Warrior General Games

Originally posted by Jiddy78
I remember back at the beginnings of slamgate we had a team run SI Slam and SI Offtackle 100% of the time for the entire season 7. Our DC put in tickets to support and multiple postings in bugs forum etc etc. as there was very little chance to stop it. (One team lucked out and beat them barely in the playoffs) The entire offseason 8 went by and this very team built around this strategy and did so AGAIN in season 8...pretty much sending a team with 30+ agents and very active participation to the round file by our DC and owner calling it a day on such a fiasco...I'm guessing you can do the math on what that type of activity by an entire team (not to mention the copycatters etc etc) did to stats, league integrity and the such.

Point is:

Yellow balloon was nowhere to be found when a AA "schlub" came a-calling for a large issue present in the game. Matter of fact, the issue wasn't resolved for 100 days (2 seasons and offseason) since said discovery and multiple contacts about it long before said resolution.

BUT...The "in crowd" in world league gets rubbed the wrong way because a team skews some stats for a wide receiver....and yellow balloon posts some crap about "lack of respect for the game and people who play it" and "going out of your way to...try and ruin the enjoyment of other users is not something that we want to see happening here" within 24 f*cking hours.

Soup to nuts: Seems to me that either yer "in" or..................yer not.

You really need to learn how to write better. That was the most incoherent post I've read in a long time. Please re-type it again, and make sure that what you are trying to say is actually clear.

Originally posted by Jiddy78
I remember back at the beginnings of slamgate we had a team run SI Slam and SI Offtackle 100% of the time for the entire season 7. Our DC put in tickets to support and multiple postings in bugs forum etc etc. as there was very little chance to stop it. (One team lucked out and beat them barely in the playoffs) The entire offseason 8 went by and this very team built around this strategy and did so AGAIN in season 8...pretty much sending a team with 30+ agents and very active participation to the round file by our DC and owner calling it a day on such a fiasco...I'm guessing you can do the math on what that type of activity by an entire team (not to mention the copycatters etc etc) did to stats, league integrity and the such.

Point is:

Yellow balloon was nowhere to be found when a AA "schlub" came a-calling for a large issue present in the game. Matter of fact, the issue wasn't resolved for 100 days (2 seasons and offseason) since said discovery and multiple contacts about it long before said resolution.

BUT...The "in crowd" in world league gets rubbed the wrong way because a team skews some stats for a wide receiver....and yellow balloon posts some crap about "lack of respect for the game and people who play it" and "going out of your way to...try and ruin the enjoyment of other users is not something that we want to see happening here" within 24 f*cking hours.

Soup to nuts: Seems to me that either yer "in" or..................yer not.

I agree with you that SI Slam was a joke and I also agree that the situations are not dissimilar. On the one hand you have a play that is clearly overpowered but available to every team in the game. Some abused it (I was part of a team that did, which ironically had an OC at the time who is involved in this fiasco) but they also could get beat using that play (we did). Others tried to use it but failed, others tried not to use it too much, but couldn't ignore that it was effective either. The admins of the game made a statement that it was ok to use that play by not pulling it out of the playbooks, which is what should have happened imo.

Here we have a user/users deciding to fuck with everyone's statistics, which ultimately is not really a big deal in the grand scheme of things - honestly I don't think anyone really cares that their dot might not get a picture of a trophy. What I do perceive people care about is that one user or a group of users has effectively rendered the efforts of everyone else in the league useless through a clearly intentional action. Bort again has an opportunity to make a statement on what is ok and what is not in his game. The experience that most people believe they are paying for is a football simulation - if that is not what GLB intends to be then he should just leave everything alone. If it is then he should take action to let everyone know that he will not permit some users to damage the game for others.

Originally posted by Longhornfan1024
You really need to learn how to write better. That was the most incoherent post I've read in a long time. Please re-type it again, and make sure that what you are trying to say is actually clear.

What part did you not understand?

I've re-read it and I feel just fine about what I typed.

I'm not going to be re-typing anything.

