Bot “Player” cannot be reported to BGA

[FrankJones]

Which brings me to the last point of calling out smurf solidarity. By that I didn't mean you condone or partake in it, but you still alleviate it by being extremely lax about calling it out.

Your posts have gone from mildly odd to off-the-rails absurd.

So, because I am slightly less inclined to call an account a Smurf than you are, that constitutes "Smurf Solidarity" , even though I have stated I oppose smurfing?

I think you are using words that do not mean what you think they mean.

Also, haven't you said twice now you are finished posting in this thread? Is anyone stopping you from seeing yourself out the door rather than remaining here and posting more?

[FrankJones]

Which translates into the second concept which is that if something looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, it's probably a duck.

If the account this thread was started for with all of its red flags doesn't arouse your suspicion, than nothing short of someone straight up admitting or getting caught is enough.

Which brings me to the last point of calling out smurf solidarity. By that I didn't mean you condone or partake in it, but you still alleviate it by being extremely lax about calling it out.

Some people specialize in one game.

Look at my account. Am I a Pente Smurf? Connect6? Aquatica? I have strong win rates in those games and ascended the Elo ranks quickly. It just so happens I had experience in those games before playing them on BGA, which can easily be the case for any player whose profile indicates "sudden" high proficiency at a game.

Am I not a Smurf because I fail to meet your other criteria? So, if a Smurf starts dabbling in other games, that Smurf ceases to be a Smurf? I mean, if my profile had only one of those 3 games I mentioned, you would say I am "obviously" a Smurf, right? Because apparently your criteria for "conclusive proof" of a Smurf is someone who plays only one game and plays it very well.

And I'm not saying the account referenced in the first post is not a Smurf account; I'm saying the evidence is far less conclusive than some in this thread believe.