|
On December 16 2011 06:58 SuperNinja wrote:
It's bait and switch. People have sued for much less when it comes to false advertising and won.
That suit would be against MLG and not GOM, you know.
|
On December 16 2011 06:56 dAPhREAk wrote:Show nested quote +On December 16 2011 06:51 s4life wrote:On December 16 2011 06:28 Trsjnica wrote:On December 16 2011 06:23 s4life wrote:On December 16 2011 06:17 Trsjnica wrote:On December 16 2011 06:14 s4life wrote:On December 16 2011 06:07 Trsjnica wrote:On December 16 2011 06:05 Ghola wrote:On December 16 2011 05:36 castled wrote:
Regardless of whether or not Nani "earned" a code S invite, he threw it away by disrespecting GOM, his opponent, and the viewers. I hope GOM doesn't feel pressure to reverse their decision because so many vocal posters on Teamliquid don't understand the meaning of respect.
I'm really sick of this whole controversy because no matter how many level-headed evaluations are posted, there are so many people that will never understand. There are ways for Gom to punish Naniwa without breaking their agreements with MLG. The MLG press release in the original post specifically says that GOM was within their rights to act as they did. Thus, the did not break their agreement at all--this was in the contract to begin with. Are you fucking kidding me??? If an organizer offers you a certain prize and announces it publicly, and then when you win tells you the prize is not what he/she promised you because of a fine print in page 500 of a contract he signed with a third party, what would you do?? I guess if you are not worked up about it, the natural thing to say would be "oh well, that's what I get for dealing with crooks and liars" .. this is something you'd never expect from an organization that is trying to market themselves as professional and ethical. Uh, so are you arguing that MLG broke their promise to Naniwa then? MLG is coming clean by shrewdly exerting all the blame on GOM, they claim GOM changed the contract unilaterally and without previous notice... the truth? I guess we'll wait for GOM's announcement. Still, I think MLG tried to play nice with GOM by making it look like if they have the right to change anything in the contract unilaterally... I mean, really? could GOM just say sorry no code A, code S for anybody and MLG be ok with that??? I seriously doubt it, it seems more likely that they are both just colluding to fuck up Naniwa coz they know he's a sitting duck right now. I know your ID says Peru, and its possible english isn't your first language (although you speak fine), but I have to nitpick here: GOM did not change the contract unilaterally. In fact, they did not change the contract at all. They took actions which both sides agree were within their rights under the contract. If you are instead suggesting that GOM's actions were not within the contract, and that both GOM and MLG are lying, based upon a contract that you have not seen... Well, that is a large leap of logic. Both parties that have actually seen the contract say that it was not violated. Because I have not seen the contract, I will take their word. Well sure, I don't know what contract says and neither do you. You are assuming both parties are operating in good faith and I have my doubts. GOM, as per MLG's statement can adjust placement without telling MLG about it. Does it mean GOM could switch code S and A for code A and B or get the 5 players that won code A and put them in another online tournament? Would MLG be ok with that? How would that work if Idra had won code S in providence and MLG would be like 'just kidding man, no code S was ever on the line, but if you make the GOM execs happy, they might give you one'. The reason i am doubtful is, the legal language that would allow GOM to place Naniwa in a different tournament and not do any of the things above-mentioned would simply be contradictory. all they have to do is say in the contract: "we reserve the right to modify this contract at any time, and for any reason, without notice to MLG," and then they can do whatever the hell they want.
Legally yes
The community doesn't give a damn what clauses they put in their legal contracts. They acted in an unprofessional manner right after they punished (or at least made a statement against) a player for acting in an unprofessional manner.
|
On December 16 2011 06:59 Trsjnica wrote:Show nested quote +On December 16 2011 06:58 SuperNinja wrote:
It's bait and switch. People have sued for much less when it comes to false advertising and won. That suit would be against MLG and not GOM, you know.
Yep, I didn't want to say that cause I think MLG is doing a great job. Feel like they were truly surprised here by GOM.
|
On December 16 2011 06:58 Trsjnica wrote:Show nested quote +On December 16 2011 06:57 seabass wrote:On December 16 2011 06:56 zzuper wrote:
typical koreans.. not surprised : ] Shit like this... why can't people see that GOM is an organization not a representative of a whole country. Equating them like this is just straight up racist. Agree. This is not Korea vs. foreigners. This is just GOM.
