The Championships - 1v1 - [t4mcr53s2]

[chapcrap]

PM sent to freemiums in regard to Round 2.

• general cod
  HighlanderAttack
  KingDiabl0
  KuchTheWiser
  PedroV100
  rick1063
  Sirmium Samurai
  Winged Cat

Also, it's been reported that Bigragooch and Masli have used sitters. I'll look into this and any of those games will be forfeited for the purpose of this tournament. All games will be played out as normal.

[shoop76]

PM sent to freemiums in regard to Round 2.

• general cod
  HighlanderAttack
  KingDiabl0
  KuchTheWiser
  PedroV100
  rick1063
  Sirmium Samurai
  Winged Cat

Also, it's been reported that Bigragooch and Masli have used sitters. I'll look into this and any of those games will be forfeited for the purpose of this tournament. All games will be played out as normal.

So they get punished for being honest. If they wouldn't have posted that they were sitting for them it likely would have gone unnoticed. It seems like this rule is unfair unless all players are being monitored for this, which in current setup would seem impossible.

I find it likely that others may have used a sitter and not stated so in chat. I believe it would be fair to remove this rule unless there is a means of controlling this in another way besides basically self reporting yourself in chat.

[RobbieDub]

I agree with shoop. I'm in a game against Masli and his sitter explained that there was a computer crash. I appreciated the honesty and wouldn't want to see him penalized for it.

[Jippd]

Real life happens so I think there should be some allowance for sitting though I'm not sure what the threshold should be.

I can also see the point of not allowing sitters because then the champion has not really played every turn to get him that title.

Tough call.

[chapcrap]

PM sent to freemiums in regard to Round 2.

• general cod
  HighlanderAttack
  KingDiabl0
  KuchTheWiser
  PedroV100
  rick1063
  Sirmium Samurai
  Winged Cat

Also, it's been reported that Bigragooch and Masli have used sitters. I'll look into this and any of those games will be forfeited for the purpose of this tournament. All games will be played out as normal.

So they get punished for being honest. If they wouldn't have posted that they were sitting for them it likely would have gone unnoticed. It seems like this rule is unfair unless all players are being monitored for this, which in current setup would seem impossible.

I find it likely that others may have used a sitter and not stated so in chat. I believe it would be fair to remove this rule unless there is a means of controlling this in another way besides basically self reporting yourself in chat.

I agree with shoop. I'm in a game against Masli and his sitter explained that there was a computer crash. I appreciated the honesty and wouldn't want to see him penalized for it.

Real life happens so I think there should be some allowance for sitting though I'm not sure what the threshold should be.

I can also see the point of not allowing sitters because then the champion has not really played every turn to get him that title.

Tough call.

Yeah, I've talked with bigWham about this and we'd like to preserve the rule. It's a rule that we're holding in all of these tournaments. As much as possible, we want the players to earn it themselves. This is the best way for that.

As far as checking every single person, no, we can't do that. It's too much work for the C&A team. If there were an easy, automated way, then the site wouldn't have multis, because it would all be taken care of. We can run some spot checks, but that's about it. So, for the moment, I don't have a better solution than what we have in front of us. So, yeah, it's a bummer if a computer crashed or you went on vacation or whatever happens, but the rules were laid out a while ago, so I'm going to try my best to uphold them. And remember, these forfeits are only for purposes of this tournament. They don't actually have to forfeit the game.

[agentcom]

I came here to ask whether we should be worried if some of our results aren't posting to the automated tourney screen. For example, I won Game 13918306, but I'm still showing up as no points for the tourney overall.

But then I read the discussion above, and I'm a little bit upset. I didn't even know about the no sitter rule until just now, and I'm the type of person who reads the entire OP. I guess I just forgot about that in the nearly 2 months between signing up for the tournament and now. How can you hold people accountable for that? And then it's only going to be the honest people that get punished. I'm completely pissed off about this, and think it is absolutely wrong of you to do this, but please forfeit for me:

These wins or likely wins:
Game 13918306 - sitter had absolutely no effect on the game
Game 13918434 - game was pretty much over when sitter took turn because of great dice earlier in game

These likely losses:
Game 13918430 - In all of these, the sitter more likely hurt me rather than helped me
Game 13918431
Game 13918148

So, since you have no plans to automate the checking for sitters, then the only people that you are going to catch are people who read this thread or the opponents of people who read this thread. And you'll only catch them if they're honest about their sitting. That sounds like a horrible way of enforcing a rule.

As Serbia would say: Bollocks.

[xman5151]

I don't like this rule either. I know it was in place since the beginning, but the rule itself is terrible. The only ones who will get punished are the honest account sitters who say they are taking someones turns... if someone takes the turn and doesn't post it in the chat, no problem. This makes zero sense to me.

[chapcrap]

We don't want sitting and I'm not sure what else to do. I'm open to suggestions that aren't completely getting rid of the rule...

As far as the scoreboard not working, I'll check on it. This is the first time we've done something like that, so I'm sure it's buggy.

