Channel Policy Announcement

by cjthedude on 2007-11-22 21:24 MDT

What about deep into the night when the judges ignore you? or even when the judges just ignore you during the day =/

by Avata on 2007-11-22 21:41 MDT

This seems really unnecessary. People ask rules questions in the main channel all the time, and most of the time, those questions are answered correctly. Also, where do you draw the line? If someone is talking about a combo and says, "Wait, <Card X> interacts with <Card Y> like this?" Answering will get you hit with a banhammer?

The fact of the matter is that a lot of people in M-L know their stuff, and being a M-L judge comes with a lot more responsibilities than just being able to answer rules questions. Not wanting/being able to commit to running minis on a consistent basis makes someone incapable of answering basic rules questions?

by Jacois on 2007-11-22 23:14 MDT

What are all the "league" channels? There are a lot, which ones can I lie to other players in?

by cloysterd on 2007-11-22 23:52 MDT

This would be less nonsensical if the judges actually answered questions in the channel. Why not just ban all chat so nobody can mislead anyone about anything?

by MaitreFlavio on 2007-11-23 01:02 MDT

*BANNED*

by mufl0n on 2007-11-23 05:37 MDT

ROFL?
ridiculus?
The players should go to #judges4you if they want an official ruling,bust most of the time its ok asking it in the mainchannel because you immediately get an answer instead of waiting 5 minutes.
Also you sometimes get wrong answers in #judges4you.
I see no point in denying to answer easy questions.If its a bit more difficult they can still go to #judges4you.
You went way too far with this and if i should be banned because i tried to help someone since the judges are daydreaming and idling all the time i wont be sorry.

by georgjorge on 2007-11-23 06:52 MDT

I have to agree with the posters before me...such a measure is only ok if you give people an alternative to the thing that is denied, which in that case would be taking care that you can always get answers in #judges4you.

by RichardDWade on 2007-11-23 07:57 MDT

Totally uncalled for. Wow... I can't wait until all were able to talk about is the proper time to water your tomatoes...

by Equinox- on 2007-11-23 08:11 MDT

I completely agree that in #judges4you for non judges should never say anything involving rulings but in the main channel especially when most people are asking for non mini/trial related questions this goes too far.

by Tenak on 2007-11-23 08:52 MDT

So helpful people get banned? That is just ridiculous. If you want to stop ruling questions being talked about you should ban the people who are asking in league channels. If you are playing in a m-l tournament or league game it is your responsibility to get a correct ruling from #judges4you and not ask in a league channel after all. Besides that, I think that they are magic channels, and part of the things that should be allowed to be discussed are the rules of the game.

by Tewl on 2007-11-23 09:09 MDT

I agree 100% with all of the posters already. I know countless times I am in #judges4you and no judges are around to answer our questions. We have to sit there for about 8 minutes and sometimes judges still won't come. And since when was altruism a crime? Not to mention the fact that between the collective mind of all magic players on the main channel I'm pretty sure that the right ruling will be given. Why is it punishment to try to help someone and why is it right to give a new player the cold shoulder?
Also, there are times I have been in judges4you where one judge will give us a ruling then another judge will step in and give an alternate ruling. Just because you pass the judge test doesn't mean you know all of the rules.

by Mtgfanatic01 on 2007-11-23 11:14 MDT

Rofl another stupid rule by gfo

by Conkisstador on 2007-11-23 13:15 MDT

audible*

"whenever ___ in #judges4you" seems like an appropriate rule. people asking in main public channels are trying to get a quick fix and don't need a 'ruling'...

it's each palyers' responsibility and choice to go to #judges4you if u want the best answer.
hut hut hike

by Vlada on 2007-11-23 13:26 MDT

*BANNED*

by Ironicus on 2007-11-23 13:49 MDT

I understand this when it's in a mini or trial, but I don't wanna wait 10min util I get an answer for a casual match. Most of the time, when a person told you a bad ruling, other poeple just tell you the truth. The main channel is like a Wikipedia for rules.

by Jacois on 2007-11-23 13:58 MDT

Excellent point Ironicus, you're words ring true.

by MaksymG on 2007-11-23 14:03 MDT

wikipedia for rules :) good analogy.

Seriously though, I propose that this policy should be revoked or at least altered. I have in fact been in J4U when someone who was not a judge answered and gave a wrong ruling and the penalty for that should be enforced. However disallowing players to comment on ruling in the main channel is absurd. As the post above me stated, the collective group will always come up with the correct ruling barring some minor exceptions. Furthermore if a person does need a ruling in regards to ml tournaments then the burden falls upon that person to visit J4U and get the "official" ruling.

by KanonP on 2007-11-23 18:33 MDT

Is this a joke? We come into a Magic channel and aren't allowed to discuss Magic rulings? What's next, no talking about current decks? That's absolutely ridiculous.

by shadowmancer on 2007-11-23 21:14 MDT

Can we tell people the answer if we site our sourse on magicthegathering.com?

by Fanboy on 2007-11-24 01:09 MDT

Seems that to a degree it makes sense but needs to be severely refined. I love mL but they need to realize they do all they do to appease a community and often they do things that counteract that; times like these they need to bounce ideas off the community and see what they like, so long as it doesn't become a hassle for the people running the show.