Well racism was the rampart in some of the other threads...
|
On December 16 2011 06:54 LorDo wrote:Show nested quote +On December 16 2011 06:48 Biane wrote:On December 16 2011 06:45 Eury wrote:On December 16 2011 06:44 hunts wrote:On December 16 2011 06:39 ACrow wrote:On December 16 2011 06:34 Tristran wrote:
What people fail to realise is that they were going to seed Naniwa into code S ANYWAY. So he basically got an extra benefit by being granted a Blizzard Cup seed as well! The thing is, his bad decision meant he lost the "extra benefit". Gom will of made the switch assuming it would be perfectly fine, because they were going to seed Naniwa into code S as well.
In this particular instance, GOM are at no blame whatsoever. The only blame to be placed on GOM was for the faulty tournament design for the Blizz cup, but lets not go over that again. What people fail to realize is that every major torunament winner was invited for this. MLG also had a special deal paying for four korean invites they did get nothing in return for (except what every other tournament got for free). Making your points bold and in CAPS doesn't make your arguments any more valid btw. But they didn't seed any korean invites. The koreans that went were seeded because they had enough MLG points, the other koreans went thru the open bracket and paid for themselves. No. Four of them in the open bracket got paid by MLG to be there. and 4 of them got paid by MLG to be there for Providence? Maybe you can tell us which 4, cause I don't recall any/can see who were http://pro.majorleaguegaming.com/news/mc-mma-bomber-and-mvp-to-mlg-providence
QxG paid for MVP. The other 3 were seeding by their results so their trip was paid by everyone else. That page is very sketchy and IMO is not being particularly truthful.
|
hehe next mlg ... oh damn goody won, we can't have a 14 hour long code s final, lets just change the seed to some only bo3 tournament we are holding.
Anyway the GomTV exchange program is something that came from them and it seems they planned that there might be situations in which they have to change the seed. (I think they even announced something like that when they started with the giving out the spots).
Its a bit bad that they didn't thought about this before the mlg was done, but i guess the blizzard cup thing came up after that.
I still find it bad to punish someone for being honest and sticking to the rules, while they bend it to their tastes. But they got their feedback for it just as Naniwa did. Both lost a few respect points from a few people and both gained a few.
I mean koreans play for their fans if nothing is on the stakes (if winning is involved they actually don't think about the viewers and just play to win, which was stated alot on these forums, that koreans play to win over everything else and not by their haters actually). But they do fun builds and other things and don't really play to their full extend. So i am confused about their reaction to this.
Anyway it will take a few weeks, till this forum will calm down, everytime a korean will cheese after getting outplayed, or if they drop mules because they know they will win, or if they play a fun strategy after being ahead. And i am sure this will return in the next gsl season.
But it probably won't reach Gom anyway except of them wondering why their subscriptions dropped heh.
Who would have thought Sc2 year 1 will end with a huge drama just because of a under 5 minutes game.
|
On December 16 2011 06:56 dAPhREAk wrote:Show nested quote +On December 16 2011 06:51 s4life wrote:On December 16 2011 06:28 Trsjnica wrote:On December 16 2011 06:23 s4life wrote:On December 16 2011 06:17 Trsjnica wrote:On December 16 2011 06:14 s4life wrote:On December 16 2011 06:07 Trsjnica wrote:On December 16 2011 06:05 Ghola wrote:On December 16 2011 05:36 castled wrote:
Regardless of whether or not Nani "earned" a code S invite, he threw it away by disrespecting GOM, his opponent, and the viewers. I hope GOM doesn't feel pressure to reverse their decision because so many vocal posters on Teamliquid don't understand the meaning of respect.
