|
United States5162 Posts
On August 14 2011 23:13 Talin wrote:Show nested quote +On August 14 2011 23:08 Myles wrote:On August 14 2011 23:04 Talin wrote:On August 14 2011 22:39 Myles wrote:On August 14 2011 22:35 Talin wrote:
To be honest, requiring contracts and deposits just to participate in what's technically an online qualifier tournament (which the whole online portion of NASL is) is just not sensible at all in the first place. You obviously have no idea how business works. You ALWAYS have contracts. A deal without a contract is no deal at all. "It's a business" has become such a standard excuse for everything that goes wrong in SC2 lately that the very mention of the word makes me die a little inside. Which other tournament requires players to put in a deposit and sign a contract in order to play (and link sources)? I know of no other tournament that has exposed details like this, so of course I can't provide sources. But I would pretty much guarantee you that all the major tournaments(MLG, IEM, Blizzcon, GSL) have contracts with players. It'd be outlining things just like NASL talked about, payment schedule, player/organizer requirements, and probably insurance. I'd like to hear some confirmation of this. As far as I know, you can just sign up for a spot in the MLG open bracket, and I doubt they throw a contract in your face when you show up at the event to take your place in the bracket. Also, players seem to be free to pull out of other tournaments at any point.
They have to sign something to agree to the tournament rules and stuff. You're being incredibly naive if you think they just show up, sit down, and play. They have to pay to get in in the first place and I would bet when they do that they agree to MLG's terms and officially sign a contract. It doesn't have to be some 50 page legal document, it could very well be a couple paragraph letter.
And insurance would be discussed because, at least in the US, being presence at someone else's property makes them liable for anything the happens to you. If a competitor(or a fan, but that would be a different matter) were to get hurt at MLG it could be a legal mess and there would certainly be some kind of agreement before hand stating what rights each party had.
|
On August 14 2011 23:14 NHY wrote:Show nested quote +On August 14 2011 23:12 mcc wrote:On August 14 2011 23:00 NHY wrote:On August 14 2011 22:58 mcc wrote:On August 14 2011 22:56 cheesemaster wrote:On August 14 2011 22:39 tyCe wrote:
Okay. Several things/possibilities going on in my mind.
1. Korean politics between the teams and the S2CON. The usual blackmail stuff.
2. Lack of communication between NASL and effectively anyone in Korea. They should get a Korean liason or PR rep. Using the media/public forums to establish communication is stupid.
3. S2CON, NASL and other parties using TL.net as their media outlet. It's ridiculous. It's unprofessional. Use twitter or your own website or a proper news outlet, and let a TL member link that source here. Using TL as the first means of public communication is amateurish. That would be NASL doing that , not sc2con or the korean teams. Just NASL, it is amateurish and they should really hold their tongues anyways until they know whats going on. "The korean teams do no wish to participate in NASL and have withdrawn" its simple its effective and it doesnt cause any drama. I dont see why they couldnt just say that. It is not like sc2con is not as amateurish. That may very well be, but s2con had nothing to do with this situation as you can read from both s2con and NASL's statement. Frankly at this point there is no reason to believe them anything they say especially as the whole picture that we currently have(very incomplete I admit) seems to make what they say very unlikely. Welcome to standard politics where statements are only about PR not in the slightest about reality. So you don't believe something that both S2CON and NASL are saying to be true?
No, not really. They might be just trying to put it to rest because of bad PR for both sides. I am not saying it is so, just that I have seen in politics many cases where "warring" parties agreed to some version of "facts" only to be later shown that they lied. Basically they are not trustworthy enough to believe anything they say.
|
This is the biggest drama in SC2 since it's release? I think like the unravelling and fall-out from all this chaos and confusion is going to have long term negative effects on the future of SC2.Altogether it's very unfortunate. Something somewhere is going very badly wrong.
|
On August 14 2011 23:14 mcc wrote:Show nested quote +On August 14 2011 23:04 Talin wrote:On August 14 2011 22:39 Myles wrote:On August 14 2011 22:35 Talin wrote:
To be honest, requiring contracts and deposits just to participate in what's technically an online qualifier tournament (which the whole online portion of NASL is) is just not sensible at all in the first place. You obviously have no idea how business works. You ALWAYS have contracts. A deal without a contract is no deal at all. "It's a business" has become such a standard excuse for everything that goes wrong in SC2 lately that the very mention of the word makes me die a little inside. Which other tournament requires players to put in a deposit and sign a contract in order to play (and link sources)? Which other big tournament is actually a league that depends on many weeks of players participation without an ability to replace players during that time ?
See, that's the problem.
If the format is so bad that it could bring player into a position where it would be in his best interest to just not play anymore, then change the format to avoid it.
If the scheduling is so bad that it conflicts with major tournaments (as it was the case in Season 1), then work with other tournaments to avoid schedule conflicting.
Those are the solutions to actual problems - getting everyone to sign contracts is just a forced roundabout way to ensure that the competition isn't a complete disaster.
