All Forums > Hoops Dynasty Basketball > Hoops Dynasty > coach_billyg - A Manefesto on 1st Class Usership
4/19/2013 12:02 AM
Man I wish I had the energy/focus right now to do something more than scan this thread, because it seems to be a really good read lol.
This post has a rating of , which is below the default threshold.
This post has a rating of , which is below the default threshold.
4/19/2013 12:21 AM
Posted by girt25 on 4/18/2013 11:44:00 PM (view original):
Posted by nachopuzzle on 4/18/2013 10:05:00 PM (view original):
Posted by girt25 on 4/18/2013 1:25:00 PM (view original):
craigcoug -- You're the most vocal person I've seen here, and if you're really as new to HD as your resume suggests (three games) and it's not an alias, then you're not really qualified to opine. That's not to say that you can't express your opinion -- you can, of course, ad naueseum -- but you don't understand the game, the community, and how it works. Your just not coming from a place of knowledge.

nacho -- I think you are vastly overstating issues that may be present with those who have multiple IDs. You're acting as though anyone with multiple teams/IDs must be cheating, and that it's rampant. I would say that it's almost certainly much, much more the exception than the rule. There are also people that cheat with their friends, with their conference mates, etc -- and that's more common than the multiple ID thing. It's not something that can be effectively policed -- not even close.

So the question is, in order to target some smaller segment of multiple ID users who might be cheating (while plenty of non-multiple ID users are doing the same), do we (a) go back on what everyone has already been promised for quite some time and (b) really anger a lot of long-time users? Again, I have just two teams, both under this ID. But I think it would be a terrible ID that creates way more problems than it solves. And I know people that have been playing HD for a long time that would drop some or all of their other teams because of it.

Bad idea.
Again, I'm not saying that teams with multiple IDs must be and/or are cheating. The upshot of this thread was to point out how a well known user on this site was advocating for certain users to be "grandfathered in" to having multiple accounts, while the majority were excluded from the practice, and at the same time had the gumption to say that this should still be allowed despite the fact that some of these coaches were using them to gain an unfair advantage.

It smacks of a form of tiered usership...in which case I would be proud to be a second class user.


Nacho, I think you are totally misconstruing what billyg was saying.
I'm not trying to put words in your mouth, and correct me if I am, but what it sounds like you're getting at is something like "Nacho, I think you are reading too much into what billyg was saying." In either case, I would say that those statements are rather unambiguous and it takes much more mental gymnastics to turn them into innocuous ones than it does to draw a conclusion similar to the one I presented.

I read (and have read since) the whole thread (as well as the other current threads) to make sure the specific statement by billyg could stand on it's own, as well as listed specifically where it came from so people could decide for themselves.

4/19/2013 12:28 AM
Posted by colonels19 on 4/19/2013 12:11:00 AM (view original):
If the secondary accounts of select/all users are removed, I will quit HD in protest, leaving my dream job that I've been at since 10-4-10.
Mount Olive has always been the pinnacle for all the basketball purists out there, haha, just playing.


4/19/2013 9:18 AM
Posted by nachopuzzle on 4/19/2013 12:21:00 AM (view original):
Posted by girt25 on 4/18/2013 11:44:00 PM (view original):
Posted by nachopuzzle on 4/18/2013 10:05:00 PM (view original):
Posted by girt25 on 4/18/2013 1:25:00 PM (view original):
craigcoug -- You're the most vocal person I've seen here, and if you're really as new to HD as your resume suggests (three games) and it's not an alias, then you're not really qualified to opine. That's not to say that you can't express your opinion -- you can, of course, ad naueseum -- but you don't understand the game, the community, and how it works. Your just not coming from a place of knowledge.

nacho -- I think you are vastly overstating issues that may be present with those who have multiple IDs. You're acting as though anyone with multiple teams/IDs must be cheating, and that it's rampant. I would say that it's almost certainly much, much more the exception than the rule. There are also people that cheat with their friends, with their conference mates, etc -- and that's more common than the multiple ID thing. It's not something that can be effectively policed -- not even close.

So the question is, in order to target some smaller segment of multiple ID users who might be cheating (while plenty of non-multiple ID users are doing the same), do we (a) go back on what everyone has already been promised for quite some time and (b) really anger a lot of long-time users? Again, I have just two teams, both under this ID. But I think it would be a terrible ID that creates way more problems than it solves. And I know people that have been playing HD for a long time that would drop some or all of their other teams because of it.

Bad idea.
Again, I'm not saying that teams with multiple IDs must be and/or are cheating. The upshot of this thread was to point out how a well known user on this site was advocating for certain users to be "grandfathered in" to having multiple accounts, while the majority were excluded from the practice, and at the same time had the gumption to say that this should still be allowed despite the fact that some of these coaches were using them to gain an unfair advantage.

It smacks of a form of tiered usership...in which case I would be proud to be a second class user.


