Cup of Harmony XLVIII Bid: Civil Citizenry/Astograth

by **Civil Citizenry** » Tue Jul 26, 2011 7:50 pm

Host Bid
Civil Citizenry ◘ Astograth

◘◘◘◘ Experience

Both Civil Citizenry and Astograth are relatively recent nations, but have already compiled impressive hosting records for such a short time span.

Civil Citizenry has hosted the eighth International Basketball Championships, the first and second Water World Championships, the third Beach Cup, the second World Junior Hockey Championships, two conferences of the third NSCAA season, and the first Cereal Bowl. The user behind Civil Citizenry has organized the NS Sports Young Guns, the International Tennis Association, the Copa de las Islas, and the Rushmore regionwide sports leagues. The nation’s football team is ranked 59th by the KPB rankings.

Astograth has hosted the Brotherhood Cup, a successful football tournament. The nation’s football team is ranked 124th by the KPB rankings, and their domestic football league is ranked 33rd by the UICA club cöefficients.

◘◘◘◘ Format

Thirty-six or forty nations will be invited to the Cup of Harmony. Selection will be based on RPing level: quality and quantity will both be taken into account. Teams must have posted at least two RPs throughout World Cup qualifying to be considered; the thirty-six or forty countries with the best, most consistent RPing will be chosen.

If 36 are chosen, teams will be split into nine groups of four. A double round-robin format will be followed; each team will play six games in the group stage. The top team in each group will automatically qualify for the playoffs, as will the top five runners-up (which will be selected first by points, then by the below tiebreakers, excluding H2H tiebreakers). The other four runners-up will play two playoff games (each team plays one game) to determine the final two playoff spots. The knockout stage will begin with a round of sixteen, and move forward from there as a simple, single-elimination bracket.

If 40 are chosen, teams will be split into eight groups of five. A double round-robin format will be followed; each team will play eight games in the group stage. The top two teams in each group will automatically qualify for the playoffs. The knockout stage will begin with a round of sixteen, and move forward from there as a simple, single-elimination bracket.

If tiebreakers are necessary at the end of the group stage, they will be applied in the following order: H2H record, overall goal differential, overall wins, H2H goal differential, overall goals scored.

Civil Citizenry and Astograth will share hosting duties equally. Each user will scorinate four groups, and half the knockout stage. If either or both qualify for the tournament, their teams will be placed in one of the other user’s groups. The final will be held in Civil Citizenry; the third-place playoff, in Astograth.

◘◘◘◘ Scorination

The users behind Civil Citizenry and Astograth have agreed to use the SQIS formula of xkoranate 0.3.2 for scorination. Both Civil Citizenry’s and Astograth’s RP cutoffs will be at approximately 8:00 PM EST each day, unless specified otherwise by the hosts.

◘◘◘◘ RP Bonus

Every RP can receive up to 2 KPB points, with four levels of points given (meaning an RP can receive 0.5, 1, 1.5, or 2 points. The hosts will award points based on quality, creativity, and length, in that order; respect for opponents’ permissions will also be taken into account. Some spelling/grammatical mistakes are okay, but the hosts expect that if a nation has problems in these areas he/she will spell-check RPs. RP bonuses will not be degraded over time, in hopes that nations will take the time to RP well and consistently to succeed. If multiple RPs are posted from one nation in a single day, they will be considered one combined RP for the day.

◘◘◘◘ Style Modifiers

Each nation is allowed to post a style modifier between -5 (most defensive) and +5 (most offensive) as part of a roster. If a team wants their modifier changed at any point during the tournament, they may notify the hosts in a tournament RP (generally as an OOC note); we will accommodate all modification requests.

◘◘◘◘ So why choose Civil Citizenry and Astograth?

