[PSL 8] Week One

[BlackJovi]

Just now, gbwead said:

I think the activity calls are fair, but I disagree with announcing them before the week is over. If there was even a slight chance of kevola vs lucas happening or anyone vs lucas, now it is gone for sure. Lucas has no reason to show up.

He's online playing ranked right now lol

[DoubleJ]

Just now, gbwead said:

I think the activity calls are fair, but I disagree with announcing them before the week is over. If there was even a slight chance of kevola vs lucas happening or anyone vs lucas, now it is gone for sure. Lucas has no reason to show up.

I'd have to agree. 

[gbwead]

1 minute ago, BlackJovi said:

He's online playing ranked right now lol

So why doesnt coolio make a sub and lets go?

Edited June 19, 2017 by gbwead

[BlackJovi]

Just now, gbwead said:

So why does coolio doesnt make a sub and lets go?

cuz trash team + manager

[Toast]

9 minutes ago, gbwead said:

So why doesnt coolio make a sub and lets go?

well if i can speak for coolio, hes currently doing some shit exam or something, our other players arent available to be subbed too

edit: as of currently, cant speak for before

Edited June 19, 2017 by Toast

[BurntZebra]

15 minutes ago, DoubleJ said:

I'd have to agree. 

Kevola was not online when I wrote the activity decision, and he is GMT time zone from what I learned through the PM's, which means he is very unlikely to get on. If Kevola does get on somehow right now, then I will revoke the decision and force them to play, if Lucas attempts to avoid it. 

[kevola]

@BurntZebra

i don't understand this decision. I pm Lucas and he replies like 4 days later telling me he's busy. He replied to my mail in game On Wednesday or so saying let's play tomorrow (no time given and didn't reply to my mail asking what time ). So I wait all day trying to catch him online but couldn't. He pm's me on the forums when he wanted to play and it was like 2-3am my time so that was never going to happen. I tell him I can do like 5- 10or something on Sunday. He didn't read it when I checked at 5:30 ( which was like 40-45 hours from when I sent it ) so I presumed he wasn't going to

Show because he didn't know. I made other plans because of this. I turned out to have an hour in between whatever I was doing but he was in quarters of tourney at this time. So waited for a bit. I went to shower for like 10 -15 mins (which was the time I was afk for) and then logged off - he may have pm'd me in this time I don't know. But I made much more effort than him

 

He responded 4 times including mail in game in 6 days and one of these times he didn't specify a time, only a day, and didn't respond to when I asked him for a time... and the other he just said he was busy

 

i could've been free on any day if he gave me at least a day's notice but he was too inactive to reply or set a time properly. His average response time on forums was 2 days and 1 of the messages he just said he was busy. You can't set a time with someone as inactive as that when they don't make a proper effort. 

 

I understand I should share some of the blame, but most of the fault is on his back, I couldn't have done much more. Why should it be a no contest when I made 10x the effort he did

 

Edit: after reading the reasoning for the no contest 

 

He didn't pm me in game Friday, only on forums, and

wanted to play at 2am or something my time. I asked him what time he was available as I could've been free on any day given at least 24 hours notice. So it's not really fair when you say I wasn't free on Saturday or Sunday especially when he didn't even open the message till Sunday so it wouldn't have made a difference. 

 

I just needed to know a time Monday - Friday in order to play as I was free the whole time (could've hopped on in max 45 mins ) hence why I didn't give a time because I could play to his preference, but he didn't read the message I sent on Monday till Friday so me stating a time wouldn't have made a difference 

 

 

All the facts are here. I don't know how you could still think it's a no contest after reading this

 

Edit: 23 because this makes no sense

 

If you still feel like the blame is roughly equal (Which is why there should be a no contest) please tell me why

Edited June 19, 2017 by kevola

[Moetal]

On 6/16/2017 at 7:57 AM, Tranzmaster said:

Find out why Krillin is the worst DBZ character Sunday 8pm GMT

Is it because he beated you?

