question about eligibility/squadhopping

[Cross]

This has been actually rather funny thread to read. Once again it
proved staffers lack of skill to control things. Or more likely those who work with TWL. This season was ruined already from the beginning and seems to me it`s not going to get any better. I have never liked people who are in staff (there are couple exceptions ofcourse) and this thingy we have here doesn`t help me to change my mind. Maybe we should just cancel this season and make everything work for next one?

-Cross-

Ps. I know that shit didn`t make any sense but I dont care so don`t come to me and say my english sux. thx :fear:

[Dabram]

you call that english? :fear:

[Lofty]

I keep seeing the same reiterated posts from the defense with little to nothing backing them up. The same deviant retorts stated over and over again, when again, like I said, the rules are slated in plain english.

Any player joining a Squad for participation in Trench Wars League, will be subject to a one round cool down period after registration and confirmation by a Squad Captain. Players will not be eligible to participate in official Trench Wars League matches until the round proceeding that player joining the Squad has completed

There it is. There will be one round cooldown penalty which consists of the round proceeding the player joining (meaning the following round).

I'm not accusing anyone of purposefully trying to break the rules (though knowing how incompetent staff like Pure_luck is, it's quite possible favoritism on their behalf of 'oking' a game and overlooking a subtle rule could've easily been the case). I'm not claiming that 2dragons was some decisive factor in a game. I am saying that rules were broken, and I want to see consequences as I have when my squads were in question of legitimacy.

C'mon. If you have games left that you could have played in, and you left therefore you missed a possible playing chance, that's the cooldown period. That's the penalty. - Epinephrine

No, you and I both know that can't be the case. Come on Epi, you expect me to believe you would think something like that? How could the black and white law you used to enforce so vehemently be layed down when such completely subjective variables exist? 'Could've had the chance to play?' Who is god to judge whether someone even plays a certain league on a squad? Maybe he doesn't even care about base. Or is one to listen to the person claim they do and use that as suitable proof?

Nobody has the power to make a call like that, which is why the rule states rounds. If you played in a round, that's that, there is no further deliberation, the next round you cooldown and don't play. There is no grey, as was once upheld in the past.

But aside from that, your point was just a fallacy. That isn't the penalty because you speak of a cooldown period. Rules say cooldown round. And he didn't have a cooldown round because he played in two consecutive rounds. What more should I say?

[PjOtTeR]

Don't fuckin talk crap to me or my squadmates, about what we have supposedly done wrong.....
The only thing we've done wrong is play epi and 2d in the lb/ld......

Not cus they weren't eligible... but cus they suck horribly -_-

irate2: YARRRRRRR :devil:

[Kim]

Nah I don't think they're talking shit pjotter, u crazy euro. BABELFISH CORRECTLY NEXT TIME

[Lofty]

Just fix the problem, define what a round is. It is not cut and dry, clearly there are two ideas of a round, - 2dragons

Unless your name is 2dragons and/or you are on the rule-breaching side of the argument, the definition of round is rather clear and without question. The only legal printed definition of rounds consists of TWL Rounds which occur once each week. What you assume people have trouble discriminating between that and it are called 'matches'.

[Sufficient]

Automate everything.

[genocidal]

while Epi is arguing the letter of the rule which states the round proceeding the one in which the member left is the cooldown period. - genocidal

No, I'm afraid you're wrong. I am arguing both the spirit and the letter of the rule. Are you familiar with the english language? Do you know what proceeding round means? It means the following round; don't step in if you don't know what you are talking about.

Haha Lofty getting pissed off. Well I'm afraid I do know what I'm talking about and if someone leaves in the middle of the round then the proceeding round can be said to be the round that is still taking place since it is not yet over. That is the LETTER of the rule you stupid fuck. My point is that it is vague and open for interpretation but since you're too dumb to even conceive of the fact that people hold opinions different from your own you can't get that through your thick skull.

