S23 ISFL Awards

[Memento Mori]

I understand a lot of this, and I think much of it is fair, I just disagree with a few main points.

Again, like ive said, GMs having equal opportunity to be shitty does not mean all of them are each shitty. GMs can still swing a vote in their favor, and have, because most GMs arent super biased. I believe its flawed reasoning to go into it thinking its fair because everyone has an equal chance to do wrong, and in my previous posts I was pointing out just a few of the many times this was not the case. I agree that bias is unavoidable, but I dont think this proposal is any more fair just because its equal representation.

Lastly, i think the "Part of why HO has authority is because the users allow them to have it." Is rather pompous. The main reason why HO has authority is because the users force them to have it. There are always scandals that force HO to take action. Without an HO, if we were just governed by mob rule, this league would have died a couple years ago. Many HO members serve well past when they want to, thanks to the intense and all encompassing harrassment they get from strangers and trusted colleagues alike. its a ruinous job. And unlike other "similar" real life jobs, theres absolutely 0 reward for it. You get 10M in fake money, 15M for commish, and thats about it. I will flip your next statement on its head then: its not that you agree to bide by their rules so that y'all can have an enjoyable community and experience, its that they agree to give up their enjoyable community experience to attempt to give you it.

I also disagree that HO should be held to a higher standard. we should not lower the standard HO has, but raise the standards other people have. We shouldnt shrug at a bad ballot a GM makes but gather the pitchforks for an HO. If an equal crime is done, an equal punishment or reaction should be levied. this goes for much more outside of awards voting

I'm not here defending what happened. I dont think its good. I dont know if ive said that here yet, but here it is. My point is not to say hey we shouldnt hold people accountable, my point is to say we need to calm down. You say HO should be trying to do whats best for the league, but thats what I have seen throughout the course of about my entire HO career and still going on. Again, I do not agree with what happened, but I think it is an isolated incident. I do not support the attacking of all HO members and tearing down their priviledges all for the events of one event. Thats all im saying here

Again, like I've said, recognising that some people within a group of people might be biased =/= implying that all people within said group are biased. I also haven't said that the fact each team gets one GM makes it fair, but that it makes it less unfair. The point I made is distinct from the one you keep arguing against.

Your next paragraph is compatible with the point that users grant HO authority, IMO. HO is absolutely necessary. HO does lots of great things. I have praised plenty of HO decisions. I didn't advocate mob rule, and don't want mob rule. Google 'social contract theory' if you want, it applies to a situation like this fairly well IMO.

I completely disagree with your next paragraph though. HO members should absolutely be held to a higher standard than the average user. Context, and the identity of the person committing a wrong are extremely important. IRL, a doctor who kills a patient is treated much more harshly under the law, because they were in a position of trust and authority. A politician who lies is treated much more harshly than an ordinary citizen caught in a lie. A rich individual who steals a loaf of bread is treated more harshly than a starving one. I shouldn't have to say this, but just to be clear: these are examples of the point and I'm not comparing vote manipulation to murder.

I agree, HO generally does very good things. HO has made several big decisions in a relatively short space of time due to the growth of the league, and I think almost all of the decisions were great ones. The ones that I don't think were great, I understand why they made the decision they did. I think this is probably an isolated incident too. I haven't attacked all HO members, I immediately made it clear that I don't think the other HO members did anything wrong, and I haven't advocated for anything to be done to all HO members.

I just went back and read the thread again to confirm, and no one criticised the rest of HO or said that anyone other than Hippo shouldn't be allowed to vote for awards. You didn't need to come into this thread defending HO against the people who said that everything HO do is bad, that HO shouldn't exist, that all HO members are culpable or that all HO members should lose their voting privileges. Because no one said any of those things.