All Forums > Hoops Dynasty Basketball > Hoops Dynasty > Tannermcc & associates are LargeScale Cheaters
5/10/2014 1:49 PM
Gillispie got screwed and rather swiftly I might add...again go ahead and thank whinenavy for that one...
5/10/2014 3:05 PM
Posted by ettaexpress on 5/10/2014 11:26:00 AM (view original):
So cheating is excusable as long as the risk of getting caught wasn't very high...

There's no slippery slope here. You either collude, or you don't collude. If you want to study that, use prisoner's dilemma. Other than that there's not much value in details, really. We're not talking about using cats against Egypt here.

I'd rather hear more about people's theories of collusion in the game right now. 
what a gross oversimplification. i never suggested cheating is excusable. if you can't see the slippery slope in, for example, the things nacho has suggested should be ok here, you really aren't trying. this is too important an issue for someone who just wants to bring a childlike approach, without doing any real thought. if you ever decide to actually take some time to think about this, i'd be happy to continue the discussion, but as long as you are unable or unwilling to put in the effort to understand shades of grey, its just a waste of time, and its a disservice to the community as a whole. i've studied the prisoner's dilemma, you have got to be kidding trying to apply such a simple concept to this... like i said, you aren't even trying. its an insult to the people you say "don't care" who have really put a great deal of time and effort into this, that you continue to carry on without one ounce of sophisticated thought. you are too smart to continue to approach issues like these like a 5th grader. don't tell me you are one of the folks who looks at situations like iraq, and the ukraine crisis, as black and white... just pointing a finger and assigning blame, without any real thought. i pegged you for someone of at least moderate intelligence, not a glorified 5th grader..
5/10/2014 3:41 PM
lulz, I'm actually kinda flattered you think my ideas are dangerous.
5/10/2014 4:00 PM
dangerous? no, just on the slippery slope... once you say someone can trade information, as long as they will tell anyone who asks, whats to stop it from progressing to the tanner like situation you are so abhorred by? even if others asked, and they were like yeah - these 30 great players are being drafted - you are powerless to do anything to stop it. you can try... but given that none of those schools have to worry about battling each other, its gonna be a tough spot for you, and grossly unfair. by your rules, as i understand them, this would be allowed because if others asked who was being drafted, they would get that information freely.
5/10/2014 4:16 PM
Posted by gillispie1 on 5/10/2014 4:00:00 PM (view original):
dangerous? no, just on the slippery slope... once you say someone can trade information, as long as they will tell anyone who asks, whats to stop it from progressing to the tanner like situation you are so abhorred by? even if others asked, and they were like yeah - these 30 great players are being drafted - you are powerless to do anything to stop it. you can try... but given that none of those schools have to worry about battling each other, its gonna be a tough spot for you, and grossly unfair. by your rules, as i understand them, this would be allowed because if others asked who was being drafted, they would get that information freely.
no, jtt was the one that brought up the notion on "any" information. I was only talking about the situations were a coach was recruiting more players than he had scholarships for...that if another coach asked them which recruits they were seriously considering then it wouldn't be collusion to answer the question as long as they didn't discriminate between any coaches that ask, i.e. they either answered the question for all coaches that asked or non at all.
5/10/2014 4:31 PM
Posted by nachopuzzle on 5/10/2014 4:16:00 PM (view original):
Posted by gillispie1 on 5/10/2014 4:00:00 PM (view original):
dangerous? no, just on the slippery slope... once you say someone can trade information, as long as they will tell anyone who asks, whats to stop it from progressing to the tanner like situation you are so abhorred by? even if others asked, and they were like yeah - these 30 great players are being drafted - you are powerless to do anything to stop it. you can try... but given that none of those schools have to worry about battling each other, its gonna be a tough spot for you, and grossly unfair. by your rules, as i understand them, this would be allowed because if others asked who was being drafted, they would get that information freely.
no, jtt was the one that brought up the notion on "any" information. I was only talking about the situations were a coach was recruiting more players than he had scholarships for...that if another coach asked them which recruits they were seriously considering then it wouldn't be collusion to answer the question as long as they didn't discriminate between any coaches that ask, i.e. they either answered the question for all coaches that asked or non at all.
Of course it is still collusion. Most coaches I would hope would know not to ask that as it is improper and cheating. To say when coach A gives it to Coach B is ok. as long as he gives it to Coach C; D; E; F...is ridicules.
5/10/2014 4:37 PM
lulz, okay...of course it's collusion because it's collusion. I'm not a big fan of such simplistic reasoning.
5/10/2014 4:38 PM
Posted by nachopuzzle on 5/10/2014 4:16:00 PM (view original):
Posted by gillispie1 on 5/10/2014 4:00:00 PM (view original):
dangerous? no, just on the slippery slope... once you say someone can trade information, as long as they will tell anyone who asks, whats to stop it from progressing to the tanner like situation you are so abhorred by? even if others asked, and they were like yeah - these 30 great players are being drafted - you are powerless to do anything to stop it. you can try... but given that none of those schools have to worry about battling each other, its gonna be a tough spot for you, and grossly unfair. by your rules, as i understand them, this would be allowed because if others asked who was being drafted, they would get that information freely.
no, jtt was the one that brought up the notion on "any" information. I was only talking about the situations were a coach was recruiting more players than he had scholarships for...that if another coach asked them which recruits they were seriously considering then it wouldn't be collusion to answer the question as long as they didn't discriminate between any coaches that ask, i.e. they either answered the question for all coaches that asked or non at all.
That is definitely collusion.
5/10/2014 4:40 PM
Posted by nachopuzzle on 5/10/2014 4:37:00 PM (view original):
lulz, okay...of course it's collusion because it's collusion. I'm not a big fan of such simplistic reasoning.
its collusion because admin says its collusion. that's the only reason that matters, and anyone ought to be able to understand that.
5/10/2014 4:45 PM
Posted by dacj501 on 5/10/2014 4:40:00 PM (view original):
Posted by nachopuzzle on 5/10/2014 4:37:00 PM (view original):
lulz, okay...of course it's collusion because it's collusion. I'm not a big fan of such simplistic reasoning.
its collusion because admin says its collusion. that's the only reason that matters, and anyone ought to be able to understand that.
I think it is collusion not for what the admin says but simply because the asking coach...or any afterwards is looking for an edge over the people that play fair. I can not see this happening with reputable coaches in real life, just fantasy ones that think they need an edge.
5/10/2014 4:56 PM
Posted by dacj501 on 5/10/2014 4:40:00 PM (view original):
Posted by nachopuzzle on 5/10/2014 4:37:00 PM (view original):
lulz, okay...of course it's collusion because it's collusion. I'm not a big fan of such simplistic reasoning.
its collusion because admin says its collusion. that's the only reason that matters, and anyone ought to be able to understand that.
Okay, again, it's collusion because it's collusion, except this time with a touch of authoritarianism to seal the deal.

