[CC2] - LoW (24-17) OSA (of 41) - Final

[Bruceswar]

The Final score. They games were in before chuuuck called for them. Sure they flip flopped on some games, but let it go.

The 12 hour rule is tricky as this is their first time using it. Every clan messes up with it the first time. Just relax a bit, and you will feel better about things.

[stahrgazer]

The Final score. They games were in before chuuuck called for them. Sure they flip flopped on some games, but let it go.

The 12 hour rule is tricky as this is their first time using it. Every clan messes up with it the first time. Just relax a bit, and you will feel better about things.

I can't believe you, still dwelling on 12 hours.

I can't believe you, thinking it's just fine and dandy for ANY clan to violate each and every agreement THEY wanted.



But if "final score" is all that matters, then it's okay for 4 of us Legends to join 18 games, right?

cuz the rules pre-agreed to, don't matter. And hey, that'd just be one rule violated, not three.

[Bruceswar]

You are making mountains out of ant piles. Relax, it is good for your blood pressure. If we were playing a clan and they broke the 12 hour rule we would simply ask for the territories and move on. Not counting maps were it matters not.(Feudal and the like.)

Remember it is just a game, and sure rules are rules, but no need to hang a new clan by their necks for minor stuff.

[stahrgazer]

You are making mountains out of ant piles. Relax, it is good for your blood pressure. If we were playing a clan and they broke the 12 hour rule we would simply ask for the territories and move on. Not counting maps were it matters not.(Feudal and the like.)

Remember it is just a game, and sure rules are rules, but no need to hang a new clan by their necks for minor stuff.

Breaking every agreement they made is no longer minor stuff.

[Hamanu]

You are making mountains out of ant piles. Relax, it is good for your blood pressure. If we were playing a clan and they broke the 12 hour rule we would simply ask for the territories and move on. Not counting maps were it matters not.(Feudal and the like.)

Remember it is just a game, and sure rules are rules, but no need to hang a new clan by their necks for minor stuff.

And if you were playing a clan and one of them was accidentaly in more games than it was allowed? What would you do then?

[Bruceswar]

Playing in too many games is not the same as violating a 12 hour fog rule. Lets not mix the 2.. Good luck to both clans!

[Hamanu]

Playing in too many games is not the same as violating a 12 hour fog rule. Lets not mix the 2.. Good luck to both clans!

Well, just saying, everything is relative and one tends to add too much value to one's own problems and undermine those of someone else. I happen to think that a player playing in a couple of games over his limit can just as easily be considered an "honest mistake" as breaking several agreements. And of course, from your perspective the game count is the holy grail whereas 12hrs and game changing are a triviality. One man's rebel is another man's freedom fighter.

Subjectivity is such a wonderful human trait, isn't it?

[stahrgazer]

Playing in too many games is not the same as violating a 12 hour fog rule. Lets not mix the 2..

It's about them violating every agreement they made, Bruce.

If it's okay to violate every OTHER agreement, why isn't it okay to play an extra few games? Isn't the bottom line the final score all that matters? That IS what you said, right?

Playing in too many games is not the same as violating a 12 hour fog rule. Lets not mix the 2.. Good luck to both clans!

Well, just saying, everything is relative and one tends to add too much value to one's own problems and undermine those of someone else. I happen to think that a player playing in a couple of games over his limit can just as easily be considered an "honest mistake" as breaking several agreements. And of course, from your perspective the game count is the holy grail whereas 12hrs and game changing are a triviality. One man's rebel is another man's freedom fighter.

Subjectivity is such a wonderful human trait, isn't it?

Gee, Hamanu, I think that's why there are things called "Negotiations" - so that each clan can determine those subjective importances.

Of course, according to Bruce, it doesn't matter if someone violates everything they agreed to in negotiations, as long as one player doesn't play one game too many.

Now, then there are those in this thread who've said it doesn't matter if a penalty isn't spelled out.

Couple of thoughts on that.
1) Penalties are negotiated items, usually, thus, if it's okay to violate all the other terms, why not okay to violate that one too?
2) Chuuuuck doesn't define a penalty for a player playing too many games for the C-cup.
3) Chuuuuck doesn't define a penalty for clans sending the WRONG games - as long as they're on time, it's okay, right?

We gave OSA "passes" until their violations hit every agreement they'd made.

Too much. No matter how petty the agreements, they were agreements, mostly things OSA wanted and LoW bent over backwards to give.

So, yeah, I think a group of boys that wants to play with the big boy club should pull up its panties and adhere to their agreements like the big boys... they can use Pull Ups if they want, but they still need to actually pull them up. We wiped for them a couple times before we decided it was time to change the didies.

[Namor]

...Well, just saying, everything is relative and one tends to add too much value to one's own problems and undermine those of someone else. I happen to think that a player playing in a couple of games over his limit can just as easily be considered an "honest mistake" as breaking several agreements...

