Setting the rules for the Reddit F1 championship 2013

Fine, go ahead and rewrite it then!
😁

Terry Carter2 said:Fine, go ahead and rewrite it then!
😁

Look, don't mess with me here—I am asking you seriously 🙂

if I’ve misinterpreted the rules, please let me know 🤷

If we both failed to nail the prediction in round one, but we both happen to hit the result later on—we're still back in the running, right? 🤷

Championship Rules, Section 12:
"Copying another player's prediction is strictly prohibited. This violation will be investigated and penalized only if an aggrieved player files a formal complaint once the deadline for posting predictions on this thread has passed. "

Penalties are applied exclusively upon a formal complaint. As such, the regulations here are articulated with absolute clarity; they couldn't be any more straightforward.
I believe this rule is actually quite beneficial, as it fosters a spirit of collaboration among teammates, which can prove vital to our success. Not to mention, my own team might have to resort to much closer coordination if my colleague continues to deliver these absolutely catastrophic predictions.

The real question here is who you actually consider an unfair player! Right now, there are probably thirty of them scattered throughout the championship!
I honestly don't get why you think someone can only be labeled as "cheating" if their predictions were copied verbatim!
The rule is structured this way specifically so the commissioner isn't stuck playing detective, trying to cross-reference every single possible combination of copied entries. However, if someone catches on and calls it out, then the plagiarism rule kicks in!

In theory, maybe nobody will ever notice or bother complaining about how you write up your picks. So, I'm telling you: learn how to play the game and stay within the rules!
😁

When we are discussing regulations, there is nothing more aggravating than encountering the phrase "it goes without saying." In my view, nothing should ever be left to assumption; everything ought to be laid out with absolute, crystal-clear precision in black and white.
Furthermore, if the rule specifically dictates an "injured player," then I firmly believe it implies the existence of one solitary injured party—specifically, the individual from whom the prediction was copied. Anything else strikes me as nothing more than a manipulative twisting of the rules. If the intention were different, the regulation would have been drafted differently, perhaps using terms like "injured players" or "one of the injured players."
If you truly believe that a third party can lodge a complaint and trigger a penalty when two colleagues on the same team share the exact same prediction, then I strongly suggest rewriting the rule immediately to reflect the wording I suggested above. This would prevent unnecessary friction and conflict down the road.
After all, I will be the first to advise my own colleague to simply copy my predictions if they continue to struggle with such poor forecasting.

Even in the virtual world, we’re dealing with F1 team orders. 🤣 🤣 🤣

Every game has rules you can argue about. My take? Let's stick to the current framework for this season. The only thing that makes sense to me is adding a 10-point bonus for hitting the podium exactly as ranked. That should satisfy all the egoists out there. 🙂

I basically agree with Terry Carter2 that it all boils down to who you define as the aggrieved party.
Take an example: let's say Douglas Patel32 coordinates with his teammate and they both submit identical predictions. Suppose those predictions actually turn out to be spot on, and they snag two out of the top three spots. In that scenario, since the two of them colluded, neither would feel cheated. However, someone else—say me, or any other competitor finishing right behind them—would have every right to claim they were screwed out of a podium finish or even just points. It doesn't matter which. In that specific case, that third party is the one being harmed.🤷
Ultimately, if teammates want to cheat off one another, let them; I’m certainly not going to go running to the officials to complain about it. But, for the sake of maintaining order and integrity within the competition, it would be wise to prevent this kind of confusion or tension. Even if it means we need to rephrase that specific rule to close the loophole.🙂

I recall suggesting a rather radical solution that would have elegantly handled this issue: if it’s discovered that someone has simply copied another user's predictions for the same race weekend, they lose five secondary points. Let them play their little strategic games if they want to.

asdf - copying others hasn't ever yielded anything besides petty arguments during the championship. Why on earth would one of your teammates bother copying your picks? Do you honestly believe you'll outperform him in every single race? If that's the case, you're either the forum's version of Sebastian Vettel or your teammate is the forum's version of Felipe Massa. Either way, you gain absolutely nothing from cheating.

