|
On July 27 2015 10:58 avilo wrote:Show nested quote +On July 27 2015 10:41 felisconcolori wrote:On July 27 2015 10:34 avilo wrote:
Players are what make tournaments, not casters no matter how much any caster ever will try to think that. Without players to play in tourneys, casters are absolutely worthless. Maybe better to respect your jobs and content are produced solely because there are players playing in these tourneys.
This foreigner jail thing like may have sounded good at first conception, but it's honestly a bit ridiculous. Without tournaments, players have no reason to play. It's symbiotic. If there is no one producing content and hosting tournaments, your skills as a player are worthless. Literally. I don't think there's a single power continuum here; if the two don't work together there's plenty of other entertainment options out there for viewers to watch. Each needs to protect their interests, but if you don't work together and in the interest of the viewers having a good product to consume, both sides die. Actually, if tournaments entirely disappeared people would still play starcraft 2 contrary to your belief. I would and so would many others. And content would still be created for the game through youtube/streams etc. Tournaments should respect players, players should respect tournaments, but i'm sorry if you believe there would be no players without tournaments because it's not true.
Apparently, some players don't respect tournaments because they refuse to be on time or play at all.
|
Professional usually means certified or getting paid.
Can't penalize people who are making no money off this game especially in the quals while the casters pocket it all comfortably.
Perks for SC2 players are steep.
|
lol, who cares if the names a joke... Does it really matter what its called? Esports jail? sc2 jail? sc2 lock out? Temp ban? online tournament ban? strike out? Community tournament ban? and that its racist? c'mon.... In my opinion, I feel you probably dont actually care and are just making it an issue for the hell of it.. Maybe I'm wrong, maybe you truly are offended by "Foreigner Jail"...In that case... I don't know what to tell ya.
Thank you very much for putting this together and appreciate all the community casters hard work. You all are awesome and keep it up!
|
Bisutopia19152 Posts
On July 27 2015 11:25 masterrn wrote:
Professional usually means certified or getting paid.
Can't penalize people who are making no money off this game especially in the quals while the casters pocket it all comfortably.
Perks for SC2 players are steep.
You act like casters are the first earn a dollar, but the list of names I read hear are all people who put in hundreds of hours casting free to make the small change they make now. No one caster in this scene has been handed a silver platter. It's been earned.
|
1001 YEARS KESPAJAIL22272 Posts
can i get a transfer to foreigner jail they probably have nicer amenities
|
On July 27 2015 11:42 lichter wrote:
can i get a transfer to foreigner jail they probably have nicer amenities
Only if you find Byun
|
would be a good tv show lol. the esport oz prison
|
On July 27 2015 10:58 avilo wrote:Show nested quote +On July 27 2015 10:41 felisconcolori wrote:On July 27 2015 10:34 avilo wrote:
Players are what make tournaments, not casters no matter how much any caster ever will try to think that. Without players to play in tourneys, casters are absolutely worthless. Maybe better to respect your jobs and content are produced solely because there are players playing in these tourneys.
This foreigner jail thing like may have sounded good at first conception, but it's honestly a bit ridiculous. Without tournaments, players have no reason to play. It's symbiotic. If there is no one producing content and hosting tournaments, your skills as a player are worthless. Literally. I don't think there's a single power continuum here; if the two don't work together there's plenty of other entertainment options out there for viewers to watch. Each needs to protect their interests, but if you don't work together and in the interest of the viewers having a good product to consume, both sides die. Actually, if tournaments entirely disappeared people would still play starcraft 2 contrary to your belief. I would and so would many others. And content would still be created for the game through youtube/streams etc. Tournaments should respect players, players should respect tournaments, but i'm sorry if you believe there would be no players without tournaments because it's not true.
On second thought, I don't see the point in arguing with someone that doesn't make money from tournaments in any case.
Just...
You did see what happened to the NHL, right?
|
8748 Posts
I think privacy should be a serious consideration. I made a decision to talk about my depression publicly but if it was private and I had some incident that made me miss a match, I'd take the strike before I trust such a sensitive issue to strangers. It is incredible how much private information gets spread around when people meet up at events, have a few drinks and decide to share a little something with a trusted friend, and that friend does the same, etc. Shit like that happens in the "real world" too even when lifelong careers are on the line. The checks and balances system makes it so the source of a leak is harder to determine and even if evidence of indiscretion came to light it might not result in severe consequences for the culprit.
Since a lot of people seem to think the system isn't strict enough, and since some players may rather take a strike than explain themselves, I think you have to give players the benefit of the doubt. I mean you should make sure to be respectful of players and let the system do the work and not assume a player is lazy or disrespectful whenever he misses a match.
