quote:

---

Originally posted by iccarus:
Took me a minute as well. Had to say it out loud.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by hilikuS:
Is it against the rules for a shop to sell pre-release packs on Ebay before the release date?

---

preselling is allowed on ebay as long as it follows the guidelines;

Guarantee that the item will be available for shipping within 30 days from the purchase date. Be sure to clearly state this information in your listing.

Clearly indicate in the listing that the item is a presale item.

The handling time specified in your listing should reflect the time from the end of the listing until the item is shipped to the buyer. Be sure to specify the correct handling time in your listing.

quote:

---

Originally posted by dfitzg88:
preselling is allowed on ebay as long as it follows the guidelines;

Guarantee that the item will be available for shipping within 30 days from the purchase date. Be sure to clearly state this information in your listing.

Clearly indicate in the listing that the item is a presale item.

The handling time specified in your listing should reflect the time from the end of the listing until the item is shipped to the buyer. Be sure to specify the correct handling time in your listing.

As for WOTC rules, I'm fairly certain they can sell them as long as they don't ship until the product release date.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by hilikuS:
Not sure if all of you saw this, but people were talking about misconduct at tournaments this past weekend. This is relevant.

http://blogs.magicjudges.org/seacat/2014/07/14/updating-unsporting-conduct-major/

---

Yes. I didn't look up any rules when I wrote up my complaint, but sometimes you just have to assume they are they - thankfully they are.

http://blogs.magicjudges.org/seacat/2014/07/14/updating-unsporting-conduct-major/[/ QUOTE]

Wow. Good for Wizards. Also: I'm totally behind the "unintentional" aspect. A great many players just don't realize how harmful their language is or can be, as evidenced by MWS, and "I didn't realize/mean it that way" is a very easy dodge. I like to think that those invoking this chunk of the rules would, in the majority of cases, first let their opponent know that they find such language offensive, and ask them to refrain from using it in the future.

__________________
"I have heard the mermaids singing, each to each. I do not think they will sing to me." -T.S. Eliot

RIP Ari

quote:

---

Originally posted by Pail42:
Yes. I didn't look up any rules when I wrote up my complaint, but sometimes you just have to assume they are they - thankfully they are.

I was unable to find a way to report a store/event to Wizards/DCI. If anybody can point me to one I would appreciate it.

---

Looks like this happened yesterday so it might not have been available to you.

quote:

---

Originally posted by hilikuS:
Looks like this happened yesterday so it might not have been available to you.

Honestly I think these rules should have been enforced anyway before they were rules. It's best for business to maintain a family friendly atmosphere with minimal cussing, and otherwise adult content. At least the way I see it. I am glad that my local shop is a very friendly place. We are vulgar people who swear, but there's not a lot of genuinely mean things going on, and most everybody is friendly. Some of the stories you guys have mentioned are seemingly unacceptable. Now you can call these rules out to hopefully straighten that out.

---

According to your story and the new rule, judges should be raining down match losses at your store like a broken pinata. I think that is the type of atmosphere that they're trying to kill. You may be vulgar with your friends, and it may be cool. What about for the new kid who just walked in with a chaperone wanting to see what FNM is all about? The kid may be a little shocked and the chaperone may be very shocked. So who is supposed to decide when too far is too far? One judge might not have a problem with another sees as a violation of this rule. I feel the new rule is a bit far reaching and somewhat vague, but their reasoning for wanting something more punitive/relevant seems solid. I also hope this is for higher RELs.

Personally, my dream is to have a physical hammer to hit d-bags with instead of handing out match losses. Just the thought of hitting them with it is soothing my soul as I type this.

__________________
"Message to women worldwide: Girls....we're stupid. We don't like games. We don't know games. We can't read minds. Say it like you mean or STFU." -rockondon

New people come in, and we make them welcome. If it becomes apparent that we can joke around with them, we do and they're part of the fun. If they're more temperamental, we leave em alone.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Goaswerfraiejen:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by hilikuS:
Not sure if all of you saw this, but people were talking about misconduct at tournaments this past weekend. This is relevant.

http://blogs.magicjudges.org/seacat/2014/07/14/updating-unsporting-conduct-major/[/ QUOTE]

Wow. Good for Wizards. Also: I'm totally behind the "unintentional" aspect. A great many players just don't realize how harmful their language is or can be, as evidenced by MWS, and "I didn't realize/mean it that way" is a very easy dodge. I like to think that those invoking this chunk of the rules would, in the majority of cases, first let their opponent know that they find such language offensive, and ask them to refrain from using it in the future.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Volcanon:
A completely subjective test is extremely unfair. It only takes one bad judge to ruin quite a few players' days.

---

The test is "reasonable expectation", which seems perfectly reasonable to me. People often use harmful language without intending harm--but they harm others nonetheless. Case in point: the common use among teens of "gay" as a derogatory term. Teens don't typically intend to harm anyone by using the word, or associating it with things and events incapable of any kind of sexual orientation, yet its constant association with undesirable outcomes contributes significantly to an atmosphere hostile to people who aren't straight. Intent is not necessary to cause tangible harm, and that kind of talk is not acceptable in a family-friendly (or queer-friendly, for that matter) environment like a Magic tournament.

