Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 Ordana wrote:
Was there significant prize support attached to these awards?

At the local RTT, $15 to $30 store credit depending on how many participants, from as small as 12 guys to 32+. For the last few GTs, a paint kit, BloodBowl sized GW box, some clamp packs.
IMHO, that doesn't seem significant, but then, after 14 years, I have more 40k models and armies than I know what to do with, so I have little incentive to win prizes. I'm in it for glory (bragging rights!), that is, fun. I'm in it for fun.

 Ordana wrote:
Because yes I agree, they are really fun guys to play with and they are there to have fun. But when you take the prize support from winning and move it to sportsmanship your going to get the dicks who just want to win at all costs involved in a prize that is about the very opposite.

In 6 years of steady tourney participation, I haven't seen it, not for Sportsmandship. The couple WAAC guys** I know are after top prize, not Sports, because top prize yields more ITC points and more store credit.

Care to cite examples you've actually experienced?



**And the ones I have encountered had not shown any consideration about the Sportsmanship prize; it'd been all about winning the Whole Enchilada.

The situation proposed was to remove prizes from winning, so its just about the achievement itself and to move prize support to sportsmanship.

 Peregrine wrote:

 Chief Librarian Mephiston wrote:
Yeah, there's really no way to make it retroactive and punitively punish people under a system of rules that they didn't agree to beforehand.

Disagree. Known cheaters are still cheaters, and should not be welcome. Taking an illegal list or whatever was still against the rules of the game they were playing, even if no formal punishment was stated at the time. So why should a TO trust a known cheater and invite the cheater to their event?

People's reputations are not always aligned with the facts of the situation. Take yourself for instance, there are a lot of people who see you as a troll and would love to see you banned. Banning you preemptively based on your reputation would be unfair.

 Crimson Devil wrote:
People's reputations are not always aligned with the facts of the situation. Take yourself for instance, there are a lot of people who see you as a troll and would love to see you banned. Banning you preemptively based on your reputation would be unfair.

Banning someone based on subjective personal opinions like "trolling" and banning based on documented acts of cheating, some of which the cheater (such as the team that started this thread) admit to doing, are two very different things. I'm not advocating bans based on vague and unproven things like "everyone knows they're TFG", I'm talking about cases where people were caught on camera or cheated with illegal lists or similar. Cases where the proof is clear and the only defense for allowing the cheater to continue playing is that their cheating happened under a different set of tournament rules.

 Crimson Devil wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:

 Chief Librarian Mephiston wrote:
Yeah, there's really no way to make it retroactive and punitively punish people under a system of rules that they didn't agree to beforehand.

Disagree. Known cheaters are still cheaters, and should not be welcome. Taking an illegal list or whatever was still against the rules of the game they were playing, even if no formal punishment was stated at the time. So why should a TO trust a known cheater and invite the cheater to their event?

People's reputations are not always aligned with the facts of the situation. Take yourself for instance, there are a lot of people who see you as a troll and would love to see you banned. Banning you preemptively based on your reputation would be unfair.

<REMOVED - RULE #1 PLEASE>

Except, it's not at all unfair to disinvite known cheaters. We saw that Team Happy cheats and are tools when they play, so why not pre-emptively ban them? What value do they bring to the event? If anything, they make the gameplay worse for the 4 or 5 other teams that have the misfortune of playing against them.

Nothing about a go-forward Tournament Code prevents the TOs from perma-banning Team Happy based on their track record to date, any more than placing on a "zero tolerance" standing in the last event. Why protect the bad 20% to hurt the good 80%? How is that fair?

Applying a clean slate when a new “code of conduct” drops is a five-year-old’s definition of fair, and equivalent to saying that if a new law came out regarding stealing everyone serving time or awaiting trial for stealing has their sentence commuted and charges dropped.
I won’t get too pedantic, but “Ethics” is a lot more complex than mere “fairness”.

All it really means is you lot will have to wait to enjoy your schadenfreude.

emperorprotectsall wrote:

HappyTony wrote:
Tony, captain of Team Happy, here to address the issues from this year’s ATC and formally suggest a competitive tournament code of conduct. First, I want to apologize for my team’s shortcomings. We did accidentally use a plasma pistol that was not included in the army list. We did have a heated conversation during a contentious game. We did have several converted models that had not been approved before the event.

