chemefreak wrote:The bottom line is that the current CD Team will never punish a clan who comes to us or an event TO and receives permission to do what they have requested to do.
Empire, Agents of Chaos, and TOFU all went through the proper procedure and were given guidance on what they could or could not do. If TOFU had come to us in the middle of the Premier League our response would have been different. Empire and Agents of Chaos came to us in the middle of a "qualifying" round. So their withdraw did not harm anyone.
This thread is just another place for complaining. If we had punished one of these clans you would be complaining too, of this I have no doubt.
I already explained how Empire and AOC withdrawing was harmful. If they would have been punished I wouldn't have complained. I advocated for them to not be allowed in CC4.
Doc_Brown wrote:Chap,
I think comic's point is that there have been plenty of other arguments in this thread outlining why a punishment would be ineffective. I gave a long string of arguments whey they would impact the wrong people and would, in the long run, result in unintended consequences that would ultimately produce the opposite of the desired effect (the desired effect being stronger clans and better attendance in clan tournaments). I think Foxy's suggestion is the best I've seen for something that would be a clan-wide policy: That if a clan is forced to drop an event because of player absences, they should be required to offer evidence to the CDs that they've recruited more people to ensure they won't drop out of a future event. An alternative might be to complete a clan war prior to joining another major clan event.
You did bring up the way you handle people dropping out of tournaments. You restrict them from entering your future tournaments for some period. However, my understanding is there is no site-wide rule banning people that drop out of tournaments from immediately joining another one or even joining the next tournament offered by the same director of the one they just left. But site rules allow tournament directors to make such restrictions. I think that's a great model for clan events. In some future chapcrap cup, you could require full attendance throughout the event, and in the event a clan drops out, they will be restricted from joining chapcrap cup 2. Perhaps other events would follow that model. The josko cup could even require clans be eligible for the next chapcrap cup to be allowed entry to ensure troublemaker clans don't cause problems in that event. Yes, I'm being a bit facetious here, but the point is that there are good reasons why blanket punishments won't work as desired, but clan tournament directors should have every right to bar clans that they believe will be unable to fulfill their commitments.
Doc, you talk sensible and I like it.
If you don't agree with a punishment that I have suggested, that's fine. But I think you are interpreting comic's post differently than I am. It seems to me he is for no punishment at all. I'm saying there needs to be some kind of system. If it's recruiting more players, fine. If it's event sanctions in some other way, fine. If it's point drop in F400, fine. All I'm saying is that dropping out adversely effects more clans than the one that might benefit from dropping and I don't think it's fair to keep going that way.
As for what you say about no site wide system for punishing people who drop tournaments, you're right, but that's just because it's too large to manage. I've discussed it, but right now there are nearly 500 active tournaments and that alone would be a bear to police, but that's actually a low number of tournaments. Normally there are more. The one thing we have done is the creation of a thread in the TO forum that reports tournament deadbeats, that way you know who they are and when one of your tournaments might be in trouble. The number of individuals on the site far out numbers the number of clans, so the implementation of some kind of retribution system is a little different.