Pseudo fairplay

[scorpsche]

Just I have the feeling or the current understanding of fairplay especially by FPC is kind of...strange?

The fairplay penalties I see are for: insulting players, attacking with minor of amount of too much riders and a message in a forum.
But fairplay undermining actions can continue for months.

The Poke brings the perfect post which is revealing this bigotry on point but as consequence he is accused himself violating fairplay rules:
viewtopic.php?f=35&p=97726#p97726
viewtopic.php?f=16&t=5488
Pursuing the people who are revealing real fairplay violations is showing how much justice can be expected.

So me the whole fairplay concept becomes more and more a farce.
Is it fair teams do strange collaborations just to have 14,16,18 riders available?
Is it fair that FPC, Leso and Luques close eyes and ignore it?

[Laurens88]

The problem is that all the teams who are accused of helping eachother can almost never be proven guilty. When one team says it is riding for a small chance to get a stage win or a jersey or whatever while the other one benefits from it, it can never be proven that unrealistic arrangements exist (especially if these arrangements are made in person, via Facebook or Whatsapp). Even if a crappy rider wins the Italian national championship with 2 other teams in front simply "because he has such a nice last name" according to one of the other managers, apparently it is impossible to prove unrealistic arrangements. While Poké's joke (which will probably not be punished anyway), the message via the forum of JoyRide, insults in the chat or a team attack can actually be proven.

Indeed it feels a bit random and unfair sometimes to punish such actions while the actions you are talking about are left unpunished. But I guess it's all the FPC can do within their powers... Unless they want to make a statement against unrealistic arrangements that seem to have been made via other channels and decide to punish the suspects without any proof. But then we turn into a police state where the FPC gets the power to punish anyone without any evidence. And I guess that is not an ideal situation as well.

[Robyklebt]

Pokes joke? He's serious.

[luques]

I think need to be a bit more precise on some things here.

The fairplay penalties I see are for: insulting players, attacking with minor of amount of too much riders and a message in a forum.

So these penalties should not be issued? It seems to me pretty good and fair the job of the FPK on that side.

Pursuing the people who are revealing real fairplay violations is showing how much justice can be expected.

The post was opened by Roby who is NOT in the FPK.
A case wasn't open following that post, so who is pursuing who?

Absolutely nothing happened, but clearly every player can open a post and write his opinion.
So really I don't get the point.

Let's come to the most important point:

The problem is that all the teams who are accused of helping eachother can almost never be proven guilty.

Which is false, in the past penalties or warnings were issued for that. So it's possible.
That said the arrangement should be unrealistic, also in real life often we see teams helping each other for small chances to catch a breakaway for example.

To punish the suspects without any evidence/proof, that's not possible, but you can collect them.

Everybody here is writing a lot on race chat about this, writing everywhere except where they should write, in the fair play forum section.

It is impossible to collect proofs? Also this is kind of wrong, you can understand/check who is helping who, what teams are collaborating the most, if some teams appear and disappear, if stars appear, if a certain behaviour is repeated only in some circumstances and so on.

Sometimes cases take more time than what is evident as a team attack, they can be even weeks long, not for this the FPK doesn't care about it, but the first step is opening a post and writing down all the material you have, then we can start to talk about facts and not about opinions or hypothesis.

[Robyklebt]

A case wasn't open following that post, so who is pursuing who?

I think a case should have been opened. The proposal itself is clearly not in line with Fairplay rules. And while the "joke-defence" was used by others, Pokemon himself only confirmed that he is serious about it. Since I (unfortunately) know him, I never doubted that he is actually serious about it. And let's be clear, what he's asking is not an alliance based on race situations, mutual profit, in his appeal he wants an alliance based on nationality, with the stated purpose to beat managers of another nationality. Because of a perceived, but not proven, alliance by those managers (with Aux involved it's of course almost sure that this alliance based on nationality exists, but it needs to be proven. As you rightly say, in the fairplay section, not the pointless whining in the different chats).

For me that should be enough to open a case. (appeal to form an alliance based purely on nationality) What happens then, up to the committee.

On another note, Scorpsche should definitely pay attention to how often he uses the term mafia. See here: viewtopic.php?f=16&t=5147

[scorpsche]

I think need to be a bit more precise on some things here.

The fairplay penalties I see are for: insulting players, attacking with minor of amount of too much riders and a message in a forum.

So these penalties should not be issued? It seems to me pretty good and fair the job of the FPK on that side.

Pursuing the people who are revealing real fairplay violations is showing how much justice can be expected.

The post was opened by Roby who is NOT in the FPK.
A case wasn't open following that post, so who is pursuing who?

Absolutely nothing happened, but clearly every player can open a post and write his opinion.
So really I don't get the point.

Let's come to the most important point:

The problem is that all the teams who are accused of helping eachother can almost never be proven guilty.

Which is false, in the past penalties or warnings were issued for that. So it's possible.
That said the arrangement should be unrealistic, also in real life often we see teams helping each other for small chances to catch a breakaway for example.

