Dominion Strategy Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Pages: 1 ... 5 6 [7] 8 9 ... 18  All

Author Topic: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]  (Read 92147 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Donald X.

  • Dominion Designer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5843
  • Respect: +23530
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« Reply #150 on: July 03, 2012, 05:43:51 pm »
+4

Let's not punish the many for the sins of a few. 
"This is why we can't have nice things."
Logged

Donald X.

  • Dominion Designer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5843
  • Respect: +23530
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« Reply #151 on: July 03, 2012, 05:44:41 pm »
+1

Then I guess he'll have to DQ the actual winner, jtl005, who is on record as having used it during the game.

To be clear, I explained in great detail exactly what I would do before the tournament started, and it was approved as non-DQable by the organizer.
Not his call! It won't be according to Jay anyway, not ever.
Logged

questioneer

  • Baron
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 57
  • Respect: +12
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« Reply #152 on: July 03, 2012, 05:45:07 pm »
0

In this case I made the spreadsheet publicly available, so that I think it can only be argued that I was playing at a disadvantage. My opponents (or at least jtl005) were certainly using it during the games, as you can see in the video by the labeled selection boxes of other users showing up in the spreadsheet, and jtl005 asking me where the sheet for game 2 was in chat.
Show this to Jay at the tournament and I think there's a decent chance he will DQ you. Also, my estimate of the chance of a
 future online qualifier happening is zero.

Hey, Donald as a GM for one of these qualifiers, in my mind what you and Jay rule on this issue is the law of the land.  I will fully support your decisions- if that that helps you guys in any way.
Logged

ftl

  • Mountebank
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2056
  • Shuffle iT Username: ftl
  • Respect: +1340
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« Reply #153 on: July 03, 2012, 05:46:53 pm »
0

Eh, I can entirely see why there won't be any more online qualifiers, considering that Personman's point is that you can't stop people from using stuff like point counters and spreadsheets.

I had assumed that in this community, people would play fairly and honestly and not use such things if not agreed to by all players, but I guess not. Hence, no more online qualifiers. Makes sense to me.
Logged

O

  • Jester
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 836
  • Respect: +603
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« Reply #154 on: July 03, 2012, 05:49:33 pm »
0

>Goes without internet really for a few days
>Comes back to see massive shitstorm
>Utterly confused about what's happening
>Finds out its about absolutely nothing of importance.

Despite my preference (which I have but won't post), who seriously gives that much of a <redacted> to care so obsessively about something that influences .1% of tournament games played at a high level. I mean, identical starting hands and shuffling patterns IRL have such a larger effect than this..

PPE: Jesus Christ. Wanderwinder had legitimate concerns. Personman has a legitimate point addressing those concerns and while his play was potential a minor point of viable discussion, screaming "CHEATER" at the top of your lungs doesn't help anyone, Kirian and Ftl.
Logged

Captain_Frisk

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1257
  • Respect: +1261
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« Reply #155 on: July 03, 2012, 05:52:11 pm »
0

I have nothing against people with open marriages or people who like point counters. Your argument is crazy nonsense though, and it turns out humanity is better than that.

Donald X. Epic Burn.  This is starting to get better than the Peterson /  Sirlin / Knizia fiasco.
Logged
I support funsockets.... taking as much time as they need to get it right.

chwhite

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1065
  • Respect: +440
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« Reply #156 on: July 03, 2012, 05:56:43 pm »
+11

I know I'm going to regret fanning the flames like this, but I can't hold out anymore.

I think that's actually a pretty unfortunately inaccurate account of what happened, and I'm now kind of thinking that the email thread should be published despite your objections...

Here is my version of a similar rundown:

1. WW raises the issue that Pman wants to use an undisableable card counter

2. Theory "asks" that I not use it.

3. After some discussion, Theory clarifies that it is explicitly legal, but that he will be "disappointed" if I use it.

4. WanderingWinder threatens me with a lawsuit, calls me a huge variety of names, and then withdraws.

5. I really should have let things rest here, but instead I try to continue the discussion, since I think that soft pressure of the kind that Theory was applying is a really awful thing to bring to a competitive environment.

