Conquer Club

Posted: **Tue Apr 17, 2012 4:59 pm**

josko.ri wrote:I do not remember that organizers changed ANY their decision from the beginning (am I wrong, did they?) no matter that their decision sometimes got ZERO support posts in thread (like the one to put LEG over LHDD). So I do not think they will change this ruling neither nor any other decision/rule. That is why I think any type of "discussion" in public is anyway useless, like speaking with wall without reply.

It seems like ego of organizer are so big that public players may think whatever, suggest whatever, and give whatever arguments, decision will anyway be how organizer says and will never be changed. For me it seems like organizer is perfect person and his opinion is always the best, who cares what numerous other players from clan world think when we have such perfect organizer.

If someone does not agree with my statement, please give me ANY link where organizer changed ANY his decision after public discussion/support had proved that some rule/decision was not good. Of course, that link does not exist, obviously we have perfect organizer who always decide the best solution. It is not weird that players who want to contribute in clan world in any way loose their will for it, when they see how much influence public opinion and effort has on organizer's decisions.

eddie2 did not make any abuse like player, what he did wrong was done from his "AKA first contact" role. So removing him from AKA contact due to not doing his tasks well are ok, but removing him like a player is unfair, as he did not do any playing abuse.

hummm, it's probably time for us to have a closer look at what's happening here...

got my answer after some reading... nothing to worry about. I'm glad to contribute to the viewer/post count of the CL4.

go on guys, i didn't want to disturb anyone

Posted: **Tue Apr 17, 2012 6:09 pm**

WPBRJ wrote:
lynch5762 wrote:qwert... you have officially made my day! I now know that all is right in the universe and that whenever I am feeling a little down..... I will just have to remember that we have qwenglish

i have to say as bad as my day has been when i read this i chuckled and want to thank you Qwert that made my day

+➊

Posted: **Thu Apr 19, 2012 2:13 pm**

Sorry for the delay, updated our roster

Primary Contact. Leehar

Secondary Contact. jj3044

Preliminary list of 10 players

1. dwilhelmi
2. mkcummins
3. ljex
4. Ninja Champion
5. silverking8
6. netspyman
7. pconnolly365
8. swimmerdude99
9. The Voice
10. mudfighter

Posted: **Thu Apr 19, 2012 9:38 pm**

Leehar wrote:Sorry for the delay, updated our roster

Primary Contact. Leehar

Secondary Contact. jj3044

Preliminary list of 10 players

1. dwilhelmi
2. mkcummins
3. ljex
4. Ninja Champion
5. silverking8
6. netspyman
7. pconnolly365
8. swimmerdude99
9. The Voice
10. mudfighter

done

Posted: **Fri Apr 27, 2012 2:53 am**

Can we make a rewrite of the unlimited rule so that it is clear and unambiguous?

Unlimited is allowed with a limit of 2 games total per home set on trips and quad games only

The way it is written can easily be interpreted as the limit only applying to trips & quads (in fact the sentence structure implies this is the case). Had it said "Unlimited is only allowed in trips and quads, with a limit of two games per round" there would be no argument. See how easy that was!

English is a beautiful language, yet its versatility can lead to confusion. Let's at least put right what may be fixed. Thanks.

p.s. great posts from Foxy & Josko on this - they were spot on - and apologies for dragging this up but it may as well be set to rights.

Posted: **Sun Apr 29, 2012 5:13 am**

WPBRJ wrote:
laughingcavalier wrote:
tokle wrote:
laughingcavalier wrote:
tokle wrote:I have added a randomly selected player from TSM's list to the quads game on FNNA, georgerx7di.

I pmd you & dj the new contact list a few weeks back & dj said I didn't need to post it any
where. Here's our list:

TSM

first contact: laughingcavalier
second contact: skillfull

laughingcavalier
Tisha
firstholliday
luckywar
ender_w99
Nate the Great
codeblue1018
Blind Date
skillfull
kratos644

This goes in the main thread. Not here.

thnx LC already change and sent pms to all involved

You have still got the wrong listing for TSM in all the threads. This is the correct one.

