|
On May 09 2010 14:01 dew wrote:Show nested quote +On May 09 2010 13:53 artanis2 wrote:
People are saying slush had over 100 supply at the end of the game, how can that possibly mean no chance of comeback? Way too much artosis fanboyism around here.
edit: I also think its sad that nony thinks it would be OK to take the win away from slush retroactively. Then you'd have two victims of poor decisions instead of one. The win has already been "taken away" retroactively. It has been ever since this topic was written up by Nazgul. It's just a question of whether TL is content to simply award Slush a 1-2 victory, or if it's worth doing another regame with, by all accounts, the players who belonged there. Maybe I was too harsh on some individuals in my earlier post, but my personal position stands. It would be an absolute mockery if TL comes out and says that Slush didn't win his Quarterfinal series, yet still has the championship. Either stick to your guns or regame the matches with the players who earned the spot. What TL seems to be trying to do is have it both ways. Either stand by your call or don't, just don't say "the call was wrong but we're gonna say the guy who lost won anyway". It doesn't make any sense.
its an absolute joke to go out and replay all the tournament games after they've already happened now. The mistake happened, it sucks, but we all have to move on
|
On May 10 2010 00:13 Geval wrote:Show nested quote +On May 10 2010 00:06 Cade)Flayer wrote:
It would be completely unacceptable to revise the results of a played out tournament where nobody cheated. Slush abided by the the ruling of the admin so he can't be blamed for anything. You can't punish a player because of admin mistakes, that would be incredibly unprofessional and against the spirit of fair play. This And remember that the staff didnt award Slush with a win! There was a rematch in which Artosis lost.
GG!!!!
|
On May 09 2010 14:13 shinosai wrote:Show nested quote +On May 09 2010 14:06 iCCup.Raelcun wrote:On May 09 2010 14:03 Azarkon wrote:
The reason he "had no chance" was because his 100 supply was tied up in 22 0/1 mutalisks, 9 roaches that were about to die, and a legion of drones that were also about to die because Artosis had his hydra army in Slush's last mining base.
Given Artosis's level of play, it is therefore believed that Slush could not have recovered and that it was the last battle of the game. Of course, if Artosis made some complete noob mistake like dancing his hydras around without attacking, Slush might've been able to recover, but many/most would feel that is beyond the realm of reasonable chance. This is what I'm talking about when you are deciding a disconnect case you cannot take into account the players you have to be neutral and say that anything could have happened at this point because realistically anything could have. SO his last mining base goes down there is a chance that Slush could catch him out of position and use his mineral surplus to remake drones. Personal feelings don't come into a decision like this which is why they're so difficult to make. Problem is, the only scenarios that Artosis could have lost are not realistic at all. Scenarios where he intentionally moves his units instead of letting them attack, or where he intentionally throws the game.... are not realistic. Even your most basic copper league player probably could have won the game at that point. So for a player at Artosis' level to make these "realistic" blunders is laughable.
Watch that Boxer/Joyo game, did you think there was any way Joyo would have lost that game? He had that game as locked up as Artosis did...and lost.
|
Can you guys really blame Artosis for being angry? Imagine you were in his situation. You've just wrapped up the deciding game and your opponent is about to gg. Due to a computer error (one which Artosis repeatedly warned us about, so you can't say that this will apply a dangerous precedent unless people start claiming computer problems in every tournament) your game crashes. Then the refs don't even watch the game and force you to rematch, while your opponent who has to know he's lost happily takes the rematch claiming ignorance.
Would you not be pissed? Everyone saying in the poll that they would not have conceded (which kinda makes me lose faith in the TL community) would surely have flipped out as well if they were in Artosis's position.
------------------------------------------------
User was temporarily banned for this post. Do not state untruths that are malicious in a serious discussion.
|
On May 09 2010 14:22 Ursad0n wrote:Slush did not do "what he thought was the right thing" IMO. He did what gave him the best possible chance of advancing. If he just took the loss like a gentelman (instead of saying "i could have won" like an ass) then he would have 0% chance of winning. By allowing the referee to decide he gained the extra advantage of having someone with a little less knowledge of the situation, and with fairness (in terms of Artosis disconnecting) in mind. He did the sleazy thing and looks like an ass to most, if not all, of the TL community. And he did not deserve the win and the $300 but that was not the fault of the admins. Slush, as i have said many times in this and my last post, is an ass. The honorable thing to do now in his position is to offer 1/2 or all the money to Artosis OR maybe play a Bo3 for it, IDK. Artosis, did nothing wrong in my opinion. He got the shitty end of the deal and e has a right to be mad. He lost out on an opportunity to get $300 because Slush is a douche bag and lied about thinking he could win. I, already said i think Artosis deserves prize money as well and i believe if 300 people donated a dollar he could get it. 