6. Theory and I have a really nice private chat in which we come to understand that (I think) he understands my logic perfectly, but wishes that everyone could make concessions to the desires of the group and play with each other harmoniously. This is a noble and understandable desire, but I am too concerned with the ease with which my opponents can cheat to take this path.

7. Half an hour before the game is scheduled to start, rrenaud suggests the "no point counter, slow play is punishable" ruling, and Theory adopts it. I protest that I will do an exactly equivalent thing (use the spreadsheet) with no chance of it causing me to slow play, and that thus this ruling is silly. Nevertheless, it us upheld and I abide by it.


Even if we assume this version of events to be the correct one, you're still in the wrong.

What would have been so hard about being a good sport, respecting the wishes of your opponents AND the tournament organizer (and as it so happens the designer of the game), and just agreeing to turn off the point counter as soon as you were asked, even if you didn't 100 percent agree with their reasoning?  What would have been so bad about a little human decency?  For shame.
« Last Edit: July 03, 2012, 06:05:45 pm by chwhite »
Logged
To discard or not to discard?  That is the question.

Powerman

  • Jester
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 766
  • Respect: +603
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order
« Reply #157 on: July 03, 2012, 05:58:33 pm »
0

Quote from: blueblimp
A little note here: from what I remember, the Donald X. ruling is that if one player is taking notes on paper, that is a variant. To play a variant legitimately, both players need to agree.

..and all players are given ample opportunity to opt out of games with the extension variant, as you yourself have just noted. I want to give you the benefit of the doubt, but it's hard not to read this as fairly pointless antagonism.

Quote from: Kirian
This addon will be barred from future IsoDom tournaments, should they happen.

You can do whatever you want in tournaments you run, but I beg you to consider the following line of argument:

1. Everyone likes to be able to trust each other and treat each other without suspicion.
2. People like to win.
3. People sometimes succumb to the temptation to secure advantages via illegitimate means, especially if they are 100% certain that they cannot be caught.
4. The point counter can be trivially modified to be undetectable. As blueblimp points out, at present there is no reason to believe anyone has done so (but neither is there particular reason to believe that they haven't).
5. Even if no one is actually cheating, the existence of an easy and undetectable way to cheat breeds suspicion and resentment.
6. It also provides an incentive for otherwise honest players to begin cheating - "My opponent is probably using an undetectable point counter, I guess I will too".
7. The only resolution to problems of unenforceability is to legalize the unenforceable action.
8. Therefore, to maintain the trusting nature of the community, and to avoid providing unfair advantages to those willing to cheat in undetectable ways, the extension should always be legal in competitive play. This is an unfortunate conclusion for those who have a strong preference for Dominion play without the extension, but I believe it is nevertheless an inescapable fact of online life. The alternative is to incentivize and reward unethical behavior.

I think you asked for someone to dispute this?  (if you were referring to some other post, my bad!)  First off, what you say in 4 basically is "Cheaters will cheat".  I assume you are American (as this was US only) and from my understanding of RL events (I know this is the internet) is RL cheating (AKA breaking the rules or laws) while not always caught, is never permissible  because it is done.  Let's look at speeding.  Who amongst us has not at some point gone over the speed limit?  I'm tempted to say no one, but we'll just say for ease that only 90% of people have gone over the speed limit.  Now, does this mean we abandon our speed limits because they are often ignored, and rarely caught?  No, obviously not.  There are police that watch roads and catch some people who speed, we'll say 10% (not that high, but w/e).  So 90% of the 90% (or 81%) of our population speeds (breaking the rules) and gets away with this.  But this doesn't mean we need to abolish speed limits.  Not a perfect example, I know.  But oh well.
Logged
A man on a mission.

