|
Aotearoa39261 Posts
On November 12 2009 16:11 Athos wrote:
I say allow Korean amateurs to play but ban idra and other progamers.
That seems the fairest way to go about things as we're creating an amateur scene and not just a foreigner one. We have no intentions of creating an amateur scene - else we would have let amateur koreans play. This is a 100% foreign tournament. Nongmin may have lived in the US for the past 4 years - but he doesn't have american citizenship! In keeping with the spirit of the TSL this is the only call we could make.
|
I agree with the decision 100%.
|
Nongmin has tentatively agreed to play in a Liquibition match against a top TSL player after the PokerStrategy.com TSL concludes.
How much winner gets from this match? 500 dollars?
|
On November 12 2009 22:00 Holgerius wrote:
I agree with the decision 100%.
|
Best TSL Storyline?
* Nongmin's storyline! Fuck all other options!! ^^
|
On November 12 2009 22:00 Holgerius wrote:
I agree with the decision 100%.
Me too, but nonetheless i feel bad for him
|
I understand that the logic is very clear to anyone who was involved in the decision-making process. After all, you made the decision. The exceptions given to Idra and ret are arbitrary at best when considering nongmin's predicament. As a result your rules are not completely airtight and don't stand up to scrutiny, hence the discussion and uproar. Also, calling people arguing against your decision/rules 'retarded' and 'stupid' does not really help the decisions or your own credibility.
Either way, as organizer you can pretty much do as you please, as such I respect the fact that a decision has been been made, but not the decision itself or what lead to the decision.
|
So where is the decision after all ?
When determining whether to grant an exception, ....
ok you start determing about an exception to the rules above.
..While his livestream is a valuable and appreciated resource, one cannot reasonably argue that Nongmin is as much a part of the foreigner community as the other players who were granted an exception previously.
ok sounds nice so you gonna grant him one
Ideally, Nongmin does not move to Korea and he can play in the TSL. But as long as he is in Korea, he cannot participate for the reasons outlined above.
WHAT? above where? you cannot mean the rules, this is going about an exception to the rules.
and you cannot mean reasons for the exceptions for the others you are also positve there.
so you said ".. outlined above.", beeing a big text above and everyone is to lazy to watch above, 11 pages just believe the reason would be somewhere above. but it is not.
so i am waiting for the decision for the exception for nongmin yet. or you show me where your "mentioned above" is. thx. i just cant find it. sorry
|
Braavos36389 Posts
On November 12 2009 23:08 timmeh wrote:
I understand that the logic is very clear to anyone who was involved in the decision-making process. After all, you made the decision. The exceptions given to Idra and ret are arbitrary at best when considering nongmin's predicament. As a result your rules are not completely airtight and don't stand up to scrutiny, hence the discussion and uproar. Also, calling people arguing against your decision/rules 'retarded' and 'stupid' does not really help the decisions or your own credibility.
Either way, as organizer you can pretty much do as you please, as such I respect the fact that a decision has been been made, but not the decision itself or what lead to the decision.
Maybe you should go back and read the thread because not once have we said someone who simply disagrees with the decision retarded or stupid.
I did a ctrl+find and 0 staff have called anyone "stupid" and Kennigit wrote "lol i cant tell who is trolling and who is retarded" which is in reference to the Sorrow posts where he repeatedly misunderstood what "AND" and "OR" meant. That's one post out of several dozen, and that post isn't even directly calling anyone any names, just expressing frustration at a banned person's trolling attempt.
The vast majority of staff posts do not contain the sort of personal insults, why do you accuse us of stuff before even checking the thread? Making baseless accusations "does not really help your own credibility" either.
|
Braavos36389 Posts
On November 12 2009 23:14 VabuDeltaKaiser wrote:So where is the decision after all ? ok you start determing about an exception to the rules above. Show nested quote +
..While his livestream is a valuable and appreciated resource, one cannot reasonably argue that Nongmin is as much a part of the foreigner community as the other players who were granted an exception previously.
ok sounds nice so you gonna grant him one Show nested quote +
Ideally, Nongmin does not move to Korea and he can play in the TSL. But as long as he is in Korea, he cannot participate for the reasons outlined above.