If you do decide to make it strict to the point that a single unexplained absence is quite severe for a player, then you are assuming a level of trust from players that you haven't earned and haven't made any effort of guaranteeing.
|
|
|
On July 27 2015 11:42 lichter wrote:
can i get a transfer to foreigner jail they probably have nicer amenities
So...tempted...to...put...you...on...the....list.....
On July 27 2015 12:05 NonY wrote:
I think privacy should be a serious consideration. I made a decision to talk about my depression publicly but if it was private and I had some incident that made me miss a match, I'd take the strike before I trust such a sensitive issue to strangers. It is incredible how much private information gets spread around when people meet up at events, have a few drinks and decide to share a little something with a trusted friend, and that friend does the same, etc. Shit like that happens in the "real world" too even when lifelong careers are on the line. The checks and balances system makes it so the source of a leak is harder to determine and even if evidence of indiscretion came to light it might not result in severe consequences for the culprit.
Since a lot of people seem to think the system isn't strict enough, and since some players may rather take a strike than explain themselves, I think you have to give players the benefit of the doubt. I mean you should make sure to be respectful of players and let the system do the work and not assume a player is lazy or disrespectful whenever he misses a match.
If you do decide to make it strict to the point that a single unexplained absence is quite severe for a player, then you are assuming a level of trust from players that you haven't earned and haven't made any effort of guaranteeing.
This is a REALLY good point. Thank you for bringing it up. There are issues that we haven't built up trust with players yet to handle a situation like that, I agree. Hopefully we can get to that point eventually but for now, we do need an alternative solution for something like that.
I'm wary about just simply always giving trust to all players for unexplained absences since it's so easy to abuse(I mean, I was in High School once. I know how making up fake excuses goes), but I also agree that this is a scenario I hadn't considered. I want to think on this one some more to see if I can come up with a good compromise. Maybe a form of evidence for the problem that isn't extremely revealing for the full depth of the situation? I'm not sure. I do sort of feel that trust should be a two way street. This organization has not earned the trust of players enough to have sensitive information like that disclosed safely, and similarly players haven't earned trust not to abuse a loophole for this system. Ultimately, I agree a compromise must be made, but I believe we still have to think a bit harder about what that compromise is.
Thank you so much for bringing this up though. This is 100% not the category of players we want to be penalizing if possible.
Edit: Conversation so far in the organization seems to lean toward people being able to approach me specifically and let me know if there is a more private situation they don't want made public, and I will simply have the power to remove strikes without giving justification for those particular situations. I don't really know what I can say that won't be biased because this puts me in a position where I can only say players would have to trust me if they want to remain without a strike & not give any information about the situation. I know that my own confidence and pride in being someone who doesn't talk about things that aren't my business to talk about may count for very little. But I hope I can build up that trust over time.
I'm not sure if people will find that to be an acceptable solution. I want to continue thinking on this to find a better solution. My feelings on putting absolute faith in players for unexplained absences is that if we do that, we may as well not have a system at all. The few "bad eggs" among a population of mostly "good eggs" ruin the system for everyone and makes it largely ineffective. I hope you see my point in why there is a large hesitance in simply always trusting this.
|
On July 27 2015 11:48 EleanorRIgby wrote:
would be a good tv show lol. the esport oz prison
Well, we already have Adebisi so that's something.
|
On July 27 2015 12:37 feardragon wrote:Show nested quote +On July 27 2015 11:42 lichter wrote:
can i get a transfer to foreigner jail they probably have nicer amenities So...tempted...to...put...you...on...the....list.....
You should put lichter in the examples section. It would be a lot more interesting than SampleName 1...
|
I wish something like this was in place a long time ago, back when I was still involved heavily in the semi-pro scene. It's something that has been desperately needed for a long time, and one of the main reasons why the NA scene in particular has suffered over the years.
|
On July 27 2015 01:38 Ariumtv wrote:
wow
sick comment!
|
This is very similar to the way leagues use to run back in sc:bw. You missed 2 matches in a row you or your team was banned for that season. This organization is not much different from that, I like it. It forces more professionalism for undisciplined competitors. The one thing I also like is that there is a clause that states if you had a unforeseen unavoidable incident that caused you to miss the match, obviously with some proof, then that competitor would not receive a strike.
edit: I read the whole OP.
|
On July 27 2015 09:16 baiesradu wrote:
Nice idea. I think it comes from the right place and the purpose is to induce a better SC2 scene.
The title though , it implies that only non korean players will be sanctioned , which I think is not true , and the first
time you will have to put a korean inside the name will create some "discussions".
I disagreed with a point made by someone earlier , that the name is racist , but the more I think about it the more I agree.
However I think the racist name came because most of the time the players involved were non koreans and we are so used to think in terms of foreigners and non koreans that the racist aspect of the title was not intended.
That's just my opinion, and I could be wrong .