Why the fuck does Artosis deserve the prize money? Did I miss the games where he beat Louder and CauthonLuck, or did he disconnect out of those too?
|
On May 09 2010 23:13 Smikis wrote:Show nested quote +On May 09 2010 22:03 UbiNax wrote:On May 09 2010 22:01 Smikis wrote:
how could you say that slush had no chance to recover.. thats pure nonsense.. slush had 3800 minerals, compared to 800 from artosis, both of them had just about 1 -2 base mining, cuz mutas killed of all workers artosis had, just before crash, artosis hydras were on attack, but im 90% sure they would lost to mutas + roaches ( if they won, and then crashed.. yes game is over.. but if mutas won , slush not only could recovered , he could easily won.. )
i dont see how there was 99% chance of no comeback..
all this topic suggest is whine and flame a lot.. and you will accomplish this.. duo hehehe i think you got it wrong, there was " NO way slushs army comp could have won vs artosis' and yes he had 3k mins but he had 2 bases mining from 1 which would go down after artosis won the fight, artosis had more drones and 6 hatcherys no way. dont underestimate mutas, in high numbers they obliterate everything , you talk like having 5 bases, with no incone, vs having 2 bases, vs huge ammount of money is different.. artosis needed to remake drones.. and army.. with no money.. slush needed to remake hatches and army, with plenty of money he had.. and if he had won with mutas, he could kept harassing.. all artosis did was suicide 20+ roaches, to kill few hatcheries.. so next time ill send my army to die.. for 350 minerals building, then i just dc, claiming i won.. cuz i have more bases? lmao.. not to mention food was almost equal, slush had 118? and artosis 130? ( half of those 130 probably was hatching, so in reality he didnt had that much of army.. nor any money.. ) why dont you guys test, who wins in that last battle, hydras or mutas + roaches.. if artosis dced 30s latter, aka after that battle, game would been different.. he either won, or lost the game.. obviously, who would give him a loss, if he lost all his army, had no money.. and he had 20+ mutas harassing him.. obviously noone would give him loss.. he would get rematch. but game would been clearly over for him by then so why should slush get a loss cuz he lost 3 hatches, and artosis saced all army just to do it?
riiight those few roaches and the mutas would have taken out the 33 hydras and 9 corruptors ^^ get real
and artosis did have more drones than slush + he was mining from the gold minerals and he still had 800 minerals
And slush didnt have any gas
|
United States42695 Posts
On May 10 2010 00:20 QuakerOats wrote:
Can you guys really blame Artosis for being angry? Imagine you were in his situation. You've just wrapped up the deciding game and your opponent is about to gg. Due to a computer error (one which Artosis repeatedly warned us about, so you can't say that this will apply a dangerous precedent unless people start claiming computer problems in every tournament) your game crashes. Then the refs don't even watch the game and force you to rematch, while your opponent who has to know he's lost happily takes the rematch claiming ignorance.
Would you not be pissed? Everyone saying in the poll that they would not have conceded (which kinda makes me lose faith in the TL community) would surely have flipped out as well if they were in Artosis's position.
The refs didn't even bother to watch the game? Then what was I doing last night during that hour of rep watching and ref debating.
|
On May 09 2010 15:06 Liquid`Nazgul wrote:Show nested quote +On May 09 2010 15:03 QuakerOats wrote:
I don't see how that's trolling; he has a pretty good point. What TL is officially saying is that the winner of the tournament actually lost in the quarterfinals. And yet you're still giving him the first place prize and title... You've never seen unjustified penalties decide matches in soccer? :/
I'm pretty sure that the people who are asking to re-game the entire fucking top half of the tournament don't watch real-life sports and hence don't realize why that isn't done.
|
KatanaSwordfish is absolutely right.
I know Artosis contributes a lot to the community and hes probably a cool dude, but based on what i saw him do in the TLI he appears to be a very bm person. He showed zero respect to his opponents.