On August 14 2011 23:17 Myles wrote:Show nested quote +On August 14 2011 23:13 Talin wrote:On August 14 2011 23:08 Myles wrote:On August 14 2011 23:04 Talin wrote:On August 14 2011 22:39 Myles wrote:On August 14 2011 22:35 Talin wrote:
To be honest, requiring contracts and deposits just to participate in what's technically an online qualifier tournament (which the whole online portion of NASL is) is just not sensible at all in the first place. You obviously have no idea how business works. You ALWAYS have contracts. A deal without a contract is no deal at all. "It's a business" has become such a standard excuse for everything that goes wrong in SC2 lately that the very mention of the word makes me die a little inside. Which other tournament requires players to put in a deposit and sign a contract in order to play (and link sources)? I know of no other tournament that has exposed details like this, so of course I can't provide sources. But I would pretty much guarantee you that all the major tournaments(MLG, IEM, Blizzcon, GSL) have contracts with players. It'd be outlining things just like NASL talked about, payment schedule, player/organizer requirements, and probably insurance. I'd like to hear some confirmation of this. As far as I know, you can just sign up for a spot in the MLG open bracket, and I doubt they throw a contract in your face when you show up at the event to take your place in the bracket. Also, players seem to be free to pull out of other tournaments at any point. They have to sign something to agree to the tournament rules and stuff. You're being incredibly naive if you think they just show up, sit down, and play. They have to pay to get in in the first place and I would bet when they do that they agree to MLG's terms and officially sign a contract. It doesn't have to be some 50 page legal document, it could very well be a couple paragraph letter.
Yeah, could be. Nobody really reads those kinds of terms anyway. 
What NASL does is obviously somewhat of a bigger deal / different as it seems to dictate and restrict so much of what a player can or can't do.
|
On August 14 2011 23:19 Talin wrote:Show nested quote +On August 14 2011 23:14 mcc wrote:On August 14 2011 23:04 Talin wrote:On August 14 2011 22:39 Myles wrote:On August 14 2011 22:35 Talin wrote:
To be honest, requiring contracts and deposits just to participate in what's technically an online qualifier tournament (which the whole online portion of NASL is) is just not sensible at all in the first place. You obviously have no idea how business works. You ALWAYS have contracts. A deal without a contract is no deal at all. "It's a business" has become such a standard excuse for everything that goes wrong in SC2 lately that the very mention of the word makes me die a little inside. Which other tournament requires players to put in a deposit and sign a contract in order to play (and link sources)? Which other big tournament is actually a league that depends on many weeks of players participation without an ability to replace players during that time ? See, that's the problem. If the format is so bad that it could bring player into a position where it would be in his best interest to just not play anymore, then change the format to avoid it. If the scheduling is so bad that it conflicts with major tournaments (as it was the case in Season 1), then work with other tournaments to avoid schedule conflicting. Those are the solutions to actual problems - getting everyone to sign contracts is just a forced roundabout way to ensure that the competition isn't a complete disaster.
Or maybe they should do both, I criticized NASL for their scheduling and format in week one of season 1. I am not going to criticize them for deposits and contracts that are as valid approach as not having them.
EDIT:typo
|
NASL seems like such a shady little venture, lol. There's always a lot of flak surrounding it, and their PR is terrible. That Xeris guy would ALWAYS get into it with people, and wasn't he supposed to be the rep? Then incontrol, of course, doing his thing, and now this... Ew. Good to know the Korean teams aren't just super duper greedy like NASL made them seem...
|
S2con, SC2con, what is this garbage. Why cant these "groups" of teams/individuals find a better way to distinguish themselves. As an organization sifting through much information as to why players arent going to participate in their tournament it's quite obnoxious to every time distinguish which group the blame lies too. Really; S2con SC2con...
|
Double speak. sc2CON is an organization founded by the teams. They can claim the teams acted on their own individually all they want, but individuals don't act as a block.
|
On August 14 2011 23:23 FallDownMarigold wrote:
NASL seems like such a shady little venture, lol. There's always a lot of flak surrounding it, and their PR is terrible. That Xeris guy would ALWAYS get into it with people, and wasn't he supposed to be the rep? Then incontrol, of course, doing his thing, and now this... Ew. Good to know the Korean teams aren't just super duper greedy like NASL made them seem...
Not to defend NASL too much, but did you see all the drama with lying and politics that surrounds sc2con and has nothing to do with NASL. Many things in sc2 scene are becoming shady, money tends to do that.
|
On August 14 2011 23:04 Talin wrote:Show nested quote +On August 14 2011 22:39 Myles wrote:On August 14 2011 22:35 Talin wrote:
To be honest, requiring contracts and deposits just to participate in what's technically an online qualifier tournament (which the whole online portion of NASL is) is just not sensible at all in the first place. You obviously have no idea how business works. You ALWAYS have contracts. A deal without a contract is no deal at all. "It's a business" has become such a standard excuse for everything that goes wrong in SC2 lately that the very mention of the word makes me die a little inside. Which other tournament requires players to put in a deposit and sign a contract in order to play (and link sources)?