WHAT? above where? you cannot mean the rules, this is going about an exception to the rules. and you cannot mean reasons for the exceptions for the others you are also positve there. so you said ".. outlined above.", beeing a big text above and everyone is to lazy to watch above, 11 pages just believe the reason would be somewhere above. but it is not. so i am waiting for the decision for the exception for nongmin yet. or you show me where your "mentioned above" is. thx. i just cant find it. sorry
You actually quoted the part where we say we're not granting him an exception. I bolded it here:
..While his livestream is a valuable and appreciated resource, one cannot reasonably argue that Nongmin is as much a part of the foreigner community as the other players who were granted an exception previously.
You responded to this quoted line "ok sounds nice so you gonna grant him one." But it does not sound nice nor does it sound like we're going to grant him one. "Above" means "before or earlier, esp. in a book or other piece of writing" and thus refers to the rules and reasons we stated earlier in the OP.
The rest of your post I don't really understand, it might be a language barrier.
|
now thats very simple, and i dont think theres anything lika barrier.. thx
i wanted to point out that you don't need to allow him if he resided inside the usa, thats just what the rules say.
i was just remarking that in the questioned determinition of an exception you give a positive arguement, but after that you are refering to the rules above that are out of question.
in short, the rules cannot be part of an arguement of exception to the rules, you understand ?
|
South Africa4316 Posts
On November 12 2009 23:08 timmeh wrote:
I understand that the logic is very clear to anyone who was involved in the decision-making process. After all, you made the decision. The exceptions given to Idra and ret are arbitrary at best when considering nongmin's predicament. As a result your rules are not completely airtight and don't stand up to scrutiny, hence the discussion and uproar. Also, calling people arguing against your decision/rules 'retarded' and 'stupid' does not really help the decisions or your own credibility.
Either way, as organizer you can pretty much do as you please, as such I respect the fact that a decision has been been made, but not the decision itself or what lead to the decision.
I'm fairly sure that you will find that we have not called those arguing against these decisions retards or idiots (unless perhaps you take one or two comments out of context).
Also, we do not believe that our exceptions regarding either Idra or ret were arbitrary, and you can see our motivations for making an exception for them throughout the thread. This does not mean that our reasons for allowing them to play cannot be criticized, in fact, we expected this level of criticism regardless of our decision as we were well aware of both sides of the argument. However, there is an important difference between making an arbitrary decision, and choosing the best solution in a difficult situation. As such, we stand by our decision, and we believe that we have made the best possible decision for the situation.
|
Braavos36389 Posts
On November 12 2009 23:32 VabuDeltaKaiser wrote:
now thats very simple, and i dont think theres anything lika barrier.. thx
i wanted to point out that you don't need to allow him if he resided inside the usa, thats just what the rules say.
i was just remarking that in the questioned determinition of an exception you give a positive arguement, but after that you are refering to the rules above that are out of question.
in short, the rules cannot be part of an arguement of exception to the rules, you understand ?
When we said "he cannot play for the reasons outlined above" we were pointing to the justifications behind why we decided to not let him play -- we gave several reasons for why we felt certain players should be granted exceptions and certain players shouldn't. We weren't simply saying "oh nongmin shouldn't play because the rules above say he shouldn't play." We felt there needed to be more explanation than that, which is why the OP is several paragraphs instead of one sentence.
|
On November 12 2009 23:37 Hot_Bid wrote:Show nested quote +On November 12 2009 23:32 VabuDeltaKaiser wrote:
now thats very simple, and i dont think theres anything lika barrier.. thx
i wanted to point out that you don't need to allow him if he resided inside the usa, thats just what the rules say.
i was just remarking that in the questioned determinition of an exception you give a positive arguement, but after that you are refering to the rules above that are out of question.
in short, the rules cannot be part of an arguement of exception to the rules, you understand ? When we said "he cannot play for the reasons outlined above" we were pointing to the justifications behind why we decided to not let him play -- we gave several reasons for why we felt certain players should be granted exceptions and certain players shouldn't. We weren't simply saying "oh nongmin shouldn't play because the rules above say he shouldn't play." We felt there needed to be more explanation than that, which is why the OP is several paragraphs instead of one sentence.
so reasons for no exception are not above in the text, but at the head of the ones taking part in the decision?
i thought this
When determining whether to grant an exception, we not only look at whether the player benefitted from growing up in a location without a professional StarCraft scene, but also whether the player has a long history of being a part of and contributing to the "foreigner" community. This is the case with every player who was granted an exception.