By the way, Koreans are certainly not exempt from this. The title is a play off of "Kespa Jail". This is moreso a "jail" ran by foreigners, not for foreigners.
|
On July 27 2015 10:03 AlloyE_Aldaris wrote:
Honestly this sounds almost entirely like Sabre's idea. He doesn't exactly have money good ones.
You're one to talk LOL
|
On July 27 2015 12:37 feardragon wrote:Show nested quote +On July 27 2015 11:42 lichter wrote:
can i get a transfer to foreigner jail they probably have nicer amenities So...tempted...to...put...you...on...the....list..... Show nested quote +On July 27 2015 12:05 NonY wrote:
I think privacy should be a serious consideration. I made a decision to talk about my depression publicly but if it was private and I had some incident that made me miss a match, I'd take the strike before I trust such a sensitive issue to strangers. It is incredible how much private information gets spread around when people meet up at events, have a few drinks and decide to share a little something with a trusted friend, and that friend does the same, etc. Shit like that happens in the "real world" too even when lifelong careers are on the line. The checks and balances system makes it so the source of a leak is harder to determine and even if evidence of indiscretion came to light it might not result in severe consequences for the culprit.
Since a lot of people seem to think the system isn't strict enough, and since some players may rather take a strike than explain themselves, I think you have to give players the benefit of the doubt. I mean you should make sure to be respectful of players and let the system do the work and not assume a player is lazy or disrespectful whenever he misses a match.
If you do decide to make it strict to the point that a single unexplained absence is quite severe for a player, then you are assuming a level of trust from players that you haven't earned and haven't made any effort of guaranteeing. This is a REALLY good point. Thank you for bringing it up. There are issues that we haven't built up trust with players yet to handle a situation like that, I agree. Hopefully we can get to that point eventually but for now, we do need an alternative solution for something like that. I'm wary about just simply always giving trust to all players for unexplained absences since it's so easy to abuse(I mean, I was in High School once. I know how making up fake excuses goes), but I also agree that this is a scenario I hadn't considered. I want to think on this one some more to see if I can come up with a good compromise. Maybe a form of evidence for the problem that isn't extremely revealing for the full depth of the situation? I'm not sure. I do sort of feel that trust should be a two way street. This organization has not earned the trust of players enough to have sensitive information like that disclosed safely, and similarly players haven't earned trust not to abuse a loophole for this system. Ultimately, I agree a compromise must be made, but I believe we still have to think a bit harder about what that compromise is. Thank you so much for bringing this up though. This is 100% not the category of players we want to be penalizing if possible. Edit: Conversation so far in the organization seems to lean toward people being able to approach me specifically and let me know if there is a more private situation they don't want made public, and I will simply have the power to remove strikes without giving justification for those particular situations. I don't really know what I can say that won't be biased because this puts me in a position where I can only say players would have to trust me if they want to remain without a strike & not give any information about the situation. I know that my own confidence and pride in being someone who doesn't talk about things that aren't my business to talk about may count for very little. But I hope I can build up that trust over time. I'm not sure if people will find that to be an acceptable solution. I want to continue thinking on this to find a better solution. My feelings on putting absolute faith in players for unexplained absences is that if we do that, we may as well not have a system at all. The few "bad eggs" among a population of mostly "good eggs" ruin the system for everyone and makes it largely ineffective. I hope you see my point in why there is a large hesitance in simply always trusting this.
But would this work in actual practice? Yes, you have people like Nony who have been extremely forthcoming with his struggles with depression, but what about some random player who isn't? If a player messaged you and was like "sorry i didn't make this event i signed up for, i was depressed, are you going to be the one to "judge" whether they are really depressed or not, and if, therefore, they should get a pass on a strike? Because if players just start messaging you things that aren't true in hopes to get out of punishment, how will you be able to weed out the fakers from honest individuals?
|
If esports in general is truly going to be considered a professional sport, then these are the steps that need to be in place. I guess the thing is where do you draw the line between professional and amateur? It's like, do amateur tournaments/players command the same guidelines as professionals? Or for instance, lets say a amateur in a $100 weekly tournament and someone like Bomber were to back out of "Hell its aboot time"(if he were going), the amateur in the 100 dollar tournament is essentially getting the same punishment. Some of these community tournaments have pretty big money, and some of them are just $100-$200 dollar tournaments, so do they command the same professionalism? The latter seem more just for fun and for players to practice in a tournament setting to increase their skill and move up. To me it seems that they should be treated a bit differently(or maybe not?), but that would make the system more complex if you were to add like 2 different strike systems. For instance 4-5 strikes in a amateur setting, and 3 strikes if the tournament has over $1000 prize pool (just random numbers).
I truly believe in what your starting, just want it to be as best as possible and throwing my 2 cents in the pot.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
