|
On December 15 2011 01:43 staavros wrote:Show nested quote +On December 15 2011 01:40 NHY wrote:On December 15 2011 01:39 staavros wrote:On December 15 2011 01:35 CEPEHDREI wrote:On December 15 2011 01:34 RPR_Tempest wrote:
Yeah, bullshit.
MLG gives Code S to the highest placing non Code S player. Why would this MLG all of a sudden not count? cause it wasnt part of the exchange program? GSL didnt send any players to providence. Please, would you be so kind to provide a link with a rule that clearly says Providence is an exception to the following? "At every 2011 Pro Circuit Live Competition after MLG Columbus, GSL placement will occur as follows: Code S status will be awarded to the highest placing player, regardless of country of origin, who doesn't already have Code S status." As soon as you link with a rule that clearly says Providence is an exception to the following. "MLG will invite four Korean pro players to each Pro Circuit Live Competition." I agree both are violations of the rules. Why would I try to find such a link? I also find it odd they didn't invite. So, sure, I see your point. Now, back to the code S spot matter. Is there a rule that says Providence is an exception?
Again, why are you asking for a rule that says Providence is an exception?
|
hopefully this clears things up
|
On December 15 2011 01:46 Juvant wrote:Show nested quote +On December 15 2011 01:46 sekritzzz wrote:On December 15 2011 01:45 Juvant wrote:On December 15 2011 01:43 staavros wrote:On December 15 2011 01:40 NHY wrote:On December 15 2011 01:39 staavros wrote:On December 15 2011 01:35 CEPEHDREI wrote:On December 15 2011 01:34 RPR_Tempest wrote:
Yeah, bullshit.
MLG gives Code S to the highest placing non Code S player. Why would this MLG all of a sudden not count? cause it wasnt part of the exchange program? GSL didnt send any players to providence. Please, would you be so kind to provide a link with a rule that clearly says Providence is an exception to the following? "At every 2011 Pro Circuit Live Competition after MLG Columbus, GSL placement will occur as follows: Code S status will be awarded to the highest placing player, regardless of country of origin, who doesn't already have Code S status." As soon as you link with a rule that clearly says Providence is an exception to the following. "MLG will invite four Korean pro players to each Pro Circuit Live Competition." I agree both are violations of the rules. Why would I try to find such a link? I also find it odd they didn't invite. So, sure, I see your point. Now, back to the code S spot matter. Is there a rule that says Providence is an exception? The exchange program ended in 2011 and doesn't apply to 2012. because providence happened in 2012 ....right? GSL January takes place in 2011... Right?
But the rule says that all 2011 MLG events will provide code S spots to for the next GSL. It does not say anything about WHEN the next GSL will take place.
Edited for messing up quotes 
|
On December 15 2011 01:46 Juvant wrote:Show nested quote +On December 15 2011 01:46 sekritzzz wrote:On December 15 2011 01:45 Juvant wrote:On December 15 2011 01:43 staavros wrote:On December 15 2011 01:40 NHY wrote:On December 15 2011 01:39 staavros wrote:On December 15 2011 01:35 CEPEHDREI wrote:On December 15 2011 01:34 RPR_Tempest wrote:
Yeah, bullshit.
MLG gives Code S to the highest placing non Code S player. Why would this MLG all of a sudden not count? cause it wasnt part of the exchange program? GSL didnt send any players to providence. Please, would you be so kind to provide a link with a rule that clearly says Providence is an exception to the following? "At every 2011 Pro Circuit Live Competition after MLG Columbus, GSL placement will occur as follows: Code S status will be awarded to the highest placing player, regardless of country of origin, who doesn't already have Code S status." As soon as you link with a rule that clearly says Providence is an exception to the following. "MLG will invite four Korean pro players to each Pro Circuit Live Competition." I agree both are violations of the rules. Why would I try to find such a link? I also find it odd they didn't invite. So, sure, I see your point. Now, back to the code S spot matter. Is there a rule that says Providence is an exception? The exchange program ended in 2011 and doesn't apply to 2012. because providence happened in 2012 ....right? GSL January takes place in 2011... Right?
