NM Deutschland Teamattacke

[Robyklebt]

Naja, Im Deutsch zu lesen gut aber jetzt schreibe ich English :

1. I agree with Allagen on 1 point : the transparency. The "straffe" and his level seems to be put "arbitrary" (I could have write german anyway). It would be cool (as I've already asked) to do a file with all the "Straffe" already put so that we can adapt the next "Straffe" to the level of the "former" one. If we don't do that, some (and I'm part of them) will always have the impression that we adapt the "Straffe" at the guilty person.

2. 300k is not that much (my point of view). Surely you would have won without this teammattack, but anyway, such move is FORBIDDEN, for EVERYBODY, in EACH race... So it leads directly to a "Straffe".

Then, you contest the judgement, you don't really recognize that it was bad... If I had to judge you, I would put a higher fine for this (I think "justice" is always more convenient when somebody recognize his fault)!

We need a catolog for the fines and penalties or we must not have transparency. I don´t want to discuss every dicission. "Team XY have got a lower fine, why?" I won´t answer this question every time. Either we define penalties for every misdoing or i handle it as before. Means the commite (and at last I) think about a penalty, especially for this team and this middoing.

How else could it be. I disagree.

Keep your flexibilty.

Don't really know how the fairness committee works, but they are a help no?

How it should work IMO:

1) Somebody does something illegal, bad.

2) Somebody opens a thread in the forum. (Has to be, that's the place where the accused can defend himself if he wants to.)

3) The fairness committee discusses. Ingame as now, we noncommittee member don't need to know what's going on. Opening that up would leave the committee member open to "reprisals", "revenges" etc. Who is on the committee on the other hand is something that should be known.Comittee discusses, reminds you of everything, recommends stuff.
4 You reach a decision, you announce the fine to the offender and that's it. (Probably the committee should know the fine too) He/she disagrees, then he can still complain in "his" thread. or per PN. And you are in a boring discussion. Sorry.



Most boring threads to read. Probably. But with a hard catalog you just create new problems as well. 3 strike US policy for example, there you occasionnally people in jail for x years for 3 minor offences. Or here, Nassau, newby, you want to take that into account. Ok write it into the rulebook, for newbies only x%. But then every situation is not exactly the same either. I attack with 2, 2 more of me follow 2 that follow me, nobody else, my computer crashes, everybody sees I'm offline, I come back 10 minutes later, 20 km later, 3 Km to the goal, 4 of my riders in a 20 riders group, don't even realize what happened. sprint, get place 5-8-19 and 20. Without the teamattack only 2 in front there was a siebmountain in the 20 km. So: Chained attack that results in more riders in the first peloton gets 200k punishment plus the money of offending riders, in that case 5-8. Ok. Well, don't I deserve a discount? After all I claim (claim that can't be proven, all everybody saw was that I was off right after the attack) that my computer crashed. And my history shows that I'm online all the time usually. Seems likely that the computerstory is true. Ok, write that into the rule. But then the same thing happens to Marzahn, except that in his case the computer is ok, but right when he clicked on attacks his cat fell out of the window. He races outside, can't see the cat, looks for it, finds it safe but a bit dirty comes back, same situation. Ok, write a cat falls out of the window rule. With picture of the cat, without picture of the cat. Or even teamattack, nobody realizes it at first, only somebody in the zc. Later a post here, teamattack was only 10 riders, not 11. Fine yes, but much less than if somebody mentioned it and the manager refused to let the rider fall back. With the hard rules you lose flexibility.

I mean, you already have some general guidelines obviously... after I said Allagen should get 50k you told me that you were giving out much higher fines than that for offenses like this nowadays. So you have some sort of general policy. That the committee probably that works with you now probably knows more or less. Is more needed? Do we need everything written down? Of course it's easier to say, 200k plus earnings, no discussion. (Which will be there anyway) but is it just? And it's justice you want after all.

Still too much work for you? Probably. Time spent that you could have spent much better.

Refine the system. Instead of you contacting all the offenders/accused, give the committee members a special ingame message thing. They send an ingame message, they all appear in the ingame fairness commitee screen (imagine it's a chat similar to the one in the nations committee?) so the whole fairness commitee sees them. Give the recipient of the message a reply possiblity. That will appear there automatically too. So instead of you writing emails, ingame messages and PNs, You see: Petit Singe team attack. You say: Mangahn, you're the man on this one, you write the ingame messages. Ask him for an explanation (if there isn't one in the forum already) You don't have to do it yourself anymore you just supervise. Ok, if you see that you don't like the tone of the messages sent by one of your boys, kick him. Then Mangahn discusses with Petit Singe, you see his answers (500 insults) if you have more questions, ok, you send one too, but in principle you just supervise. You say who handles the communication, ingame, you read, you listen to the boys, you decide. That stays, you decide, not your boys. Less writing for you. And make it clear to the accused/offender that THIS is the way of communication, not PN, Emails etc. Unless you want to handle that case by PN/email. Less writing, less bla bla. And if you want a specific quesiton asked, you tell that to the boy in charge. Mangahn, ask that motherfucker petit singe a, b and c. Shorter than having to write yourself, where it would be, dear Petit Singe, I was wondering if you could answer me the following questions, so far I don't really udnerstand bla bla bla... That's Mangahns Job then, the being nice thing, you can just bark around orders in the ingamefairness part.

But keep the flexibility. And get FL to join the fairness committee.

[gaurain rx]

Well, if you don't put some rules (and think there are no rules at the moment), guys like Allagen, Aywaille or me will never ever accept the amount of their fines. If you know that a teammattack will cost you (for example) between 250 and 350k, then there will be less unproductive discussions after the fine.

Secondly, flexibility yes but in some guidelines... That would make the work more easy and more easy to understand for all. So you can "arranged" easilly the 90% of the cases where the things are easy to understand. Then, there will be some where people will always discussed.

Thirdly, races circumstances and defense of the "possible guilty person" has to be taken in account, and it was never ever out of what I've said. It's a noob, then ok, stay "cool" with him,...

[Bear]

Irgendwie ziemlich lächerlich das ganze Gejaule hier... "Das andere Team hat aber eine viel geringere Strafe bekommen... Ich bin hier der einzige der eine hohe Strafe bekommt... blablabla."

Wenn man schon sagt, dass man die Strafe so annimmt wie sie ist, dann soll man das auch tun. Ohne Gejaule.

Ich finde übrigens, dass die Freiheit, die Buh ohne einen Strafenkatalog hat, gerade etwas positives ist. Denn man schafft sich nur weitere Probleme. Wo sind die grenzen zwischen den verschiedenen Delikten? Ich finde es am besten, wenn weiterhin jeder Fall separat geklärt wird.