Originally Posted by
mooper
Ah, but you are overlooking the context within which that is mentioned. It says they *reserve the right to cancel, etc.* if any of those things (including the technical failures you cite) occur. It does *not* say that the using the technical failures to your advantage is breaking the rules... it simply reserves the right to change/cancel the contest in that event. VERY different things, and that's precisely why no one has yet been able to cite what rules are being broken by so-called "cheaters" (other than multiple accounts, which I'll address in a second).
This is a very valid point and is the one rule that appears to be getting broken on a frequent basis, and therefore should be enforced as such. However, don't presume that there would be more fake accounts if the game was rewarding the skill of trivia knowledge only. Fake account would be inspired by any configuration of the game that rewards winners handsomely, so you should be careful not to argue that rewarding fast-clickers, fast-readers, thorough-readers, etc. is the *cause* of the fake accounts. It is the lucrative awards themselves that are the inspiration. Heck, even if the game was nothing more than a random-number generator that amounted to a lottery draw, you'd still have fake accounts being created so people could get multiple tries at the booty. This is the point I keep repeating... people are so obsessed with getting the game to match their skill set so they can win that they overlook the fact that there's nothing inherently bad about rewarding people randomly, people who can click fast, or even people who are smart enough to read what their browser downloads.
See, we differ on perspective here. I've read the posted rules many times, and it's very clear, regardless of where the points are made, or in which context,...it all applies to the game being played as intended,...as a 5 question trivia game, with no aid or exploit. Very simple.
The exact language is irrelevant, as I pointed out. How can this company or any other detail every possible exception in the world? What if the answers were only revealed in your browser window at exactly 12:12:12am when their servers were being backed up? Should the rules then state that "no one is allowed to play the game at 12:12:12am because the answers might be revealed to the player?" If true, and they did include that in the rules, then ePrize would be alerting everyone to that possible exploit. That would certainly be idiotic and counter-productive to running a fair game.
Once again, common sense should prevail here. I do not care if every exception is stated in the rules or not. I don't expect them to be. I live in the real world. I know if and when I am breaking a rule, or a law for that matter. If I proceed down a given road, however righteous or not, I am aware if and when I cross that proverbial line. I don't need any rule to be spelled out literally. I understand intention. I understand motive. I understand that the game was designed to be played as a simple 5 question trivia game where your knowledge, your memory, the speed of your reading and the speed of your mouse were paramount to winning. The game was designed with THESE skill-sets in mind. The use of any skills beyond these 4 were not intended to factor into the game, especially not a technical glitch or technical failure on the part of ePrize.