give based casts the offical rgl channel
seriously?
posted in
TF2 General Discussion
Why does aim get immediately banned for this rule violation? Wouldn't and shouldn't it be a warning? At the very least, someone from RGL could have messaged aim last night during the cast and informed him that this was against their (shitty) rule?
Why does aim get immediately banned for this rule violation? Wouldn't and shouldn't it be a warning? At the very least, someone from RGL could have messaged aim last night during the cast and informed him that this was against their (shitty) rule?
what is the purpose of this rule lol at least all the other ones make some sort of sense even if they are stupid or vague like what does this accomplish
what is the purpose of this rule lol at least all the other ones make some sort of sense even if they are stupid or vague like what does this accomplish
the real question is who would bother reporting this in the first place
the real question is who would bother reporting this in the first place
It doesn't even make sense because this is allowed by other, much bigger games. I mean just a few hours ago shroud was streaming Valorant matches and was getting close to 70k viewers while the official channel was getting like 15-20k viewers. There are plenty of times in CS:GO where ex-pros or even current pros watch/cast games (most of the old c9 crew have done so in the past)
It doesn't even make sense because this is allowed by other, much bigger games. I mean just a few hours ago shroud was streaming Valorant matches and was getting close to 70k viewers while the official channel was getting like 15-20k viewers. There are plenty of times in CS:GO where ex-pros or even current pros watch/cast games (most of the old c9 crew have done so in the past)
How is this even allowed? Having a monopoly over casting a certain match by allowing no competition is fucking dumb. I don't want to play in a league that doesn't let the community participate outside of playing matches/scrims.
https://prnt.sc/10jau1r
How is this even allowed? Having a monopoly over casting a certain match by allowing no competition is fucking dumb. I don't want to play in a league that doesn't let the community participate outside of playing matches/scrims.
How is this even allowed? Having a monopoly over casting a certain match by allowing no competition is fucking dumb. I don't want to play in a league that doesn't let the community participate outside of playing matches/scrims.
this is often prohibited or discouraged by major esports casting orgs, but those orgs are directly relying on stream viewership to make money off of sponsors and investors
RGL makes money off of league fees though, if they have sponsors I doubt they're using stream viewership as the KPI
so it should be purely in their interest to encourage "big" streamers to cast games as it will only increase the league's visibility and bring in new players
this is often prohibited or discouraged by major esports casting orgs, but those orgs are directly relying on stream viewership to make money off of sponsors and investors
RGL makes money off of league fees though, if they have sponsors I doubt they're using stream viewership as the KPI
so it should be purely in their interest to encourage "big" streamers to cast games as it will only increase the league's visibility and bring in new players
RGL makes money off of league fees though, if they have sponsors I doubt they're using stream viewership as the KPI
so it should be purely in their interest to encourage "big" streamers to cast games as it will only increase the league's visibility and bring in new players
i sure do love controversial bans that serve to do nothing but divide the community and push them away from rgl :DDD
i sure do love controversial bans that serve to do nothing but divide the community and push them away from rgl :DDD
zx37this is often prohibited or discouraged by major esports casting orgs, but those orgs are directly relying on stream viewership to make money off of sponsors and investors
most esports orgs are fine with people casting their matches as long as they don't restream the cast
I know AdmiralBulldog watches dota matches frequently on stream
[quote=zx37]this is often prohibited or discouraged by major esports casting orgs, but those orgs are directly relying on stream viewership to make money off of sponsors and investors
[/quote]
most esports orgs are fine with people casting their matches as long as they don't restream the cast
I know AdmiralBulldog watches dota matches frequently on stream
[/quote]
most esports orgs are fine with people casting their matches as long as they don't restream the cast
I know AdmiralBulldog watches dota matches frequently on stream
wishmost esports orgs are fine with people casting their matches as long as they don't restream the cast
I know AdmiralBulldog watches dota matches frequently on stream
i dont know about dota or most games really but GOTV is rarely ever given out publicly in csgo, and non-english streams have contracted exclusivity.
the only time you'll see casual casts is at majors, where Valve forces public GOTV, or gAuLeS, who is big enough that he gets to be the exclusive BR stream for most events
[quote=wish]most esports orgs are fine with people casting their matches as long as they don't restream the cast
I know AdmiralBulldog watches dota matches frequently on stream[/quote]
i dont know about dota or most games really but GOTV is rarely ever given out publicly in csgo, and non-english streams have contracted exclusivity.
