FYI: How true to their word Monria owners are...

You will find many examples with the game history of rules being changed during events.

What ND posts on his events.

"Event Management Reserve the Right to alter the rules or disqualify anyone competing in bad faith in order to create a fair event"

Mistakes can be easily be over looked during a event making with so many different variables with in game. The problem is when rules are charged someone do feel wronged at of start of event the rules was not clear enough. Its up to event manger to then decide on right action. I do understand DOA being ignored with the owners and maybe they should of given her something for all her work, but i dont know the whole story. What i have heard about the new owners is mostly good stuff. I wish them all the best anyone who is willing to invest heavily in this game and have to deal with MA needs all the luck they can get.

bigdaddy trim said:

You will find many examples with the game history of rules being changed during events.

What ND posts on his events.

"Event Management Reserve the Right to alter the rules or disqualify anyone competing in bad faith in order to create a fair event"

Mistakes can be easily be over looked during a event making with so many different variables with in game. The problem is when rules are charged someone do feel wronged at of start of event the rules was not clear enough. Its up to event manger to then decide on right action. I do understand DOA being ignored with the owners and maybe they should of given her something for all her work, but i dont know the whole story. What i have heard about the new owners is mostly good stuff. I wish them all the best anyone who is willing to invest heavily in this game and have to deal with MA needs all the luck they can get.

Click to expand...

This.

It's a simple case of an event was created with a purpose. Someone found a way to circumvent the intent of the event using the point system to thier advantage in order to win with quantity over quality.

Once found out, the organisers updated the rules to keep the competition in line with its purpose, to which said individual got upset about it.

Doa is not daft as they so often like to point out, they knew fine well they were not competing with the spirit of the competition.

It is frequently seen in law "The letter of the law versus the spirit of the law is an idiomatic antithesis. When one obeys the letter of the law but not the spirit, one is obeying the literal interpretation of the words (the "letter") of the law, but not necessarily the intent of those who wrote the law"

That being said however, there could have been some minor compensation to appease the situation, a runner up prize or such like. But I do wonder if doa has cut their nose off despite thier face. maybe there was a suggestion of such a thing, but the behaviours of the op scuppered that.

The owners of monria are kind, friendly and just people, someone tried to play against the spirit of the competition and the rules were amended in accordance, as simple as that. Thier competition, their rules. Next time try to play also within the spirit of the game or competition, or at the very least if you don't clarify or understand the intentions vs rules, don't get pissy when caught out.

A situation arose and was negotiated by the event organizers, whose reputation in this community is not in question. It is time to let go, Alex. You were supported to the extent possible and you're only damaging yourself from here on. Take it from a friend, please. You don't want to get to the point where you are compelled to start over yet again.

I understand your personality craves a certain type of closure, which cannot always be achieved. If you receive counselling, I suggest to bring up the matter. Anything that helps you navigate around the cliffs in this little virtual realm is good to have in your toolbox for later. It is cold out there.

DoA said:

Actually, I already filled a written complaint at the employment and consumer rights agencies in my country against Virtualsense LTD; now I don't have huge hopes that anything will happen, but I'm waiting for their resolution - all I can say far now is that they considered there's enough reasoning in my complaints to at least accept them and investigate.

Click to expand...

San said:

A situation arose and was negotiated by the event organizers, whose reputation in this community is not in question. It is time to let go, Alex. You were supported to the extent possible and you're only damaging yourself from here on. Take it from a friend, please. You don't want to get to the point where you are compelled to start over yet again.

I understand your personality craves a certain type of closure, which cannot always be achieved. If you receive counselling, I suggest to bring up the matter. Anything that helps you navigate around the cliffs in this little virtual realm is good to have in your toolbox for later. It is cold out there.

Click to expand...

I disagree. This "diagnosis" of yours is not based on any objective facts. Nothing here is outside normal human behavior.

If I was challenged I would have defended myself as well. If my attacker suggests I have cheated on purpose like Alainax did, u can be damn sure I would have set the record straight. Yes, yes she didn't know the facts. That's why there's now a reply with facts. Case closed.


Ppl feel the need to keep commenting, it's their choice. Maybe u wanna advice bigdaddy and Alainax to some counceling?