[DoctorPBC]

15 hours ago, kevola said:

@BurntZebra

i don't understand this decision. I pm Lucas and he replies like 4 days later telling me he's busy. He replied to my mail in game On Wednesday or so saying let's play tomorrow (no time given and didn't reply to my mail asking what time ). So I wait all day trying to catch him online but couldn't. He pm's me on the forums when he wanted to play and it was like 2-3am my time so that was never going to happen. I tell him I can do like 5- 10or something on Sunday. He didn't read it when I checked at 5:30 ( which was like 40-45 hours from when I sent it ) so I presumed he wasn't going to

Show because he didn't know. I made other plans because of this. I turned out to have an hour in between whatever I was doing but he was in quarters of tourney at this time. So waited for a bit. I went to shower for like 10 -15 mins (which was the time I was afk for) and then logged off - he may have pm'd me in this time I don't know. But I made much more effort than him

 

He responded 4 times including mail in game in 6 days and one of these times he didn't specify a time, only a day, and didn't respond to when I asked him for a time... and the other he just said he was busy

 

i could've been free on any day if he gave me at least a day's notice but he was too inactive to reply or set a time properly. His average response time on forums was 2 days and 1 of the messages he just said he was busy. You can't set a time with someone as inactive as that when they don't make a proper effort. 

 

I understand I should share some of the blame, but most of the fault is on his back, I couldn't have done much more. Why should it be a no contest when I made 10x the effort he did

 

Edit: after reading the reasoning for the no contest 

 

He didn't pm me in game Friday, only on forums, and

wanted to play at 2am or something my time. I asked him what time he was available as I could've been free on any day given at least 24 hours notice. So it's not really fair when you say I wasn't free on Saturday or Sunday especially when he didn't even open the message till Sunday so it wouldn't have made a difference. 

 

I just needed to know a time Monday - Friday in order to play as I was free the whole time (could've hopped on in max 45 mins ) hence why I didn't give a time because I could play to his preference, but he didn't read the message I sent on Monday till Friday so me stating a time wouldn't have made a difference 

 

 

All the facts are here. I don't know how you could still think it's a no contest after reading this

 

Edit: 23 because this makes no sense

 

If you still feel like the blame is roughly equal (Which is why there should be a no contest) please tell me why

 

@BurntZebra

[gbwead]

I would rather have them play now than settling for an activity call. 

[DoubleJ]

#noextensions#ironfists

 

=)

[gbwead]

Just now, DoubleJ said:

#noextensions#ironfists

 

=)

fak u, gimme feedback on my antidoc doubles team and that Wobbuffet of yours so I can trap this uguu.

[DoubleJ]

Just now, gbwead said:

fak u, gimme feedback on my antidoc doubles team and that Wobbuffet of yours so I can trap this uguu.

 God dammit. 

 

This man really hates me

[BlackJovi]

2 minutes ago, DoubleJ said:

 God dammit. 

 

This man really hates me

Who doesn't? 

[DoubleJ]

2 minutes ago, BlackJovi said:

Who doesn't? 

Wow. 

 

Let me kick you again. 

[Kizhaz]

1 hour ago, DoubleJ said:

Wow. 

 

Let me kick you again. 

Should stick to throwing, you're good at it

[DoubleJ]

Just now, Kizhaz said:

Should stick to throwing, you're good at it

 Bruh, steroids. 

[Bilburt]

14 hours ago, Moetal said:

Is it because he beated you?

Paste tence of beat

is still beat

 

[kevola]

@BurntZebra

I've addressed all your points in game and on the forums and you haven't replied to me fully on either yet 

[BurntZebra]

3 minutes ago, kevola said:

@BurntZebra

I've addressed all your points in game and on the forums and you haven't replied to me fully on either yet 

Taken from the discussion in manager pm chain.

 

This is somewhat of a change from last season. To get an activity win, you have to be *active* (strange how that works) throughout the whole week. That means starting with the forum PM on Sunday night/Monday. Take initiative in contacting your opponent by mailing in game to their username (non-English people typically are less active on forums, so this is important with them), contact the other player's manager (Kevola did this to some extent, but he should have given some information to Lkrenz about when he is able to play, so that Lkrenz can relay information back to Lucas).