Several other top teams also had similar issues at the ATC. As captain of Team Happy I am ultimately responsible for my team’s conduct and again admit that we were a part of this group. I did not protest our punishment, even as it changed in response to petitions and lobbying from other teams. Our only request to the T.O.s of ATC is that we be treated fairly and in line with the other teams and that they do not give in to the targeted efforts of this very small group of toxic individuals.

To show our commitment to moving the community in a positive direction, we are suggesting the following rules of conduct are put in place by T.O.s across the competitive landscape for all events. Most importantly, we urge that that they are applied evenly and consistently across all participants, and not used as a tool of intimidation by those who have a louder voice or a larger platform.

1. If a list is found to be over the allotted number of points, the participant receives an automatic disqualification.

2. If a participant is found to be using an unapproved conversion, the model is removed for the remainder of the event and the participant must play points down.

3. If a participant is found to be using a non WYSIWYG model, the model is removed for the remainder of the event and the participant must play points down.

These rules represent the start of a more comprehensive list. We also recommend that an affidavit of completion/validity is added to the score sheet and that both players are required to sign verifying that the game was played fairly and that the results are valid.

Team Happy feels that the tournament scene and the hobby are better off with a clearly and evenly applied set of rules. We are committed to the above rules moving forward and will do our best to bring the competitive scene out of the dark place that it has been dragged to.

We hope that T.O.s across the country incorporate these suggestions into their tournament packets so that all participants can have confidence that they will be treated fairly. I am committed to personally embodying these ideals moving forward.

Well said Tony, it takes a brave person to come forward and admit your flaws. I agree with your suggestions and hope that TO's adopt them. Don't let the toxic elements of this community hold you down.

Fresh Faced New User. While I applaud your third post and Tony's first (Welcome to dakka), the "toxic" environment doesn't seem to be as much here as surrounding the tournament tables of certain repeat offenders. So, introspection would be where I would start if in his shoes rather than suggesting rules that his team, clearly, did not already abide by. This is a game of toys to be played between gentlemen. He has little footing on which to suggest rules. Rule number one is "Don't be ungentlemanly." Number two "Don't Cheat."

 greyknight12 wrote:
Applying a clean slate when a new “code of conduct” drops is a five-year-old’s definition of fair, and equivalent to saying that if a new law came out regarding stealing everyone serving time or awaiting trial for stealing has their sentence commuted and charges dropped.
I won’t get too pedantic, but “Ethics” is a lot more complex than mere “fairness”.

Reecius said that a clean slate would be applied in response to a question about whether penalties would be applied for LVO / ATC. I'm not 100%, but that sounds to me more like "we won't retroactively apply rules to tournaments held before the rules were defined" rather than "existing penalties applied under the rules of prior tournaments will be ignored."

It is not reasonable to apply penalties retroactively for actions taken before the rules were defined. You can't set up a law saying that jeans are illegal then arrest people for wearing jeans before the law even came into force.

Aelyn wrote:
Reecius said that a clean slate would be applied in response to a question about whether penalties would be applied for LVO / ATC. I'm not 100%, but that sounds to me more like "we won't retroactively apply rules to tournaments held before the rules were defined" rather than "existing penalties applied under the rules of prior tournaments will be ignored."

I interpreted this:

Reecius wrote:Clean slate. That is the only ethical way to handle it.

Once we have some guidelines in place we all agree to, then we can enforce it fairly moving forward.

As "we are wiping the slate clean once this code of conduct is in place", which is supported by his exposition on it later.

Aelyn wrote:It is not reasonable to apply penalties retroactively for actions taken before the rules were defined. You can't set up a law saying that jeans are illegal then arrest people for wearing jeans before the law even came into force.

Your example is flawed; in 40K wearing jeans has ALWAYS been ilegal. The penalties may be changing somewhat, but cheating has always been against at least a "common law" understanding of 40K rules.

