General Tournament Rules

[Tom]

With the variety of tournaments we have running I think we need to come up with a set General Rules that are common to all TourneyBot tourneys.

To the players they are handled from the same interface (the bot) so should have common rules.

I have thought about this often, but this has only become more important to me recently because a rule that seems to
have been in effect for over a year came to my attention that I feel needs to be considered and evaluated by more than a handful
of people.

The rule is one Socksey implemented that prohibits a player of the finals match from blinding any FIBS user from watching their match.

It seems arbitrary to me, if the rule is good, then why not any match?

The ABT rules do address the watchers in rule 1.7

1.7 SPECTATORS. Spectators shall remain silent while
   observing a match. Spectators have no right to
   draw attention to any misplays or comment on
   plays. Spectators who observe improprieties
   or irregularities during a match should discuss
   them in private with the Director. A player may
   request the Director to bar one or more spectators
   from viewing his match.

I would like to get a group of people together to discuss a short coherent set of rules we can all agree with.
I would like to get people from a variety of other venues and would like to compare the rules they use there.

I have the rules used by the Cases Ace Point league run on Yahoo.

To me the important aspects of any set of rules are should center around keeping the tourney moving at
a reasonable pace, insuring each player can play to the best of their ability with no disruptions and allowing the
TD freedom to make decisions based on the facts at hand.

The rules should also have as few exceptions as possible so they are clear and easily explained to new players.

If you are interested in helping with this effort please reply and leave a short comment about your outside FIBS league
experience and other rule sets you have easy access to that we can use as a model.

[edit] I forgot to say, I am looking for people with experience as TDs and HTDs of both live and online leagues.

Tom

[diane]

This discussion has been raised in response to the latest flare up of the 'anyone can watch any tournament match' rule.  For those intending to participate, it is worth reading this background thread, so old old ground can be avoided.

http://www.fibsboard.com/general-chit-chat/blinds/

LuckyDice introduced this rule first in Bago, about 12 months ago, and Naavanax followed with the tourneys he ran.  I was against it at the time it was first introduced, and had a lively debate in shouts with LuckyDice about it. He refused to budge, probably wisely. His tourney, his rule.

Naavanax persuaded me to change my mind sometime later with an email he sent me.

A year on, I think some have found it unworkable, and some are using it as a weapon.

The 'set of rules'..particularly for TPR tourneys as a set, is a great idea. I have a point of view, but I am happy with majority decisions. I have always the option to opt out if I am really unhappy with it.

[diane]

I would like to contribute.

I have run online tournaments on two sites [one is fibs and the other I think is now gone], going back as far as the Early days of Fridays3 when we did it on paper!! Then with the bot on one of its first trial outings, later with spreadsheets when the bot was unstable..and with challonge.

I have TD'd several live events, fun and serious, and attended many more.

[Tom]

Diane thanks for the reference!

Boy, how was I left out of this discussion?

I read the whole thread and saw a number of references to all Active TDs being involved...

I certainly was an active TD at the time! LOL

Tom

[KissMyAss]

I would like to participate in this discussion, unless it matters that I have only TD'd on fibs, and never played a live game, let alone a live tourney. 

I also have read back, so I understand the history of all this, as has been written in the threads. 

You all know I don't get involved in past personal BS between players, so my one rule for my tourney is that any old bs gets left out of it, in respect for me and my other players.  I'm not so naiive as to think that people don't get hurt by what others have said or done in the past, and that to see certain people online brings up bad feelings, resentment etc.  I know people have a past, I know people dont always get along with each other.   But I also know that I have no issues with anyone on fibs (and you can start naming names, but i really dont have an issue with them either, they have the issue all on their own), therefore nobody should bring their issues to my tourney.  As I have stated in the past, and will stand by... anyone brings their sh** to my table, their opponent will be awarded the win, if I catch it happening.  I don't always watch games, but I do drop in from time to time just to see if everything's going okay.  There is one player who has used my tourney in the past, to act up, and when this was pointed out to me, I kept an eye on that player.  When I saw for myself what was going on, he was banned from my tourney for a week.  After that week was up, he was allowed back in, with a clean slate, and has never to my knowledge done that particular thing again. 