__________________
"I have heard the mermaids singing, each to each. I do not think they will sing to me." -T.S. Eliot

RIP Ari

quote:

---

Originally posted by Goaswerfraiejen:
The test is "reasonable expectation", which seems perfectly reasonable to me. People often use harmful language without intending harm--but they harm others nonetheless. Case in point: the common use among teens of "gay" as a derogatory term. Teens don't typically intend to harm anyone by using the word, or associating it with things and events incapable of any kind of sexual orientation, yet its constant association with undesirable outcomes contributes significantly to an atmosphere hostile to people who aren't straight. Intent is not necessary to cause tangible harm, and that kind of talk is not acceptable in a family-friendly (or queer-friendly, for that matter) environment like a Magic tournament.

---

Well 'gay' is a corner case. What if somebody gets hurt feelings from an innocent word, or something he thought he heard? "Game" in Japanese sounds an awful lot like "gay" in English. Or since many magic players are, to use a polite term, "cheating idiots", who is to say that that player just doesn't make something up? Playing the unpopular guy? Call a judge on him saying he said you were gay! Free wins!

quote:

---

Originally posted by Volcanon:
Might be a bit fair to warn the players that the judges have Stalin-esque powers to ruin your day.

---

Judges already had this power. The old rules were also subjective. The major change here is that being a jerk can now a match loss instead of a game loss.

http://blogs.magicjudges.org/seacat/2014/07/14/updating-unsporting-conduct-major/

quote:

---

Originally posted by hilikuS:
I don't think it's the same because we're not really being jerks. We just like to bust chops a lot, and usually only amongst ourselves. It's really a good group, I guess I just don't paint the right picture. Like, there's not a lot of ill nature during games or about losses anymore. There used to be. If somebody's mad we let em vent it out, usually it's just they're mad at themselves.

---

Right. That's the way you see it. Others may not.

quote:

---

New people come in, and we make them welcome. If it becomes apparent that we can joke around with them, we do and they're part of the fun. If they're more temperamental, we leave em alone.

---

That's fine and all, but I'm not generally just talking about "at the store." I'm talking about during whatever rated tourney your store has that may require a judge. During those instances, the whole atmosphere becomes part of the event even if it's just you and your cronies. I guess it helps you if the judge is part of your normal crowd though. If s/he is not though, then what you think is funny or joking may result in a match loss for you.

quote:

---

It's funny you should say that our group is part of the problem, yet want to bring a weapon to the shop and hit people with it. Hitting people generally escalates things in my experience.

---

Are you really this dense?

quote:

---

Originally posted by Goaswerfraiejen:
The test is "reasonable expectation", which seems perfectly reasonable to me. People often use harmful language without intending harm--but they harm others nonetheless. Case in point: the common use among teens of "gay" as a derogatory term. Teens don't typically intend to harm anyone by using the word, or associating it with things and events incapable of any kind of sexual orientation, yet its constant association with undesirable outcomes contributes significantly to an atmosphere hostile to people who aren't straight. Intent is not necessary to cause tangible harm, and that kind of talk is not acceptable in a family-friendly (or queer-friendly, for that matter) environment like a Magic tournament.

---

Fine. Define "reasonable expectation." The fact that intent isn't required just makes this insane imo. TOs have always had the power to eject "undesirables" as they see fit. Why add this element and make it so broad? I've already seen cases where judges have been homers at regularly run events. I just see this sort of crap making it worse.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Pail42:
Judges already had this power. The old rules were also subjective. The major change here is that being a jerk can now a match loss instead of a game loss.

http://blogs.magicjudges.org/seacat/2014/07/14/updating-unsporting-conduct-major/

Any judge is unlikely to instantly give you a match loss without a warning. If you are doing something that gets you a warning from a judge I suggest you stop doing that thing - even if it feels the judge's request seems silly.

---

So they didn't have case examples of when to employ this under the old rules? I thought they did.

__________________
"Message to women worldwide: Girls....we're stupid. We don't like games. We don't know games. We can't read minds. Say it like you mean or STFU." -rockondon

quote:

---

Originally posted by wayne:
Does anyone like the new mtgo client? I personally don't like it as tournament rounds are taking longer.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by stab107:

not one bit, actually. I don't expect I will be playing future formats and while the new client is not the only reason, it is a pretty big one.

---

I like how it's less laggy than the last client for things like tapping lands. But that's about it. They removed a boatload of features, including things like smilies, which can't possibly be very hard to implement. And other things like not having to do a bunch of legwork to set up chat.

quote:

---

Originally posted by chaos021:
The fact that intent isn't required just makes this insane imo.

---

Are you worried that judges are going to start handing out match losses without warning? If the judges in your area do that in anything but extreme cases you should report them.

If behavior is offending somebody or could be reasonably expected to offend somebody then that behavior should stop. If somebody is warned that their behavior is unnacceptable and continues that behavior then (1) they failed to follow a judge's instructions and (2) clearly violate these updated rules.

quote:

---

Originally posted by JesusChristMD:
Anyone else enjoy their modo prices crashing into the ground?

---

The prices are crashing almost as often as the new client does. ZING

quote:

---

Originally posted by dfitzg88:
The prices are crashing almost as often as the new client does. ZING

But seriously. I sold off all my cards because the client literally doesn't run on my computer.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by JesusChristMD:
Anyone else enjoy their modo prices crashing into the ground?

---

I love it.....bc I didn't buy into Vintage like I was going to and rarely keep anything bc I redeem sets once acquired through drafting.