Copa Rushmori XLI - Sign-Up Thread (ONLY Rushmore)

[Brookstation]

Yes

[Oberour Ar Moro]

Let's just cross our fingers and hope for the best.

[Xin-hua]

Let's give this another go.

[Nyowani Kitara]

We're in, let's go

[San Isidro Labrador]

Sign us up! And while I understand why some users who have primary nations in Rushmore or who have strong records may oppose Qus' bid, I'm not against it.

[Eura]

Eura signs up.

Having read the Sanford CR bid, to be honest, I can't support it, and hope someone else will put forward a more standard format bid. I appreciate the effort that's gone into it and the attempt to do something new - nothing wrong with that at all in of itself - but I instinctively dislike the format and don't think it will end up being fair in practice. Its a departure from the CR being a truly regional tournament into something else and would take away a lot from the tournament for me - I don't want to be playing just my neighbours, I want to get a mix of countries from across the region. I want Eura to compete with Rushmore, not Terranea; Terranea has lots of history, an identity and Eura is a big part of it, but I just have no interest in a Terranean crown for example. I don't really care about sub-regional inter-competition, it feels distinctly artificial compared to inter-nationstate competition - Eura vs Pasarga or Eura vs Sargossa means something to me for example, whereas Terranea vs Goose Coast or Terranea vs Pavola means nothing to me and feels a bit confected. For me this is a tournament about competing with teams across Rushmore for a Rushmori crown at every stage, not just an addendum to subregional contests. I see zero good reason to change that.

Also, to be honest, this does come across a bit as being designed to suit the Pavola subregion IC story - which is great as an IC cultural thing and all, but it shouldn't be reshaping the tournament of the entire region. It doesn't sit right with me. It feels like this has been put together solely for Pavolan things rather than anything cross-Rushmori, even if that wasn't necessarily the intent. The zone names, for example, are Pavola and then three generic geographic descriptors that don't mean anything to anyone - we could change that in the tournament planning, sure, but really it comes across as the thinking being "lets do this Pavola thing and the rest of the region can just sort of be there". Which isn't in the spirit of the CR and rubs me up the wrong way, to be honest.

Have updated my post to be a bit more thorough - as I said in Discord chat about this, I'm not seeking to take shots here and I hope I've not come across as too harsh to you Qus/Sanford (or any of the Pavolan users regarding the second para, I know this isn't a collective bid or anything); its just how the bid and concept has come across to me and I can't see any circumstance in which I will end up voting for it right now. I mentioned this on Discord a little while ago, but one solution that I might be open to is if this was guaranteed to be a one off special edition of the Copa (this format being the norm I would be very firmly against).

[The Isles of Avon]

Oh yeah, we're back.

We've previously competed in CR 25 and 26, so we should be eligible to enter despite the fact that we were just brought back from CTE.

[Pasarga]

I have many the same concerns as Eura does and for me this hits a little bot harder. This is a tournament that I brought into existence, I was the one who came up with the idea and convinced the others at the time of its merit. It is supposed to be a regional tournament, a place where we contest with the entire region and come together as a region. This bid feels like it is a tool of division and should it bleed OOC lines, runs the risk of breaking apart the region. Seeing this event that I created be used as a point of division is extremely upsetting for me and I can not in good conscious participate in the event should the Sanford bid win, to actively partake in a source of division.

[Sargossa]

Sign-up post is what this is.

[Eastfield Lodge]

Oh, alright then.

Pre-confirming Olastor (no IC relation, beyond technological envy, of course)

[Olastor]

Oh, alright then.

Pre-confirming Olastor (no IC relation, beyond technological envy, of course)

This.

(Numbers puppet and all that jazz)

[Greater Sanford]

Howdy, folks. Lots to discuss. I apologize in advance for how much longer everything is than I'm sure it needs to be.

The response to the Gatchingerrak Union basically encompasses every thought I've ever thought about plagiarism, AI, and what constitutes a creative work.