If you vote for us, you're getting a new look on things. We don't have decades of IC history behind us, nor years of OOC play-time under our belts - but we are planning to make things interesting, exciting - fun. The bidders have great eagerness for the game, and NS Sports in particular. We're not a couple of newbs expecting to get zero votes for the sake of getting our names out there: in our eyes, this is the beginning of greater success as active members of this community. Vote for us, and usher in a new era of strong forces in the world of football. You don't need to have been playing for dozens of months to run a great tournament - you need caring, passion, a willingness to work hard to benefit the many nations we all interact with every day on this board. And that's what we bring to the table.

by **Newmanistan** » Tue Jul 26, 2011 9:42 pm

I don't mean to offend Astograth, but he would be a newbie host. I had to phrase that bluntly because of the way the bid says "they each have compiled an impressive hosting record". That exaggeration admittedly gave me a poor first impression of what I read thereafter. There was virtually no RP in that Brotherhood Cup, and therefore something I can't put any weight on, whatsoever.

This takes me to Civil Citizenry, who is someone I like here. But after the IBC, which had some let's face it, peculiar results, I'm not jumping up and down over him being the lead member of this combination. He hosts well, though, I would just still like to see him with someone more experienced, not because of him, but because of him being the lead person for someone else.

Now, that aside:
The fascination with the hard cap of 32 nations invited does not appeal to me. I don't know why we've been going in this direction with the Cup of Harmony, lately.

The bid does not specify whether or not RP bonuses will degrade or be cumulative. Please specify, and I am hoping you'll say the latter.

Notifying the hosts of style modifiers via TG? I can't buy into that. It needs to be in the open.

I'll be hoping to see better bids for this Cup of Harmony.

by **Andossa Se Mitrin Vega** » Wed Jul 27, 2011 12:10 am

To echo Newmanistan, I also would prefer to see both of you operate with a more experienced host partner. I also have some reservations after results and decisions made for the IBC. Both of you have solid futures around here - I just want to know where the decisions will come from with all eyes watching. WC sanctioned events are different from any other hosting duties. Only the Olympics and the World Bowl draw more attention than the CoH.

No offense to either of you on your own merits, but combined this bid seems to lack stability.

by **Civil Citizenry** » Wed Jul 27, 2011 6:35 am

Newmanistan wrote:I don't mean to offend Astograth, but he would be a newbie host. I had to phrase that bluntly because of the way the bid says "they each have compiled an impressive hosting record". That exaggeration admittedly gave me a poor first impression of what I read thereafter. There was virtually no RP in that Brotherhood Cup, and therefore something I can't put any weight on, whatsoever.

This takes me to Civil Citizenry, who is someone I like here. But after the IBC, which had some let's face it, peculiar results, I'm not jumping up and down over him being the lead member of this combination. He hosts well, though, I would just still like to see him with someone more experienced, not because of him, but because of him being the lead person for someone else.

I can understand your viewpoints here. I can't speak for Astograth, but I do know that the IBC went a little strangely scorewise, which is something that will unfortunately reflect on me but in the end is a byproduct of random number generation.

Now, that aside:
The fascination with the hard cap of 32 nations invited does not appeal to me. I don't know why we've been going in this direction with the Cup of Harmony, lately.

32 is an easy, simple number to work with. In recent CoHs, how many consistent RPers have not been invited? A small number, I would say, enough so that 32 seems quite reasonable.

I will add that I'm not in favor of specific caps myself for the World Cup, as I've made publicly known. But I consider the 32-team limit for this bid the same as outlining a certain number of accepted teams in bids for any other tournaments. With the way Asto and I wanted to run the tournament, 32 nations was the best number to settle on.

The bid does not specify whether or not RP bonuses will degrade or be cumulative. Please specify, and I am hoping you'll say the latter.

The bid does state that there will be no degradation at any point during the competition. So yes, bonuses will be cumulative over the course of the tournament.

Notifying the hosts of style modifiers via TG? I can't buy into that. It needs to be in the open.

I suppose I can see what you mean. TGing should only be done when you want to change your modifier, not submit your original one; and whereas it makes it easier for the hosts to make a modifier change, I do understand that opposing RPers would like to know of such a modification. I will change the bid to reflect that momentarily.

Andossa Se Mitrin Vega wrote:I also have some reservations after results and decisions made for the IBC.