In Germany the EPS Players have to sign contracts to play in it. they dont't have to pay a deposit, but if they make something stupid and will earn some paneltypoints, they will get less money at the end of the season.
|
On August 14 2011 23:13 Talin wrote:Show nested quote +On August 14 2011 23:08 Myles wrote:On August 14 2011 23:04 Talin wrote:On August 14 2011 22:39 Myles wrote:On August 14 2011 22:35 Talin wrote:
To be honest, requiring contracts and deposits just to participate in what's technically an online qualifier tournament (which the whole online portion of NASL is) is just not sensible at all in the first place. You obviously have no idea how business works. You ALWAYS have contracts. A deal without a contract is no deal at all. "It's a business" has become such a standard excuse for everything that goes wrong in SC2 lately that the very mention of the word makes me die a little inside. Which other tournament requires players to put in a deposit and sign a contract in order to play (and link sources)? I know of no other tournament that has exposed details like this, so of course I can't provide sources. But I would pretty much guarantee you that all the major tournaments(MLG, IEM, Blizzcon, GSL) have contracts with players. It'd be outlining things just like NASL talked about, payment schedule, player/organizer requirements, and probably insurance. I'd like to hear some confirmation of this. As far as I know, you can just sign up for a spot in the MLG open bracket, and I doubt they throw a contract in your face when you show up at the event to take your place in the bracket. Also, players seem to be free to pull out of other tournaments at any point.
I played WoW competitively for two years and every league played in I had to sign something in order to participate. That includes WSVG, MLG, Blizzards WWI, Dreamhack.
MLG charges $70 per event per player. NASL charges $5 I believe. NASL has a deposit for $500 if you qualify, which can be a lot for many people, but their league spans over months instead of a weekend. I think that's how NASL works anyway.
|
I thought FXO was trying to play in the NASL and withdrew from s2con to play in it . . .
|
On August 14 2011 23:24 tdt wrote:
Double speak. sc2CON is an organization founded by the teams. They can claim the teams acted on their own individually all they want, but individuals don't act as a block.
s2con members:
IM, MVP, NSHoSeo, oGs, Prime, StarTale, ZeNEX
Korean teams mentioned in NASL's announcement:
oGs, StarTale, WeMadeFox, TSL, Prime
Korean teams NOT mentioned in NASL's announcement but are not participating in NASL:
SlayerS, FXO Korea
Total of 7 teams withdraw from NASL. Only 3 of them are in S2CON.
|
On August 14 2011 22:31 thehitman wrote:
Now that FXO has left the SC2con organization I'm inclined to believe that Koreans are lying about this. I think there is a conspiracy within most of the korean teams to either get their way or the highway.
I mean think about it, if they can pose special requirements to NASL, what stops them for posing requirements to dreamhack, ISL, IPL, etc...
Hopefully Blizzard steps in if things get too out of hand and realize that global e-sports is more important than few korean teams.
I also think GOMTV has a lot of saying just because of the new partnership with MSL.
nice speculation bro. Maybe if you bothered to read the fxo leaves korea thread, you wouldnt be saying this.....
|
On August 14 2011 22:55 mcc wrote:Show nested quote +On August 14 2011 22:48 Myles wrote:On August 14 2011 22:46 AlBundy wrote:On August 14 2011 22:39 Myles wrote:On August 14 2011 22:35 Talin wrote:
To be honest, requiring contracts and deposits just to participate in what's technically an online qualifier tournament (which the whole online portion of NASL is) is just not sensible at all in the first place. You obviously have no idea how business works. You ALWAYS have contracts. A deal without a contract is no deal at all. Well maybe in USA but I know a couple of countries where a lot of deals are sealed with a nothing more than a formality. Really? That's crazy imo. I don't see how you can agree to something and not put it in writing. Don't get me wrong, I understand preliminary agreements and such are often made on a verbal basis, but they're always written into contracts at some point before everything is supposed to happen. In more than few places oral contracts are as binding as written one, but you need to be able to prove that they actually happened in case of court dispute.
i trust oral contracts as much as leaving a bucket of fried chicken in a room with oprah
|
This is confusing as hell.
The impression I'm getting is that the korean teams/team managers just don't want to participate in NASL, for whatever reasons. Probably a combination of play times/monetary issues/experience at the s1 finals, or whatever.
If we could just have some coach from some korean team explain his reasons, I'm fairly certain we can all get over this.
|
does it say in the article the reasons cause i dont see any in the OP.
btw if u read FXOboss's thread on why FXO left sc2con, i dont know why anyone would believe anything sc2con says. if they do that to a foreign team who is already less likely to keep quiet, imagine what they are doing to the korean teams behind the scenes.
|
To this critiqing the NASL, I'd like to just remind you that the korean teams JOINED up, they can't just expect everything to be paid for them, thats completely unfair...The people from EU don't get their travel paid for.
The korean teams joined the NASL and then left after the season had started.
The korean teams are the ones being unreasonable.
|
I still believe my conspiracy theory that Mr. Chae wants to support MLG to the fullest and only have Koreans play in the USA while competing in MLG.
Of course I'm probably just f'n nuts, but still this is what I believe to be true.
|
The hell has been going on the last week? Its like everyone took their drama juice and turned into monkeys throwing shit about.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