To punish the suspects without any evidence/proof, that's not possible, but you can collect them.

Everybody here is writing a lot on race chat about this, writing everywhere except where they should write, in the fair play forum section.

It is impossible to collect proofs? Also this is kind of wrong, you can understand/check who is helping who, what teams are collaborating the most, if some teams appear and disappear, if stars appear, if a certain behaviour is repeated only in some circumstances and so on.

Sometimes cases take more time than what is evident as a team attack, they can be even weeks long, not for this the FPK doesn't care about it, but the first step is opening a post and writing down all the material you have, then we can start to talk about facts and not about opinions or hypothesis.

Your post is just confirming my point: I see no real interest to stop the obviously unfair behaviour of teams.
There is no investigation started even multiple players reported the behaviour independently.
There might be others than the Italian teams but here it is so obvious that a denial is revealing.
I see clearly 5 teams in the named stages races which are collaborating without any announcement in chat.
Therefor it is unrealistic since it is not a race situation dependent collaboration but moreover just an enlargement of team.
Cleary you admit that you either don't want to stop this behaviour or you cannot stop this behaviour.
An investigation might take long and since there is no interest to start...so how can it ever be successful?
Plus what does it help the teams in the current race of Savoie tour?
The gc is made in favor of those 2 collaborating teams - evening by evening.
...and still nothing is happening beside even defending this behaviour.

Why Robyklebt does pursuit Poke but not the real unfair teams I can just speculate.
Maybe he just doesn't like Poke and about the unfair evening races he doesn't care since he rides just in the morning.
Therefore his opinion is extremely biased.
Just a thought...

[luques]

A case wasn't open following that post, so who is pursuing who?

I think a case should have been opened. The proposal itself is clearly not in line with Fairplay rules. And while the "joke-defence" was used by others, Pokemon himself only confirmed that he is serious about it. Since I (unfortunately) know him, I never doubted that he is actually serious about it. And let's be clear, what he's asking is not an alliance based on race situations, mutual profit, in his appeal he wants an alliance based on nationality, with the stated purpose to beat managers of another nationality. Because of a perceived, but not proven, alliance by those managers (with Aux involved it's of course almost sure that this alliance based on nationality exists, but it needs to be proven. As you rightly say, in the fairplay section, not the pointless whining in the different chats).

For me that should be enough to open a case. (appeal to form an alliance based purely on nationality) What happens then, up to the committee.

On another note, Scorpsche should definitely pay attention to how often he uses the term mafia. See here: viewtopic.php?f=16&t=5147

Just to be clear I wasn't telling if it was right or not to open it, but just that it was not done as revenge, but because you (not FPK member) thought it was worth discuss about it.

About the mafia term completely agree with you, especially because it is being extended to the italian community in general, while on the other side there are not similar offenses used (Long time since I don't see the word "nazi" for example).

[luques]

I don't know if I can't explain myself enough clearly so I try to keep it simple.

Your post is just confirming my point: I see no real interest to stop the obviously unfair behaviour of teams.
There is no investigation started even multiple players reported the behaviour independently.

The interest is to be fair with everybody. WHERE players did report it?

There might be others than the Italian teams but here it is so obvious that a denial is revealing.

So obvious? So WHY is it a problem to write down proofs?

I see clearly 5 teams in the named stages races which are collaborating without any announcement in chat.

Why you didn't open a fair play post then?

Why Robyklebt does pursuit Poke but not the real unfair teams I can just speculate.
Maybe he just doesn't like Poke and about the unfair evening races he doesn't care since he rides just in the morning.

Roby is a player, he thought that wasn't right, and rightly he opened a post about that, simple as it is.

In the past I collected lots of proofs, wrote down everything in a post and waited for the FPK, I took screenshots, race chat, results, info and everything that was possible to collect in order to give to the FPK the best picture possible to take a decision.

And all decisions started with... writing a post and putting some proofs, not pointing to the "italian mafia".

[Robyklebt]

Why Robyklebt does pursuit Poke but not the real unfair teams I can just speculate.
Maybe he just doesn't like Poke and about the unfair evening races he doesn't care since he rides just in the morning.
Therefore his opinion is extremely biased.
Just a thought...

A little turd like you is NOT going to call my opinion biased. And get your facts straight anyway.

[Pokemon Club]

Currently you all makes me laugh, especially you FL and Donkey who are more and more ridiculous in this story. You all talking about alliances, but in first points I never see in the games rules alliances are forbidden :

Autres régles de Fair-Play:
- Le remplacement du directeur sportif est interdit pour les courses d´un jour.
- Chaque directeur doit faire de son mieux pour son équipe (avec fairplay bien entendu).
- Les connections irréalistes sont interdites:(par ex.: une équipe travaille pour une autre équipe sans rien y gagner.équipe profite de l´absence imprévue d´un concurent dans un tour, etc.).
- Les régles de fairplay prévalent, dans les courses, sur les relations familiales ou amicales.

