|
does anybody know what happened to that awesome automated streamguide from HSC?
PS: Wtf. I'm getting an add for vaginal infection drugs.
|
Looks like we might get bc vs bc on stream A
|
On June 30 2013 10:32 c0ldfusion wrote:he's got a ton of potential
Potential is a lack of results 
|
I missed the last 2.5 hours, anything exciting happen?
|
On June 30 2013 10:30 _SpiRaL_ wrote:Show nested quote +On June 30 2013 10:29 Orek wrote:On June 30 2013 10:22 _SpiRaL_ wrote:On June 30 2013 10:20 DamageControL wrote:On June 30 2013 10:17 _SpiRaL_ wrote:On June 30 2013 10:15 DamageControL wrote:On June 30 2013 10:10 _SpiRaL_ wrote:On June 30 2013 10:08 DamageControL wrote:On June 30 2013 10:05 _SpiRaL_ wrote:On June 30 2013 10:04 TTOMZ wrote:
[quote]
When did i say Catz sucks? I said he's not seen as a pro player anymore. He doesn't play to win major tournements be plays for moral support for his team
And its the exact same situation Again no actual points here. Catz isnt a pro therefore its ok. That is NOT RELEVANT. Why is it a problem? Or rather, in what world is "throwing matches" avoidable? People say rushing probes is unacceptable. I think how we handled the NaNi incident was bad. You can't force someone to try. You say it "hurts the integrity of the tournament." How? What's the impact? What harm does it do to the tournament? There will not be sudden rash of people throwing games--there are a fairly unique set of circumstances where it's beneficial to both parties. Answer my questions above please. LG-IM all 4 semi finalists, forfeit to give MVP the win. Fine? Its not a unique set of circumstances. There is nothing unique about it. It is a principle. Either its acceptable or not. Black and white. You can't force someone to try. But you can disqualify them if you think they didn't try deliberately in order to influence the outcome. 1. Yes it's fine. 2. You keep saying it's acceptable or not, black or white. I'm saying it's fine. You're saying it's not. But you aren't substantiating your claim. You keep claiming IT'S NEVER OK. I believe that it is fine for two reasons: a) it's unenforceable (Catz can suddenly and inexplicably show up late, etc.) b) I don't see what's wrong with it ethically. 3. What's the threshold for effort there? Do we keep a magic effort meter somewhere? 4. You still haven't answered my question: what happens that is so bad here? it is enforceable. You can disqualify if you have evidence it was done deliberately. Ethically it is not acceptable because he has given a team mate a free pass. He didn't have to play a match in the tournament. They have manipulated the brackets to their advantage and affected the integrity of the whole tournament. Do you think what Savior did is fine? 1. How would you collect this evidence? 2. No what savior did was not fine because it was: a. Not explicit (this matter less but people don't like being deceived) b. There was money being gambled and he was fixing it--which is actually illegal Please define what the "integrity" of a tournament is. I don't know how to point out it's not violating that spirit otherwise. 1. Same way you collect any evidence. 2. I don't disagree that there is a difference, but the ethical principle is similar. That was the reason for my analogy. Not to make it seem like they were the same situation. The explanation of the difference between them to reveal the ethical reasoning is the important thing (before people misunderstand me). Integrity of the tournament=the belief that the tournament is played ethically with full effort from all players involved so that the results can be trusted. Personally, I support "rule absolutism." Unless MLG rules explicitly forbid such acts, players are allowed to do literally whatever they want within those rules. Fuck eithics. If anything, it is MLG's fault for not expecting this situation and making rules accordingly. If majority of the community feels that it is unethical, then tournaments should include it to their rules. I don't like what CatZ has done, but I would rather blame MLG than CatZ for this turmoil. It is against MLG's rules....
If you guys want to read the rules http://www.majorleaguegaming.com/competitions/57#2013-pro-circuit-conduct-rules.
Additional rules is important here.
1. Competitors may not intentionally Forfeit a Game or conspire to manipulate Rankings or Brackets.
As I said, it all comes down to why Catz forfeited and if he had a good reason, you can't just let you teammate advance, pretty sure that's in the rules of every tournament.
|
On June 30 2013 10:31 _SpiRaL_ wrote:Show nested quote +On June 30 2013 10:31 Orek wrote:On June 30 2013 10:30 _SpiRaL_ wrote:On June 30 2013 10:29 Orek wrote:On June 30 2013 10:22 _SpiRaL_ wrote:On June 30 2013 10:20 DamageControL wrote:On June 30 2013 10:17 _SpiRaL_ wrote:On June 30 2013 10:15 DamageControL wrote:On June 30 2013 10:10 _SpiRaL_ wrote:On June 30 2013 10:08 DamageControL wrote:
[quote]
Why is it a problem? Or rather, in what world is "throwing matches" avoidable?
People say rushing probes is unacceptable. I think how we handled the NaNi incident was bad. You can't force someone to try.
