|
On April 11 2012 08:04 dAPhREAk wrote:Show nested quote +On April 11 2012 08:00 jinorazi wrote:On April 11 2012 07:57 dAPhREAk wrote:On April 11 2012 05:36 Hot_Bid wrote:
It appears that my profile has now been removed. It's okay though, it wasn't a serious entry and I'm glad I helped some people vent about the ridiculousness of the gamer girl term and the contest in general. If you're still interested in it please vote for Anna, she's a good representative of our community. sex discrimination lawsuit? maxim has deep pockets. it was invalid entry to begin with and would have not passed the judges as it says on the rules. au contraire mon ami. nothing prevents guys from participating. =D Show nested quote +2. ELIGIBILITY: This Contest is only open to residents legally residing and permitted to work within the fifty (50) United States and the District of Columbia, who are twenty-one (21) years of age or older as of April 2, 2012. Employees of Sponsor, Gotcast, LLC (“Gotcast”), and Intertaintech Corporation DBA Virgin Gaming ("Virgin Gaming"), any event sponsors, and their respective parent companies, affiliates, subsidiaries, and related companies, agencies, the judging panel (collectively, the “Promotion Parties”) and immediate families (defined as parents, children, siblings and spouse and their respective spouses, regardless of where they reside) and those living in the same household, whether or not related, are not eligible to enter, win or vote. Void in Puerto Rico, all U.S. territories and possessions and overseas military installations and where prohibited or restricted by law.
Nit picking of the rules aside. The clear intent is for the participant to be female, Denoted by Gamer Girl, by removing a male from the line up is well within their right and American legal precedent. Hypothetically, if the case went to court, they'd easily win, not that something this silly would or should be brought to a court.
|
... He means USA... fuck yea...
ps. ...America...f-u-c-k-y-e-a. :D
|
Lol. The FAQ now includes the statement that participants must be female.
|
On April 11 2012 16:32 abominare wrote:Show nested quote +On April 11 2012 08:04 dAPhREAk wrote:On April 11 2012 08:00 jinorazi wrote:On April 11 2012 07:57 dAPhREAk wrote:On April 11 2012 05:36 Hot_Bid wrote:
It appears that my profile has now been removed. It's okay though, it wasn't a serious entry and I'm glad I helped some people vent about the ridiculousness of the gamer girl term and the contest in general. If you're still interested in it please vote for Anna, she's a good representative of our community. sex discrimination lawsuit? maxim has deep pockets. it was invalid entry to begin with and would have not passed the judges as it says on the rules. au contraire mon ami. nothing prevents guys from participating. =D 2. ELIGIBILITY: This Contest is only open to residents legally residing and permitted to work within the fifty (50) United States and the District of Columbia, who are twenty-one (21) years of age or older as of April 2, 2012. Employees of Sponsor, Gotcast, LLC (“Gotcast”), and Intertaintech Corporation DBA Virgin Gaming ("Virgin Gaming"), any event sponsors, and their respective parent companies, affiliates, subsidiaries, and related companies, agencies, the judging panel (collectively, the “Promotion Parties”) and immediate families (defined as parents, children, siblings and spouse and their respective spouses, regardless of where they reside) and those living in the same household, whether or not related, are not eligible to enter, win or vote. Void in Puerto Rico, all U.S. territories and possessions and overseas military installations and where prohibited or restricted by law. Nit picking of the rules aside. The clear intent is for the participant to be female, Denoted by Gamer Girl, by removing a male from the line up is well within their right and American legal precedent. Hypothetically, if the case went to court, they'd easily win, not that something this silly would or should be brought to a court.
No one's arguing that the intent is for it to include males. They're saying that it's discriminatory to not let males be represented if there's no clear rule that says males can't. And they wouldn't win the case since there was nothing in the Terms and Conditions that excluded males. So clearly then, where do they draw the line between removing registrants, if the reason for the removal is simply they're male, and not that it's illegal for males to be represented? Maybe if they amended their eligibility rules to exclude males. But it's discriminatory to just remove them like that, even if it is blatantly obvious.
I like that you argue intent, then talk about legality. Intent means nothing, especially for a contest. He's arguing legality, not ethics.