I believe it was universally accepted, that the game over the limit WAS considered an honest mistake. The problem that Chuck faced there, was he didn't want to bend the rules that had been set out in his OP.

I'm sure that once Chuck has evaluated the issues here, that he will enforce any rule that he deems to have been violated. Give him chance to collect the facts and weigh them up... and giving him 6 pages to wade through here, won't help to speed the process.

[Deadpool]

It doesn't look as though they are saying, "f* the rules, we'll do what we want, when we want, no matter what."

Added:
Besides, putting it into perspective.

The two clans made the following side-agreements:

1) Exchange as many games as possible on the 9th (OSA violated)

In other words, OSA violated or attempted to violate each and every agreement they made, while LoW adhered to the agreements.

Couldn't 0 be the most possible that day? It is very hard to violate that "side-agreement." It is like agreeing to try your best and having someone else turn around and tell you that you didn't.

I am also glad this is in perspective.

[stahrgazer]

Couldn't 0 be the most possible that day? It is very hard to violate that "side-agreement." It is like agreeing to try your best and having someone else turn around and tell you that you didn't.

I am also glad this is in perspective.

No. Benga said they had 6 available, with a concern about 4 additionals that wouldn't follow until Saturday. Now, if they'd sent even half the 6 they said they had ready to go, that's something rather than nothing. He was online long enough to send several additional notes, so he was online long enough to send us at least some of the games he'd promised to send when we sent all of ours, at his request, on the 9th.

I gave it a bye at the time. We gave the fog thing a bye at the time. Then the world2.1... Sum total, it appears they do not care about ANY agreements they make.

And, since according to one of Chuuuuck's ORIGINAL post rules, these side-agreements, once agreed upon and approved by him, constitute rules for the skirmishes, it means they violated about half the existing tournament rules; and all the existing negotiated rules.

I don't believe violating every negotiation looks like "accident" anymore, so it was time to bring major attention to it.

But even assuming it was all 'accidents' - you don't teach a child what to do and not to do when they've done something wrong, by rewarding said child with candy. You take the candy away to teach lesson.

Accidents do happen, to all of us. But at some point, someone really should give serious consideration to the agreements they make, to do their BEST to uphold them, not treat them like fluff.

And not nasty at those who go, "Um.. wait, you violated every one of our agreements, there's something WRONG with that."

[jpcloet]

I don't believe violating every negotiation looks like "accident" so it was time to bring major attention to it.

Instead of making a big deal, why not simply pm Chuuuck and have him make a ruling or come up with an agreement.

[Ace Rimmer]

I don't believe violating every negotiation looks like "accident" so it was time to bring major attention to it.

Instead of making a big deal, why not simply pm Chuuuck and have him make a ruling or come up with an agreement.

chuck doesn't have to make a decision, it's up to LoW to decide if they want to stick with the original rules or not. At least, that's what we learned from Bruce and his Cowards - it's all up to the aggrieved party whether or not to rake the other clan over the coals for an honest mistake.

And an additional note for bruceswar - shove your self-righteous attitude up your ass. You're such a fucking prick with your attitude, and if LoW is too nice to say it in such words, I'm not. Stop acting like you're such a great guy and have all this love for everyone on here. It's sickening. I can't even foe you so I don't have to read your shit in the forums because the moderator foe function is broken.

Jake speaks for himself, not TOFU.

[jpcloet]

chuck doesn't have to make a decision, it's up to LoW to decide if they want to stick with the original rules or not. At least, that's what we learned from Bruce and his Cowards - it's all up to the aggrieved party whether or not to rake the other clan over the coals for an honest mistake.

Let's leave the TOFU-KORT thing out of this. I want Chuuuck to speak up soon, as my understanding is that LOW should not be enforcing anything, especially since that special rule was not even documented on the first page. My impression from Chuuuuck was that CC2 would be run differently.

[InsomniaRed]

I don't believe violating every negotiation looks like "accident" so it was time to bring major attention to it.

Instead of making a big deal, why not simply pm Chuuuck and have him make a ruling or come up with an agreement.

chuck doesn't have to make a decision, it's up to LoW to decide if they want to stick with the original rules or not. At least, that's what we learned from Bruce and his Cowards - it's all up to the aggrieved party whether or not to rake the other clan over the coals for an honest mistake.

And an additional note for bruceswar - shove your self-righteous attitude up your ass. You're such a fucking prick with your attitude, and if LoW is too nice to say it in such words, I'm not. Stop acting like you're such a great guy and have all this love for everyone on here. It's sickening. I can't even foe you so I don't have to read your shit in the forums because the moderator foe function is broken.

Jake speaks for himself, not TOFU.

Might I say, Bruce is definitely not above hypocrisy, or so it would seem...