Artosis has every right to be angry at Slush for not being a sportsman, everyone else would have been angry too. But if he wants to play this game to make money and not to make friends and have fun, he cant expect his opponents to have a different attitude. Slush was given another chance and he took it. Another way to put it: Artosis was given another chance to seal the deal and he blew it. If he won the rematch, nobody would care.
This post of Nazgul is a big mistake because things like that will keep on happening from time to time and now everybody will expect some kind of apology from TL. Here is what I would do: If you get a disconnect, you lose the game. One can argue about wether the winner should be able to forfeit the win but thats another question. If there was an autoloss, all this embarrassing rage by Artosis wouldnt have happened cause there would have been noone to blame.
If there were rules simple as this one, the admins would have a much easier time.
Think about this: if u get injured in any other sport, the game is over. Thats the way it should be in SC2 when theres money on the line.
|
Okay guys
I tested out the final forces in UMS
26 Hydralisks 3/2 (what he had at slush's bottom base), 9 Corrupters 0/0 (he had some in the lower left he might have forgot about but I included them)
vs
9 roaches (all upgrades but burrow related 3/3), 2 corrupters 1/0, and 22 1/0 mutalisks
I also sacced 10 drones in the attack.
If Slush focused down the Hydras first with muta, and does good micro with roaches (abusing their regen), and sacrifices some drones, he CAN hold off the attack and survive at least in the short term.
He was not 100% defeated.
Yes I did add triggers to account for upgrades.
He still had a very small chance to come out as winner so I find the 100% chance to win, not accurate.
![[image loading]](http://img210.imageshack.us/img210/2043/picturekn.jpg)
*note quick and dirty test just to see if that force of hydra would be able to kill slush.
Further info
How Slush could possibly win: focus down hydra with roach + some drones + muta, Once hydras are dead, run with any remaining muta and do harass on drones around the map, while transferring drones to his new 2nd and massing up a new force.
He had a *chance* to win this game, I agree with rewarding a regame, he was not dead, he could kill the hydras at his base and had 5 more roaches coming up which are good units against the reinforcements (hydralisks) incoming from Artosis.
|
Slush
A few points I want to address in a single post without replying to anyone in specific there's a lot of things being repeatedly said here. I feel that in all kinds of sports that are much bigger, more widely accepted, it is proven time and time again that players will do anything within the rules to win. A soccer player will dive to get a freekick and his teammates will applaud him. This is infact not even allowed by rules and it is simply meant to trick the referee. His fans will applaud him. His opponents cry outrage, commentators will call it out. It's not noble but it's not immoral or unacceptable. What Slush did; not trying to be a judge himself does not deserve respect, but it also does not deserve to be called out on. He did not even try to trick the referees but simply looked at them for the right decision. From my experience in both poker and SC leaving it up to the referees if it benefits you is a totally standard thing to do. Giving away the win in his situation deserves respect. Not doing so does not deserve to be flamed. Hell, even Flash vs Jaedong who was in just as bad of a position as Slush, and his more mature coaches with him, did not agree with the decision to be awarded a loss. This is one of the most respected progamers out there, one of the players with the best grasp of a situation being hopeless. Doesn't this tell you enough? Stop judging Slush. Most of you have never been in a situation like this before and it's easy to talk when you've never proven yourself to do the opposite. I have done the opposite. I have given away wins when my opponents disconnected even recently, yet I don't judge Slush for not doing so because I know how rare it is that people actually follow through with that sort of thing. Lots of people talk, but very few actually do. He listened to the refs, pulled himself mentally together, and beat Artosis, Louder and Cauthonluck afterward and deserves respect for this accomplishment. The fault is with TL not Slush and we take full blame for this.
Artosis
Artosis didn't help himself with the way he acted. Getting that angry is understandable, but not acceptable. It is not 'proper behavior' for a well-known commentator to lose his cool like this and although he was operating as a player we all have to realize that a majority of the people are not capable of making this distinction. They will just see Artosis, not Artosis the player or Artosis the commentator. He knows this and apologized to ETT for his behavior and that should be the end of it. It happened and now we move on best we can.