Next is Eura, on the merits of the bid itself; I've chopped up Eura's comments a bit to address one thing at a time, which I hope is alright (and a fair depiction of what Eura had to say). You'll see a blasé response about subregional rivalries, a poorly-written love letter to eastern Rushmore and to Rushmori subregions that pretty much gets to the heart of the bid, and an assurance that I don't believe a format like this would become the norm for the Copa, or any other tournament, whether or not this bid wins or loses.

Finally is my response to Pasarga, which is basically just another love letter to Rushmore (and, yes, Pavola) and an assurance that I only hope the best for the entire region as a whole going forward.

If I've misrepresented or not fully addressed what anyone's said, please let me know, as that isn't my intention. If I missed anything or you have additional questions, comments, or concerns, please send them my way; I'm always happy to talk, no matter where you stand on this bid.

[snip] What'd be your stance on grading RPs that have used texts from AI text generators ala. GPT-3 specifically for this CR?

Thank you for the kind comments, Quebs. In my usual style, I have written way too much in response, so the summary is: if you use AI generators, please acknowledge you're doing so, because I will otherwise consider it to be plagiarism and deal with accordingly. As long as you do appropriately acknowledge your source, however (and feel free to talk to me privately if you have any questions about that), I will grade based on the portion of the RP the user themselves creates, rather than copies and pastes from an AI output.

So, I skimmed the conversation on Discord, as well as having a few private discussions to make sure I was clear on what the question meant and what recent precedent would say. (On that note, thank you for the help, Quebs and Snew.) As I see it, if AI is used to write an RP, the first question to ask is whether we knew that because it was appropriately acknowledged by the user themself or whether it was caught after the fact somehow (though I'll admit I have no clue how this could be conclusively proven). If someone tried to pass off something they did not write as their own work — whether it was actually written by another user, some news site or someone else outside the community, or an AI — that is plagiarism. As such, I would treat it the same as any other instance of plagiarism.

Per the precedent set in World Cup 89, if I come to believe a nation is plagiarizing their RPs, I will reset their RP bonus, roster bonus, and rank to zero. I would discuss this with them privately, telling them what I saw, why it's wrong, and explaining what steps I am (and am not) taking as a result. I would not re-scorinate their prior matches or award walkovers to their opponents, and I would not award walkovers to future opponents or withdraw or disqualify them from the tournament. They would have a chance to accumulate RP bonus after it is reset, but I would be much more thorough about attempting to verify whether any future RPs are also plagiarized if they do choose to continue RPing.

If I believe the plagiarism is particularly egregious; if it becomes a point of public discussion (i.e., if others have brought the plagiarism up for attention in this thread, on Discord, &c.); if it is repeated; or if I believe they may do the same thing again in a future tournament; then I may also publicly address the matter, explaining what's happened, so that hosts of other tournaments in which the plagiarizer is participating can be aware and give appropriate scrutiny. However, my default will be to handle the matter privately, because I believe most folks who would plagiarize on this site are just folks who don't understand the seriousness of plagiarism. There's no point branding someone with a scarlet letter if they just didn't understand what they were doing, they learned, they were contrite, and they won't do it again. Then again, I hope this is a discussion that we'll never need to actually have.

Now comes the question: what if the AI-produced RP was properly acknowledged and credited as such? In this case, I would need to take into account how much of the RP is written by the user themselves and how much is written by an AI (or just "not the user" in general). (As an important note: I don't believe I need to ask this question if the RP was plagiarized; even if only part of an RP is plagiarized, that is still plagiarism [though I would be less likely to find it to be a "particularly egregious" example].) If the entire RP is written by an AI (or anyone else besides the user themself), I would likely award the RP a zero bonus — though I would not penalize them. I believe the user has to contribute something in order to be awarded RP bonus, and it would be unfair to users who did produce their own creative material to treat something that a user did not write the same way. In my eyes, feeding a prompt into an AI does not represent a creative work unless the prompt itself, alone, is a creative work. If it's a particularly amazing prompt or there are some other circumstances, I might award some bonus, but I won't reward users for writing that they did not write. Finally, we come to the situation in which the user appropriately acknowledged their source and specified that only part of their RP was generated by an AI (or, again, a less third-millennium equivalent). In this case, I would award bonus for the portion of their RP that they themselves created, and I would not award bonus for the portion of their RP that an AI created.

