![[DEV] ISFL Forums](http://dev.sim-football.com/forums/images/emerald/logo.png "[DEV] ISFL Forums"){kind=logo}
+- [DEV] ISFL Forums (http://dev.sim-football.com/forums)
+-- Forum: Community (http://dev.sim-football.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=5)
+--- Forum: Media (http://dev.sim-football.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=37)
+---- Forum: Graded Articles (http://dev.sim-football.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=38)
+---- Thread: *In Defense of the Indefensible (/showthread.php?tid=5832)
Pages:
1
2
*In Defense of the Indefensible - Deusolis - 11-02-2017
[div align=\\\"center\\\"]In Defense of the Indefensible[/div]
“VI. Other
- No multis. If caught the multi will be deleted and the player will be subject to discipline”
But why though?
This is my first sim league and my lack of experience is something I acknowledge from the jump. All else equal, I should, and will, defer to those who have been around longer than me. This is not my first-time crafting policies however, and it certainly isn’t my first time analyzing policies that have already been established. It is that experience that I lean on from here on out.
In constitutional law, there is a common test called rational basis. The premise being that, for any law to withstand a challenge, at the very least it must be rationally related to a legitimate, well-found government interest. A salary cap? Regression? Waiver rules? All three, and nearly every other rule in the rulebook, seem to serve a legitimate interest for the league. The one exception? Rule VI, Bullet point 1: No Multis. There are rules and regulations that are arbitrary to be sure, but while perhaps indicative of a lack of experience, this is the only rule that doesn’t have an apparent rational basis. To the uninitiated, the rule smacks of dogma. There are few more dangerous sentences in the English language than “that’s the way we’ve always done it,” and, even in conversations with more experienced sim leaguers than I, that appears to be the sole justification. I have no doubt that there will be response from those in the HO among others with rationalizations for the rule, but, on a fundamental level, I believe the community would survive without it. After all, I’m not quite sure the harm that would befall the NSFL if someone was so inclined as to be active on two accounts (the obvious exception being avoiding punishment for abusive behavior).
But I didn’t sit down today with the intention of changing a rule, my goals are bigger than that. At the end of the day, it seems to me that the driving force for the league, its raison d'être, is to maximize the enjoyment of all the participants. I am concerned that yesterday’s front office ruling does not achieve that goal. First and foremost, there is evidence that user dustyatters is not a Noble multi account. Although there’s no way of knowing one way or another, given the uncertainty, I think it best to err on the side of caution. The drawbacks of banning a user, especially one with an apparent league interest, are concrete and significant, preventing someone from experiencing the genuine fun of sim leagues. The benefits? Markedly less clear.
Additionally, this does seem to be a rather classic case of piling on. As has been mentioned, RainDelay and I share an IP address when we’re at school, as do three other users. Setting a standard in which the black sheep is slaughtered for sharing an IP but model members aren’t given a second thought is concerning to me. The fact that RainDelay and I are in good standing while Noble is not, is a result of our respective actions. Noble obviously has a much spottier record than either of us. But the fact remains that the same basic set of evidence – multiple accounts emanating from one IP address – should produce the same investigation and, in most cases, the same result. While there is other circumstantial evidence in the case of Noble’s account, it appears that the decision was made long before that evidence was taken into account.
Finally, and I suppose this runs counter to the prior themes of precedent and fair governance. Noble has a track record of really contributing to the league. We can all speak to the many hats he wore in the early stages of getting this all off the ground and the amount of work he put in, even if the S2 Top-50 was bullshit. But beyond that, speaking as an individual, Noble made a big difference for me early on in the league. Outside of RD, Noble may have been the most important person in navigating me through this process. His work has added a level of depth to the league that may not have otherwise existed. Obviously, there is no room for special treatment, but when what amounts to the sim league “death penalty” is on the table, mitigating factors ought to be taken into account.
I will be the first to admit that Noble has made mistakes. He has without question violated the trust of this community. Based solely on his actions on these boards, he’s something of a narcissistic prick, popularity in Saskatoon be damned. But every decision should satisfy the basic condition that, on balance, it helps achieve an organization or group’s central goal. And if we agree that the goal of the league is maximize the enjoyment of the members, in the case of banning Noble, a troubled but incredibly participatory member, and a potentially innocent user such as dustyatters, I don’t believe we’re achieving the goal.
@
@Ballerstorm
@RainDelay
@`dustyatters`
@Sweetwater
*In Defense of the Indefensible - JuOSu - 11-02-2017
Fair point. Interesting and well written. I don't necessarily agree, but you make good arguments at least. Should be something that is at least considered or discussed.
*In Defense of the Indefensible - 7hawk77 - 11-02-2017
We're still working on the Noble issue.
As far as multis:
If you are controlling two players. You could be on two different teams that are directly competing with one another. There should never be a conflict of interest like this. If you had access to both LRs, you could figure out one team's strategy and implement the counter to it on the team you would rather win. This is all kinds of terrible.