Personman

  • Conspirator
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 230
  • Respect: +62
    • View Profile
    • My Friendfeed
Re: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« Reply #158 on: July 03, 2012, 06:02:30 pm »
+1

Quote from: Donald X
long rebuttal

Thank you! It is very helpful to know what you are talking about. I'm glad you decided that it was worth your time. Also it was funny!

First, my not-serious response: I'm totally poly, so whatever, man! (I actually am, but this obviously does not invalidate your argument).

My actual response is that games are different from life. In life, I agree wholeheartedly that we must trust each other, and that is, in the end, usually more rewarding to be worthy of trust than to betray it. There are exceptions; as you've said, it's all just a bunch of atoms moving around, and there's no real moral consistency to anything. But on the whole I think we're on the same page here.

I just don't think the same ideals can apply to games with stakes played over the internet. There's a reason that my side won this debate in the Poker community but hasn't done so so convincingly here: it's bigger, and there's more at stake. Under those conditions, the system will converge towards the strictly, logically fair alternative much more quickly, and analogies to real-life morals and community values stop holding water. (Of course, there are other, insoluble fairness issues in online poker, like collusion. But since people really like playing online poker, they kinda just have to ignore them.)

I don't think we need to have a 100-page discussion about this. I respect the desire to have an online community in which rules are not made on the presumption of dishonesty. It's a nice dream, and maybe I am too cynical in thinking that we cannot achieve it here (though see my earlier point re trolls on isotropic). I personally prefer it when rules ARE made on that assumption, because then I don't have to be afraid that I am being a chump by not taking advantage of my trivial ability to cheat, and can instead rest assured that my actions are legal and that everyone else is doing it too. But it's okay for us to have this difference of opinion, and there is room for both kinds of people to play and enjoy this wonderful game that you have made for us.

As theory put it very well at some point during the email discussion, the primary take away from the whole thing is that rules need to be hammered out a bit better ahead of time.
Logged
My youtube channel. Isoptropic games with commentary!

Ozle

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3625
  • Sorry, this text is personal.
  • Respect: +3356
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« Reply #159 on: July 03, 2012, 06:04:00 pm »
+5

Quote
I think you asked for someone to dispute this?  (if you were referring to some other post, my bad!)  First off, what you say in 4 basically is "Cheaters will cheat".  I assume you are American (as this was US only) and from my understanding of RL events (I know this is the internet) is RL cheating (AKA breaking the rules or laws) while not always caught, is never permissible  because it is done.  Let's look at speeding.  Who amongst us has not at some point gone over the speed limit?  I'm tempted to say no one, but we'll just say for ease that only 90% of people have gone over the speed limit.  Now, does this mean we abandon our speed limits because they are often ignored, and rarely caught?  No, obviously not.  There are police that watch roads and catch some people who speed, we'll say 10% (not that high, but w/e).  So 90% of the 90% (or 81%) of our population speeds (breaking the rules) and gets away with this.  But this doesn't mean we need to abolish speed limits.  Not a perfect example, I know.  But oh well.

A better example could be athletes taking drugs

We know some athletes take drugs, we cant stop that. Every now and then one gets caught, but in all liklihood a load more are taking some and not getting caught.

Therefore should we allow drug taking so that everyone is on a level playing field?
Logged
Try the Ozle Google Map Challenge!
http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=7466.0

Sullying players Enjoyment of Innovation since 2013 Apparently!

ftl

  • Mountebank
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2056
  • Shuffle iT Username: ftl
  • Respect: +1340
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« Reply #160 on: July 03, 2012, 06:09:31 pm »
0

Heh. Unlike previous analogies, I think that one fits perfectly. Don't like the speeding or cheating-on-spouse analogy, but that one is good.
Logged

timchen

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 704
  • Shuffle iT Username: allfail
  • Respect: +233
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« Reply #161 on: July 03, 2012, 06:09:46 pm »
+2

Quote
This argument about bringing the qualifiers in line as much as possible with what will happen at Nationals keeps coming up over and over, and it continues to baffle me. Online Dominion is nothing like paper Dominion for so many other reasons - the psychology of being face to face, the presence of the log, the chance to misclick, no requirement to shuffle, the official point counter - that bringing up one additional difference and trying to make a principled stand on those grounds just baffles me.