I'm really sick of this whole controversy because no matter how many level-headed evaluations are posted, there are so many people that will never understand. There are ways for Gom to punish Naniwa without breaking their agreements with MLG. The MLG press release in the original post specifically says that GOM was within their rights to act as they did. Thus, the did not break their agreement at all--this was in the contract to begin with. Are you fucking kidding me??? If an organizer offers you a certain prize and announces it publicly, and then when you win tells you the prize is not what he/she promised you because of a fine print in page 500 of a contract he signed with a third party, what would you do?? I guess if you are not worked up about it, the natural thing to say would be "oh well, that's what I get for dealing with crooks and liars" .. this is something you'd never expect from an organization that is trying to market themselves as professional and ethical. Uh, so are you arguing that MLG broke their promise to Naniwa then? MLG is coming clean by shrewdly exerting all the blame on GOM, they claim GOM changed the contract unilaterally and without previous notice... the truth? I guess we'll wait for GOM's announcement. Still, I think MLG tried to play nice with GOM by making it look like if they have the right to change anything in the contract unilaterally... I mean, really? could GOM just say sorry no code A, code S for anybody and MLG be ok with that??? I seriously doubt it, it seems more likely that they are both just colluding to fuck up Naniwa coz they know he's a sitting duck right now. I know your ID says Peru, and its possible english isn't your first language (although you speak fine), but I have to nitpick here: GOM did not change the contract unilaterally. In fact, they did not change the contract at all. They took actions which both sides agree were within their rights under the contract. If you are instead suggesting that GOM's actions were not within the contract, and that both GOM and MLG are lying, based upon a contract that you have not seen... Well, that is a large leap of logic. Both parties that have actually seen the contract say that it was not violated. Because I have not seen the contract, I will take their word. Well sure, I don't know what contract says and neither do you. You are assuming both parties are operating in good faith and I have my doubts. GOM, as per MLG's statement can adjust placement without telling MLG about it. Does it mean GOM could switch code S and A for code A and B or get the 5 players that won code A and put them in another online tournament? Would MLG be ok with that? How would that work if Idra had won code S in providence and MLG would be like 'just kidding man, no code S was ever on the line, but if you make the GOM execs happy, they might give you one'. The reason i am doubtful is, the legal language that would allow GOM to place Naniwa in a different tournament and not do any of the things above-mentioned would simply be contradictory. all they have to do is say in the contract: "we reserve the right to modify this contract at any time, and for any reason, without notice to MLG," and then they can do whatever the hell they want.
That would never be a valid contract....
|
On December 16 2011 07:01 Biane wrote:Show nested quote +On December 16 2011 06:58 Trsjnica wrote:On December 16 2011 06:57 seabass wrote:On December 16 2011 06:56 zzuper wrote:
typical koreans.. not surprised : ] Shit like this... why can't people see that GOM is an organization not a representative of a whole country. Equating them like this is just straight up racist. Agree. This is not Korea vs. foreigners. This is just GOM. Well racism was the rampart in some of the other threads...
So because other threads had illogical shitflinging we should resort to that here as well?
|
Let us get one thing very straight.
Naniwa literally breaks no rules/guarantees with his controversial game.
GOM literally breaks their rules/guarantees over said game.
|
I dont think this was a nice damage control. After Sundances statement, everything looks more shady.
Imagine if MLG did the same thing. A week before Providence they simply came and said "you know those 4 korean invites? lol they can pay for themselves.".
|
On December 16 2011 07:02 ExO_ wrote:Show nested quote +On December 16 2011 06:56 dAPhREAk wrote:On December 16 2011 06:51 s4life wrote:On December 16 2011 06:28 Trsjnica wrote:On December 16 2011 06:23 s4life wrote:On December 16 2011 06:17 Trsjnica wrote:On December 16 2011 06:14 s4life wrote:On December 16 2011 06:07 Trsjnica wrote:On December 16 2011 06:05 Ghola wrote:On December 16 2011 05:36 castled wrote:
Regardless of whether or not Nani "earned" a code S invite, he threw it away by disrespecting GOM, his opponent, and the viewers. I hope GOM doesn't feel pressure to reverse their decision because so many vocal posters on Teamliquid don't understand the meaning of respect.
I'm really sick of this whole controversy because no matter how many level-headed evaluations are posted, there are so many people that will never understand. There are ways for Gom to punish Naniwa without breaking their agreements with MLG. The MLG press release in the original post specifically says that GOM was within their rights to act as they did. Thus, the did not break their agreement at all--this was in the contract to begin with. Are you fucking kidding me??? If an organizer offers you a certain prize and announces it publicly, and then when you win tells you the prize is not what he/she promised you because of a fine print in page 500 of a contract he signed with a third party, what would you do?? I guess if you are not worked up about it, the natural thing to say would be "oh well, that's what I get for dealing with crooks and liars" .. this is something you'd never expect from an organization that is trying to market themselves as professional and ethical. Uh, so are you arguing that MLG broke their promise to Naniwa then? MLG is coming clean by shrewdly exerting all the blame on GOM, they claim GOM changed the contract unilaterally and without previous notice... the truth? I guess we'll wait for GOM's announcement. Still, I think MLG tried to play nice with GOM by making it look like if they have the right to change anything in the contract unilaterally... I mean, really? could GOM just say sorry no code A, code S for anybody and MLG be ok with that??? I seriously doubt it, it seems more likely that they are both just colluding to fuck up Naniwa coz they know he's a sitting duck right now. I know your ID says Peru, and its possible english isn't your first language (although you speak fine), but I have to nitpick here: GOM did not change the contract unilaterally. In fact, they did not change the contract at all. They took actions which both sides agree were within their rights under the contract. If you are instead suggesting that GOM's actions were not within the contract, and that both GOM and MLG are lying, based upon a contract that you have not seen... Well, that is a large leap of logic. Both parties that have actually seen the contract say that it was not violated. Because I have not seen the contract, I will take their word. Well sure, I don't know what contract says and neither do you. You are assuming both parties are operating in good faith and I have my doubts. GOM, as per MLG's statement can adjust placement without telling MLG about it. Does it mean GOM could switch code S and A for code A and B or get the 5 players that won code A and put them in another online tournament? Would MLG be ok with that? How would that work if Idra had won code S in providence and MLG would be like 'just kidding man, no code S was ever on the line, but if you make the GOM execs happy, they might give you one'. The reason i am doubtful is, the legal language that would allow GOM to place Naniwa in a different tournament and not do any of the things above-mentioned would simply be contradictory. all they have to do is say in the contract: "we reserve the right to modify this contract at any time, and for any reason, without notice to MLG," and then they can do whatever the hell they want. That would never be a valid contract....