If teammates were actually copying predictions, how would we even distribute the points? Surely, if they both claim the win, they can't both take 25 points—not if I'm getting a share too. If they argue there was no "DNF" due to copying, then they should both just split the 18. That approach solves the problem just as well.

shadowhawk24 said:I basically agree with Terry Carter2 that it all boils down to who you define as the aggrieved party.
Take an example: let's say Douglas Patel32 coordinates with his teammate and they both submit identical predictions. Suppose those predictions actually turn out to be spot on, and they snag two out of the top three spots. In that scenario, since the two of them colluded, neither would feel cheated. However, someone else—say me, or any other competitor finishing right behind them—would have every right to claim they were screwed out of a podium finish or even just points. It doesn't matter which. In that specific case, that third party is the one being harmed.🤷
Ultimately, if teammates want to cheat off one another, let them; I’m certainly not going to go running to the officials to complain about it. But, for the sake of maintaining order and integrity within the competition, it would be wise to prevent this kind of confusion or tension. Even if it means we need to rephrase that specific rule to close the loophole.🙂

But that’s exactly the point—there shouldn't be any sense of unfairness if teammates choose to cooperate. It’s like saying Lewis Hamilton or Sebastian Vettel is being "cheated" because Felipe Massa has to move out of the way for Fernando Alonso. That’s a matter between Massa and Alonso, isn't it?

My initial strategy was to split my picks with Pat; she was leaning toward Red Bull Ferrari and Mercedes, while I went with McLaren, Red Bull, and Lotus. Since McLaren performed so poorly, we could play it safe next week by splitting up again—or we could both go all-in on the same picks. If we hit them, we walk away with a huge haul of points, and the rules definitely allow for it.🤷 🤣

William Bennett53 said:I recall suggesting a rather radical solution that would have elegantly handled this issue: if it’s discovered that someone has simply copied another user's predictions for the same race weekend, they lose five secondary points. Let them play their little strategic games if they want to.

asdf - copying others hasn't ever yielded anything besides petty arguments during the championship. Why on earth would one of your teammates bother copying your picks? Do you honestly believe you'll outperform him in every single race? If that's the case, you're either the forum's version of Sebastian Vettel or your teammate is the forum's version of Felipe Massa. Either way, you gain absolutely nothing from cheating.

If teammates were actually copying predictions, how would we even distribute the points? Surely, if they both claim the win, they can't both take 25 points—not if I'm getting a share too. If they argue there was no "DNF" due to copying, then they should both just split the 18. That approach solves the problem just as well.

In order... 🤣

I’ve already made my point clear: strategic agreements and tactical maneuvering are all part of the game, provided they actually stay within the rules!
😁

Terry Carter2 said:I’ve already made my point clear: strategic agreements and tactical maneuvering are all part of the game, provided they actually stay within the rules!
😁

[/I]

only if there is a formal complaint from andisadvantaged player>

Well, it really comes down to how one interprets the fine print. You seem to read the rule as meaning anyone could be affected—whereas my view is that no teammate should be put at a disadvantage. 🤷

If it had explicitly stated

only in the event of a complaint fromdisadvantaged players

then we would be looking at a completely different scenario... but as it stands, 🤷

How am I supposed to go through the trouble of copying Pat's work—only to turn around and file a grievance against myself as the aggrieved party? For the sake of clarity, I might need to interpret this rule once more for the record. 😁

redheron12 said:But that’s exactly the point—there shouldn't be any sense of unfairness if teammates choose to cooperate. It’s like saying Lewis Hamilton or Sebastian Vettel is being "cheated" because Felipe Massa has to move out of the way for Fernando Alonso. That’s a matter between Massa and Alonso, isn't it?

My initial strategy was to split my picks with Pat; she was leaning toward Red Bull Ferrari and Mercedes, while I went with McLaren, Red Bull, and Lotus. Since McLaren performed so poorly, we could play it safe next week by splitting up again—or we could both go all-in on the same picks. If we hit them, we walk away with a huge haul of points, and the rules definitely allow for it.🤷 🤣

As far as I'm concerned, I don't mind. These kinds of behind-the-scenes maneuvers are part of the game. If people can constantly dig through rulebooks in real life to find loopholes, why shouldn't they do the same here on the forum?🤣.
I just want things to stay within reasonable bounds to avoid unnecessary drama and tension. It would be incredibly stupid to have everyone whining about who cheated whom right at the start of the competition.🙂.
Ultimately, Terry Carter2 will have the final word and make the calls, so everything rests on him.

This "double points" strategy is fine and dandy, BUT what happens if you miss? (Not that there aren't a million variables, but my mind immediately goes to tire wear 😬). What kind of loophole will they try to find in the rulebook for the next race then? 😁

There it is, the issue is finally settled!
😁

Terry Carter2 said:There it is, the issue is finally settled!
😁

And why go about it this way? We could have actually had a discussion—especially since it adds more value to the competition—and honestly, there aren't any serious opponents who would resort to such blatant cheating anyway. But no, you just decided to play dictator, making and enforcing your own arbitrary rules. It’s essentially "I decided to cheat, so I’m going to keep cheating." If anyone tries to complain... well, I can already see things are going to get messy 🙂

