Native Completed [NASTe] North American Small Teams Seasonal Ladder [Season 2]

[MadocComadrin]

Marnid, I think one of the main problems here is that you're enforcing a definition on two words that are in common tongue somewhat interchangeable: there is no reason to believe that, by your definition, the match wasn't postponedinstead of rescheduled, unless the rules give some other precedent (however, I'm either not seeing something, or your post is more detailed than the rules themselves). 

 

[Catholic]

He means postponement as in it's fought in the same day. Rescheduling is it is refought in the other day.
I don't understand why we do not keep the 3-2 score. Even in your own words like you told me over steam, it was uncontested until then. Why is it that an hour later you pick off with the same score, but another day you start all over?

 

[MadocComadrin]

Yet, my point stands the same: they're redefinitions of words used somewhat interchangeable in common tongue, thus leading to confusion. Likewise, I still see no language in the rules besides two entries that could (but don't, if you take my point into account) that create the definitions Marnid posted. While I do respect that admins should be able to create/modify rules, doing so in one post does (or at least should) not count as a rule change, especially when it leads to one team being repeatedly shafted.

Let me ask a question just to clarify: were both teams involved okay with picking up the match from where it was left off (as it appears)?

 

[Kitten-mew!]

ay yo man my old friend visited me and we had a snowball fight :3......... 

 

[MadocComadrin]

Yeah, snow.

 

[Catholic]

Talked it over with nom and he didn't object to it.

I'm honestly fine with going 0-0. If it was that close and we were winning, then we can do it again. What I'm sick of is constantly getting a disadvantage, the attitude and making rules and changing them on the spot. I read the rules through twice and I cannot see anything about either keeping scores or not. Where you pulled the rule about keeping them for postponements but dropping it for reschedules I do not understand. CRAP has brought 6+ players to 5 consecutive matches now and each time it's been rescheduled, wasting all of our players' time due to something that was in no way our fault.

 

[Kitten-mew!]

Yeah, snow.

I'm surprised you started at snow and didn't end in ball. Snowball? It's a ******* joke. Jeez, heteros these days...

 

[MrNomNom]

Talked it over with nom and he didn't object to it.

Object to 3-2?! Of course I object! That means we're losing! D:

 

[MadocComadrin]

I read the rules through twice and I cannot see anything about either keeping scores or not. Where you pulled the rule about keeping them for postponements but dropping it for reschedules I do not understand.

That's what I'm getting at: in essence, two words that are synonyms in common tongue are given definitions not even in the rules, but in some random post afterwards.

I'm surprised you started at snow and didn't end in ball. Snowball? It's a ******* joke. Jeez, heteros these days...

But balls don't come at the end!

 

[Kitten-mew!]

I can't believe they censored oral sex. Snowballing is when they hit the finish line and your reward of gooey special edition Gatorade overflows and comes out of your nostrils.

Now imagine a rainbow above my head. A big, ******** rainbow. Wait for it. wait for it...

THE MORE YOU KNOWWWWWW~

 

[Mr.X]

Team Malion has 1 official warning. As per Wappaw's request.

 

[ZeEpicGirl]

That Lavender guy should be spanked for delaying 

 

[Beowulf661]

That Lavender guy should be spanked for delaying 

I concur.

 

[Mr.X]

Team Malion's warning revoked as they did not flee to the edge of the map or hide for extended periods of time, as per rules.

 

[BigBoss]

****, we had this in our pockets.

 

[Orion]

Talked it over with nom and he didn't object to it.

I'm honestly fine with going 0-0. If it was that close and we were winning, then we can do it again. What I'm sick of is constantly getting a disadvantage, the attitude and making rules and changing them on the spot. I read the rules through twice and I cannot see anything about either keeping scores or not. Where you pulled the rule about keeping them for postponements but dropping it for reschedules I do not understand. CRAP has brought 6+ players to 5 consecutive matches now and each time it's been rescheduled, wasting all of our players' time due to something that was in no way our fault.

Precedent states that if a map is disputed, its results are thrown out. See Balion v BkS, 2nd challenge, first attempt, first map. Balion felt like they got the shaft there too, but would you rather replay a map or have a 20-page ragefest between two teams about the dispute? I'm honestly curious as to which you (the general you) prefer. I'd rather not play mediator between two pissed off team captains after a match has been recorded because one captain lost and decides to dispute something after the fact. The rules in this ladder are meant to minimize the occurrence of disputes and the potential drama that follows in their wake.

Aside from poor luck in scheduling and some very short-lived drama between Balions & BkS, so far the rules have succeeded in doing just that.

CRAP has brought 6+ players to 5 consecutive matches now and each time it's been rescheduled, wasting all of our players' time due to something that was in no way our fault.

And whose fault is that? The rules? I don't think so. The rules don't make players more punctual.

 

[MadocComadrin]

But there was no dispute. Both sides agreed to continue the match from where it was left off.

 

[MacKain]

CRAP has brought 6+ players to 5 consecutive matches now and each time it's been rescheduled, wasting all of our players' time due to something that was in no way our fault.

And whose fault is that? The rules? I don't think so. The rules don't make players more punctual.

No, but the Rules should be protecting us from having 5 consecutive games rescheduled when we are abiding by the rules.

 

[MrNomNom]

Talked it over with nom and he didn't object to it.

I'm honestly fine with going 0-0. If it was that close and we were winning, then we can do it again. What I'm sick of is constantly getting a disadvantage, the attitude and making rules and changing them on the spot. I read the rules through twice and I cannot see anything about either keeping scores or not. Where you pulled the rule about keeping them for postponements but dropping it for reschedules I do not understand. CRAP has brought 6+ players to 5 consecutive matches now and each time it's been rescheduled, wasting all of our players' time due to something that was in no way our fault.

Precedent states that if a map is disputed, its results are thrown out. See Balion v BkS, 2nd challenge, first attempt, first map. Balion felt like they got the shaft there too, but would you rather replay a map or have a 20-page ragefest between two teams about the dispute? I'm honestly curious as to which you (the general you) prefer. I'd rather not play mediator between two pissed off team captains after a match has been recorded because one captain lost and decides to dispute something after the fact. The rules in this ladder are meant to minimize the occurrence of disputes and the potential drama that follows in their wake.

wat

But there was no dispute. Both sides agreed to continue the match from where it was left off.

 

[Catholic]

And whose fault is that? The rules? I don't think so. The rules don't make players more punctual.

  And I'll argue this too. Of course it's the rules, what else is it? What stopped me from dropping one player for the rest of the map, being completely happy with it, except the rules? I'll even argue that on the GOOD vs. CRAP second try, the fact it wasn't played due to it storming at a guy's house was because of the rules. And of course it's the rules that forgive a team for not making three consecutive matches, don't reward the team that make it, and then punish a team for playing a player 12 hours before he was supposed to. That's the rules. That's the entire point of me and lust's argument, that this ridiculous nonsense has got to be changed. There was no debate. There would have been no opposition or unfairness for CRAP to drop one player to finish out the map, or, if LAG had won, the match. In K-BOOB, I got slammed for not dropping a player for two rounds, here, it's impossible to drop a player for more than two rounds.