Originally posted by jdros13
I agree with you that SI Slam was a joke and I also agree that the situations are not dissimilar. On the one hand you have a play that is clearly overpowered but available to every team in the game. Some abused it (I was part of a team that did, which ironically had an OC at the time who is involved in this fiasco) but they also could get beat using that play (we did). Others tried to use it but failed, others tried not to use it too much, but couldn't ignore that it was effective either. The admins of the game made a statement that it was ok to use that play by not pulling it out of the playbooks, which is what should have happened imo.

Here we have a user/users deciding to fuck with everyone's statistics, which ultimately is not really a big deal in the grand scheme of things - honestly I don't think anyone really cares that their dot might not get a picture of a trophy. What I do perceive people care about is that one user or a group of users has effectively rendered the efforts of everyone else in the league useless through a clearly intentional action. Bort again has an opportunity to make a statement on what is ok and what is not in his game. The experience that most people believe they are paying for is a football simulation - if that is not what GLB intends to be then he should just leave everything alone. If it is then he should take action to let everyone know that he will not permit some users to damage the game for others.

It's obviously two different situations as you have an agent handling both team's coordination in a way to skew a game's results...I agree with that.

My big deal is that you have Bort claiming integrity and respect for others and answering the call within 24 hours when "the right people" make a stink....but sitting on his laurels if yer just an everyday, non-forum player.

That, in its own right, smells bad to me....and I felt like commenting on it.

Now excuse me, I have a grammar lesson to attend to, apparently.

Originally posted by jdros13
Originally posted by Jiddy78

I remember back at the beginnings of slamgate we had a team run SI Slam and SI Offtackle 100% of the time for the entire season 7. Our DC put in tickets to support and multiple postings in bugs forum etc etc. as there was very little chance to stop it. (One team lucked out and beat them barely in the playoffs) The entire offseason 8 went by and this very team built around this strategy and did so AGAIN in season 8...pretty much sending a team with 30+ agents and very active participation to the round file by our DC and owner calling it a day on such a fiasco...I'm guessing you can do the math on what that type of activity by an entire team (not to mention the copycatters etc etc) did to stats, league integrity and the such.

Point is:

Yellow balloon was nowhere to be found when a AA "schlub" came a-calling for a large issue present in the game. Matter of fact, the issue wasn't resolved for 100 days (2 seasons and offseason) since said discovery and multiple contacts about it long before said resolution.

BUT...The "in crowd" in world league gets rubbed the wrong way because a team skews some stats for a wide receiver....and yellow balloon posts some crap about "lack of respect for the game and people who play it" and "going out of your way to...try and ruin the enjoyment of other users is not something that we want to see happening here" within 24 f*cking hours.

Soup to nuts: Seems to me that either yer "in" or..................yer not.

I agree with you that SI Slam was a joke and I also agree that the situations are not dissimilar. On the one hand you have a play that is clearly overpowered but available to every team in the game. Some abused it (I was part of a team that did, which ironically had an OC at the time who is involved in this fiasco) but they also could get beat using that play (we did). Others tried to use it but failed, others tried not to use it too much, but couldn't ignore that it was effective either. The admins of the game made a statement that it was ok to use that play by not pulling it out of the playbooks, which is what should have happened imo.

Here we have a user/users deciding to fuck with everyone's statistics, which ultimately is not really a big deal in the grand scheme of things - honestly I don't think anyone really cares that their dot might not get a picture of a trophy. What I do perceive people care about is that one user or a group of users has effectively rendered the efforts of everyone else in the league useless through a clearly intentional action. Bort again has an opportunity to make a statement on what is ok and what is not in his game. The experience that most people believe they are paying for is a football simulation - if that is not what GLB intends to be then he should just leave everything alone. If it is then he should take action to let everyone know that he will not permit some users to damage the game for others.

The admins of the game made a statement that it was ok to do by allowing someone to run two teams in the same league.

It's patently obvious that Bort favours the USAPL crowd, as he knows a large portion of them from before the game went public and many of them are now part of the mod team.