Nacho, I think you are totally misconstruing what billyg was saying.
I'm not trying to put words in your mouth, and correct me if I am, but what it sounds like you're getting at is something like "Nacho, I think you are reading too much into what billyg was saying." In either case, I would say that those statements are rather unambiguous and it takes much more mental gymnastics to turn them into innocuous ones than it does to draw a conclusion similar to the one I presented.

I read (and have read since) the whole thread (as well as the other current threads) to make sure the specific statement by billyg could stand on it's own, as well as listed specifically where it came from so people could decide for themselves.

Nacho, i don' t think billy was saying only those listed coaches should be grandfathered in-- he was simply listing a few well-known, well-respected guys who would be adversely affected by this change to the rules. Some would give up teams and carry on as-is, some would give up teams and quit or slow down in their helpfulness/activity (which would hurt the game), and some would quit altogether.

Then, his next comment was that he wasn't sure the game would/could survive without all those accounts. While I thought it might be a little far-fetched, it wasn't crazy. We have no idea how many guys have multiple accounts, nor do we know how many would give up a team vs quitting altogether. (Hence my support for the required disclosure of multiple accounts somewhere else on one of these infinite threads). I, for one, would like Naismith less without Alblack and his good teams and dynasty list.
 
4/19/2013 9:36 AM
Posted by kashmir75 on 4/18/2013 11:50:00 PM (view original):
Posted by reddyred on 4/18/2013 11:30:00 PM (view original):
Posted by kashmir75 on 4/18/2013 11:11:00 PM (view original):
kevin_w64.........................  So, let me get this straight. A sitemail to another coach that only asks "is recruit x a priority for you or not" To which the reply is only "yes" or "no" is what's now considered collusion?  you feel this to be in some way....cheating or collusive?
this is definitely collusion. you are attempting to gain info other coaches don't have access to in order to avoid a battle and save money... yes this is collusion. 
Well it appears to me any human contact at all during recruiting is considered collusion.

For the record, I have always approached this from the perspective of a courtesy to the other coach, to inquire, rather than simply pile on as I don't think I've ever seen a recruit who had no equal and I really don't like taking recruits from someone.

But, while we're at it, why isn't it collusive to ask for and receive help from someone?   Are you not benefiting from knowledge that others do not or are not getting? Why is is not considered collusion to ask for advice on how to set your team for the big game? Does the other coach also get information to set up his team?  Do you maybe see that we are splitting the hair very fine these days in what's considered "cheating"?

I can certainly see the potential to be collusive, but I don't think that line was crossed in the sitemail example.

Most coaches I know who give advice don't tell others how to set their teams for specific big games, they may offer advice on what they would do in a given situation, but to specifically go in and tell a coach how to set their team up from A to Z, I personally have not seen.  I do see your point here and will concede that it's not really fair to the other coach to have someone else basically coach your team for a game is this does happen.

As for advice, that's what the forums are for. Almost any advice you get from any coach through sitemail regarding theory on how to play this game has been posted somewhere in this forum so I would think that is a bad example as the knowledge is available to all coaches who actively seek it. But to ask who a specific coach is targeting is definitely collusion once the second coach responds yes or no. You may call it a courtesy but it's more like you are in the clear to recruit said player. Taking recruits from people is part of the game and as much as I hate losing recruits to other coaches, it's part of the game and should not be purposely avoided by sitemailing other coaches asking who they are targeting. This has clearly been defined in the past as collusive activity.
4/19/2013 10:18 AM (edited)
billyg... Explain to me how multiple teams,  in the same division,  is not collusion. 

Make sure you use the Fairplay guidelines for collusion. 

I understand it is currently legal, but how is it not collusion? 

4/19/2013 10:35 AM
And I want to make it clear that I am not saying that anyone with multiple teams in the same world IS ACTUALLY cheating. I do not know if anyone is. 

In fact, billyg and jdno (the only 2 people who I know have multiple teams) both do not cheat, IMHO. They are both outstanding coaches and I am not trying to  accuse them, or anyone else of cheating. 

I am merely saying that cheating/collusion is made to be a trivial effort event if multiple teams in the same world is allowed. 

I would say, if there were only a couple of world's out there to play in,  that it is a risk we need to take. 

But unless someone has a team in every world, I do not see it as something that needs to be done now. 

I currently have 1 team in every world with my one userid. I have no other id's. I have plenty of competition in every place I play, and there is plenty of fun without the need for me to have 2 teams in one world. 



4/19/2013 10:56 AM
wronoj, I know that the list of coaches he named was just a rough outline of the type of users he was talking about. However, I do think what he said was crazy. And to your point, if a small group of users have enough different accounts whereby the site would go under should they all quit, then this place is nothing but a shell game - which I do not think it is.

I would like to echo what hughes has been saying, unless a coach has a team in every single one a day world then there is no adequate reason to have multiple teams in one world.

4/19/2013 12:03 PM
Posted by nachopuzzle on 4/19/2013 10:56:00 AM (view original):
wronoj, I know that the list of coaches he named was just a rough outline of the type of users he was talking about. However, I do think what he said was crazy. And to your point, if a small group of users have enough different accounts whereby the site would go under should they all quit, then this place is nothing but a shell game - which I do not think it is.

