Warrior General Games

Originally posted by Dub J
If you don't see the problem with what Catch did then I don't know what to tell you.

The point is instead of doing the right thing he took control of other people's dots that they had spent money on.

What was the right thing?

Originally posted by Homage
What was the right thing?

My position in that whole mess is that there was no right thing. Probably would've been better to just let the team stay CPU for the rest of the season, though that would've sucked too and would've also been derided as "wrong." But Catch's solution was... A.) not really that big of an improvement, and B.) just pissed a lot of people off even more than just having a CPU team in World League would've done.

But aside from esoteric arguments about it being "wrong," at the end of the day, Catch's decision really didn't hurt anyone. But if righteous indignation is what keeps Dub J and others interested in the game, then I'm cool with that too.

Either keep the team CPU or swap it out with a Pro team. I know schedules had already been made but if it was so important to not have a CPU in WL I don't think it would be too much of a hassle to run the script for one league again.

Not even sure they would need to touch the schedule. Just swap out teams.

Originally posted by Novus
But aside from esoteric arguments about it being "wrong," at the end of the day, Catch's decision really didn't hurt anyone. But if righteous indignation is what keeps Dub J and others interested in the game, then I'm cool with that too.


Obviously you must just troll Suggestions and never read and/or comprehend the things on the NGTH list in there. It's a pretty slippery slope when you make something NGTH and lock threads any time someone suggests something and then turn around and do it yourself.

Originally posted by Dub J

Obviously you must just troll Suggestions and never read and/or comprehend the things on the NGTH list in there. It's a pretty slippery slope when you make something NGTH and lock threads any time someone suggests something and then turn around and do it yourself.



I fully understand and agree with you that Catch's decision was on a slippery slope.

I also fully understand that it is possible to stand on a slippery slope without actually sliding down it. Not a good idea, granted, but still possible.

Seriously, Dub J, just because I disagree with you on an issue doesn't automatically mean I have no understanding of the issue at all. It just means we disagree.

Now if you'll excuse me, I need to get back to trolling the Suggestions forum.

Originally posted by Fumanchuchu
So he did an inactive agent the disservice of putting some WL stats on their dots that weren't doing anything anyway?

What was the right thing?

If the guy is inactive, that would mean Catch had to go into his account, and sign the players...... What's to say he can't log into your account, my account, and do shit if he feels like it.

Originally posted by CyberNinja
If the guy is inactive, that would mean Catch had to go into his account, and sign the players...... What's to say he can't log into your account, my account, and do shit if he feels like it.

Agreed, it's like if you have money in the bank (pretend they didn't already loan it out and it just sits there) and the bank people say "oh hey Mr. so and so hasn't been here in a while. He wouldn't mind if we borrowed some money". Sure the accounts may have been inactive, but they aren't his accounts to go into and use players. It's unethical, I don't care how small of an issue it was.

Originally posted by Greg B
Originally posted by CyberNinja

If the guy is inactive, that would mean Catch had to go into his account, and sign the players...... What's to say he can't log into your account, my account, and do shit if he feels like it.

Agreed, it's like if you have money in the bank (pretend they didn't already loan it out and it just sits there) and the bank people say "oh hey Mr. so and so hasn't been here in a while. He wouldn't mind if we borrowed some money". Sure the accounts may have been inactive, but they aren't his accounts to go into and use players. It's unethical, I don't care how small of an issue it was.

Agreed. It's unethical.

It's also unethical to keep a ten-dollar bill that you find on the street if you don't make an effort to find out who it belongs to. If you see someone do that, are you gonna chew them out publicly for it?

It's also unethical to do a rolling right-turn through a stop sign or red light. If you see someone do that, are you going to follow them in your car and chew them out for it when they get to their destination?

Sometimes you have to pick your battles. And sometimes you have to recognize when a battle is already over.

If Catch pulls something like this again, I'll be on your side in that battle, because yes, unethical, and yes,slippery slope. But if a CPU team pops up in World League again, based on the backlash from how he handled it last time, I'm willing to bet Catch won't do it that way again. Part of that is because guys like you and Dub J called him out on it, and I thank you for that. But if you keep harping on it and trying to re-fight a battle that's already been fought, you're just going to annoy people and lose credibility, and then you won't have that credibility when you need it on another, bigger issue later.

Think strategically, guys, not just tactically.

Originally posted by bigbean
http://goallineblitz.com/game/team.pl?team_id=1317

how come this cpu team cannot be bought?

Because not all CPUs are crooked: some just can't be bought.

Try threatening his family, that usually works.

Originally posted by Greg B
Agreed, it's like if you have money in the bank (pretend they didn't already loan it out and it just sits there) and the bank people say "oh hey Mr. so and so hasn't been here in a while. He wouldn't mind if we borrowed some money". Sure the accounts may have been inactive, but they aren't his accounts to go into and use players. It's unethical, I don't care how small of an issue it was.

Nobody explain to this guy about how loans work...

Originally posted by Time Trial
Originally posted by Greg B

Agreed, it's like if you have money in the bank (pretend they didn't already loan it out and it just sits there) and the bank people say "oh hey Mr. so and so hasn't been here in a while. He wouldn't mind if we borrowed some money". Sure the accounts may have been inactive, but they aren't his accounts to go into and use players. It's unethical, I don't care how small of an issue it was.

Nobody explain to this guy about how loans work...

I got what he was going for. I think in his scenario, what the bank was doing was actually reducing the "inactive" bank customer's account balance so they could use the money to order pizzas for the tellers, with the intention of putting the money back and restoring his balance later. If the "inactive" customer had come along during that time to check his account balance and seen it was $20 lower, he'd want to know why, and he'd be pissed off when he learned why.

Of course, in the end, the bank would have no choice but to put the $20 back in the account, and the account-holder wouldn't actually be out anything the end.

But he'd probably also switch banks anyway.

In the end, it's a bad, bad, bad, bad, bad, terrible, bad idea... but one where nobody actually gets damaged in the end. I only have so much outrage to go around, so I'm not gonna spare much for this. Sorry, I'm just not.

(EDIT: Geez, I can't spell today...)

Originally posted by Time Trial
Nobody explain to this guy about how loans work...



My point is no one should EVER go into someone elses account.

Originally posted by Novus
Agreed. It's unethical.

It's also unethical to keep a ten-dollar bill that you find on the street if you don't make an effort to find out who it belongs to. If you see someone do that, are you gonna chew them out publicly for it?

It's also unethical to do a rolling right-turn through a stop sign or red light. If you see someone do that, are you going to follow them in your car and chew them out for it when they get to their destination?

Sometimes you have to pick your battles. And sometimes you have to recognize when a battle is already over.

If Catch pulls something like this again, I'll be on your side in that battle, because yes, unethical, and yes,slippery slope. But if a CPU team pops up in World League again, based on the backlash from how he handled it last time, I'm willing to bet Catch won't do it that way again. Part of that is because guys like you and Dub J called him out on it, and I thank you for that. But if you keep harping on it and trying to re-fight a battle that's already been fought, you're just going to annoy people and lose credibility, and then you won't have that credibility when you need it on another, bigger issue later.

Think strategically, guys, not just tactically.

That was the first I heard about what Catch did was a few posts ago. Guess it depends on the user, I don't care how inactive I go. My account should be left alone until I decide I want to use it again unless I give permission. I hear where your coming from though.

Hey guys, apparently it can be bought,,,http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7edeOEuXdMU http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=fvwp&v=gqynT-deDuo&NR=1