Now, I do want to clarify a few things. First off: all of these hypothetical scenarios are very different from things that take an existing work and build on it. For example, if someone writes a song parody (some of which have made for excellent RPs in the past), they might borrow the same instrumental performance, rhythm, melody, rhyme scheme, even some of the original lyrics, &c. — but if it's a parody, they will change something about it to create a new, if related, work. If they create something new, rather than copying & pasting an AI output, that is a creative work and will be awarded bonus accordingly. Similarly, if someone uses an image of a player they found on the Internet, I won't award bonus for the image, but I'll award bonus for the accompanying RP. If there is no accompanying RP, and it's just a stock image of someone playing football, that isn't a creative work. On the other hand, if the image is something you created — either from scratch or by editing in your team's kit, your nation's sponsors on the ad boards around the pitch, &c. — that is something you created. If you parodize AI outputs themselves, that falls into the same category as a song or similar parody, and I will award you bonus so long as you're the one who created it. If you use AI to generate images, which you caption, RP about, or otherwise integrate into something you've created, I'll grade the portion of the RP that you've created.

So, essentially, if you take something from someone, somewhere, or something else and use it in your RPs, give credit to your source. Otherwise, it's plagiarism. Please don't plagiarize. As long as you use AI as a tool to enhance your own creative work, rather than a replacement for you to do that work, I'll give you credit for what you contributed to your RP. If you have any questions at all, please don't be afraid to ask me, publicly or privately (preferably on Discord; you'll get a quicker response there and it won't make my inbox go over the twenty-telegram limit). I'd rather you ask than accidentally make a mistake that's plagiarism, but I'd also rather you ask than steer clear of a potential RP that's totally fine just in case I see it as plagiarism when it's not.

I'm guessing everyone's fine as is. If you use AI to help, just acknowledge it like any other source — but if you use AI, use it to help, not to do the work for you. As always, anyone's welcome to ask if they have any more questions.

Having read the Sanford CR bid, to be honest, I can't support it, and hope someone else will put forward a more standard format bid. I appreciate the effort that's gone into it and the attempt to do something new - nothing wrong with that at all in of itself - but I instinctively dislike the format and don't think it will end up being fair in practice. Its a departure from the CR being a truly regional tournament into something else and would take away a lot from the tournament for me - I don't want to be playing just my neighbours, I want to get a mix of countries from across the region. I want Eura to compete with Rushmore, not Terranea; Terranea has lots of history, an identity and Eura is a big part of it, but I just have no interest in a Terranean crown for example. I don't really care about sub-regional inter-competition, it feels distinctly artificial compared to inter-nationstate competition - Eura vs Pasarga or Eura vs Sargossa means something to me for example, whereas Terranea vs Goose Coast or Terranea vs Pavola means nothing to me and feels a bit confected. For me this is a tournament about competing with teams across Rushmore for a Rushmori crown at every stage, not just an addendum to subregional contests. I see zero good reason to change that.
...
Have updated my post to be a bit more thorough - as I said in Discord chat about this, I'm not seeking to take shots here and I hope I've not come across as too harsh to you Qus/Sanford (or any of the Pavolan users regarding the second para, I know this isn't a collective bid or anything); its just how the bid and concept has come across to me and I can't see any circumstance in which I will end up voting for it right now.

