|
On April 19 2016 00:01 BisuDagger wrote:
Not enough Taeja. Pretty sure Taeja won every category.
I need more TaeJa in my life. What is this nonsense?
|
On April 19 2016 01:30 Die4Ever wrote:Show nested quote +On April 19 2016 01:28 Kaizor wrote:On April 19 2016 01:24 OtherWorld wrote:On April 19 2016 01:03 Kaizor wrote:On April 19 2016 00:23 Olli wrote:On April 18 2016 22:25 Kaizor wrote:
No i do not understand TL's stance or agree with it.
True he has not been convicted of anything yet but i think most would agree that by this point, it's highly likely.
And look around, sportsmen that have been caught in various scandals, get their medals stripped, championships revoked, sponsorships withdrawn.
You would never see a sportsmen being awarded anything after they bring the sport into dispute just because "their performances merited it". Organizations get as far away as they can.
So no, TL's stance just does not make sense. This is absolutely nonsensical and, if anything, points out a huge issue in our society. Condemning people without evidence, even if there is an investigation ongoing, is defamation ot character. That is the case until a verdict is made. Essentially you base your argument on "what everyone thinks". Guess what, everyone doesn't know shit and their opinion on a case they have zero insight into is 100% irrelevant. No information about the case has been released, which means as of right now, Life is not guilty. So that's how we're going to treat him for the time being. If he does turn out to be guilty, we may re-evaluate. Fair enough, if that's how you guys really feel about it. I am not going get into an arguing match about how we define definitive. But i just want to point out that if any sportsmen is being investigated or being linked to any scandal, even if it is not 100% proven yet, they are not going to be getting any Best Sports Person of the year award. Not 100% proven as in they have been called in by Prosecutors. Just like Life. If this happens to any sportsmen. Zero. Chance. And the way you put it as "may re-evaluate" even if he is found guilty is very disappointing. So you wouldn't give Messi the Ballon d'Or because he is linked to the Panama papers scandal, for example? Interesting I should have been clearer. Scandal related to the sports, eg. Match-fixing, performance enhanced drugs. If Messi had done any of those, or suspected of it, ya i wouldn't give Messi the Ballon d'Or. With the panama papers, it's a financial scandal and it changes how i look at Messi as a person, not how i look at him as a footballer. Just like i don't respect John Terry for his alleged affairs, but since that has zero to do with his defending, i still rate him as a good defender. match fixing honestly has nothing to do with how good Life is/was at Starcraft, he didn't win tournaments by throwing games
I think at the root of this, is how people who do not agree with this and how people who agree look at this.
For me it's simple.
For crying out loud, i am a zerg player myself and i liked Life. Did he give us great games, for sure. Was he a great player. Yes.
But.
We should not be honoring a person that has damaged the scene, that has hurt the fans.
It's like giving a boy the Best Student Award for the year after he was caught selling answers to friends during exams.
But he got full marks for all his exams you said.
|
On April 19 2016 01:36 Kaizor wrote:Show nested quote +On April 19 2016 01:30 Die4Ever wrote:On April 19 2016 01:28 Kaizor wrote:On April 19 2016 01:24 OtherWorld wrote:On April 19 2016 01:03 Kaizor wrote:On April 19 2016 00:23 Olli wrote:On April 18 2016 22:25 Kaizor wrote:
No i do not understand TL's stance or agree with it.
True he has not been convicted of anything yet but i think most would agree that by this point, it's highly likely.
And look around, sportsmen that have been caught in various scandals, get their medals stripped, championships revoked, sponsorships withdrawn.
You would never see a sportsmen being awarded anything after they bring the sport into dispute just because "their performances merited it". Organizations get as far away as they can.