Hah, yeah, I didn't want to bring it up because I'm generally on the same side as him on this one, but this contract isn't valid.
A contract has to bind a party in some way to be valid, at least in the US.
|
On December 16 2011 07:02 MeLlamoSatan wrote:
Let us get one thing very straight.
Naniwa literally breaks no rules/guarantees with his controversial game.
GOM literally breaks their rules/guarantees over said game.
GOM broke no rules. It's been stated many times this is all totally legal, and them changing their format means nothing is guaranteed as they see it.
|
On December 16 2011 06:56 Nexic wrote:Show nested quote +On December 16 2011 06:51 JoeSchmoe wrote:On December 16 2011 06:47 babylon wrote:On December 16 2011 06:44 m0ck wrote:On December 16 2011 06:39 Snowball_ wrote:On December 16 2011 06:33 ACrow wrote:On December 16 2011 06:20 Treemonkeys wrote:On December 16 2011 06:12 Longshank wrote:On December 16 2011 06:08 Treemonkeys wrote:On December 16 2011 06:06 Longshank wrote:
[quote]
Uhm no, GOM promised it on their own website. Since before the website changed? I don't think it's there now, but it was still MLG promoting every time they had a tournament. Can we look at what GOM actually promised? Does anyone have that? http://www.gomtv.net/2011gslsponsors3/news/65291edit: "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. Code A status will be awarded to the next 3 highest placing non-Korean players. If Code S status is awarded to a Korean player, Code A status also will be awarded to the 4th highest placing non-Korean player." ....and they followed through with this. By MLG providence there was no 2011 code S left and they had made it public that things were changed in 2012. They weren't explictly clear about what would happen with the new format, and neither was MLG, and both sides could have taken the initiative to sort this out before it came to all this. I hold MLG more accountable because it was being offered as a prize to *their* tournament and they were able to profit from it. I'm sorry but MLG is just as much to blame in this. Read a little more closely - the original states all 2011 MLGs will award a code S spot. Providence was in 2011 and thus should award a code S (no mention the code S spot has to be in 2011 as well) spot. As mentioned read more closely: "Pro Circuit". Providence wasn't one of them. it was rather a championchip. Bullshittu. http://pro.majorleaguegaming.com/The above is the site for the Pro Cirvcit. Go to the menu-point "Competitions". Do you see Providence? What is your basis for excluding Providence from the Pro Circuit? The organizers of the Pro Circuit themselves counted Providence as gifting a code S spot. This entire argument boggles my mind. People need to reread the OP. It doesn't matter if Providence was included in the Pro Circuit or not -- the understanding was as follows: The original agreement between MLG and GSL through the League Exchange Program (LXP) stated that the highest ranked player in the Top 3 from each MLG Pro Circuit event in 2011, including Providence, who did not already have Code S status would be granted Code S status at GSL for one season. yet using the same agreement that MLG cited, they never seeded 4 korean players directly into championship pools. what's your explanation for that? or are we to assume that GSL is supposed to keep up their end of the bargain but MLG does not? You don't know what you're talking about. MLG did uphold their part of the agreement. In providence there was obviously no pool play, so instead MLG paid for 4 previous MLG champions/1 runner-up (MMA, MVP, Bomber, and MC) to come to Providence. GSL did not do anything for their half of the LXP for Providence.
actually you don't know what you're talking about. lol convenient, no pool play so yeah we don't have to seed them even though that's a CONDITION in the agreement. also MLG didn't pay for MVP. Quantic did as a result of their partnership with IM.
|
On December 16 2011 07:02 FeyFey wrote:
...
