Park / Merlinwood

03-January 05

49 Comments

This park shares comments with 1 other park(View Park)

chapelz Offline

So I guess it's ok if a parkmaker admits he made a park before voting is over but there is a problem when a non-parkmaker does. Or its ok if everyone in a topic points it right out its ok.
posted 19 years ago
- #21
- Back to top
iris Offline

Huh?
posted 19 years ago
- #22
- Back to top
sloB Offline

So I guess it's ok if a parkmaker admits he made a park before voting is over but there is a problem when a non-parkmaker does. Or its ok if everyone in a topic points it right out its ok.
i have no clue what you're talking about with the parkmaker stating it out right, but i'd say there's no arguing this one chapel. the rules are clearly stated and your player distinctly disobeyed them, whether it was intentionally or not. corkscrewed has no choice but to disqualify you guys. it's a shame too, becuase the park was obviously the better of the two. too bad, but i'm sure it won't happen again for you guys.
posted 19 years ago
- #23
- Back to top
cg? Offline

Anyways, I actually voted for the Seal Clubbers park. They were both uninteresting, so I voted for the one I found most beautiful, again.

Can you people come up with more interesting parks?!?! Please?
posted 19 years ago
- #24
- Back to top
Kumba Offline

I think Chapel is talking about Ed blowing his cover on Erwindale last year.
posted 19 years ago
- #25
- Back to top
Ride6 Offline

The official score of this match is:
Vehemences DQ'ed
Seal Clubbers WIN
That is bull imo. I know it's the rules but it's almost too harsh since it's only a fucking banner. Just take away the Vehemences one solo park, that would be pretty fair imo. But whatever, it wasn't and isn't my call.

I think Chapel is talking about Ed blowing his cover on Erwindale last year.

Actually I think he was refering to Corkscrewed in week one here when he admitted that it was him who made most of rockwood. I mean we all knew it was him, but even so.

ride6
posted 19 years ago
- #26
- Back to top
gymkid dude Offline

But whatever, it wasn't and isn't my call.
posted 19 years ago
- #27
- Back to top
chapelz Offline

I agree with ride on this one when a player in the NBA does something he is not suppposed the NBA doesnt go after the team they fine the player. I'm willing to give anything else up but come on let the boys play.
posted 19 years ago
- #28
- Back to top
gymkid dude Offline

if you had an issue with the rule targetting a team rather than a player, your concern should have been brought up before the season started while the rules were being discussed. It's not like the rule was a secret. It clearly stated the rule and the consequence for breaking the rule. You do not dispute that the rule was broken, and you have no reason why this is a special case and the rule should not be applied.
posted 19 years ago
- #29
- Back to top
gir Offline

Well, this is rather unfortunate. I guess all I can say is that what Corkscrewed decided was fair, as we clearly violated the rules. At least we won the vote even though it doesn't count, which sucks.
posted 19 years ago
- #30
- Back to top
spiderman Offline

I completely agree with Gymkid.

I agree with ride on this one when a player in the NBA does something he is not suppposed the NBA doesnt go after the team they fine the player. I'm willing to give anything else up but come on let the boys play.

When an NFL player commits a penalty, the whole team suffers by losing yardage. This rule is of the same concept.
posted 19 years ago
- #31
- Back to top
chapelz Offline

But the team onlyu loses 5 yards or so they don't lose the entire game for slip up and neither shopudl we make yyo sit out the season, take our solo, or even take like 15 votes off the top of count.
posted 19 years ago
- #32
- Back to top
penguinBOB Offline

rules are rules. aknoledge them, take it like a man, and move on.
posted 19 years ago
- #33
- Back to top
gymkid dude Offline

Chapel, that's great. If the rule would have said "If a player puts their name in a park, then that team forfeits a solo", then we wouldn't be having this discussion. The fact is, the rule is clear, unambiguous, and clearly applies. It says that if a player puts their name in a park, the park is disqualified. Simple. It's irrelevant, you didn't challenge the rule before, and now it's too late...that rule was there last season, too.
posted 19 years ago
- #34
- Back to top
Drew Offline

Just wondering, chapel_, say the number of votes were switched, so the Seal Clubbers have the more votes, and their park had the name on a banner. Would you be all for them being DQ'ed?
posted 19 years ago
- #35
- Back to top
gymkid dude Offline

Just wondering, chapel_, say the number of votes were switched, so the Seal Clubbers have the more votes, and their park had the name on a banner. Would you be all for them being DQ'ed?
I agree drew, but it doesn't matter anyway, because corky already made the decision.
posted 19 years ago
- #36
- Back to top
chapelz Offline

last season, too.
yet everyone forgets that Ed clearly violated the rule with Erwindale but guess what Erwindale still won.
posted 19 years ago
- #37
- Back to top
tracidEdge Offline

You know, arguing about the rule isn't going to do anything. The decision was made, and there's nothing anyone can do about. We got disqualified, it sucks ass, and everyone on our team is disapointed. Let's just move on. Most people agreed that our park looked better. So there's no use bickering over technicalities, and what happened last season. We just gotta move on and win the rest of the season.
posted 19 years ago
- #38
- Back to top
Coaster Ed Offline

Yeah but I wasn't even aware that was a rule while I was making Erwindale because it was never listed at the beginning of the season with the "official" rules. It was something iris decided on and I only found out later. Also there was nothing in the park itself that revealed who made it. (Other than anyone who ever saw one of my parks probably recognizing who it was anyway). And the rule that revealing who made a park results in a disqualification was made after that incident. I can see your point chapel, but that was H2H2 not H2H3. It was practically two years ago. It isn't really relevant in this case. The rules were quite clear this time about not revealing who made it in the park itself.

Now considering one week of competition represents 1/7 of a full season, and this is a pretty tiny insignificant little thing and that park was obviously going to win otherwise, a more leniant interpretation of the rules would probably result in a warning instead of an outright disqualification. If I were the one in charge that would probably be my decision in this case (regardless of who's team it was). No complete park has ever been disqualified in H2H before and to have it done because of one banner sign seems awfully silly. But I'm not in charge and I have to respect that a rule is a rule. We all agreed on the rules at the beginning so now we're bound by them. Games usually work best when you follow the rules exactly afterall because any kind of subjective officiating is bound to be unfair.
posted 19 years ago
- #39
- Back to top
penguinBOB Offline

maybe assign a dq, for purpose sake, but to skew the stats fairly have only 6 weeks worth of votes counted for each team, not count percentages or what not, and ignore this whole matchup?

EDIT: or for the stats, give the Seal Clubbers the win (no votes), and not assign win/loss to the vehemeces or whatever because they were obvioulsly going to win?
posted 19 years ago
- #40
- Back to top