Fifth said:

I disagree. This "diagnosis" of yours is not based on any objective facts.

Click to expand...

It is based on previous information outside of this thread.

San said:

A situation arose and was negotiated by the event organizers, whose reputation in this community is not in question. It is time to let go, Alex. You were supported to the extent possible and you're only damaging yourself from here on. Take it from a friend, please. You don't want to get to the point where you are compelled to start over yet again.

I understand your personality craves a certain type of closure, which cannot always be achieved. If you receive counselling, I suggest to bring up the matter. Anything that helps you navigate around the cliffs in this little virtual realm is good to have in your toolbox for later. It is cold out there.

Click to expand...

If you would have watched carefully, you would have noticed I haven't "bumped" this thread in a good while; from my point of view, I rested my case, I said (and proved with links, screenshots) everything I had to say, let everyone make their own judgement, filled complained with MindArk about the behavior about one their Planet Partners, filled complained IRL to customer rights protection agency and I moved on.

I don't intend to post anything else (unless the case I'll have any update to the situation - the organizers apologizing or getting any replies from mentioned authorities) in this thread to bump it up; but if anyone will post in it directing a message to me, you can be sure I will answer to each and all of them, because I can't let people just post false things, without countering them with arguments.

San said:

It is based on previous information outside of this thread.

Click to expand...

Yeah, I did told you IN PRIVATE, when I considered you A FRIEND, that I want closure on all situations... that was a confession I made to you, as a friend, and in private, not something to use in public against me (and that is not the first time you brought up in public things I told you in private). Anyway, lesson learned, I will be more careful when choosing whoever to trust and who don't.

Not to mention that, if a FRIEND notices you do something (he considers to be) wrong, he calls you on the side and tells you in private what (he thinks) you do wrong, not try to embarrass you in the middle of the crown.

Anyway, that is not relevant with the situation; as said, it wasn't me that reopened the discussion, but other people, all I did was to answer to their claims.

Still OP have a valid point. This situation that came out of this contest and in this case for DoA is a great discussion overall in regards to execution of events both official and player ran events, people arranging events can learn from a discussion like this

San said:

It is based on previous information outside of this thread.

Click to expand...

I can't let people just post false things, without countering them with arguments.

Click to expand...

I might choose to silently disagree with someone via your "-rep"-ing, instead of continuing an argument that is obvious that is not going anywhere. You may see things differently, but I consider the act of -rep-ing a lighter version of starting or continuing an argument in public (let that person know privately you disagree with them, but without creating further drama on public forums -

Click to expand...

The funniest part? She neg repped me for telling her to stop creating drama on public forums.

Why do I have this image of herd of jackals circling a defenseless victim in my mind whenever I read this thread?
Proves the evolution theory ofc. We're indeed a predatory species who used to hunt in groups just like jackals, our ancient forebears...

Well I don't know about you but I consider myself a follower of Jesus of Nazareth. I don't care much about the conventional church or dogma but with that guy I can't deny he's above and beyond me in so many ways that I simply have to respect him.

What did he say about the weak and defenseless? That's your chance, go get some fresh meat? Or did he say:
"Truly I tell you, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for me."

Think about that.

Fifth said:

If I was challenged I would have defended myself as well. If my attacker suggests I have cheated on purpose like Alainax did, u can be damn sure I would have set the record straight. Yes, yes she didn't know the facts. That's why there's now a reply with facts. Case closed.

P

Click to expand...

There was no attack, no suggestion of diliberate cheating and no reply with new "facts" .

There was the op repeating her comments form the first post which we have all read. The op still uses quantity as justification, "100+ words". This doesn't mean the competition organisers thought they were of any quality.

However that is irrelevant, it's their competition, their rules. If they update them due to someone going against the spirit of the competition, that's their shout. As said, they could have certainly made it a bit smoother for doa, with a consolidation prize, but now is see even that wouldn't have appeased the ops entitled attitude.


There was a suggestion that the op was not working in the spirit of the competition and that throwing a hissy fit about it - and they continue to do ( see point about contacting their local trading standards with a complaint). Also a suggestion that this is not always the best practice.

Finally, op suggesting that they should be compensated by 200 ped for payment in hours worked is extremely laughable. imagine if MA compensated people for all the time they spent on events when they didn't win... Just daft.

