My side of the story

[ponciliano]

? What in the f is this post even supposed to mean lmao.

I could literally have only read Chrazini's side of the story (which in fact was the first one I read, followed up by Hera's tweet just to know context) and I would still think the wrong decision was taken here. Stop trying to display Chrazini as a victim here. His opening to the thread is just as bad as Hera's tweet when it comes to calling someone out if not worse, as Hera only shared his opinion on what he considered a bad admin decision (and I did too, from the moment I read Chrazini's version). You can already see it's effect on people on this thread alone, you being one of them. Hera might be a person with influence on this community, but so is Chrazini.

Feels like I'm answering to an obvious troll at this point.

Chrazini hasn't nearly as influence as Hera has.

The situation is also quite different: Chrazini has been attacked. He has to defend. He didn't have the initiative of attacking. Both Belgium and Hera, according to posts here, promoted witchhunt against Chrazini in some way. What's Chrazini supposed to do? Obviously he gotta expose his point.

It's common knowledge that a defense to a public attack has to be made as publicly.

You saying "stop trying to display Chrazini as a victim" already shows for whom you stand. Nothing against you, but you don't have the right of calling me a troll, lol.

 

[FolderOfDoom]

His opening to the thread is just as bad as Hera's tweet when it comes to calling someone out if not worse, as Hera only shared his opinion on what he considered a bad admin decision (and I did too, from the moment I read Chrazini's version). You can already see it's effect on people on this thread alone, you being one of them. Hera might be a person with influence on this community, but so is Chrazini.

Just that he wouldnt even had to open this thread if not for Hera starting this whole overheated situation with his tweet .... BUt at this point ig its just players stick together to the end ^^

 

[Chengaze]

I think my favorite part of this whole thing is seeing a player post, then seeing other players like it. Maybe we should change the name to AoEtheCircleJerk. Players are obviously going to support and stand up for other players. Hera saw a chance to do a hit piece on a guy who left him out of a tournament and took it.

The sense of entitlement players have is insane, especially as this game grows. Big money requires real professionals. Seems quite simple.

 

[IYIyTh]

I think everyone is a bit in the wrong and a bit in the right in this situation. I think something unfortunate happened (the delayed set) which is certainly not admins fault but neithers is PB and it kinda snowballed from there, where i personally think -like i said- there are no absolute victims, things could've been done differently from every angle. Im just sad to see that only one single person has to pay for the after party of a mess thats not the fault of either PB or the admin. I can only imagine how tricky things can be when organizing these events, but players are after all people too and they too have a personal life and im not sure how "rules are rules" apply when unexpected things happened. I agree rules are, indeed, rules but rules can be questioned, can be changed and can certainly be improved. Either way its allowed to agree to disagree, im not sure why its either all one side or the other

How do you figure about there being a mix of right/wrong? I see disdain regarding someone being impacted by the rules being enforced, but I'm not sure what qualifies the situation as there being a right/wrong.

Spoiler

Unless you're referring to the twitter post(s), which were certainly wrong.

The point of a tournament rule book and admin is to make the hard decision(s) you speak of in your post binary as opposed to a judgement call. It is by design that there is no judgement call at all. That is the most fair and impartial way to run a tournament. The admin simply is an implementer of the rule book. The circumstances are a bummer, as PB has been catching good momentum outside of these events as well. But inflexibility is a feature as it eliminates judgement calls.

These sort of rules always receive similar reactionary castigation when a popular player like PB are impacted (Just like Hera recently was when he failed to check into TOC, or PB/Daniel in Two Pools after ultimately running into computer issues and time after exhausting earlier potential playing time due to other/outside commitments).

Suggesting an admin should have had flexibility when they by rule could not isn't fair to the admin. Discussing ways to improve is wonderful, but given the rigid framework of tournaments in general it is hard to imagine a solution that would have universal buy-in or be universally fair, and in fact I haven't heard any except essentially that there should be discretion on a case-by-case basis.