In this scenario the HUGE flaw seems to be that in the event a person needs to ask a ruling it's in 3 scenarios:

hypothetical...in which casual debate should be fine...

during a casual match...see above...

and during a league match. The problem here is that when a rule is in question...often two people go in to verify it...if they both agree and run to an unviable source, I feel it almost rests on their shoulders...

NOW if someone is deliberately heralding themselves as a judge and giving advise in Judges4you or even claiming to have judge rank within and mL and they don't...that seems bannable. Or if someone is obviously giving bad info to torment a new player.

At worst if theres a problem the player should be warned...lack of warnings seems to be the biggest issue with policing mL. (by that i mean defining what is over the line and whats not...many judges will punish borderline behavior without giving a notice that they're GETTING too close)

My solution may not be the best, but the community obviously rejects whats been instated and i highly advise a revisit on this issue.

by nico on 2007-11-24 01:22 MDT

Apperantly no-body really read the added lines in the original post.
The policy is that:

A) It is not allowed to ask for, and give rulings for match disputes in the play channels of magic-league

B) It is strictly forbidden for any non-judges to try and give out rulings in the channel #judges4you.

This will prevent a lot of confusion, and fights over rulings.
Also, it is not advisable to whine and bitch in the play channels about rulings given in #judges4you that haven't gone your way. This is also a bannable offense, if it is deemed disruptive for the channel by the ops.

Ofcourse you are free to discuss hypothetical situations and clarification about certain interactions etc.

Greetz Nico

by DoRyuSen on 2007-11-24 02:15 MDT

this is rather redunkulous....if judges were consistently available all the time, i would have no problem with this. and judges don't always answer right anyways...

I'm just reiterating (with buyback, bad joke) what everyone else has said. Very silly update.

by Ro on 2007-11-24 04:14 MDT

OMG with buyback, I'm laughing the ears of my head.

by TugaChampion on 2007-11-24 05:26 MDT

"B) It is strictly forbidden for any non-judges to try and give out rulings in the channel #judges4you." ---> This is a nice change.

"A) It is not allowed to ask for, and give rulings for match disputes in the play channels of magic-league" ---> This is an horrible change. Countless times I got no answer in #judges4you and had to ask in #magic-league. Also let's face the fact: there are several judges that know nothing about rules. Don't get me wrong, IRL I've seen a judge say that with Teferi in play you don't get the storm copies. There are bad judges everywhere but it's more likely to encounter a bad judge in m-l than IRL (like it's easier for a bad deck to top4 a trial in here than to top8 a PTQ). And if someone asks something in #magic-league and there's an wrong answer, other people will give the correct answer.

Overall: a bad change.

by tcook589 on 2007-11-24 08:52 MDT

I'll preface by saying that I really love the league and I have appreciated all of its services for the past 2.5 years.

Having said that, there still seem to be a few admins who have less patience than others. Meaning, some are quicker to swing the ban hammer than others. This exemplifies that.

More specific to this topic, I agree with the general consensus of the vocal community before me. Plenty of times a question can go unruled in #J4U for upwards of 10 minutes, even while minis are in progress.

I understand the desire to prevent incorrect rulings in #J4U but I don't think it is necessary to +b whoever wants to be helpful in a community channel. After all, isn't that what this is, a community?

by Trotsky1 on 2007-11-24 10:19 MDT

This policy change offically makes magic-league more annal than modo and you cant even swear on modo. But you can still ask for rules advice of your fellow players.

by Jeebus on 2007-11-24 12:47 MDT

in sanctioned tournaments, rulings from judges in #judges4you are the only correct ones. make that a rule and you've solved your problems without banning anyone that wants to talk. doesn't have to something as excessive and senseless like whats posted here.

by thedarkness on 2007-11-24 16:06 MDT

Actually, what Jeebus said makes sense (for once.)

I think it might work better for the general populous if the change was amended to something along the lines of:

"in ANY rated match, only rulings made BY A JUDGE in #judges4you are acceptable rulings. You may appeal to a higher level judge if you feel that the ruling is unjust or wrong."

by Senadai on 2007-11-24 16:36 MDT

A bit ago there were no judges in j4you late night for 30 minutes for a single match ruling, and me and my opponent had to ask in m-l to get a ruling, and got one.

I'd hate for me/him/our answerer to be banned over this..

by SL|RedDemon on 2007-12-08 07:30 MDT

ridiculous?

by Wiley on 2007-12-09 20:00 MDT

yeah this is the worst announcement I have ever seen, I think this even tops Neo's joke a few months back, and Nico's leaving announcement (which was hilarious by the way)

I don't think there's a single person here who actually agrees with the admins this time! Imagine that... finally the M-L community is wising up

Also easy way to prevent this: have judges who actually look at #judges4you and actively rule in it. As well, punish judges who put members on ignore, as this can foster enormous waiting times as well.

But hey why listen to me, I'm just some insubordinate peasant right?