Anyway, it's daft to keep repeating stuff, most folks can make up thier own mind from all that has been stated here already. And the op can continue the fun of Neg repping every one who disagrees with them.

Fifth said:

Why do I have this image

Click to expand...

It is called "white knight complex"

ZPF said:

It is called "white knight complex".

Click to expand...

Sure sure, cranky child, have it your way.

Fifth said:

Why do I have this image of herd of jackals circling a defenseless victim in my mind whenever I read this thread?
Proves the evolution theory ofc. We're indeed a predatory species who used to hunt in groups just like jackals, our ancient forebears...

Well I don't know about you but I consider myself a follower of Jesus of Nazareth. I don't care much about the conventional church or dogma but with that guy I can't deny he's above and beyond me in so many ways that I simply have to respect him.

What did he say about the weak and defenseless? That's your chance, go get some fresh meat? Or did he say:
"Truly I tell you, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for me."

Think about that.

Click to expand...

Try to have an open mind about it. Don't always presume the op is a victim, what about the other side?

You invest all your savings in a game you love, you are trying your best to make your new planet survive. You run a wee competition to get it off its feet and hope that in the process you get some value added to the content. It backfires, you need to update the rules. You do so but then get the op having a right go at you.

In fairness, as for the pack mentality, there has been many people on here agreeing with the op, so that doesn't wash. Furthermore... Myself and big daddy trim rarely agree

Alainax said:

There was a suggestion that the op was not working in the spirit of the competition and that throwing a hissy fit about it - and they continue to do ( see point about contacting their local trading standards with a complaint). Also a suggestion that this is not always the best practice.

Click to expand...

The thing with contacting trading standards (or the ASA we would contact re: competitions), its a different country so unlikely to progress far as the costs to do so will outweigh and also I doubt any trading standards would recognise or support competitions for digital goods. This would be the job for our new president surely

Fifth said:

Sure sure, cranky child, have it your way.

Click to expand...

I thought I was an evil jackal?

The Jetman said:

The thing with contacting trading standards (or the ASA we would contact re: competitions), its a different country so unlikely to progress far as the costs to do so will outweigh and also I doubt any trading standards would recognise or support competitions for digital goods. This would be the job for our new president surely

Click to expand...

Sorry I wasn't very clear and on my phone so not multi quoting well. The op stated they had contacted their local consumer rights division regarding this. Not that I was suggesting that was a good idea! And yes you are right, trading standards would be the wrong people in any case

Now you have me thinking though, does our president have a conflict of interest here? If he were to step in..

DoA said:

Yeah, I did told you IN PRIVATE, ...

Click to expand...

The only thing I want to add at this point is, that I considered carefully what to say in public and what not, to strictly limit it to things you only ever chose to publish about yourself already. If I have overstepped it and violated your privacy, I apologize, this I clearly didn't want. Yet I don't believe that I have. Use me as a punching ball if it helps you wind down, but please don't harm yourself any further. All points have been made and maybe the result is not all cut and dried, but belabouring it in this way will not get you closer to the desired resolution.

Alainax said:

However that is irrelevant, it's their competition, their rules.

Click to expand...

That is only correct before the competition starts; in normal conditions, once it starts, the rules become a pending contract between the organizer and participants. I have yet to hear of any RL contest organized by a company where they changed the rules in the middle of the contest and anyone backed them up. That's also the reason why they are well thought, eventually checked by their juridic department, before the start, to make sure there are no loopholes or interpretable terms.

Alainax said:

As said, they could have certainly made it a bit smoother for doa, with a consolidation prize, but now is see even that wouldn't have appeased the ops entitled attitude.

Click to expand...

I already said a couple of times, including just a couple of posts ago, that I would have accepted compensations if they would have been offered in good will and in a reasonable amount.

Alainax said:

Finally, op suggesting that they should be compensated by 200 ped for payment in hours worked is extremely laughable. imagine if MA compensated people for all the time they spent on events when they didn't win... Just daft.

Click to expand...

Thre are a couple big differences:

1. I didn't said I expected compensation for not winning (I participated in quite a few HSL competitions in games, I always lost, I never complained or asked for compensations); I said I expected compensation for rules being changed.

