teams doubles league

Optimus Prime · Post by **Optimus Prime** » Wed Jan 16, 2008 6:44 pm

hulmey wrote:if i was to take over the doubles tournament and the other one as well. may i then give yorkie access to my account to make the games?

No, you can't do that.

rebelman · Post by **rebelman** » Wed Jan 16, 2008 6:46 pm

Night Strike wrote: True, I hadn't thought about that last point. I'll talk to Optimus about it next time I see him on messenger (unless he posts here before that, which is distinctly possible since I'm working soon).

i already spoke to him about this some time ago, to the best of my knowledge although he and steel are the enforcers this decision was dictated from on high so its reallylack that needs convincing not op.

Night Strike · Post by **Night Strike** » Wed Jan 16, 2008 6:52 pm

rebelman wrote:i already spoke to him about this some time ago, to the best of my knowledge although he and steel are the enforcers this decision was dictated from on high so its reallylack that needs convincing not op.

Perhaps it could be pitched to lack as a quick fix until we have the opportunity to install Rivals. But if he doesn't want it, then everyone just needs to drop it and let the rules be the rules for the time being. We know lack wants to change it, but it's his site and his time.

Optimus, I suggest we take this discussion to either the Organizers forum or the General forum. I vote either break of some of this topic (if possible) or create a new one to voice all concerns.

wicked · Post by **wicked** » Wed Jan 16, 2008 6:54 pm

yorkiepeter wrote:But rules are meant to be challenged are they not?

umm... no? Discuss and possibly revamp yes, break no. Besides what you did is break the rule, not challenge it. Breaking the rules just because you don't like them is not how to get things done around here. You have two very enthusiastic and proactive tourney directors here in OP and Steely. They're working pretty damn hard behind the scenes to improve the whole tourney process, and I know they've very open to new ideas and suggestions. If you want something changed around here the right way, you post a suggestion and discuss it with the tourney directors in this case. Pissing off the very people you need on your side by breaking the rules is not how to get things done.

There's a lot of changes going on around this site, and the tourney area is just one small area that requires lack's time to upgrade. Several other things needed to happen first before CC can get the rivals/ladder system going. First we need the newest phpbb software, which we're in the process of doing now. So yeah, patience with a healthy dose of common sense about how to get things done is what's needed here.

Since the current system's rules is obviously an important discussion, I suggest you guys carry it on in a separate thread and leave this one to figuring out what to do with yorkie's tourney(s).

rebelman · Post by **rebelman** » Wed Jan 16, 2008 7:16 pm

wicked wrote: Since the current system's rules is obviously an important discussion, I suggest you guys carry it on in a separate thread and leave this one to figuring out what to do with yorkie's tourney(s).

done

debate on clan privs now open here

Battle-Rage · Post by **Battle-Rage** » Thu Jan 17, 2008 8:59 am

What a shitfight. If anyone legitimately takes over this tourney, could you be so kind as to pm the team captains.

The private games concept seems a little messy, and difficult for those who don't have the luxury of extra time up their sleeves.

However this has been a great tourney so far, so I for one hope it continues.

David_Wain · Post by **David_Wain** » Thu Jan 17, 2008 9:32 am

Just caught up on this thread.. disappointing to say the least. Hopefully this can continue and if not thank you Yorkie for all the hard work you have put in so far it has been very enjoyable

Steelhorse · Post by **Steelhorse** » Thu Jan 17, 2008 10:14 am

Hello all. I've been following this thread for a while now and I've read all of your points and opinions. It's gotten a little heated and emotions have run high at times so I'd like to say a few things that may help clarify and/or explain the TD's actions regarding this issue.

First, I need to make clear that yorkie's privilege ban was not personal against him or any clan. I have always had a good repoire with yorkie and I think he would agree. He has contributed much to this site and to the Tournament Forum. He has hosted a number of successful, legitmate tournaments and is an active, valuable, member of the CC community.