I don't see the reason for a whole list of rules, beyond "be nice, or be silent, or be gone".  Which means, be nice to the other players in the tourneys, or shut the hell up and play silently, or if you really can't tolerate the sight of them, resign from the tourney.  This has happened in the past, and I have respected the player's right to leave, if they told me they were about to do so.  There's only been one occasion where it affected the running of my tourney because I lost the fourth player, but that was when I first started out, and it hasn't been an issue since. 

I haven't, to my knowledge, had any issue where someone has gagged or blinded another player.  Either it didn't happen (which I doubt because I know some people have others on permagag) or nobody complained about it.  So for the life of me, I don't understand it.  I don't see the need for making rules for watchers, when the only tourney rules that should be made, should be for players.  If someone has been played out of the tourney, then that's it in my view.  If they want to watch the final, no worries.. but unless they receive the go ahead from the two players in the final, they shouldn't chat in kibitz.  If they do, or if the players choose not to see any chat, they should be able to gag all watchers at their discretion so that if one does accidentally chat in kibitz, the player won't see it. 
But I leave those choices up to the players themselves.  I'm not going to demand that players keep all those enrolled in the tourney ungagged/unblinded.  That opens up old bullshit to be able to free flow again.   I'm also not going to police the watchers to make sure they don't chat in kibitz.  Personally, i love a good chat, and don't give a sh** about people chatting in kibitz.  Roll up, watch, chat, whatever.  Keep your game opinions to whisper though, or you're gone.  Simple.  But that's in my own games, and is also subject to the permission of my opponent. 

That's my two cents, for what its worth from a non-league'er who has never played a live game. 

Hugs

[socksey]

Having done this conversation before, I don't have anything more to add other than, the rules for Fri3 and Mini-Matches will remain the same, i.e., no blinding in the finals unless someone is disruptive in kibitz, and any player is allowed to gag whoever he wants.

Since Tom does not agree, nor does he feel comfortable with the bans I have imposed regarding the tourneys I host, Tom has removed Fri3 and Mini-Matches from TourneyBot and I will be using Challonge.com for these tourneys in the future until further notice.

socksey



The problem with political jokes is they get elected.  - Henry Cate, VII

[Tom]

Since Tom does not agree, nor does he feel comfortable with the bans I have imposed regarding the tourneys I host, Tom has removed Fri3 and Mini-Matches from TourneyBot and I will be using Challonge.com for these tourneys in the future until further notice.

A more accurate statement is "Tom does not agree with the new rule and at your request has removed them from auto"

I call this rule new because this is the first I have heard of it (in spite of the posts from a year ago and to my surprise since the posts say
all the active TDs participated in the discussion)

But it also does not appear if the official F3 rules posted on the website.

And from my reading of the threads on this it seems only a couple of people are pushing for this new rule.
I think more question it validity and still more for the most part say what's the point of the while discussion...

tom

[inim]

no blinding in the finals unless someone is disruptive in kibitz

This doesn't take into account past behaviour. I have a small but devoted group of people who repeatedly created drama in my tourney matches on more than one occasion. I fail to understand why I can only ban them after a new incident. These people, in their own words in tell, are not interested in the backgammon part, only in the audience a tourney match gives them for abuse. Even if TD banned them each time on request, this still is a convenient and permanent stage for drama. I do not intend to provide it. Plus the ability to interrupt matches at will is a great way to break the player's concentration, which was happily abused in the past too.

any player is allowed to gag whoever he wants.

Gag does not remove the stage for abuse, there are enough listeners left for libelious behaviour in whisper and kibitz.

There is a variation of the "tourney match as stage for abusive behaviour", namely when one of the players starts rants in a match. This is non-fictional, happened in the past to me. In that case the proper reaction is to blind all spectators to remove the stage. This is sad collateral damage, but the only way I found to work dealing with the problem.

[socksey]

A more accurate statement is "Tom does not agree with the new rule and at your request has removed them from auto"

This is precisely what I said with the names *ed, "these rules have been in effect for well over a year now and all the players know the rules.  **** earned a temporary ban by his defiance and comments to me during tourney play when i was the td.  i won't allow anyone to speak to me disrespectfully during my tourneys and completely disregard my rule as he has done.  i've been running fri3 for years and i intend to continue running it as long as i am able with or without tourneybot.

oh, and please add ****** to the ban list.  he was playing the **** game today as well.  if you feel uncomfortable doing as i request just let me know and take fri3 and mini matches off auto tourneybot."

One of the banned players told me to resign as TD, implying that I am incompetent.   I must add that both of those players gagged me during that tourney as well.   

