EPTIf you can win a WCS event while intoxicated you should be given double the prize money for being a badass.
Don't Get Fined - WCS 2014 Handbook - Page 19
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
dUTtrOACh
Canada2339 Posts
If you can win a WCS event while intoxicated you should be given double the prize money for being a badass. | ||
|
j4vz
Canada976 Posts
On December 22 2013 03:02 dUTtrOACh wrote: Players that are intoxicated during any event may be disqualified at the discretion of the tournament organizer. If you can win a WCS event while intoxicated you should be given double the prize money for being a badass. haha some rules are fine. but who care about an idra finger to MC, i mean its all entertainment... now its gonna be boring | ||
|
noodloid
7 Posts
Blizzard and their partners are all 'just' companies interested in profit in the first place and telling everybody how to act in a very detailed way hits my stomach hard. in my opinion we need an instance - at best elected by the players themselves - that represent the interest of the real actors of this sport: the players of this game. plz dont forget them about all the trademark focussed events. furthermore, as blizzard suggest "The WCS is dedicated to creating the best competitive experience for both players and spectators around the world." maybe they should also hear a delegation of the viewer side. this group could also ensure that the millions of dollars that these events generate as profit for those companies (that also create the rules) would come around - just a little bit - for those who pay/generate that money. that would be just fair. In my opinion, the starcraft2 e-sport needs to get more independent of those major companies when they try to make all the rules. we could switch 'our' true world championship to another event that is not so regulatory. we should start discussions on ourselves how a "best competitive experience" should look like for both players and spectators and harden common positions in papers and institutions. first of all i think of an organisation that represents the players and that stands up for their interests whatever these may be. but it needs to be independant from those event organizers so they dont tell whats best for them. the spectators, including me, are already discussing this topic extensively and building one speaking representation for hundred of thousands is way more difficult. also, for me it is more important that the interests of the players are represented. looking forward to change in that direction. best regards, noodloid | ||
|
EasyLemon
Latvia5 Posts
- blizzard basically says no to free speech with rules on interviews. - blizzard doesnt own players so blizzard shouldnt say what players can do and what they cant apart from the event premises. yes - blizzard gives money to players, but players gives their lives to sc2. so its just not fair that blizzard treats players like this. sad. just sad. | ||
Zealously
East Gorteau22261 Posts
On December 22 2013 03:56 EasyLemon wrote: this is mad. i suggest pro-gamers start to organize and make an union to defend their rights. - blizzard basically says no to free speech with rules on interviews. - blizzard doesnt own players so blizzard shouldnt say what players can do and what they cant apart from the event premises. yes - blizzard gives money to players, but players gives their lives to sc2. so its just not fair that blizzard treats players like this. sad. just sad. You really don't understand how this works. | ||
|
noodloid
7 Posts
| ||
|
trinxified
Canada7774 Posts
 Naniwa has a chance still. | ||
|
Karis Vas Ryaar
United States4396 Posts
On December 22 2013 03:57 Zealously wrote: You really don't understand how this works. Blizzard owns the game so in order to play the game you have to follow their rules. seems pretty simple. | ||
|
Nymzee
3929 Posts
A. Language – In all languages, players may not use obscene gestures, profanity and/or racist comments in game chat, lobby chat, or live interviews. This includes abbreviations and/or obscure references. Organizers reserve the right to enforce this at their own discretion. But homophobic and transphobic language is allowed? Neat! | ||
|
Deleted User 123474
292 Posts
On December 22 2013 03:57 Zealously wrote: You really don't understand how this works. So, in the fashion of Plansix, Zealously, and others who take a position and insult everybody who takes the opposite position: Sounds like you have both reading comprehension problems and straight-up autism, Zealously! Can't we all just stop this us and them thing? Probably not, but let's at least try. These rules are, in general, "good" for everybody, but, just like freedom of speech, you should let people be outspoken and passionate even if you don't agree with them. Please, let's not have an entirely PC society in SC2, too.  | ||
|
Zealously
East Gorteau22261 Posts
On December 22 2013 05:19 Komentaja wrote: So, in the fashion of Plansix, Zealously, and others who take a position and insult everybody who takes the opposite position: Sounds like you have both reading comprehension problems and straight-up autism, Zealously! Can't we all just stop this us and them thing? Probably not, but let's at least try. These rules are, in general, "good" for everybody, but, just like freedom of speech, you should let people be outspoken and passionate even if you don't agree with them. Please, let's not have an entirely PC society in SC2, too. I have an issue with people invoking "free speech" as if it were relevant in this case. I don't want some kind of censorship where players are only allowed to plug sponsors and say nice things, but "free speech" isn't really applicable here. The same goes for the following statement. Of course Blizzard can tell the players playing in their own tournament (funded mostly by their money and played in their game) what they can and can't do. It's one thing not to like that they have power over the players, it's another to make incorrect statements about Blizzard's rights in the situation. | ||