And for the 1,378 time, I do not utilize, endorse, or encourage such practices because they are a violation of the fairplay guidelines. However, I personally don't agree with the this decision by the admin and retain my right to argue about the merits of this ruling.
5/10/2014 5:04 PM
Posted by nachopuzzle on 5/10/2014 4:16:00 PM (view original):
Posted by gillispie1 on 5/10/2014 4:00:00 PM (view original):
dangerous? no, just on the slippery slope... once you say someone can trade information, as long as they will tell anyone who asks, whats to stop it from progressing to the tanner like situation you are so abhorred by? even if others asked, and they were like yeah - these 30 great players are being drafted - you are powerless to do anything to stop it. you can try... but given that none of those schools have to worry about battling each other, its gonna be a tough spot for you, and grossly unfair. by your rules, as i understand them, this would be allowed because if others asked who was being drafted, they would get that information freely.
no, jtt was the one that brought up the notion on "any" information. I was only talking about the situations were a coach was recruiting more players than he had scholarships for...that if another coach asked them which recruits they were seriously considering then it wouldn't be collusion to answer the question as long as they didn't discriminate between any coaches that ask, i.e. they either answered the question for all coaches that asked or non at all.
for starters, i know you agree this is collusion, and all that. just trying to have the discussion on what is actually wrong and why (outside the official definition), like you are :)