They broke EVERY agreement they made.

If that doesn't matter, what does?

The Final score.

In case he forgot, the final score of TOFU-KORT was 32-28, or even 31-29. With TOFU winning. Maybe he forgot?

And jpc, I think we are just trying to reference something that Bruce seemed to have forgotten, and therefore is making ridiculous arguments that we are trying to call him out for. I think giving examples of where things like this have happened before is actually good, gives more of a basis for getting both clans to a final decision about what to do.

[Deadpool]

Couldn't 0 be the most possible that day? It is very hard to violate that "side-agreement." It is like agreeing to try your best and having someone else turn around and tell you that you didn't.

I am also glad this is in perspective.

But even assuming it was all 'accidents' - you don't teach a child what to do and not to do when they've done something wrong, by rewarding said child with candy. You take the candy away to teach lesson.

Can we also PM this Chuck guy and get a ruling on the best way to discipline a child? My take would be to not even give the child candy in the first place, but that might be too strict, stahrgazer seems to have some pretty strong opinions on this topic.

Another question, Where did the flame wars topic go, and when will this thread be moved there?

[Rodion]

I don't believe violating every negotiation looks like "accident" so it was time to bring major attention to it.

Instead of making a big deal, why not simply pm Chuuuck and have him make a ruling or come up with an agreement.

chuck doesn't have to make a decision, it's up to LoW to decide if they want to stick with the original rules or not. At least, that's what we learned from Bruce and his Cowards - it's all up to the aggrieved party whether or not to rake the other clan over the coals for an honest mistake.

And an additional note for bruceswar - shove your self-righteous attitude up your ass. You're such a fucking prick with your attitude, and if LoW is too nice to say it in such words, I'm not. Stop acting like you're such a great guy and have all this love for everyone on here. It's sickening. I can't even foe you so I don't have to read your shit in the forums because the moderator foe function is broken.

Jake speaks for himself, not TOFU.

Sorry, Jake, you're just plain wrong here. The precedent you're mentioning had clear rules stating that the applicable punishment for the case (same player joining more than 20 games) was the forfeit of all the (more than 20) games involved.

The current case, however, has infractions with no previously established punishment, hence Chuuuuck's power/duty to establish them.

That said, I would like to see both parties solve this graciously, but I understand they gotta do what they gotta do.

[benga]

As you seem to keep up with monkey business,
there was never an agreement about the 9th.

Don't know from where you take this.

The only thing that was said:

Sent: Mar 9th, '11, 11:57
From: benga
To: stahrgazer
I have made those I can fill today,
will wait for freemiums till saturday
if they still have ongoing games
I will just make the ones I can fill with premiums

So if you like all now made can start today and others will come later this week.

Sent: Mar 9th, '11, 15:29
From: benga
To: stahrgazer
are you ok with what I said, should I fill your games and you our 6 atm
and other 4 will come at latest on saturday?

Sent: Mar 9th, '11, 20:42
From: benga
To: stahrgazer
they should join by saturday all games
i have sent invites for ačč exiting games
GL!

Sent: Mar 10th, '11, 08:19
From: benga
To: reptile stahrgazer
Triples
Game 8665171 England

Quads
Game 8665169 Pearl Harbor
Game 8665164 Stalingrad
Game 8665157 Das Schloss
Game 8665156 WWII Poland
Game 8665155 Feudal Epic

I have sent them reminder twice about 12 h
and also when started a clan warned them about it.

I will send the whole list of games again to both you and chuck when I make them all.

Can you now stop lying please!
I have already admit of breaking the 12 h rule.
Leave your ego out of this.
Yes you are ranked 5, but you are showing you aged 5!

[jpcloet]

3rd minor flame for the lock.

I will unlock once Chuuuuck has responded to myself.

[jpcloet]

Okay, here is my understanding and the ruling on the issues.

1) 12-hour fog rule was violated multiple times. I guess this is something I forgot to think of when writing out the rules, in the future if there is an agreed upon rule between clans then I will discuss what happens if that rule is broken with them before it comes to it, because as we stand right now, there was not a defined punishment.

It is my intent to keep this as fair as possible for all sides and let game play decide the winners of each match and nothing else. With no agreed upon punishment in advance, then for this instance I will allow LoW to decide whether or not they want to remake the games where the fog rule was violated. Except, they cannot restart the Feudal Epic game. Although Benga did violate the rule in that game, there can never be an advantage for violating that rule on conquer style maps (with 1 starting territory) so no harm was done there. In the past, Empire has specified that 12-hour fog does not apply in these types of games. I will make sure that is better clarified in the future.