I did not request you to take Fri3 and Mini Matches off auto tourneybot unless you felt uncomfortable doing as I requested  which was to also place the bans on the two players.  So, since you removed Fri3 and Mini Matches from auto tourneybot, I assumed you did not wish to do as I asked regarding the bannings, and , of course I will be using challonge.com exclusively until further notice. 

I had planned to resume using challonge.com anyway until some solution could be found to fix the problem that the bot can't see invites which has caused many unfair forfeits on time.

I call this rule new because this is the first I have heard of it (in spite of the posts from a year ago and to my surprise since the posts say all the active TDs participated in the discussion)

But it also does not appear if the official F3 rules posted on the website.

I included all the active TD's that I knew of at that time and there were many, including  diane, Naavanax, sixtiesomething, Tanika, jackdaddy, and some others.  There were so many names on the TD list who are no longer active on Fibs and/or whose email addresses were unavailable as well.  I don't remember you being an active TD at that time, but cannot argue the point.  All I can say is that I did my best to include all active TDs.  The new rules for Fri3 and Mini-Matches were posted in the Fri3 thread on 16 Nov 10 here:  http://www.fibsboard.com/fibsleagammon/info-about-f3/80/  at the bottom of that page, and on the Mini-Matches thread on 16 Nov 10 here:  http://www.fibsboard.com/fibsleagammon/mini-matches/360/  found about 3/4 of the way down the page. 

And from my reading of the threads on this it seems only a couple of people are pushing for this new rule.
I think more question it validity and still more for the most part say what's the point of the while discussion...

tom

It was not just a couple of people pushing for the no blind during finals rule, on the contrary, it was the minority who objected.   There were a couple who didn't think any rules should be established citing that was what TD's were for. 

As usual, it seems my short reply does not suffice.  I do hope this was explanation enough, from me, anyway.   

socksey



Those who are too smart to engage in politics are punished by being governed by those who are dumber.  - Plato[/b][/size]

[diane]

i've been running fri3 for years and i intend to continue running it as long as i am able with or without tourneybot.

of course I will be using challonge.com exclusively until further notice.  

It was not just a couple of people pushing for the no blind during finals rule, on the contrary, it was the minority who objected.  

socksey

F3 has been running for 9 years, and you have taken it for the last few years. Other TDs across the years have been Kari who started it, Houtx, gogogiz, Bushsucks, adrian, myself of course and I think tryout may have run some. To my thinking, this is a tournament that belongs to fibs, not one individual.

The recent rule change was done without consultation and without thought for longer term workability - but, in the thoughts of plenty of players, simply to create a great opportunity for some good old fibs drama. In that, it has been enormously successful.

If you remain uncomfortable with the right of a player to a fair and pleasant match, hand F3 back to auto and let the bot handle it for future generations. That way, no personalities get in the mix.

[inim]

I must add that both of those players gagged me during that tourney as well.   

This claim is wrong at least for ****.

[socksey]

F3 has been running for 9 years, and you have taken it for the last few years. Other TDs across the years have been Kari who started it, Houtx, gogogiz, Bushsucks, adrian, myself of course and I think tryout may have run some. To my thinking, this is a tournament that belongs to fibs, not one individual.

The recent rule change was done without consultation and without thought for longer term workability - but, in the thoughts of plenty of players, simply to create a great opportunity for some good old fibs drama. In that, it has been enormously successful.

If you remain uncomfortable with the right of a player to a fair and pleasant match, hand F3 back to auto and let the bot handle it for future generations. That way, no personalities get in the mix.

The earliest evidence I could find for Fri3 was from June of 2006.  Those are the first posts to Fibsleagammon site here:  http://fibsleagammon.free.fr/fridays3.htm#Standings thru a partial 2009.  Seems like I do remember vaguely some of the TD's you mentioned from then, but that clearly isn't 9 years. 

During  2009, posts were brought to Fibsboard by, adrian, who apparently had been hosting for a while at that time, and wanted to quit.  At that time, I researched some TourneyBot Fri3 tourneys and brought the posts up to date as best I could from 3 Apr 09 - 21 May 09.  I began hosting Fri3 on 12 Jun 09 reluctantly, as I recall, until 14 Aug 09 when jackdaddy hosted  for 2 weeks, 28 Aug 09 I hosted until 4 Feb 10, then left again.  Keep in mind I never wanted to host this tourney.  I was sort of forced into it.  I used to ask for volunteers when I was hosting........yes, begging for help.  I had Mini-Matches already and I enjoyed setting up impromptu tourneys whenever and I didn't want to be tied to two tourneys per week. 

