DHK v Gaz
#54
Posted 17 November 2011 - 07:46 AM
Emerald, on 16 November 2011 - 08:40 PM, said:
He ruled against the rules, logic and the evidence while also bringing up things which were not even relevant and disregarded opinions of people who are relevant.
My ruling was based on the ruleset that would've been written had it not been overlooked. Maybe nothing unexpected ever happens to you. Well done. But I appreciate that unforseen circumstances are a legitimate possibility - I would've written the rules to reflect this and treated everyone similarly, within the bounds of sound reasoning of course.
You gave us the false impression that I had any say in this so that it doesn't come across as "The Dan Show?" That's funny, I was working under the false impression that you had any decision-making authority in this competition whatsoever...
Seriously though, if the decision was already made, in your mind, from the start, then what was there to discuss in the first place? What an absolute joke. Hey, The Dan Show must go on...
My position is now totally untenable, considering that you have just publicly undermined my "authority." Therefore I am withdrawing my input altogether. Furthermore, my head is in a place where I no longer feel comfortable participating in this competition.
Thank you everyone. Farewell
#55
Posted 17 November 2011 - 08:00 AM
I wanted to see both sides of the discussion. My mind was not fully made up. If everyone or a majority had voted against my view I would have gone with the majority in this case and allowed the reschedule but it would NOT have been the default ruleset for next season. everyone would have been made aware of this at the start and the compromise of wildcard would most likely be in place. even you yourself said default loss would be the standard response to this situation if the wildcard had already been used!
I see Kapoks as sponsoring the tournament, while the spa grand prix might have "shell" in its name it isn't shell who started it or who set the rules. This league was originally started by me and you offered to incorporate it into Kapoks provided forums to help out.
In hindsight choosing someone who is barely interested in this and has no time (hence lack of match previews in time) was a mistake. I should have throught it through better but I just wanted to avoid another DHK complaint over me misinterpreting the way challonge works.
The ruleset would never have been "missing matches has no consequences", i stated before that I never would have allowed it.
I don't know why you would assume that you have direct control over the situation either way without talking to me about it anyway
while I would have normally apologised for using you in this way your blatant lack of respect for me has made me think better of it.
I see Kapoks as sponsoring the tournament, while the spa grand prix might have "shell" in its name it isn't shell who started it or who set the rules. This league was originally started by me and you offered to incorporate it into Kapoks provided forums to help out.
In hindsight choosing someone who is barely interested in this and has no time (hence lack of match previews in time) was a mistake. I should have throught it through better but I just wanted to avoid another DHK complaint over me misinterpreting the way challonge works.
The ruleset would never have been "missing matches has no consequences", i stated before that I never would have allowed it.
I don't know why you would assume that you have direct control over the situation either way without talking to me about it anyway
This post has been edited by Emerald: 17 November 2011 - 08:04 AM

#56
Posted 17 November 2011 - 08:24 AM
Emerald, on 17 November 2011 - 08:00 AM, said:
In hindsight choosing someone who is barely interested in this and has no time (hence lack of match previews in time) was a mistake.
I was interested but didn't expect to have so little free time. Otherwise, at least this is something we can agree on.
Emerald, on 17 November 2011 - 08:00 AM, said:
I don't know why you would assume that you have direct control over the situation either way without talking to me about it anyway
while I would have normally apologised for using you in this way your blatant lack of respect for me has made me think better of it.
Well, you did a very good job of making it sound like you would trust my judgement even if you didn't necessarily agree with it. It's not like you were very forthcoming with any conversation either. In truth, I was waiting, hoping, for you to bring it up with me directly. Alas, we haven't really spoken for weeks...
And I am incensed that you used me like you did. I thought you had more respect for me than that (as per the "trusting my judgement" line above) so I'm hardly going to congratulate you for treating me like a mug infront of everyone. Don't know if you can tell, but I've taken it rather personally.
#57
Posted 17 November 2011 - 08:30 AM
I'm not going to drag personal issues into this further. We have both been in a position to speak to each other since this occurred. We are both at fault and both have cause to be unhappy about this. I honestly think that if I had spoken out earlier, or to you in private before your judgement (after it I should have tried to speak to you about it, yes), the entire discussion would have fallen flat and no matter how people perceive this I have taken everything on board here.


Help





MultiQuote












