Ladle 51

[sinewav]

i think this rule is seriously flawed and that more thought should be put into it.

Good. Start thinking. We can't lift all bans because there are deviant individuals who want nothing more than to ruin people's fun. Ladle's popularity makes it a target, as has been shown in the past.

...bans are not always given for good reason- you're assuming this game is full of reasonable people.

If that ban rule is to be put in place, server admins should be held accountable for their bans. I mean that in the sense that the community should remove servers that abuse them.

Yes. Fortunately, the persons offering tournament servers have been reasonable people thus far. Arilou has never offered a Ladle server to the best of my knowledge. Gene, on the other hand, is the owner of the ID servers and is not the type to make crazy permabans. He would certainly investigate and make a just action.

[compguygene]

There are no perma-bans in any of the tournament servers I host.

[AI-team]

I heard PRU's was nearly unplayable for Americans...

dunno who told you that, but when I entered and asked some americans whether they are lagging more or less than in other EU servers, they said no

[Kijutsu]

I heard PRU's was nearly unplayable for Americans...

dunno who told you that, but when I entered and asked some americans whether they are lagging more or less than in other EU servers, they said no

They probably won, then. People whine more when they lose and less when they win.

[INW]

I heard PRU's was nearly unplayable for Americans...

dunno who told you that, but when I entered and asked some americans whether they are lagging more or less than in other EU servers, they said no

They probably won, then. People whine more when they lose and less when they win.

Once I entered the server to watch during our break, slick instantly messaged me with "we are not playing in this server spin, it is horrible". Slick didn't know that AoT had priority over it anyway. R was winning by a lot but most of them complained in chat. IIRC.

[sinewav]

I think the logic pretty lights provided is more than enough, the fact is, if you're banned, you're banned from public use of a private server. If they offer the server for ladle, it becomes a public server, and the ladle rules should reflect this.

I don't agree that special considerations should be made for Ladle. If I ban you from my server it's because I don't want you playing there. If you can't play Ladle, that's all the better. More time for you to reflect on your actions. Of course, I don't know that I've ever banned anyone for more than a few hours or days.

Yes, there is potential for abuse by rogue admins. I'm not sure how to get around sabotage by them. But if it ever happens and we uncover it that person will certainly be shunned forever. Now, in the case of someone getting caught in a range ban, or in Nightmare's case, alleged innocence and trapped by association, I have no answer. (Personally I consider his case a "family issue" and "not my problem", the same if his brother broke the computer or something.) Whatever the solution is, it should be automated. I don't want to deal with any more responsibilities like keeping track of who is banned or unbanned.

For now let's just say this until we have something better:

11. Be aware of preexisting bans on tournament servers. If you were previously banned from a Ladle server it is your responsibility to discover the ban and make arrangements with the server administrator beforehand. There is no guarantee a ban can be lifted on Ladle day.

[INW]

11. Be aware of preexisting bans on tournament servers. If you were previously banned from a Ladle server it is your responsibility to discover the ban and make arrangements with the server administrator beforehand. There is no guarantee a ban can be lifted on Ladle day.

Sounds good to me.

If we were to have problems with a server owner consistently, we can just choose to not use the server for future Ladles.

[dariv]

I don't agree that special considerations should be made for Ladle. If I ban you from my server it's because I don't want you playing there. If you can't play Ladle, that's all the better.

Sorry I massively object to this. Ladle is supposed to be run by the community, so why do we have this channel whereby a single person can ban another single person from playing?

If we were to have problems with a server owner consistently, we can just choose to not use the server for future Ladles.

By this time someone has already been wrongfully banned from the tournament, and your action is too late.

[Lackadaisical]

nvm

[þsy]

I agree with Lackadaisical's sentiment. I would also like to point out that this discussion has similar problems to the authentication/pickup discussion we had a few weeks ago:

It's about private and public space. Ladle is already a fairly inaccessible event - you need to have knowledge, experience of fort and relationships with certain people in order to play in a team (be it an open or private team). If you haven't already signed up, you cannot play - and even if you do, you have to reach certain requirements in order to participate (e.g. DS this ladle with no team leader). There are even further implications such as being picked to play within that team's line-up, you get the picture.

But regardless of this, there is always the opportunity to play if you can fulfil all those criterias. With this current discussion concerning previously banned players, it is a question of accessability and 'rights' as a player/server owner.

Is it fair for a player to be banned from a public tournament because of a private dispute outside?

Does a server owner give up his/her private rights when their server is used for a public tournament?

Do we want the ladle to be as accessible as possible? Are there further steps we can take to achieving this?

[Mecca]

Congratz on winning the ladle to MYM!

Shout-out to Liz' cat, Mittens! =^.^=

[Pr3]

I'd like to bring up another serious matter... No recordings!? ... I know we don't really consider recordings until after, but I believe its an important addition to every ladle. If Zman is otherwise preoccupied, we should find someone else to record; maybe someone would volunteer?

[syllabear]

I'd like to bring up another serious matter... No recordings!? ... I know we don't really consider recordings until after, but I believe its an important addition to every ladle. If Zman is otherwise preoccupied, we should find someone else to record; maybe someone would volunteer?

You were watching the unk-pL match as far as I remember, how come you didn't make a recording

[Pr3]

I'd like to bring up another serious matter... No recordings!? ... I know we don't really consider recordings until after, but I believe its an important addition to every ladle. If Zman is otherwise preoccupied, we should find someone else to record; maybe someone would volunteer?

You were watching the unk-pL match as far as I remember, how come you didn't make a recording

Netbook

[prettylights]

I don't agree that special considerations should be made for Ladle. If I ban you from my server it's because I don't want you playing there. If you can't play Ladle, that's all the better.

how is that all the better? because you (or another server owner/anyone with a pw) might think so? so special considerations should be made for the server owners but not the players then.

it doesnt take that much thinking. im just saying that in the public use of a private server, private matters should stay in the latter.

thats not to say that someone cant get themselves banned from ladle though.

For now let's just say this until we have something better:

11. Be aware of preexisting bans on tournament servers. If you were previously banned from a Ladle server it is your responsibility to discover the ban and make arrangements with the server administrator beforehand. There is no guarantee a ban can be lifted on Ladle day.

btw, there was no real change in the edit to the rule you wrote- the server administrator still decides if he/she doesn't want to let someone play.

ok cool, youre telling people to be aware. im sure they already were, and how does that really help the person anyway?

anyway, i think you basically agree, you just need to think more longterm:

Fortunately, the persons offering tournament servers have been reasonable people thus far

Yes, there is potential for abuse