[xman5151]

Yeah I understand, I don't have any good suggestions at this point either. I would say in future tournaments not to have this rule in place where forfeiture is determined by a post in game chat. I don't know what you do about this one though, I like the fact that account sitting should not be allowed but don't know what you do to regulate that...

[chapcrap]

Yeah I understand, I don't have any good suggestions at this point either. I would say in future tournaments not to have this rule in place where forfeiture is determined by a post in game chat. I don't know what you do about this one though, I like the fact that account sitting should not be allowed but don't know what you do to regulate that...

I'll just get them to make a sitter feature real quick.

[Masli]

Also, it's been reported that Bigragooch and Masli have used sitters. I'll look into this and any of those games will be forfeited for the purpose of this tournament. All games will be played out as normal.

I agree with shoop. I'm in a game against Masli and his sitter explained that there was a computer crash. I appreciated the honesty and wouldn't want to see him penalized for it.

Well, I did send Teegee an emergency message that my laptop crashed. Sucks for being punished for this...

[agentcom]

We don't want sitting and I'm not sure what else to do. I'm open to suggestions that aren't completely getting rid of the rule...

As far as the scoreboard not working, I'll check on it. This is the first time we've done something like that, so I'm sure it's buggy.

So because the site hasn't figured out how to get the long-anticipated sitter feature in place, the users get punished?! I can't see the logic behind that. I understand why you want the rule there, but then you don't give the users the ability to comply with the rules. You bury this VERY IMPORTANT rule with VERY SEVERE punishment in tiny text inside the last spoiler of the OP?! I mean, with the way 1v1 goes, basically 1 day of being away from the computer is going to cost you the entire tournament.

It would be one thing if this was advertised clearly to everybody. In that case, I would've found some way to take the turns from my phone and just waited 10 minutes for each page load (I was in an area with bad cell reception when I requested a sitter). Most of the turns were inconsequential even in the games that I was winning. But now I'm DQ'd from 5 of my 14 games this round. If it had happened a few days later, I would've probably been bounced from nearly all of them.

If you want an alternative suggestion, I'd say that at a minimum you should've made it very clear to people that the no sitting rule was in place. Better yet, would've been to post it in gamechat of every game in the tournament. There's a couple suggestions floating around out there about having certain automatic announcements in game chat. If they're not already included, things like special tournament rules should be added to that suggestion. (I imagine that lots of people would be happy if fog rule tournaments had an announcement to that effect come up in chat.)

My other suggestion, is that you use common sense in this situation. Have there be a warning first before users have to forfeit except in egregious situations. I can't speak to other situations, but in my case, I gained zero advantage from having a sitter. My sitter even complained to me about the types of maps and settings that were being played. I was probably disadvantaged by having my sitter take my turns given that they were outside his wheelhouse. I even stated as much in chat in the Eastern Hemisphere games.

My third suggestion, which you've already rejected is to abandon the rule because it is unworkable. If you aren't going to be checking for sitting violations (which should still only happen after widespread notification of the rule), then the only people who get punished are the ones whose sitters follow good procedure and announce their presence. That's a horrible way of enforcing a rule. You're discouraging good practice of sitters announcing themselves, which has ramifications beyond this tournament.

I'm just in utter disbelief about how this situation is being handled. I understand why you want the rule, but you don't have the tools to enforce it. And the way that you went about (not) announcing the rule and enforcing it are horribly misguided.

[IcePack]

As the emergency sitter in the situation, I'm not sure how I would have known not to take the turns.
Agentcom had an emergency and needed games covered, and I just went thru them 1 by 1 until the time he needed was covered.
As with most emergencies, he probably wouldn't have known what games were coming up (or have the time to detail out for me the rules). It would have been better to miss the turns for agent but again, without it being in the chat or title bar I as the sitter have no idea.

I feel bad, I didnt know the rule existed, had no way to know, and as other pointe out could have easily went "under the radar" instead of posting as a courtesy and he wouldn't have been punished.

Now as a sitter who was trying to help in an emergency situation, I'm left to feel like crap :/ I guess I owe agentcom an apology....

[IcePack]

Also for what it worth, there was another official tournament that took place previously with this rule. This very same problem came up (I brought it up and went thru several e tickets).
In the end, all those who violated it were issued warnings not to abuse the rule and they basically said it wasn't enforceable. And if that person continued to abuse it, that they would be punishe at that point.

I do think perhaps a warning system might be in order for this as well. I don't know what the other tournament was, but I know I went back and forth with KA via e ticket email for awhile. I could try and look it up if I had too, but may not have those emails still.

[Graceless_]

All this rule does is encourage people to not announce when they're sitting. You have to figure this has already occurred and will only happen with increasing regularity as we move deeper into the tournament. I know that many people had no knowledge of this rule, and as more people become aware of it, silent turn sits will only increase. Why not put not a limit of turns that can be sat per game and for the entire tournament before DQ? Dq'ing a person for one emergency sit is just incredibly harsh if you ask me. I suggest keeping track when people have turns sat and if they reach 'x' amount, then they are out of the tournament.