Posted: **Wed May 16, 2012 5:22 am**

Can PLEASE have regular updates (once a week) to the CL4 league tables. Div 3 hasn't been updated for a while and even though a mistake in the War vs Koa score has been pointed out it's still not been corrected over a week later.

Posted: **Wed May 16, 2012 7:47 am**

Keefie wrote:Can PLEASE have regular updates (once a week) to the CL4 league tables. Div 3 hasn't been updated for a while and even though a mistake in the War vs Koa score has been pointed out it's still not been corrected over a week later.

Not the only one and DJ has a right to have spare time for himself

Posted: **Wed May 16, 2012 4:57 pm**

Yeah, even bi weekly updates would be nice.

Posted: **Tue May 22, 2012 6:07 am**

I was just reading rules of the event and found this:

overwiew spoiler

WPBRJ wrote:10. League position is determined firstly by Total Points, then by Total Games Won, then by comparing Head-to-Head rounds between any tied teams. If this still does not separate teams then a best-of-3 Play-Off will take-place (Random Trips, Escalating, Chained, Sunny).

Last edited by WPBRJ on Sun Apr 22, 2012 6:59 pm, edited 28 times in total.

Did organizers break their own rules by putting LEG over LHDD without playing best-of-3 Play-Off?

Posted: **Tue May 22, 2012 7:40 am**

josko.ri wrote:I was just reading rules of the event and found this:

overwiew spoiler
WPBRJ wrote:10. League position is determined firstly by Total Points, then by Total Games Won, then by comparing Head-to-Head rounds between any tied teams. If this still does not separate teams then a best-of-3 Play-Off will take-place (Random Trips, Escalating, Chained, Sunny).

Last edited by WPBRJ on Sun Apr 22, 2012 6:59 pm, edited 28 times in total.

Did organizers break their own rules by putting LEG over LHDD without playing best-of-3 Play-Off?

you might be right finally. but i guess it's too late for us to complain now we've started the second phase. can we have an official position about that ?

Posted: **Tue May 22, 2012 8:13 am**

How did LHDD not notice they were just as eligible as LEG when the results were final?

Nice spot josko.

Posted: **Tue May 22, 2012 10:48 am**

Chariot of Fire wrote:How did LHDD not notice they were just as eligible as LEG when the results were final?

Nice spot josko.

Josko is a twit. The decision made by the TOs was made back in March. The new language was added (which can be seen by the edit dated in April) just in case there was a tie in the 2nd Phase. This should be plainly obvious to anyone with half a brain. All Josko has to do is look back at his complaining posts a few weeks ago to see that this has been updated. I hate players who do nothing but complain about this stuff. Josko, run a fucking event yourself or shut up.

Posted: **Tue May 22, 2012 2:11 pm**

Since most changes have been highlighted in Blue, it's an easy enough misrepresentation to make?
Otherwise how else are you gonna know if some rules have been added midway through and others have been there since the beginning?

And then whats with this discrepancy that some changes are allowed midway through, but others have to be suggested as implementations for CL5? :-s

If tiebreakers can be a prospective addition for phase 2 onwards, then why can't unlimited or other concerns also be implemented for the future phases?

Posted: **Tue May 22, 2012 2:35 pm**

chemefreak wrote:
Chariot of Fire wrote:How did LHDD not notice they were just as eligible as LEG when the results were final?

Nice spot josko.

Josko is a twit. The decision made by the TOs was made back in March. The new language was added (which can be seen by the edit dated in April) just in case there was a tie in the 2nd Phase. This should be plainly obvious to anyone with half a brain. All Josko has to do is look back at his complaining posts a few weeks ago to see that this has been updated. I hate players who do nothing but complain about this stuff. Josko, run a fucking event yourself or shut up.

according to comments which followed my post, it seems like 4 players think I have some point while only you for now think I am just speaking without any point. it seems that you looks like twit.

And saying that I do nothing is huge lie. I wrote my suggestion how to solve LEG/LHDD problem, so I think I have right to expect that responsible people for the decision stays behing their own decision, not hide in fog and behing others. here is link where I gave my suggestion how it should be solved:
viewtopic.php?f=442&t=161514&start=60#p3669514

so you can see that I do not only complain, but I also give suggestions. I am not guilty that TO team does not consider suggestions and make bad decisions.