So, vegasvic helped me out by hosted while I posted, a couple of weeks, alternating with me hosting, then I quit again 16 Apr 10, resumed hosting again 23 Apr 10 until 18 Jun 10 when sixtie helped me out for a couple of weeks.  Since 2 Jun 10, I accepted that if I wanted to continue playing the tourney, I was stuck, so I settled in and I have hosted continuously until now. 

The addition of a few rules which I have referenced that include the "no blinding during tourney final match" were implimented on 16 Nov 2010.  I made a change in posting format which became bold and with font size of 12 on 8 Apr 11. 

For a few months I dropped the scoring in the listings, choosing only to post the places as they happened.  Then in Aug 2011, I began posting the TPR counts to correspond with the TPR calculations which are now done my TourneyBot.

I have resumed posting to theFri3 thread the old way with the old calculations which are different than the TPR method, and I will also keep a record of cumulative points for the month for a monthly winner there.

I hate when you throw out statements that are absolutely false and make them sound like fact, diane.  For instance, your statement of:  "The recent rule change was done without consultation and without thought for longer term workability - but, in the thoughts of plenty of players, simply to create a great opportunity for some good old fibs drama. In that, it has been enormously successful."  This is simply a falsehood.  I did consult, discuss, change, and never thought about creating drama.  NEVER.  You don't bother to say even that "you think maybe".  You just blatantly jump in like you know the facts.  You were in on the emails that went back and forth among the TD's during that time as you stated somewhere. 

socksey



"These are my ideas. If you don't like them, I've other ones too" --- Groucho Marx

[/size][/b]

[moonshadow]

My eyes glazed over as I read through this thread.

Then I got double vision and a headache by the time I got to socksey's bold faced post followed by one in this horrible violet.

[Tom]

The earliest evidence I could find for Fri3 was from June of 2006.

Try this link http://fibsleagammon.free.fr/about.htm

1 August 2003      New kind of realtime tournament "Friday 3"

2 January 2004      Today's FIBSLeaGammon Fridays3 tourney was held with the assistance of TourneyBot.

That makes 9 years... (Edit: Actually about 8 1/2 Years)

Tom

[socksey]

OK, Tom, I hadn't found that until you pointed it out, but there seems to be no record of the tourneys or how often they ran.  Does TourneyBot have records of that time when it began running the tourneys?  Maybe the tournaments were not officially scheduled weekly?  When the thread began on Fibsboard, there had been no Fri3 for that month but there were some posts that had not been made.  Anyway, it appears diane is almost correct, or more correct than I was on that point. 

The rest of my documentation is correct, and I believe that still makes me the longest running TD in the history of Fri3 who is still actively on Fibs at the very least. 

[diane]

I hate when you throw out statements that are absolutely false and make them sound like fact, diane.

For instance, your statement of:  

"The recent rule change was done without consultation and without thought for longer term workability - but, in the thoughts of plenty of players, simply to create a great opportunity for some good old fibs drama.

You don't bother to say even that "you think maybe".  You just blatantly jump in like you know the facts.  

You were in on the emails that went back and forth among the TD's during that time as you stated somewhere.  

ok..I hope I have edited your post sufficiently for you to easily see your error. I included myself in the collective 'thoughts of plenty of players'.

I wasnt in the email exchange, you didnt have my email address. I didnt state I was in on the emails, I said Naavanax and I exchanged emails..after I sent him one objecting to the decision that had been made. However, that is neither here nor there, I wasn't hosting any tournies then. I started the two Australian ones, and categorically didnt include that rule, as I do not in any way agree with it. Even though Naavanax persuaded me to play with it.

Fridays3 was run weekly, by Kari Grandi, on paper from 2003. He was immensely proud of it never missing a session, ever. The results were kept up to date at FLG and can be read from late 2003. I am sad you forget the history of this tournament you now run, it is quite a special event.