So no, TL's stance just does not make sense. This is absolutely nonsensical and, if anything, points out a huge issue in our society. Condemning people without evidence, even if there is an investigation ongoing, is defamation ot character. That is the case until a verdict is made. Essentially you base your argument on "what everyone thinks". Guess what, everyone doesn't know shit and their opinion on a case they have zero insight into is 100% irrelevant. No information about the case has been released, which means as of right now, Life is not guilty. So that's how we're going to treat him for the time being. If he does turn out to be guilty, we may re-evaluate. Fair enough, if that's how you guys really feel about it. I am not going get into an arguing match about how we define definitive. But i just want to point out that if any sportsmen is being investigated or being linked to any scandal, even if it is not 100% proven yet, they are not going to be getting any Best Sports Person of the year award. Not 100% proven as in they have been called in by Prosecutors. Just like Life. If this happens to any sportsmen. Zero. Chance. And the way you put it as "may re-evaluate" even if he is found guilty is very disappointing. So you wouldn't give Messi the Ballon d'Or because he is linked to the Panama papers scandal, for example? Interesting I should have been clearer. Scandal related to the sports, eg. Match-fixing, performance enhanced drugs. If Messi had done any of those, or suspected of it, ya i wouldn't give Messi the Ballon d'Or. With the panama papers, it's a financial scandal and it changes how i look at Messi as a person, not how i look at him as a footballer. Just like i don't respect John Terry for his alleged affairs, but since that has zero to do with his defending, i still rate him as a good defender. match fixing honestly has nothing to do with how good Life is/was at Starcraft, he didn't win tournaments by throwing games I think at the root of this, is how people who do not agree with this and how people who agree look at this. For me it's simple. For crying out loud, i am a zerg player myself and i liked Life. Did he give us great games, for sure. Was he a great player. Yes. But. We should not be honoring a person that has damaged the scene, that has hurt the fans. It's like giving a boy the Best Student Award for the year after he was caught selling answers to friends during exams. But he got full marks for all his exams you said.
ok, so add onto all this that we don't know the outcome of the case, don't you think innocent until proven guilty applies? you're already treating him as guilty
|
On April 19 2016 01:37 Die4Ever wrote:Show nested quote +On April 19 2016 01:36 Kaizor wrote:On April 19 2016 01:30 Die4Ever wrote:On April 19 2016 01:28 Kaizor wrote:On April 19 2016 01:24 OtherWorld wrote:On April 19 2016 01:03 Kaizor wrote:On April 19 2016 00:23 Olli wrote:On April 18 2016 22:25 Kaizor wrote:
No i do not understand TL's stance or agree with it.
True he has not been convicted of anything yet but i think most would agree that by this point, it's highly likely.
And look around, sportsmen that have been caught in various scandals, get their medals stripped, championships revoked, sponsorships withdrawn.
You would never see a sportsmen being awarded anything after they bring the sport into dispute just because "their performances merited it". Organizations get as far away as they can.
So no, TL's stance just does not make sense. This is absolutely nonsensical and, if anything, points out a huge issue in our society. Condemning people without evidence, even if there is an investigation ongoing, is defamation ot character. That is the case until a verdict is made. Essentially you base your argument on "what everyone thinks". Guess what, everyone doesn't know shit and their opinion on a case they have zero insight into is 100% irrelevant. No information about the case has been released, which means as of right now, Life is not guilty. So that's how we're going to treat him for the time being. If he does turn out to be guilty, we may re-evaluate. Fair enough, if that's how you guys really feel about it. I am not going get into an arguing match about how we define definitive. But i just want to point out that if any sportsmen is being investigated or being linked to any scandal, even if it is not 100% proven yet, they are not going to be getting any Best Sports Person of the year award. Not 100% proven as in they have been called in by Prosecutors. Just like Life. If this happens to any sportsmen. Zero. Chance. And the way you put it as "may re-evaluate" even if he is found guilty is very disappointing. So you wouldn't give Messi the Ballon d'Or because he is linked to the Panama papers scandal, for example? Interesting I should have been clearer. Scandal related to the sports, eg. Match-fixing, performance enhanced drugs. If Messi had done any of those, or suspected of it, ya i wouldn't give Messi the Ballon d'Or. With the panama papers, it's a financial scandal and it changes how i look at Messi as a person, not how i look at him as a footballer. Just like i don't respect John Terry for his alleged affairs, but since that has zero to do with his defending, i still rate him as a good defender. match fixing honestly has nothing to do with how good Life is/was at Starcraft, he didn't win tournaments by throwing games I think at the root of this, is how people who do not agree with this and how people who agree look at this. For me it's simple. For crying out loud, i am a zerg player myself and i liked Life. Did he give us great games, for sure. Was he a great player. Yes. But. We should not be honoring a person that has damaged the scene, that has hurt the fans. It's like giving a boy the Best Student Award for the year after he was caught selling answers to friends during exams. But he got full marks for all his exams you said. ok, so add onto all this that we don't know the outcome of the case, don't you think innocent until proven guilty applies? you're already treating him as guilty
I was replying to the scenario that you provided. So if he is indeed found to be guilty, i hope this will be looked into again.
|
On April 19 2016 01:28 Kaizor wrote:Show nested quote +On April 19 2016 01:24 OtherWorld wrote:On April 19 2016 01:03 Kaizor wrote:On April 19 2016 00:23 Olli wrote:On April 18 2016 22:25 Kaizor wrote:
No i do not understand TL's stance or agree with it.