So working for another without anything to win isn't good. BUT I see no problem if there is payback after. And that payback FPK is incompetent to prove it. Only players used to ride at their time can see if at long terms things are ok or not, so only them can do their own justice. It is why I never open thread for some gang, and it is why you will do nothing against AGF. Even more that you can't prove that we don't have some mutual interest.

To finish it is definitively not FPK who will impose me how I will ride. It isn't FPK but the races which build my relationship with different players since years, in good or bad way, FPK doesn't kknow and doesn't of my background with all of them, so it isn't FPK who can judge if ride for or against someone because I appreciate him or not after X yeears is OK or not. And it is the same for strangers like Donkey or FL, who, in this case, don't ride the night but aren't ashamed to talk in the name of night players without their permissions.

[Robyklebt]

Talking in the name of night players!!! Without their permission nonetheless!!!
Too funny.
I suppose you have a quote for that outlandish claim?? Or could it be just a lie?

Interestingly enough you are very fast in running to the FC in other cases. Mommy, Mommy, heeeelp. But they won't tell YOU what's fair and what not. Exactly like Aux, you feel you're above the rules.

[Robyklebt]

But seriously, do we really want this kind of shameless lying go through each time?

In the end what Pokemon does here is nothing other than fake a quote.

If I were to post something like

I fully agree with Big Donkey that making an alliance is a bad idea and unfair. I was just frustrated because I didn't win. Forgive me, please, please!

would that be ok? Don't think so. But as I already said, by posting falsehoods like "talk in the name of the evening players" Pokemon is doing the exact same thing.

Since this seems sort of a general question/whining thread, I add my whiny question:
Is there any chance that if a thread is opened about repeated misrepresentation of others opinion/behaviour, that a case will be opened or shouldn't I even bother?

[Pokemon Club]

But seriously, do we really want this kind of shameless lying go through each time?

In the end what Pokemon does here is nothing other than fake a quote.

If I were to post something like

I fully agree with Big Donkey that making an alliance is a bad idea and unfair. I was just frustrated because I didn't win. Forgive me, please, please!

would that be ok? Don't think so. But as I already said, by posting falsehoods like "talk in the name of the evening players" Pokemon is doing the exact same thing.

Since this seems sort of a general question/whining thread, I add my whiny question:
Is there any chance that if a thread is opened about repeated misrepresentation of others opinion/behaviour, that a case will be opened or shouldn't I even bother?

[/quote]

A case wasn't open following that post, so who is pursuing who?

I think a case should have been opened. The proposal itself is clearly not in line with Fairplay rules. And while the "joke-defence" was used by others, Pokemon himself only confirmed that he is serious about it. Since I (unfortunately) know him, I never doubted that he is actually serious about it.

Coucou Alzeihmer how are you ?

No I definitively don't know you. I know a guy like RFM because I see him sometimes, I know a bit a guy like Luques because I talk to him off games about some topics that aren't link at C4F? You you are just a virtual existence to me who, it seems, try to existing by intruding by force in the virtual life of others players.

[Robyklebt]

You're not very perceptive, that's your problem.

[team fl]

It seems its the same pattern Pokemon uses everytime someone disagrees with him. He tries to vilify his counterpart with pointless accsations to strenghten his position. Usually a good indication that there is a lack of arguments.

[Pokemon Club]

You vilify yourself well without my help

The only facts are that there was a fight Poke/SWE vs Auxi/VP during a night race. Accusations of alliances in both sense.
I said openly to them (especially Auxi as VP lost his month) that as the night italians populations always collab as hell, I'll convice french guys to do the same against them the night to show them we can kick their ass when we want.
No reaction of Auxi and VP and as all can see no negative fairplay vote between us even after that. So no problem between us, challenge accepted for them.
So I checked with guys who can ride the night who was in or out the alliance against italians.
And so while all was clear and OK between night guys, 2 borings morning/afternoon guys, FL and Big Donkey, just would to put their noises in a fight they are not involve first.
Where is the unfair stuff if both parts don't feel there was unfair stuff ?

[team fl]

q.e.d.

[scorpsche]

q.e.d.

So you agree to remove the following fairplay rules?
- unrealistic arrangements are not allowed
- every manager must do the best for his team . Separation of private and RSF is required.

Because it seems you agree with Pokes statement:

the night italians populations always collab as hell, I'll convice french guys to do the same against them the night to show them we can kick their ass when we want.

Or you will start to finally punish Italian teams?
Maybe be more precise what your q.e.d. is about....

[team fl]

I think you know the answer to your completely made up assumption and about my opinion. Or you just dont understand what I've been writing about.

[High Flyer]

q.e.d.

So you agree to remove the following fairplay rules?
- unrealistic arrangements are not allowed
- every manager must do the best for his team . Separation of private and RSF is required.

The rules are there to stop people from pre-planning before hand and general fairness.
Yes, they are easy rules to bypass and yes they are completely objective as to how you view "best for his team"

But they exist to stop cases where there is undeniable evidence. And there have been cases of these. They are also there to "put people off doing it too".

Just because rules don't go in your favor doesn't mean they should be removed.