in the meantime tho, while i do support cornfused i feel like he could use some "exercise" to avoid this problem next time

How's a mouse control game?
or a maze?

Posted by jetwildcat on 8/27/2010 8:19:00 PM (view original):

Posted by isack24 on 8/27/2010 3:11:00 PM (view original):

Posted by jetwildcat on 8/27/2010 2:11:00 PM (view original):

Posted by isack24 on 8/27/2010 1:58:00 PM (view original):
"fwiw i think mcdonalds thing was stupid"

For what it's worth, the facts of that case are much different than people think.

Ultimately, the judge reduced the jury award to just over $600K, and the case settled for less than that.  McDonald's could have settled for the medical bills, but refused and offered almost nothing. 

And part of the issue there was that they had been told multiple times to reduce the temperature of their coffee because it has caused hundreds of injuries in the recent years prior to that trial. 

Just sayin', there's a lot more to that which makes your analogy not work.

The point still remains, WIS is now going to have to tell someone "no, we won't change that for you," when it seems marginally similar to what happened here.  There's a reason HBD doesn't fix user errors, and does everything they can to give you every chance to cancel the transaction (e.g. pop-up boxes).                    

the analogy isn't about where to draw the line...its about the people who "dont think to ask CS to fix their mistakes"...

drawing a line somewhere isn't the worst thing in the world. here's an analogy for ya. the ncaa tournament draws a line for teams that could be the national champion after 68 teams now, correct? the bcs draws a line too, after just two teams. where SHOULD the line be drawn? nobody call give a definitive answer, however we can probably agree that the 100th best basketball team in the country PROBABLY ISNT the best, and the 2nd ranked bcs team MIGHT be the best. just because you send the 100th ranked team home doesnt mean you have to send the 50th and 20th and 3rd ranked teams home.

Well no, the analogy is faulty because it has to do with compensating for wrongdoing vs. self-inflicted damage.  People wouldn't think to ask for money if they warmed up the coffee themselves and then poured it on themselves. 

Your new analogies are fatally flawed because an arbitrarily-drawn line is neccesarily required.  Here, that's not the case.  HD could simply say, "you screw up, your fault," exactly the way HBD does. 

arbitrarily drawn lines aren't "necessarily required" plenty of leagues don't have playoffs...and any league could simply say "you didnt come in first in regular season, your fault".

by not allowing any misclicks or mistakes you're simply drawing a line at one end of the spectrum. in a way, not drawing a line is just as arbitrary as drawing one in the middle somewhere.

If you're going to have a national championship game, there is going to be a line drawn somehwere, unless you have a playoff involving every team in the country. 

And the second sentence is just wrong.  By not allowing anything, you have a set rule that can't be argued with.  By allowing some and not others, there's a grey area, and someone can make the argument that one misclick is less egregious than another.

really? by not allowing anything, people can't argue? really?

people are less inclined to argue, yes, but that doesn't mean they can't.

They literally can, but they know the rule and know they have no argument.

If you set a rule, then there's a legitimate argument about if one is worse than the other, and whether one should be allowed and one not.

It's really not that complicated.

if you set a rule that only the top regular season team can be the champion, there is a legitimate argument about whether the regular season is enough to determine a champion.

its why we have playoffs in the first place.

if you don't get what i'm saying, then it might be just a teensie bit more complicated than you realize.

Posted by isack24 on 8/27/2010 7:56:00 PM (view original):

Posted by cornfused on 8/27/2010 7:23:00 PM (view original):
Building up my team.  We were an Div I NT 1-seed last year, but 19-62 in the three years before I got there and not in the top 300 of DIII wins.

And it was definitely one misclick.

One misclick and one act of blatant apathy/stupidity. 

I'm fine with what happened, but don't pretend like it's not your fault for failing to read the pop-up box.