The proper way to do it is to update the Terms and Conditions, notify all registrants and require them to re-accept the new Terms and Conditions, then remove all the invalid males who re-accepted.
EDIT:
Anyway,s have you guys even read the stuff they posted on the Maxim site? It's disgusting.
|
i thnk they removed hotbid 
|
On April 11 2012 17:08 Leeoku wrote:i thnk they removed hotbid
yep, he tweeted about that. It`s a shame. As we all know, being a girl isn`t about having boobs, but the way you feel about yourself.
|
On April 11 2012 17:00 Blisse wrote:Show nested quote +On April 11 2012 16:32 abominare wrote:On April 11 2012 08:04 dAPhREAk wrote:On April 11 2012 08:00 jinorazi wrote:On April 11 2012 07:57 dAPhREAk wrote:On April 11 2012 05:36 Hot_Bid wrote:
It appears that my profile has now been removed. It's okay though, it wasn't a serious entry and I'm glad I helped some people vent about the ridiculousness of the gamer girl term and the contest in general. If you're still interested in it please vote for Anna, she's a good representative of our community. sex discrimination lawsuit? maxim has deep pockets. it was invalid entry to begin with and would have not passed the judges as it says on the rules. au contraire mon ami. nothing prevents guys from participating. =D 2. ELIGIBILITY: This Contest is only open to residents legally residing and permitted to work within the fifty (50) United States and the District of Columbia, who are twenty-one (21) years of age or older as of April 2, 2012. Employees of Sponsor, Gotcast, LLC (“Gotcast”), and Intertaintech Corporation DBA Virgin Gaming ("Virgin Gaming"), any event sponsors, and their respective parent companies, affiliates, subsidiaries, and related companies, agencies, the judging panel (collectively, the “Promotion Parties”) and immediate families (defined as parents, children, siblings and spouse and their respective spouses, regardless of where they reside) and those living in the same household, whether or not related, are not eligible to enter, win or vote. Void in Puerto Rico, all U.S. territories and possessions and overseas military installations and where prohibited or restricted by law. Nit picking of the rules aside. The clear intent is for the participant to be female, Denoted by Gamer Girl, by removing a male from the line up is well within their right and American legal precedent. Hypothetically, if the case went to court, they'd easily win, not that something this silly would or should be brought to a court. No one's arguing that the intent is for it to include males. They're saying that it's discriminatory to not let males be represented if there's no clear rule that says males can't. And they wouldn't win the case since there was nothing in the Terms and Conditions that excluded males. So clearly then, where do they draw the line between removing registrants, if the reason for the removal is simply they're male, and not that it's illegal for males to be represented? Maybe if they amended their eligibility rules to exclude males. But it's discriminatory to just remove them like that, even if it is blatantly obvious. I like that you argue intent, then talk about legality. Intent means nothing, especially for a contest. He's arguing legality, not ethics. The proper way to do it is to update the Terms and Conditions, notify all registrants and require them to re-accept the new Terms and Conditions, then remove all the invalid males who re-accepted. EDIT: Anyway,s have you guys even read the stuff they posted on the Maxim site? It's disgusting.
Updating the rules is not a legal necessity, there is a clear and easily arguable intent that the contest is to find a female.
If the contest had been called "Find the next gamer icon" or something equally ambiguous then you'd have an argument that the contest never had shown proper intent to be exclusionary towards one sex or the other. In this case however the contest is showing that obviously they want a female, thus having that in the rules is unnecessary. On a more recent topic, you could make the argument that nothing is barring a transgender contestant from winning or entering.
The legality of having a contest be for one sex rather than both is obvious.
|
On April 11 2012 05:55 m1rk3 wrote:
All check out tradechat, she's a wow player and has her own channel
Get out WoW scum! HotBid has spoken and has passed his mantle and scepter to Anna Prosser. Listen not to the false prophets like you!
|
Without Hot_Bid in the 'competition' there is really no reason to vote in this most excellent contest.
|
On April 11 2012 16:44 Iri wrote:
Lol. The FAQ now includes the statement that participants must be female.
hahaaah. This.