"At every 2011 Pro Circuit Live Competition after MLG Columbus, GSL placement will occur as follows:
Code S status will be awarded to the highest placing player, regardless of country of origin, who doesn't already have Code S status."
"At every 2011 Pro Circuit Live Competition after MLG Columbus,"
"At every 2011 Pro Circuit Live Competition"
"every 2011 Pro Circuit"
GSL jan is not a pro circuit.
P.S. On December 15 2011 01:44 MLG_Adam wrote:
Slasher works for MLG in our video department. He is NOT a representative of the League. Any opinion or discussion from Slasher is solely opinion based.
|
makes sense now. there was no exchange program in providence due to the tournament structure.
|
On December 15 2011 01:46 HappyChris wrote:Show nested quote +On December 15 2011 01:42 Focuspants wrote:
The fact of the matter is, GSL didnt send players to Providence, and Slasher is saying that Providence wasnt involved in the exchange program. Clearly there was a lack of clarity on this issue, which is now being brought out due to this situation.
You are left with 2 options:
1) Believe the MLG employee, and the fact they say it wasnt prat of the exchange program, coupled with the fact that the GSL didnt send any representatives to the event.
or
2) Believe a bunch of annonymous forum posters, who are using articles, that are likely wrong because of the lack of clairty with the exchange program.
I choose to go with the information from the people directly involved with the companies responsible for the exchange program, rather than people looking at it from the outside. Haha, Open you eyes. Anyone with a brain can actually see whats going on here. This hole incident is is starting to become so laughable The annonymous forum posters as you call them are just linking statement and articles from MLG own site GomTV own site and reliable and well known news site. Come on man lol
Perhaps instead of jumping to conclusions about who has half a brain you should wait for everything to come out... yah.. thats not as fun I guess.
|
Ok so here is some logic for you. If you view information released by MLG as being reliable, then Slasher's (an MLG employee) twitter post can be seen as credible. The most recent information, is likely the most accurate, as they are dealing with this situation.
You cant claim a source to be reliable, and then claim it isnt relaible when it disagrees with your opinion. The likely answer, is that there was a misunderstanding about Providence amongst the community, because they didnt make it commonly known, that it was no longer part of the exchange program.
I have a brain, and I dont need you coming in here and trying to insult me, when you have made 3 or 4 similar posts in the multiple threads where you spell "whole", hole.
I am here to show what MLG has to say about the matter, and you question my intelligence, because I post a direct source to one of its employees messages to the community.
Please have a little more class.
|
There was no exchange program at Providence. No Koreans outside hte Top 16 were given seeds into the Winner's Bracket. Please check your facts before you post stuff like htis.
|
On December 15 2011 01:47 NHY wrote:Show nested quote +On December 15 2011 01:43 staavros wrote:On December 15 2011 01:40 NHY wrote:On December 15 2011 01:39 staavros wrote:On December 15 2011 01:35 CEPEHDREI wrote:On December 15 2011 01:34 RPR_Tempest wrote:
Yeah, bullshit.
MLG gives Code S to the highest placing non Code S player. Why would this MLG all of a sudden not count? cause it wasnt part of the exchange program? GSL didnt send any players to providence. Please, would you be so kind to provide a link with a rule that clearly says Providence is an exception to the following? "At every 2011 Pro Circuit Live Competition after MLG Columbus, GSL placement will occur as follows: Code S status will be awarded to the highest placing player, regardless of country of origin, who doesn't already have Code S status." As soon as you link with a rule that clearly says Providence is an exception to the following. "MLG will invite four Korean pro players to each Pro Circuit Live Competition." I agree both are violations of the rules. Why would I try to find such a link? I also find it odd they didn't invite. So, sure, I see your point. Now, back to the code S spot matter. Is there a rule that says Providence is an exception? Again, why are you asking for a rule that says Providence is an exception?