|
Deleted User 123474
292 Posts
On December 22 2013 05:24 Zealously wrote: I have an issue with people invoking "free speech" as if it were relevant in this case. Like, I don't want some kind of censorship where players are only allowed to plug sponsors and say nice things, but "free speech" isn't applicable here. The same goes for the following statement. Of course Blizzard can tell the players playing in their own tournament (funded mostly by their money and played in their game) what they can and can't do. It's one thing not to like that they have power over the players, it's another to make incorrect statements about Blizzard's rights in the situation. I guess my point is mainly that it doesn't matter what Blizzard's rights are. It matters more what is the right thing to have. In that case, it seems better financially, entertainment-wise, and administratively to allow all kinds of speech. Just fine extremely egregious examples of idiocy and things will be all good. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On December 22 2013 05:19 Komentaja wrote: So, in the fashion of Plansix, Zealously, and others who take a position and insult everybody who takes the opposite position: Sounds like you have both reading comprehension problems and straight-up autism, Zealously! Can't we all just stop this us and them thing? Probably not, but let's at least try. These rules are, in general, "good" for everybody, but, just like freedom of speech, you should let people be outspoken and passionate even if you don't agree with them. Please, let's not have an entirely PC society in SC2, too. Complains that people are getting insulted, then insults the poster he was complaining about. Brings up free speech, when it has nothing to do with the topic, as players willing enter WCS. There is nothing wrong with being outspoken, as long as you have your facts straight. If you don't, expect to get called out on it. | ||
|
Zealously
East Gorteau22261 Posts
On December 22 2013 05:26 Komentaja wrote: I guess my point is mainly that it doesn't matter what Blizzard's rights are. It matters more what is the right thing to have. In that case, it seems better financially, entertainment-wise, and administratively to allow all kinds of speech. Just fine extremely egregious examples of idiocy and things will be all good. And you can be pretty sure that's what's going to happen as well. If I remember correctly, a similar rule against chatting was in place in GS(T?)L but never enforced because it was never considered necessary. Having the rules in place and not enforcing them is better than not having them in place and being unable to punish terrible behaviour, in my opinion. | ||
|
Deleted User 123474
292 Posts
On December 22 2013 05:27 Plansix wrote: Complains that people are getting insulted, then insults the poster he was complaining about. Brings up free speech, when it has nothing to do with the topic, as players willing enter WCS. There is nothing wrong with being outspoken, as long as you have your facts straight. If you don't, expect to get called out on it. I was doing that theatrically for effect, to show you what it feels like and looks like. Not seriously. Also, what is the point of free speech if we can say, "Oh, yeah, we like free speech, but not here. Nope, not there either. Welp, looks like there's only free speech in 25% of actual life." That whole attitude is a little dangerous, don't you think? | ||
|
BaronVonOwn
299 Posts
H. Players may request a blind pick where each player will communicate their race to the tournament administration team before map selection. I. Players may switch races after each match. love seeing this, fun is allowed, too bad it won't be used good rules all around though. | ||
|
Amoment
Germany175 Posts
Q. In Qualifiers, replay watching may be considered as a delay of game and be grounds for a warning and subsequent penalties. I don´t get this. If you lose you want to learn. Fast forwarding the replay takes a few minutes. Just make it a 2 minute rule and everything is fine. | ||
|
Zealously
East Gorteau22261 Posts
On December 22 2013 05:37 Amoment wrote: No replay watching between games Q. In Qualifiers, replay watching may be considered as a delay of game and be grounds for a warning and subsequent penalties. I don´t get this. If you lose you want to learn. Fast forwarding the replay takes a few minutes. Just make it a 2 minute rule and everything is fine. In case you didn't know, the same rule was (according to Adebisi) in effect in WCS this year as well. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On December 22 2013 05:30 Komentaja wrote: I was doing that theatrically for effect, to show you what it feels like and looks like. Not seriously. Also, what is the point of free speech if we can say, "Oh, yeah, we like free speech, but not here. Nope, not there either. Welp, looks like there's only free speech in 25% of actual life." That whole attitude is a little dangerous, don't you think? Nope, its not a problem all. Happens to you all the time. You can't talk any time you want in school or at work. It is was is expected of a professional, to know when it is appropriate to say specific things. It is what is expected of high school athletes. There is nothing in these rules that you would not get in trouble for if you were on a little league team. Players are not being repressed or expected to do anything more that most professionals do every day. | ||
|
Nymzee
3929 Posts
| ||
| ||