 

So in summary, why Kevola does not get the activity win

 

1. Kevola did not give any times he was available to play until Friday. "When are you free to play" is not sufficient.

2. Kevola was not online during the time he said he was free (Sunday 5-11 PM GMT) (actually apparently he was online Sunday, but did not reply to whispers from Lucas/Lkrenz/others about playing the match)

[Bilburt]

#robbed

[OldKeith]

Just can't buy the "be available during the weekend" line. There is a reason why we have 7 days to complete our games. I don't think I should bench my players if they are away for the weekend.

[kevola]

2 minutes ago, BurntZebra said:

Taken from the discussion in manager pm chain.

 

This is somewhat of a change from last season. To get an activity win, you have to be *active* (strange how that works) throughout the whole week. That means starting with the forum PM on Sunday night/Monday. Take initiative in contacting your opponent by mailing in game to their username (non-English people typically are less active on forums, so this is important with them), contact the other player's manager (Kevola did this to some extent, but he should have given some information to Lkrenz about when he is able to play, so that Lkrenz can relay information back to Lucas).

 

Funny how being online a lot of the time on Monday to Friday doesn't constitute to being active (Strange how that works). I pm'd him on Monday on forums, and pm'd him in game multiple times to see if he was online (He wasn't), and sent mail. From this you can see that I was the active one, so this point doesn't make sense. I added Lkrenz to the pm. I could have told him a time, but by your logic, Lucas could've done the same through his manager, so this point is nullified as the blame, could be shared, even though I made more of an effort than him 

 

6 minutes ago, BurntZebra said:

 

 

So in summary, why Kevola does not get the activity win

 

1. Kevola did not give any times he was available to play until Friday. "When are you free to play" is not sufficient.

2. Kevola was not online during the time he said he was free (Sunday 5-11 PM GMT) (actually apparently he was online Sunday, but did not reply to whispers from Lucas/Lkrenz/others about playing the match)

I pm him Monday, he replies Friday. Normally takes 2 people to have a conversation. As soon as he responded, I told him when I could play under the short notice. Even if we ignore all these points, me initiating the conversation and asking him when he's free is much more than he did in 6 days as he only responded on Friday. I asked when he could play as I didn't have any restrictions on time provided he actually responded quickly - His average response time was 48 hours, and some of the messages included in this response time were irrelevant 

 

He said he was free on wednesday or thursday to play but didn't give me a time. I was on most of the day, and tried to pm him frequently but he was not on

 

He didn't agree, let alone even see the message when I checked at like 5:30-6. When someone doesn't agree or even see something, it's logical to assume it's not going to happen. Yes, you're right, I was on. However I was afk for a maximum of 10-15 mins (Which is my fault) which is the only time frame which they could've pm'd me in. A time frame that low is hardly fair especially when I was on for a whole day waiting for him, which isn't mentioned. 

 

In direct response to your 1st point : When are you free to play is not sufficient if and only if your opponent doesn't respond in a reasonable time, which shouldn't happen in the first place. Even so, that message still shows an infinitely more amount of effort put in from side in comparison to his.

 

In direct response to your 2nd point : I was online, I was just afk for 10-15mins (Pretty certain it was closer to 10). Like come on, that's not much time at all. This is my fault, but it's still a fraction of the time he was not on for on the date he said he was free on (The whole day)

 

So even with your current reasoning it's not wrong to say i put at least 10x the amount of effort in than he did. This reasoning also encourages people to reply to forum pm's on saturday because it'll likely be a no contest as long as you say 1 time on saturday/sunday that your opponent clearly can't make

 

 

 

 

[Bilburt]

Just now, OldKeith said:

Just can't buy the "be available during the weekend" line. There is a reason why we have 7 days to complete our games. I don't think I should bench my players if they are away for the weekend.

I think the main thing is that Kevola didnt provide any times himself, and while I feel that kevin was the more active one, I can see why zebra didnt find it enough 

[OldKeith]

Just now, Bilburt said:

I think the main thing is that Kevola didnt provide any times himself, and while I feel that kevin was the more active one, I can see why zebra didnt find it enough 

If I was host, I would definitely enforce the 48 hour rule. Kevola clearly showed initiative in starting the conversation, even if he did not provide times. It's a delicate situation, if it's set in stone, so be it, but I disagree with the ruling.