Maybe that's my problem with this whole thing; there's a lack of personal accountability, and it's worse that you're seemingly trying to minimize your role in this whole situation.

dont sink to colonel's level. you are better than that. its not an act of blatant apathy/stupidity. those confirmation boxes are all similar, i would  bet 90% of people dont really carefully read those - just carefully enough to figure out which button confirms. i sure as hell don't do any more. anyway, a misclick is a misclick. nobody is saying its not his fault. just that it was an honest mistake and given the fact that there was an easy way to rectify it, that it should be rectified. key words, honest mistake. this is not the fricken olympics here. its a friendly and fun game. and i think WIS's choice to treat it as such and give cornfused a pass, like they have done with so many others before him, is a smart one. given that this is a friendly and fun game, it seems like a no-brainer.

Posted by jetwildcat on 8/27/2010 11:17:00 PM (view original):
if you set a rule that only the top regular season team can be the champion, there is a legitimate argument about whether the regular season is enough to determine a champion.

its why we have playoffs in the first place.

if you don't get what i'm saying, then it might be just a teensie bit more complicated than you realize.

This is so far off point that it's not even worth addressing.

Rule 1: No mistakes will be corrected. 

-- Easy to apply.  No mistakes will be corrected.

Rule 2: Honest mistakes that don't hurt anyone else will be corrected.

-- Much less easy.  Requires determination of (1) subjective intent and (2) objective harm to others. 

Again, not complicated.  Rule 1 is much easier to apply consistently.

Posted by gillispie on 8/28/2010 1:50:00 AM (view original):

Posted by isack24 on 8/27/2010 7:56:00 PM (view original):

Posted by cornfused on 8/27/2010 7:23:00 PM (view original):
Building up my team.  We were an Div I NT 1-seed last year, but 19-62 in the three years before I got there and not in the top 300 of DIII wins.

And it was definitely one misclick.

One misclick and one act of blatant apathy/stupidity. 

I'm fine with what happened, but don't pretend like it's not your fault for failing to read the pop-up box.

Maybe that's my problem with this whole thing; there's a lack of personal accountability, and it's worse that you're seemingly trying to minimize your role in this whole situation.

dont sink to colonel's level. you are better than that. its not an act of blatant apathy/stupidity. those confirmation boxes are all similar, i would  bet 90% of people dont really carefully read those - just carefully enough to figure out which button confirms. i sure as hell don't do any more. anyway, a misclick is a misclick. nobody is saying its not his fault. just that it was an honest mistake and given the fact that there was an easy way to rectify it, that it should be rectified. key words, honest mistake. this is not the fricken olympics here. its a friendly and fun game. and i think WIS's choice to treat it as such and give cornfused a pass, like they have done with so many others before him, is a smart one. given that this is a friendly and fun game, it seems like a no-brainer.

Not reading carefully (or at all) doesn't appeal to me as a legitimate argument.  That just reinforces everything that is wrong with the world.

That this is a fun and friendly game does - and also the reason that I don't really care that he got him back.

It would, however, be nice to read a corfused post that said, "I fucked up, it was totally my fault, and it was nice that WIS decided to give him back when I'm clearly not entitled to that," instead of some post about how it was only one misclick and how it's not really a big deal.

First of all, I love how agreeing with me/"stooping to my level" was brought up...yeah...and you guys are objective when it comes to my posts...people are cast out at the mere mention that they might agree with me...hilariously unreal.

Intent has nothing to do with the argument here.  There were 2 misclicks...he clicked rescind scholarship when he thought he clicked remove redshirt, and then he clicked ok to rescind...so that's 2, that's not arguable, there were 2 misclicks.  Again, what's to stop me or anyone else misclicking 24 times and removing my entire roster, but getting it back after begging WIS to give me my players back because it was an "honest mistake"?  Where is the line drawn?  Obviously the only line drawn has been drawn in water.

Also, like isack is saying, cornfused has shown no accountability...the mouse may as well have double clicked itself the way he makes it seem.  He's compromised the integrity of the game because releasing and getting his player back didn't only affect his team, it affects his 20+ opponents and all the users that would have recruited said player otherwise.  Like I said, this action isn't/wasn't made independently, yet almost all of you make it seem that way.  I'm not taking this stance just to *****, I'm taking this stance because this is what is ethical...I'm standing up for the game and it's integrity because everyone else is simply ok with people making "mistakes"...it happens, right?........