Because, if by the rules it is not an exception, then it automatically rewards the highest placed, non-code S finisher a code S spot (unless all top 3 finishers are already code S). Which means that Naniwa did earn the spot and it was taken away from him. Maybe for good reason, but I am trying to focus on this delicate point, because I don't like the fact that suddenly both organizations are trying to convince us that he didn't earn it through a standard procedure.
|
On December 15 2011 01:25 IOvEggY wrote:
heres how life is.
if you act like a dick
karmas going to come back at you
Lets look at it this way.
currently GSL is the SC2 channel in Korea.
All the koreans watch this so they can get their fill for SC2
GSL/GOMtv is a Business
Naniwa is a pawn in the business.
Naniwas job is to give SC2 games because he is a PRO, that is why he is THERE
Naniwa DID NOT fulfill his job. You cannot call that a game of sending probes.
Please dont say this is even a legitimate strategy, thats just some technical bullcrock. Would you even do it on ladder?
GSL was like well **** you, you dont make our business look good peace
/Endofthisnaniwa
Haha wow... the player resentment. So players are just "pawns" to you? fuck off please.
You are making this to a organizers vs players discussion, and i have no idea why you would not side with the players. This is a business for naniwa just as much as it is for gomtv, it doesn't make them justified in whatever actions they chose to take.
No one is saying it is a legitimate strategy, they're saying the game didn't matter. So, if the game didn't matter, that means that... The. Game. Didn't. Matter.
He did however play the game, and therefore fulfill his job. He had to play all the games, so he did, and he didn't break any rules. Yea it was a stupid thing to do, but what he did doesn't matter since the game didn't matter.....
User was warned for this post
|
How does this change anything? Are people arguing he wouldn't have gotten the Code S spot even if this hadn't happened? I think that's a fairly small chance unless gom was completely oblivious to what most people (including MLG's own news writers) was thinking.
|
On December 15 2011 01:47 Daimai wrote:
This doesn't matter.
They decided to invite Naniwa and then they pulled the invite even when Naniwa didnt break any other rules than some stupid code of honor. They dont have any grounds to pull his invite.
Sure it does.
He didn't earned his spot like many of you guys were arguing for. Gom decided that he was no longer worthy which is up to them. They didn't take away anything from him unlike the first misunderstood case.
|
On December 15 2011 01:49 OopsOopsBaby wrote:
makes sense now. there was no exchange program in providence due to the tournament structure.
Hahaha, Yea belive that.
I really want to belive that also. But I just cant. Just as I cant belive in the santa clause or aliens.
|
United States23455 Posts
On December 15 2011 01:53 HappyChris wrote:Show nested quote +On December 15 2011 01:49 OopsOopsBaby wrote:
makes sense now. there was no exchange program in providence due to the tournament structure. Hahaha, Yea belive that. I really want to belive that also. But I just cant. Just as I cant belive in the santa clause or aliens.
Well, to be fair, there were no GSL exchange program at Providence. No outside Koreans were seeded in the top sixteen or given free rides to Providence.
|
On December 15 2011 01:50 mrtomjones wrote:Show nested quote +On December 15 2011 01:46 HappyChris wrote:On December 15 2011 01:42 Focuspants wrote:
The fact of the matter is, GSL didnt send players to Providence, and Slasher is saying that Providence wasnt involved in the exchange program. Clearly there was a lack of clarity on this issue, which is now being brought out due to this situation.
You are left with 2 options:
1) Believe the MLG employee, and the fact they say it wasnt prat of the exchange program, coupled with the fact that the GSL didnt send any representatives to the event.
or
2) Believe a bunch of annonymous forum posters, who are using articles, that are likely wrong because of the lack of clairty with the exchange program.
I choose to go with the information from the people directly involved with the companies responsible for the exchange program, rather than people looking at it from the outside. Haha, Open you eyes. Anyone with a brain can actually see whats going on here. This hole incident is is starting to become so laughable The annonymous forum posters as you call them are just linking statement and articles from MLG own site GomTV own site and reliable and well known news site. Come on man lol Perhaps instead of jumping to conclusions about who has half a brain you should wait for everything to come out... yah.. thats not as fun I guess.