I appreciate your comments, Eura, and this certainly doesn't strike me as harsh or personal in any way. Reasonable people can disagree, and I respect that. Personally, it's my hope that this format could do a little bit to help foster some of those rivalries with even closer geographic distance, and help spark new RPs among neighbors or near-neighbors. Although Sanford does not yet really have any rivalries, I valued rivalries like Qusmo–Ceni over things (I'm not even sure you could really call them "rivalries") between Pavola and Terranea. It's not my hope that "rivalries" between subregions supersede rivalries between nations, because that's not going to happen, and frankly, I wouldn't want it to happen. I just hope that this can introduce a subregional- or zonal-level rivalry where none may have existed before, or just add a little subregional- or zonal-level spice, to already-existing national-level rivalries — and I think near-geographic rivalries have tremendous potential, and I hope to see them grow. But that's just my perspective, and I respect your opinions and your stance.

Also, to be honest, this does come across a bit as being designed to suit the Pavola subregion IC story - which is great as an IC cultural thing and all, but it shouldn't be reshaping the tournament of the entire region. It doesn't sit right with me. It feels like this has been put together solely for Pavolan things rather than anything cross-Rushmori, even if that wasn't necessarily the intent. The zone names, for example, are Pavola and then three generic geographic descriptors that don't mean anything to anyone - we could change that in the tournament planning, sure, but really it comes across as the thinking being "lets do this Pavola thing and the rest of the region can just sort of be there". Which isn't in the spirit of the CR and rubs me up the wrong way, to be honest.

This is a valid concern, and I appreciate your bringing it up. I mentioned this on Discord, but for the sake of transparency, when I did my initial search into whether something like this could be feasible, using the Mupdate 19 version of the map, Terranea had its own zone all to itself in either two or three of the Copas I used as examples. In these cases, the zones were: the Northern Zone, the Southern Zone, the Pavolan Zone, and the Terranean Zone. After Mupdate 20, a few more nations joined the map, so I had to accommodate this by adding one or two teams from the Vatmark to the Terranean Zone in each example. Because the Terranean Zone now included teams from elsewhere on the map, I decided to name it the Southeastern Zone, and the Southern Zone became the Southwestern Zone. I see your point, though, and I'd be more than happy to change names to something like the Terranean–Vatmarkish Zone, the Goose–Oceanic–Terramidian Zone, or the Brantan–Oygruppeni–Tempalian Zone.

Furthermore, just because this is how the zones worked out in the past three Copas doesn't mean they would necessarily be the zones for Copa XLI. If not as many Pavolans enter as in the past few editions, I may group Pavola with Tempalia, or another subregion, and if a few more Terraneans (or folks from other subregions) enter than recently, they may get their own subregion, or at least have to share it with fewer others. Terranea, in particular, was only one or two nations away from getting a single-subregion zone in all three examples I used, though any subregion can get its own zone if enough nations from that subregion enter the Copa — and indeed, I do hope we get multiple single-subregion zones, for the sake of hopefully enhancing even more local rivalries.

Of course, I don't believe the particular name one zone or another uses is your main point here, so I'll try to address that. I think it's no secret that I think connections between Pavolans nations is a good thing, both ICly and OOCly. I wouldn't have created a bid like this if I didn't put special value on near-geographic relations and rivalries. It's not just Pavola, either. When I joined NSS, countries like Nephara, Ceni, Electrum, Valladares, and yourself were competing at or near the height of their powers. Terranea was legendary, and it still is. Some folks have taken some time off, some folks haven't had quite as much success as before (though that's a ridiculously high "did we win the World Cup again?" bar for most of y'all), but Terranea still amazes me. For not just a region, but a subregion, to have the kind of talent Terranea has is incredible.

The reason I'm so excited about Pavola is because I'm hoping we can be a new Terranea of sorts. I mean, look at all the amazing RPers we have here. We even have the reigning World Cup champion, for crying out loud! We have so many amazing users and nations here, and the fact that we're all in the same subregion is incredible. I'm really proud of the folks around me, who I've spent time collaborating and building things with, and I think a format that emphasizes subregional and geographic connections could do more for Pavola and more for every other subregion and geographic zone across Rushmore. I'll admit, even if I do win the host vote, this'll depend on what folks actually choose to RP about, but it's my hope that a format like this could help foster the kinds of subregional or near-geographic ties that a place like Pavola or Terranea has, or make existing ties even stronger than they already are.

