Tournament Discussion - More Stringent Policy

[SuicidalSnowman]

Even PaulusH ...

Am I special
Did I do anything wrong
Is that the reason why you didn't join
Why do you comment my tournaments, while you never have been part of it

As far as I know it is allowed to join your own tournament
The first time I joined one of my own tournaments was because there was one special place to fill, which was clearly worse compared to all other places
Now I do it also when I use clear simple setups with specific games-settings of which it otherwise is difficult to find good games. In fact I hardly join tournaments or games for winning them, but more for the fun. My fun is getting to understand how the people would react in the games and tournaments and based on my predictions of that make my next turn; so yes in the end I have more fun when I win, but that is not the starting point

In the example you mentioned it is simply a 3x3-bracket of a 3x3 windmill, hardly to make more simple tournaments

No, no, no, and no! I was trying to COMMEND you for having the sense to step back a bit from your own tournament. You make sure to play the role of player and the role of organizer separately. And when you join a tournament, it is not a simple win 5 games for a medal, it is a long, detailed tournament. I was comparing the way you conduct yourself as the example of, in my opinion, the right way to run tournaments.

And I play your tournaments when I can! viewtopic.php?f=91&t=97496#p2225806 which was an awesome tournament, by the way.


And I wish people could read Barterer's posts, I swear I can but then three posts later everyone is back arguing about medals again.

[72o]

I think that organizers who abandon a tournament should have their organizing privileges revoked for a set amount of time. As long as they can keep up with them, and the tournaments are not generating complaints from their participants because they are poorly run, they should be able to make as many as they want with whatever format they want. I would rather see 100 tournaments of the same format, all well run, than 10 distinctly different format tournaments run by a bunch of idiots and deadbeats.

I guess I should clarify that I am operating under the assumption that tournaments are required to have an objective method for determining winners and losers. I think that should go without saying, but, nothing ever does.

[Lindax]

I think that organizers who abandon a tournament should have their organizing privileges revoked for a set amount of time. As long as they can keep up with them, and the tournaments are not generating complaints from their participants because they are poorly run, they should be able to make as many as they want with whatever format they want. I would rather see 100 tournaments of the same format, all well run, than 10 distinctly different format tournaments run by a bunch of idiots and deadbeats.

I guess I should clarify that I am operating under the assumption that tournaments are required to have an objective method for determining winners and losers. I think that should go without saying, but, nothing ever does.

There is a system in place with sanctions for those who abandon tournaments.

See Abandoned Tournament Policies in the Tournament Handbook.

Lx

[barterer2002]

Part of the problem though Lindax, is that the current system is set up so that when Organizer X abandons a tournament it gets posted in the TO forum for rescue. There are many Organizers there who care about making sure tournaments are fun for all players and not abandoned. However, when one of us rescues a tournament that means that the original organizer has nothing happen to them. Its not considered abandoned even though it was because a second organizer was kind enough to come in and finish off the tourament for the players involved. I contend that this part of the policy needs to be changed.

[jpcloet]

Incorrect?

If a tournament that is rescued did not have permission from the original organizer, the original organizer will be recorded for an abandoned tournament per the Abandoned Tournament Policy.

My understanding is that the TD's decide to move to TO group and thus the original TO does have a mark on their record.

[Night Strike]

Incorrect?

If a tournament that is rescued did not have permission from the original organizer, the original organizer will be recorded for an abandoned tournament per the Abandoned Tournament Policy.

My understanding is that the TD's decide to move to TO group and thus the original TO does have a mark on their record.

I think the organizer gives Lindax permission to post it in the TO forum.

[Lindax]

Incorrect?

If a tournament that is rescued did not have permission from the original organizer, the original organizer will be recorded for an abandoned tournament per the Abandoned Tournament Policy.

My understanding is that the TD's decide to move to TO group and thus the original TO does have a mark on their record.

barterer: Not every tournament that is or seems abandoned is automatically up for rescue. Generally I post the tournaments that the original TO would like to be rescued or tournaments that are almost finished.

jp: IF a tournament gets rescued without permission by the original TO (basically when the original TO has not logged onto CC for an X amount of time), he/she will receive a "mark", i.e., it counts as an abandoned tournament.

Lx

[Lindax]

Incorrect?