And what do multis even add? If a player has fun playing one character, they will have more fun playing two? I don't think this really adds anything beneficial especially compared to the drawbacks stated earlier.
*In Defense of the Indefensible - RedCydranth - 11-02-2017
The reason, as far as I can tell, is that having multiple accounts would create an unfair advantage.
1. Creating Multis could lead to other forms of cheating. If I had a second account, let's call it BlueCydranth, and that player was drafted by the Sabercats what would stop me from leaking any information I have from the locker room to the Otters? or vice versa? By having one account, I can't be in two places at once and my loyalty to my team is not under suspicion or question. But one could also instate a rule that Multis must be on the same team. But this leads to point 2...
2. It prevents super teams. Let's say I'm like our dear friend Noble. I have a metric fuckton of time on my hands, despite my amazing music career and maintaining that elite social status in my hometown of Saskatoon. So much that I can create and manage 4 accounts. And I have a few close friends/followers/fans who, like me, are super popular in happenin' Saskatoon (likely riding my coat tails) and have an inordinate amount of time on their hands when they're not filming radical snowboarding videos and playing volleyball at an elite level. So, each of my fukkbois friends creates 3-4 players. So, let's say between the trio of us, we have 11 active players. That could be pretty much a complete active team. By rule from point 1, all multis must be on one team, and if my buddies wanna be dicks, they can make it so they have to be with me on my team. So, now my team has 11 active players from 3 guys.
Now comparatively, you have the rest of us. Like my close personal friend Bradley Westfield, who often struggles to, but makes the time, to manage his account. Despite having a wife and newborn son, full time job and a plethora of friends who enjoy his company, he gets all his PTs and maximizes his TPE on most weeks. How is it fair to him that he can put in enough effort to manage one player on the Otters, but 3 dudes can basically field an entire team by themselves?
When you have 1 player per account, there's a cap on a single person's impact on the NSFL. No matter how active I am on this site, I can only be one piece of the machine that is the Otters. I rely on the activity of Bradley, Phelps, Boss, Verns, Clegane, Bolty, Jenkins, The O'Sullivans, Winchester etc etc to have a successful team and win games. It's a team sport. Each one of us has to do our part, as individuals, to make the Otters what we are. It would not be fair to each of us who do everything we can if 3 dudes can essentially be a team. Even if each of us COULD have a multi, the fact is most of us don't have the time.
*In Defense of the Indefensible - ItsJustBarry - 11-02-2017
I can preface this by stating this is also my first SIM league so the rationale of “that’s the way we’ve always done it,” means nothing to me since I don't know the difference. Its the same reason we gain TPE instead of XP even though nobody is confidently sure what TPE is.
I can also admit I am on the Team "Noble's cheating punishment was insufficient". When Carmel Gibson was caught with too much TPE, either accidentally or intentionally, he was all but publicly castrated. While the ring leader of this witch hunt was Archon, the league not only allowed his behavior but almost encouraged it doesn't sit well with me. The we have Noble and his blatant cheating and admittance. He ends up with a virtual slap on the wrist and a 1 season ban. In my opinion, for someone blatantly cheating, this is far too lenient.
Let's assume dusty is a separate person running his own NSFL account. He was still instructed by Noble to lie and mislead the entire league's community. This behavior, although not as severe, is not behavior that should be condoned. I spend a lot of time on this forum and in discord. I find it discouraging to play and try to contribute to the league while the others are doing the opposite.
*In Defense of the Indefensible - Sweetwater - 11-02-2017
(11-02-2017, 12:22 PM)Deusolis Wrote:In constitutional law, there is a common test called rational basis. The premise being that, for any law to withstand a challenge, at the very least it must be rationally related to a legitimate, well-found government interest.
Not that it makes a difference, and not that I'm trying to insult you. But, this screams law school student, like 1L/2L to me.
But Dan hit the nail on the head about the other parts.
*In Defense of the Indefensible - RainDelay - 11-02-2017
(11-02-2017, 01:25 PM)Sweetwater Wrote:Not that it makes a difference, and not that I'm trying to insult you. But, this screams law school student, like 1L/2L to me.
But Dan hit the nail on the head about the other parts.
Nope. Psychology/rhet major with a concentration in education... and avid debater.
*In Defense of the Indefensible - Deusolis - 11-02-2017
(11-02-2017, 01:13 PM)RedCydranth Wrote:The reason, as far as I can tell, is that having multiple accounts would create an unfair advantage.
1. Creating Multis could lead to other forms of cheating. If I had a second account, let's call it BlueCydranth, and that player was drafted by the Sabercats what would stop me from leaking any information I have from the locker room to the Otters? or vice versa? By having one account, I can't be in two places at once and my loyalty to my team is not under suspicion or question. But one could also instate a rule that Multis must be on the same team. But this leads to point 2...