You say it "hurts the integrity of the tournament." How? What's the impact? What harm does it do to the tournament? There will not be sudden rash of people throwing games--there are a fairly unique set of circumstances where it's beneficial to both parties.
Answer my questions above please. LG-IM all 4 semi finalists, forfeit to give MVP the win. Fine? Its not a unique set of circumstances. There is nothing unique about it. It is a principle. Either its acceptable or not. Black and white. You can't force someone to try. But you can disqualify them if you think they didn't try deliberately in order to influence the outcome. 1. Yes it's fine. 2. You keep saying it's acceptable or not, black or white. I'm saying it's fine. You're saying it's not. But you aren't substantiating your claim. You keep claiming IT'S NEVER OK. I believe that it is fine for two reasons: a) it's unenforceable (Catz can suddenly and inexplicably show up late, etc.) b) I don't see what's wrong with it ethically. 3. What's the threshold for effort there? Do we keep a magic effort meter somewhere? 4. You still haven't answered my question: what happens that is so bad here? it is enforceable. You can disqualify if you have evidence it was done deliberately. Ethically it is not acceptable because he has given a team mate a free pass. He didn't have to play a match in the tournament. They have manipulated the brackets to their advantage and affected the integrity of the whole tournament. Do you think what Savior did is fine? 1. How would you collect this evidence? 2. No what savior did was not fine because it was: a. Not explicit (this matter less but people don't like being deceived) b. There was money being gambled and he was fixing it--which is actually illegal Please define what the "integrity" of a tournament is. I don't know how to point out it's not violating that spirit otherwise. 1. Same way you collect any evidence. 2. I don't disagree that there is a difference, but the ethical principle is similar. That was the reason for my analogy. Not to make it seem like they were the same situation. The explanation of the difference between them to reveal the ethical reasoning is the important thing (before people misunderstand me). Integrity of the tournament=the belief that the tournament is played ethically with full effort from all players involved so that the results can be trusted. Personally, I support "rule absolutism." Unless MLG rules explicitly forbid such acts, players are allowed to do literally whatever they want within those rules. Fuck eithics. If anything, it is MLG's fault for not expecting this situation and making rules accordingly. If majority of the community feels that it is unethical, then tournaments should include it to their rules. I don't like what CatZ has done, but I would rather blame MLG than CatZ for this turmoil. It is against MLG's rules.... Then, why are we arguing? He should be punished because he went against rules. It's that simple. You tell me man. Many are defending it.
Yeah. Assuming CatZ went against MLG rules, I don't know how to defend him.
|
On June 30 2013 10:33 Hryul wrote:
does anybody know what happened to that awesome automated streamguide from HSC?
PS: Wtf. I'm getting an add for vaginal infection drugs.
R1CH is not here this weekend 
|
Why don't you guys make a seperate thread about the CatZ situation rather then fill up this thread with the drama, so we can actually see results or talk about games
|
On June 30 2013 10:22 _SpiRaL_ wrote:Show nested quote +On June 30 2013 10:20 DamageControL wrote:On June 30 2013 10:17 _SpiRaL_ wrote:On June 30 2013 10:15 DamageControL wrote:On June 30 2013 10:10 _SpiRaL_ wrote:On June 30 2013 10:08 DamageControL wrote:On June 30 2013 10:05 _SpiRaL_ wrote:On June 30 2013 10:04 TTOMZ wrote:On June 30 2013 10:03 _SpiRaL_ wrote:On June 30 2013 10:01 TTOMZ wrote:
I think this Catz thing is silly and people are being silly, is Catz even considered a pro player anymore? I see him more as an acting manager you could say, playing for moral support
Coach Park is playing in this MLG right? So imagine if he'd got paired with an EG or TL player in his first game. Do you think he would have played vs them? No he's of forfeited his place. He's playing for fun and if he ever ran into an EG or TL player he would simple give them the bye
I see Catz as being in the same situation Of course he would have played. This also does not even attempt to evaluate the actual issue. Just "its fine because Catz sucks"? That is not a good reason. When did i say Catz sucks? I said he's not seen as a pro player anymore. He doesn't play to win major tournements be plays for moral support for his team And its the exact same situation Again no actual points here. Catz isnt a pro therefore its ok. That is NOT RELEVANT. Why is it a problem? Or rather, in what world is "throwing matches" avoidable? People say rushing probes is unacceptable. I think how we handled the NaNi incident was bad. You can't force someone to try. You say it "hurts the integrity of the tournament." How? What's the impact? What harm does it do to the tournament? There will not be sudden rash of people throwing games--there are a fairly unique set of circumstances where it's beneficial to both parties. Answer my questions above please. LG-IM all 4 semi finalists, forfeit to give MVP the win. Fine? Its not a unique set of circumstances. There is nothing unique about it. It is a principle. Either its acceptable or not. Black and white. You can't force someone to try. But you can disqualify them if you think they didn't try deliberately in order to influence the outcome. 