Again, while I can see where you're coming from, I don't feel like the numbers that I copy and paste out of xkoranate reflect my ability to host a tournament. I don't think the IBC I hosted was perfect, by any sense; but I don't think I did a bad job, and I hope others don't feel the same way. I put effort into that tournament, just as I have with all my other competitions, and I tried my best to make it successful.

Both of you have solid futures around here - I just want to know where the decisions will come from with all eyes watching. WC sanctioned events are different from any other hosting duties.

I totally agree on that last point. Which is why we believe this is the step we need to take to elevate ourselves to the next level of prestige in this community. We know we have it in ourselves to prove we have what it takes to host a competition of this magnitude - it's just a matter of having the opportunity to do so. Asto and I are great friends, and we're both excited about the chance to work with someone we know well and can trust to run a smooth, exciting tournament over a couple weeks.

Only the Olympics and the World Bowl draw more attention than the CoH.

But not that silly old World Cup thing

No offense to either of you on your own merits, but combined this bid seems to lack stability.

I'm sorry, I'm not completely sure of what you mean by "stability." Is there a specific detail in the bid about the tournament you can point out that is disagreeable to you? Is there anything in particular we have explained in too little detail? In your post, you've criticized us, but not any part of the actual bid that affects the tournament (format, RP bonus, et al).

by **Starblaydia** » Wed Jul 27, 2011 6:48 am

Points and questions:

I don't think the hosting experiences you (as a pair, but specifically Asto) have had quite adequately bridges the gulf to the Cup of Harmony yet. For CC to be the 'senior' bid partner worries me. I'd recommend one or both of you become the 'junior' partner in a BoF or CoH bid instead of trying to go it as a pair for the first time. Just because you're eager doesn't mean you're going to be a good pair of hosts.

I don't like the limit of 32 teams, either, as with a field of 130 non-qualifiers there could well be far more than 30 teams (assuming you both don't make it either) who fail to make it to the World Cup and deserve to be in the CoH. There aren't any accurate numbers on this at the moment, though, but at a guess 32 would cut a fair few out.

I also don't like Head-to-Head as first tiebreaker, but that really is minor.

Why have you chosen the SQIS formula over other options?

How exactly are you planning to make the CoH "interesting, exciting - fun." It's a common claim, but what as a host are you going to do to facilitate that?

by **The Kiaser Colonies** » Wed Jul 27, 2011 7:03 am

I know both of you seem to have issues with me and won't value my opinion but here goes.

The 32 team limit is just too small. And the rule of selection by RP quality and quantity will be unfair on some teams. From what I've seen most of the RPing nations are ones that will go to the world cup.

You are both slightly inexperienced (although more experienced than me. Especially CC) to host the CoH quite yet.

The head to head tie breaker should not be used first

I strongly disagree TGing style modifiers changes to hosts. It shouldn't be done.

by **Civil Citizenry** » Wed Jul 27, 2011 3:20 pm

I'm on my phone right now, so at this point I will say that we're going to look at the 32 nation cap, as I am starting to see why that would be detrimental. The rest of the comments/questions from Star and TKC will be answered in due time.

by **Civil Citizenry** » Wed Jul 27, 2011 5:23 pm

Upon detailed assessment, I have found the following statistics:

There are currently thirty-six teams who, by the restrictions set by me and Asto's bid, would be eligible to receive invitations to the CoH, as noted above. This requires us to make a major change to our bid.

There are now two options we may take with our format. If thirty-six teams are selected, we will see teams sorted into nine groups of four. Yes, nine. At the end of the group stage, the nine group winners will automatically advance to the knockout stage, along with the top five (by points, followed by the tiebreakers listed in order in the OP) runners-up. The other four runners-up will play two playoff games (one for each team) to determine which two claim the final two spots in the knockout stage. This sets up a round of 16, and a straight knockout will be played from there. This is a somewhat quirky way to do things, but it seems to fit best given the number of teams that are currently in position to receive invitations.

If more teams become eligible - which is certainly possible, though there shouldn't be more than several more - then we will select forty teams, that will be sorted into eight groups of five. The top two teams in each group will qualify for the knockout stage, beginning with the round of 16. Under this format, every team will play eight games; that is more than it would be if 36 teams are chosen (six games per team) but still manageable.