Having a hard time figuring out what the better solution/potential future change that is even being offered up outside of "let the admin's make judgement calls to impact tournament schedule that bend the rules on some occasions if both players agree, regardless of impact on tournament administration and schedule."

In a perfect world everything runs smooth, the sun shines at the same time across the world and no one has to work, has to take care of family, and none of my friends or favorite players have frequent run-ins with tourney admins. But sadly that's not the case, and I can't think that the above course of action as tenable without introducing schedule risk, additional administration time/effort, potential unnecessary imposition on opposing players for lacking availability, and added potential for impartiality in decisions.

Spoiler

This discussion is heated and way too much influenced by personal feelings and negative experiences to have a clear picture of the situation and an open-minded discussion.

It's Corona's fault, everybody knows.

View attachment 195729

We've read your Voobly posts , we know you need a hug, you don't have to blame it on Corona :P.

 

[ponciliano]

I think my favorite part of this whole thing is seeing a player post, then seeing other players like it. Maybe we should change the name to AoEtheCircleJerk. Players are obviously going to support and stand up for other players. Hera saw a chance to do a hit piece on a guy who left him out of a tournament and took it.

The sense of entitlement players have is insane, especially as this game grows. Big money requires real professionals. Seems quite simple.

How dare you criticize players with their sizeable fanbase ganging up doing cancel culture against somebody? You must be a troll!!

 

[Hearttt]

Chrazini hasn't nearly as influence as Hera has.

The situation is also quite different: Chrazini has been attacked. He has to defend. He didn't have the initiative of attacking. Both Belgium and Hera, according to posts here, promoted witchhunt against Chrazini in some way. What's Chrazini supposed to do? Obviously he gotta expose his point.

It's common knowledge that a defense to a public attack has to be made as publicly.

You saying "stop trying to display Chrazini as a victim" already shows for whom you stand. Nothing against you, but you don't have the right of calling me a troll, lol.

Chrazini wasn't attacked. A relevant player DISAGREED publicly with his decision and nothing else. What is this witch hunt talk? Are people on these forums really this manipulable?
No, he doesn't have to defend, because he wasn't attacked. What he had to do was clarify the situation from his perspective, which he has done. The opening to this thread is absolutely unnecessary and just redirects whatever was being aimed at Chrazini to Hera, which I doubt was his intention, just like it wasn't Hera's.

You don't need to quote that part of my post to know who I stand for. At the beggining, I disagreed with the decision made, and that was it. Now, I definitely stand against this redirected so called "witch hunt" against Hera.

I think my favorite part of this whole thing is seeing a player post, then seeing other players like it. Maybe we should change the name to AoEtheCircleJerk. Players are obviously going to support and stand up for other players. Hera saw a chance to do a hit piece on a guy who left him out of a tournament and took it.

The sense of entitlement players have is insane, especially as this game grows. Big money requires real professionals. Seems quite simple.

Yeah, the entitlement of refusing to play a high level tournament at 2 am. These entitled immature kids nowadays, right?

 

[Chengaze]

Yeah, the entitlement of refusing to play a high level tournament at 2 am. These entitled immature kids nowadays, right?

No one called you kids, or immature, so I don't know why you are adding words to excessively victimize yourself.

Also, is it not a job? Do you not call yourself Pros, aka Professionals. If I have to go into work at a random time because that's what I have signed up for, then I do so. I don't get to then try to whip up sentiment against my boss or anything. Hera even mentioned it could be life changing money, but its a job, not a right, not a guarantee. You want the money, show up. I've never gotten paid to not show up or by pushing work until later.

So, with that in mind, at this time, I will say that: Yes, as far as I can tell, you are an immature kid.

 

[roxyc]

How do you figure about there being a mix of right/wrong? I see disdain regarding someone being impacted by the rules being enforced, but I'm not sure what qualifies the situation as there being a right/wrong.

Spoiler

Unless you're referring to the twitter post(s), which were certainly wrong.