I mentioned this on Discord a little while ago, but one solution that I might be open to is if this was guaranteed to be a one off special edition of the Copa (this format being the norm I would be very firmly against).

I respect that. I obviously can't guarantee a different user won't make a similar bid, but I can say that I wouldn't plan to make a similar Copa bid anytime in the near future, whether or not I host this edition of the Copa. By the time all the regionals wrap up and we get through an entire WCC cycle, I'm sure my summer will be over, and I certainly have no plans to spend my senior year in uni hosting NSS tournaments. And even if the NSS calendar starts going hyperspeed and we do somehow have another Copa in a month or two, I definitely wouldn't bid for a Copa right after I've just hosted the previous edition of the same tournament — and particularly not with the same format that some people seem to very strongly dislike.

In my "but wait, why, though?" section, I also noted that I don't think this particular kind of format could be viable except in very particular, relatively rare circumstances. As of now, we have a variety of different strong teams from every corner of the map. That won't be the case forever. If the top three teams in the region are all from the same subregion, for example, this format just doesn't work. I believe a format like this could be balanced at this precise moment in time, but given the natural churn of the ranks and nations which may come or go, it'd be increasingly precarious to presume that balance will continue to hold for much longer. I'm bidding for Copa XLI with this format because I almost certainly won't be able to bid for Copa XLII, and by the time I graduate or do have more time, whenever that is, I believe there's a good chance the conditions that make this sort of format balanced enough to be viable will disappear.

Again, to sum up, I can't guarantee anything, but I do think of this as a one-time thing, taking advantage of special circumstances which may not last, rather than the start of a norm.

I have many the same concerns as Eura does and for me this hits a little bot harder. This is a tournament that I brought into existence, I was the one who came up with the idea and convinced the others at the time of its merit. It is supposed to be a regional tournament, a place where we contest with the entire region and come together as a region. This bid feels like it is a tool of division and should it bleed OOC lines, runs the risk of breaking apart the region. Seeing this event that I created be used as a point of division is extremely upsetting for me and I can not in good conscious participate in the event should the Sanford bid win, to actively partake in a source of division.

Pasarga, I hope you know that I respect you, ICly and OOCly, as a nation and as a user. You've won some amazing things (including the Copa I hosted!), but you've also done some great things for the community and for the region. This tournament is certainly one of them, and I've enjoyed every Copa I've participated in. I don't intend this to be an attack on Rushmore or anyone in it, and I hope no one takes it that way.

To address what I'm afraid might be an elephant in the room: I know the AO–Anaia split was acrimonious, but I do want to take this moment to assure everyone that something like that is not what this is about. I love being in Rushmore; it's my home in NSS, and it's been my home here since I first joined NSS. As many of you already know, I first joined Rushmore mostly because I'm OOCly from the RL Rushmore State — and Sanford is ICly based on the Rushmore State, too. As the person who first floated the idea of a Copa Pavola, and the person who placed a Copa bid based on geographic zones, and a person who's very much a fan of Pavola and subregional connections, I want to say that I consider Pavola to be just that: a subregion of Rushmore. I have absolutely no intention of trying to split Pavola off from Rushmore, and I'd honestly be shocked if anyone else in Pavola would consider the idea, either. We have another place that's new, and Anaia has become a second home for me and some of my zanier ideas, but I love what Rushmore is, and I want to keep being a part of it.

That said, I've grown to love Pavola, too — and I hope that doesn't get mistaken for a lesser love for the region as a whole. My goal with this format isn't to divide Rushmore; it's to help foster new subregional or near-geographic rivalries, and it's to help strengthen existing ones. I think Pavola's been doing a great job of that recently, but my hope isn't to pit Pavola or anyone else against the rest of Rushmore; it's to strengthen bonds within Rushmore. I could see this create IC tension or divisions between nations; if Sanford somehow gets to its zonal final but loses to Græntfjall, for example, Græntfjall would instantly become one of our first rivals (though the reverse may not necessarily be true in that situation). And D. Tommy Sanford definitely has a strong pro-Pavolan bent ICly, which I'm planning to write about when RPing about why Sanford bid and why it bid the way it did (whether I win or lose the host vote).