|
On April 11 2012 16:32 abominare wrote:Show nested quote +On April 11 2012 08:04 dAPhREAk wrote:On April 11 2012 08:00 jinorazi wrote:On April 11 2012 07:57 dAPhREAk wrote:On April 11 2012 05:36 Hot_Bid wrote:
It appears that my profile has now been removed. It's okay though, it wasn't a serious entry and I'm glad I helped some people vent about the ridiculousness of the gamer girl term and the contest in general. If you're still interested in it please vote for Anna, she's a good representative of our community. sex discrimination lawsuit? maxim has deep pockets. it was invalid entry to begin with and would have not passed the judges as it says on the rules. au contraire mon ami. nothing prevents guys from participating. =D 2. ELIGIBILITY: This Contest is only open to residents legally residing and permitted to work within the fifty (50) United States and the District of Columbia, who are twenty-one (21) years of age or older as of April 2, 2012. Employees of Sponsor, Gotcast, LLC (“Gotcast”), and Intertaintech Corporation DBA Virgin Gaming ("Virgin Gaming"), any event sponsors, and their respective parent companies, affiliates, subsidiaries, and related companies, agencies, the judging panel (collectively, the “Promotion Parties”) and immediate families (defined as parents, children, siblings and spouse and their respective spouses, regardless of where they reside) and those living in the same household, whether or not related, are not eligible to enter, win or vote. Void in Puerto Rico, all U.S. territories and possessions and overseas military installations and where prohibited or restricted by law. Nit picking of the rules aside. The clear intent is for the participant to be female, Denoted by Gamer Girl, by removing a male from the line up is well within their right and American legal precedent. Hypothetically, if the case went to court, they'd easily win, not that something this silly would or should be brought to a court.
what american legal precedent is that? pray tell...
|
On April 12 2012 05:20 dAPhREAk wrote:Show nested quote +On April 11 2012 16:32 abominare wrote:On April 11 2012 08:04 dAPhREAk wrote:On April 11 2012 08:00 jinorazi wrote:On April 11 2012 07:57 dAPhREAk wrote:On April 11 2012 05:36 Hot_Bid wrote:
It appears that my profile has now been removed. It's okay though, it wasn't a serious entry and I'm glad I helped some people vent about the ridiculousness of the gamer girl term and the contest in general. If you're still interested in it please vote for Anna, she's a good representative of our community. sex discrimination lawsuit? maxim has deep pockets. it was invalid entry to begin with and would have not passed the judges as it says on the rules. au contraire mon ami. nothing prevents guys from participating. =D 2. ELIGIBILITY: This Contest is only open to residents legally residing and permitted to work within the fifty (50) United States and the District of Columbia, who are twenty-one (21) years of age or older as of April 2, 2012. Employees of Sponsor, Gotcast, LLC (“Gotcast”), and Intertaintech Corporation DBA Virgin Gaming ("Virgin Gaming"), any event sponsors, and their respective parent companies, affiliates, subsidiaries, and related companies, agencies, the judging panel (collectively, the “Promotion Parties”) and immediate families (defined as parents, children, siblings and spouse and their respective spouses, regardless of where they reside) and those living in the same household, whether or not related, are not eligible to enter, win or vote. Void in Puerto Rico, all U.S. territories and possessions and overseas military installations and where prohibited or restricted by law. Nit picking of the rules aside. The clear intent is for the participant to be female, Denoted by Gamer Girl, by removing a male from the line up is well within their right and American legal precedent. Hypothetically, if the case went to court, they'd easily win, not that something this silly would or should be brought to a court. what american legal precedent is that? pray tell...
" Each Entry: ...(ii) must be in keeping with the Sponsor’s image (as Sponsor determines in its sole discretion)... (vii) may not contain commercial or corporate advertising, including display of corporate logos, brand names and slogans, other than those relating to Sponsor"
"Sponsor has the right in its sole discretion to determine if any Entry is not appropriate for publication on the Site or for any other public release and if Entry is in compliance with these Official Rules. Sponsor reserves the right to disqualify an Entry that is not in compliance with these Official Rules. Sponsor’s decisions are final and binding with respect to all matters relating to this Contest."
" By participating in the Contest, each Entrant agrees that Contest decisions, including judging, Judging Criteria, procedures, Voting, voting rules and procedures, eliminations, competition rules, game play, penalties and disqualification determinations, and the awarding of the prize, are at the sole discretion of Sponsor and are final and not subject to appeal."