True he has not been convicted of anything yet but i think most would agree that by this point, it's highly likely.
And look around, sportsmen that have been caught in various scandals, get their medals stripped, championships revoked, sponsorships withdrawn.
You would never see a sportsmen being awarded anything after they bring the sport into dispute just because "their performances merited it". Organizations get as far away as they can.
So no, TL's stance just does not make sense. This is absolutely nonsensical and, if anything, points out a huge issue in our society. Condemning people without evidence, even if there is an investigation ongoing, is defamation ot character. That is the case until a verdict is made. Essentially you base your argument on "what everyone thinks". Guess what, everyone doesn't know shit and their opinion on a case they have zero insight into is 100% irrelevant. No information about the case has been released, which means as of right now, Life is not guilty. So that's how we're going to treat him for the time being. If he does turn out to be guilty, we may re-evaluate. Fair enough, if that's how you guys really feel about it. I am not going get into an arguing match about how we define definitive. But i just want to point out that if any sportsmen is being investigated or being linked to any scandal, even if it is not 100% proven yet, they are not going to be getting any Best Sports Person of the year award. Not 100% proven as in they have been called in by Prosecutors. Just like Life. If this happens to any sportsmen. Zero. Chance. And the way you put it as "may re-evaluate" even if he is found guilty is very disappointing. So you wouldn't give Messi the Ballon d'Or because he is linked to the Panama papers scandal, for example? Interesting I should have been clearer. Scandal related to the sports, eg. Match-fixing, performance enhanced drugs. If Messi had done any of those, or suspected of it, ya i wouldn't give Messi the Ballon d'Or. With the panama papers, it's a financial scandal and it changes how i look at Messi as a person, not how i look at him as a footballer. Just like i don't respect John Terry for his alleged affairs, but since that has zero to do with his defending, i still rate him as a good defender.
I understand if we're talking about things that would make him a better performer, like doping or corrupting the opposing team's defenders, but "defensive" matchfixing (i.e. he plays intentionaly bad instead of playing at his full level)? If it doesn't affect his performance in a positive way, then there's no reason to discard these performances because of it. Same reasoning applies with Life : assuming he did lose on purpose, it certainly didn't raise his chances of being named Player of the Year. Thus no reason to be against that.
On that note, I'm surprised the MKP² vs ByuL's creep scandal is not first place in the "Worst Drama" category
|
Austria24416 Posts
Just to clear this up, I wrote "we may re-evaluate" because there are different types of 'match-fixing'. For example, Life may have bet money on himself winning matches if he was feeling extremely confident. That technically falls in the match-fixing category, but is really "just" him earning more money illegally while still playing a legitimate match. If that were to be the case, I don't think it automatically devalues all his achievements. Makes him a criminal and I'd lose a lot of respect for him, but it really does not devalue his skill and achievements inside the game (at least in my opinion), which is what the Best Player award is for. In a scenario like that, we may not retract the award.
But that's something we'll have to discuss if it does come to that. Just wanted to clear up my choice of words there.
|
Mute City2363 Posts
On April 19 2016 01:42 OtherWorld wrote:Show nested quote +On April 19 2016 01:28 Kaizor wrote:On April 19 2016 01:24 OtherWorld wrote:On April 19 2016 01:03 Kaizor wrote:On April 19 2016 00:23 Olli wrote:On April 18 2016 22:25 Kaizor wrote:
No i do not understand TL's stance or agree with it.
True he has not been convicted of anything yet but i think most would agree that by this point, it's highly likely.
And look around, sportsmen that have been caught in various scandals, get their medals stripped, championships revoked, sponsorships withdrawn.
You would never see a sportsmen being awarded anything after they bring the sport into dispute just because "their performances merited it". Organizations get as far away as they can.