2. MA has a rule in their TOS / EULA that they reserve the right to change anything in game and we all did agreed with said TOS / EULA in the moment when we created our accounts and, subsequently, every time when we log in the game, while Monria team didn't had any such clause in their original rules.

3. MA competitions were in-game competitions - they involved playing the game, they involved getting some kind of benefits (like skill-ups, chance for loot, etc), while this is was a RL competition, presuming RL work, from which I didn't got any side-benefit.

Alainax said:

Now you have me thinking though, does our president have a conflict of interest here? If he were to step in..

Click to expand...

Good point there!

I'm sure we all still remember what the best traditions in the civilized society say about the customer rights against the corporate powers or government agencies? You have no invested interest, yet you have decided to side with the one's who have power against a single individual who has none. Why did you go down that road? Because you can, right? Because you have the right to have and express your opinion like everybody else.

Now, the president, however, should serve his people. Represent their rights against corporate powers and the state itself. Yet he's also part of the system with invested interest. So there's a tough choice he has to make. Somehow, knowing ND, I would think he's smart enough to see the only real option left for him is to side with us, players, against the powers to be. Why? Because he can.


That's assuming the case would ever become important enough for the President to interfere either way. Which is, well, highly doubtful.

The Jetman said:

The thing with contacting trading standards (or the ASA we would contact re: competitions), its a different country so unlikely to progress far as the costs to do so will outweigh and also I doubt any trading standards would recognise or support competitions for digital goods. This would be the job for our new president surely

Click to expand...

Alainax said:

Sorry I wasn't very clear and on my phone so not multi quoting well. The op stated they had contacted their local consumer rights division regarding this. Not that I was suggesting that was a good idea! And yes you are right, trading standards would be the wrong people in any case

Click to expand...

1. It's not a court action, is just a written complain, so it has no costs associated to fill one (at least not in my country).

2. Since both me and the competition organizing company are located in European Union, they accepted, registered and said they will investigate my complaint; I was even given a term of 90 days to receive a writing response if this will be classified or escalated further on.

3. Of course, that doesn't makes me necessarily right and there is nothing more I can do to influence the outcome; I did filled the complaint, it was registered, it will be investigated by people that are qualified to do so, according with existing laws (which I don't even know or have how to know myself) and there will be a resolution.

It's kinda similar action with using the report function on a post on the forum. You see a post, you think it is not respecting the rules, you hit the report button (and I do that A LOT!) and here is where your role ends; from that point on, the report gets to authorities (forum moderators in this case), they analyze and decide to either dismiss it as unfounded or to take actions according to their rules. Your simple action of reporting a post doesn't mean that post broke any rule, but just that you considered you did, and you brought it in the authorities attention, who are able to judge it. Nothing more, nothing less.

PS: And thank you for suggestion, I will actually bring it in attention of our newly elected president too.



-----

To the people that said either in this thread, in private message or via negative reputations messages that by going further with this I do harm my reputation: I'm not an idiot and that is something I'm fully aware; further more, that was was something I was aware from the moment when I made this post.

Yet, that is something that, since this thread, I simply don't care about any more; some people can agree with me, some others can disagree, some people may love me, some others may hate me, and guess what... that's totally fine and I really don't care about one random person or another (with very few exceptions of people which really mean something to me) thinks about me. As long as I do what I think is right, I stay within the rules, and I can sleep well at night, without a guilty conscience and without hate against other people clouding my mind, I may as well be the most hated person in whole EU and I couldn't care less - no storm has ever stopped because scared puppy start barking at thunders.

And, anyway, the goal of this thread was not to raise my popularity, notoriety, sympathy or anything else, but just to expose what I considered to be an unfair act, and, while some vocal minority, with a personal agenda, may rally up their banners and "get to war" (against me), I'm convinced that the silent majority will just read, make their own judgement and just move on.

I never intended to "bump" the thread past the original post, and all my subsequent posts were just replies to other people posts; I still have the same idea, and I don't intend to "bump" the thread again in the future either. But, I can't deny that whenever someone does that, it causes me a bit of joy, knowing that more/new people will get to read it and make their own judgement, which was exactly the goal of my original thread.