2) From all of the communications it seems stahrgazer was saying that benga agree to send all games on the 9th. From the communications I saw, he said he had 6 games already created and he will send those on the 9th and the rest will come soon to follow. He then proceeded to not send any games on the 9th and all games on the 10th. Although I agree this isn't the right way to handle things on benga's part (I think if he said he would send 6 games on the 9th, he should of sent 6 games) there will be no punishment for these games coming in 1 day late. They were still sent in before the deadline date of the tournament and, as pointed out in the original post of the Conqueror's Cup thread, there will be some leniency given with sending the games on the exact date. I stated that after games were late, I would talk to violating clan and tell them they have a few days to get them sent and if they are still late then game punishments will be handed out from there. With OSA only being 1 day late and trying to follow the nature of the rule that I have laid out for everyone, I will not punish them anymore for this as they have not delayed the tournament at all. However, I do feel this is slightly poor sportsmanship on their part and will warn benga to be more timely in the future because if I have to address this topic again with him then I will remember this occassion.

3) I have asked everyone to send the 41st game as part of batch 1 to keep the games moving more quickly. I was sent a PM a while back stating that OSA has asked to postpone but you all said you would fill that game as quickly as possible. LoW agreed and I also agreed. Then OSA tried to send it with their first batch on the 10th right after asking it be postponed. On top of that, LoW should of been sending the game. Although I feel this is another hassle and poor organization from OSA. I see no actual way that this hurts anything in the competition. The agreement is you all would play it as soon as possible and I guess this all of the sudden became as soon as possible. Since the game is not being played yet, LoW, please remake this game at your earliest possible convenience and get it under way.

In the end, I feel most of OSA's violations were relatively minor and don't go out of the way of giving them an unfair advantage in the actual war. However, I think it is important to note for OSA that top level clans do a lot of planning in preparation. Everyone is very busy in their real lives and we work hard to do time management and plan ahead for game loads/start dates/etc. When you do not fulfill agreements that you make such as start dates for games and stuff it gets frustrating for the opponents who are trying to make all of the arrangements on their side. Please be mindful of this in the future and please get your clan better organized for this stuff. This is basically a first warning for them because there was not a lot of violation that gave advantage in the war as I said, but if it persists, then actual punishments may follow.

jpcloet, can you please quote this into the thread.

[stahrgazer]

FYI.

I've asked Chuuuuck to correct his first statement on item 2 - I never said benga agreed to send all games on the 9th; I said very clearly he said 6 but sent none.

When I know from the clan what they want to do about the fog games (remake or let them stay as is) we'll notify.

[Chuuuuck]

FYI.

I've asked Chuuuuck to correct his first statement on item 2 - I never said benga agreed to send all games on the 9th; I said very clearly he said 6 but sent none.

When I know from the clan what they want to do about the fog games (remake or let them stay as is) we'll notify.

I hate to add much pressure here, I should of included this in that message, but you all will need to post a decision on whether you want to remake those games or not within 24 hours. I do not want to leave the door open for you all to see how those games progress any more than they have to make your decision. 24 hours is fair because all players should be on within a 24 hour window and it gives OSA the oppurtunity to wait to take their next turn as to not let the games progress much farther.

Also, stahrgazer is correct. I rechecked her messages, she did say that he agreed to send "some" of the games with the rest coming later.

[stahrgazer]

I hate to add much pressure here, I should of included this in that message, but you all will need to post a decision on whether you want to remake those games or not within 24 hours.

My personal opinion is the game will stand as is, but I've already asked the other game members for input via pm (none currently online).

Also, LoW officially apologizes for OSA for the game on Chinese Checkers, where one of our members began it approximately 3 hours too soon (I didn't spot it because on my timer, the date changed and I mis-added).

Please let us know if you wish a remake.

[benga]

We just wish what we have wished from the start:
to have an enjoyable war.

We do not need any game repeating and will repeat any that you wish.

Good luck in the rest of the games.

[Chariot of Fire]

Surely a breach of the 12 hour fog rule (which is really just a gentlemen's agreement anyway) can just be remedied by the party that started too soon simply posting in gamechat what move they made and which territories (if any) that are now obscured are owned by whom? Give them 12 hours to post this info so the problem can be remedied, and only if they exceed this timeframe (as the player going 2nd would probably want to know what move he should make) should a remake be considered at the behest of the wronged party.

This situation really highlights the need for better definition of the rules, as there are those which are pertinent to the Cup itself and then there's also the proviso that any agreement between the two clans (e.g. the playing of freestyle or nukes) also constitute rules that are to be upheld.

To the best of my knowledge the concept behind this tourney is that it is simply a framework within which a whole series of challenges takes place (that was its original intent) and there are guidelines which both clans must follow (as per Chuck's rules) and then there's scope for negotiation between both clans for a whole set of additional rules. The latter should simply be posted in the OP of the challenge thread and will then constitute part of the rules in addition to those governing the tourney proper. In the event of any absence of clearly defined penalties then it should go to the TO (Chuck) to arbitrate on the matter.