the only time you'll see casual casts is at majors, where Valve forces public GOTV, or gAuLeS, who is big enough that he gets to be the exclusive BR stream for most events
I know AdmiralBulldog watches dota matches frequently on stream[/quote]
i dont know about dota or most games really but GOTV is rarely ever given out publicly in csgo, and non-english streams have contracted exclusivity.
the only time you'll see casual casts is at majors, where Valve forces public GOTV, or gAuLeS, who is big enough that he gets to be the exclusive BR stream for most events
ive been casting hl matches for the past 3 years and rgl has been doin this shit for ages. when tftv wanted to cover hl and i joined tftv the rgl admins in the tftv production channel immediately shut it down, when i was in a stv 5 minutes before match time last season, already having announced that i was casting it they delayed the match by 30 minutes after finding out that i was also covering the match in order to get a whole new server and move all 18 players to it, ive been pm'ed directly by the admins saying that if i keep casting the same matches as them theyll ban me
any time i tried to ask them why they do this i was ignored/blocked
ive been casting hl matches for the past 3 years and rgl has been doin this shit for ages. when tftv wanted to cover hl and i joined tftv the rgl admins in the tftv production channel immediately shut it down, when i was in a stv 5 minutes before match time last season, already having announced that i was casting it they delayed the match by 30 minutes after finding out that i was also covering the match in order to get a whole new server and move all 18 players to it, ive been pm'ed directly by the admins saying that if i keep casting the same matches as them theyll ban me
any time i tried to ask them why they do this i was ignored/blocked
[img]https://i.imgur.com/9RpLh01.png[/img]
any time i tried to ask them why they do this i was ignored/blocked
[img]https://i.imgur.com/9RpLh01.png[/img]
i am very excited to see this get overturned tomorrow morning and then see makka complain about it in discord for the next 3 weeks
and then i will say some retarded shit like "same time next month everybody?"
i am very excited to see this get overturned tomorrow morning and then see makka complain about it in discord for the next 3 weeks
and then i will say some retarded shit like "same time next month everybody?"
and then i will say some retarded shit like "same time next month everybody?"
Wait let me look for my post literally saying this exact shit would happen a year ago....
Wait let me look for my post literally saying this exact shit would happen a year ago....
alfa opening his long trenchcoat to hand over the stv info
alfa opening his long trenchcoat to hand over the stv info
[img]https://i.imgur.com/BAZ57GE.png[/img]
[img]https://i.imgur.com/BAZ57GE.png[/img]
I like watching player povs rather than casted ones. I hate the overhead bullshit, i'd rather have povs.
I like watching player povs rather than casted ones. I hate the overhead bullshit, i'd rather have povs.
all we need is a non-retard head admin but instead its been the same shitty circlejerk in charge the entire time rgl has been a thing and surprise, its still shitty.
all we need is a non-retard head admin but instead its been the same shitty circlejerk in charge the entire time rgl has been a thing and surprise, its still shitty.
more proof that rgl and most tf.tv staff are not real humans and someone simply has to stop putting nobodies in charge
more proof that rgl and most tf.tv staff are not real humans and someone simply has to stop putting nobodies in charge
frosttyiii sure do love controversial bans that serve to do nothing but divide the community and push them away from rgl :DDD
this isn't even a controversial ban, it is such an obviously incompetent overstepping of bounds that I would love to see anybody involved publicly explain how stifling any sort of exposure for an already small league and discouraging content creation by the community could possibly be beneficial in any way
[quote=frosttyii]i sure do love controversial bans that serve to do nothing but divide the community and push them away from rgl :DDD[/quote]
this isn't even a controversial ban, it is such an obviously incompetent overstepping of bounds that I would love to see anybody involved publicly explain how stifling any sort of exposure for an already small league and discouraging content creation by the community could possibly be beneficial in any way
this isn't even a controversial ban, it is such an obviously incompetent overstepping of bounds that I would love to see anybody involved publicly explain how stifling any sort of exposure for an already small league and discouraging content creation by the community could possibly be beneficial in any way
maybe if u let invite players cast the invite matches people would wana watch your streams lol
maybe if u let invite players cast the invite matches people would wana watch your streams lol
https://i.imgur.com/QjwRIsS.png
You shall not cast.... AVADA KEDAVRA!
[img]https://i.imgur.com/QjwRIsS.png[/img]
You shall not cast.... AVADA KEDAVRA!
You shall not cast.... AVADA KEDAVRA!
yerbhttps://i.imgur.com/QjwRIsS.png
You shall not cast.... AVADA KEDAVRA!
fear? Put it back
[quote=yerb][img]https://i.imgur.com/QjwRIsS.png[/img]
You shall not cast.... AVADA KEDAVRA![/quote]
fear? Put it back
You shall not cast.... AVADA KEDAVRA![/quote]
fear? Put it back
Tery_Why does aim get immediately banned for this rule violation? Wouldn't and shouldn't it be a warning? At the very least, someone from RGL could have messaged aim last night during the cast and informed him that this was against their (shitty) rule?