1. Yes it's fine. 2. You keep saying it's acceptable or not, black or white. I'm saying it's fine. You're saying it's not. But you aren't substantiating your claim. You keep claiming IT'S NEVER OK. I believe that it is fine for two reasons: a) it's unenforceable (Catz can suddenly and inexplicably show up late, etc.) b) I don't see what's wrong with it ethically. 3. What's the threshold for effort there? Do we keep a magic effort meter somewhere? 4. You still haven't answered my question: what happens that is so bad here? it is enforceable. You can disqualify if you have evidence it was done deliberately. Ethically it is not acceptable because he has given a team mate a free pass. He didn't have to play a match in the tournament. They have manipulated the brackets to their advantage and affected the integrity of the whole tournament. Do you think what Savior did is fine? 1. How would you collect this evidence? 2. No what savior did was not fine because it was: a. Not explicit (this matter less but people don't like being deceived) b. There was money being gambled and he was fixing it--which is actually illegal Please define what the "integrity" of a tournament is. I don't know how to point out it's not violating that spirit otherwise. 1. Same way you collect any evidence. 2. I don't disagree that there is a difference, but the ethical principle is similar. That was the reason for my analogy. Not to make it seem like they were the same situation. The explanation of the difference between them to reveal the ethical reasoning is the important thing (before people misunderstand me). Integrity of the tournament=the belief that the tournament is played ethically with full effort from all players involved so that the results can be trusted.
1. I just think this may be the easiest thing to leave no evidence for
2. I understand the point of your analogy--I'm saying that you're wrong in saying the same guiding ethical principle was why both acts are wrong. Savior was rigging bets to ensure that money went in his direction. Very wrong.
Tournament results can never be "fully trusted." Some players get lucky with brackets, game errors, lag, even team kills can affect emotional state. I think this falls under the "lucky break" category rather than the "manipulation of outcomes" part. The reason is because I feel that Catz was legitimately able to defeat everyone in his path up until this point. And so was Kane. When they met, an outcome was reached without robbing or harming others in the process. The only tangential benefit Kane received is he will be more rested which I don't believe falls outside the normal benefits of luck so often seen playing a role in these tournaments.
On the other hand, if Kane, say, wins the tournament, you might wonder if catz could have knocked him out. But under "tournament logic" (which is to say, the winner is the best because they defeated someone who defeated someone who defeated someone...etc.) the ONLY problem with Catz not throwing is that he instead could have gone FURTHER in the tournament which would hurt Kane's future opponents anyways.
Basically if Kane > Catz anyways, no difference for future opponents
If Catz>Kane, future opponents get an easier time, not a harder one (again by tournament logic)
If tournament logic is NOT true (which is the case, I feel), results are never to be "trusted"
edit: People are right, this is clutter, done posting about it, PM me if you care passionately, or start another thread
|
hahaha HerO checking himself out in the reflection.
|
So much for phones being banned in the booths?
|
Did I just see Sage use his phone?
|
Fun TvT, Theognis beating up EG Terrans
|
On June 30 2013 10:34 Pootytang wrote:
Why don't you guys make a seperate thread about the CatZ situation rather then fill up this thread with the drama, so we can actually see results or talk about games
It's been going on for the last 30 pages or so, they don't get the hint.
|
On June 30 2013 10:33 Flossy wrote:
I missed the last 2.5 hours, anything exciting happen?
Naniwa stomped HuK into the ground. It wasn't pretty.
|
On June 30 2013 10:33 Loxley wrote:Show nested quote +On June 30 2013 10:33 Hryul wrote:
does anybody know what happened to that awesome automated streamguide from HSC?
PS: Wtf. I'm getting an add for vaginal infection drugs. R1CH is not here this weekend
too bad. hoped he would expand on it. Esp. since MLG has this standardized scheme for putting up players.
Edit: and that google doc confuses me
|
On June 30 2013 10:36 Koshi wrote:Show nested quote +On June 30 2013 10:33 Flossy wrote:
I missed the last 2.5 hours, anything exciting happen? Naniwa stomped HuK into the ground. It wasn't pretty.
QXC took a game off dear then lost 2-0
|
On June 30 2013 10:36 Koshi wrote:Show nested quote +On June 30 2013 10:33 Flossy wrote:
I missed the last 2.5 hours, anything exciting happen? Naniwa stomped HuK into the ground. It wasn't pretty.
Jaedong still can't win vs Protoss.
|
On June 30 2013 10:35 Daogin wrote:Show nested quote +On June 30 2013 10:34 Pootytang wrote:
Why don't you guys make a seperate thread about the CatZ situation rather then fill up this thread with the drama, so we can actually see results or talk about games It's been going on for the last 30 pages or so, they don't get the hint.
People are just being driven mad by this echoing audio.
|
grubby's out
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