Anyway it will take a few weeks, till this forum will calm down, everytime a korean will cheese after getting outplayed, or if they drop mules because they know they will win, or if they play a fun strategy after being ahead. And i am sure this will return in the next gsl season.
But it probably won't reach Gom anyway except of them wondering why their subscriptions dropped heh.
...
Oh, exactly what i think to! Well sad! :D
|
On December 16 2011 07:04 Trsjnica wrote:Show nested quote +On December 16 2011 07:02 ExO_ wrote:On December 16 2011 06:56 dAPhREAk wrote:On December 16 2011 06:51 s4life wrote:On December 16 2011 06:28 Trsjnica wrote:On December 16 2011 06:23 s4life wrote:On December 16 2011 06:17 Trsjnica wrote:On December 16 2011 06:14 s4life wrote:On December 16 2011 06:07 Trsjnica wrote:On December 16 2011 06:05 Ghola wrote:
[quote]
There are ways for Gom to punish Naniwa without breaking their agreements with MLG. The MLG press release in the original post specifically says that GOM was within their rights to act as they did. Thus, the did not break their agreement at all--this was in the contract to begin with. Are you fucking kidding me??? If an organizer offers you a certain prize and announces it publicly, and then when you win tells you the prize is not what he/she promised you because of a fine print in page 500 of a contract he signed with a third party, what would you do?? I guess if you are not worked up about it, the natural thing to say would be "oh well, that's what I get for dealing with crooks and liars" .. this is something you'd never expect from an organization that is trying to market themselves as professional and ethical. Uh, so are you arguing that MLG broke their promise to Naniwa then? MLG is coming clean by shrewdly exerting all the blame on GOM, they claim GOM changed the contract unilaterally and without previous notice... the truth? I guess we'll wait for GOM's announcement. Still, I think MLG tried to play nice with GOM by making it look like if they have the right to change anything in the contract unilaterally... I mean, really? could GOM just say sorry no code A, code S for anybody and MLG be ok with that??? I seriously doubt it, it seems more likely that they are both just colluding to fuck up Naniwa coz they know he's a sitting duck right now. I know your ID says Peru, and its possible english isn't your first language (although you speak fine), but I have to nitpick here: GOM did not change the contract unilaterally. In fact, they did not change the contract at all. They took actions which both sides agree were within their rights under the contract. If you are instead suggesting that GOM's actions were not within the contract, and that both GOM and MLG are lying, based upon a contract that you have not seen... Well, that is a large leap of logic. Both parties that have actually seen the contract say that it was not violated. Because I have not seen the contract, I will take their word. Well sure, I don't know what contract says and neither do you. You are assuming both parties are operating in good faith and I have my doubts. GOM, as per MLG's statement can adjust placement without telling MLG about it. Does it mean GOM could switch code S and A for code A and B or get the 5 players that won code A and put them in another online tournament? Would MLG be ok with that? How would that work if Idra had won code S in providence and MLG would be like 'just kidding man, no code S was ever on the line, but if you make the GOM execs happy, they might give you one'. The reason i am doubtful is, the legal language that would allow GOM to place Naniwa in a different tournament and not do any of the things above-mentioned would simply be contradictory. all they have to do is say in the contract: "we reserve the right to modify this contract at any time, and for any reason, without notice to MLG," and then they can do whatever the hell they want. That would never be a valid contract.... Hah, yeah, I didn't want to bring it up because I'm generally on the same side as him on this one, but this contract isn't valid. A contract has to bind a party in some way to be valid, at least in the US.
But TeamLiquid isn't a court. We're a community. We can judge any way we want and, if we decide, we can execute GOM by not paying for any more tickets or watching the GSL. (Note: This isn't a call to action. I'm merely stating what we can do).