So to everyone that did posted in the thread (even if just to attack me, on a personal level), a most honest THANK YOU for raising the awareness about it.

DoA said:

1. It's not a court action, is just a written complain, so it has no costs associated to fill one (at least not in my country).

2. Since both me and the competition organizing company are located in European Union, they accepted, registered and said they will investigate my complaint; I was even given a term of 90 days to receive a writing response if this will be classified or escalated further on.

3. Of course, that doesn't makes me necessarily right and there is nothing more I can do to influence the outcome; I did filled the complaint, it was registered, it will be investigated by people that are qualified to do so, according with existing laws (which I don't even know or have how to know myself) and there will be a resolution.

It's kinda similar action with using the report function on a post on the forum. You see a post, you think it is not respecting the rules, you hit the report button (and I do that A LOT!) and here is where your role ends; from that point on, the report gets to authorities (forum moderators in this case), they analyze and decide to either dismiss it as unfounded or to take actions according to their rules. Your simple action of reporting a post doesn't mean that post broke any rule, but just that you considered you did, and you brought it in the authorities attention, who are able to judge it. Nothing more, nothing less.

PS: And thank you for suggestion, I will actually bring it in attention to our newly elected president too.

Click to expand...

In RL i filed a complaint regard a competition to the ASA (our advertising authority) against an Irish company, same in a way as they didn't honor their terms ( i had finished top in leaderboard, didn't state Irish only like they claimed) i won and received a bitter email but i got my Wii ☺ .

But been a in game comp for a in game prize, I'm not sure the eu will have a stance on this, Yet...

We could do with ND making a peoples charter, with a process for civil complaints. A presidents job isn't just about flying around getting donations/connections, there is boring laws to put in place to improve the lives of the avatars

Alainax said:

However that is irrelevant, it's their competition, their rules.

Click to expand...

The Jetman said:

In RL i filed a complaint regard a competition to the ASA (our advertising authority) against an Irish company, same in a way as they didn't honor their terms ( i had finished top in leaderboard, didn't state Irish only like they claimed) i won and received a bitter email but i got my Wii ☺ .

Click to expand...

This ^^

Clear, real life example where things don't work on the principle that "their competition, their rules" basis; that's what I said all along.

The Jetman said:

We could do with ND making a peoples charter, with a process for civil complaints. A presidents job isn't just about flying around getting donations/connections, there is boring laws to put in place to improve the lives of the avatars

Click to expand...

I agree, this is hopefully what the peoples charter will do. From my perspective the whole "I am my avatar" campaign is about having avatars recognised with the same rights as we would expect in the real world. Agreed a real world competition would almost certainly not get away with changing the rules part way through unless the terms of agreement stated some clause to cover their backs. I guess most competitions do this.

I am interested to see if trading standards consider the case because this is for a virtual item for a virtual competition. In real world competitions I feel participants have to agree to the terms and conditions. Therefore if the terms are changed then it is unfair. Here if I read about a competition on the forum and participate have I actually agreed to the terms and conditions or not? Unless you state absolutely "yes I agree to the said terms and conditions"? What if someone had just stumbled across the wiki and made some edits without ever seeing the forum post about it, can they later complain that the rules changed even though they never explicitly agreed to the rules in the first place?

It is like running a marathon and winning and then complaining that you didn't get a medal because it turns out you didn't officially sign up to the race in the first place.

Following with interest

DoA said:

This ^^

Clear, real life example where things don't work on the principle that "their competition, their rules" basis; that's what I said all along.

Click to expand...

If you really think the two situations are similar then you are more delusional then I thought. The example you actually are quoting is talking about an exclusion of competition which wasn't stated. ANYONE would dispute this decission since it s a hard exclusion.
Your situation clearly is more a case of not actually holding true to the intention of the contest. Despite people actually trying to teach you here how an event also has a morale side to it's rules, you seem to just not get it. You filed your case, as San stated already I join in on that. Stop responding to people, because right now you are turning this more into a farce......

matthew said:

I am interested to see if trading standards consider the case because this is for a virtual item for a virtual competition. In real world competitions I feel participants have to agree to the terms and conditions. Therefore if the terms are changed then it is unfair. Here if I read about a competition on the forum and participate have I actually agreed to the terms and conditions or not? Unless you state absolutely "yes I agree to the said terms and conditions"? What if someone had just stumbled across the wiki and made some edits without ever seeing the forum post about it, can they later complain that the rules changed even though they never explicitly agreed to the rules in the first place?