The list of TDs you state reminded me even more how much a group effort this tournament has been over the years, what a shame it is now wielded like this. Players banned for some overly escalated non-issue - and yes, I still do not overlook the fact that you banned me from entering - and I quote

because I dont like her

You state you didnt want to run F3 - and that if you are not here for some reason, it is good the bot is there to run it. Why not just let go, and let the bot do what it was created to do. Incidentally - some other history you may not know is that Kari and MadMatt consulted during the writing of tourneybot, it was ALWAYS the intention that F3 would run on it - and indeed, it was the first scheduled tourney on there.

If you are the longest serving TD on it - it isnt by much, Kari was on it for 3 years - and that is without the bot to actually do the running. Each week - at the appointed time, he would collect the players names, issue the brackets, collect the results, announce matches, collate final totals and publish at FLG.  I know how much work that was, because I did it a few times too!

The whole ***tourney announcement*** format came from then, as everything occurred in shouts..as they were back then..and you remember that..dont you?  

In any case, and whatever happens next, thank you for diligently keeping this special fibs tourney running for the last few years, it really is full of memories, and they still make me smile. 

[diane]

Then I got double vision and a headache by the time I got to socksey's bold faced post followed by one in this horrible violet.

Could not agree more..but somehow I dont think she will take constructive criticism from me 

[diane]

but there seems to be no record of the tourneys or how often they ran.  Does TourneyBot have records of that time when it began running the tourneys?  Maybe the tournaments were not officially scheduled weekly?  

When the thread began on Fibsboard, there had been no Fri3 for that month but there were some posts that had not been made.  Anyway, it appears diane is almost correct, or more correct than I was on that point.  

The thread 'began' on fibsboard here...in 2004...and refers you to the FLG site...we used to do a complicated spreadsheet for Tomawacky to auto-upload the data..my those were fun times  

http://www.fibsboard.com/fibsleagammon/fridays-3-237/

Hey look socksey - you not only played in it - but placed joint 10th position.  The tournament ran weekly, and monthly winners were posted - Kari [or the host] gave current standings in shouts as the race for monthly winner got going.

Makes for interesting reading - in Jun 2004, you were in second place, with Backwoods winning the month  

The weekly results seem to start here...with each week posted, until the month was completed, then a new thread started.

http://www.fibsboard.com/fibsleagammon/fridays-3-282/

The results are all there - and browsable..I enjoyed 5 mins with all that - a stroll down memory lane with some of those old nicks, together with memories of posting out FIBs T-Shirts to the monthly winners for a couple of years. I think the post office were a bit suspicious of me and my small, regular international packages   

[PersianLord]

I don't get it why this debate has been started at all. FIBS and anything FIBS have always been run on this eternal and sacred rule: suck it up or shut the f uck up!

So, when a TD decides to make new rules or modify the existing ones, the fibsters are left basically with 2 choices:

i) To continue playing under TD-approved rules

or

ii) To stop enrolling in tourneys wherein they see the rules as unfit or unjust or whatever

Make you choice and call it a day.

PL

[Tom]

I don't get it why this debate has been started at all. FIBS and anything FIBS have always been run on this eternal and sacred rule: suck it up or shut up!

So, when a TD decides to make new rules or modify the existing ones, the fibsters are left basically with 2 choices:

I'll take the blame for starting this up.

The reason I started this is because with the number of tourneys running over the course of a week I felt it was important to get a common
set of rules. I frankly thought we had a common set (mostly un-written) until one can to my attention that I strongly disagree with.

I also have found that the tourneys that run the smoothest are on full auto. Which is why I have spent hundreds of hours (thousands?) over
the past few years to improve TourneyBot so it can run tourneys so well. (no it is not perfect but it does one heck of a job on it's own)

Now I agree if someone creates a random tourney they can state any rules they want, but with the long standing tourneys and most of them
running at the same time of the day, people should be able to expect a common set of rules.

It is possible to create a serious tourney environment on a site where there is mild chaos.

I came from one running on Yahoo servers... we can do it on FIBS too, if we want.

We have a lot of good players here but all too often we allow things to happen that destroy that enviroment. (ie. Drama)

A good set of rules can help reduce or eliminate drama from tourney matches.

Tom

[PersianLord]

I appreciate the time and energy you invest in improving tourneys, Tom.

But the point is that we should also respect the choice made by one of the most revered veteran TDs of FIBS; i.e. Socksey. She has made the decision to enforce a new rule aiming at creating a more friendly environment for tourneys by prohibition of the blind command during her tourneys. Now, any player who has objections to this rule can simply avoid playing in her tourneys from now on and by doing so, expressing his/her discomfort with the new rule. It is like 'voting with your wallet' in market; if you don't like the brand, then don't buy it.