You can still apply sanctions given under previous rules, in fact you could argue that wiping away previously earned punishments is unfair to the TOs who administred them and the players who now have to play known cheaters. I simply want it to be something under consideration rather than immediately dissmissed with a hand wave. A few reasons why:
1. There are more tournaments than just ATC and LVO, and they range from local store games to mid-sized regionals. After LGT and ATC, TOs are probably going to be keeping a closer eye on cheating and if something happens they need to be empowered to take action if they feel the need and have it respected by the community at large. Now you can say "but it's their tournament, they can do what they want"...but that's what Reece is saying he cannot do for his tournaments in the interest of "fairness".
2. How is a game against someone who had their "slate" wiped going to go? If I know that I'm going against someone who was known to cheat, I'm going to ask for every rules reference and hawk their every move...probably call a judge over if I suspect anything at all. There will be a lot of undue drama at every game, and more cause the rest of their victories are now suspect even if it's just a local player that's known to cheat. I'm not nationally ranked or known at all, but I've played Alex Fennel and Tony Kopach at NOVA and Justin Curtis this last LVO...what happens if someone like Peregrine gets paired first round with Tony?
3. Players have been calling on TOs to do something about cheating, be it illegal lists or misused rules for quite some time now. Using the rules implementation to potentially give certain players a free pass reeks of protection regardless of intent. Perception is reality.

Another reason why all this matters, beyond having a sense of "fairness" at tournaments is that in 40K there is no upward mobility. Yesterday the winner of the women's 50M backstroke at the US Swimming Championships said "you could be here someday", in basketball we talk about if Lebron James is the next Michael Jordan and in football we analyze the potential of each draft pick. But in competitive 40K, we're told that the current "top players" are the best and we can't possibly hope to compete at their level or understand their awesome play skills. But just like Lance Armstrong finally getting caught (after a lot of people saying how great a guy he was), the integrity of some of their skill is thrown into question. And if cheating is allowed to pervade 40K, and it's not a fair matchup, then the entire premise of competitive 40K ceases to exist.

If one player cheats at a game both wasted their time by playing.

 JohnnyHell wrote:
If one player cheats at a game both wasted their time by playing.

Agreed.

I'm stunned it has been admitted that rules need to be put in place to cover cheating, rules of engagement and rules violations.

We'll see.

The shocking thing is how hard guys like Reece are bending over to support cheaters. I thought he was better than that.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
The shocking thing is how hard guys like Reece are bending over to support cheaters. I thought he was better than that.

I got the impression he was just playing devils advocate ?

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
Except, it's not at all unfair to disinvite known cheaters. We saw that Team Happy cheats and are tools when they play, so why not pre-emptively ban them? What value do they bring to the event? If anything, they make the gameplay worse for the 4 or 5 other teams that have the misfortune of playing against them.

Nothing about a go-forward Tournament Code prevents the TOs from perma-banning Team Happy based on their track record to date, any more than placing on a "zero tolerance" standing in the last event. Why protect the bad 20% to hurt the good 80%? How is that fair?

The plasma pistol thing seems pretty egregious to me. Nobody gives their commanders a plasma pistol. Long-time tournament players, and serious players at that, certainly aren't going to. A modeled plasma pistol who doesn't pay for it and tries to sneak it by is just blatant, they know what they are doing 100%.

NOBODY writes "Company commander, Kurov's Aquila, laspistol" and then conveniently forgets and thinks that he took an expensive pistol that nobody would ever use. If I am expecting any random opponent I face to have 3 colors minimum and everything modeled, I don't get how a Veteran can mess such a thing up.

 ph34r wrote:
The plasma pistol thing seems pretty egregious to me. Nobody gives their commanders a plasma pistol. Long-time tournament players, and serious players at that, certainly aren't going to. A modeled plasma pistol who doesn't pay for it and tries to sneak it by is just blatant, they know what they are doing 100%.

To be fair, now that plasma pistols have a much more reasonable cost in 8th edition there's an argument for taking them. What happened in the specific incident was still obviously cheating, but it doesn't mean that the presence of a plasma pistol is automatically suspicious.

 Peregrine wrote:

 ph34r wrote:
The plasma pistol thing seems pretty egregious to me. Nobody gives their commanders a plasma pistol. Long-time tournament players, and serious players at that, certainly aren't going to. A modeled plasma pistol who doesn't pay for it and tries to sneak it by is just blatant, they know what they are doing 100%.

To be fair, now that plasma pistols have a much more reasonable cost in 8th edition there's an argument for taking them. What happened in the specific incident was still obviously cheating, but it doesn't mean that the presence of a plasma pistol is automatically suspicious.

I run a Plaspistol on my jump Chappy and 4 in a LT lead assault squad (Lt, Sgt, 2 marines). All paid for and modelled.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
The shocking thing is how hard guys like Reece are bending over to support cheaters. I thought he was better than that.