Imagine how many of these threads would have been avoided with a warning
[quote=Tery_]Why does aim get immediately banned for this rule violation? Wouldn't and shouldn't it be a warning? At the very least, someone from RGL could have messaged aim last night during the cast and informed him that this was against their (shitty) rule?[/quote]
Imagine how many of these threads would have been avoided with a warning
Imagine how many of these threads would have been avoided with a warning
One of the big things about RGL that we try to do is transparency and owning our mistakes.
You can see that when the Invite qualifiers for sixes had confusion in the organization, despite us having successfully run qualifiers multiple times before. We had an internal review and wrote up where we went wrong, covered the fees for the teams affected, and made a clear plan going forward.
The issue with slurs from players in logs turned out to be a map review before the match. Something that we've never seen before and as soon as it was brought to our attention through an appeal, in our official process. We reviewed, confirmed, and reversed the decision the next day after being notified. We also wrote up an article breaking that down in more detail and how we want to include some questions around this in our next survey.
Now we have today, the ban that went in on aim. What happened is that there was a discussion that happened in an admin discord about the rule that was broken and the punishments that should take place. Then a ban was issued. There was confusion internally as to if this is something that is not a misconduct report (e.g. slurs, harassment, etc...), so it might not go through the normal misconduct ban review process. However, any punishment that results in a league ban, should be reviewed by that process.
Our normal process: We have two separate meetings each week where two unique groups of admins meet to review the submitted reports, review evidence, and decide the next steps. Whether that's to throw it out (most common) or issue a warning or issue a ban. We started this process about a year and half ago when we had issues with inconsistencies in our bans. Depending on which admin did it, they might have slightly different lengths or reasons to do it. Whereas when we have 7-12 people review and discuss it. We make sure that our bans lengths are consistent and for edge cases, we discuss what the correct length is and is it even ban worthy or is it covered in our rules, etc...
Since this we've switched this, we've had much more consistency with how things are handled. (Note: This is not where Anti-cheat cases are handled.)
Part of our mission statement is about admining
RGL Mission StatementWhen it comes to being an Admin, it’s not always easy. A lot of situations are not purely black and white, but shades of gray. It’s our responsibility though to do our best in that area and try to make rulings and decisions as consistently and fairly as possible. We want to be admins who make decisions based on reason, not reaction. We will do our best, but ultimately we are human. We will make mistakes, we will do our best to own the situation, learn from it, and make sure we do not make the same mistake going forward.
This decision did not follow our normal process we setup and was put in prior to our meetings. Which is very unusual. Even for clear bans (e.g. slurs in a match), we still would wait until the second of the meetings to put in a ban. That's why you would see bans go in on Friday night consistently.
With that said, here are the next steps
- aims ban has been removed
- Going forward, league bans must require head league admin approval (exa) to be placed. This is not that he is deciding them, more that he is validating our procedures were followed.
- During the next offseason we will be reviewing our rulebook and try to make it more streamlined and have more clear reasoning and punishments/warnings (where applicable.)
- We've also been leaning more on initial warnings for minor penalties. That's not clear in this case, and we don't report them on the site, but that has been an internal policy change that we've been doing more often.
At the end of the day, whatever decision is made, ultimately falls on my shoulders. I'm the league owner and I apologize for this situation. We do our best for this great community and we do our best to listen to feedback like with our post season surveys every season and make adjustments based on those results. We also do writeups about every month with any rule changes, bans, etc....
(Jan 2021, Dec,Nov,Oct, October, September, August, July, June,May,April,March,February, January)
Here is a writeup we put together last month about how misconduct reports are handled link
We also talked about the process I mentioned above in an article in June of this year link.
Still, we will make mistakes and it's important that we're clear about that and grow from it.
We have a couple of weeks left in the season, good luck to everyone for the upcoming playoffs.
One of the big things about RGL that we try to do is transparency and owning our mistakes.
You can see that when the Invite qualifiers for sixes had confusion in the organization, despite us having successfully run qualifiers multiple times before. We had an internal review and [url=https://rgl.gg/?r=40&a=1508]wrote up where we went wrong[/url], covered the fees for the teams affected, and made a clear plan going forward.
