Forum
ETF2L Highlander Season 8 Feedback Thread
Created 8th March 2015 @ 19:28
Add A Reply Pages: « Previous 1 ... 13 14 15 Next »
Quoted from CanFo
Replacing too many players does not become legal by contacting an admin either – but it gives the admins an opportunity to make an informed decision based on the information that is taken to them (what many people in this thread seem to be asking for) before the problem even occurs. If they are not informed, how can they make a decision?
That’s exactly what I’m talking about. Instead of not making a decision or informing themselves they make an uninformed decision. And that decision turns out to be the wrong one.
I appreciate that the admins sacrifice their time for this, but it’s still no excuse to half-ass things just to save time.
Nice feedback
Quoted from Setsul
[…]
That’s exactly what I’m talking about. Instead of not making a decision or informing themselves they make an uninformed decision. And that decision turns out to be the wrong one.
And here is where we disagree. I believe that in the sense of the hijack rule, the team is obliged to seek contact with an admin, if they don’t want to risk being dropped. You seem to expect the admin team to get in touch and ask what that rule break was about after it happened and then make a decision.
PS popcorp: I just feel like arguing today!
Quoted from Setsul
4 years ago you say?
Please explain this match:
http://etf2l.org/matches/40453/
How could you let me get away with this?
Makes sense to confront me with a match that was played when I wasnt even an admin. The rule was introduced in February and changed in March 2010. So you can go ahead and ask any of the admins from that time frame what happened there. :)
Quoted from EmilioEstevez
If that’s the actual intention of the rule then I guess those teams fell foul of it and should be punished.
Exactly that is the intention of the rule as I stated before already.
One last time to put an end to this I will say it again.
The rule is under review and the wording will be changed to make its content more clear for everyone. This may or may not open new loopholes, which will then again require admin discretion, but we’ll see about that in the future. (The existing rule was purposely written without specifying concrete numbers) The content will pretty much stay the same though, since the rule serves a purpose after all. Once it is changed it will also be featured in a newspost of some sort, so that should also serve as a reminder.
The teams affected by this rule will remain dropped. While the decision might seem harsh, the rule was enforced correctly taking all circumstances into consideration.
Any further questions as to why the teams were dropped, demands to undrop them, claims that the rule is unfair, etc will be removed and may or may not lead to forum bans. I’d rather not lock the General S8 Highlander Feedback Thread.
This is very likely the last time I will be commenting on that matter, since this is the feedback thread and not the discuss rules with an admin thread. I just stepped in here and in the other thread to correct the simply wrong facts and statements by some people.
Do you think that making decision based on intention of the rule rather than exatly words written it the rule is right?
Looks to me like this is a situation where the admins followed the rules perfectly, but the rules had a flaw in this specific scenario. It’s really difficult to balance admin discretion and 100% following the ruleset when the community gives you shit for both avenues.
Communication is always key. If you’re worried something is against the rules, or if changing that many rostered players is allowed, contact the admins.
If you think so Lazy. For me it was 50/50 Me, after reading the rule really doubt that it was appropiate for the thing that happened. But please don’t call people stupid or lazy, because I am sure that 90% people weren’t aware of that rule I even after reading it woudn’t interpretate it the way you did.
So consider things to include in future ruleset about it, because rule is not about adding
people to roster, more using those additions in officials:
1. Don’t use less than 5 members signed for competition in a game(if you can’t use 5 people from initial roster contact admins)
2. Mark newly added players in similar way than unverified players and maybe allow people to verify players as members before week 1.
3. Add a rule that if you want add more experienced player to the roster you have to add admin(similard to deafult merc rule)
Think about punishment other than removing from competition – minus points, warnings or deafult losses.
Last edited by Hajdzik,
Quoted from Podski
could somebody please explain to me how to set up a team.
http://etf2l.org/wp/wp-admin/index.php?page=teams&sub=create
Quoted from Podski
could somebody please explain to me how to set up a team.
Use the classical site theme, not the beta. (as in, don’t use the one full of blue everywhere, it’s really not intuitive to use)
Top right corner
Team Admin
My teams
Create team
[Not Verified] is a tag that will go away by itself after waiting 24 hours. It is a way to ensure that people don’t team-hop around unrestricted. Pay no attention to it.
If you create your team but you don’t show up in roster somehow then just wait a day and you’ll be there. Alternatively you could try tinkering about in the Team Admin page because I think sometimes you have to accept yourself on the team you just made (???)
Everything you need is there in the Team Admin thingie.
Hmm now I want to check how creating team looks in new theme. Would see if it’s actually true. Never mind I don’t know what Fuxxx is talking about then.
Last edited by Hajdzik,
I don’t think you need anything else to whine about Hajdzik, you’ve got enough on your plate already.
http://gfycat.com/MindlessPlayfulHornedviper
I can’t believe I survived doing this on the new theme
I always find it hilarious to see a discussion go on this long – Admins never review or update rules or policies yet always disregard feedback and spend hours defending or justifying existing rules.
Create a sub-forum for feedback on rules/policies and suggestions for amendments, write strict guidelines, moderate heavily, keep debate to a minimum and keep league admins (especially one’s who are best off not contributing) from commenting and review each major topic on a monthly/quarterly basis and vote or rule on proposed amendments.
Haji proposed a change to a rule and I’ve just read admins debate and argue and insult people rather than spend time on say important stuff like collating and creating MI stats, interpreting them, promoting the league, developing. The Head Admin of ETF2L could have updated this Partner’s page that hasn’t been touched for years – http://etf2l.org/etf2l/partners/
Policy/Rules should be reviewed far more regularly (like not once every 5 years) and shouldn’t need a stupidly long forum debate before reviewing them. Fact ETF2L doesn’t update anything unless an issue arises shows they aren’t looking clearly enough at potential issues and taking action.
Last edited by Hildreth,
@Hildreth
Disregarding feedback to me would be to set up a feedback thread and not even respond to the suggestions. I’m seeing a lot of input from the admins here which seem well thought out, although i’ll admit it’s not the most professional of debates it’s still on the level.
To me it’s more of a weakness on how this kind of forum works. You can only really discuss one thing at a time in a thread, so if a suggestion creates a lot of comments and/or drama, you can’t really suggest anything else in there as the thread will just blow up with pages and pages of retorts. Comments can’t be collapsed into subsections etc. The result is a very untidy thread, but other forum systems has their downsides too. Having it’s own forum section for suggestions and feedback could mitigate this flaw a little bit, but I don’t think HL needs it’s own feedback section.
Last edited by Lazybear,
Add A Reply Pages: « Previous 1 ... 13 14 15 Next »
content rss