@Personman: Thing is-- this tournament is the qualification for the nationals. All in all I think the objective of the online qualifier is to find someone among us who is the most likely to win the national. Thus, if memorization is a part that would be tested in the nationals, I'd rather it is also tested in the qualifier. I hope it is easy to see how this is obviously different from other things you have listed.

On the other hand I do find WW sometimes a bit hard to communicate. But if a large portion of your insistence on using the point counter is based on his response I think it went too far.

@Donald: a great response. Exactly what I would like to see yesterday.
Logged

theory

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3594
  • Respect: +6048
    • View Profile
    • Dominion Strategy
Re: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« Reply #162 on: July 03, 2012, 06:10:59 pm »
+3

Whoa whoa whoa.

I never, ever approved the point counter or labeled it "explicitly legal".  I don't care about all your other statements, I haven't gone back and analyzed the dozens of emails exchanged, but I absolutely, most certainly, would never say anything of the sort. 

What I did say (initially) is that if you use it, I couldn't DQ you.  This is partially because you would have instead simply taken notes (and made the game take 3x as long) -- an understandable temptation, and partially because I felt constrained by the fact that the tournament rules were silent on the subject.  Had I the foresight to anticipate this issue, I would have simply banned it, no questions asked. 

I am uninterested in the factual dispute of what happened.  As far as I'm concerned, the finals happened, they could have gone better, but they happened and they're over.  But I don't want anyone to think that I supported the use of the extension.  Moreover, what we were forced to do in the middle of a tournament, constrained by existing tournament rules, is not equivalent to what we would do in the future.
Logged

Powerman

  • Jester
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 766
  • Respect: +603
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« Reply #163 on: July 03, 2012, 06:11:37 pm »
0

A better example could be athletes taking drugs

We know some athletes take drugs, we cant stop that. Every now and then one gets caught, but in all liklihood a load more are taking some and not getting caught.

Therefore should we allow drug taking so that everyone is on a level playing field?

That is a better example.  Why didn't I think of that?  ::)
Logged
A man on a mission.

Personman

  • Conspirator
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 230
  • Respect: +62
    • View Profile
    • My Friendfeed
Re: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« Reply #164 on: July 03, 2012, 06:12:51 pm »
0

Speeding: as with Donald's example, my response is that games are not real life. Additionally, going over the speed limit is not an arbitrary advantage: you are legitimately more likely to die and/or kill someone.

Athletes: This won't win me any sympathy points, I'm sure, but I think professional physical sports are pretty stupid. I mean, they are fun and great and people should play them, but when millions of dollars (not to mention, often, the lives of fans) are at stake, it just gets absurd. And then there's all the impossible murkiness around prostheses and other body mods - if a fake leg can help me run better, but it's illegal to have the operation voluntarily, should I try to get run over by a car? It's just a mess, and I really don't care what sports regulatory bodies end up doing. I would be fine with them legalizing steroids.
Logged
My youtube channel. Isoptropic games with commentary!

Personman

  • Conspirator
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 230
  • Respect: +62
    • View Profile
    • My Friendfeed
Re: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« Reply #165 on: July 03, 2012, 06:14:15 pm »
0

Whoa whoa whoa.

I never, ever approved the point counter or labeled it "explicitly legal".  I don't care about all your other statements, I haven't gone back and analyzed the dozens of emails exchanged, but I absolutely, most certainly, would never say anything of the sort. 

