Forums

THE NATIONS CUP

• alosso 21,072 Posts

  Thu, Jul 7 2016 7:45 AM

  I'd better stick with "voluntary statements that can't be proven" - and I'd not claim the statements to be lies but the persons to be liars as they pretend to speak out truth:

  => "Proof or liar!"

  Here, those statements are used to justify a late protest against the tourney's outcome, so they'd better be proven before being taken into account.

  And no, no religious discussions ;)

• 1,866 Posts

  Thu, Jul 7 2016 11:18 AM

  alosso:

  I'd better stick with "voluntary statements that can't be proven" - and I'd not claim the statements to be lies but the persons to be liars as they pretend to speak out truth:

  => "Proof or liar!"

  Here, those statements are used to justify a late protest against the tourney's outcome, so they'd better be proven before being taken into account.

  And no, no religious discussions ;)

  We'll have to agree to disagree on this. To me, the highlighted part can't be treated as 2 separate things. Since you can't prove what they say isn't true (and there's a decent chance, it is true) you shouldn't call anyone a liar. You may think it, but not call them that. That's according to the rules you set for this discussion ;-)

   

• alosso 21,072 Posts

  Thu, Jul 7 2016 11:40 AM

  mkrizan86:

  Since you can't prove what they say isn't true [...]

  I need not do so - they make a claim and have to prove it. If they don't, the claim is void. And since they know from the beginning that they can't prove it, they are liars to me.

  And, for the most part, I haven't called those users liars.

• 1,866 Posts

  Thu, Jul 7 2016 3:55 PM

  alosso:

  mkrizan86:

  Since you can't prove what they say isn't true [...]

  I need not do so - they make a claim and have to prove it. If they don't, the claim is void. And since they know from the beginning that they can't prove it, they are liars to me.

  And, for the most part, I haven't called those users liars.

  Respectfully disagree. Surely you must realise that the highlighted part is only  your point of view and your opinion, not a fact. While someone else may think you do.

  Like I said before, there's a decent chance they're speaking the truth and not all "evidence" is circumstantial, although there's plenty of that. Let me explain.

  First of all, let me say this. I believe that the term "cheating" is used in these forums for a broad variety of things, basically for every T&C breach there is. While people can't know, which T&C regulations these 2 had broken, they know that WGT has come out and said they DID break the T&C. So the "banned for no reason" clause is void. Furthermore, the fact that they were banned is an equivalent of being convicted. When that happens, the burden of proof is shifted to the convicted party and the "innocent until proven guilty" becomes bs. So the people, who are using the term cheaters (in the broadest sense) are simply stating what WGT has showed them, by the "conviction" and by stating they did break the T&C and that WGT doesn't take terminating accounts lightly (I believe this came from Shoe). So, to most of the players, this is the truth. And now it's up to the "convicts" and their "lawyers" to prove otherwise, not the other way around.

  P.S.: I am truly curious, what is your opinion on the legitimacy of their scores (I'm in no way demanding a public answer, just asking out of curiosity). And just to make things clear, I'd much rather have no answer, than something along the lines of "I don't have an opinion on this". Cause, seeing you're human and neither a robot nor a bloody ameba, that's just not possible ;-)

  P.P.S.: I'll try to end my involvement in these matters with this post. Hopefully Icon will find it civil enough to leave this thread. If not, just delete this post ;-)

  A huge thatnk you again to Carlo and Alberto for putting up this tourney. It's been a while since it ended, but it was truly a pleasure to play in it. The stuff that happened later doesn't change my experience one bit.

   

• AlbertoBQ 2,560 Posts

  Thu, Jul 7 2016 8:04 PM

  Hello everyone,

  Due to the controversy and lack of clarity on the matter of the banned players, it is very difficult for us to take a decision on this, so I hope you understand our situation.

  This tournament was born with the purpose of bringing fun and participation to the WGT community, and we think this is a good formula, probably the most successful from the Carlo & Alberto Productions.

  For this reason, we won't try to "correct" the tables or try to "reassign" the title, but we will simply hereby void the entire competition and title, and restart it from scratch.

  Me and Carlo will roll up our sleeves and dust the spreadsheets, and will be ready after the holiday season, to start over this tournament that has been appreciated by many.

  Keep your eyes open on the "Community-Organized Tournaments" Forum!

  Carlo & Alberto

• alanti 10,564 Posts

  Thu, Jul 7 2016 8:44 PM

  AlbertoBQ:

  This tournament was born with the purpose of bringing fun and participation to the WGT community, and we think this is a good formula, probably the most successful from the Carlo & Alberto Productions.

  It was superb and for me the results were secondary. It was about bragging rights, camaraderie and friendships....this tournament delivered that in spades.

  The controversy did not tarnish that for me and I would participate in #2 in a heartbeat.

  Alan

• alosso 21,072 Posts

  Thu, Jul 7 2016 10:01 PM

  mkrizan86:

  alosso:

  mkrizan86:

  Since you can't prove what they say isn't true [...]

  I need not do so - they make a claim and have to prove it. If they don't, the claim is void. And since they know from the beginning that they can't prove it, they are liars to me.