Wow.

*sigh*

JHDD, have you even *met* the guy, let alone attended an event he runs? Or are you just going off what you read on the forums?

I have met the guy. Have had drinks with him. Talked. Only a twice or thrice a year, for 6 years. We aren't friends, but we're friendly. May I humbly suggest you get to know someone before making a statement like that?

 Brothererekose wrote:

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
The shocking thing is how hard guys like Reece are bending over to support cheaters. I thought he was better than that.

Wow.

*sigh*

JHDD, have you even *met* the guy, let alone attended an event he runs? Or are you just going off what you read on the forums?

I have met the guy. Have had drinks with him. Talked. Only a twice or thrice a year, for 6 years. We aren't friends, but we're friendly. May I humbly suggest you get to know someone before making a statement like that?

I have interacted with Reece many times over many years, and my impression of him has been very favorable. Until his most recent post in this thread, where he suggested that Team Happy (to Cheat!) gets to start over with a clean slate, suffering zero consequences from their recent ejection from the most recent tournament. To allow them to continue from zero, is unfair to everyone who would have expected more serious consequences based on their most recent behavior. That's fethed up, and I would be happy to buy Reece a beer and tell that to his face, straight up. That's why I said I thought he was better than that.

Let's be clear that the lack of a any current set of guidelines means that they can do whatever the feth they want to punish Team Happy. They aren't beholden to follow any process whatsoever. And they're a private entity, so there is no need to even provide the illusion of due process. That's why I noted that persons like Peregrine (or myself) can be outright banned for trivial things that have nothing to do with any of their events.

Hopefully, Reece will clarify things and do right by everyone who didn't deliberately cheat their opponents.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

 Brothererekose wrote:

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
The shocking thing is how hard guys like Reece are bending over to support cheaters. I thought he was better than that.

Wow.

*sigh*

JHDD, have you even *met* the guy, let alone attended an event he runs? Or are you just going off what you read on the forums?

I have met the guy. Have had drinks with him. Talked. Only a twice or thrice a year, for 6 years. We aren't friends, but we're friendly. May I humbly suggest you get to know someone before making a statement like that?

I have interacted with Reece many times over many years, and my impression of him has been very favorable. Until his most recent post in this thread, where he suggested that Team Happy (to Cheat!) gets to start over with a clean slate, suffering zero consequences from their recent ejection from the most recent tournament. To allow them to continue from zero, is unfair to everyone who would have expected more serious consequences based on their most recent behavior. That's fethed up, and I would be happy to buy Reece a beer and tell that to his face, straight up. That's why I said I thought he was better than that.

Let's be clear that the lack of a any current set of guidelines means that they can do whatever the feth they want to punish Team Happy. They aren't beholden to follow any process whatsoever. And they're a private entity, so there is no need to even provide the illusion of due process. That's why I noted that persons like Peregrine (or myself) can be outright banned for trivial things that have nothing to do with any of their events.

Hopefully, Reece will clarify things and do right by everyone who didn't deliberately cheat their opponents.

Instead of beating up Reece on the subject...how about this. Let the ATC come forward and let everyone know how they are going to deal with Team Happy for next year.

Lets hold the guys who run LVO,BAO, Adepticon and NOVA responsible for an event they dont have anything to do with.... i mean really ?!

If you want answers on how Teams are going to be delt with at Team events...ask ATC because as far as i know...its the only big Team event in the states worth talking about.

 zedsdead wrote:

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

 Brothererekose wrote:

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
The shocking thing is how hard guys like Reece are bending over to support cheaters. I thought he was better than that.

Wow.

*sigh*

JHDD, have you even *met* the guy, let alone attended an event he runs? Or are you just going off what you read on the forums?

I have met the guy. Have had drinks with him. Talked. Only a twice or thrice a year, for 6 years. We aren't friends, but we're friendly. May I humbly suggest you get to know someone before making a statement like that?

I have interacted with Reece many times over many years, and my impression of him has been very favorable. Until his most recent post in this thread, where he suggested that Team Happy (to Cheat!) gets to start over with a clean slate, suffering zero consequences from their recent ejection from the most recent tournament. To allow them to continue from zero, is unfair to everyone who would have expected more serious consequences based on their most recent behavior. That's fethed up, and I would be happy to buy Reece a beer and tell that to his face, straight up. That's why I said I thought he was better than that.