The issue with slurs from players in logs turned out to be a map review before the match. Something that we've never seen before and as soon as it was brought to our attention through an appeal, in our official process. We reviewed, confirmed, and reversed the decision the next day after being notified. We also wrote up an [url=https://rgl.gg/?r=40&a=1512]article breaking that down in more detail[/url] and how we want to include some questions around this in our next survey.
Now we have today, the ban that went in on aim. What happened is that there was a discussion that happened in an admin discord about the rule that was broken and the punishments that should take place. Then a ban was issued. There was confusion internally as to if this is something that is not a misconduct report (e.g. slurs, harassment, etc...), so it might not go through the normal misconduct ban review process. However, any punishment that results in a league ban, should be reviewed by that process.
Our normal process: We have two separate meetings each week where two unique groups of admins meet to review the submitted reports, review evidence, and decide the next steps. Whether that's to throw it out (most common) or issue a warning or issue a ban. We started this process about a year and half ago when we had issues with inconsistencies in our bans. Depending on which admin did it, they might have slightly different lengths or reasons to do it. Whereas when we have 7-12 people review and discuss it. We make sure that our bans lengths are consistent and for edge cases, we discuss what the correct length is and is it even ban worthy or is it covered in our rules, etc...
Since this we've switched this, we've had much more consistency with how things are handled. (Note: This is not where Anti-cheat cases are handled.)
Part of our mission statement is about admining
[quote=RGL Mission Statement]When it comes to being an Admin, it’s not always easy. A lot of situations are not purely black and white, but shades of gray. It’s our responsibility though to do our best in that area and try to make rulings and decisions as consistently and fairly as possible. We want to be admins who make decisions based on reason, not reaction. We will do our best, but ultimately we are human. We will make mistakes, we will do our best to own the situation, learn from it, and make sure we do not make the same mistake going forward.[/quote]
This decision did not follow our normal process we setup and was put in prior to our meetings. Which is very unusual. Even for clear bans (e.g. slurs in a match), we still would wait until the second of the meetings to put in a ban. That's why you would see bans go in on Friday night consistently.
With that said, here are the next steps
- aims ban has been removed
- Going forward, league bans must require head league admin approval (exa) to be placed. This is not that he is deciding them, more that he is validating our procedures were followed.
- During the next offseason we will be reviewing our rulebook and try to make it more streamlined and have more clear reasoning and punishments/warnings (where applicable.)
- We've also been leaning more on initial warnings for minor penalties. That's not clear in this case, and we don't report them on the site, but that has been an internal policy change that we've been doing more often.
At the end of the day, whatever decision is made, ultimately falls on my shoulders. I'm the league owner and I apologize for this situation. We do our best for this great community and we do our best to listen to feedback like with our post season surveys every season and make adjustments based on those results. We also do writeups about every month with any rule changes, bans, etc....
([url=https://rgl.gg/Public/Articles/Default.aspx?a=1515&r=40]Jan 2021[/url], [url=https://rgl.gg/Public/Articles/Default.aspx?a=1506&r=40]Dec[/url],[url=https://rgl.gg/Public/Articles/Default.aspx?a=1485&r=40]Nov[/url],[url=https://rgl.gg/Gaben/News/Editors/CreateNews.aspx?a=1485&r=40]Oct[/url], [url=https://rgl.gg/?&a=1458]October[/url], [url=https://rgl.gg/?&a=1454]September[/url], [url=https://rgl.gg/Public/Articles/Default.aspx?a=1445]August[/url], [url=https://rgl.gg/Public/Articles/Default.aspx?a=1423]July[/url], [url=https://rgl.gg/Public/Articles/Default.aspx?a=1409]June[/url],[url=https://rgl.gg/Public/Articles/Default.aspx?a=1406]May[/url],[url=https://rgl.gg/Public/Articles/Default.aspx?a=1394]April[/url],[url=https://rgl.gg/Public/Articles/Default.aspx?a=1386]March[/url],[url=https://rgl.gg/Public/Articles/Default.aspx?a=1365]February[/url], [url=https://rgl.gg/Public/Articles/Default.aspx?a=1364]January[/url])
Here is a writeup we put together last month about how misconduct reports are handled [url=https://rgl.gg/?a=1511]link[/url]
We also talked about the process I mentioned above in an article in June of this year [url=https://rgl.gg/?a=1404]link[/url].
Still, we will make mistakes and it's important that we're clear about that and grow from it.
We have a couple of weeks left in the season, good luck to everyone for the upcoming playoffs.
You can see that when the Invite qualifiers for sixes had confusion in the organization, despite us having successfully run qualifiers multiple times before. We had an internal review and [url=https://rgl.gg/?r=40&a=1508]wrote up where we went wrong[/url], covered the fees for the teams affected, and made a clear plan going forward.