2. It prevents super teams. Let's say I'm like our dear friend Noble. I have a metric fuckton of time on my hands, despite my amazing music career and maintaining that elite social status in my hometown of Saskatoon. So much that I can create and manage 4 accounts. And I have a few close friends/followers/fans who, like me, are super popular in happenin' Saskatoon (likely riding my coat tails) and have an inordinate amount of time on their hands when they're not filming radical snowboarding videos and playing volleyball at an elite level. So, each of my fukkbois friends creates 3-4 players. So, let's say between the trio of us, we have 11 active players. That could be pretty much a complete active team. By rule from point 1, all multis must be on one team, and if my buddies wanna be dicks, they can make it so they have to be with me on my team. So, now my team has 11 active players from 3 guys.
Now comparatively, you have the rest of us. Like my close personal friend Bradley Westfield, who often struggles to, but makes the time, to manage his account. Despite having a wife and newborn son, full time job and a plethora of friends who enjoy his company, he gets all his PTs and maximizes his TPE on most weeks. How is it fair to him that he can put in enough effort to manage one player on the Otters, but 3 dudes can basically field an entire team by themselves?
When you have 1 player per account, there's a cap on a single person's impact on the NSFL. No matter how active I am on this site, I can only be one piece of the machine that is the Otters. I rely on the activity of Bradley, Phelps, Boss, Verns, Clegane, Bolty, Jenkins, The O'Sullivans, Winchester etc etc to have a successful team and win games. It's a team sport. Each one of us has to do our part, as individuals, to make the Otters what we are. It would not be fair to each of us who do everything we can if 3 dudes can essentially be a team. Even if each of us COULD have a multi, the fact is most of us don't have the time.
I was going to raise the point of either tethering multis to one team or requiring that the original account owner be disclosed before the draft so I'm glad you did. The point about capping the influence of a single player is a fair one. Even though the amount of work you put in should reflect in your player (s) skill i.e. having 3 600 TPE players is harder than having 1, I completely understand the point about it being discouraging for a person busting their ass to be active watching some HS freshman with loads of free time run 4 multis.
I'll add though that my broader point had less to do with multis and more to do with noble
*In Defense of the Indefensible - SwagSloth - 11-02-2017
(11-02-2017, 12:13 PM)RedCydranth Wrote:The reason, as far as I can tell, is that having multiple accounts would create an unfair advantage.
1. Creating Multis could lead to other forms of cheating. If I had a second account, let's call it BlueCydranth, and that player was drafted by the Sabercats what would stop me from leaking any information I have from the locker room to the Otters? or vice versa? By having one account, I can't be in two places at once and my loyalty to my team is not under suspicion or question. But one could also instate a rule that Multis must be on the same team. But this leads to point 2...
2. It prevents super teams. Let's say I'm like our dear friend Noble. I have a metric fuckton of time on my hands, despite my amazing music career and maintaining that elite social status in my hometown of Saskatoon. So much that I can create and manage 4 accounts. And I have a few close friends/followers/fans who, like me, are super popular in happenin' Saskatoon (likely riding my coat tails) and have an inordinate amount of time on their hands when they're not filming radical snowboarding videos and playing volleyball at an elite level. So, each of my fukkbois friends creates 3-4 players. So, let's say between the trio of us, we have 11 active players. That could be pretty much a complete active team. By rule from point 1, all multis must be on one team, and if my buddies wanna be dicks, they can make it so they have to be with me on my team. So, now my team has 11 active players from 3 guys.
Now comparatively, you have the rest of us. Like my close personal friend Bradley Westfield, who often struggles to, but makes the time, to manage his account. Despite having a wife and newborn son, full time job and a plethora of friends who enjoy his company, he gets all his PTs and maximizes his TPE on most weeks. How is it fair to him that he can put in enough effort to manage one player on the Otters, but 3 dudes can basically field an entire team by themselves?
When you have 1 player per account, there's a cap on a single person's impact on the NSFL. No matter how active I am on this site, I can only be one piece of the machine that is the Otters. I rely on the activity of Bradley, Phelps, Boss, Verns, Clegane, Bolty, Jenkins, The O'Sullivans, Winchester etc etc to have a successful team and win games. It's a team sport. Each one of us has to do our part, as individuals, to make the Otters what we are. It would not be fair to each of us who do everything we can if 3 dudes can essentially be a team. Even if each of us COULD have a multi, the fact is most of us don't have the time.
This is a really good explanation. #2 in particular is a great point. You can easily funnel several players to the team of your choice after their draft contracts end. I was always curious about this. The rules are the rules, so I respected it, but it's nice to understand the reasoning between it. I think it's a question that people are afraid to ask, but the answer is insightful.
*In Defense of the Indefensible - Sweetwater - 11-02-2017
(11-02-2017, 01:31 PM)RainDelay Wrote:Nope. Psychology/rhet major with a concentration in education... and avid debater.
Fair enough, just used to friends in law school bringing up random legal stuff they have a tenuous grasp on in places where it has no bearing. Not saying that's necessarily what happened, just that that's how it came across on a quick glance.