I am not going to go in to details as to why he received his 6 month privilege ban. The details are between yorkie, myself, and Optimus. There is no need to air anyones dirty laundry publicly.

I will say that the site rules were violated...badly. They were knowingly and intentionally violated repeatedly over an extended period of time. Yorkie abused the trust and respect that he was given when he was granted tournament privileges by abusing them to make illegitimate clan-related tournaments. Again, he knows this and would not disagree. In fact, I had asked him to be patient as new software was on it's way that would allow for clan tournaments in the near future. Unfortunately, this has been delayed due to issues outside of this site.

As he stated in one of his previous posts, he made the decision to do so, for the purpose of challenging what he perceives to be an unjust, or foolish rule. I respect that. But, being a martyr does not come with out a price. The bottom line is that he knowingly and intentionally broke the rules AND implicated everyone who joined the illegitimate tournaments.

Many think that the rule is stupid or unfair. Maybe it is, maybe it isn't. Everyone is entitle to their opinion and I respect each of them. But, Lack (who is a pretty smart fellow) had his reasons for creating this rule and we, as members of his site, are obligated to honor it---whether you agree with it or not.

Further, many members have requested privileges to host Inter/Intra Clan tournaments. Each one was denied. To allow this to continue would have been truly unfair to all those who were previously denied.

Regarding the 6 month privilege ban, this was my decision. The site Administrators told Opt and I that, considering the extent of the abuse, they would support whatever decision we made. There were some that would have supported a perma-ban for tourney privileges. But, taking into account the positive contributions he's made most likely saved him from that. If there is anyone who should shoulder the heat it's me, not Optimus. He was just dutifully carrying out and delivering the message.

Having read your posts, some think the 6 month privilege ban was too harsh, some think it was too light, and some think it was right on the money. This tells me that the right decision was a 6 month ban. No decision I could have made would have pleased everyone.

This is the first time, as a Tournament Director or Moderator, that I have handed down a punishment of any kind...unfortunately, this one just happened to be a doozy. It's difficult and unpleasant, especially when you respect the person on the receiving end of it. But, my responsibilities to this site, Lack, and the community at large, have to take priority.

Anyhow, I know this will generate some further debate and draw some thunder my way. So, feel free to let me have it...

But, whether you agree with me or not, I respect each of your opinions and you are all valued members, and customers, of the Conquer Club community.

As I stated above, I hoped this helped to explain/clarify the actions taken and decisions made.

Steel

rebelman · Post by **rebelman** » Thu Jan 17, 2008 10:46 am

Thanks for that detailed and thoughtful post steel. Your points were very well made and in the main I agree.

A few points in response:

I for one very much regret being a knowing participant in this and I apologise for the trouble/ hassle this has resulted in. Obviously at no stage did I envisage this type of fallout - if I did I would have done something to avoid this outcome. I'm very aware rules are rules and they apply to all equally. I have learned a valuable lesson from this and I suspect others can say the same.

At wicked's suggestion I have started a separate thread where these priv's for clan tournies and inter clan challenges decision can be discussed. At the end of the day it's entirely lack's decision but this site has never stifled debate and always is open to suggestions. I put this in the tournies discussion forum but if a mod believes it would be better elsewhere eg suggestions or general discussion.

http://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=40259

I do hope this and yorkie's other public tournies can be salvaged as the participants in them truly are the innocent victims of this through no fault of their own.

Blitzaholic · Post by **Blitzaholic** » Thu Jan 17, 2008 12:54 pm

Optimus Prime wrote:
hulmey wrote:if i was to take over the doubles tournament and the other one as well. may i then give yorkie access to my account to make the games?
No, you can't do that.

we need help optimus on the tournament ongoing/create named Triples War please

Blitzaholic · Post by **Blitzaholic** » Thu Jan 17, 2008 12:59 pm

yorkiepeter wrote:Well to clarify a couple of points. I was banned for creating empty games to host a tournament within the untouchables which yes is against the rules. But rules are meant to be challenged are they not?

oh yorkie, your too funny m8

Rules are meant to be followed, to prevent chaos, and if rules are broken there can be consequences, make sense?