So no, TL's stance just does not make sense. This is absolutely nonsensical and, if anything, points out a huge issue in our society. Condemning people without evidence, even if there is an investigation ongoing, is defamation ot character. That is the case until a verdict is made. Essentially you base your argument on "what everyone thinks". Guess what, everyone doesn't know shit and their opinion on a case they have zero insight into is 100% irrelevant. No information about the case has been released, which means as of right now, Life is not guilty. So that's how we're going to treat him for the time being. If he does turn out to be guilty, we may re-evaluate. Fair enough, if that's how you guys really feel about it. I am not going get into an arguing match about how we define definitive. But i just want to point out that if any sportsmen is being investigated or being linked to any scandal, even if it is not 100% proven yet, they are not going to be getting any Best Sports Person of the year award. Not 100% proven as in they have been called in by Prosecutors. Just like Life. If this happens to any sportsmen. Zero. Chance. And the way you put it as "may re-evaluate" even if he is found guilty is very disappointing. So you wouldn't give Messi the Ballon d'Or because he is linked to the Panama papers scandal, for example? Interesting I should have been clearer. Scandal related to the sports, eg. Match-fixing, performance enhanced drugs. If Messi had done any of those, or suspected of it, ya i wouldn't give Messi the Ballon d'Or. With the panama papers, it's a financial scandal and it changes how i look at Messi as a person, not how i look at him as a footballer. Just like i don't respect John Terry for his alleged affairs, but since that has zero to do with his defending, i still rate him as a good defender. I understand if we're talking about things that would make him a better performer, like doping or corrupting the opposing team's defenders, but "defensive" matchfixing (i.e. he plays intentionaly bad instead of playing at his full level)? If it doesn't affect his performance in a positive way, then there's no reason to discard these performances because of it. Same reasoning applies with Life : assuming he did lose on purpose, it certainly didn't raise his chances of being named Player of the Year. Thus no reason to be against that. On that note, I'm surprised the MKP² vs ByuL's creep scandal is not first place in the "Worst Drama" category
Included under the general banner of matchfixing I guess, seeing as that's how everyone was calling it.
On a lighter note, I'm disappointed there aren't complaints about my horrendous pun in KR POTY
|
On April 19 2016 01:45 Olli wrote:
Life may have bet money on himself winning matches if he was feeling extremely confident. That technically falls in the match-fixing category
How is that match-fixing? O.o Have been I understanding the term wrong all this time? What would he be fixing here?
|
Austria24416 Posts
On April 19 2016 01:53 Silvana wrote:Show nested quote +On April 19 2016 01:45 Olli wrote:
Life may have bet money on himself winning matches if he was feeling extremely confident. That technically falls in the match-fixing category How is that match-fixing? O.o Have been I understanding the term wrong all this time? What would he be fixing here?
I don't really get it myself, I think it's misleading - but betting on your own matches, no matter the outcome you're betting on, is commonly generalized as match-fixing. Even if you're betting on your own wins. Not sure why, but if that's what happened - which may be the case, we don't really know - then it's different to me than losing on purpose.
|
On April 19 2016 01:58 Olli wrote:Show nested quote +On April 19 2016 01:53 Silvana wrote:On April 19 2016 01:45 Olli wrote:
Life may have bet money on himself winning matches if he was feeling extremely confident. That technically falls in the match-fixing category How is that match-fixing? O.o Have been I understanding the term wrong all this time? What would he be fixing here? I don't really get it myself, I think it's misleading - but betting on your own matches, no matter the outcome you're betting on, is commonly generalized as match-fixing. Even if you're betting on your own wins. Not sure why, but if that's what happened - which may be the case, we don't really know - then it's different to me than losing on purpose.
I see. But it's really strange. If where you live it is legal to bet... why can't you bet on yourself? You're not hurting anyone by doing that..
|
I miss life so much 
|
Austria24416 Posts
On April 19 2016 02:07 Silvana wrote:Show nested quote +On April 19 2016 01:58 Olli wrote:On April 19 2016 01:53 Silvana wrote:On April 19 2016 01:45 Olli wrote:
Life may have bet money on himself winning matches if he was feeling extremely confident. That technically falls in the match-fixing category How is that match-fixing? O.o Have been I understanding the term wrong all this time? What would he be fixing here? I don't really get it myself, I think it's misleading - but betting on your own matches, no matter the outcome you're betting on, is commonly generalized as match-fixing. Even if you're betting on your own wins. Not sure why, but if that's what happened - which may be the case, we don't really know - then it's different to me than losing on purpose. I see. But it's really strange. If where you live it is legal to bet... why can't you bet on yourself? You're not hurting anyone by doing that..