Now, on to other things:

Starblaydia wrote:Just because you're eager doesn't mean you're going to be a good pair of hosts.

Maybe so, but it is the amount of effort that is put into the tournament that will a successful tournament make. Asto and I have been working on this bid since June, and we've done our best to set all of our details. Of course, we are making changes to our bid as necessary, since good hosts do not stick to outdated principles for too long. That is one of the benefits of posting a bid early - we can quickly make edits based on the community's reaction.

I also don't like Head-to-Head as first tiebreaker, but that really is minor.

I am a firm believer that head-to-head is a better tiebreaker than goal difference. If Noobland beat Doesnotexistia twice, then regardless of other factors Noobland deserves to qualify over Doesnotexistia, if a knockout spot comes down to those two teams alone. Unfortunately, we must agree to disagree here.

Why have you chosen the SQIS formula over other options?

Both Asto and I believe the SQIS formula is the one that produces the most accurate results, over the NSFS and Footba11er formulas. Much of this comes from Kagdazka and Pazhujebu's wonderful scorinator study. His analysis stated that while the NSFS formula produces realistic scores over a longer tournament, such as World Cup qualifying, it "shows some unnecessary volatility in small group-stage-style tournaments." On the other hand, the SQIS formula "seems to be universally effective, producing fair and consistent results with satisfactory degrees of randomness, no matter the size of the tournament."

How exactly are you planning to make the CoH "interesting, exciting - fun." It's a common claim, but what as a host are you going to do to facilitate that?

Two things: helpful IC info and host-participant interaction. A lot of people are disappointed when some hosts do not provide any IC background; that is something that Asto and I will not ignore. Also, I personally will interact with other nations in my RPs, whether or not I'm in the tournament, so that people can get into RPing more and have the necessary spark to RP consistently throughout an entire tournament.

The Kiaser Colonies wrote:I know both of you seem to have issues with me and won't value my opinion but here goes.

As long as you're not a jerk about things (e.g. New Palmouth), your opinions are valued just as much as anyone else's.

And the rule of selection by RP quality and quantity will be unfair on some teams. From what I've seen most of the RPing nations are ones that will go to the world cup.

Neither of these are correct. We are not weighting quantity highly; it is merely a small factor, because we are not looking for three lines of text, double-spaced. All Cup of Harmony hosts invite nations based on those criteria, so your point there is moot.

Per my above research, not even half of consistently-RPing nations will qualify for the World Cup at this point. There are still thirty-six nations who have RPd well and often in the first half of qualifying that are not in position to qualify. That is not an issue.

You are both slightly inexperienced (although more experienced than me. Especially CC) to host the CoH quite yet.

Does anyone remember when Erathore co-hosted the 42nd Baptism of Fire? The only hosting experience to his name was the International Football Tournament - a football tournament that is similar in almost every way to Astograth's Brotherhood Cup. The experience issue should be a question of me having the capability to be a senior host, not Astograth's capability to be a junior host.

The head to head tie breaker should not be used first

Read my reply to Star on this one. Asto and I are firm on this point and will not change it.

I strongly disagree TGing style modifiers changes to hosts. It shouldn't be done.

That was changed this morning.

by **Qazox** » Wed Jul 27, 2011 10:04 pm

On the technical side, not much to quibble about for this bid.

Having co-hosted NSCAA III with CC and participated in IBC 8, I wouldn't have a problem with CC hosting this event. But Astrogath hasn't really hosted anything of substance on here, so I have no reference of work to judge their qualifications.

by **Sarzonia** » Wed Jul 27, 2011 10:22 pm

I also echo the concerns about Civil Citizenry and Astograth pairing up right now to host a Cup of Harmony.

I'll start with Astograth. You really don't have the kind of experience that would make me think you'd be ready to be the co-host of one of the most scrutinised tournaments in the NS Sports community. One solitary tournament does not make for the kind of experience needed to serve as even a junior partner in a Cup of Harmony.

