Originally posted by Master-BorgNo, if I left nothing to the imagination I would have been downright vulgar. Funny thing is the "Wet your whistle" is a comment refering to getting a drink.
listen, I didn't insinuate anything. You left nothing to the imagination with the imagery of your post.
You COULD have taken it to she bought you a beer. Which there is nothing wrong with. But you obviously took it to mean something harsher.
Yes, I'm rather rude, I'm a self declared *******. But you lost your honor when you went the sexual route. Because volumes were written about where your mind was with your response.
Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
You know us so well.
😬
I'm not talking about everyone, but no one can honestly tell me that all people are entirely upright when it comes to these things. Every tourney there's hypocrisy in the form of believing anything one's own team does is fine, but a LOT of what others do should be banned....and sometimes it's the same stuff.
...
Anyway, bump.
Originally posted by DigiMark007
You agreed with her when she changed a rule mid-tourney?! You can admire it for "going against the grain" as you seem to imply, but there's a valid reason why it was against the grain. It was changing a rule entirely to invalidate a previously approved plan...not an unforeseen loophole, but something that was known and brought to her attention.As for whining and b*tching, you have a point that less people should be doing it, but there's also legitimate times where complaining is warranted. And when rules aren't clear, or are changed, that is an appropriate time. It might've been interesting to see what reaction was like if goober had still been around, and his previously approved plan had been negated by the same change.
Props to id for stepping down (sine I think that's what he did) when he realized he was against the rules. It's easier than fighting for a losing cause and becoming more annoyed, which is why I stepped down after the rug got pulled out from under me as well.
And a controversy-less tourney is an oxymoron, so you're really just spouting ideological nonsense with that one. Good tourney directors, and good tourneys, have happened frequently, but never entirely without controversy. Part of it is that when you throw a bunch of pseudo-mature comic geeks (many of them teens) together in a competition, they lose whatever civility they possess. But some of it can also be attributed to the directors...whom I always empathize with to an extent, because it's far harder than most realize to run an efficient tourney. But that doesn't make them beyond reproach.
...
The problem, in my mind, seems to be that Evangel (and now yourself) are simply trying to squelch dissent rather than listening to it and adapting. People were banned from voting for disagreeing with some of the rules. They are told what to think in terms of how we should approach matches, whether its prep plans or drafted teams, rather than deciding on our own. There was no concession to those (I count 4 now) whose plans have been banned, either by a failure on the part of the participant or the director...no apologies, no compromises, not even a chance to make the case for the other side (I was never given a voice in my match's decision despite having laid my case out intelligently and respectfully, though apparently Stacks was).
Originally posted by DigiMark007
You agreed with her when she changed a rule mid-tourney?! You can admire it for "going against the grain" as you seem to imply, but there's a valid reason why it was against the grain. It was changing a rule entirely to invalidate a previously approved plan...not an unforeseen loophole, but something that was known and brought to her attention.As for whining and b*tching, you have a point that less people should be doing it, but there's also legitimate times where complaining is warranted. And when rules aren't clear, or are changed, that is an appropriate time. It might've been interesting to see what reaction was like if goober had still been around, and his previously approved plan had been negated by the same change.
Props to id for stepping down (sine I think that's what he did) when he realized he was against the rules. It's easier than fighting for a losing cause, which is why I stepped down after the rug got pulled out from under me as well.
And a controversy-less tourney is an oxymoron, so you're really just spouting ideological nonsense with that one. Good tourney directors, and good tourneys, have happened frequently, but never entirely without controversy. Part of it is that when you throw a bunch of pseudo-mature comic geeks (many of them teens) together in a competition, they lose whatever civility they possess. But some of it can also be attributed to the directors...whom I always empathize with to an extent, because it's far harder than most realize to run an efficient tourney. But that doesn't make them beyond reproach.
1. I didn't have an opinion about her ruling regarding your case, since I'm not knowledgeable enough with the facts of the situation. Although from my understanding, her ruling didn't affect your plan at all. She said instant tech isn't available without purchase...your plan did not rely on 'instant' tech...it was merely very fast tech due to the nature of your team. Evangel clearly said it was up to voters to judge how feasible your tech plan was. For example, in Goober's case, voters plainly didn't buy his plan of creating 6 billion androids, even though Evangel's new rule wasn't established at the time. Hence no difference if Goober stayed in, because people still dont buy his plan of creating 6 billion androids.
2. I said people should stop whining and bitching. Not that people should stop providing constructive criticism. There's a big and clear difference.
3. My point was that every tourney has controversies. No matter what, someone is going to disagree and feel cheated. So someone is always going to feel the rules suck or the decisions were unfair.
Originally posted by BadabingQuite possibly. As its discussing the behavior of those around it. *indicates Digi's post*
Guys, does this really have anything to do with the tournament? We have an off topic thread. Thanks.
I share his concern. Its called "Railroading" and it sucks in RPGs and it sucks in tournaments.
Giving the illlusion of choice when things are rather much set on a linear path. While there is the illusion of being able to choose, it is just that an illlusion.
From Evangel:
Evangel94 wrote on Mar 23rd, 2008 03:49 PM:
I thought I should let you know that I've received multiple complaints and arguments citing the Doctor's use of inorganic matter manipulation, instead of using it as a weapon, to create advanced technology on the battlefield in a short period of time a violation of the instant technology privilege. And unfair to those who actually bought preparation time.Therefore, I am going to have to place a restriction on inorganic matter manipulation in relation to creating super technology.