I am conducting a free seminar later this evening if anyone wants to attend.

yorkiepeter · Post by **yorkiepeter** » Thu Jan 17, 2008 6:12 pm

Blitzaholic wrote:
yorkiepeter wrote:Well to clarify a couple of points. I was banned for creating empty games to host a tournament within the untouchables which yes is against the rules. But rules are meant to be challenged are they not?
oh yorkie, your too funny m8

Rules are meant to be followed, to prevent chaos, and if rules are broken there can be consequences, make sense?

I am conducting a free seminar later this evening if anyone wants to attend.

lol,i think i missed it.

As I have said earlier, history is littered with people who have challenged and broken rules that we now appreciate were unjust. We are not robots who just follow rules blindly irrespective of how just they may be.

What I did was not designed to challenge the rules but simply to create a competititive tournament within a clan which would have been impossible without using privileges.

From a PM rreceived from lack, it would appear that the way that this rule can be abused is by non premium players creating password protected games to circumvent buying premium. This I have never done even though I have been asked.

So while I may have broken a rule this was a victimless crime.

A 6 month ban seems ludricous when you have the likes of Krusher who has stolen loads of points off everybody yet he was not banned for a day!

either way I can now have my life back and will no longer feel obliged to update this or get the next round started. In the 1 v 1 singles league I have run 10 divisions over 3 seasons, the amount of games created for them was over 3000 alone, not to mention recording the scores and updating the tables (all 30 of them) and recruiting 100 players and grading them. All these players will now be disappointed, these are the losers, not me.

As far as this tourny is concerned jpcloet has agreed to take over the creation of the games abd I will continue to update the tables and fixtures. So I am pleased to say it will continue provided the powers that be will allow jp to continue it.

If any good as come of this it is the fact that this is opened for debate and I do believe this rule will be ultimately changed and I can feel instrumental in bringing about this change that is wanted by most people (checkout the poll)

hwhrhett · Post by **hwhrhett** » Thu Jan 17, 2008 6:21 pm

yorkiepeter wrote:
So while I may have broken a rule this was a victimless crime.

A 6 month ban seems ludricous when you have the likes of Krusher who has stolen loads of points off everybody yet he was not banned for a day!

i would propose that no matter how 'noble' you believe yourself to have been, it is unfair to those of us that do follow the rules that are set in place, if you really cared about having the rule changed, where were you when the dragoons were making a stink about it back in march? seems there was not very much support for us protesting the rule when it first came in to effect. there was little support for the cause, so it was dropped. i think your punishment was perfectly fair, you knowingly broke the rules thinking that you were above them because of your dedication to the site. and there are plenty of other people that make large contributions and DO follow the rules, no matter how stupid the rule may be, or how much they disagree with it.

wicked · Post by **wicked** » Thu Jan 17, 2008 6:51 pm

yorkiepeter wrote:A 6 month ban seems ludricous when you have the likes of Krusher who has stolen loads of points off everybody yet he was not banned for a day!

To clarify, yorkie was not banned from the site for 6 months. His tourney privileges were revoked for 6 months, that is all. He can still play games and participate in the site. The punishments he listed above both fit the particular "crime": abuse tourney privileges = lose tourney priv's; abuse point system = lose points.

hulmey · Post by **hulmey** » Thu Jan 17, 2008 7:06 pm

I would like to point out that certain people who abused the system to get the termaninato and frestyle rules changed were not punished in anyway at all....

Double standards, yes....

I also think CC's brain picked up on yorkie's inclan tournmaent organsing when he failed to renew his premium membership. Can CC confirm if they have computerflags/ on this

wicked · Post by **wicked** » Thu Jan 17, 2008 7:08 pm

Nice try humls, but they weren't breaking any rules.