I can't give you the official reasoning, but I think it's because you still have direct control over whether or not you're going to win, and with that you have control over the outcome of your bet. That and you're already winning prize money. But I'm not an expert so don't quote me on that.
|
On April 19 2016 02:11 Olli wrote:Show nested quote +On April 19 2016 02:07 Silvana wrote:On April 19 2016 01:58 Olli wrote:On April 19 2016 01:53 Silvana wrote:On April 19 2016 01:45 Olli wrote:
Life may have bet money on himself winning matches if he was feeling extremely confident. That technically falls in the match-fixing category How is that match-fixing? O.o Have been I understanding the term wrong all this time? What would he be fixing here? I don't really get it myself, I think it's misleading - but betting on your own matches, no matter the outcome you're betting on, is commonly generalized as match-fixing. Even if you're betting on your own wins. Not sure why, but if that's what happened - which may be the case, we don't really know - then it's different to me than losing on purpose. I see. But it's really strange. If where you live it is legal to bet... why can't you bet on yourself? You're not hurting anyone by doing that.. I can't give you the official reasoning, but I think it's because you still have direct control over whether or not you're going to win, and with that you have control over the outcome of your bet. That and you're already winning prize money. But I'm not an expert so don't quote me on that.
Sounds like a technicality. Btw I quote you muahahha because I can :D
|
Goddamn I miss Life. (((((((((
Great read.
|
On April 19 2016 01:24 Muffloe wrote:Show nested quote +On April 19 2016 01:14 boxerfred wrote:
Those Lolbow awards are undeserved af yeah, where's Naniwa 
Dont trigger me
Kidding. Id give this award rather to nani than to lilbow.
|
On April 19 2016 00:23 Olli wrote:Show nested quote +On April 18 2016 22:25 Kaizor wrote:
No i do not understand TL's stance or agree with it.
True he has not been convicted of anything yet but i think most would agree that by this point, it's highly likely.
And look around, sportsmen that have been caught in various scandals, get their medals stripped, championships revoked, sponsorships withdrawn.
You would never see a sportsmen being awarded anything after they bring the sport into dispute just because "their performances merited it". Organizations get as far away as they can.
So no, TL's stance just does not make sense. This is absolutely nonsensical and, if anything, points out a huge issue in our society. Condemning people without evidence, even if there is an investigation ongoing, is defamation of character. That is the case until a verdict is made. Essentially you base your argument on "what everyone thinks". Guess what, everyone doesn't know shit and their opinion on a case they have zero insight into is 100% irrelevant. No information about the case has been released, which means as of right now, Life is not guilty. So that's how we're going to treat him for the time being. If he does turn out to be guilty, we may re-evaluate.
In addition to that: technically condemned fixers that endured their suspension should be considered for those awards. The whole idea of punishment (in europe) is one of rehabilitation, not of ongoing guilt.
|
Mute City2363 Posts
On April 19 2016 02:22 boxerfred wrote:Show nested quote +On April 19 2016 01:24 Muffloe wrote:On April 19 2016 01:14 boxerfred wrote:
Those Lolbow awards are undeserved af yeah, where's Naniwa Dont trigger me Kidding. Id give this award rather to nani than to lilbow.
Name a foreigner who did better.
We had to give it to someone
|
Austria24416 Posts
Lilbow award was the easiest. Made 2 WCS finals, won one, qualified for Blizzcon. No other foreigner came close.
|
On April 19 2016 02:25 thecrazymunchkin wrote:Show nested quote +On April 19 2016 02:22 boxerfred wrote:On April 19 2016 01:24 Muffloe wrote:On April 19 2016 01:14 boxerfred wrote:
Those Lolbow awards are undeserved af yeah, where's Naniwa Dont trigger me Kidding. Id give this award rather to nani than to lilbow. Name a foreigner who did better. We had to give it to someone
well you didn't have to, you could have just said no foreigner deserved it, haha jk
|
Has was robbed of most entertaining player
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
