|
Please stop bringing country or state-bashing into this discussion. |
On February 12 2015 17:41 ROOTiaguz wrote:Show nested quote +On February 12 2015 16:45 Waxangel wrote:Given the selective and arbitrary nature with which Blizz has enforced its rules in the past, hopefully this won't be a problem. On February 12 2015 15:24 ROOTiaguz wrote:
What a strange country. And by strange I mean fucking idiotic. fuck you, at least we don't have to worry about being eaten by dropbears Dropbears don't kill you to eat you mate. They just do it because it's fun. That half second of sheer terror as the neck cranes upwards and the scream is aborted halfway beneath 80 pounds of condensed fuzzy murder, THAT my friend is what a Dropbear lives for.
Dropbear aka trollbear
|
On February 12 2015 17:49 TheBloodyDwarf wrote:Show nested quote +On February 12 2015 17:41 ROOTiaguz wrote:On February 12 2015 16:45 Waxangel wrote:Given the selective and arbitrary nature with which Blizz has enforced its rules in the past, hopefully this won't be a problem. On February 12 2015 15:24 ROOTiaguz wrote:
What a strange country. And by strange I mean fucking idiotic. fuck you, at least we don't have to worry about being eaten by dropbears Dropbears don't kill you to eat you mate. They just do it because it's fun. That half second of sheer terror as the neck cranes upwards and the scream is aborted halfway beneath 80 pounds of condensed fuzzy murder, THAT my friend is what a Dropbear lives for. Dropbear aka trollbear
Dropbear aka trollbear aka Rocket-bear
|
lawl sucks to liv in us i guess
|
France9034 Posts
Well that sucks :/
It seems like Blizzard realized that in fact they don't want to end up breaking the law and changed their rules. How would it have been possible the past seasons otherwise?
|
|
|
On February 12 2015 16:11 Yakikorosu wrote:Show nested quote +On February 12 2015 16:03 Seeker wrote:
How has puCK been able to participate in WCS in previous years then? Because no one cares and would never actually prosecute a guy for playing a video game under a law designed to prohibit lotteries. That said, it's true that the legalese 2015 handbook seems to say you can't participate in WCS if you're a resident of several states, including North Dakota (the language quoted in the OP). The 2014 handbook didn't have this language. Edit: It also says players from Quebec can't participate... so I guess for example desRow can't either? He didn't make it into WCS this season but still. I wonder whether the legalese in that handbook was actually researched or some guy at Blizzard just copy/pasted it from some other document. Judging by the multiple typos and formatting errors I noticed from a casual look at the section I doubt anyone spent any significant time writing it.
I've heard someone say that they just basically copied Hearthstone's rulebook
which would make sense, considering there's a lot of RNG involved
|
i dont get it. gambling is not the same as professional sports. these states have regular sport teams dont they? so why is blizz taking this stuff into account of their rules? makes no sense to me
|
On February 12 2015 15:10 digmouse wrote:Show nested quote +North Dakota Century Code, Chapter 53-11 "Contest Prize Notices"
53-11-02 says "a sponsor may not require a person to pay the sponsor money as a condition of awarding the person a prize..."
Because you have to pay for Starcraft 2 to play in the open qualifiers, the law prevents Blizzard from payouts. If SC2 had a business model from this decade instead of the 90s, this wouldn't be a problem.
Isn't SC2 free to play for custom games via the starter edition? In which case you don't actually have to pay to play in the qualifiers.
Edit: nevermind, I forgot the number of ladder games requirement
|
On February 12 2015 15:31 Pontius Pirate wrote:Show nested quote +On February 12 2015 15:24 ROOTiaguz wrote:
What a strange country. And by strange I mean fucking idiotic. That's state's rights in action for you. The philosophy behind it is that each administrative region can customize its legal code to service its citizens' principles, but in practice, it kind of just adds to the bureaucracy and fuels a weird fantasy that some states are being held back by the others.
The point was for each state to be a country with its own government but was tied together in union with anews overhead government. That doesn't exist anymore, and our national government has way too much power and fucks not only with our lives, but uses our selves to fuck with others.
Anyways, shitty situation for puck.. he should be okay though.
|
On February 12 2015 15:24 ROOTiaguz wrote:
What a strange country. And by strange I mean fucking idiotic.
Wow. fuck off dude. How dare we have a country that allows groups of people to make their own laws instead of abiding to national ones. Holy shit, what a fucking strange idea. I think it's called liberty? Though we don't follow it to the T, it's better than some bum ass country made from fucking prisoners.