The point of a tournament rule book and admin is to make the hard decision(s) you speak of in your post binary as opposed to a judgement call. It is by design that there is no judgement call at all. That is the most fair and impartial way to run a tournament. The admin simply is an implementer of the rule book. The circumstances are a bummer, as PB has been catching good momentum outside of these events as well. But inflexibility is a feature as it eliminates judgement calls.

These sort of rules always receive similar reactionary castigation when a popular player like PB are impacted (Just like Hera recently was when he failed to check into TOC, or PB/Daniel in Two Pools after ultimately running into computer issues and time after exhausting earlier potential playing time due to other/outside commitments).

Suggesting an admin should have had flexibility when they by rule could not isn't fair to the admin. Discussing ways to improve is wonderful, but given the rigid framework of tournaments in general it is hard to imagine a solution that would have universal buy-in or be universally fair, and in fact I haven't heard any except essentially that there should be discretion on a case-by-case basis.

Having a hard time figuring out what the better solution/potential future change that is even being offered up outside of "let the admin's make judgement calls to impact tournament schedule that bend the rules on some occasions if both players agree, regardless of impact on tournament administration and schedule."

In a perfect world everything runs smooth, the sun shines at the same time across the world and no one has to work, has to take care of family, and none of my friends or favorite players have frequent run-ins with tourney admins. But sadly that's not the case, and I can't think that the above course of action as tenable without introducing schedule risk, additional administration time/effort, potential unnecessary imposition on opposing players for lacking availability, and added potential for impartiality in decisions.

Spoiler

We've read your Voobly posts , we know you need a hug, you don't have to blame it on Corona :P.

oh i simply think no one can be completely on the right and i think the fact that theres so much controversy on the topic kinda shows that, but tbh i dont have much of an opinion, i feel bad for bugum for missing out and i can only imagine the things that were said to chrazini which is unfair too, so yeah thats all i got. As far as rules go, i disagree with your view on them but as i stated we can agree to disagree, you have your opinion i have mine

 

[ponciliano]

Chrazini wasn't attacked. A relevant player DISAGREED publicly with his decision and nothing else. What is this witch hunt talk? Are people on these forums really this manipulable?
No, he doesn't have to defend, because he wasn't attacked. What he had to do was clarify the situation from his perspective, which he has done. The opening to this thread is absolutely unnecessary and just redirects whatever was being aimed at Chrazini to Hera, which I doubt was his intention, just like it wasn't Hera's.

Well, I'm presupposing nobody here is lying. Hera isn't lying, Belgium isn't lying, the posters here aren't lying, and mainly, Chrazini isn't lying.

That said, people here put strong evidence that Hera and Belgium indeed attacked Chrazini Publicly. Hera, by tweeting to "leave Robo alone, that's Chrazini!". And Belgium, saying he wasn't treated fairly on-stream, that if he was Viper such things wouldn't have happened, suggesting that Chrazini is a biased admin.

If those things are true, then Chrazini was indeed attacked. I don't know what kind of interpretation you adopt to say it's not an attack, but any reasonable person can tell it IS an attack.

And how was Chrazini supposed to react against that? Well, obviously that had to be 1- public, because the attack was public; 2- stating all the facts, since he now has to state the truth of the situation to save his skin. That's what he's done, unless he lied or omitted something.

That said, I can understand the heat of the moment. It's the attitude of not apologizing and still insisting on their points, like they didn't do anything wrong, that bothers me so much.

You don't need to quote that part of my post to know who I stand for. At the beggining, I disagreed with the decision made, and that was it. Now, I definitely stand against this redirected so called "witch hunt" against Hera.


Yeah, the entitlement of refusing to play a high level tournament at 2 am. These entitled immature kids nowadays, right?

That's not the entitlement. The entitlement is putting his personal compromises above the event, then expect the admin to bend to his will, even lying for such purpose (if what Chrazini said is true), then promote his and his mates' fanbases to gang up on the admin when AL'd. And even worse, insisting that they didn't do anything wrong after being called out.

Yeah I call that immature. I know what cancel culture can do to people, making them miserable, losing their jobs and future opportunities, and maybe even suiciding themselves. That's why I don't find this behavior acceptable.