I edited out some dumb because someone smarter than me helped me be less...dumb.
|
United Kingdom14464 Posts
Goddamit GOM. People talk about respect, honour, korean values etc, but they have done something far worse, lying to their own business partners. First the NASL crap, now this.
|
On December 16 2011 07:06 Klondikebar wrote:Show nested quote +On December 16 2011 07:04 Trsjnica wrote:On December 16 2011 07:02 ExO_ wrote:On December 16 2011 06:56 dAPhREAk wrote:On December 16 2011 06:51 s4life wrote:On December 16 2011 06:28 Trsjnica wrote:On December 16 2011 06:23 s4life wrote:On December 16 2011 06:17 Trsjnica wrote:On December 16 2011 06:14 s4life wrote:On December 16 2011 06:07 Trsjnica wrote:
[quote]
The MLG press release in the original post specifically says that GOM was within their rights to act as they did. Thus, the did not break their agreement at all--this was in the contract to begin with. Are you fucking kidding me??? If an organizer offers you a certain prize and announces it publicly, and then when you win tells you the prize is not what he/she promised you because of a fine print in page 500 of a contract he signed with a third party, what would you do?? I guess if you are not worked up about it, the natural thing to say would be "oh well, that's what I get for dealing with crooks and liars" .. this is something you'd never expect from an organization that is trying to market themselves as professional and ethical. Uh, so are you arguing that MLG broke their promise to Naniwa then? MLG is coming clean by shrewdly exerting all the blame on GOM, they claim GOM changed the contract unilaterally and without previous notice... the truth? I guess we'll wait for GOM's announcement. Still, I think MLG tried to play nice with GOM by making it look like if they have the right to change anything in the contract unilaterally... I mean, really? could GOM just say sorry no code A, code S for anybody and MLG be ok with that??? I seriously doubt it, it seems more likely that they are both just colluding to fuck up Naniwa coz they know he's a sitting duck right now. I know your ID says Peru, and its possible english isn't your first language (although you speak fine), but I have to nitpick here: GOM did not change the contract unilaterally. In fact, they did not change the contract at all. They took actions which both sides agree were within their rights under the contract. If you are instead suggesting that GOM's actions were not within the contract, and that both GOM and MLG are lying, based upon a contract that you have not seen... Well, that is a large leap of logic. Both parties that have actually seen the contract say that it was not violated. Because I have not seen the contract, I will take their word. Well sure, I don't know what contract says and neither do you. You are assuming both parties are operating in good faith and I have my doubts. GOM, as per MLG's statement can adjust placement without telling MLG about it. Does it mean GOM could switch code S and A for code A and B or get the 5 players that won code A and put them in another online tournament? Would MLG be ok with that? How would that work if Idra had won code S in providence and MLG would be like 'just kidding man, no code S was ever on the line, but if you make the GOM execs happy, they might give you one'. The reason i am doubtful is, the legal language that would allow GOM to place Naniwa in a different tournament and not do any of the things above-mentioned would simply be contradictory. all they have to do is say in the contract: "we reserve the right to modify this contract at any time, and for any reason, without notice to MLG," and then they can do whatever the hell they want. That would never be a valid contract.... Hah, yeah, I didn't want to bring it up because I'm generally on the same side as him on this one, but this contract isn't valid. A contract has to bind a party in some way to be valid, at least in the US. No, those sorts of clauses show up in TONS of contracts. I have no idea how they'd actually fair in court but they do make it into legally binding contracts all the time. But TeamLiquid isn't a court. We're a community. We can judge any way we want and, if we decide, we can execute GOM by not paying for any more tickets or watching the GSL. (Note: This isn't a call to action. I'm merely stating what we can do).
I wonder how quickly a call to boycott GOM would get closed and the poster banned.
I suppose in that case it might be more wise to go to Reddit with something like that. 
|
On December 16 2011 07:04 seabass wrote:
GOM broke no rules. It's been stated many times this is all totally legal, and them changing their format means nothing is guaranteed as they see it.
Of course! GOM has no obligations to anyone! They can do as they please and reneg any offer anytime.
|
So GOM fucked MLG with this. MLG paid maybe 15k for four players in order to come to the US for 1 code S and 3 code A spot for their tournament. Since Code S is way more desired among fans and players, GOM did not hold up to their part of the agreement, even if MLGs laywers think it is within the contractual obligations of GOM. GOM did lose his face and exposed MLG to ridicule.
|
On December 16 2011 07:04 seabass wrote:Show nested quote +On December 16 2011 07:02 MeLlamoSatan wrote:
Let us get one thing very straight.
Naniwa literally breaks no rules/guarantees with his controversial game.
GOM literally breaks their rules/guarantees over said game.
GOM broke no rules. It's been stated many times this is all totally legal, and them changing their format means nothing is guaranteed as they see it.
There is such a thing as an invalid clause inside contracts. Korea has such a law as well Im sure, all 1st world nations do.
|
|
|
|
|
|
80
EPT