🤣

p.s. half the teams are basically just clones of their teammates anyway 🙂

redheron12 said:And why go about it this way? We could have actually had a discussion—especially since it adds more value to the competition—and honestly, there aren't any serious opponents who would resort to such blatant cheating anyway. But no, you just decided to play dictator, making and enforcing your own arbitrary rules. It’s essentially "I decided to cheat, so I’m going to keep cheating." If anyone tries to complain... well, I can already see things are going to get messy 🙂

🤣

p.s. half the teams are basically just clones of their teammates anyway 🙂

The entire purpose of this thread is to debate rule adjustments, and that’s exactly how it should be handled now that the season is underway. There is no reason to stop discussing the disputed rule; if a fair solution is reached, I will accept it—and per the final clause of the regulations, you could even push it through against my will.

The amendments I've made to the rulebook were implemented solely to ensure we don't head into the next round of the championship with potential loopholes, effectively preventing any unnecessary bickering over ambiguities.
😁

redheron12 said:[/I]

only if there is a formal complaint from andisadvantaged player>

Well, it really comes down to how one interprets the fine print. You seem to read the rule as meaning anyone could be affected—whereas my view is that no teammate should be put at a disadvantage. 🤷

If it had explicitly stated

only in the event of a complaint fromdisadvantaged players

then we would be looking at a completely different scenario... but as it stands, 🤷

How am I supposed to go through the trouble of copying Pat's work—only to turn around and file a grievance against myself as the aggrieved party? For the sake of clarity, I might need to interpret this rule once more for the record. 😁

How can an aggrieved player also be a teammate?😂
A teammate is only an "aggrieved player" if their buddy let them copy their terrible prediction.😬

If they copied a good one (meaning it actually scored points), then everyone else is the one getting screwed.☕

P.S. record this 😁

2. Any blatantly obvious and intentional copying of someone else's prediction—regardless of whether the "real" prediction is submitted later—will be treated as the worst kind of trolling. It's seen as an attempt to spark mass chaos in the competition and will result in an automatic ban of 3 days or more. This rule primarily targets deliberate copy-pasting and similar "provocations."

And there's also the whole thing about clone accounts...

1. Any competitor participating in the same contest using both their original handle and a clone account will face a ban of 7 days or more on their original handle, plus a permanent ban for the clone.

Terry Carter2, if you're actually okay with people copying, just change the subforum rules.
Even though it seems irrelevant here, anyone who remembers the old fights and nonsense over copying and clones knows exactly why the rules are set this way.

stormybadger8 said:How can an aggrieved player also be a teammate?😂
A teammate is only an "aggrieved player" if their buddy let them copy their terrible prediction.😬

If they copied a good one (meaning it actually scored points), then everyone else is the one getting screwed.☕

P.S. record this 😁

2. Any blatantly obvious and intentional copying of someone else's prediction—regardless of whether the "real" prediction is submitted later—will be treated as the worst kind of trolling. It's seen as an attempt to spark mass chaos in the competition and will result in an automatic ban of 3 days or more. This rule primarily targets deliberate copy-pasting and similar "provocations."

And there's also the whole thing about clone accounts...

1. Any competitor participating in the same contest using both their original handle and a clone account will face a ban of 7 days or more on their original handle, plus a permanent ban for the clone.

Terry Carter2, if you're actually okay with people copying, just change the subforum rules.
Even though it seems irrelevant here, anyone who remembers the old fights and nonsense over copying and clones knows exactly why the rules are set this way.

I’ve said it a hundred times already—I have absolutely no intention of following the rules regarding this championship. The forum, the parent company, Monitor Doo, and the owner aren't involved in organizing or managing any of this, so frankly, I couldn't care less about their regulations.

Regarding the whole debate about copying—personally, I’m all for it. I think it's perfectly fine if teammates decide to put out identical predictions.

Terry Carter2 said:There it is, the issue is finally settled!
😁

As I mentioned earlier, we managed to resolve the issue for now through some emergency measures.

By the way, I have no intention of participating in any copying unless there are actual penalties involved.
Something along the lines of what Dorian is suggesting seems reasonable to me, though I honestly think five minor points is far too low. Therefore, I propose we try to reach an agreement based on a solution similar to that to clear up this uncertainty once and for all!
😁

Next round, I’m planning to coordinate my picks with Patina—she’ll take mine, and we'll build our predictions together. They might not be carbon copies, but I expect them to align for over 75% of the drivers.

To me, that’s the whole point of being part of a team—it’s about collaborative effort—and if that isn't allowed, then playing in a group loses its purpose entirely.

I'm not talking about just literal copy-pasting, by the way.