Ladle 61

[ElmosWorld]

Ladle 61

[DaGarBBaGeMAN]

lol @ ww hahahahaa

[sinewav]

lol @ ww hahahahaa

Don't laugh, he did the right thing. It doesn't matter that 75 % the people on the roster are inactive. This will stop unnecessary Challenge Board edits, which is very desirable indeed. "Of course "any, subs, that, we, may, have" is simply understood and doesn't need to be written as subs don't need to be listed at all. He'll get better at it with practice; he's still new to this (and probably hasn't read the rules yet).

Good job Ratchet, a gold star for you!

[ElmosWorld]

Is that the same we, signed up under WW, that signed up Team Baylife some ladles ago?

gotta keep track of all these aliases...

[DaGarBBaGeMAN]

i know sine. i just found it funny. especially the 'any, subs, that, we, may, have' part. clearly it was meant to be humorous

[sinewav]

i know sine. i just found it funny. especially the 'any, subs, that, we, may, have' part. clearly it was meant to be humorous

It's not really that funny. He's thumbing his nose at everyone and seems to be holding on to some resentment from last month. But, it's his own willfull ignorance that brought on all those problems, so that's just sad in my book.

[Ritsuka]

10 bucks says shock and tweezy leave early and go sumo.

[J Dawg]

Rd has 15 people roughly.. Would have been cool for you guys to have two teams.

[Flow]

Rd has 15 people roughly.. Would have been cool for you guys to have two teams.

A fair amount of those players are not expected to make it. However, they are possibilities. We would not have enough players to be able to have two full teams on ladle day.

[Ratchet]

i know sine. i just found it funny. especially the 'any, subs, that, we, may, have' part. clearly it was meant to be humorous

It's not really that funny. He's thumbing his nose at everyone and seems to be holding on to some resentment from last month. But, it's his own willfull ignorance that brought on all those problems, so that's just sad in my book.

*willful

What happened last month wasn't bitter, I just thought it was a rather nonsensical thing (and still don't necessarily agree with it) to require a team to know their subs more than 2 days before the ladle. They approached me and I instantly went and put it on the challenge board assuming keeping things organized was priority.

I still have not read the rules, and frankly I don't want to read 15 threads that people have thrown in random things and argued about. If there's a bullet list of the important things people have put together; throw it my way, I'll be more than happy to skim over it. I have read the past votes for rules to be changed, though I admittedly don't remember a damn one.

It's not "sad", I'm just preventing you guys from arguing about it. Any subs we have will use those names if that's what it takes to satisfy the bickering.


I'm not trying to be a nuisance and uncooperative, I don't disapprove of the rules you guys put together. (I'm well aware they are needed) I, again, just thought this specific one was really not required. It still seems silly to me not being able to sign someone up two days ahead. Isn't it something about you keeping player-specific stats? For like the spoon or something? Can't you just not include those who are edited in late? I honestly don't care if our subs get credit for subbing in your stat sheet, but for everyone else they would be able to see who our subs were without having to guess and remember anyone over two people.

[sinewav]

Ok look, you aren't required to read a dozen threads on each rule. However, you should read the threads related to the "non-sensical" rule to understand it makes perfect sense. If you don't want to bother doing your homework then you forfeit having a respected opinion on such topics and will be reduced to being known as a lazy whiner. You want a simple, bulleted list? That's pretty much what the rules look like in their current form. You can read the whole thing in a few minutes. No need to "skim" it.

There is no arguing when people take the smallest amount of time to read and follow the rules. We are all expected to do at least that much. If you did read the rules you would understand there is no need to add substitutes to the Challenge Board after it is locked, nor is there a need to mention you will add subs in your team list. Please, for the love of all that is good, just read the goddamn rules.

[Ratchet]

I read the bullet list I didn't see anything about the number of players allowed to be substitutes, though? It says you may add substitutes until Semi-finals, then you must ask your opponent. That doesn't apply to before the ladle starts? I'll just trust that it's an understood rule that isn't on the rule list O.o

[sinewav]

I read the bullet list I didn't see anything about the number of players allowed to be substitutes, though? It says you may add substitutes until Semi-finals, then you must ask your opponent. That doesn't apply to before the ladle starts? I'll just trust that it's an understood rule that isn't on the rule list O.o

I think the problem here is how you define "substitute." The Challenge Board is for Team Leaders and team members, any player who is committed or expected to join us for Ladle. Those people are added before sign-ups close and you can make make two changes after (this is a compromise allowing teams some freedom, but not so much that complete teams can swap places, understand?).

A substitute is anyone who is picked up after sign-ups close, who isn't listed (or can't be listed) for whatever reason, or anyone you pick-up during the actual Ladle -- until the semi-finals of course. There is no limit to the number of substitutes you can have, just like there is no limit to the number of players you can list (why would there be?)

So, we can be exhaustive and write a self-evident definition for "player" and "substitute" on the Operations page, but then we make that page even longer and more tiresome to read for people like you who can't be bothered to do the necessary groundwork (you know, stuff "leaders" do). We can't fit the rules for an entire tournament into a "tweet," sorry. And if you look at the rules, roll your eyes, yawn, and say tl;dr, well, maybe you aren't cut out to lead your team to victory anyway.

And finally, had you just read the rules you wouldn't have to read pages and pages of this crap here -- which by now is probably even longer than the Operation page.

[Ratchet]

That's true, I was using a substitute as it should have been applied; someone that was filling in for a position that we needed them to. I've always had people ask to "sub" which meant putting their names down on the team. I've never had someone say "Hey! I'll sub for you guys on ladle day, don't worry about putting me on your team though I'll just show up!". Just depends on how you look at it, but it's understood now. I'll just copy and paste what we now have on the board to every other ladle. It's cool.

[0000]

So ratchet is basically bypassing the "no new subs during the semis/final" rule? He will be able to bring anyone he wants in and have them use his "any, subs, we, ... " aliases?

This doesn't necessarily bother me. I'm just trying to understand why he is doing it.