[Jippd]

I think a possible compromise is to allow for maybe a certain amount of "days or hours" that could be missed in a given time period. IE a player can have one 24 hour emergency sitter coverage period every 1 week/2 weeks/every tournament/every set of games/etc. Something along those lines. This would allow for coverage of real EMERGENCY situations without ruining the tournament but still prevent people abusing it by having others play the tournament for them.

If people do want to abuse the tournament they could obviously very easily have someone log in and take the turns from them and not announce it. That would never get caught and there is no way to prevent that. I think the rule if anything, as others have pointed out, will only punish honest people and dishonest people can still cheat the system if they wanted to.

[chapcrap]

@Masli: Rules are rules, right? Plenty of nice multis in similar situations.

@agentcom: I love you. Simmer down for a minute. It's still being worked on.

@Graceless_: I know this isn't the point, but there is no way this would happen with increased regularity as the tournament went on. We eliminate people as we go.

@IcePack: Worst sitter ever, obvi. But, not having sitters know the rule is a little paramount to the enforcement. We can ask the C&A team to spot check for us, but admittance really is the only way at this point.

@all: I have continued to talk with bW about this. Nothing has been officially decided except that sitters won't be allowed in perpetuity. We will have a sitter rule of some sort. Whether or not that is different from the current rule is yet to be determined. As far as not making a banner for this rule or having it be extra large font, I don't regret it. This is how rules are in most tournaments and many other areas of life as well. I think we can all understand the reason for the rule. Also, as with other things in life, just because you can't punish EVERYONE that breaks a rule, doesn't mean the rule shouldn't be there. We don't need to look any further than our own site to see examples. Honest multis come back and get immediately banned if they admit to being a multi that forgot their pw or username. Would we have caught them if they didn't admit the wrongdoing? Probably not.

The point is, I see where everyone is coming from. I can empathize, but I can also make rebuttles. I'm going to try to make fair rulings here, so be patient for now.

[Graceless_]

@Masli: Rules are rules, right? Plenty of nice multis in similar situations.

@agentcom: I love you. Simmer down for a minute. It's still being worked on.

@Graceless_: I know this isn't the point, but there is no way this would happen with increased regularity as the tournament went on. We eliminate people as we go.

@IcePack: Worst sitter ever, obvi. But, not having sitters know the rule is a little paramount to the enforcement. We can ask the C&A team to spot check for us, but admittance really is the only way at this point.

@all: I have continued to talk with bW about this. Nothing has been officially decided except that sitters won't be allowed in perpetuity. We will have a sitter rule of some sort. Whether or not that is different from the current rule is yet to be determined. As far as not making a banner for this rule or having it be extra large font, I don't regret it. This is how rules are in most tournaments and many other areas of life as well. I think we can all understand the reason for the rule. Also, as with other things in life, just because you can't punish EVERYONE that breaks a rule, doesn't mean the rule shouldn't be there. We don't need to look any further than our own site to see examples. Honest multis come back and get immediately banned if they admit to being a multi that forgot their pw or username. Would we have caught them if they didn't admit the wrongdoing? Probably not.

The point is, I see where everyone is coming from. I can empathize, but I can also make rebuttles. I'm going to try to make fair rulings here, so be patient for now.

I understand that people are eliminated as the tournament progresses, that's generally how tournaments work after all. However, what i meant was that I could see the number of instances of players not announcing sitters relative to the players remaining increase. First of all, as more and more players are knocked out, the the stakes are raised, and the likelihood that people would take steps to avoid forfeits increases. Not only that, but as we narrow down the players, each player's game load increases, making it more likely that people might miss turns or need help covering turns. That wasn't really the point of my post but I thought it needed some clarification.

[Winged Cat]

These wins or likely wins:
Game 13918306 - sitter had absolutely no effect on the game
Game 13918434 - game was pretty much over when sitter took turn because of great dice earlier in game

These likely losses:
Game 13918430 - In all of these, the sitter more likely hurt me rather than helped me
Game 13918431
Game 13918148

As someone who lost to a sitter-user, I concur for my case. Game 13918296 was mostly over before the turn in which a sitter apparently acted. I have no objection to the result.

[benga]

Can it be removed?

Or can we have some sort of vacation mode that we can activate?

I would love to have break now and then...

[Swifte]

As far as I know, most auto tournaments do not have a rule against sitting... the only ones I know of that do are the official Championship tourneys (1v1, Doubles).

[benga]

As far as I know, most auto tournaments do not have a rule against sitting... the only ones I know of that do are the official Championship tourneys (1v1, Doubles).

okay, my bad then, but still any of those tournaments takes at least 6 months to finish

I am not allowed to have power outage or drunk fest or anything else besides CC?

[spiesr]

I am not allowed to have power outage or drunk fest or anything else besides CC?

Missing turns (non-intentionally) is not against the rules...

[benga]

I am not allowed to have power outage or drunk fest or anything else besides CC?

Missing turns (non-intentionally) is not against the rules...

so I can't have a week off then?

this isn't then the best of anything, this is I have no life and am willing to sit here and wait for those games to start

[shoop76]

Yeah I agree its totally ridiculous. What if there is a death in your family?
Can we not have a real life anymore. I understand it would be a problem if it happens continuously but for a 24 hour period.