But the rule vagueness does allow for interpretation - genocidal

On the contrary, despite no punishment for offense being clarified, the actual outline of the rule is very clear for anyone who can use their head. Try it.

I did use my head. Why don't you use your head and read the rest of my post and respond to it? You completely ignore the fact that they asked the TWL Ops, the fact that I said there needs to be rule clarification but that obviously no rule has been broken here since the rule makers were asked prior to the action, and the fact that there is really no harm done at all. You are acting like 2d, PL, and Rodge commited a moral wrong against your soul. You need to take it easy and consider everything instead of getting your small brain hung up on one line of a rule that is clearly vague.

[Awesome]

I'm not trying to trash talk Lofty or Rusher no matter what i may personally think about either, but what is this really about? as usual, essays are being written here on the forums about bullshit that doesnt even matter.

Look at the games Randedl linked, in one case we got like 1 minute, 45 seconds vs. -FINAL- in a TWLB which we played horribly... so why cry that 2d and epi got to play in it??

The other game in which one of them played, 2dragons got 6-5 in a game where we beat Rusher 50-26... is this whole argument an excuse for that loss or are you really really concerned that other people may get to play in TWL a week after leaving a squad? so concerned that you'd write many long winded paragraphs which all start with a quote in the incorrect forum "style"

As they said, they asked TWL ops if they were eligable before they were played. The answer was yes. We cannot be held responsible for any of this. If you got a problem, take it up with Rodge or PL or whoevers dealing with it these days.

PS: 2dragons and Epinephrine did leave Venom earlier that day.. i was online for that part and 2d had to go play a HZ game in the middle of the process of him leaving Venom to join us, so we waited 'till later that day to follow through with the whole "twd process". Not that any of that matters to the lawyers of trench wars.

[bloodzombie]

awesome, I think you miss the point. How can they let it go this time and then make an issue of it in a game where it might've made a difference?

You need consistency.

You let a guy play that shouldn't have played... your mistake. If the other squad wants a rematch, I think they should get it.

Epi's argument makes sense for logic, but it's not how the rules are written. The rule should be changed to simply say that you can't play for two different squads in one weekend, that would solve everything.

[Foreign]

i have to agree with rand and lofty on this one. i don't really care who said what. the fact of the matter is there is a difference in basic english between the words current and proceeding. if a player changes squads during the season, he is not permitted to play the proceeding round. if a player is currently in a round that is in progress, that is not the next, or proceeding round because it has already been initiated. the following week becomes the proceeding round at the very moment the current round begins. this isn't subject to interpretation. don't think you're as sly as bill. if she sucked your dick, she sucked your dick. playing with the words to suit your purposes is both immature and fallible.

i don't blame epi or 2d or pirates for any of this. i think it was the tw ops' fault for not being meticulous enough of the league rules. it is quite clear what the decision should have been, and i think rusher should be awarded the rematch.

[Awesome]

You let a guy play that shouldn't have played... your mistake.

not at all. as said above, we asked if they were allowed. if anything, the ops made a mistake... IF they were wrong that is. how is it that we should suffer any consequences when we followed the rules that were given to us.

[Lofty]

Foreign is right, there is no room for misinterpretation; he layed the truth down straight and true, but I'll take care of some little tidbits that popped up.

Genocides appears to be struggling, what with reasoning ability and all. Don't worry though, I'll clear up your
confusion in no time.

if someone leaves in the middle of the round then the proceeding round can be said to be the round that is still
taking place since it is not yet over. - genocides

Wrong again. The rule states 'the round proceeding the one when the player joined'. I would suggest you try again
but granted your one-sided streak it would probably be a waste of time.