Posted: **Tue May 22, 2012 3:02 pm**

josko.ri wrote:so you can see that I do not only complain, but I also give suggestions. I am not guilty that TO team does not consider suggestions and make bad decisions.

Actually, the TO team did consider suggestions and that is how the new tiebreaker came to be. And yes, all you do is complain. I mean, did you seriously think the TOs put up with all that bullshit from people like you just because they failed to read a sentence of their own rules? Jackass.

Posted: **Tue May 22, 2012 9:57 pm**

chemefreak wrote:
josko.ri wrote:so you can see that I do not only complain, but I also give suggestions. I am not guilty that TO team does not consider suggestions and make bad decisions.

Actually, the TO team did consider suggestions and that is how the new tiebreaker came to be. And yes, all you do is complain. I mean, did you seriously think the TOs put up with all that bullshit from people like you just because they failed to read a sentence of their own rules? Jackass.

Lets keep it civil cheme, dont want to have to take away a clan medal if you guys win a war

Posted: **Tue May 22, 2012 10:46 pm**

John Deere wrote:
chemefreak wrote:
josko.ri wrote:so you can see that I do not only complain, but I also give suggestions. I am not guilty that TO team does not consider suggestions and make bad decisions.

Actually, the TO team did consider suggestions and that is how the new tiebreaker came to be. And yes, all you do is complain. I mean, did you seriously think the TOs put up with all that bullshit from people like you just because they failed to read a sentence of their own rules? Jackass.

Lets keep it civil cheme, dont want to have to take away a clan medal if you guys win a war

+2

Posted: **Tue May 22, 2012 11:12 pm**

grifftron wrote:
John Deere wrote:
chemefreak wrote:
josko.ri wrote:so you can see that I do not only complain, but I also give suggestions. I am not guilty that TO team does not consider suggestions and make bad decisions.

Actually, the TO team did consider suggestions and that is how the new tiebreaker came to be. And yes, all you do is complain. I mean, did you seriously think the TOs put up with all that bullshit from people like you just because they failed to read a sentence of their own rules? Jackass.

Lets keep it civil cheme, dont want to have to take away a clan medal if you guys win a war

+2

+.... ah never mind I got my medal but..... What he said! :twisted:

Posted: **Wed May 23, 2012 1:21 pm**

John Deere wrote:
chemefreak wrote:
josko.ri wrote:so you can see that I do not only complain, but I also give suggestions. I am not guilty that TO team does not consider suggestions and make bad decisions.

Actually, the TO team did consider suggestions and that is how the new tiebreaker came to be. And yes, all you do is complain. I mean, did you seriously think the TOs put up with all that bullshit from people like you just because they failed to read a sentence of their own rules? Jackass.

Lets keep it civil cheme, dont want to have to take away a clan medal if you guys win a war

You Pack guys really make my work more enjoyable

Plus, I never took away your medals...you never had them to begin with. Also, if you keep up the good behavior, there is a chance you might yet get them...someday. Only time will tell. Also, kudos on your performance thus far in the CL4...looks like you guys are just destroying your competition.

The CL4 TOs (and the DDs) are working there asses off. To make unresearched, uninformed, and unwarranted accusations for the sole purpose of stirring up trouble is just frustrating. I mean seriously...even if the accusation were correct, what could we do about it now? Ugh.

Posted: **Thu May 24, 2012 8:35 am**

josko.ri wrote:I was just reading rules of the event and found this:

overwiew spoiler
WPBRJ wrote:10. League position is determined firstly by Total Points, then by Total Games Won, then by comparing Head-to-Head rounds between any tied teams. If this still does not separate teams then a best-of-3 Play-Off will take-place (Random Trips, Escalating, Chained, Sunny).

Last edited by WPBRJ on Sun Apr 22, 2012 6:59 pm, edited 28 times in total.