 

[LowEloNobody]

Damn they really nerfed walling on AoeZone too smh

 

[Hera_]

Listen guys, the purpose of my initial tweet was literally to show support to Project Belgium and shed light on a situation where I believed and still believe that a poor decision was made.

I never ever wanted chrazini to be on the receiving end of any negativity and explicitly made it a point to not mention his name at all. Only when I saw someone immediately tag robo did I clear up the situation so robo doesnt get questioned for smthg he didnt do.

Maybe its best that I dont comment on things that dont concern me, or controversial topics. Idk, I just try to stand up for what I believe is right, and I really didn't think id be harming chrazini at all. In fact, I still believe I stayed objective and only ever focused on the admin decision.

I literally had 0 gain for talking about this, and no this obviously has nothing to do with TOC, I was the first to agree it was the correct admin decision made there.

Lastly I remember t90 saying he received negative emails about fans upset about the home map situation in HC4. Stray fans will always have a reason to be nasty. I focused my entire text about the admin decision and not the people involved, and I didnt encourage anyone to go harass him.

 

[Hearttt]

No one called you kids, or immature, so I don't know why you are adding words to excessively victimize yourself.

Also, is it not a job? Do you not call yourself Pros, aka Professionals. If I have to go into work at a random time because that's what I have signed up for, then I do so. I don't get to then try to whip up sentiment against my boss or anything. Hera even mentioned it could be life changing money, but its a job, not a right, not a guarantee.

So, with that in mind, at this time, I will say that: Yes, as far as I can tell, you are an immature kid.

Those are words that have been either mentioned on this thread previously or implied, such as in your post. My words defend them saying THEY are not, yet yours are aimed at me, who is not even involved in this, but am apparently victimizing myself? Of what exactly?

Is this Belgium's job? No clue. Pretty sure, just like most high level players, it isn't. But that isn't even relevant, because no matter whether he does this as a job, it is literally unreasonable to have expected him to start a series at midnight under those circumstances when a more suiting time was clearly available. And it potentially being a life changing amount of money just reinforces the idea that this SHOULD have been rescheduled to the next day where he had a fair chance to compete.

 

[IYIyTh]

oh i simply think no one can be completely on the right and i think the fact that theres so much controversy on the topic kinda shows that, but tbh i dont have much of an opinion, i feel bad for bugum for missing out and i can only imagine the things that were said to chrazini which is unfair too, so yeah thats all i got. As far as rules go, i disagree with your view on them but as i stated we can agree to disagree, you have your opinion i have mine

Since you state that you disagree with my view on rules, what part do you disagree with?

I agree that if your premise is that rules should be flexible we'd probably have nothing more to talk about. However, I would suggest that one should put aside the idea of an individual event (such as this situation,) when considering such implementation in the interest of fairness for all events if the true purpose of this dialogue is to find a "better," future solution.

I understand you don't have a strong opinion, so that might be where we end.

But for those that do --

This would include consideration of schedule impact, how fair it is for other players who must then potentially feel obligated to oblige such rescheduling, additional admin time to schedule/manage, potential impartiality issues, moral hazard -- and disruption to future production/rounds, et al.

It's easy to say "both players agreed to it, I personally don't see it as a big deal to delay, and maybe there wouldn't actually have been a schedule impact on this individual occurrence," but honestly it just ends up being more projection of being disheartened for bugum than a rational argument for a change to the rules/way things are done.

It leads to a more nuanced conversation where individual occurrences of enforcement are less a matter of choice but necessity.

 

[SlipperySteve]

I'm going to try not to be an ass here and I'm glad you seem to be trying to learn from this but when you acknowledge

I never ever wanted chrazini to be on the receiving end of any negativity and explicitly made it a point to not mention his name at all.

After tweeting "also chrazini was the admin making this terrible call". You can see how disingenuous it comes across. Whether you disagree with the decision or not, this was clearly a very poor way to go about it

 

[Hearttt]

Well, I'm presupposing nobody here is lying. Hera isn't lying, Belgium isn't lying, the posters here aren't lying, and mainly, Chrazini isn't lying.