I would like to echo what hughes has been saying, unless a coach has a team in every single one a day world then there is no adequate reason to have multiple teams in one world.

i think you significantly underestimate the number of coaches with multiple IDs. its not that a small group of users have enough different accounts to take the game down, if they quit - its that if you remove all those 2nd and 3rd teams coaches have in a world, from all the users with different accounts, you are going to make a significant hit to the total HD team population - which is already riding low. d1 population is BY FAR the lowest its been in many years, and i just dont know how much more of a population hit it can take and remain enjoyable. its already considered by some to be past that point, for some types of teams. some d3 worlds were getting so desolate and barren it just wasnt that fun to play there anymore, thats a big part why i gave up on d3 in the first place. d3 is doing better now with the mass exodus from d1, and freeHD apparently, but the HD population is really not doing very well, and its spread across 2 extra worlds now. d1 has shed i believe a full third of coaches since seble's new engine / recruit generation change. how many more can d1 afford to lose? thats the question.

there is also the aspect of the forum community being pretty small, and again, not by coincidence, many of those passionate enough to participate regularly are the same guys passionate enough to create new IDs to keep programs as they move up, and such. i think the hit to the forum community would be significant, because simply losing say 10 or 20 active coaches could really slow things down. its already half dead compared to how the forums used to be. 
4/19/2013 12:08 PM
And to me, the point isn't that HD would go under. It wouldn't. The point is that it would have a significantly negative impact on HD overall, because you're talking about alienating a lot of dedicated, involved, vocal coaches who had merely been operating as they had been told they could operate by WIS.

I'll say it again:

The much more effective, sensible way to legislate this is to control what you can FSS with each division.

It would be more effective and not induce the collateral damage. It's a no-brainer.
4/19/2013 12:13 PM
I'm reminded of a Down Goes Brown piece on Grantland about NFL fans watching the NHL after the Super Bowl ended. One question was about how many related players there are in the NHL (so they can have brother vs. brother storylines like the NFL does). The answer: Pretty much all of them, actually. There's like eight families that are left that are still producing hockey players. 

Siblings, aliases. Ya know. 
4/19/2013 12:55 PM
Posted by gillispie1 on 4/19/2013 12:03:00 PM (view original):
Posted by nachopuzzle on 4/19/2013 10:56:00 AM (view original):
wronoj, I know that the list of coaches he named was just a rough outline of the type of users he was talking about. However, I do think what he said was crazy. And to your point, if a small group of users have enough different accounts whereby the site would go under should they all quit, then this place is nothing but a shell game - which I do not think it is.

I would like to echo what hughes has been saying, unless a coach has a team in every single one a day world then there is no adequate reason to have multiple teams in one world.

i think you significantly underestimate the number of coaches with multiple IDs. its not that a small group of users have enough different accounts to take the game down, if they quit - its that if you remove all those 2nd and 3rd teams coaches have in a world, from all the users with different accounts, you are going to make a significant hit to the total HD team population - which is already riding low. d1 population is BY FAR the lowest its been in many years, and i just dont know how much more of a population hit it can take and remain enjoyable. its already considered by some to be past that point, for some types of teams. some d3 worlds were getting so desolate and barren it just wasnt that fun to play there anymore, thats a big part why i gave up on d3 in the first place. d3 is doing better now with the mass exodus from d1, and freeHD apparently, but the HD population is really not doing very well, and its spread across 2 extra worlds now. d1 has shed i believe a full third of coaches since seble's new engine / recruit generation change. how many more can d1 afford to lose? thats the question.

there is also the aspect of the forum community being pretty small, and again, not by coincidence, many of those passionate enough to participate regularly are the same guys passionate enough to create new IDs to keep programs as they move up, and such. i think the hit to the forum community would be significant, because simply losing say 10 or 20 active coaches could really slow things down. its already half dead compared to how the forums used to be. 
Okay, if all these users with all their different accounts are so important to the game, then it could be relatively easy assumed that they would most likely have multiple teams per account.

So if you don't mind me asking: how many and which specific teams teams do you have between your accounts coach_billyg and gillispie1, what worlds are each of those teams in, and are those teams over 1000 miles apart?

4/19/2013 12:59 PM
Too difficult to click on his usernames and look directly at the easily available information?
of 17
All Forums > Hoops Dynasty Basketball > Hoops Dynasty > coach_billyg - A Manefesto on 1st Class Usership

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

Popular on WhatIfSports site: Baseball Simulation | College Basketball Game | College Football Game | Online Baseball Game | Hockey Simulation | NFL Picks | College Football Picks | Sports Games

© 1999-2014 WhatIfSports.com, Inc. All rights reserved. WhatIfSports is a trademark of WhatIfSports.com, Inc. SimLeague, SimMatchup and iSimNow are trademarks or registered trademarks of Electronic Arts, Inc. Used under license. The names of actual companies and products mentioned herein may be the trademarks of their respective owners.