But I also hope that everyone knows that I and all other competitors in this region and in this tournament respect each other OOCly, no matter how rowdy things may get ICly. I want to have a fun, competitive Copa, not to do anything to hurt the region or the tournament. It's my belief that a novel format like this could help to do that, while preserving the balance, competitiveness, and prestige of the tournament that's been built up for forty editions and counting. However, as I mentioned to Eura, I believe reasonable people can disagree, and I know not everyone will be as excited about this idea as I am.

If you'd like to talk more about your concerns, I'd be happy to. I hope that, if I win the host vote, you'll feel comfortable participating in the Copa. However, if I do win the vote and you do decide to withdraw as a result, I'd respect your choice, and we'd miss your presence.

[Eura]

Thank you for your response Qusmo. I appreciate your efforts to alleviate concerns and add further detail/explanation/justification etc, such as on the subregion naming (though as you noted that wasn't the thrust of my problem necessarily!)

That said, unfortunately I don't think this is enough to shift my position. I don't think you've said anything additional that I'd object to in your response beyond my last post, but its not swung me either, and as much as I appreciate your sentiments they can't really fix things that fundamentally don't sit right with me because they are core parts of the bid, e.g. the subregional format before the final stages.

On one repeat theme in your response: I see the RP opportunities for sub regional rivalries and identities of course. But I fundamentally don't think it is something that should be shaping the format of the Copa Rushmori. Plus, the more I think about it, I'm not sure it even works that well as an idea IC'ly - sure, maybe from a Sanford perspective it does, but to me a Terranean cordoned off sub-tournament would just feel out of place and IC'ly is something I could never envision Eurans engaging with, and I may not be alone in Terranea on that one (though I won't speak for anybody, I could be wrong). There is some crossover with why I was against the idea of signing Eura up to a multiassociational league in the subregion.

On the future Copa's point - maybe I shouldn't have said that as of course you can't guarantee what someone else would do, and I know you're probably not planning on hosting every other CR. But for me that is another reason to reject this bid; I could live with this format as a one off, but not repeated regularly, and absolutely not the norm, regardless of which user it is running it.

I don't entirely agree with Pasarga's points about division etc (her and I spoke about it on Discord earlier and exchanged our thoughts) as that seems to be influenced by the AO/Anaia situation which Rushmore simply doesn't share. So I agree with you on that for sure, Qusmo/Sanford.

That said, I do think to some degree her unease about this at the very least understandable beyond her own personal/historic role in the region, whether its because its seen as too Pavola-centric or just because in general it makes sub-regionalism too big a part of regional life, regardless of where the idea originated from. If Electrum put in a similar bid tomorrow with a casual focus on Terranea, I wouldn't support that either.

[Soldera]

Yes please

[Greater Sanford]

That said, I do think to some degree her unease about this at the very least understandable beyond her own personal/historic role in the region, whether its because its seen as too Pavola-centric or just because in general it makes sub-regionalism too big a part of regional life, regardless of where the idea originated from. If Electrum put in a similar bid tomorrow with a casual focus on Terranea, I wouldn't support that either.

Yeah, I may disagree with Pasarga on this point, but that doesn't mean her concern isn't valid. I'm glad we're able to talk things over here, and as always, I'm happy to continue with anyone who'd like to talk.

That said, unfortunately I don't think this is enough to shift my position. I don't think you've said anything additional that I'd object to in your response beyond my last post, but its not swung me either, and as much as I appreciate your sentiments they can't really fix things that fundamentally don't sit right with me because they are core parts of the bid, e.g. the subregional format before the final stages.

No worries. I appreciate your willingness to consider the bid and to give me a chance to respond to your concerns, even if I may not've been able to resolve them. Looking forward to competing with you in the future.