Referee decisions that influence outcome of matches
If a tournament continued due to a bad decision it has to stand. You can't just take back what was done to people completely unrelated to the situation. It's standard protocol in every big sport that broadcasts to large audiences to accept the mistake but not to un-do it if a match or tournament was continued afterward. If this had happened in the final it would have been completely different. We told them to re-game; Slush won, we continued the tournament and Slush won that too. He didn't do anything illegal by listening to the referees and we can't take back a decision that is in the middle of all the action influencing a thousand different factors as a result. I know it's not always perfect to refer to other sports as an example as you also have to look for your own 'right thing to do', but I do believe in this case it is for a good reason that every major sport accepts bad decisions and moves on because refereeing is a human action and human actions mean mistakes happen.
Policy
I've seen people suggest we need a better policy. This is completely false please don't post this in the future. Our policy regarding discing is the best out there. However when you have policies and rules they need to be carried out and that's where the mistake happened. Every policy has its pros and cons so to suggest our policy is bad because it allows for human error is incorrect. Human error is something that will not occur when saying disc = loss, but the cons attached to a rule like this are simply enormous and do not weigh up in the slightest against the removal of human error.
|
Thanks for posting the chatlog kwark. Shows that the main reason Artosis was so upset was because he thought it was an easy $300 from when he first got the invite. Hope he doesn't get invited again.
|
On May 10 2010 01:00 Full.tilt wrote:
Thanks for posting the chatlog kwark. Shows that the main reason Artosis was so upset was because he thought it was an easy $300 from when he first got the invite. Hope he doesn't get invited again.
And he certainly got his fame...
|
On May 10 2010 00:58 Liquid`Nazgul wrote:+ Show Spoiler +
Slush
A few points I want to address in a single post without replying to anyone in specific there's a lot of things being repeatedly said here. I feel that in all kinds of sports that are much bigger, more widely accepted, it is proven time and time again that players will do anything within the rules to win. A soccer player will dive to get a freekick and his teammates will applaud him. This is infact not even allowed by rules and it is simply meant to trick the referee. His fans will applaud him. His opponents cry outrage, commentators will call it out. It's not noble but it's not immoral or unacceptable. What Slush did; not trying to be a judge himself does not deserve respect, but it also does not deserve to be called out on. He did not even try to trick the referees but simply looked at them for the right decision. From my experience in both poker and SC leaving it up to the referees if it benefits you is a totally standard thing to do. Giving away the win in his situation deserves respect. Not doing so does not deserve to be flamed. Hell, even Flash vs Jaedong who was in just as bad of a position as Slush, and his more mature coaches with him, did not agree with the decision to be awarded a loss. This is one of the most respected progamers out there, one of the players with the best grasp of a situation being hopeless. Doesn't this tell you enough? Stop judging Slush. Most of you have never been in a situation like this before and it's easy to talk when you've never proven yourself to do the opposite. I have done the opposite. I have given away wins when my opponents disconnected even recently, yet I don't judge Slush for not doing so because I know how rare it is that people actually follow through with that sort of thing. Lots of people talk, but very few actually do. He listened to the refs, pulled himself mentally together, and beat Artosis, Louder and Cauthonluck afterward and deserves respect for this accomplishment. The fault is with TL not Slush and we take full blame for this.
Artosis
Artosis didn't help himself with the way he acted. Getting that angry is understandable, but not acceptable. It is not 'proper behavior' for a well-known commentator to lose his cool like this and although he was operating as a player we all have to realize that a majority of the people are not capable of making this distinction. They will just see Artosis, not Artosis the player or Artosis the commentator. He knows this and apologized to ETT for his behavior and that should be the end of it. It happened and now we move on best we can.
Referee decisions that influence outcome of matches
If a tournament continued due to a bad decision it has to stand. You can't just take back what was done to people completely unrelated to the situation. It's standard protocol in every big sport that broadcasts to large audiences to accept the mistake but not to un-do it if a match or tournament was continued afterward. If this had happened in the final it would have been completely different. We told them to re-game; Slush won, we continued the tournament and Slush won that too. He didn't do anything illegal by listening to the referees and we can't take back a decision that is in the middle of all the action influencing a thousand different factors as a result. I know it's not always perfect to refer to other sports as an example as you also have to look for your own 'right thing to do', but I do believe in this case it is for a good reason that every major sport accepts bad decisions and moves on because refereeing is a human action and human actions mean mistakes happen.