Follow the money buddy all I got to say
|
On December 15 2011 01:45 mrtomjones wrote:Show nested quote +On December 15 2011 01:42 Alvar wrote:On December 15 2011 01:39 mrtomjones wrote:On December 15 2011 01:35 Alvar wrote:On December 15 2011 01:31 mrtomjones wrote:On December 15 2011 01:26 Alvar wrote:
What does Slasher have to do with this? He probably just missunderstood it himself? So you are assuming that the posters here have more knowledge than Slasher why? Because it supports your views. Believe Slasher until proven otherwise by a credible source. My views? you do not even know my views, I have no idea one way or the other, but all the evidence before Slashers twitter(?) says that Naniwa recieved the seed from providence, even statements from MLG. Even the original statement from GOM said there was a seed from every pro circuit this year. Others have posted that Gom didnt send Koreans. That in itself could be the very reason this exhcnage didnt exist for this tournament. You might be right about this, but you are probably just guessing. I see no reason to go with only slashers twitter as evidence over all the other statements made before. GOM might have changed their minds. I do feel the communication between MLG and GOM seem to have been horrible for all those statements to be made without any response from GOM or correction from GOM. Slasher works for MLG and although he doesn't represent them he has a heck of a lot more knowledge about their "goings on" than you, me, or anyone else posting in this thread. Until someone contradicts him from MLG or GOM I would suggest that listening to the most credible source of information is wisest.
Well, as soon as someone else collaborates this I'm all aboard that this is how it is. I see no reason why it couldnt be equally plausible that Slasher missunderstood something though, considering the information that was available before contradicts him somewhat.
Still would make the communication between them laughable for allowing all those press releases to be released before.
|
On December 15 2011 01:51 BoomNasty wrote:There was no exchange program at Providence. No Koreans outside hte Top 16 were given seeds into the Winner's Bracket. Please check your facts before you post stuff like htis.
So why is MLG Adam basically saying, that Slasher has no idea, what is actually going on?
I mean, if Slasher was right, then why bother to post at all...it doesn't make sense.
|
On December 15 2011 01:16 Focuspants wrote:This needs to be cleared up, because I cant stand reading all of the misinformed posts in the numerous other threads. Naniwa did not earn a Code S spot from MLG Providence. GOM was going to give him one of the two foreigner spots. Based on Naniwa's behaviour at the Blizzard cup, they chose to not give him that spot, and instead, give it to someone else. I think this is a very fair reaction, seeing as how he acted inappropriately. GOM was going to give him a gift, Naniwa ofended them, they decided they would no longer give him that gift. Here is Slashers twitter confirming this: http://twitter.com/slasherPlease people, whether you agree or disagree with Naniwas actions, at least understand what you are arguing over. This will save a lot of headaches in the multitude of other threads related to this issue.
You're using Slasher to defend your statement? Isn't he notorious for lying?
I'm not saying you're wrong, and I'd also argue that offering Naniwa a Code S spot (and then taking it away) is pretty much the same as winning a Code S spot (and then taking it away) as far as the end result and GOMtv's behavior goes... but yeah.
I have no idea what to believe at the moment
|
On December 15 2011 01:52 nam nam wrote:
How does this change anything? Are people arguing he wouldn't have gotten the Code S spot even if this hadn't happened? I think that's a fairly small chance unless gom was completely oblivious to what most people (including MLG's own news writers) was thinking.
The point is that they didn't take away an earned slot in the tournament, they took away an intended invite. The player failed to live up to the standards they would want of an invite, so they invited someone else.
It is a rather large difference in my opinion, regardless of which side of the argument you're on.
|
On December 15 2011 01:54 Juvant wrote:Show nested quote +On December 15 2011 01:52 nam nam wrote:
How does this change anything? Are people arguing he wouldn't have gotten the Code S spot even if this hadn't happened? I think that's a fairly small chance unless gom was completely oblivious to what most people (including MLG's own news writers) was thinking. The point is that they didn't take away an earned slot in the tournament, they took away an intended invite. The player failed to live up to the standards they would want of an invite, so they invited someone else. It is a rather large difference in my opinion, regardless of which side of the argument you're on.
I thought this point is rather easy to understand but so many people can't see the difference.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