As for Civil Citizenry, you do have some experience, though I question your judgment at times based on my experience with your International Basketball Championships. That said, since you're bidding for the Cup of Harmony, my biggest objection to your host bids (all matches taking place in Civil Citizenry) doesn't apply here. In your other tournaments, it's a deal-breaker for me, but here, playing entirely in Civil Citizenry would be par for the course.

I would not have as many qualms with you bidding as a co-host for a Cup of Harmony if you were bidding as a junior host. I'm adamantly in favour of head-to-head being the first tiebreaker, and I use it in any tournament I'm either solo hosting or I'm senior host, depending of course on whether my junior or senior host agrees. Being guided by a more senior co-host would be beneficial and would likely make you a better host in the long run.

As a senior host, however, I don't think you've experienced enough potential trouble spots, either as a participant or as a host to know how to handle thorny issues that invariably come up in any tournament.

by **Astograth** » Thu Jul 28, 2011 6:55 pm

First of all, thank you all for taking the time to provide input. It's appreciated.

Seeing as Civil Citizenry has already answered the questions about the format and such, I'd like to address the points raised as to my hosting experience. I'm under no illusions and consider myself as inexperienced as you've all pointed out (so no offense taken at all, Newmanistan), and perhaps it's true we should've each independently sought out a more established partner.

Nevertheless, I feel that CC and I are up to the challenge of hosting a WCC event. I can't speak for my partner, but I've known from day one that this isn't something to be taken lightly, and I didn't agree to this hosting bid wanting to just throw in my name and get some attention. Knowing how big this is and how dearly a mistake could cost me with such little experience elsewhere, I intend to give this nothing but all my effort. Which, again, may not mean much to you but I feel the need to mention.

And no, Kiaser, I have no personal issues with you. If you're referring to the kits situation, I'm mature enough to bear no grudges.

Again, thank you for your time.

by **Civil Citizenry** » Thu Jul 28, 2011 7:40 pm

Sarzonia wrote:As for Civil Citizenry, you do have some experience, though I question your judgment at times based on my experience with your International Basketball Championships.

Sorry, but besides the one RP cutoff I screwed up in the playoffs I'm not immediately aware of any judgmental mistakes during the tournament. Obviously, there were some odd scores, but it would be great if you could enlighten on what else in particular makes you feel that way.

That said, since you're bidding for the Cup of Harmony, my biggest objection to your host bids (all matches taking place in Civil Citizenry) doesn't apply here. In your other tournaments, it's a deal-breaker for me, but here, playing entirely in Civil Citizenry would be par for the course.

To be honest, I overlook that a lot, but generally I don't mean to have all matches played in Civil Citizenry either

. In this case, though, it works out okay.

I would not have as many qualms with you bidding as a co-host for a Cup of Harmony if you were bidding as a junior host. ... Being guided by a more senior co-host would be beneficial and would likely make you a better host in the long run.

As a senior host, however, I don't think you've experienced enough potential trouble spots, either as a participant or as a host to know how to handle thorny issues that invariably come up in any tournament.

Given my lack of hosting experience in comparison to others, I can, of course, understand why you say that. If a particularly tricky problem were to arise during the tournament, I would not only consult my co-host, but also the NS Sports community, so that we don't make a silly mistake. There is bound to be a learning curve, but Asto and I are confident that with the effort we have and plan to put into the tournament (and the help of the people around us, as we are not the most experienced people around), we can run a smooth competition together, despite invariable road bumps.

Astograth wrote:Nevertheless, I feel that CC and I are up to the challenge of hosting a WCC event. I can't speak for my partner, but I've known from day one that this isn't something to be taken lightly, and I didn't agree to this hosting bid wanting to just throw in my name and get some attention. Knowing how big this is and how dearly a mistake could cost me with such little experience elsewhere, I intend to give this nothing but all my effort. Which, again, may not mean much to you but I feel the need to mention.

This is an accurate statement of my own feelings about our bid as well. This is not my first time bidding for the tournament - I bid for CoH 47 with Swartaz - and I didn't submit either bid just to get more recognition. Last cycle, Swartaz and I nearly won: we lost to Sarzonia/Saugeais by a single vote. (I don't think it would help to mention Swartaz's Rugby Union World Cup...

