Revised Featured Stream Requirements for 2016 - Page 6

On February 16 2016 13:54 ProTech wrote:



Are you really going to just ignore the previous conversation?

On February 16 2016 14:02 Cobrakush wrote:
The video I offered as proof isn't from 2015 its from a couple weeks ago (I don't know how to add quotes sorry) February 6th 2016 to be exact. Maybe I misunderstood you, but the video explains about the last time this happens then goes on to prove the recent activity of viewbots. Is it that he's been forthcoming with info whenever it happens?

On February 16 2016 14:35 lichter wrote:


For the benefit of others: ProTech's removal from featured streams was before I became an admin, and as you can all imagine, that requires a more bureaucratic (read: complicated) process. As much as I would like to give him a chance, the decision was made before my time and beyond my ability to reverse.

On February 16 2016 15:41 ProTech wrote:



Ok, so are you saying that TL.net doesn't mind showcasing this type of hypocrisy?

On February 16 2016 01:34 lichter wrote:




I was tempted to press it

On February 16 2016 16:10 lichter wrote:


Well, as much as possible we would like to avoid applying rules retrospectively because that creates a whole host of other complications. Situations like these are incredibly complex even in common law, and discerning when to apply "prospective overruling" isn't a simple matter. To label it outright as hypocrisy due to an isolated case seems disingenuous; you could read this article that explains the difficulties in applying present rules to past decisions in common law. While the article recommends that prospective overruling be used when applicable while presenting its merits, it doesn't really help much in providing insight on how to discriminate (read: not the -ism kind of discrimination) between cases.

Changing an old ruling isn't as easy as you suggest, but you are correct that some discernment—and, inevitably, discrimination—must be applied. That we've decided not to overrule our previous decision is unfortunate, and you can understandably voice your discontent (as long as it is within the forum rules).

As an aside for everyone else, I mentioned on twitter that the rule on behavior is indeed a subjective one, perhaps the only subjective rule on the entire list. It is a necessary rule of course, but one that is difficult to enforce because once applied it sets a precedent. We don't want to play mind police, and we understand that some players vent their frustrations negatively. We aren't here to act like armchair psychiatrists teaching them to be more constructive in their methods. However we do want our streamers to be on their best behavior as much as possible, making such a rule necessary. When we finally decide to ax someone because of their behavior, it won't be a debatable matter.

On February 16 2016 18:16 -Kyo- wrote:


Hence why I mentioned you only see yourself as a victim. So sad.

In response to NoRegret: As much as I dislike him I think the others have made a valid point in regards to what I mentioned on the first page. If someone has gotten as far as NoRegret did in the current WCS system and still is not featured based on their level of skill then it seems like most of NA hereafter would need to either be defeatured, or will not have any many(any?) new faces any time soon which would seem rather odd... ? >.>..

I hope the PM was good news on that frront~

There's a difference between libel/slander. Idra was a prick/BM but that didn't effect his featured status, nor does it avilo or destiny.

On February 16 2016 22:01 ProTech wrote:


Moron, read the thread. You're literally the biggest faggot on this website, kill yourself.