" Sponsor reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to disqualify any individual (and void his or her Entry) implicated in those actions or to modify or terminate the Contest or further participation in this Contest, as Sponsor deems appropriate."
"Except where prohibited, each Entrant agrees that any and all disputes which cannot be resolved between or among the parties and any claims or causes of action arising out of or connected with this Contest, the prize awarded, or the determination of the winner shall be resolved individually, without resort to any form of class action."
that enough for you? there is no way anyone could sue Maxim for discrimination it would be a frivolous lawsuit in both senses of the word
|
On April 12 2012 05:28 corpuscle wrote:Show nested quote +On April 12 2012 05:20 dAPhREAk wrote:On April 11 2012 16:32 abominare wrote:On April 11 2012 08:04 dAPhREAk wrote:On April 11 2012 08:00 jinorazi wrote:On April 11 2012 07:57 dAPhREAk wrote:On April 11 2012 05:36 Hot_Bid wrote:
It appears that my profile has now been removed. It's okay though, it wasn't a serious entry and I'm glad I helped some people vent about the ridiculousness of the gamer girl term and the contest in general. If you're still interested in it please vote for Anna, she's a good representative of our community. sex discrimination lawsuit? maxim has deep pockets. it was invalid entry to begin with and would have not passed the judges as it says on the rules. au contraire mon ami. nothing prevents guys from participating. =D 2. ELIGIBILITY: This Contest is only open to residents legally residing and permitted to work within the fifty (50) United States and the District of Columbia, who are twenty-one (21) years of age or older as of April 2, 2012. Employees of Sponsor, Gotcast, LLC (“Gotcast”), and Intertaintech Corporation DBA Virgin Gaming ("Virgin Gaming"), any event sponsors, and their respective parent companies, affiliates, subsidiaries, and related companies, agencies, the judging panel (collectively, the “Promotion Parties”) and immediate families (defined as parents, children, siblings and spouse and their respective spouses, regardless of where they reside) and those living in the same household, whether or not related, are not eligible to enter, win or vote. Void in Puerto Rico, all U.S. territories and possessions and overseas military installations and where prohibited or restricted by law. Nit picking of the rules aside. The clear intent is for the participant to be female, Denoted by Gamer Girl, by removing a male from the line up is well within their right and American legal precedent. Hypothetically, if the case went to court, they'd easily win, not that something this silly would or should be brought to a court. what american legal precedent is that? pray tell... " Each Entry: ...(ii) must be in keeping with the Sponsor’s image (as Sponsor determines in its sole discretion)... (vii) may not contain commercial or corporate advertising, including display of corporate logos, brand names and slogans, other than those relating to Sponsor" "Sponsor has the right in its sole discretion to determine if any Entry is not appropriate for publication on the Site or for any other public release and if Entry is in compliance with these Official Rules. Sponsor reserves the right to disqualify an Entry that is not in compliance with these Official Rules. Sponsor’s decisions are final and binding with respect to all matters relating to this Contest." " By participating in the Contest, each Entrant agrees that Contest decisions, including judging, Judging Criteria, procedures, Voting, voting rules and procedures, eliminations, competition rules, game play, penalties and disqualification determinations, and the awarding of the prize, are at the sole discretion of Sponsor and are final and not subject to appeal." " Sponsor reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to disqualify any individual (and void his or her Entry) implicated in those actions or to modify or terminate the Contest or further participation in this Contest, as Sponsor deems appropriate." "Except where prohibited, each Entrant agrees that any and all disputes which cannot be resolved between or among the parties and any claims or causes of action arising out of or connected with this Contest, the prize awarded, or the determination of the winner shall be resolved individually, without resort to any form of class action." that enough for you? there is no way anyone could sue Maxim for discrimination it would be a frivolous lawsuit in both senses of the word
thats not "legal precedent."
|
i wonder how many people voted for the trade chat chick jsut to see the bikini shoot?