Policy
I've seen people suggest we need a better policy. This is completely false please don't post this in the future. Our policy regarding discing is the best out there. However when you have policies and rules they need to be carried out and that's where the mistake happened. Every policy has its pros and cons so to suggest our policy is bad because it allows for human error is incorrect. Human error is something that will not occur when saying disc = loss, but the cons attached to a rule like this are simply enormous and do not weigh up in the slightest against the removal of human error.
/thread
|
On May 10 2010 01:05 zeppelin wrote:Show nested quote +On May 10 2010 01:00 Full.tilt wrote:
Thanks for posting the chatlog kwark. Shows that the main reason Artosis was so upset was because he thought it was an easy $300 from when he first got the invite. Hope he doesn't get invited again. And he certainly got his fame...
Soon sc2 up and comers will start coke habits, shave their heads, and marry random people in vegas, not to mention possible reality shows where they compete in events like milking farm animals and sticking their hands up rectums.
The true path to being invited to money events. Although right now raging as often as possible is the best way, I'm sure it will get more competitive over time.
|
Whether or not Artosis is right/wrong/blowing a chance at free money, Slush should just have given the game to artosis if indeed it was a 100% situation. The fact that he did not concede shows that either A. it was not 100% or B. Slush is a dick.
|
On May 10 2010 01:15 Trezeguet23 wrote:
Whether or not Artosis is right/wrong/blowing a chance at free money, Slush should just have given the game to artosis if indeed it was a 100% situation. The fact that he did not concede shows that either A. it was not 100% or B. Slush is a dick.
If he thought it was 100% he would have already said gg by then, you don't get to be a top player by having a weepy lack of self-confidence in your ability to overcome adversity.
|
On May 10 2010 00:58 Liquid`Nazgul wrote:
Slush
A few points I want to address in a single post without replying to anyone in specific there's a lot of things being repeatedly said here. I feel that in all kinds of sports that are much bigger, more widely accepted, it is proven time and time again that players will do anything within the rules to win. A soccer player will dive to get a freekick and his teammates will applaud him. This is infact not even allowed by rules and it is simply meant to trick the referee. His fans will applaud him. His opponents cry outrage, commentators will call it out. It's not noble but it's not immoral or unacceptable. What Slush did; not trying to be a judge himself does not deserve respect, but it also does not deserve to be called out on. He did not even try to trick the referees but simply looked at them for the right decision. From my experience in both poker and SC leaving it up to the referees if it benefits you is a totally standard thing to do. Giving away the win in his situation deserves respect. Not doing so does not deserve to be flamed. Hell, even Flash vs Jaedong who was in just as bad of a position as Slush, and his more mature coaches with him, did not agree with the decision to be awarded a loss. This is one of the most respected progamers out there, one of the players with the best grasp of a situation being hopeless. Doesn't this tell you enough? Stop judging Slush. Most of you have never been in a situation like this before and it's easy to talk when you've never proven yourself to do the opposite. I have done the opposite. I have given away wins when my opponents disconnected even recently, yet I don't judge Slush for not doing so because I know how rare it is that people actually follow through with that sort of thing. Lots of people talk, but very few actually do. He listened to the refs, pulled himself mentally together, and beat Artosis, Louder and Cauthonluck afterward and deserves respect for this accomplishment. The fault is with TL not Slush and we take full blame for this.
Artosis
Artosis didn't help himself with the way he acted. Getting that angry is understandable, but not acceptable. It is not 'proper behavior' for a well-known commentator to lose his cool like this and although he was operating as a player we all have to realize that a majority of the people are not capable of making this distinction. They will just see Artosis, not Artosis the player or Artosis the commentator. He knows this and apologized to ETT for his behavior and that should be the end of it. It happened and now we move on best we can.
Referee decisions that influence outcome of matches
If a tournament continued due to a bad decision it has to stand. You can't just take back what was done to people completely unrelated to the situation. It's standard protocol in every big sport that broadcasts to large audiences to accept the mistake but not to un-do it if a match or tournament was continued afterward. If this had happened in the final it would have been completely different. We told them to re-game; Slush won, we continued the tournament and Slush won that too. He didn't do anything illegal by listening to the referees and we can't take back a decision that is in the middle of all the action influencing a thousand different factors as a result. I know it's not always perfect to refer to other sports as an example as you also have to look for your own 'right thing to do', but I do believe in this case it is for a good reason that every major sport accepts bad decisions and moves on because refereeing is a human action and human actions mean mistakes happen.