What I did say (initially) is that if you use it, I couldn't DQ you.  This is because I felt constrained by the fact that the tournament rules were silent on the subject.  Had I the foresight to anticipate this issue, I would have simply banned it, no questions asked. 

I don't know the difference between a tournament organizer telling me I won't be DQ'd and an action being explicitly legal. In my mind you've just directly contradicted yourself.
Logged
My youtube channel. Isoptropic games with commentary!

eHalcyon

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8689
  • Respect: +9174
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« Reply #166 on: July 03, 2012, 06:26:20 pm »
0

Whoa whoa whoa.

I never, ever approved the point counter or labeled it "explicitly legal".  I don't care about all your other statements, I haven't gone back and analyzed the dozens of emails exchanged, but I absolutely, most certainly, would never say anything of the sort. 

What I did say (initially) is that if you use it, I couldn't DQ you.  This is because I felt constrained by the fact that the tournament rules were silent on the subject.  Had I the foresight to anticipate this issue, I would have simply banned it, no questions asked. 

I don't know the difference between a tournament organizer telling me I won't be DQ'd and an action being explicitly legal. In my mind you've just directly contradicted yourself.

In tournaments as in life, not everything is black and white.  I believe theory is saying that he did not consider the point counter "explicitly legal" but his hands were tied and he had to allow it because neither was it explicitly illegal.  "I can't stop you from doing this thing" is a far cry from "go forth with my blessing."
Logged

zxcvbn2

  • Golem
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 193
  • Respect: +87
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« Reply #167 on: July 03, 2012, 06:40:23 pm »
0

Athletes: This won't win me any sympathy points, I'm sure, but I think professional physical sports are pretty stupid. I mean, they are fun and great and people should play them, but when millions of dollars (not to mention, often, the lives of fans) are at stake, it just gets absurd. And then there's all the impossible murkiness around prostheses and other body mods - if a fake leg can help me run better, but it's illegal to have the operation voluntarily, should I try to get run over by a car? It's just a mess, and I really don't care what sports regulatory bodies end up doing. I would be fine with them legalizing steroids.

Say what? What does this have to do with the comparison between competitive sports and competitive gaming? I think it's a pretty good analogy. And the fact that people may or may not take it more seriously than they should is irrelevant. I think people have taken this point counter extension more seriously than they should, and yet here we are. We still should strive for fairness, as they should in sports.

You're competing for an IRL dominion tournament. As far as I'm concerned, it should be as close to IRL dominion as possible. And it totally would be possible if people weren't dicks and would just follow the rules on an honor system. It'd be great for a bunch of other things, too.  Apparently that's not really possible with our crowd. Wouldn't have expected that.
Logged
One Day Cup II Champion: qmech III: Rabid IV: Qvist

Personman

  • Conspirator
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 230
  • Respect: +62
    • View Profile
    • My Friendfeed
Re: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« Reply #168 on: July 03, 2012, 06:40:49 pm »
0

Quote from: eHalcyon
In tournaments as in life, not everything is black and white.  I believe theory is saying that he did not consider the point counter "explicitly legal" but his hands were tied and he had to allow it because neither was it explicitly illegal.  "I can't stop you from doing this thing" is a far cry from "go forth with my blessing."

Ok, but blessing or no, if something isn't illegal, and it is advantageous, I don't think it can be immoral to do it.

That may sound insane, but here's why it's not: I think that competitive events should have explicit, enforced sportsmanship guidelines. These can never be precise, but they don't need to be. As soon as there is the potential to be DQ'd for slow play, trash talk, or other unsportsmanlike conduct, it stops being advantageous. The Magic: The Gathering Infraction Procedure Guide handles this extremely well.

Quote from: zxcvbn2
As far as I'm concerned, it should be as close to IRL dominion as possible.

And as I've said at length earlier in this thread, I think that's a completely absurd notion.