If a tournament that is rescued did not have permission from the original organizer, the original organizer will be recorded for an abandoned tournament per the Abandoned Tournament Policy.

My understanding is that the TD's decide to move to TO group and thus the original TO does have a mark on their record.

I think the organizer gives Lindax permission to post it in the TO forum.

Generally that's correct NS. There are exceptions though.

Lx

[Bones2484]

Why should they not get a "mark" for abandoning a tournament, even if it is rescued by someone else? Sorry, I don't understand the logic here.

[PaulusH]

Sorry

I misinterpret you

Even PaulusH ...

Am I special
Did I do anything wrong
Is that the reason why you didn't join
Why do you comment my tournaments, while you never have been part of it

As far as I know it is allowed to join your own tournament
The first time I joined one of my own tournaments was because there was one special place to fill, which was clearly worse compared to all other places
Now I do it also when I use clear simple setups with specific games-settings of which it otherwise is difficult to find good games. In fact I hardly join tournaments or games for winning them, but more for the fun. My fun is getting to understand how the people would react in the games and tournaments and based on my predictions of that make my next turn; so yes in the end I have more fun when I win, but that is not the starting point

In the example you mentioned it is simply a 3x3-bracket of a 3x3 windmill, hardly to make more simple tournaments

No, no, no, and no! I was trying to COMMEND you for having the sense to step back a bit from your own tournament. You make sure to play the role of player and the role of organizer separately. And when you join a tournament, it is not a simple win 5 games for a medal, it is a long, detailed tournament. I was comparing the way you conduct yourself as the example of, in my opinion, the right way to run tournaments.

And I play your tournaments when I can! viewtopic.php?f=91&t=97496#p2225806 which was an awesome tournament, by the way.


And I wish people could read Barterer's posts, I swear I can but then three posts later everyone is back arguing about medals again.

[jpcloet]

Why should they not get a "mark" for abandoning a tournament, even if it is rescued by someone else? Sorry, I don't understand the logic here.

There was an original "out" clause if the TO (on their own) could find someone to take it over. Having the TO group was meant as a last resort and I thought all tournaments that were put there were a mark, but it may not be the case by the above posts. I would say a high % (not all) have been rescued.

[Bones2484]

Why should they not get a "mark" for abandoning a tournament, even if it is rescued by someone else? Sorry, I don't understand the logic here.

There was an original "out" clause if the TO (on their own) could find someone to take it over. Having the TO group was meant as a last resort and I thought all tournaments that were put there were a mark, but it may not be the case by the above posts. I would say a high % (not all) have been rescued.

Oh, that makes sense. Thanks for the explanation.

I guess there's a difference if a TO can't handle it and actively pursues a replacement than if they simply stop updating and someone takes over (even if the TO then gives permission). I assume a "mark" would not be given in either situation, then? Personally, I think the second scenario deserves a "mark" while the first wouldn't.

[jpcloet]

After much debate, this was added under the rescue portion of the Handbook....

If the original organizer has not logged on for more than one week or has been busted/banned (1 month or longer), the new organizer does not need permission to rescue the tournament.

There was an argument that the original TO owned the right to the tournament. However, a number of us felt that by failing to meet the requirements of running one, they forfeited that right.


In this situation, I'd like to see B and HA become TO coaches so that all tournaments can run as well as theirs. Personally, I still agree there is a lack of innovation in tournaments, but that is something we have to do ourselves in creating our own tournaments.

[Night Strike]

After much debate, this was added under the rescue portion of the Handbook....

If the original organizer has not logged on for more than one week or has been busted/banned (1 month or longer), the new organizer does not need permission to rescue the tournament.

There was an argument that the original TO owned the right to the tournament. However, a number of us felt that by failing to meet the requirements of running one, they forfeited that right.

The original paradigm in the tournament forums (that OP started and later trained me on) is that once a tournament was created, that organizer had the "copyrights" on that tournament until it was finished. And no one could take over that tournament without express permission by the organizer. The Rescued Tournaments Policy was created, in part, to handle those tournaments where the organizer had just up and disappeared. The wording of the new policy represents a compromise in the original paradigm of how tournaments are viewed.

[barterer2002]

Over the past year I've rescued around 7 tournaments give or take a couple. Every time I needed to have the original organizer PM a TD to allow it so none of them got marks to my knowledge.