[Cabo Azure]

In

[Bollonich]

in

[Ceni]

The Football Associations of Ceni and the Isles of Avon present...

(aka THE BORING BID™)

ABOUT CENI
Ceni is a small island country of around 5500 km2 located in the eastern parts of the Rushmori region of Terranea. Although it has no land borders, the nearest countries are Electrum, from which it is separated in the west by a narrow strait, and the Isles of Avon, a small republic located to the east in the same island chain. With a population of just over 13 million, this makes Ceni one of the densest countries in Rushmore, at around 2360 people per sq km. Ceni is also one of the most urbanized countries in Rushmore, with the three major cities, Cenial, the capital, City Centre, and New Oxford, forming one large urban agglomeration, with the city petering out around the edges of the metropolis. Cenians enjoy a high standard of living as well as a large social welfare net and free education, courtesy of a Scandinavian-style liberal government.

ABOUT THE ISLES OF AVON
The Isles of Avon are a small archipelago of 5 islands off the coast of Eastern Rushmore, the Terranean region. They're south of Ceni in the South Endemian Ocean and are slightly bigger than the more famous nation. Gifted as a satellite territory from Ceni to Drawkland, the Isles operate their own sovereign government, however being very uninfluential on the interregional stage. The small government prioritizes infrastructure, education, and economic stimulus, and tries to be as self-sufficient as possible despite the inherent inability to fully do so. The isles of Columbia, New Avon, and William's Isle are known for being more tourist-trap and environmentally focused, while Vericonium and Snowdonia are more urban centers. Either way, it's a small, easy-to-explore area which makes world travelers rave.

HOSTING RESUMES
Ceni has hosted events as five nations - Racao, Kel Assuk, Costa de Ouro, New Gelderland, and this one. As Racao, he has hosted the Port Louis Rugby Sevens events. As Kel Assuk, he hosted the 3rd Independents Cup with Spaam. As Costa de Ouro, he has hosted the 13th Handball World Cup, the 6th Volleyball World Expo, 1st Fencing Grand Prix, and 3 Astyrian Series of tennis. As New Gelderland, he has co-hosted the Games of the X Olympiad with Electrum and the 23rd Copa Rushmori. Finally, as Ceni, he hosted World Cup 76 with Electrum, World Cup 79 with Drawkland, the 63rd Cup of Harmony with San Jose Guayabal, the 61st Baptism of Fire with Red Blackiland, the 20th International Basketball Championships, 7 editions of the Cenian Open, and 3 editions of the International Tennis Trophy. He has also hosted numerous smaller tennis tournaments with both Costa de Ouro and Ceni.

Under his main nation of Drawkland, the user behind the Isles of Avon has hosted to every event in the World Cup Cycle, specifically World Cup 79 (with Ceni as well), World Cup 86 (with Newmanistan), Cup of Harmony 70 (with Eshan), and Baptism of Fire 65 (with Spaam). They've also hosted the Independent Associations Championship, edition 7 (solo). In the other major tournaments, Drawkland has hosted World Bowl XXIX (with Frenline Delpha), International Basketball Championships 21 (with Royal Kingdom of Quebec), and World Baseball Classic 48 (solo). Several miscellaneous competitions have also been hosted by Drawkland. For a small sample, consider Handball World Cup 18, International Cups of 7ball 1 and 2, and the perennial hosting of at least one NSCF and NSCAA conference per edition.

FORMAT AND SCORINATION DETAILS
Scorination will be conducted through the SQIS module on xkoranate with xkoranate-style (additive) style modifiers (based entirely upon host preference, as usual).

Tiebreakers will be as follows:
Points
Overall goal difference
Head-to-head points
Head-to-head goal difference
Wins
Coin flip (OOCly: Match scorinated with RP bonus as only inputs)

We aim to have matchdays ever 48 hours and to reveal aggregate RP bonus information a la the hosts in World Cup 91. Given current numbers, we will aim for a traditional format consisting of X groups of X distributed via a normal pot seeding system, with the two most likely formats being 8 groups of 4 (32 nations) and 8 groups of 5 (40 nations) based on current numbers.

