Wolves' Den PvP Tournament - The Great Aether Cup

[Ayerro]

I voiced my concern without being rude as well.

[Atreus]

Not really, no.

[Ayerro]

o?

"Please take this privately because I, along with a few others, found it rude to spam an already-created event with 'your event has some major issues.'" <--- My post

"You're emotional but that's because your team needs the OP rules." <--- Logos' reply

[Logos]

"...I, along with a few others, found it rude to spam...

So one totally related post is spamming... really?

Who are the others who think what I did was rude? They aren't speaking up. Or are they ones just silently clicking "like" on your posts?

[Ayerro]

You just couldn't resist taking more shots... well, so be it.

1) That does not mean discussion is not allowed or warranted.

2) Nowhere in the original post does it say "do not discuss" here. You aren't the forum dictator, moderator, or even the original poster.

3) So you agree the teams should be 4 player, no subs? If so, that is more evidence we should change the rule, or at least have a legitimate vote. Just because you tell me to take it privately doesn't make it the right thing to do.

4) I did not "shove" my opinion. I put plenty of time into that post, choosing the right words, giving reasons to back up my suggestions. I did not know the post could be edited after the fact to surpass the character limit, so I condensed the three posts into one post. I care about fairness. Do not tell me what to do; there is nothing more rude than that. And again, you are not the forum queen. Discussion forums are made for discussion.

5) I am just returning what you are giving me. I started out with a rational, objective post about concerns I (and others) have about the rules. You called me "rude" and continued on that track instead of putting any effort into offering any rational, objective input or criticism. I am just like a mirror, showing you what you are putting out.

"idgaf" -- your continued defensive reactions suggest differently!

1) Doesn't mean it's not rude either.

2) No where in the post does it say "discuss here." It's an implied courtesy to refrain from trying to change an event that has been created already. I fail to understand why that's so hard to understand.

3) Yes. I want 4man teams with no substitutes. I've said that in private chat where it belongs.

4) You did, but as you said, that's alright. I was just suggesting you take it privately, but I can't stop you. Not shoving an opinion begins with "would you like to hear what I have to say" whereas shoving an opinion begins with "I have a problem with..."

5) My first post was a suggestion to take matters privately, but you took it as a passive-aggressive post. Mirrors don't do that.

We're both explicating each others' sentences and our argument about how to go about things isn't relevant to PVP. I just assumed you would be more open to see how voicing an opinion after an event has started could be rude.

[Astrapls]

I'm not really seeing the issue with having 6 player teams. A team of 4 has similar advantages as a team of 6, perhaps even moreso in some ways. By not swapping out members, there is no need to rebuild team synergy between the rotating players. To claim it gives them an unfair advantage is disingenuous, as every single team is eligble to have 6 players. Maybe you don't have the people to field a 6 man team, and that's ok. A single player can play every job in the game, so any team still has the option of any composition. This means that the playing field is still level. You could also argue that not everyone has all jobs leveled, but if we compare this to sports, not every professional sports player have the same skill level. That's like saying every football team has to have equally skilled players to be fair to each other.

Allowing 6 man teams makes the tournament more inclusive and allows more people to participate who may not be able to get together another 4 man team. You might even have one or two friends who want to play, as well. The 6 man teams is an established rule and has worked well for reoccurring tournaments on JP data centers. Keep in mind that this is an MMO, a game to play with friends.

Those extra players could be part of another team, which would help get more competition going ~

As for having the other two players join or form other teams, that's not really fair to them. You can't force people to team up with others if they don't want to.

[Ayerro]

So one totally related post is spamming... really?

Who are the others who think what I did was rude? They aren't speaking up. Or are they ones just silently clicking "like" on your posts?

There were three huge posts before you condensed it.

The point in calling out more people?

I'm dipping out of this because we digressed to the point of calling out people who don't want to speak up. At this point, there really is no relevance to the topic.

[heiligeharmonie]

You could also argue that not everyone has all jobs leveled, but if we compare this to sports, not every professional sports player have the same skill level. That's like saying every football team has to have equally skilled players to be fair to each other.
.

Going to piggy back off the sports comparison for a second--its more common for team based sports to have extra players to sub in for one reason or another, be it tactical or because a player can no longer play, than to not. If it's done irl, why not here?

[Logos]

There were three huge posts before you condensed it.

The point in calling out more people?

I'm dipping out of this because we digressed to the point of calling out people who don't want to speak up. At this point, there really is no relevance to the topic.

I explained why it was three posts. I did not remove any words when I condensed them into one post.

You said there were others who thought what I did was rude, so I was wondering if that is the truth, or just something you made up.

5) My first post was a suggestion to take matters privately, but you took it as a passive-aggressive post. Mirrors don't do that.

I just assumed you would be more open to see how voicing an opinion after an event has started could be rude.

Your first post:

You guys should discuss this somewhere else. `-` This looks like a completed event thread; It's a little rude to bombard it after people worked hard to even set this up in the first place. I understand that the concern could be genuine, but this discussion can really be better thought out elsewhere.

It did not specifically suggest to take matters privately, and passive-aggressively used "a little rude to bombard" to politely try to hide the emotions you let out later in the thread. Also, the event has not started, in fact it does not start for about a month. No other teams except for the original poster's team have even registered. I just had to correct you on those points.

I agree that this is getting off topic. Let's get this back on topic.

You continue to say the event was already created. Does that mean the rules are set in stone and not up for public discussion?

[Ayerro]

I explained why it was three posts. I did not remove any words when I condensed them into one post.

You said there were others who thought what I did was rude, so I was wondering if that is the truth, or just something you made up.

I agree. Let's get this back on topic.

You continue to say the event was already created. Does that mean the rules are set in stone and not up for public discussion?

Those who are secretly liking my posts are likely the ones who also share my opinion, as well as those liking yours.

I'll clarify:
Discussion would be spam in context, and a discussion like the rule change would involve many people as seen presently. I suggested taking it privately because what comes with a discussion is the incorporation of anyone who has anything to say about the topic. Especially for a rule change such as the one you brought up, I wouldn't be surprised if it went on for pages and if it did, it would look unprofessional and badly thought-up especially on the creators' side. This wasn't created by one person but by many who've contributed their thoughts, though one person is representing it's creation.

That is not my decision and I'm participating solely as a player in this tournament. The person representing this event seems more than willing to hear what you and others have to say, but the option for the Aether Skype group might be more sensible. You would be able to be a spokesperson for those who don't want to speak up in a setting with others who want to have a sincere discussion that doesn't turn into a heated debate on what's better.