) Every time I bid to host a tournament, it is with the intention of running a smooth, successful tournament - something that requires effort and eagerness. Those are two important qualities that Asto and I can both promise everyone.

That's not all it takes to run a good competition around here, as we all know. But that's what we have for sure. And we wouldn't have paired up to bid for a prestigious tournament such as the Cup of Harmony if we weren't acutely aware of the time and effort necessary to actually go through with it. So while all concerns of our joint lack of experience are certainly justifiable, we both believe past precedent should not be the only factor when considering bids.

by **Civil Citizenry** » Wed Aug 10, 2011 9:28 pm

This post is to officially announce that this bid will be re-submitted for the new vote. Astograth and I have been planning this bid for a month and a half, and we certainly don't plan to give up on it now.

Allow me to state again that we will not be using a 32-team cap. There are 45 nations, including two puppets, that are eligible to be invited to the tournament, so it is likely we will use a format of 40 or 44 teams, both of which our planned format can accommodate. I would also like to mention again that we have opted to use the SQIS formula for scorination because we believe it to produce the most accurate results - much of which comes from the results of Kagdazka and Pazhujebu's scorinator study.

As well, let me add that my hosting experience now includes the ongoing twelfth World Lacrosse Championships, as well as organizing the Rushmore team for the AOvR challenge. (Just a bit of shameless boosting.

)

If anyone has any more questions about our bid, please do not hesitate to ask - we are more than happy to answer.

And I leave you all with two final quotes from previous posts:

Astograth wrote:I feel that CC and I are up to the challenge of hosting a WCC event. I can't speak for my partner, but I've known from day one that this isn't something to be taken lightly, and I didn't agree to this hosting bid wanting to just throw in my name and get some attention. Knowing how big this is and how dearly a mistake could cost me with such little experience elsewhere, I intend to give this nothing but all my effort.

Civil Citizenry wrote:This is not my first time bidding for the tournament - I bid for CoH 47 with Swartaz - and I didn't submit either bid just to get more recognition. Last cycle, Swartaz and I nearly won: we lost to Sarzonia/Saugeais by a single vote. ... Every time I bid to host a tournament, it is with the intention of running a smooth, successful tournament - something that requires effort and eagerness. Those are two important qualities that Asto and I can both promise everyone.

That's not all it takes to run a good competition around here, as we all know. But that's what we have for sure. And we wouldn't have paired up to bid for a prestigious tournament such as the Cup of Harmony if we weren't acutely aware of the time and effort necessary to actually go through with it. So while all concerns of our joint lack of experience are certainly justifiable, we both believe past precedent should not be the only factor when considering bids.

by **Virabia** » Wed Aug 10, 2011 9:51 pm

I once again endorse this bid!

by **Newmanistan** » Wed Aug 10, 2011 10:13 pm

No offense and Civil Citizenry is probably going to think I hate him at this point, which I assure him is absolutely not the case.... I still can't get excited over him being the lead partner for a new host.

There's been a bit of shakiness in the WLC. Very forgiveable shakiness for that tournament, but is it best for CoH and as the lead partner for a relatively new host?

Civil Citizenry wrote:So life's been impossibly hectic the last couple of days. Yesterday I crashed and fell asleep very early and slept through the entire night. In the interest of avoiding further delays, I will scorinate MD4 now; MD5 will be scorinated this time tomorrow; and MD6 and will be scorinated tomorrow night. This way, everyone has a day's notice of the shortened time to RP for a matchday.

Again, I apologize for the problems over the last couple of days, but I am confident there will be no more problems the rest of the way.

I'm forgiving him on the first one, which can be read in the WLC Discussion thread. I can forgive him for the falling asleep early.... but you know what I don't like: what was bolded..... two matchdays in one day, decided upon without asking the participants what was best. As the host, he can do as he wants, absolutely.