ANY QUESTIONS?
Please ask!

And as a brief note: We did plan this bid before Sanford/Qusmo launched their own bid, so it should not be taken as a statement from the users involved on the merits or demerits of the plan they proposed.

[The Isles of Avon]

Confirming participation in the above bid!

[Graintfjall]

Ceni/Avon: is your proposed group stage single or double round-robin? 16 team knockouts?

[Greater Sanford]

Howdy, folks. I've edited my bid post, making two changes: first, I uploaded my bid logo. (Anyone who knows me knows I love my graphics too much to be the one bidder without any.) Second, and more substantively, I've decided to eliminate the double-elimination portion of my bid's format and make everything after the group stage a single-elimination tournament, including the panregional stage.

I feel like I should explain why — the second part, at least, since everyone knows I just made another graphic because I like making more graphics. I know this change won't move the needle massively — as a few folks both on this thread and on Discord have mentioned, the heart of both the bid and the debate has really been the format's geographic divisions — but from discussions I've had, I think it's clear that many more people would prefer single-elimination throughout to my original format. For those not on Discord, I commissioned a bit of an informal poll on this subject. Of the eleven responses I got, four folks said they'd prefer this change, and seven said this wouldn't really change their thoughts on the bid. Three more folks agreed with a message saying they'd prefer single elimination, although not strongly enough to alter their thoughts on the bid as a whole or whether they'd participate in a format like this. No one said they wanted to keep partial double-elimination.

I'd be surprised if this affects anyone's vote one way or the other — single-elimination or not, my bid is clearly still the more novel of the two on offer so far, and that hasn't changed — but I felt it was the right choice to make a change to the bid, and since I intend to make that change, to be transparent about the change and why I'm making it. I knew this bid would likely be controversial, but I didn't anticipate it would be divisive. That has never been the intent of my bid, of course, and I still hope this can be a fun tournament with a new, interesting, competitive format. But whether the folks who are wary of this bid turn out to be a majority or minority, it's certainly clear that several folks are wary. If this bid does win, I want to make sure as many folks as possible feel comfortable participating, and I want to make sure everyone who participates has as positive as an experience as possible. I still think partial double-elimination could be cool, but it's clear not everyone agrees. That may not be the main way folks evaluate the bid, or their experience in the tournament if the bid wins, but it may affect the experiences of those who participate — and certainly the experiences of the teams which reach what would've been the double-elimination part of the tournament. Hopefully, this'll be a small change to help make those experiences a little bit better.

I don't anticipate making more edits to my bid — except more graphics. graphic design is my passion. — but as always, I'm open for any questions or comments.

[Ceni]

Ceni/Avon: is your proposed group stage single or double round-robin? 16 team knockouts?

We are currently planning for a single round robin and a 16-team knockout given current numbers.

[Graintfjall]

Ceni/Avon: is your proposed group stage single or double round-robin? 16 team knockouts?

We are currently planning for a single round robin and a 16-team knockout given current numbers.

Thanks.

[Rushmore]

The deadline for Copa Rushmori host bids is now set to Monday, July 4th, 2022 at 03:00 UTC.

[Rushmore]

Voting for the hosting rights for Copa Rushmori XLI:

Voting for the hosting of Copa Rushmori 41 is now open. Any user that has signed up for the competition (except for the bidders) is allowed to vote. As with any other previous host bid votings, only one vote will be allowed per user, which means any users who have signed up both master and puppet nations may only vote once.

There are two bids to host the event, which are:

• Sanford
• Ceni & The Isles of Avon

Voters may:

• Accept the bid proposed by Sanford
• Accept the bid proposed by Ceni and The Isles of Avon
• Reject the proposed bids and re-open the bidding process

Voting for Copa Rushmori XLI Hosting Rights will close at 04:00 UTC on Friday, July 8^th, 2022.

All votes should be sent to Rushmore, by TG only.