Sad to hear about the score adjustment, feels so wrong
Someone has to write decisions, she is just doing jobAporta said:Oh yea aeronwen is stronk women
I decided to post it here in case others have any desire to discuss it, as was my original intention. Unfortunately the thread was locked until very recently.Orion said:Hello,
I'm not directly involved in anything in this NC, so whatever decision the admins come up with won't effect me, but I feel the need to advocate for the NA team to an extent because of what I have seen done so far. Take that as you will, but I'd appreciate your time reading this if nothing else. I would try to be brief, but this is a complicated matter. I apologize for the length, and I'll provide a tl;dr at the end.
Some punishment is necessary. This is not up for debate, and I believe all parties acknowledge it. The severity of the punishment is in question. The rules are clear that a player using a texture modification that is not specifically excepted (bannerpacks and crosshairs) is to be banned from play. This is good, and I trust you will follow through. However, the rules are not clear regarding time to report & further punishment, specifically regarding "significant advantage" and the forfeiture of relevant rounds. The emphasis will be explained later.
The rules clearly state that reports must be made within 30 minutes of a match's completion. They do not state what consideration will be given to reports made after that point, so this is open to interpretation, and I would argue that it is implied they will not be given credence for various reasons (photoshopping, as an example, though I doubt that happened in this case). Because the results of the NA v FIN match were not reported, and any admin responsible for reviewing the supplied screenshots for the purposes of confirming reported scores also did not notice any rule violation at the time, then all parties are at fault. NA is at fault for evident violation of the rules, but FIN and the reviewing admin(s) are at fault for their lack of vigilance in reporting & enforcing the rules as implied by the above quoted rule. For this reason, if no other, it is unfair to NA to punish them for this match without punishing the other parties at fault; furthermore, because all parties are at fault and FIN has stated their desire for the original result to stand, I believe it is best for no parties to be punished for the NA v FIN match.Concerned players must post their screenshot within 30 minutes of the match ending on the forums or send it to a tournament admin or the match referee.
Obviously, because the NA v AUT incident was reported the above consideration is not relevant to it. However, now I will explain the previous emphasis of relevant rounds and the concerns I have regarding "significant advantage." For reference, here's the rule as it is written:First, because it is absolute, are you certain that only relevant rounds were forfeited in the NA v AUT match? Allow me to further clarify in this way: are there any rounds in which Arys' texture mod would have been irrelevant because of a lack of javelins, does his texture mod change more than just javelins (and is there reliable proof of this), and if so are there still any rounds in which his mod would have been irrelevant? Further, can/will this be enforced with empirical evidence? I'm aware the match was streamed, and as far as I'm aware Arys' texture mod only applies to javelins, so has anyone gone through the stream to see if there are any rounds in which javelins were not used, and do the results of those rounds stand as they should in accordance with the wording of the rule? Succinctly, is the enforcement of punishment consistent with the rules, and if not, you must correct it by some means.If a player is found to have broken any of the rules during a match and the admins determine that a significant advantage was gained, that player’s team will forfeit the relevant rounds.
Now, regarding "significant advantage," I'm sure you're all aware this is not quantifiable. Therefore, you are all weighing your opinions against each other, opinions which may not be absolute. This means that, by the rules, the decision of the admins may not be true to their feelings on the matter, as the decision must be absolute. While I disagree with the notion of subjective rulings, in this case you're stuck with one. I ask that you adjust your punishment to be equivalent to the strength of your opinions regarding this incident rather than allow yourselves to be cornered by your own poorly written rule, forced to pass judgment you may not wholly agree with. Even if your position regarding the NA incident remains unchanged, then I strongly advise you to rewrite this rule after. You cannot quantify something with opinions, and attempting to do so will create distrust and animosity in the community. If your desire is zero tolerance, then the rule should read "and the admins determine that any advantage was gained," or better, "any non-excepted changes were made." It is best if nothing is left to interpretation.
At the very least, Arys should be banned from play in accordance with the rules.
The rules say incidents must be reported within 30 minutes of a match ending. It is implied, therefore, that reports after this will not be given credence, and the reported results will thereby be considered valid. Thus, it is unfair to punish NA for the NA v FIN match as the window to report an incident was past, and both FIN and the admin(s) reviewing the screenshots failed to report or enforce the rules.
It is your responsibility to ensure rules are enforced, and also that they are enforced properly. The rules also say that only "relevant rounds" will be forfeited by an offending team or player. Was punishment enforced in accordance with the rules in the case of NA v AUT? Were there any rounds where Arys' texture mod would have been irrelevant to play because there were no javelins, and do the results of these rounds stand? Or, were all rounds forfeited in a blanket punishment, not in accordance with the rules?
"Significant advantage" is not quantifiable, thus justifications for & against it are subjective. This is a poorly written rule that is restrictive to the admins, and at the very least should be rewritten. I also implore you to consider alternative punishment that may better reflect the opinions of the admins in this case, rather than cornering yourselves with a poorly written rule and passing an absolute judgment you may not entirely agree with.
Thank you for your time & patience.
- Orion/Marnid
trot888 said:Hey can I be admin for upcoming tournaments?
trot888 said:NC_PL, that gives a large advantage to you, don't really matter if it's based in France
Captain Lust said:The new decision is that Arys' tournament ban will be upheld but the original results of NA vs FIN and NA vs AUT & SWI will stand (8-8 and 10-3, respectively).
Dyktator said:trot888 said:Hey can I be admin for upcoming tournaments?
https://forums.taleworlds.com/index.php/topic,344002.msg8227182.html#msg8227182 *caugh* *caugh*
Goodbye Fietta.
trot888 said:NC_PL, that gives a large advantage to you, don't really matter if it's based in France
Alene said:Admin team used some common sense and kept original scores of the matches.
That is a gracious decision, and I hope the North American team appreciates the leniency the admins have shown in this situation.Alene said:Admin team used some common sense and kept original scores of the matches.
Captain Lust said:The new decision is that Arys' tournament ban will be upheld but the original results of NA vs FIN and NA vs AUT & SWI will stand (8-8 and 10-3, respectively).
I think most of us are content with this ruling.
Now let's leave the incident behind and focus on upcoming matches.
Edit: No, I'm still not part of the admin team, just a player.
I completely agree.Orion said:That is a gracious decision, and I hope the North American team appreciates the leniency the admins have shown in this situation.Alene said:Admin team used some common sense and kept original scores of the matches.
Captain Lust said:The new decision is that Arys' tournament ban will be upheld but the original results of NA vs FIN and NA vs AUT & SWI will stand (8-8 and 10-3, respectively).
I think most of us are content with this ruling.
Now let's leave the incident behind and focus on upcoming matches.
Edit: No, I'm still not part of the admin team, just a player.
They haven't said what (if anything) influenced their decision. As much as I would like to believe the community had something to do with it, this may be what some of them wanted to do from the beginning. It's up to them to explain that, if they want.trot888 said:Orion or NA should appreciate the fact that the community changed this decision or it'll be kept the same. Any whom, it's over. I'm glad the NC will continue without any flaming, good job everyone.
I don't think anyone really benefits from us discussing the internals of this during the tournament. I can say that cheating always creates a lot of very difficult decisions and this occurrence was no exception.Orion said:They haven't said what (if anything) influenced their decision. As much as I would like to believe the community had something to do with it, this may be what some of them wanted to do from the beginning. It's up to them to explain that, if they want.