I don't really have a problem with that when they're bringing valid issues to his attention. What I do have a problem with is crying to Bort when a team that is beating them pulls what is really a trivial stunt and crying for bans.

Bort can of course ban whoever he wants, it's his game, noone says it has to be fair and just. But to ban for this without fair warning would be a giant dick move.

Originally posted by Longhornfan1024
Originally posted by silenthatred

1. No preemptive measure were taken.
2. It didn't break any rules. So it wasn't cheating.
3. This is far from the first time something like this has happened.

I'll take two first since one and three are pretty similar. Bort gets to decide what's cheating. Gart went into the AI of a team his team was about to play and changed their game so that it would be a blow out and his players could rack up huge individual statistics. There may not be a list of actions that are cheating and actions that are not cheating, but I think everyone agrees (and more importantly Bort agrees) that what he did was cheating. Even if it isn't cheating per se, it was an attempt to ruin the game for others, which is a banable offense if it's to the extent that Bort deems the cost of letting the agents stay is less than the cost of banning them.

In regards to one and three, neither of these mean that Bort shouldn't ban the agents involved for doing it this time. The fact that there was nothing in the code to prevent this and that it has happened before without repercussions might have given them a feeling of invincibility when decided to do what they did, but it doesn't change the fact that they what they were doing was wrong and it doesn't excuse their actions. This time just happened to be at a scale that it pissed off enough people that a large response has ensued. Whether it was the straw that broke the camel's back or whether it was just at a larger scale, people are pissed, and they want Bort to do something about it. Enough is enough.

Well your selective response makes my selective response easier...Cheating is defined as something illegal or rules being violated. The law would be the code in this case. So by definition you can't do that. Next would be the rules. Since there is no rule set against a person GMing two teams that could potentially play each other, no rule was violated either. Thus, not cheating by definition. Call it something else. Shady, underhanded tactics, cheap, gimmicky, whatever...but it isn't cheating. You guys almost sound like the Jets when they got wildcatted by the Dolphins.

Originally posted by silenthatred
The admins of the game made a statement that it was ok to do by allowing someone to run two teams in the same league.

Made a statement that what was ok to do?

Yes, it is clearly permitted to coordinate for 2 teams right now - I'm doing it poorly myself. Not sure where you are taking the leap to "it's now clearly permitted to damage the GLB experience for other users since I can be the Owner/Coordinator for 2 different teams." Pretty big stretch there.

Originally posted by Jiddy78
It's obviously two different situations as you have an agent handling both team's coordination in a way to skew a game's results...I agree with that.

My big deal is that you have Bort claiming integrity and respect for others and answering the call within 24 hours when "the right people" make a stink....but sitting on his laurels if yer just an everyday, non-forum player.

That, in its own right, smells bad to me....and I felt like commenting on it.

Now excuse me, I have a grammar lesson to attend to, apparently.

I agree that he should treat the complaints of the "average user" the same as the complaints of "the right people." Unfortunately, that isn't the case. However, his differential treatment of the users doesn't excuse what happened here. It may not be fair that some people get punished and others don't (though there will always be arguments that distinguish between the different situations), but the agents who did this can't claim that they didn't do anything. They chose to do what they did and now they have to live with the consequences. Arguing that some other people did some other thing that should be punished won't get them off from being punished for the actions committed.

Originally posted by jdros13
Originally posted by silenthatred

The admins of the game made a statement that it was ok to do by allowing someone to run two teams in the same league.

Made a statement that what was ok to do?

Yes, it is clearly permitted to coordinate for 2 teams right now - I'm doing it poorly myself. Not sure where you are taking the leap to "it's now clearly permitted to damage the GLB experience for other users since I can be the Owner/Coordinator for 2 different teams." Pretty big stretch there.

Saying that what he did damaged the GLB experience for others is a pretty big stretch. I said before this would work better if you all could respond without saying how you feel personally affected, but that's all it is. This is a community, how you personally feel doesn't matter when speaking in terms of the community. How damaging was this to the overall community of GLB? That is the degree at which it should matter.