Policy
I've seen people suggest we need a better policy. This is completely false please don't post this in the future. Our policy regarding discing is the best out there. However when you have policies and rules they need to be carried out and that's where the mistake happened. Every policy has its pros and cons so to suggest our policy is bad because it allows for human error is incorrect. Human error is something that will not occur when saying disc = loss, but the cons attached to a rule like this are simply enormous and do not weigh up in the slightest against the removal of human error.
Liquid`Nazgul, the voice of reason :-)
Well put, on all accounts. Let's all move on, shall we?
|
On May 10 2010 00:51 dacthehork wrote:
Okay guys
I tested out the final forces in UMS
Appreciate the effort but your test is incorrect he did not have regen upgrades, his 9 roaches were all in the yellow while 95% of the hydras were fully in the green, and they were fighting already without the mutas being there.
|
On May 10 2010 00:58 Liquid`Nazgul wrote:+ Show Spoiler +Slush
A few points I want to address in a single post without replying to anyone in specific there's a lot of things being repeatedly said here. I feel that in all kinds of sports that are much bigger, more widely accepted, it is proven time and time again that players will do anything within the rules to win. A soccer player will dive to get a freekick and his teammates will applaud him. This is infact not even allowed by rules and it is simply meant to trick the referee. His fans will applaud him. His opponents cry outrage, commentators will call it out. It's not noble but it's not immoral or unacceptable. What Slush did; not trying to be a judge himself does not deserve respect, but it also does not deserve to be called out on. He did not even try to trick the referees but simply looked at them for the right decision. From my experience in both poker and SC leaving it up to the referees if it benefits you is a totally standard thing to do. Giving away the win in his situation deserves respect. Not doing so does not deserve to be flamed. Hell, even Flash vs Jaedong who was in just as bad of a position as Slush, and his more mature coaches with him, did not agree with the decision to be awarded a loss. This is one of the most respected progamers out there, one of the players with the best grasp of a situation being hopeless. Doesn't this tell you enough? Stop judging Slush. Most of you have never been in a situation like this before and it's easy to talk when you've never proven yourself to do the opposite. I have done the opposite. I have given away wins when my opponents disconnected even recently, yet I don't judge Slush for not doing so because I know how rare it is that people actually follow through with that sort of thing. Lots of people talk, but very few actually do. He listened to the refs, pulled himself mentally together, and beat Artosis, Louder and Cauthonluck afterward and deserves respect for this accomplishment. The fault is with TL not Slush and we take full blame for this.
Artosis
Artosis didn't help himself with the way he acted. Getting that angry is understandable, but not acceptable. It is not 'proper behavior' for a well-known commentator to lose his cool like this and although he was operating as a player we all have to realize that a majority of the people are not capable of making this distinction. They will just see Artosis, not Artosis the player or Artosis the commentator. He knows this and apologized to ETT for his behavior and that should be the end of it. It happened and now we move on best we can.
Referee decisions that influence outcome of matches
If a tournament continued due to a bad decision it has to stand. You can't just take back what was done to people completely unrelated to the situation. It's standard protocol in every big sport that broadcasts to large audiences to accept the mistake but not to un-do it if a match or tournament was continued afterward. If this had happened in the final it would have been completely different. We told them to re-game; Slush won, we continued the tournament and Slush won that too. He didn't do anything illegal by listening to the referees and we can't take back a decision that is in the middle of all the action influencing a thousand different factors as a result. I know it's not always perfect to refer to other sports as an example as you also have to look for your own 'right thing to do', but I do believe in this case it is for a good reason that every major sport accepts bad decisions and moves on because refereeing is a human action and human actions mean mistakes happen.
Policy
I've seen people suggest we need a better policy. This is completely false please don't post this in the future. Our policy regarding discing is the best out there. However when you have policies and rules they need to be carried out and that's where the mistake happened. Every policy has its pros and cons so to suggest our policy is bad because it allows for human error is incorrect. Human error is something that will not occur when saying disc = loss, but the cons attached to a rule like this are simply enormous and do not weigh up in the slightest against the removal of human error.
This sums up everything. There will always be people to argue over this decision.
This is what makes TL great; not only the great events that are organized but also the wisdom of the staff. And also the backbone required to get through a shitstorm that often (it would be fun to check at the ratio uneventful event / number of events done).
Tough decision but fair nontheless, at least people should respect that rules were applied.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
