SWMGAMERS.com Forums :: View topic - Regional and Gencon Process and Procedure

Echo wrote:

TimmerB123 wrote:

If it is left up to the final 4 and judge/TO, and it has to be a consensus to bump someone up, then that is their decision. Nobody else should have a say in it.

I'm curious: If the top 4 and the TO agree and have consensus that the entire playoff should be skipped because one person has to leave, and the final standings are just the Swiss standings, would that be cool?

I'm still genuinely curious about this.

Look, I understand your point in all this. I also totally agree that playoffs should happen at regionals, especially if they were planned for. I just don't understand your position on how one thing (a player asking another player to not play) is so unfair, but also seemingly holding the view that if everybody involved ("involved" being the TO/judge and the top 4) agrees on a course of action that that's what should be done. I mean, you're being incredibly indignant about what happened, but it seems that a lot of other unfair situations you're fine with.

I actually think that what went down in MI was unfair. I think David put it best when he said that what happened was "theoretical minis"; going through the steps of saying "Well I'm likely to win this match, and he's likely to win that match, and then that's likely to happen, so this is probably how everything will end up, so lets say that's the final standings" is pretty crappy. It just really seems to me that you aren't necessarily fighting for whats fair, but you're fighting for what would make you (and your friends) happiest, which aren't always the same thing.

I take issue with the point of view of "The top 4 and TO/judge should decide what to do in rare, unusual circumstances, but if they make this specific decision than they are WRONG!". Why is that decision the exception? Add that to the fact that I have no sympathy whatsoever for someone being pressured into doing something that they don't want to do, and the fact that a huge amount of complaining seems to be happening well after the event, and this whole discussion just rubs me the wrong way.

If I were in Jake's shoes, I would have said "Sorry Gerry, but I want to play, and I don't think it's fair for us not to. If you feel that you are being forced to play, that's on you, not me. You are free to forfeit your match and leave for the sake of safety.". I like Gerry a lot, he's a cool guy and I always enjoy hanging out with him, and I would hate for something to happen to him because he stayed to play. Gerry's best decision absolutely 100% was to leave. But Gerry has to make that decision for himself.

Author:	TimmerB123 [ Sat Apr 20, 2013 4:30 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Regional and Gencon Process and Procedure
Echo wrote: Echo wrote: TimmerB123 wrote: If it is left up to the final 4 and judge/TO, and it has to be a consensus to bump someone up, then that is their decision. Nobody else should have a say in it. I'm curious: If the top 4 and the TO agree and have consensus that the entire playoff should be skipped because one person has to leave, and the final standings are just the Swiss standings, would that be cool? I'm still genuinely curious about this. Look, I understand your point in all this. I also totally agree that playoffs should happen at regionals, especially if they were planned for. I just don't understand your position on how one thing (a player asking another player to not play) is so unfair, but also seemingly holding the view that if everybody involved ("involved" being the TO/judge and the top 4) agrees on a course of action that that's what should be done. I mean, you're being incredibly indignant about what happened, but it seems that a lot of other unfair situations you're fine with. I actually think that what went down in MI was unfair. I think David put it best when he said that what happened was "theoretical minis"; going through the steps of saying "Well I'm likely to win this match, and he's likely to win that match, and then that's likely to happen, so this is probably how everything will end up, so lets say that's the final standings" is pretty crappy. It just really seems to me that you aren't necessarily fighting for whats fair, but you're fighting for what would make you (and your friends) happiest, which aren't always the same thing. I take issue with the point of view of "The top 4 and TO/judge should decide what to do in rare, unusual circumstances, but if they make this specific decision than they are WRONG!". Why is that decision the exception? Add that to the fact that I have no sympathy whatsoever for someone being pressured into doing something that they don't want to do, and the fact that a huge amount of complaining seems to be happening well after the event, and this whole discussion just rubs me the wrong way. If I were in Jake's shoes, I would have said "Sorry Gerry, but I want to play, and I don't think it's fair for us not to. If you feel that you are being forced to play, that's on you, not me. You are free to forfeit your match and leave for the sake of safety.". I like Gerry a lot, he's a cool guy and I always enjoy hanging out with him, and I would hate for something to happen to him because he stayed to play. Gerry's best decision absolutely 100% was to leave. But Gerry has to make that decision for himself. As for your first question, Jason answered that the same way I would. For the rest you do have some good points, that I agree with. Yes, it should have happened differently. I think we all agree there. Now people have thought about it, so if it happens again - I really think this conversation will help people to speak up in such situations. As you and most others know, I am not shy to voice my opinions. Loudly. What I am indignant about, in any situation, is having gaming stopped (outside of conditions out of everyone's control). I like gaming. Passionately. So when anyone gets a game taken away from them, it sucks. What I proposed is playing the predermined amount of games, with a caveat to avoid unfairness. Perhaps it does look better on paper than in practice. but don't confuse my passion against the finals not being played with my passion for bumping someone up. I feel very strongly against the finals being skipped. I lean toward the #4 method, but it's not something I lose sleep over. Totally agree with Weeks sentiment about "theoretical minis". Anyway - it really does look like most of us agree on the main point of this. I really think the #2,3,4 methods were a tangent. I'm as guilty of anyone about running with that tangent. I'll be happy with the #2 method as long as we never see #1 again.

Author:	Engineer [ Sat Apr 27, 2013 10:30 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Regional and Gencon Process and Procedure
So to sum it all up, speak up for yourself at the time. That seems easy.

Author:	TimmerB123 [ Sun Apr 28, 2013 8:39 am ]
Post subject:	Re: Regional and Gencon Process and Procedure
Engineer wrote: So to sum it all up, speak up for yourself at the time. That seems easy. I think the bigger deal is that TO's need to actually HAVE the finals played, instead of just ending early.

Author:	Lou [ Sun Apr 28, 2013 12:46 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Regional and Gencon Process and Procedure
What should the TO do if everybody packs up their stuff

Author:	TimmerB123 [ Mon Apr 29, 2013 7:47 am ]
Post subject:	Re: Regional and Gencon Process and Procedure
Lou wrote: What should the TO do if everybody packs up their stuff Confirm that each player is forfeiting.

SWMGAMERS.com Forums https://www.swmgamers.com/forums/

Regional and Gencon Process and Procedure https://www.swmgamers.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=106&t=16167	Page 3 of 3

Page 3 of 3	All times are UTC - 6 hours
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/