That said, people here put strong evidence that Hera and Belgium indeed attacked Chrazini Publicly. Hera, by tweeting to "leave Robo alone, that's Chrazini!". And Belgium, saying he wasn't treated fairly on-stream, that if he was Viper such things wouldn't have happened, suggesting that Chrazini is a biased admin.

If those things are true, then Chrazini was indeed attacked. I don't know what kind of interpretation you adopt to say it's not an attack, but any reasonable person can tell it IS an attack.

And how was Chrazini supposed to react against that? Well, obviously that had to be 1- public, because the attack was public; 2- stating all the facts, since he now has to state the truth of the situation to save his skin. That's what he's done, unless he lied or omitted something.

That said, I can understand the heat of the moment. It's the attitude of not apologizing and still insisting on their points, like they didn't do anything wrong, that bothers me so much.

Let me just put this here, so I am sure that we are talking about the same thing. Am I an unreasonable person for thinking this is not an attack on Chrazini, but rather an opinion on the decision he made while clarying that it was NOT robo (who people probably thought was the guy who made the decision)?

If so, then there's nothing to even discuss here, because I also disagree with his decision. I respect it, because he's the admin, but I seriously don't think this is the way to go about things in the future, therefore it IS important that players and others that don't agree with it speak up, which is precisely what Hera was trying to do on his Twitter and was clearly taken the wrong way by some people.

 

[Chengaze]

Those are words that have been either mentioned on this thread previously or implied, such as in your post. My words defend them saying THEY are not, yet yours are aimed at me, who is not even involved in this, but am apparently victimizing myself? Of what exactly?

Did you read my mind? I'm really wondering how you know what it is that I am implying? What I'm saying is that players will definitely support players, it's much like a union in my eyes, you will more than likely always stand by each other. My words are aimed at you cause you replied...like I'm lost, what is your point here? You decided to add something about immature entitled kids, which I did not explicitly say. So if you think that is what I was implicitly saying, I want to clear it up and say it was not my intent at all.

And you saying this should have been rescheduled just proves my point of the disconnect between a real job and this, that's the sense of entitlement players have. You can disagree, I'm just noting my observation based on what I've seen in this community.

Also, not an attack on Chrazini? C'mon man. Names the dude, says terrible call. We are too grown to play the "I didn't know what my words would do" game.

 

[dux]

I was away all weekend and hooooo-boy what fun this is now that I'm catching up.

All I have to say is that if RBW6 ever happens, they might need to look at NOT having a qualification bracket that starts with a Ro512 played all over one single weekend.

 

[roxyc]

Since you state that you disagree with my view on rules, what part do you disagree with?

I agree that if your premise is that rules should be flexible we'd probably have nothing more to talk about. However, I would suggest that one should put aside the idea of an individual event (such as this situation,) when considering such implementation in the interest of fairness for all events if the true purpose of this dialogue is to find a "better," future solution.

I understand you don't have a strong opinion, so that might be where we end.

But for those that do --

This would include consideration of schedule impact, how fair it is for other players who must then potentially feel obligated to oblige such rescheduling, additional admin time to schedule/manage, potential impartiality issues, moral hazard -- and disruption to future production/rounds, et al.

It's easy to say "both players agreed to it, I personally don't see it as a big deal to delay, and maybe there wouldn't actually have been a schedule impact on this individual occurrence," but honestly it just ends up being more projection of being disheartened for bugum than a rational argument for a change to the rules/way things are done.

It leads to a more nuanced conversation where individual occurrences of enforcement are less a matter of choice but necessity.

i simply think asking for a player to stay up and on the watch for an uncertain amonunt of time for things they cant control at times isnt very rational, imo, so perhaps moving fwd there should be a consideration of how long is reasonable to stay up or on the look out should these situations happen. I think rules in the past have been unfair and have been changed, and rules have been fair yet improved. Theres always room for improvement is there not? i just dont feel like limiting myself to "oh this is the rule i should i def follow no questions asked" asking questions is fine and maybe perhaps finding ways to perfection things that might already be good! either way at this point im not even talking about PB situation, just in general i think its irrational to assume people can and will stay up till any time really, since the whole point of wanting to play a tournament is also wanting to be able to win your rounds. Im kinda rambling at this point and i dont wanna clogg the thread but you can dm me if you want to and we can discuss as much as youd like :D

 

[damdres]

You're a great admin. Thank you for all your work.