The issue with slurs from players in logs turned out to be a map review before the match. Something that we've never seen before and as soon as it was brought to our attention through an appeal, in our official process. We reviewed, confirmed, and reversed the decision the next day after being notified. We also wrote up an [url=https://rgl.gg/?r=40&a=1512]article breaking that down in more detail[/url] and how we want to include some questions around this in our next survey.
Now we have today, the ban that went in on aim. What happened is that there was a discussion that happened in an admin discord about the rule that was broken and the punishments that should take place. Then a ban was issued. There was confusion internally as to if this is something that is not a misconduct report (e.g. slurs, harassment, etc...), so it might not go through the normal misconduct ban review process. However, any punishment that results in a league ban, should be reviewed by that process.
Our normal process: We have two separate meetings each week where two unique groups of admins meet to review the submitted reports, review evidence, and decide the next steps. Whether that's to throw it out (most common) or issue a warning or issue a ban. We started this process about a year and half ago when we had issues with inconsistencies in our bans. Depending on which admin did it, they might have slightly different lengths or reasons to do it. Whereas when we have 7-12 people review and discuss it. We make sure that our bans lengths are consistent and for edge cases, we discuss what the correct length is and is it even ban worthy or is it covered in our rules, etc...
Since this we've switched this, we've had much more consistency with how things are handled. (Note: This is not where Anti-cheat cases are handled.)
Part of our mission statement is about admining
[quote=RGL Mission Statement]When it comes to being an Admin, it’s not always easy. A lot of situations are not purely black and white, but shades of gray. It’s our responsibility though to do our best in that area and try to make rulings and decisions as consistently and fairly as possible. We want to be admins who make decisions based on reason, not reaction. We will do our best, but ultimately we are human. We will make mistakes, we will do our best to own the situation, learn from it, and make sure we do not make the same mistake going forward.[/quote]
This decision did not follow our normal process we setup and was put in prior to our meetings. Which is very unusual. Even for clear bans (e.g. slurs in a match), we still would wait until the second of the meetings to put in a ban. That's why you would see bans go in on Friday night consistently.
With that said, here are the next steps
- aims ban has been removed
- Going forward, league bans must require head league admin approval (exa) to be placed. This is not that he is deciding them, more that he is validating our procedures were followed.
- During the next offseason we will be reviewing our rulebook and try to make it more streamlined and have more clear reasoning and punishments/warnings (where applicable.)
- We've also been leaning more on initial warnings for minor penalties. That's not clear in this case, and we don't report them on the site, but that has been an internal policy change that we've been doing more often.
At the end of the day, whatever decision is made, ultimately falls on my shoulders. I'm the league owner and I apologize for this situation. We do our best for this great community and we do our best to listen to feedback like with our post season surveys every season and make adjustments based on those results. We also do writeups about every month with any rule changes, bans, etc....
([url=https://rgl.gg/Public/Articles/Default.aspx?a=1515&r=40]Jan 2021[/url], [url=https://rgl.gg/Public/Articles/Default.aspx?a=1506&r=40]Dec[/url],[url=https://rgl.gg/Public/Articles/Default.aspx?a=1485&r=40]Nov[/url],[url=https://rgl.gg/Gaben/News/Editors/CreateNews.aspx?a=1485&r=40]Oct[/url], [url=https://rgl.gg/?&a=1458]October[/url], [url=https://rgl.gg/?&a=1454]September[/url], [url=https://rgl.gg/Public/Articles/Default.aspx?a=1445]August[/url], [url=https://rgl.gg/Public/Articles/Default.aspx?a=1423]July[/url], [url=https://rgl.gg/Public/Articles/Default.aspx?a=1409]June[/url],[url=https://rgl.gg/Public/Articles/Default.aspx?a=1406]May[/url],[url=https://rgl.gg/Public/Articles/Default.aspx?a=1394]April[/url],[url=https://rgl.gg/Public/Articles/Default.aspx?a=1386]March[/url],[url=https://rgl.gg/Public/Articles/Default.aspx?a=1365]February[/url], [url=https://rgl.gg/Public/Articles/Default.aspx?a=1364]January[/url])
Here is a writeup we put together last month about how misconduct reports are handled [url=https://rgl.gg/?a=1511]link[/url]
We also talked about the process I mentioned above in an article in June of this year [url=https://rgl.gg/?a=1404]link[/url].
Still, we will make mistakes and it's important that we're clear about that and grow from it.
We have a couple of weeks left in the season, good luck to everyone for the upcoming playoffs.
Please
sign in through STEAM
to post a comment.