If you'd like to debate this elsewhere, I'd be happy to. Let's leave this thread for whoever is carrying on this tourney please? Thanks for your cooperation!

hulmey · Post by **hulmey** » Thu Jan 17, 2008 7:49 pm

its hulmey me little buttercup!!

yorkiepeter · Post by **yorkiepeter** » Fri Jan 18, 2008 5:02 am

good point hulmey.

And Wicked what dim did in order to get the terminator 1 v 1 rule changed on deadbeats by deadbeating games that he was likely to lose is against the rules

please refer to the unwritten rules section.

Obviously any gross abuse of the game is forbidden. This includes but is not limited to: throwing games, intentional deadbeating, serial teammate killing, hijacking accounts.

Night Strike · Post by **Night Strike** » Fri Jan 18, 2008 12:33 pm

yorkiepeter wrote:good point hulmey.

And Wicked what dim did in order to get the terminator 1 v 1 rule changed on deadbeats by deadbeating games that he was likely to lose is against the rules

please refer to the unwritten rules section.

Obviously any gross abuse of the game is forbidden. This includes but is not limited to: throwing games, intentional deadbeating, serial teammate killing, hijacking accounts.

I'm pretty sure they added that rule after DiM's experiment.

Optimus Prime · Post by **Optimus Prime** » Fri Jan 18, 2008 12:42 pm

This tournament will be continuing with jpcloet creating the games and yorkiepeter updating the standings and such. As soon as jpcloet sends me the form, I will grant him the privileges and all of you will be on your way.

Regards, Optimus Prime

wicked · Post by **wicked** » Fri Jan 18, 2008 12:43 pm

I'm pretty sure I've already asked everyone nicely to bring the rules conversations elsewhere. But ya know, yesterday was a long time ago, so I'll ask you nicely once again... please move any discussions on rules, or anything else not related to the continuation of this tournament, to another more appropriate place, like general discussion. Thank you.

(yorkie I'll PM you and tell you why you're wrong.

)

comic boy · Post by **comic boy** » Sat Jan 19, 2008 4:37 am

yorkiepeter wrote:Well to clarify a couple of points. I was banned for creating empty games to host a tournament within the untouchables which yes is against the rules. But rules are meant to be challenged are they not?

Who can remember the many people who went to prison rather than pay the poll tax, they got a criminal record but got the law changed.

What about the black woman on the bus who refused to stand up - was she wrong? according to OP, yes. But she gave birth to the whhole civil rights movement and changed the face of america.
Nelson Mandela too, emily pankhurst, the list is endless.

This rule is clearly ridiculous and only curtails lack's customers from enjoying the site to its potential and serves no useful purpose. I do not understand why any premium player could not create an empty game just like they can create password protected games - what difference does it make?

How would allowing that, which is only what these privileges consist of be to the detriment of cc?

The rule was created over a year ago with lack promising to review when a new clan system got started. well that has started but now we have to wait for this rivals thing to be written before anything changes.

Saying privileges are only given for public tournys is rubbish. There are many tournaments that you have to be captain or premium or something.

So I say to everyone, if you think this rule is silly then are you going to lend support in getting it changed?

As far as this tournament is concerned It could continue in 1 of 2 ways either someone else can do the hard work in creating all the games and making sure they get filled or the home captain can get the games started by just creating password protected games. Either way I would be happy to continue to maintain the fixture list and publish a regular table....that is if my posting privileges are still current. I might even get to play in some of them so long as my playing privileges are still ok.

I always thought you were arrogant but this post takes the biscuit, anyway now you have left CC you will have plenty of time to indulge in the pie eating contests you so love

hulmey · Post by **hulmey** » Sat Jan 19, 2008 5:35 am

^^^^Why don't you grow up!!!

comic boy · Post by **comic boy** » Sat Jan 19, 2008 9:04 am

Grow up and be loved like you

wicked · Post by **wicked** » Sat Jan 19, 2008 5:39 pm

PMs sent.