-Evangel94
She approved it multiple times (all of which I posted), then banned it mid-tourney MB. Nothing more or less. I would know if my plan were still acceptable.
And since you quoted my post before I had a chance to edit in the last section:
The problem, in my mind, seems to be that Evangel (and now yourself) are simply trying to squelch dissent rather than listening to it and adapting. People were banned from voting for disagreeing with some of the rules. They are told what to think in terms of how we should approach matches, whether its prep plans or drafted teams, rather than deciding on our own. There was no concession to those (I count 4 now) whose plans have been banned, either by a failure on the part of the participant or the director...no apologies, no compromises, not even a chance to make the case for the other side (I was never given a voice in my match's decision despite having laid my case out intelligently and respectfully, though apparently Stacks was).
Originally posted by Master-BorgSo you didn't actually read what she said? And yet you defend her when it bothers people and they complain... And you wonder why I tease you about your motives for such actions?
1. I didn't have an opinion about her ruling regarding your case, since I'm not knowledgeable enough with the facts of the situation. Although from my understanding, her ruling didn't affect your plan at all. She said instant tech isn't available without purchase...your plan did not rely on 'instant' tech...it was merely very fast tech due to the nature of your team. Evangel clearly said it was up to voters to judge how feasible your tech plan was. For example, in Goober's case, voters plainly didn't buy his plan of creating 6 billion androids, even though Evangel's new rule wasn't established at the time. Hence no difference if Goober stayed in, because people still dont buy his plan of creating 6 billion androids.2. I said people should stop whining and bitching. Not that people should stop providing constructive criticism. There's a big and clear difference.
3. My point was that every tourney has controversies. No matter what, someone is going to disagree and feel cheated. So someone is always going to feel the rules suck or the decisions were unfair.
Originally posted by DigiMark007
From Evangel:She approved it multiple times (all of which I posted), then banned it mid-tourney MB. Nothing more or less. I would know if my plan were still acceptable.
I didnt know of the PM, as I think the rule change she posted on the thread was a bit different. But yeah I agree with you that it is wrong that she approved your plan and THEN changed the rules.
Originally posted by Master-BorgOh come now, how stupid do you think people are?
funny thing is I mentioned nothing about sexual innuendo in my posts, yet you assumed I went the 'sexual route', now who's mind is in the gutter? 🙄
Originally posted by Master-Borg
that is a despicable insinuation and you should be ashamed of yourself.
Originally posted by Master-Borg
I'm not sure what kinda game you're playing, but I refuse to engage in it any further. Some of us prefer our honor kept intact.
It's pretty damned clear what you were thinking. Talks of "despicable insinuations" and "keeping honor intact". Even with the veiled "some of us" rift that clearly means "Not you".
So the answer is: Yours.
Originally posted by Master-BorgHe posted her approving it in the match thread when the legality of it was challenged the first time. If you'd read when she made the change it'd be clear to you that she was instituting a change...
I didnt know of the PM, as I think the rule change she posted on the thread was a bit different. But yeah I agree with you that it is wrong that she approved your plan and THEN changed the rules.
But you know what? I'm not going to get into that again...
Originally posted by CreshoskI agree now, I had thought it was more a rule clarification than a change. my mistake.
He posted her approving it in the match thread when the legality of it was challenged the first time. If you'd read when she made the change it'd be clear to you that she was instituting a change...But you know what? I'm not going to get into that again...
The same was posted in the discussion or battle thread as well, but I didn't mean to spring a Pm on you (which you couldn't have known about).
In any case, the b*tching you mentioned...generally participants can tolerate flaws in a tourney if the decisions remain consistent and don't impart a massive advantage on one person (or disadvantage). But when 4 people (myself, goober, id, and Trick) have had entire plans banned, something is wrong. Trick brought his on himself, but the other 3 could have been avoided, and should have as well.
The alternative to complaints is lock-step acceptance, which I disagree with if there's something legit to complain about. The "no more comments like this. The tourney will move on." style of squelching discussion exemplifies this.
So I have wished everyone good luck (still do) and hope that the tourney can still have merit (it will...Sym, DL, Typhus, Kandy, id, others I'm probably forgetting...all cool in my book), and I will never encourage complaints...but neither will I discourage them if they are warranted.
Originally posted by DigiMark007Don't forget when stacks complained about Mogo for being a planet. Rather than proving that Mogo was on par with Ego He whined about some unrelated comparison and Mogo was banned.
The same was posted in the discussion or battle thread as well, but I didn't mean to spring a Pm on you (which you couldn't have known about).In any case, the b*tching you mentioned...generally participants can tolerate flaws in a tourney if the decisions remain consistent and don't impart a massive advantage on one person (or disadvantage). But when 4 people (myself, goober, id, and Trick) have had entire plans banned, something is wrong. Trick brought his on himself, but the other 3 could have been avoided.
The alternative to complaints is lock-step acceptance, which I disagree with if there's something to complain about.
So I have wished everyone good luck (still do) and hope that the tourney can still have merit (it will...Sym, DL, Typhus, Kandy, id, others I'm probably forgetting...all cool in my book), and I will never encourage complaints...but neither will I discourage them if they are warranted.
Originally posted by King_Mungicry
Reported! 😠
Originally posted by CreshoskOkay, then this is to me.....dur
Yes, Bada, it does have to do with the tournament.Someone is probably reporting things but yes. The answer is Yes. It might seem off topic but we are indeed discussing events in the tournament.