PL

[moonshadow]

I don't get it why this debate has been started at all.

PL, you are incorrect, this hasn't been a debate and I'm surprised you failed to see the thread was started by Tom who was looking for a consensus on FIBS tourneys:

With the variety of tournaments we have running I think we need to come up with a set General Rules that are common to all TourneyBot tourneys.

The dissonance continues:

FIBS and anything FIBS have always been run on this eternal and sacred rule: suck it up or shut the f uck up!

PL, you are quite wrong on this as well.  First, compared to the last decade, the tenor of FIBs shouts in the last year has remarkably and dramatically improved. Its a far more friendly place.

Second, despite the current discussion and some confusion in the thread about blinding or not during tourney finals, there has been some consensus and effort among the TDs on how to run tourneys and so forth and it has not been a "suck it up or shut up" attitude. From my perspective, the overall organization and cooperation among the TDs about running tourneys seem much much better than the past and this is in spite of the fact there have been strong clashes between some of the TDs over various issues.

Third, Tom has continually asked for feedback on how to improve the robots and what features should or should not be included and I've never seen Tom say, "This is how it is, suck it up or shut up!"

[diane]

Third, Tom has continually asked for feedback on how to improve the robots and what features should or should not be included and I've never seen Tom say, "This is how it is, suck it up or shut up!"

Never indeed - thankyou moonshadow, the voice of reason and hope 

[moonshadow]

But the point is that we should also respect the choice made by one of the most revered veteran TDs of FIBS; i.e. Socksey. She has made the decision to enforce a new rule aiming at creating a more friendly environment for tourneys by prohibition of the blind command during her tourneys. Now, any player who has objections to this rule can simply avoid playing in her tourneys from now on and by doing so, expressing his/her discomfort with the new rule. It is like 'voting with your wallet' in market; if you don't like the brand, then don't buy it.

PL

No, PL,  that is not the point, though it is the point you wish to drive home and so I now suspect you of perhaps being a closet Leftist who conveniently moves the goal posts around to justify the argument.

The point Tom raised, and I think it a good one, is that there ought to be a general set of rules for all FIBs tourneys.

The point about socksey being revered or that she has wishes to run a tourney in a certain manner for whatever reason is not only irrelevant to Tom's reasoning for reaching a consensus but it is logically incorrect, as other tourney TDs may be equally revered and may think allowing blinding creates a "more friendly environment".

The other option which you neglect to point out is that perhaps socksey could join the TD consensus about blinding.

[Tom]

Thanks moonshadow for observing things I did not see, I guess I need to keep things at arms length or longer!

While I started looking that this because one specific rule bothered me, I still think we need a common set of rules as a basis for FIBS tourneys or atleast tourneys that are part of the TPR rankings.

At the risk of crossing threads, by biggest concern is that the rule (everyone please go look at it and vote!) does not seem consistent to me.

It is specific to Finals Matches only, if you have a strong player that people can learn from then why not prohibit blinding all together?

I Do Not Want answers to THAT question HERE!

My point is I think we need a group of people to review the rules and consider them from their past experience so we can make them solid
to enforce and easy for players (new and old) to underdstand.

THAT is what THIS thread is SUPPOSED to be about!!!

Tom

[socksey]

You still misquote me, diane, dear.    This is what I said, "I believe that still makes me the longest running TD in the history of Fri3 who is still actively on Fibs at the very least."

FYI, I was instrumental in including you in the discussion on the rules and your input was noted.  I remember not having your email address, and your not willing to give it to me (for God only knows what reason) opting instead that I message you on Fibsboard which seemed quite reasonable to you, but was a distinct inconvenience for me.  Also, Tom and I have been in email and it is decided that he will reinstate Fri3 and Mini-Matches to TourneyBot.  We had so many issues with Tourneybot over the years, and the latest one two weeks ago sort of pushed me over the edge regarding TourneyBot.  But, I've cooled down now, and am willing to try one more time, so we shall see. 

Yes, I remember playing in all those tourneys.  I've been on Fibs for 13 years and was always enthusiastic in the tourneys.  However, I don't remember dates too well unless there is some other memorable event in my private life for a time-line.     I was able to find all of the Mini-Matches history.  And, yes, old memories revisited was fun. 