Haha Lofty getting pissed off. - genocides

I'm just contributing to a proper cause since this thread happens to exist. But, since you appear to be
confused about this subject as well, I'm in a charitable enough mood to show you an example of someone getting
pissed off -

That is the LETTER of the rule you stupid fuck. - genocides

Now that I've cleared that up, shall I proceed with shredding your next point? =P

obviously no rule has been broken here since the rule makers were asked prior to the action -
genocides

I almost feel embarrassed for you to have to ask you something so elementary, but unfortunately my hunch may be
correct and therefore I must - do you actually believe that the objective legitimacy of a course of action rests
solely on the judgment of authorities? =P

Thats why rules exist, so authorities can enforce them, not call the shots. People do make mistakes and misinterpret
rules or allow for corrupted choices, one of which is present in this case. I suggest you take notes to avoid having
me hand feed you these points in the future =P

The rest of your emotional rants are of little relevance and require none of my intervention. I suggest calming down
before proceeding with futile retorts, or better yet, simply stop posting. Choice is yours, don't blame me later if
you make the wrong one =P

is this whole argument an excuse for that loss or are you really really concerned that other people may get to play in TWL a week after leaving a squad? - Awesome

I just don't like to see corruption or incompetence like this demonstrated.

We cannot be held responsible for any of this. - Awesome

I didn't say Pirates is responsible; read before you post, this is focused on TWL staff, not Pirates =P

[Awesome]

We cannot be held responsible for any of this. - Awesome

I didn't say Pirates is responsible; read before you post, this is focused on TWL staff, not Pirates =P

i was responding to this:

You let a guy play that shouldn't have played... your mistake.

[Epinephrine]

I didn't say Pirates is responsible; read before you post, this is focused on TWL staff, not Pirates =P

If you don't believe that Pirates is responsible, then why mention corruption over and over in your post? Obviously you think that somehow 2d and I bypassed the rules using some sort of method. Corruption doesn't happen unless someone does someone wrong for someone else who knew it was wrong but asked for it anyway for whatever reason. So by mention corruption over and over, you're implying that 2d and I somehow 'corrupted' the TWL ops to let us play.

That is simply and utterly false.

As for the semantics, obviously the dictionary definition of the word 'proceeding' is not in question here. We all know what proceeding means.

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=proceeding

The question is, whether a round in progress can be counted as proceeding. Let me give you an example. If someone leaves before their squad's games for the weekend and joins another squad (before that squad's games for the weekend) but after 1pm EST Saturday, then they will miss every single game in that round right?

Therefore for that person, you can say that the proceeding round to them joining directly applies to the games that come after they join that they will by default miss that weekend.

What if that person only plays in one league? Then for that person the games that happen wouldn't even matter aside from the one league they play. If they miss that game, it's proceeding them joining the other team and they miss it (the game as part of the round proceeds them joining, therefore for that person the round can be thought of as proceeding).

Obviously it's pretty impossible to quanitify this exactly as someone can just say 'oh I only play one league' and you'd never know the difference. So to eliminate all ambiguity, if they join while a round is in progress then they can't play for the rest of that round, and thus that round is proceeding them joining the squad. If they join after the round is over, then the next round is proceeding the time after they join.

The issue is whether you like to think of proceeding as applying to 'full round' or 'a part of a round'. I tend to think of it as the latter. Why? Because I believe the spirit of the rule is to not let someone play two games in the same weekend for two different squads, which is obviously something bad for the league.

Now I agree with you that this rule is somewhat ambiguous, because in my mind the rule has never meant anything other than what I've said I thought it meant in this thread for the LAST TWO YEARS. Similarily a lot of other people (i.e. P_L, Rodge, 2d, Genocide) also agree with me. It obviously means something different to you and others who are on your side of the argument for this thread.

Now while the results of your appeal are done and over with, I agree that next season (since the roster lock happened this rule doesn't matter at all for this season anymore) the rule should be adequately changed to reflect a more exact meaning. But I urge discussion at that time as to whether or not the rule should be about PUNISHING people for joining a new squad (i.e. force them to sit out 2 rounds if they leave in the middle of a round) or if it's only about not letting someone play 2 games for 2 different squads in the same round which is what I personally believe in.