Did organizers break their own rules by putting LEG over LHDD without playing best-of-3 Play-Off?

cheme, I'm no fan of josko but I want to point out that

#1 this rule is not listed in blue in the OP so how would he know if it was made later in the competition
#2 his post is civil and non threatening
#3 you are acting like a huge dick in your response to him

Posted: **Thu May 24, 2012 9:34 am**

Agree with Ace. I nearly wrote an identical PM, then opted not to. Love Nick to death, but Josko was being pretty civil here - plus he has always been helpful in coming up with ideas and/or pointing out anomalies (in a well-mannered way).

Posted: **Thu May 24, 2012 10:42 am**

Chariot of Fire wrote:Agree with Ace. I nearly wrote an identical PM, then opted not to. Love Nick to death, but Josko was being pretty civil here - plus he has always been helpful in coming up with ideas and/or pointing out anomalies (in a well-mannered way).

It is plain as day that he was just trying to stir up controversy. All he had to do is read his OWN posts to see that the rule wasn't there. I stick by my Jackass statement.

Posted: **Thu May 24, 2012 11:55 am**

chemefreak wrote:
Chariot of Fire wrote:Agree with Ace. I nearly wrote an identical PM, then opted not to. Love Nick to death, but Josko was being pretty civil here - plus he has always been helpful in coming up with ideas and/or pointing out anomalies (in a well-mannered way).

It is plain as day that he was just trying to stir up controversy. All he had to do is read his OWN posts to see that the rule wasn't there. I stick by my Jackass statement.

I'm late to the CL4 thread, so I don't know about the discussion from before. However, if his posts show it wasn't there previously, and the text doesn't show up in blue showing that it is a new rule (which it does not) than how was he supposed to know when it was changed? The edit date just shows the last time that one was edited, it doesn't tell us what is changed.

Posted: **Thu May 24, 2012 12:51 pm**

Chariot of Fire wrote:Agree with Ace. I nearly wrote an identical PM, then opted not to. Love Nick to death, but Josko was being pretty civil here - plus he has always been helpful in coming up with ideas and/or pointing out anomalies (in a well-mannered way).

Whilst I agree with josko in most questions, that he has raised here, I disagree with him being civil or well-mannered about it.

A couple of weeks ago he was border-line stalking one of the TOs, posting in several league threads, even of divisions he was not even part of, stirring up hostility towards that particular TO. He called at least one TO unqualified and the League in general poorly run.

And the whole debate about Unlimited forts was simply uncalled for. It was obvious, that josko had been involved in that debate already before the start of the League, and that he was unsatisfied with the final decision & rules. As I said, I even agree with him in this question, but raising that argument again, when the League was running already for several months, was simply uncalled for.

He then started to get involved in the question of the tie between LEG & LHDD and even in the debate surrounding eddie2. So, whilst I agree with him on certain points in those discussions, I can certainly understand the TOs, if they feel harassed by him.

So much work put into this, and then being called "unqualified" and stuff like this. It´s pretty disrespectful and out of place, if you ask me. And for me as an impartial bystander, it certainly appeared, as if josko had an axe to grind on a personal level here, based on some past dispute about the set-up of the whole thing.

Conquer Club

[CL4] Clan League 4 - FINAL

Re: [CL4] Clan League 4

Re: [CL4] Clan League 4

Re: [CL4] Clan League 4

Re: [CL4] Clan League 4

Re: [CL4] Clan League 4

Re: [CL4] Clan League 4

Re: [CL4] Clan League 4

Re: [CL4] Clan League 4

Re: [CL4] Clan League 4

Re: [CL4] Clan League 4

Re: [CL4] Clan League 4

Re: [CL4] Clan League 4

Re: [CL4] Clan League 4

Re: [CL4] Clan League 4

Re: [CL4] Clan League 4

Re: [CL4] Clan League 4

Re: [CL4] Clan League 4

Re: [CL4] Clan League 4

Re: [CL4] Clan League 4

Re: [CL4] Clan League 4

Re: [CL4] Clan League 4

Re: [CL4] Clan League 4

Re: [CL4] Clan League 4

Re: [CL4] Clan League 4

Re: [CL4] Clan League 4