Thanks for the links. You're always better at finding those than I.

socksey



Why pay money to have your family tree traced; go into politics and your opponents will do it for you.  ~Author Unknown

[PersianLord]

No Moonshadow, I did understand the reasoning behind Tom's decision in starting this thread and I still keep my position on this issue.

I think the TDs can set up whatever rules they deem fit to run their tourneys and if anyone is in discord with the rules, s/he simply should avoid playing in them. As my market example, if you think a certain brand doesn't satisfy you as a customer, then you stop buying it; aka voting with your wallet. You absolutely have no right in demanding the company's CEO to modify his products because YOU dislike them.

To me, F3 and Minis are brands and Socksey is the CEO of the company. If you don't like the recent modifications in the products, then don't buy them (don't enroll in F3 and Minis). Of course you can initiate a campaign to drag other customers to further your cause; i.e. forcing the CEO indirectly to undo the modifications in F3 and Minis. But to start a polemic campaign to force her directly to retreat is absolute nonsense and indeed sounds quite shamefully leftistic to me.

I should also emphasis that I for one am very happy with the new rule as it ensures that a bunch of sanctimonious hypocrites can not spoil the fun of playing in a tourney by banning other players from watching.

And no, I don't think we need a identical set of rules for all of FIBS tourneys. If a certain TD prefers to change/modify the rules of his/her tourney at any given time, s/he should be able to do it without having to consult other TDs, or any other person for that matter.

I also don't think understanding this requires a higher than average IQ.

PL

[inim]

You paraphrase the good old "let people vote with their feet" principle in your posting. Well understood principle applied to many things fibs already. Easy. However, you keep ingoring results of the previous discussion in this thread. The main objective of this whole thing is to find out where agreement and dissent between TDs exist. In short: rules for all tourneys run on Tourneybot, the decision making process to come to such rules, and how rules are enforced.

Back in 1997 a tourney run by a lone hero with pen  and paper may have been "property". This is no longer the case anymore in 2012. Tourneys use TBot for automation, which is the result of 1000s of person hours of coding, brainstorming and communication by dozens of people.

Tourneys can run and often do run without a human attending them. The main purpose of a TD today is no longer to keep timers and results. People not even need to be aware who has admin priviledges for a particular tourney, nor whether one or more admins are logged in at all. TBot offers a uniform interface maintained by a consenting team, at least according to Tom it should. The "brand" thus is not what socksey alone defines as long as her tourneys operate as affiliates of TourneyBot Corp, so to say.

There now is this case with one dissenting TD trying to enfoce ideosyncratic rules on top of the common set, without consensus. As a result, depending on which TD happens to be logged in, playing in the same tourney may take place under different rule sets for end users. This causes all sort of problems, obviously. And this is the problem Tom tries to solve in this discussion.

Here are a few selected points where you IMHO ignore previous results.

TDs can set up whatever rules they deem fit to run their tourneys

We have a situation where a minority of TDs (socksey) is in dissent with a majority (Tom, diane, KMA). There seems to be no mechanism to remove this stallmate and the whole TD group is at the risk of breaking apart, potentially damaging tourneys over "ownership" questions.

To me, F3 and Minis are brands and Socksey

For many others F3 is not. See the extensive postings on the tourney history above.

don't enroll in F3 and Minis

The issue here is that socksey reacted to something she perceives as a problem in one particular tourney with sanctions affecting all tourneys. This again was overridden by Tom, using his admin priviledges for tourneybot. Not enrolling doesn't solve a problem on this level. Both sockey's and Tom's actions may or may not overstep the priviledges of a single TD.

I also don't think understanding this requires a higher than average IQ.

This whole complex of closely related problems has social, organizatorial, technical, interpersonal and probably more dimensions. The fact you consider a solution to be simple mainly shows me you do not understand the problem(s) fully yet.

The goal of this whole thread is not to find an "easy" solution by declaring full victory for one positon. That would break apart the tourney system. What is needed is a feasible and acceptable for all TDs version of socksey's proposed new rule. It may turn out such a compromise does not exist. But hope is not lost yet.

[PersianLord]

No inim, the issue is very simple but you prefer to make it appear complicated for obvious reasons.