Originally posted by silenthatred
Well your selective response makes my selective response easier...Cheating is defined as something illegal or rules being violated. The law would be the code in this case. So by definition you can't do that. Next would be the rules. Since there is no rule set against a person GMing two teams that could potentially play each other, no rule was violated either. Thus, not cheating by definition. Call it something else. Shady, underhanded tactics, cheap, gimmicky, whatever...but it isn't cheating. You guys almost sound like the Jets when they got wildcatted by the Dolphins.

8. CHEATING

You agree to use the GoalLineBlitz.com website in a manner that is consistent with the expressed wishes of the owners of GoalLineBlitz.com and the Terms of Use herein. Any attempt to cheat, gain multiple accounts through illicit means, or gain Flex Points via fake referrals will result in immediate termination of all accounts you have opened, and may result in a ban of the IP address used to open said accounts. Cheating includes, but is not limited to: using automated account creation or log-in tools (i.e. "bots"), exploiting a bug or loop-hole without bringing it to the attention of GoalLineBlitz.com administrators, attempting to hack into any GoalLineBlitz.com server, and gaining Flex Points through fake referrals.

You agree that the interpretation of the word "cheating" is entirely up to the administrators of GoalLineBlitz.com and may change at any time, in order to improve the experience of all users.

There is no standing definition of cheating. Your whole argument is wrong.

Originally posted by jdros13
Originally posted by silenthatred

Well your selective response makes my selective response easier...Cheating is defined as something illegal or rules being violated. The law would be the code in this case. So by definition you can't do that. Next would be the rules. Since there is no rule set against a person GMing two teams that could potentially play each other, no rule was violated either. Thus, not cheating by definition. Call it something else. Shady, underhanded tactics, cheap, gimmicky, whatever...but it isn't cheating. You guys almost sound like the Jets when they got wildcatted by the Dolphins.

Originally posted by Terms of Use

You agree that the interpretation of the word "cheating" is entirely up to the administrators of GoalLineBlitz.com and may change at any time, in order to improve the experience of all users.

What the "may change at anytime" part fails to mention is that under a legally binding contract, when terms DO change, notice has to be given. You can't just change them and say "Oh, well this is what I meant" after the fact. The other party then has right to terminate if they do not agree to the new terms.

Originally posted by Longhornfan1024
Originally posted by silenthatred

Well your selective response makes my selective response easier...Cheating is defined as something illegal or rules being violated. The law would be the code in this case. So by definition you can't do that. Next would be the rules. Since there is no rule set against a person GMing two teams that could potentially play each other, no rule was violated either. Thus, not cheating by definition. Call it something else. Shady, underhanded tactics, cheap, gimmicky, whatever...but it isn't cheating. You guys almost sound like the Jets when they got wildcatted by the Dolphins.

8. CHEATING

You agree to use the GoalLineBlitz.com website in a manner that is consistent with the expressed wishes of the owners of GoalLineBlitz.com and the Terms of Use herein. Any attempt to cheat, gain multiple accounts through illicit means, or gain Flex Points via fake referrals will result in immediate termination of all accounts you have opened, and may result in a ban of the IP address used to open said accounts. Cheating includes, but is not limited to: using automated account creation or log-in tools (i.e. "bots"), exploiting a bug or loop-hole without bringing it to the attention of GoalLineBlitz.com administrators, attempting to hack into any GoalLineBlitz.com server, and gaining Flex Points through fake referrals.

You agree that the interpretation of the word "cheating" is entirely up to the administrators of GoalLineBlitz.com and may change at any time, in order to improve the experience of all users.

There is no standing definition of cheating. Your whole argument is wrong.

What the "may change at anytime" part fails to mention is that under a legally binding contract, when terms DO change, notice has to be given. You can't just change them and say "Oh, well this is what I meant" after the fact. The other party then has right to terminate if they do not agree to the new terms. And there is a standing definition in Websters and the meaning in the English language. Do those count?

Edit: And this was soooooo brought to the attention of the administrators, so I'm not sure why you bolded that part.