|
Please stop bringing country or state-bashing into this discussion. |
On February 12 2015 19:33 hoby2000 wrote:Show nested quote +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.
Perhaps I should clarify.
America isn't a fucking idiot nation. Sometimes it just appears that way when they do little teensy things that are like have silly laws that prohibit people from playing a video game competitively if they live in certain areas. I do apologize if your feelings were hurt.
|
|
|
As others have mentioned, these states have professional sports teams or individuals.
If someone was to buy equipment from some manufacturer of sports good, would it then be illegal
for them to take part in any competition that that manufacturer was involved with?
Or is it down to although you are using the same brand that is
responsible for some of the prize pool (even if they are personal sponsors of both you and the tournament?),
you could technically use a different brand. Where as there is no alternative to buying sc2 to play sc2.
Also is there no problem taking part in an sc2 competition where blizzard is not providing the prize pool?
|
Also is there no problem taking part in an sc2 competition where blizzard is not providing the prize pool?
It seems like it would be fine if you wouldn't have to pay for SC2.
|
On February 12 2015 20:31 m4ini wrote:Show nested quote +Also is there no problem taking part in an sc2 competition where blizzard is not providing the prize pool?
It seems like it would be fine if you wouldn't have to pay for SC2.
Isn't that really easy to circumvent then? Blizz just gives out free SC2 accounts, to everyone, who qualifies for WCS. The qualifier itself has no cash price, so you play it with your own account without being in trouble. As soon as you are qualified, Blizz provides you with a FREE tournament account, so that the anti-gambling law doesn't apply.
|
On February 12 2015 19:33 hoby2000 wrote:Show nested quote +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.
PJSalt :D
These American patriots
you know it's people like you that force us to make fun of the US
User was warned for this post (memes)
|
On February 12 2015 19:33 hoby2000 wrote:Show nested quote +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.
so what you're saying is, you have so much freedom, that state leaders make decisions for you instead of a nation ones?
and if you're gonna backdoor mod, at least be civil, you have so many curse words in that post it's like someone insulted you directly... i thought nationalism was not a thing in the land of the free, what a total over-reaction
edit: i once got banned by TL for responding in a similar tone to yours. difference was, on the other side wasn't a guy criticizing joke-laws in my country, it was some nationalist scumbag calling for formation of union of all slavic people under russian rule. in a thread about ukraine crisis. and i got banned because i allowed myself to get baited into responding. i really don't get how you're still around. must be that popular countries patriotism thing, you know, cuz "mods know them" 
|
hahaha :D what a state. I mean restricting gambling is quite a nice idea, but saying progaming is gambling is quite idiotic.
|
On February 12 2015 20:42 Xoronius wrote:Show nested quote +On February 12 2015 20:31 m4ini wrote:Also is there no problem taking part in an sc2 competition where blizzard is not providing the prize pool?
It seems like it would be fine if you wouldn't have to pay for SC2. Isn't that really easy to circumvent then? Blizz just gives out free SC2 accounts, to everyone, who qualifies for WCS. The qualifier itself has no cash price, so you play it with your own account without being in trouble. As soon as you are qualified, Blizz provides you with a FREE tournament account, so that the anti-gambling law doesn't apply.
As i said, i'm not entirely sure - but it appears that this would already solve it, apparently. At least the logic behind it.
|
Minnesota is a pretty cool place.
|
Spalding is a manufacturer and sponsor for many sports but lets say the Nba. They also produce the balls that basically every team is going to have to use in order to play. (There may be other brands?)
I may be mistaken but I am guessing the teams have to pay for the balls and that money can then go into funding the nba and contributing to its prize pool?
Is this ok because spalding is a sponsor and the nba is a separate entity running the competition or because spalding is not the only sponsor or because the balls are not purchased by the individual players or are they simply so big and rich that they can effectively ignore some laws?
There are bound to be other examples but I am just trying to understand where the lines are.
|
Sometimes I am angry about the EU trying to force their opinions into legal systems of individual countries ... and then examples like these show how useful is to have unified legislation so that people don't randomly bump into obscure local laws.
|
On February 12 2015 20:57 m4ini wrote:Show nested quote +On February 12 2015 20:42 Xoronius wrote:On February 12 2015 20:31 m4ini wrote:Also is there no problem taking part in an sc2 competition where blizzard is not providing the prize pool?