|
On April 12 2012 05:28 corpuscle wrote:Show nested quote +On April 12 2012 05:20 dAPhREAk wrote:On April 11 2012 16:32 abominare wrote:On April 11 2012 08:04 dAPhREAk wrote:On April 11 2012 08:00 jinorazi wrote:On April 11 2012 07:57 dAPhREAk wrote:On April 11 2012 05:36 Hot_Bid wrote:
It appears that my profile has now been removed. It's okay though, it wasn't a serious entry and I'm glad I helped some people vent about the ridiculousness of the gamer girl term and the contest in general. If you're still interested in it please vote for Anna, she's a good representative of our community. sex discrimination lawsuit? maxim has deep pockets. it was invalid entry to begin with and would have not passed the judges as it says on the rules. au contraire mon ami. nothing prevents guys from participating. =D 2. ELIGIBILITY: This Contest is only open to residents legally residing and permitted to work within the fifty (50) United States and the District of Columbia, who are twenty-one (21) years of age or older as of April 2, 2012. Employees of Sponsor, Gotcast, LLC (“Gotcast”), and Intertaintech Corporation DBA Virgin Gaming ("Virgin Gaming"), any event sponsors, and their respective parent companies, affiliates, subsidiaries, and related companies, agencies, the judging panel (collectively, the “Promotion Parties”) and immediate families (defined as parents, children, siblings and spouse and their respective spouses, regardless of where they reside) and those living in the same household, whether or not related, are not eligible to enter, win or vote. Void in Puerto Rico, all U.S. territories and possessions and overseas military installations and where prohibited or restricted by law. Nit picking of the rules aside. The clear intent is for the participant to be female, Denoted by Gamer Girl, by removing a male from the line up is well within their right and American legal precedent. Hypothetically, if the case went to court, they'd easily win, not that something this silly would or should be brought to a court. what american legal precedent is that? pray tell... " Each Entry: ...(ii) must be in keeping with the Sponsor’s image (as Sponsor determines in its sole discretion)... (vii) may not contain commercial or corporate advertising, including display of corporate logos, brand names and slogans, other than those relating to Sponsor""Sponsor has the right in its sole discretion to determine if any Entry is not appropriate for publication on the Site or for any other public release and if Entry is in compliance with these Official Rules. Sponsor reserves the right to disqualify an Entry that is not in compliance with these Official Rules. Sponsor’s decisions are final and binding with respect to all matters relating to this Contest." " By participating in the Contest, each Entrant agrees that Contest decisions, including judging, Judging Criteria, procedures, Voting, voting rules and procedures, eliminations, competition rules, game play, penalties and disqualification determinations, and the awarding of the prize, are at the sole discretion of Sponsor and are final and not subject to appeal." " Sponsor reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to disqualify any individual (and void his or her Entry) implicated in those actions or to modify or terminate the Contest or further participation in this Contest, as Sponsor deems appropriate." "Except where prohibited, each Entrant agrees that any and all disputes which cannot be resolved between or among the parties and any claims or causes of action arising out of or connected with this Contest, the prize awarded, or the determination of the winner shall be resolved individually, without resort to any form of class action." that enough for you? there is no way anyone could sue Maxim for discrimination it would be a frivolous lawsuit in both senses of the word
If we followed those to the T, you would have to ban every single girl wearing any type of Gaming shirt and every girl with pictures of them holding controllers. Tradechat and just about everyone else would be removed because of the bolded section alone.
|
On April 12 2012 05:31 Forikorder wrote:
i wonder how many people voted for the trade chat chick jsut to see the bikini shoot?
I think the real question is: how many traitors on TL voted for the TradeChat chick just to see the bikini shoot?
|
On April 12 2012 05:54 AC3 wrote:Show nested quote +On April 12 2012 05:31 Forikorder wrote:
i wonder how many people voted for the trade chat chick jsut to see the bikini shoot? I think the real question is: how many traitors on TL voted for the TradeChat chick just to see the bikini shoot?
well she does have like 9 times as many votes as anyone else
|
|
|
On April 12 2012 05:54 AC3 wrote:Show nested quote +On April 12 2012 05:31 Forikorder wrote:
i wonder how many people voted for the trade chat chick jsut to see the bikini shoot? I think the real question is: how many traitors on TL voted for the TradeChat chick just to see the bikini shoot?
Someone already posted in this thread a link to her in a bikini... It wasn't anything special =/
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