Quote from: zxcvbn2
Say what? What does this have to do with the comparison between competitive sports and competitive gaming? I think it's a pretty good analogy.

And I think it isn't, because I don't think it's possible to resolve the issues with physical sports, whereas I do think it is possible to resolve them in abstract games.

I've never heard of any controversy about top chess players taking nootropics, and I guess that might become an issue in abstract gaming circles some day. If that day comes, we can hash out the issues then, but certainly some isotropic players may be taking them right now, and those same players may be competing in tournaments. Should we send drug-testing teams to everyone's house? Should we add explicit no-drugs clauses to our tournament rules and hope everyone abides by them?
« Last Edit: July 03, 2012, 06:49:34 pm by Personman »
Logged
My youtube channel. Isoptropic games with commentary!

Ozle

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3625
  • Sorry, this text is personal.
  • Respect: +3356
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« Reply #169 on: July 03, 2012, 06:48:53 pm »
+1

"if something isn't illegal, and it is advantageous, I don't think it can be immoral to do it."

One of the craziest things I have heard so far:

So would you agree your GF/BF  cheating with your Friend/Dad/Sibling on you wouldnt be immoral? Thats not illegal and it has an advantage for her?

Logged
Try the Ozle Google Map Challenge!
http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=7466.0

Sullying players Enjoyment of Innovation since 2013 Apparently!

zxcvbn2

  • Golem
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 193
  • Respect: +87
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« Reply #170 on: July 03, 2012, 06:49:42 pm »
+1

Ok, but blessing or no, if something isn't illegal, and it is advantageous, I don't think it can be immoral to do it.

That may sound insane, but here's why it's not: I think that competitive events should have explicit, enforced sportsmanship guidelines. These can never be precise, but they don't need to be. As soon as there is the potential to be DQ'd for slow play, trash talk, or other unsportsmanlike conduct, it stops being advantageous. The Magic: The Gathering Infraction Procedure Guide handles this extremely well.

Emphasis mine. And that's the issue. Hate to be all sappy, but the whole point of sportsmanship is to strive for fairness and good will outside of what the rules explicitly allow.

For instance, there's no explicit rule that teams shake hands at the end of a hockey series, but they do it. An even better example, IMO, is in baseball, where you can get thrown out if the umpire thinks you tried to intentionally hit a batter. There's nothing in the rules explicitly stating that you can't intentionally hit a batter (at least that I can find). But it's still reason for ejection in that sport.

Though I'm sure you don't like this reasons because they involve sports and aren't directly comparable. I find it a very fair analogy, fwiw.
Logged
One Day Cup II Champion: qmech III: Rabid IV: Qvist

Personman

  • Conspirator
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 230
  • Respect: +62
    • View Profile
    • My Friendfeed
Re: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« Reply #171 on: July 03, 2012, 06:54:10 pm »
0

Quote from: zxcvbn2
Emphasis mine. And that's the issue. Hate to be all sappy, but the whole point of sportsmanship is to strive for fairness and good will outside of what the rules explicitly allow.

The world is big, and the internet brings us all together. What is sportsmanlike in your town may not be in mine. Without explicit guidelines, situations like this will always arise. That is why a game similar to Dominion, but with a much larger and more competitive community, has to have them. Ask any Magic judge, and e will tell you that the sportsmanship entries in the IPG are absolutely vital to the success of the game and the creation of a healthy tournament atmosphere.
« Last Edit: July 03, 2012, 06:58:36 pm by Personman »
Logged
My youtube channel. Isoptropic games with commentary!

nopawnsintended

  • Conspirator
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 220
  • Respect: +186
    • View Profile
    • My Website
Re: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« Reply #172 on: July 03, 2012, 06:55:34 pm »
+3

Quote from: Donald X
long rebuttal
I don't think we need to have a 100-page discussion about this. I respect the desire to have an online community in which rules are not made on the presumption of dishonesty. It's a nice dream, and maybe I am too cynical in thinking that we cannot achieve it here (though see my earlier point re trolls on isotropic). I personally prefer it when rules ARE made on that assumption, because then I don't have to be afraid that I am being a chump by not taking advantage of my trivial ability to cheat, and can instead rest assured that my actions are legal and that everyone else is doing it too. But it's okay for us to have this difference of opinion, and there is room for both kinds of people to play and enjoy this wonderful game that you have made for us.