  And, for the most part, I haven't called those users liars.

  Respectfully disagree. Surely you must realise that the highlighted part is only  your point of view and your opinion, not a fact. While someone else may think you do.

  What I said.

  I hope you agree that a proof for a claim is inevitable in serious discussion, otherwise it's just balderdash.

  mkrizan86:

  I believe that the term "cheating" is used in these forums for a broad variety of things, basically for every T&C breach there is. While people can't know, which T&C regulations these 2 had broken, they know that WGT has come out and said they DID break the T&C.

  Wrong belief IMHO. Wrong memory.

  WGT never spoke about any specific users. Mind you, the names were given by users, and the most blatant name-and-shame post was deleted within minutes. WGT's second public statement in the deleted thread was a political "no statement" statement to me, just feeding the phantasy of the readers.

  What "these 2" and others allegedly did was only construed by users from the originally unrelated facts of good scores, security sweeps, bans, "T&C breaches". Possible? Yes, but not proven.

  AFAIK, the "reason" given with the ban notice included six paragraphs of the T&Cs with a dozen breaches, including "commercial use". Would that be "cheating"? IBTD! So, WGT never gave a true verdict to the banned players, thus they have no chance to disprove anything nor to appeal - we may suspect a clever move by the company lawyers. It might as well be "no reason" - another option given in the T&Cs.

  mkrizan86:

  And now it's up to the "convicts" and their "lawyers" to prove otherwise, not the other way around.

  With all due respect, this I consider bigot. The bogus accusations are made here, in the Forums, where the banned players have no access. Furthermore, the Guidelines forbid to circumvent moderation. So, how should they be able to prove anything?

  And why did nobody reply stating what you say? They all pointed to the "unbelievable scores" as a fake proof. The 49 is the pinnacle of "proof" and I do not accept such phantasy conclusion which I chalk up to jealousy. IMHO, your retrospective interpretation has no standing. I believe that you're trying to prove me wrong by bending the facts and with unfair arguments.

  My opinion on other items ain't relevant in this discussion. Like all of you, I don't know why these players have been banned. I accept the bans as a fact but I won't offer my opinion to unfair arguments nor to the mad mob present here. Others did and certainly regret.

• 1,866 Posts

  Fri, Jul 8 2016 3:50 AM

  alosso:

  Wrong belief IMHO. Wrong memory.

  Shoe did, on page 6 or 7 of the deleted thread. Didn't mention names, but refered to the players people were discussing and said they broke the T&C. I have a somewhat photographic memory, but I make a few mistakes a year. This could be one of them, but I don't think so.

   

  alosso:

  The bogus accusations are made here, in the Forums,

  Again, how do you know they're bogus? Without real proof, yes. But that does not make them untrue, therefore bogus.

  alosso:

  And why did nobody reply stating what you say? They all pointed to the "unbelievable scores" as a fake proof. The 49 is the pinnacle of "proof" and I do not accept such phantasy conclusion which I chalk up to jealousy. IMHO, your retrospective interpretation has no standing.

  To more experienced players it was never about that 49, that was just the score that broke the camel's back. It was about 6 months of perfection. and, at least in my case, jealousy has nothing to do with this. I fully realize scores posted in this game can be ridiculously good, if you work hard at it. I also know, mine will never be, cause I'm a strictly feel and memory players, no notes, no calculators. And 49s and 50s are  definitely achievable, but folks simply can't believe that 1 person could never make a single mistake, whether it's missing the ding on putts or something else. As for why nobody came up with that explanation before, I have no idea. Maybe the rest just aren't bothered or are not as eloquent and knit-picking as you or me ;-)

  alosso:

  I believe that you're trying to prove me wrong by bending the facts and with unfair arguments.

  Just playing the advocate ofr the other side of this argument and I don't think I bent any facts. If I did, it wasn't intentional and I apologize.

   

  alosso:

  I hope you agree that a proof for a claim is inevitable in serious discussion,

   

  I do agree. Although English is neither yours or mine 1st language, we're both pretty good at it. I simply think you're using wrong terminology. If you look up the word "liar" in the dictionary, you'll see that it never says anything about proving what you're saying is true. Liars are people, who (knowingly) say untrue things. And since nobody will ever know, what is the truth here and nobody can prove that it isn't, the word liar does not come into play here. It only makes them liars, if it ever turns out, their assumptions were wrong.

  But what they do (when they state things as being factual without proof) can easily be called a slander. A totally different thing. That's why (I'm sure you'll agree) try to never state things as facts, but only as my beliefs, which I believe are correct (otherwise I wouldn't have them, lol), but can be a subject to change, if any piece stops fitting.

   

   

• PaulTon 10,731 Posts

  Fri, Jul 8 2016 4:38 AM

   

• 1,866 Posts

  Fri, Jul 8 2016 4:39 AM

  AlbertoBQ:

  Me and Carlo will roll up our sleeves and dust the spreadsheets, and will be ready after the holiday season, to start over this tournament that has been appreciated by many.

  Eagerly awaiting the end of holidays ;-)