shadowstag10 said:Just so we’re all clear—the only reason I stepped up to lead this whole mess was because everyone was losing their minds over how fast the points were being calculated after the Race. And now? Now you’ve got me stuck in this impossible spot where if I decide nobody gets the PP—even though TBF1D is totally right, and honestly, has every reason to walk away from the game entirely—I’m the bad guy. On the flip side, silentbear49 couldn't care less, yet I’ve got Fortin, Amanda Kelly, and darkmarlin16 breathing down my neck if I give Valtteri Bottas the PP. So, fine. I'm giving Valtteri Bottas the PP because that’s what the rules say, and that hasn't changed regardless of any recent tweaks.
As for next season, I’m seriously weighing whether I even want to deal with this headache again.
Whether you want to be the commissioner or not is entirely up to you.
The call is yours, but don't let people pressure you or mess with the results.
Stick to the rulebook and end the conversation. No matter how much someone tries to act smart or pull linguistic gymnastics, just ignore them and move on.
Bottom line:
graniteharbor502 said:8. What happens if a competitor fails to submit a fresh prediction, or perhaps submits one only after the official deadline has already passed? In such an instance, the "Joker" rule will be triggered. You see, while it is mandatory for every participant to provide a new prediction for every single race, the rules allow for three "Jokers" per season; these are activated automatically whenever someone misses a submission, at which point their most recent official prediction will be credited for those specific races. However, once a player has exhausted all three of their "Jokers," no further points will be awarded to them, meaning they would be required to submit a new prediction if they truly wish to remain in the competition.
If a competitor fails to submit a fresh prediction for two consecutive races, their teammate is granted the authority to remove them from the team if they see fit; should this occur, that individual will simply proceed through the rest of the competition as a solo entrant, unless they explicitly state otherwise.
9. Is there any clarity regarding the protocols for submitting predictions? To ensure everything remains orderly, a participant may only post their predictions using the specific username they utilized when registering for the competition—unless, of course, an administrator has seen fit to modify that handle. Furthermore, we must establish that any participant facing a ban is ineligible to participate in the specific round during which the ban is active. This regulation applies to anyone whose suspension lasts at least until the submission deadline for that particular round; however, an exception exists if the individual managed to submit a fresh prediction prior to the ban being enforced, in which case that prediction will be honored regardless of their status. Additionally, should a banned participant possess an unused Joker prediction and fail to submit a standard entry for the round in question, that Joker prediction will still be applied to their score, just as it would for any other competitor. Does this sufficiently outline the expectations for everyone involved?
10. Is it not a fascinating thought that competitors might move between teams without any restriction whatsoever? In the event that such a transfer occurs, one must consider how the scoring functions; specifically, a competitor does not carry over the collective team points earned during their tenure with a previous squad, though their individual points remain entirely intact. Does this not seem like a fair distinction to maintain? This same logic applies to those who have been eliminated from the competition as well. Essentially, team points begin accumulating anew from the very moment a fresh team is established, whereas a simple change in a team's name carries no weight regarding the point totals. Each team is permitted two name changes throughout the duration of the season, yet prior to the start of the season, they may alter their designation as often as they see fit. Is there not a certain freedom in that level of flexibility?
11. If a participant chooses to include a driver in their prediction who doesn't actually appear on the official FIA entry list for a specific race, will they receive any points for that selection? The answer is a firm no; if the driver isn't part of the official roster, they simply don't count. Furthermore, one cannot claim points for drivers omitted from their submitted ranking, regardless of how logical or seemingly necessary it might feel to have left a specific individual out. The scoring process follows the exact positions a participant assigns to their chosen drivers; therefore, should there be a clerical error or a typo in those numerical rankings, the standings will be calculated strictly according to the numbers provided, however flawed they may be. If certain positions are left blank, no points will be awarded for them. Additionally, if a participant happens to list the same position number or the same driver more than once, all points associated with those duplicate entries will be forfeited entirely. What occurs if someone lists more drivers than would normally be expected to start a race under standard circumstances? In such an instance, no points will be granted for those surplus drivers or extra positions. For any driver where a position hasn't been specified, they shall be treated as NOP. However, if the entire ranking is submitted without any position numbers at all, the list will be processed as a ranking without any NOPs. Is it not essential that we maintain this level of precision to ensure fairness for everyone involved?
12. Is it not worth noting that copying someone else's prediction is strictly prohibited? It is a matter we take quite seriously, though we only move to investigate and issue penalties if a participant files a formal complaint, and even then, only once the deadline for submitting predictions on this thread has officially passed. For those wondering what constitutes plagiarism in this context, it is defined as posting more than 75% of the drivers—including all groups, rounded up to the nearest whole number—in the exact same positions as another prediction already submitted for that specific race. Naturally, any previous predictions being utilized as Jokers are excluded from this calculation. Should anyone be found guilty of such copying, the penalty is straightforward: the prediction will simply be disregarded entirely.
13. How exactly are the standings calculated? Well, they are determined strictly based on the official results released by the FIA immediately following the conclusion of the race—that initial preliminary order is what counts. Any subsequent corrections or adjustments made by the FIA after that moment are simply not taken into account for our purposes. As for the Non-Points scorers, we consider any driver listed on the official FIA entry list who fails to secure a finishing position, regardless of whether their status is marked as a DNF, NC, or Retired. Furthermore, if we look at the standard FIA regulations, a driver is technically considered to have retired if they complete less than 90% of the total race distance. And of course, the race itself consists of however many laps the FIA deems necessary, whether they decide that through their standard procedure or via some extraordinary ruling.
Drivers who fail to qualify during the qualifying sessions and therefore do not participate in the race will be calculated as NOP, provided they were officially included on the FIA entry list.
3. Should any controversial situation arise during the competition that isn't explicitly covered by the specific points within these Regulations, the Race Director shall make the final call, relying upon common sense and adhering to the fundamental moral principle of fair play. These Regulations take effect upon their publication within the Championship thread designated for rules and standings, though they may be subject to amendments if, as the season progresses, it becomes evident that such changes are absolutely necessary to ensure the smooth and effective operation of the competition.
4. It remains possible to replace the Race Director at any point during the competition, should a majority of the competitors elect a new director who is willing to accept the position. In much the same manner, any disputed rules may be modified, though under no circumstances can such changes be applied retroactively to previous events.
Is it not perfectly clear in the rules?
It says exactly what to follow, and there's no need to overthink who's happy or unhappy.
Follow the rules and that's that.
If people can't manage to read them, just tell them to go read the rules and leave it at that.
At the end of the day, this rule was written specifically so individuals couldn't harass the commissioners...
The commissioner has the final word, and if they turn out to be incompetent, they can easily be replaced... but one or two people definitely can't make that happen.