The noble thing to do is to own your mistake, fall on your sword, and let the player go.  You want to brazenly make changes to your roster, then that's your fault, it's your problem, and you should have to deal with it.  It's not like WIS booted that player from your team.  Cornfused is bad for HD, as is everyone else who has partaken in these actions.  Hold yourself accountable, period.

Posted by jetwildcat on 8/27/2010 11:17:00 PM (view original):
if you set a rule that only the top regular season team can be the champion, there is a legitimate argument about whether the regular season is enough to determine a champion.

its why we have playoffs in the first place.

if you don't get what i'm saying, then it might be just a teensie bit more complicated than you realize.

Many/All? major European soccer leagues operate under a double round robin format (each team plays every team twice, once home, once away) and have no playoffs.  The team with the most points at the end of the season wins the league and I think this is by far the fairest way to crown a champion out there.  Playoffs are arguably more of a money grab than anything else.  Sure they're exciting and "properly" crown a champion, however it is a bit contrived as well...resetting the season after it's been played.

Posted by colonels19 on 8/28/2010 9:42:00 AM:
The noble thing to do

I guess that's another word we can add to the list of ones you don't know the definition of.

At the very least, you're incapable of practicing what you preach.

Posted by colonels19 on 8/28/2010 10:06:00 AM (view original):
Hey, I could have begged for SCSU back after the renewal lapsed and I wasn't eligible/qualified for any other D1s, but I didn't because it's in the best interest in the game.  I'm in the position that I'm in because of my actions REGARDLESS of how flawed I think the jobs process maybe and probably is.  I ate my crow and have moved along...I still don't agree with the jobs process, but I never sent CS a ticket at all about the situation...I'm not going to waste their time...so yes, I did practice what I'm preaching thank you very much.

for reference:

"After Emery Lyon, my would be starting PG, left, I was never going back to coach SCSU, and that's why I wouldn't have begged CS for the team back, because that wasn't the team that I was going to coach...I'm not going to just get f***ed by the sim and accept it...sometimes you just have to stand on principle."

you're so noble

Not in this thread, you aren't. The noble thing to do here would be to not ***** and whine about somebody else getting a break.

For that matter, the noble thing to do in that other thread would have been to post tmac's resume and say something like "Oh, it looks like taking a season off resets your Loyalty and allows you to make that kind of lateral move, so I guess I inadvertently stumbled onto the right course of action by forgetting to renew. My bad, folks, sorry."

Basically, you're one of the last people on this forum who should be lecturing someone else on what "the noble thing to do" is. You come across as a small, petty, self-absorbed person, and while that might be 'noble' in the sense that you'd fit right in with a 17th century French aristocracy, it's certainly not 'noble' in the way you're using the word.

Posted by pinkeye on 8/28/2010 10:20:00 AM (view original):

Posted by colonels19 on 8/28/2010 10:06:00 AM (view original):
Hey, I could have begged for SCSU back after the renewal lapsed and I wasn't eligible/qualified for any other D1s, but I didn't because it's in the best interest in the game.  I'm in the position that I'm in because of my actions REGARDLESS of how flawed I think the jobs process maybe and probably is.  I ate my crow and have moved along...I still don't agree with the jobs process, but I never sent CS a ticket at all about the situation...I'm not going to waste their time...so yes, I did practice what I'm preaching thank you very much.

for reference:

"After Emery Lyon, my would be starting PG, left, I was never going back to coach SCSU, and that's why I wouldn't have begged CS for the team back, because that wasn't the team that I was going to coach...I'm not going to just get f***ed by the sim and accept it...sometimes you just have to stand on principle."

you're so noble

A. I thought you were done talking to me...way to keep your word....only when the going gets tough on your end, right?  You can't scramble worth a damned.

and

B.  Yes I am noble, because I had that opportunity, I was ****** about being squelched from D1, and I did consider getting SCSU back after dalter suggested it, but again in the end I decided not to do it because I wasn't going to compromise the integrity of the game for my personal wants.  This game is more important and bigger than me and I understand it.  I will not stand in the way of progress and ethics here, I just won't do it.