It is like running a marathon and winning and then complaining that you didn't get a medal because it turns out you didn't officially sign up to the race in the first place.

I think this is the line trading standards will take, or there will be some clause in the EULA or something. Anyway I am following with interest now.

Click to expand...

1. The competition was real not virtual; both the promotion and work were done in RL, not in game. Further more, the contest was not organized by a player or a person, but by a registered company, on their official site, registered under their business name.

2. True, the prize was a virtual item, and that's the point where I think (and I was also told by the official that registered my complaint) resides my case's weak spot.

3. Not all competitions require a formal registration, and those that do have it specified in the rules (like in your marathon competition example, you signup and you are assigned a running number); anyway, even if it would be so, I did "signed up" and I have prove (print screen) of it.

Now, to be honest, considering the different countries issue, the registration issue (was contesting with forum alias, not with RL name), and mostly the fact that the prize was a virtual, not real item, I don't have huge hopes that I'll get a positive resolution and I consider it just a long shot.

Still, since it didn't costed me anything to fill the complaint and it was my right to do so, I did proceed with it, and, to be honest, I'm really curious about the resolution - worst case scenario, it may brought some attention to the issue and create some (hopefully) interesting and constructive discussions about this kind of competitions, about virtual prizes about what's allowed and what isn't; best case scenario, it could represent a interesting precedent for all further competitions having as prizes virtual assets.

Anyway, once I do have my written answer back (90 days term for it), I do promise to translate it, scan it (for conformity) and post it here so everyone can know the outcome, as well as send a copy to various gaming sites (in case someone would be interested to talk about it, although, again, I don't put much hopes into this).

Fifth said:

Good point there!

I'm sure we all still remember what the best traditions in the civilized society say about the customer rights against the corporate powers or government agencies? You have no invested interest, yet you have decided to side with the one's who have power against a single individual who has none. Why did you go down that road? Because you can, right? Because you have the right to have and express your opinion like everybody else.

Now, the president, however, should serve his people. Represent their rights against corporate powers and the state itself. Yet he's also part of the system with invested interest. So there's a tough choice he has to make. Somehow, knowing ND, I would think he's smart enough to see the only real option left for him is to side with us, players, against the powers to be. Why? Because he can.


That's assuming the case would ever become important enough for the President to interfere either way. Which is, well, highly doubtful.

Click to expand...

This is where we have wildly different views on the matter, almost on the political scale. I don't see some huge corporate or government entity squashing the poor waife that you see. I see a small up starting family business, trying to do their very best in the world and getting berated by someone with a warped sense of entitlement. ( I have no idea what the op does for a living, it is absolutely none of my business, the point here is only from competition vs competitor from this thread)

So yes, I fully support small business and their contribution to society. I support those who work blooming hard every day to put food on the table, I support those making a go of it for themselves, giving up the day job and creating their own jobs for other people to thrive. I have less patience for people who knowingly go against the spirit of a competition then whine when they didn't get thier way.

I do get the sense of fairness, and upholding the letter of the rules, hence some minor compensation may have been an option, but op has already stated that they feel entitled to at least hundreds of peds... Go figure.

As for the conflict of interest, you missed the point. Not that he is a corporate giant who also wishes to squish people... But that ND is in direct competition with these owners who set the competition.

Dang cant believe this crap is still going on .

Someone correct me if im wrong but wasnt what happened this :

You spotted a way to make the wiki look like you had added tons of valuable , quality content , when in reality you copy pasted stuff and did minor edits ?

When the owner found this out thats when the rules were "changed" to prevent a further breach of the spirit of the competition .

If I were you I would be very careful of how far you actualy take this in case you find yourself on the wrong side of a law suit aimed at you , from which up to this point is mostly based on hearsay.

Non hearsay would envolve lawyers and you wouldnt like the costs of that one little bit.

My advice , ask for this thread to be closed , move on and forget all about it.

I for one will think twice before i join a competion on Monria...