Let's be clear that the lack of a any current set of guidelines means that they can do whatever the feth they want to punish Team Happy. They aren't beholden to follow any process whatsoever. And they're a private entity, so there is no need to even provide the illusion of due process. That's why I noted that persons like Peregrine (or myself) can be outright banned for trivial things that have nothing to do with any of their events.

Hopefully, Reece will clarify things and do right by everyone who didn't deliberately cheat their opponents.

Instead of beating up Reece on the subject...how about this. Let the ATC come forward and let everyone know how they are going to deal with Team Happy for next year.

Lets hold the guys who run LVO,BAO, Adepticon and NOVA responsible for an event they dont have anything to do with.... i mean really ?!

If you want answers on how Teams are going to be delt with at Team events...ask ATC because as far as i know...its the only big Team event in the states worth talking about.

Nobody forced Reece to post in this thread, but he did it anyways. It's not unreasonable to react to what he posted. Favorably, or not.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

 zedsdead wrote:

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

 Brothererekose wrote:

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
The shocking thing is how hard guys like Reece are bending over to support cheaters. I thought he was better than that.

Wow.

*sigh*

JHDD, have you even *met* the guy, let alone attended an event he runs? Or are you just going off what you read on the forums?

I have met the guy. Have had drinks with him. Talked. Only a twice or thrice a year, for 6 years. We aren't friends, but we're friendly. May I humbly suggest you get to know someone before making a statement like that?

I have interacted with Reece many times over many years, and my impression of him has been very favorable. Until his most recent post in this thread, where he suggested that Team Happy (to Cheat!) gets to start over with a clean slate, suffering zero consequences from their recent ejection from the most recent tournament. To allow them to continue from zero, is unfair to everyone who would have expected more serious consequences based on their most recent behavior. That's fethed up, and I would be happy to buy Reece a beer and tell that to his face, straight up. That's why I said I thought he was better than that.

Let's be clear that the lack of a any current set of guidelines means that they can do whatever the feth they want to punish Team Happy. They aren't beholden to follow any process whatsoever. And they're a private entity, so there is no need to even provide the illusion of due process. That's why I noted that persons like Peregrine (or myself) can be outright banned for trivial things that have nothing to do with any of their events.

Hopefully, Reece will clarify things and do right by everyone who didn't deliberately cheat their opponents.

Instead of beating up Reece on the subject...how about this. Let the ATC come forward and let everyone know how they are going to deal with Team Happy for next year.

Lets hold the guys who run LVO,BAO, Adepticon and NOVA responsible for an event they dont have anything to do with.... i mean really ?!

If you want answers on how Teams are going to be delt with at Team events...ask ATC because as far as i know...its the only big Team event in the states worth talking about.

Nobody forced Reece to post in this thread, but he did it anyways. It's not unreasonable to react to what he posted. Favorably, or not.

Reacting to a guys post is one thing but....

"The shocking thing is how hard guys like Reece are bending over to support cheaters. I thought he was better than that."

....thats attacking the guys character and pretty much undeserved.

 zedsdead wrote:

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

 zedsdead wrote:

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

 Brothererekose wrote:

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
The shocking thing is how hard guys like Reece are bending over to support cheaters. I thought he was better than that.

Wow.

*sigh*

JHDD, have you even *met* the guy, let alone attended an event he runs? Or are you just going off what you read on the forums?

I have met the guy. Have had drinks with him. Talked. Only a twice or thrice a year, for 6 years. We aren't friends, but we're friendly. May I humbly suggest you get to know someone before making a statement like that?

I have interacted with Reece many times over many years, and my impression of him has been very favorable. Until his most recent post in this thread, where he suggested that Team Happy (to Cheat!) gets to start over with a clean slate, suffering zero consequences from their recent ejection from the most recent tournament. To allow them to continue from zero, is unfair to everyone who would have expected more serious consequences based on their most recent behavior. That's fethed up, and I would be happy to buy Reece a beer and tell that to his face, straight up. That's why I said I thought he was better than that.

Let's be clear that the lack of a any current set of guidelines means that they can do whatever the feth they want to punish Team Happy. They aren't beholden to follow any process whatsoever. And they're a private entity, so there is no need to even provide the illusion of due process. That's why I noted that persons like Peregrine (or myself) can be outright banned for trivial things that have nothing to do with any of their events.