#LoveForChrazini

 

[malamadre]

Is it christmas already? Cos' this is truly phenomenal drama.

Idk, I just try to stand up for what I believe is right, and I really didn't think id be harming chrazini at all.

My boy Hera standing up for whats right. Truly the hero we deserve lul.
Go for them my boy, make those angry tweets that will absolutely have no impact whatsoever and will just create drama.

 

[Hera_]

I'm going to try not to be an ass here and I'm glad you seem to be trying to learn from this but when you acknowledge

After tweeting "also chrazini was the admin making this terrible call". You can see how disingenuous it comes across. Whether you disagree with the decision or not, this was clearly a very poor way to go about it

My idea with that tweet was to protect robo who was NOT the admin believe it or not. I should have added a message that told people not to message him nasty DMs, but again my focus was 100% on the admin call and not about what people do afterwards. Its also obvious to most who can look at liquipedia who the admin was aswell...either way I really just wanted to point out why I thought it was a bad admin decision and not to get people to attack anyone. I always use twitter to give my thoughts on tourney results for the record/situations.

I always learn from all my experiences and especially the mistakes, and have publicly and privately apologized so im not sure why people even say im too proud to apologize when ive done so several times

 

[IYIyTh]

i simply think asking for a player to stay up and on the watch for an uncertain amonunt of time for things they cant control at times isnt very rational, imo, so perhaps moving fwd there should be a consideration of how long is reasonable to stay up or on the look out should these situations happen. I think rules in the past have been unfair and have been changed, and rules have been fair yet improved. Theres always room for improvement is there not? i just dont feel like limiting myself to "oh this is the rule i should i def follow no questions asked" asking questions is fine and maybe perhaps finding ways to perfection things that might already be good! either way at this point im not even talking about PB situation, just in general i think its irrational to assume people can and will stay up till any time really, since the whole point of wanting to play a tournament is also wanting to be able to win your rounds. Im kinda rambling at this point and i dont wanna clogg the thread but you can dm me if you want to and we can discuss as much as youd like :D

IMO I think this kind of discussion is a better direction than the thread was heading, rambling or not.

 

[roxyc]

IMO I think this kind of discussion is a better direction than the thread was heading, rambling or not.

i agree with you, at least its constructive but i see how people still have their fair share of thoughts/ feelings/ whatever else they wanna say and this kinda gets lost in it 11

 

[FolderOfDoom]

I always learn from all my experiences and especially the mistakes, and have publicly and privately apologized so im not sure why people even say im too proud to apologize when ive done so several times

Not that i realy care about that specific point but my guess would be the absence of an "real apology"

PLZ correct me if i am wrong (cant remember every word that was said here and the RBW thread the last what 6-8 hours now) but i cant recall you saying SORRY even once. Just defending your actions by saying you never intended to do any harm no matter if it was caused in the end or not.

 

[BIG sauce]

Let me just put this here, so I am sure that we are talking about the same thing. Am I an unreasonable person for thinking this is not an attack on Chrazini, but rather an opinion on the decision he made while clarying that it was NOT robo (who people probably thought was the guy who made the decision)?

It's not an attack on Chrazini. It does, however, acknowledge that people were harassing robo (who they thought was the responsible admin) and then points the finger at Chrazini. It's pretty obvious that those people would likely go on to harass Chrazini instead. IMO that, and making a public accusation before knowing both sides of the story (noting I haven't heard PB's side - so I'll reserve my judgement on the original situation), make Hera's tweet pretty unprofessional and irresponsible.

In saying that, good on Hera for recognising things he could have done better while still standing up for PB.