Too bad for crappy forgers. If you want to fake a PM, it should take some effort.
-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
As pointed out in the post above all this is moot, since each reply in a conversation gets its own number and thereby doesn't give any hint at when the conversation was started.
But my method wasn't hard; the simply one at least. Let me give an example.
Your role PM is number 256421.
You want to fake a PM and make a new conversation; it has number 263871.
13 days has passed since you got your role PM and the game started; you claim that the fake conversation started on day 6.
The change in conversation number between your role PM and the conversation you started when you write the fake PM is 256421-263871 = 7450.
13 days has passed giving 7450/13 ~ 573 new conversations a day during this period. You claim the fake conversation was started on day 6; well then it would have a number in the range
7450/13*6+256421 = 259859 and 7450/13*7+256421 = 260433.
If you claim the fake conversation was started shortly after deadline day 5 (thereby early day 6) choose an early number in the interval; if you claim it was started shortly before deadline day 6 (i.e. late day 6) choose a late number in the interval.
It is basic math and it would be rather hard to detect unless you are so unlucky to hit a number somebody in the game has.
But as mentioned it is moot since each reply has its own number; just wanted to show how simple my original idea was.
Lets test what happens if you by chance hits a conversation message number somebody in the game has used. I have taken the conversation number of a reply LK made in my pack conversation, but I have changed the name and member number to RRW. Lets see if I, MC, EURO and LK are still taken to the new standing list LK made.
Edit: I am still taken to the correct conversation message. So if you are so unlucky to randomly hit a number which refers to a reply in a conversation somebody in the game is a part of, your fakery will be foiled. On the other hand what is the chance of that happening.
You can also look at your PMs and see which numbers were used around the time you claim the fake PM was sent; heck you can even take the number of an actual PM if no living player was part of the conversation that PM was made in. And if you don't have a PM on the day you claim the fake one was sent then just use a linear interpolation (like I showed above) to get a plausible number. It is basic math so everybody should be able to do it fast. Only if you are so unlucky to hit a PM number which was used in a conversation a living player was part of, will you get discovered forging PMs, if you put in a little effort on your forgery; and being that unlucky won't happen often.
Agree.
That took about 5 minutes of direct HTML editing. It's not hard to do..
It appears I forgot to edit the last post's signature to match EURO's. Ten seconds extra work.
I don't see why not. Although I understand banning it due to not everybody being able to forge PMs by HTML editing; and without that a screenshot will be almost bullet proof proof that you are what you pretend to be.
It would be interesting to gather data about lite starting times, from the time the thread went up to the time the 17th player signed up.
Two things:
1. Clear rules without special cases. If forging PMs - including the more complex aspect of forging their IDs - is allowed, why is forging screenshots not allowed?
2. The game - and any forging being part of it - should stay playable for the average person.. Uhm normal person.. Hmm no that's not the right term either.. You know what I mean ;-)
When forging PMs the contents of these PMs, the raw text, should really be the most important part. Players should be trying to mislead others by imitating another player's style, tone and punctuation, without being distracted by these technical details that are otherwise irrelevant to the game.
Which speaks against forging screenshots since you need to be able to HTML edit to do that properly.
Faking a PM on the other hand just requires the conversation number and as mentioned a simple linear interpolation is enough---that is the stuff you learn in elementary school. (I think you Americans would call it middle school.)
You'll need to have multiple PMs in the recent days to do a proper interpolation. And in some cases things might actually get more complex. Some PMs might only have been sent after or before other PMs between other people (e.g. scan results). I struggle to think of an appropriate situation that properly highlights this, but I still think conversation numbers are irrelevant technical details.
And I'm not an American