Doesn't feel good, does it? Maybe if you had spent more time learning about shit that matters instead of attempting to be good at a game you clearly suck at, you would understand that while states like North Dakota have strange ass laws, their ability to make those laws is actually pretty awesome despite your disagreement. I understand that you like to be ordered around, and told what to do, but here in America, we like to deal with the consequences of our own free wills.
Not only that, but no moderation on this at all? Once again, it's okay for a popular Starcraft 2 player to troll and bait people, because the moderators know them - yet if I said that, I would be warned and/or banned. I don't mind following rules, but favoring people because their players? Come on. This is obviously not something someone should be posting, and anyone else would likely receive a warning.
User was warned for this post
|
On February 12 2015 18:46 TheSayo182 wrote:
#The Land of Freedom!
Indeed it is, and your ignorance to the fact that BECAUSE North Dakota can have such a law is apparent by your attempt to be funny. Freedom doesn't always give us what we want in the long run, but it does allow and force us to take responsibility for our own actions.
|
Indeed it is, and your ignorance to the fact that BECAUSE North Dakota can have such a law is apparent by your attempt to be funny.
How's that even special, it's quite normal for countries to have different laws on certain things from state to state. That "freedom" you guys are so turned on by only lives in your imagination. In fact, you're worse off than many other countries, including (funny enough) australia.
Freedom doesn't define itself by you being able to get an assault rifle in a drugstore (hyperbole) or being able to hatepreach without official consequences.
|
On February 12 2015 19:35 hoby2000 wrote:Indeed it is, and your ignorance to the fact that BECAUSE North Dakota can have such a law is apparent by your attempt to be funny. Freedom doesn't always give us what we want in the long run, but it does allow and force us to take responsibility for our own actions.
Yes because the requirement in many states to pledge allegiance to the flag isn't effectively trying to brainwash you into patriotism.
|
How is pro gaming gambling? Not even a card game or betting.
|
On February 12 2015 17:21 SixStrings wrote:
Give it another five years and everything that's bad about the USA will apply to EU countries as well.
We try to resist, but man the battle is hard :<
|
On February 12 2015 19:47 Phaenoman wrote:
How is pro gaming gambling? Not even a card game or betting.
I think it's because the participation-fee. You pay in, you might or might not get money back. As far as i understand it, a tournament not sponsored(!) by Blizzard and without entry-fee would be totally fine.
edit: it might even be fine if the starter-edition (the free2play) edition would be enough to participate in the tournament (tournaments are custom games, which are free), which it isn't (you need masters-rating to be able to participate).
That's something i read though, so not entirely sure.
edit2: doesn't make the law less retarded in this case though.
|
On February 12 2015 19:54 crow_mw wrote:Show nested quote +On February 12 2015 17:21 SixStrings wrote:
Give it another five years and everything that's bad about the USA will apply to EU countries as well.
We try to resist, but man the battle is hard :<
Coming from a polish that is fucking funny 
|
On February 12 2015 19:35 hoby2000 wrote:Indeed it is, and your ignorance to the fact that BECAUSE North Dakota can have such a law is apparent by your attempt to be funny. Freedom doesn't always give us what we want in the long run, but it does allow and force us to take responsibility for our own actions.
sarcasm? BTW enjoy to carry around how many weapons you like but you can't drink a beer on the street
|
On February 12 2015 19:35 hoby2000 wrote:Indeed it is, and your ignorance to the fact that BECAUSE North Dakota can have such a law is apparent by your attempt to be funny. Freedom doesn't always give us what we want in the long run, but it does allow and force us to take responsibility for our own actions.
I don't think that everyone in North Dakota necessarily agrees with their laws, and those who don't can't do much about it. Laws are basically the opposite of freedom, even though they are necessary (in general).
Edit: Removed irrelevant sentence
|
On February 12 2015 20:08 KingAlphard wrote:Show nested quote +On February 12 2015 19:35 hoby2000 wrote:On February 12 2015 18:46 TheSayo182 wrote:
#The Land of Freedom! Indeed it is, and your ignorance to the fact that BECAUSE North Dakota can have such a law is apparent by your attempt to be funny. Freedom doesn't always give us what we want in the long run, but it does allow and force us to take responsibility for our own actions. It's good for you that you agree with the laws of North Dakota, but not everyone necessarily agrees with them and they can't do anything about it. Laws are basically the opposite of freedom, even though they are necessary (in general).
This. How can you reach the the point where 'look, we are freedom, we can forbid this this and this' is a valid argument?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