anyway, so if you are ok with someone asking a coach something like this, as long as he answers say, all 3 coaches that ask him - what all are you allowed to ask? it can't *just* be when a coach is recruiting more players than he wants, is it? what makes one case ok, and another, not ok?

5/10/2014 5:13 PM
Frankly I have ZERO CLUE why Billy needs to expand the zone for what is right and wrong. If a coach, paying customer here, has information (whether he will continue after as recruit) and shares that WITH anyone, That is cheating the honest people that would not have the slimy morals to ask such a question.

At what point don't some of YOU know what is RIGHT and WRONG, and think everyone does not KNOW the difference? Pathetic
5/10/2014 5:22 PM
My Grandmother used to say "if you have to THINK if it's right or wrong, it's probably wrong!"    WIS could police cheaters very easily (IP addresses, Credit Card data, etc) however they choose for economic reasons to turn a blind eye.

It is by and large up to the HD Community to police the actions of the few, before the cancer can grow!
5/10/2014 5:23 PM
Posted by gillispie1 on 5/10/2014 5:04:00 PM (view original):
Posted by nachopuzzle on 5/10/2014 4:16:00 PM (view original):
Posted by gillispie1 on 5/10/2014 4:00:00 PM (view original):
dangerous? no, just on the slippery slope... once you say someone can trade information, as long as they will tell anyone who asks, whats to stop it from progressing to the tanner like situation you are so abhorred by? even if others asked, and they were like yeah - these 30 great players are being drafted - you are powerless to do anything to stop it. you can try... but given that none of those schools have to worry about battling each other, its gonna be a tough spot for you, and grossly unfair. by your rules, as i understand them, this would be allowed because if others asked who was being drafted, they would get that information freely.
no, jtt was the one that brought up the notion on "any" information. I was only talking about the situations were a coach was recruiting more players than he had scholarships for...that if another coach asked them which recruits they were seriously considering then it wouldn't be collusion to answer the question as long as they didn't discriminate between any coaches that ask, i.e. they either answered the question for all coaches that asked or non at all.
for starters, i know you agree this is collusion, and all that. just trying to have the discussion on what is actually wrong and why (outside the official definition), like you are :)

anyway, so if you are ok with someone asking a coach something like this, as long as he answers say, all 3 coaches that ask him - what all are you allowed to ask? it can't *just* be when a coach is recruiting more players than he wants, is it? what makes one case ok, and another, not ok?

ahhhh, good question, if memory serves me right I think a while back me and you went back and forth a bit on what I'm about to bring up.

And as a disclaimer: I do not utilize, endorse, or encourage such practices because they are strictly forbidden by the fairplay guidelines. The position I am defending is for arguments sake only.

The only other situation, besides the one previously discussed, whereby I think there is some wiggle room when it comes to communication between coaches on the subject of recruits/recruiting is the areas relating to transfer players. I don't see a problem with contacting a recruits former coach in order to inquire about potentials, and also, I don't see any problems with a recruits former coach answering as long as he or she doesn't discriminate in who they disseminate that information to, i.e. provide information to all inquiring coaches or non at all.

In real life, you're kidding yourself if think coaches don't pick up the phone and contact a transfer player's former coach to inquire about the circumstances surrounding the players dismissal/leaving, as well as information regarding that players capabilities.
of 10
All Forums > Hoops Dynasty Basketball > Hoops Dynasty > Tannermcc & associates are LargeScale Cheaters

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- 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.