I realize the fact that TourneyBot is the result of hours of Tom's technical endeavor and therefore, I admit that this Bot is  completely a property of Tom. And we all know that Tom, being in discord with Socksey's new rule, have once barred her from using TB. Again fine, and as Socksey made it clear, she will use challenge.com to handle her tourneys instead. This clearly shows how strongly she puts credit in her new rule for running her tourneys, as TB seems to be a much smoother device to run any tourney than challenge.com .

We have a situation where a minority of TDs (socksey) is in dissent with a majority (Tom, diane, KMA). There seems to be no mechanism to remove this stallmate and the whole TD group is at the risk of breaking apart, potentially damaging tourneys over "ownership" questions.

I don't see any problem here. Mind you, IMO dissent is a blessing, rather than a threat. We, as humans, are very diversified creatures and have various, oftentimes opposing, opinions on many issues. So, why to crash the minority vote and impose the will of majority on them?!

Let us celebrate our diversity and allow each TD decide how to run his/her own tourney in whatever way s/he deems fit. There will be no falling apart of the tourney system.

The issue here is that socksey reacted to something she perceives as a problem in one particular tourney with sanctions affecting all tourneys. This again was overridden by Tom, using his admin priviledges for tourneybot.

Then the problem IS solved. If I trust you in narrating the story honestly, which I do, Socksey wanted to impose her will on the majority by enforcing the her preferred rule in all of tourneys and this led Tom to reacting by barring her of using TB. Now, Socksey can enforce this rule (No blinding) just in her own tourneys (F3 and Minis). Doesn't sound like a drama to me.

Finally, the goal of this whole thing is not to find an "easy" solution by declaring full victory for one side. That would break apart the tourney system.

I don't want a full victory for any side. Hell I don't see this as a debate/war at all. A certain TD (i.e. Socksey) with a brilliant record of running tourneys, stretching back to the past millennium, has decided to introduce and enforce a new rule (No blinding) in her tourneys. Now a certain number of people, feeling inconvenient with this rule, want her to undo the modifications she's made so far.

The only war I see her is occurring in Socksey's own mind: whether to continue enforcing the new rule in her tourneys or not!

Whatever she decides I will respect, even though I personally would like to see the new rule continue.

PL

[Tom]

barred her from using TB

I did no such thing.

She asked me to make the temporary ban automatic and I refused, because she  could manually add the ban each week
she wanted it in force.

tom

[PersianLord]

Well, since I am no TD, I've decided to withdraw from this debate. I think TDs should solve this issue themselves.

PL

[Tom]

After discussions with TDs who actively use TourneyBot I have a set of rules we can live with.

They will be announced when a player registers so there is no question which rules are in effect.

They are:

Common Rules
     1. Players are expected to give tourney matches the highest priority and save any other match they may be playing when their tourney match is ready.
     2. Opponents may not use any aids to evaluate moves this includes getting coaching from a watcher directly or indirectly. PIP counts may be enabled.
     3. The Opponents have the right to play their match with no disruptions. Watchers should use the "whisper" command to comment. If you use kibitz, shout about the match, or talk directly to the players, you can expect to be blinded and/or gagged by either player.
     4. Exceptions to rule #3: - The TD may briefly interrupt a match for tournament-related issues that can't wait until the match is finished.
     5. A Watcher may be gagged or blinded by either opponent without any explanation. The TD may not be gagged or blinded by a player, unless they are violating Rule #3.

F3 and Mini-Matches Specific Rule

     6. Blinding anyone for the tournament finals is prohibited, unless they are specifically violating Rule #3. The tournament is for the enjoyment and learning experience for all.

After talking to the group I decided that Socksey and I needed to come to agreement first.

We came up with the rules listed above.

I then have presented them to the other TDs via email.

They were mostly well received, one had reservations about some aspects and one has not replied.

For FIBS discussion I deem it a huge success!

They are posted here http://tourneybot.fibs.com/rules.html

Thanks to Socksey and Patti for their invaluable help!

Tom

[Tom]

Right now FIBS is having some DNS problems, some can't log in... the the Rules link (above) is also having the same problems.

I am sure it will be fixed shortly

tom
ps. I can't even log in to FIBS right now!

[mpetch]

If you can't login try using the current fibs.com IP address instead of "fibs.com". At present the IP address for fibs.com is 64.201.248.215 .

[moonshadow]

After discussions with TDs who actively use TourneyBot I have a set of rules we can live with.

Good job on getting a uniform set of rules for the tourneys.