Nongmin has only joined the foreigner community very recently. He has not participated in any foreigner tournaments, leagues, or showmatches. While his livestream is a valuable and appreciated resource, one cannot reasonably argue that Nongmin is as much a part of the foreigner community as the other players who were granted an exception previously...
was part of the decision for or against an exception.
and this
Ideally, Nongmin does not move to Korea and he can play in the TSL. But as long as he is in Korea, he cannot participate for the reasons outlined above.
is the decision and you decide against, dont mention the reason because they are beyond public and let the rule exclude him, did i get it right ?
|
I realise this is a difficult decision with good arguments for both sides, but why is him being in Korea at the time so much of an issue? It seems like the deciding factors should be how long he's lived in the states, how involved he is with the foreign scene and following from that whether or not he's viewed as a member of the foreign community. Not letting him play because he happens to be on holiday in Korea at the time seems like an arbitrary criterion to solve a difficult problem.
|
How about
All Korean citizens are not allowed to play.
Considering this is a foreign tournament, and foreign pretty much means "non-Korean".
P/S: I'm not sure about the Chinese though. They do have professional SC over there.
|
Braavos36389 Posts
I don't know how else to explain it, other than that the OP, taken as a whole, outlines our reasoning behind why Nongmin didn't get an exception. I'm not going to argue how you interpret the word "above."
|
Braavos36389 Posts
On November 12 2009 23:54 nayumi wrote:
How about
All Korean citizens are not allowed to play.
Considering this is a foreign tournament, and foreign pretty much means "non-Korean".
P/S: I'm not sure about the Chinese though. They do have professional SC over there.
As nice and clean a rule as that may sound, there is no way to know if a Korean citizen is actually playing in the United States. Since this is an online tournament, how would we check if someone is a Korean citizen? Are we going to take a video of them playing? A Korean citizen who wanted to play from the US could simply say he's someone else, and there's no real way to verify it. Further, how do we even know who to ask for verification? You can't tell just by someone's username whether he is Korean or not.
This "impossibility of enforcement" played a role in our decision to allow Nongmin if he resided in the United States. However, we can see IP addresses, which is why we are able to not allow Korean citizens in Korea.
|
I realise this is a difficult decision with good arguments for both sides, but why is him being in Korea at the time so much of an issue?
It becomes an issue because it's against the rules. I have yet to see anyone come up with a better set of rules. If you have been reading the topic you probably agree that the set of rules is a very realistic representation of the ideology of TSL. The rules are good, but of course no rule applies 100% according to its intent, and thus we have carefully looked into this case.
It seems like the deciding factors should be how long he's lived in the states, how involved he is with the foreign scene and following from that whether or not he's viewed as a member of the foreign community. Not letting him play because he happens to be on holiday in Korea at the time seems like an arbitrary criterion to solve a difficult problem
This is all explained by Hot_Bid in the OP, I'm not sure I see what you're getting at. Arbitrary would be not looking into it at all and sticking by your rules no matter what. That's not what we have done so it is not arbitrary. These things you bring up are also brought up in our explanation.
|
Alright, since none of this discussion is going to change anything for TSL2, let's talk about this "if he has obtained foreigner recognition by TSL3, he can play" requirement. Since livestreaming was deemed inadequate, it seems that "he has not participated in foreign tournaments" is one of the only explicit ways to quantify "foreigner recognition". But when TSL3 rolls around, since he can't play in TSL2, how will the situation change with regards to this "recognition"?
"You can play in the tournament if you have participated in previous tournaments." and "You can't participate in this instance of the tournament." means that he'll never have this tournament participation which seems to be seen as the mark of being part of the foreigner community.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