I presumed honesty in the tournament because the spirit of the rules (Re: Polk5440's comment) was that players have a level playing field.  I didn't assume that others would take advantage of loopholes in the rules because I wouldn't ever find it optimal -- and I never thought anyone else would either.  It seems like such a hassle to defy the spirit of a tournament, just to secure 1/10th of a point to 5 points of a level of playing ability.

You might not agree with my premise, and hence, we come to different conclusions.  You say under bullet point 2 that people want to win.  I think that's right, but incomplete.  In any competition, I want to win, but I want winning to mean something, and it won't mean anything if I deliberately tilt the field in my favor. 

That is, winning (right) > losing (right) > winning (wrong). 

In other words, if I took advantage of a tracking technique that is not explicitly mentioned in the rules (yet not explicitly prohibited, but explicitly frowned upon; see theory's comments) and won the match, I'd doubt myself.  I'd feel bad.  I wouldn't know if I could do it without the (dubious, not sanctioned) technique, and that would always eat away at me when I think about my victory.  I think that's why people are surprised that you have been so persistent to push for deck tracking in the finals.  If WW objected and theory frowned upon it, why not just play the game "blind"?  If you win despite your uncertainty that your competition is cutting corners, it's that much more of an accomplishment.

This argument applies to manually-entered speadsheets with deck contents as well as unofficial point trackers.  I know this has been hammered on from both sides, but my view is that a big part of the game is knowing the state of the game based on playing it.  I stuck to that in the tournament, and I will in future competitions, but I guess I'm a chump for that.
« Last Edit: July 03, 2012, 06:59:03 pm by nopawnsintended »
Logged

Powerman

  • Jester
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 766
  • Respect: +603
    • View Profile
Re: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« Reply #173 on: July 03, 2012, 06:58:38 pm »
0

Personman, if you had a way to say order your deck in anyway you wanted, and no one would find out about it, would you do it?
Logged
A man on a mission.

Personman

  • Conspirator
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 230
  • Respect: +62
    • View Profile
    • My Friendfeed
Re: Finals order [plus a point/card counter debate]
« Reply #174 on: July 03, 2012, 07:00:49 pm »
0

Personman, if you had a way to say order your deck in anyway you wanted, and no one would find out about it, would you do it?

If only I had this ability, and I knew that, absolutely not.

If everyone did, yes! And I've often thought that stacking your deck instead of shuffling it would be a really interesting Dominion variant, though it would be slow, and a lot of people wouldn't like to play it.

If WW objected and theory frowned upon it, why not just play the game "blind"?  If you win despite your uncertainty that your competition is cutting corners, it's that much more of an accomplishment.

I hate repeating myself this much for fear of turning into that 100 page thread Donald was scared of, but one more time:

I advocated that the rules allow as much information tracking as possible, because I do not trust internet strangers not to cheat.
Once the rules were set in stone, I publicly announced my intentions to take full advantage of them, extended that advantage to my opponents in a gesture of good will (and at no real loss to me, since hopefully they would be taking full advantage of the rules on their own anyway), and did so.

I see no reason why I ought to accede to an opponent's request NOT to take full advantage of the rules. It would be like asking my opponent not to buy Provinces.
« Last Edit: July 03, 2012, 07:18:55 pm by Personman »
Logged
My youtube channel. Isoptropic games with commentary!
Pages: 1 ... 5 6 [7] 8 9 ... 18  All
 

Page created in 0.104 seconds with 23 queries.