculation on mod tools is considered off-topic, and if continued will be addressed accordingly.

This is questionable at best. Mods not having the same evidence is in the first few posts of the thread. You could just say, "We don't approve of anybody talking about mod tools."

Now, it's either the case that TEP is lying, or that Mods are wrong. That raises the question of how Mods could be wrong, or how inadequate multying detection is when it comes to mobile devices. That's a serious Gameplay topic, isn't it, and one relevant to this particularly big event in Gameplay?

[Calvinistan]

Additionally, speculation on mod tools is considered off-topic, and if continued will be addressed accordingly.

Now, it's either the case that TEP is lying, or that Mods are wrong. That raises the question of how Mods could be wrong, or how inadequate multying detection is when it comes to mobile devices. That's a serious Gameplay topic, isn't it, and one relevant to this particularly big event in Gameplay?

Just for clarification from our side we've offered the mods root admin access to verify for themselves. As we're on Zetaboards and don't have root database access it's physically impossible for us to modify the IP logs to frame the suspected multying person.

I understand the mods normal position on offsite evidence, but this particular situation and the ruling forces a "they're wrong or we're wrong" stance; this isn't a "normal" situation.

[Topid]

Additionally, speculation on mod tools is considered off-topic, and if continued will be addressed accordingly.

Now, it's either the case that TEP is lying, or that Mods are wrong.

Is it? Who is to say that the NS nation was accessed by the same person/people in the same way as the offsite forum account. Just because an account on an offsite forum says it is controlled by the same player that controls a particular nation does not make it true. That's been a gameplay tactic used for infiltration of offsite forums, and isn't something NS Mods can do much about, other than say the nations aren't multying.

The question of if two accounts on an offsite forum are controlled by the same RW person is totally independent of the question of if two accounts onsite are. The mods can answer the latter, this topic is about the former, and how TEP is going to handle posts from the same IP.

Quite a mess, TEP! Good luck, I don't know how I would handle this. Very hard to prove identities definitively once there is doubt. Hope it all works out.

[Calvinistan]

Now, it's either the case that TEP is lying, or that Mods are wrong.

Is it? Who is to say that the NS nation was accessed by the same person/people in the same way as the offsite forum account.

Trying to avoid specifics about mod tools, though it's my opinion they are entirely relevant to this thread. The mods conceded both nations shared a mobile IP address (Which we know what mobile IP address it was, and can link it to both forum accounts as well as residential IP addresses in the same area) then in the next breath said they weren't multying; that's what sets this apart from a normal infiltration type situation. Obviously if it was a typical infiltration type deal the chances of them happening to be in the same city on the same mobile carrier in the same timeframe are incredibly low, I'd wager the chances of that without any insider trading (i.e, close friends, roommates, or in our opinion the same person) are similar to being struck by lighting

[Todd McCloud]

Now, it's either the case that TEP is lying, or that Mods are wrong.

Is it? Who is to say that the NS nation was accessed by the same person/people in the same way as the offsite forum account. Just because an account on an offsite forum says it is controlled by the same player that controls a particular nation does not make it true. That's been a gameplay tactic used for infiltration of offsite forums, and isn't something NS Mods can do much about, other than say the nations aren't multying.

The question of if two accounts on an offsite forum are controlled by the same RW person is totally independent of the question of if two accounts onsite are. The mods can answer the latter, this topic is about the former, and how TEP is going to handle posts from the same IP.

Quite a mess, TEP! Good luck, I don't know how I would handle this. Very hard to prove identities definitively once there is doubt. Hope it all works out.

Indeed, but the doubt for me is in how the evidence is handled by both sides. It's as Hobbes indicated - we as an admin team offered the mods a chance to view the IP's directly via an admin account, but such action was not pursued by the mods. If the mods only consider on-site evidence as canon (which we were told), then it appears the nations in question did a very good job at making sure the two were separate... on NS gameside. Based on the evidence we have, that was certainly not the case in TEP's onsite forums (note: I say this as an admin taking the evidence at face-value - I'm not a part of the trial processes that will continue / begin). I'm pretty sure this isn't the first time this has happened, though it may be the first time it happened to a serving delegate.

[Todd McCloud]

I understand the mods normal position on offsite evidence, but this particular situation and the ruling forces a "they're wrong or we're wrong" stance; this isn't a "normal" situation.

Mmn, not quite. It depends on what evidence they consider. If they only consider on-site evidence, as they indicated, then the nations in question could've been more stringent with logging in and more careful with how they went about things. If they'd consider both on-site and off-site evidence as permissible, my guess is that the ruling would change. The fact of the matter is TEP has one set of evidence and the mods are using another set of evidence.