But for me this shows my concern about him taking a relative new host under his wing. I think most of us who are experienced hosts, if we were co-hosting the WLC with him, would have said to him to not do the two matchdays in one day. The notice was given, but some people only have a 2 or so hour window every day when they are on here. Maybe some wouldn't think that was a big deal either, and maybe in a smaller tournament like the WLC you can go with it, but I'd hate to see that happen in a CoH.

by **Sarzonia** » Wed Aug 10, 2011 11:02 pm

Newmanistan wrote:But for me this shows my concern about him taking a relative new host under his wing. I think most of us who are experienced hosts, if we were co-hosting the WLC with him, would have said to him to not do the two matchdays in one day. The notice was given, but some people only have a 2 or so hour window every day when they are on here. Maybe some wouldn't think that was a big deal either, and maybe in a smaller tournament like the WLC you can go with it, but I'd hate to see that happen in a CoH.

I alluded to that in my comments on the WCDT when I said my objections with the bid earlier were not addressed after the previous EWCC vote. I don't think CC is ready to be a senior host of one of the most important tournaments in NS Sports, at least one of the most important tournaments that don't decide its sport's world championship. As a junior host, I think he'd be a great fit for many a potential senior host.

However, I would argue your later point by saying the WLC is beginning to become big enough in scope where you wouldn't be able to get away with two matchdays in one day.

by **Civil Citizenry** » Thu Aug 11, 2011 5:30 am

I actually didn't opt for the two matchday thing by myself. I discussed it with Kura-Pelland over IRC, who is participating as The Kytler Peninsulae. I figured he'd provide some good advice, since he did kinda host the first WLC

.

I also don't think it would be likely that Astograth or I would feel the need to scorinate twice in one day. The WLC is a longer tournament than the CoH, and there had already been a one-day delay. As well, I did tell everyone in advance that I was going to scorinate twice in one day - I gave everyone a day's notice. And I don't feel so bad about giving people less time to RP for that one matchday because I gave everyone two days to RP for MD4, and every RP for that day received a 25% bonus.

I guess you could call it shakiness, and I understand that the delays are unfortunate. There's still a while to go, though, and I'm confident the WLC will be a well-run tournament from here on out.

By the way, Newmanistan, why did you opt to mention your objection here rather than in the WLC discussion thread? That would have been the right place to mention something like that if it were really critical.

by **Newmanistan** » Thu Aug 11, 2011 6:26 am

Civil Citizenry wrote:I discussed it with Kura-Pelland over IRC, who is participating as The Kytler Peninsulae.

That's Kura-Pelland? Didn't realize that!

Civil Citizenry wrote:By the way, Newmanistan, why did you opt to mention your objection here rather than in the WLC discussion thread? That would have been the right place to mention something like that if it were really critical.

In the WLC, you are the host, and it's your call. You didn't really ask for opinions; instead it was an announcement and as far as the WLC is concerned, we must deal with that. You say if it were really critical... I didn't think, for purposes of the WLC, it was that critical. I mentioned it here because I thought it was a good example of why I am skeptical about your bid.

Here's what I'm gonna do... I'm gonna call a truce with you. We simply seem to greatly disagree on procedural manners with things. Maybe you are too inexperienced to be a lead bidder... or maybe I am just being too hard on you because we disagree on a lot of procedural things. You wouldn't be the only capable host in NS Sports who's style I just don't really like but it's just because of procedural differences.

Good luck if your bid wins.

by **Civil Citizenry** » Thu Aug 11, 2011 6:29 am

Newmanistan wrote:Here's what I'm gonna do... I'm gonna call a truce with you. We simply seem to greatly disagree on procedural manners with things. Maybe you are too inexperienced to be a lead bidder... or maybe I am just being too hard on you because we disagree on a lot of procedural things. You wouldn't be the only capable host in NS Sports who's style I just don't really like but it's just because of procedural differences.

I think that's fair to both of us. We do seem to have many differing opinions about such matters, but it is better not to quibble about all of them. I have always respected you around here and I hope the respect can be mutual, despite being different in more ways than one.

Cup of Harmony XLVIII Bid: Civil Citizenry/Astograth

Cup of Harmony XLVIII Bid: Civil Citizenry/Astograth

Who is online