It seems like it would be fine if you wouldn't have to pay for SC2. Isn't that really easy to circumvent then? Blizz just gives out free SC2 accounts, to everyone, who qualifies for WCS. The qualifier itself has no cash price, so you play it with your own account without being in trouble. As soon as you are qualified, Blizz provides you with a FREE tournament account, so that the anti-gambling law doesn't apply. As i said, i'm not entirely sure - but it appears that this would already solve it, apparently. At least the logic behind it.
True. Unfortunately this would require changes to the WCS handbook and, considering that the handbook took ages to write and contains a number of errors (64-man tournament for 31 spots what?), I can't imagine that happening.
|
On February 12 2015 21:02 Startyr wrote:
Spalding is a manufacturer and sponsor for many sports but lets say the Nba. They also produce the balls that basically every team is going to have to use in order to play. (There may be other brands?)
I may be mistaken but I am guessing the teams have to pay for the balls and that money can then go into funding the nba and contributing to its prize pool?
Is this ok because spalding is a sponsor and the nba is a separate entity running the competition or because spalding is not the only sponsor or because the balls are not purchased by the individual players or are they simply so big and rich that they can effectively ignore some laws?
There are bound to be other examples but I am just trying to understand where the lines are.
The caveat as I understand it is you are likely not having to pay spalding for the balls themselves in the NBA, whereas there was for most people who play SC2 a $60-120 entry fee to "get your foot in the door" kind of thing. Now that Blizzard, the owner and developer is sponsor and organizer, who profited from your buying the game to begin with, their legal team is likely taking a wide birth on laws like this, not that anyone in ND's legislature likely would have noticed. I woudln't want to fuck with the gambling lobby in the US myself.
|
Hahaha state laws killing esports I guess. Hopefully Blizzard is kind and let's this slip.
|
On February 12 2015 19:54 m4ini wrote:Show nested quote +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.
WCS Handbook states the following:
Qualifiers will be open to players that fulfill the residency requirements and are Master-level
or above on the official qualifier region’s StarCraft II ladder (preceding or current season).
Individual regions may lower the Master-level requirement with Blizzard approval.
Nowhere does it say Master in 1v1 , playing Ranked 2v2 with a free account is possible. So it is entirely possible to play in WCS without buying the game.
|
On February 12 2015 21:10 ThomasjServo wrote:Show nested quote +On February 12 2015 21:02 Startyr wrote:
Spalding is a manufacturer and sponsor for many sports but lets say the Nba. They also produce the balls that basically every team is going to have to use in order to play. (There may be other brands?)
I may be mistaken but I am guessing the teams have to pay for the balls and that money can then go into funding the nba and contributing to its prize pool?
Is this ok because spalding is a sponsor and the nba is a separate entity running the competition or because spalding is not the only sponsor or because the balls are not purchased by the individual players or are they simply so big and rich that they can effectively ignore some laws?
There are bound to be other examples but I am just trying to understand where the lines are.
The caveat as I understand it is you are likely not having to pay spalding for the balls themselves in the NBA, whereas there was for most people who play SC2 a $60-120 entry fee to "get your foot in the door" kind of thing. Now that Blizzard, the owner and developer is sponsor and organizer, who profited from your buying the game to begin with, their legal team is likely taking a wide birth on laws like this, not that anyone in ND's legislature likely would have noticed. I woudln't want to fuck with the gambling lobby in the US myself.
wcs = esl, not blizzard 
so no puck, only 2 usa flag left on premier league
gl suppy and astrea
|
I'm sure Blizzard will figure something out. They'll register Puck under California and nobody will care.
|
LOL this thread derailed quickly
On topic, surely SC2 is not gambling. Looking at that law mentioned in the thread, I don't see how buying Starcraft 2 is paying a WCS entry fee. A starcraft account is just a tool used to compete not an entry fee. It's like buying your own football shoes to participate in a football match.
|
US state laws are not ignored by everyone for once? Puck should be careful and not have a duck or a chicken on his head when driving over the border of Minnesota.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