Hopefully, Reece will clarify things and do right by everyone who didn't deliberately cheat their opponents.

Instead of beating up Reece on the subject...how about this. Let the ATC come forward and let everyone know how they are going to deal with Team Happy for next year.

Lets hold the guys who run LVO,BAO, Adepticon and NOVA responsible for an event they dont have anything to do with.... i mean really ?!

If you want answers on how Teams are going to be delt with at Team events...ask ATC because as far as i know...its the only big Team event in the states worth talking about.

Nobody forced Reece to post in this thread, but he did it anyways. It's not unreasonable to react to what he posted. Favorably, or not.

Reacting to a guys post is one thing but....

"The shocking thing is how hard guys like Reece are bending over to support cheaters. I thought he was better than that."

....thats attacking the guys character and pretty much undeserved.

Reece said they would be rolling back to zero, rather than holding the zero tolerance that they were already at, with zero consequences going forward. Team Happy appears to be getting a pass for blatant cheating, with their past history getting wiped clean. How else do you interpret that as anything other than supporting known cheaters?

They were DQ's from a major event, name dragged through the mud, and facing a near total loss of face in the entire community. They aren't exactly getting a pass.

 djones520 wrote:
They were DQ's from a major event, name dragged through the mud, and facing a near total loss of face in the entire community. They aren't exactly getting a pass.

Except that it appears they'll be free to do it again next time. Zero go-forward consequences. Not even double-secret probation.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

 djones520 wrote:
They were DQ's from a major event, name dragged through the mud, and facing a near total loss of face in the entire community. They aren't exactly getting a pass.

Except that it appears they'll be free to do it again next time. Zero go-forward consequences. Not even double-secret probation.

And ATC still hasn't made an announcement if they'll be banned or not. It was an ATC infraction, so it's their call. Reece's only roll for that event is as a participant player.

Reece gave a clear and reasonable explanation why no one would be subject to sactions for past behavior under a new system that hasn’t even been completed or implemented.

Is it reasonable to punish people under rules that did not exist when the infraction occurred? Most people would say no.

It's reasonable to punish people for bad behavior. If there's a new framework, and they haven't yet been punished, then apply that new framework. Or simply drop the hammer. That works, too.

 alextroy wrote:
Reece gave a clear and reasonable explanation why no one would be subject to sactions for past behavior under a new system that hasn’t even been completed or implemented.

Is it reasonable to punish people under rules that did not exist when the infraction occurred? Most people would say no.

What people have you been hanging with?

So your telling me the worlds first murderer should have walked free on the technicality that laws weren't in existence, and your justification would be ethics? Which ethics? Is it more ethical to allow certain people extra chances despite new rules being required because of their behavior? Extra chances after they have already negatively impacted other innocent gamers?

I guess it was unethical to lock up the worlds first murderer because there was no rule about not doing that. I mean, we want to protect folks, but we also don't want to be unfair and catch him off guard with some new rule right? Or how about the worlds first bank robber? Wasn't he just gaming the system so it worked for him until some spoil sport had to create a new rule about that? Some people in here have a really crappy sense of ethics lol. What sick sense of justice concerns itself with the guilty over the protection of the innocent?

Lets be clear here, we aren't talking about new rules added to a games mechanics. We are talking about those pesky golden rules grandma always hounded you over. You know the unwritten social fabric, respect and common decency. How the feth is it moving the post to expect basic manners from guests at an event? So we are rules lawyering etiquette now? Willfully misleading an opponent to take advantage of them, to lie, break trust. This is what occurred, and while I appreciate there not being one governing arm that has the authority to ban certain bad apples, there is a massive little thing known as leading be example. "Hey guys, we can't tell you how to run your events, but these guys are not going to be allowed at any event we run because they demonstrated they cannot be trusted, balls in your court." Not we think everyone should get a clean slate going forward as it's somehow ethical.

I guess whats done is done though, I'd suggest anyone at an event that recognizes said actors should warn any and all their opponents and make sure a judge is handy because they certainly wouldn't have my trust, and frankly I'd be more then a bit pissed off after paying thousands to attend an event only to draw a known cheater.






Automatically Appended Next Post:

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
It's reasonable to punish people for bad behavior. If there's a new framework, and they haven't yet been punished, then apply that new framework. Or simply drop the hammer. That works, too.

Said far more concisely then myself,