cycling4freaks.com

FPC,

Some ideas following Roby/OL endless story :

1- close the thread after FPC decision ?
-> to avoid endless and steril discussions
-> I have never seen in a court counterparts discussing judgement

2- if someone re-open the thread to discuss the judgement (similar to go in front of an other court for the same case / make an appeal)
-> just review again the case with posssibility to increase/lower the judgement regarding the counterpart which re-open the case

Good point, this No.1, thanks for the input, Mr. cottonhot

Good point.

Then, can we still ask somewhere the FPC to give a bit of explanation ?
There were questions asked to FPC there.

FPC gives his decisions, but there is not transparency on how sentences are chosen and on what this and this penalty is given. It would be nice to know why penalties are set the way they are, especially when it was asked like in that case.

If they want to answer here, I still can re-write my questions :

Then can I ask how you set up the fines as well ?

Cause f.e you give 150k for a newbie that seems to act bad for the first time (viewtopic.php?f=16&t=4370), but then gives only the double for someone who is insulting other player for weeks and weeks, and regularly insults other players. Especially when you all know that 300k is really nothing for most of big/old teams, some of them did even more benefits in the small cat1 Gevaudan tour f.e. So ? Where is the logic ?

Also, what's the logic of that warning ? A warning is here to prevent from recidivism, right ? What's the point of giving a warning to someone who already shown he is a multiple-recidivist ?

I am really wondering how you determined that decision, thanks for your answer.

This is not the thread for these answers.

And just to make that clear, OL, esp. as you mentioned other browser games and penalties as well in your comparison for Robys penalty in your case: In other browser games where I've played and worked for (!), the fair play decisions may have been more consistent (?), but not public at all. Every discussion about decisions and penatlies has been forbidden (even treated with penalty!) in the public forum. Thus, also in this case, please just write a PM to the FC members or to leso in particular. Thanks.

I actually don't think it's a good decision to close the threads immediately. No such things, discussions, happen in real life in front of a court? So what. We're not in a real court. Close a thread if it gets out of hand, which none of the threads did I think, although the "weeks of ruthlessness" one was close. And btw, deleting posts IMO would be bad too, move them to a special spam topic maybe, but don't delete them (and don't call it spam, if it's my posts!!!)

What's wrong with a comment. What's wrong about talking about decisions? For example I would have had comments on both of the newest decisions, one of them is really baffling.
Now... I can't say anything anywhere? Or need to open a new thread?

Exactly, like in front of the law "open a new thread" which will be equivalent to an appeal. But in that case you could also be judged with a highest fine

What if you don't want to appeal, just to talk?
It's like if I closed this thread now and if you want to talk further about this topic you need to open a new one because you already posted your opinion here... .

The sensible thing to do would be to stop talking about it, really. Not that I give a damn horseshit, but that's a fact.

Robyklebt wrote:What's wrong with a comment. What's wrong about talking about decisions? For example I would have had comments on both of the newest decisions, one of them is really baffling.
Now... I can't say anything anywhere? Or need to open a new thread?

It's the never ending story.
There is a "case", as fascinating as it is. Then there is a decision, as baffling as it is. Just let it go. There is no need for further bullshit. Writing non stop about it makes it only worse : the decision and the jury lose credit, the insults/provocations keep going, nobody is happy nor will get happier...
Just let it go.

And if, at some point, people think the FP jury is doing a bad job, THEN there could be a discussion about how to change it, which rules and standards to apply, and more. But on one and every particular case, really it's not making any sense.

And if, at some point, people think the FP jury is doing a bad job, THEN there could be a discussion about how to change it, which rules and standards to apply, and more.

How do we find out that this point is reached and that a discussion can be opened ?

imo...if you're not happy or satisfied with a decision of the fpc...go to next higher step...in case of our fpc, write a message to Leso(leader of the fpc) and tell him what you think

Rockstar Inc wrote:imo...if you're not happy or satisfied with a decision of the fpc...go to next higher step...in case of our fpc, write a message to Leso(leader of the fpc) and tell him what you think

Obviously everybody can but always remeber that Leso is part of the decision process.

luques wrote:

Rockstar Inc wrote:imo...if you're not happy or satisfied with a decision of the fpc...go to next higher step...in case of our fpc, write a message to Leso(leader of the fpc) and tell him what you think

Obviously everybody can but always remeber that Leso is part of the decision process.

Obviously everybody can but always remember that leso together with Buhmann are the OWNERS OF THIS GAME. Which makes them the ultimate deciders. No matter if they are part of the decision process or not.

I hope nobody wants to claim that this discussion is in any way more fruitful than what would have been written in the closed thread, if they hadn't been closed.

team fl wrote:

luques wrote:

Rockstar Inc wrote:imo...if you're not happy or satisfied with a decision of the fpc...go to next higher step...in case of our fpc, write a message to Leso(leader of the fpc) and tell him what you think

Obviously everybody can but always remeber that Leso is part of the decision process.

Obviously everybody can but always remember that leso together with Buhmann are the OWNERS OF THIS GAME. Which makes them the ultimate deciders. No matter if they are part of the decision process or not.

Well, don't know if I wasn't clear. At the moment Leso as the head of the FPK is who takes the final decision, members of the FPC can propose, give their opinions and suggestions but at the end the one who really applies the fine is Leso.

Therefore for sure everyone can ask to Leso and Buhmann that as you say are the admins of the game and they have the last word, but I would be pretty surprised to see a dramatic change of the verdict made by Leso after all the discussion in the FPK.

But well... it's just a personal consideration.

Back from holiday, have some time to write a bit more.

So, big mess, contesting decisions, appealing, endless discussions, FPK here, FPK there....

Speaking for myself (but I guess that the other guys of the FPK will agree on some points), there are some things that must be underlined.

1) The FPK is made up of 3 members that express their opinion about a case. Every one of them just gives his idea about how the case should be handled. Then Leso the Head of the FPK tries to moderate and find a good compromise between all the solutions (and proposing himself obviously). The FPK has a sort of standard table to apply fines, then every case has its peculiarities and then some variations could be made taking care of accuse and defense.

The OL-Donkey case has no precedence, but actually I can see from the table which is available to anybody that the fine fits the standard insults fine. Need to increase the fine standard? Well, then we can discuss it.

2) Appealing... for what? Actually, there is NO way I would change my fine suggestion to anything other if nothing new shows up. I mean, if there is no new evidence, I don't see why should I change the fine I suggested. It is just coherence I think and actually if we start to change the FPK decisions just because someone laments we will lose our objectivity.

3) I hear about FPK reform, what standards apply, what rule changes, how to change. All pretty funny. When the FPK was reformed some months ago we had opened post for that, but almost nobody cared. They are floating in page 2 and 3. Feel free to contribute.

The FPK has a sort of standard table to apply fines

Some sort of ?

I can see from the table which is available to anybody that the fine fits the standard insults fine.

Which table ? (sorry I was away from RSF for long, probably missed it.)

Need to increase the fine standard? Well, then we can discuss it.

If we can know what is that standard why not. By closing the posts, saying that thread is not good for such answers and saying that PM Leso is the solution if complain exists, does not seem so open to discuss such thing, but good to hear you think we can discuss that.

I will post here instead of re-opening a thread.

I really think there is a problem around here.

When a member of FPC, Hunsrueck, is himself writing insulting stuff on the forum ...

viewtopic.php?f=14&p=83088&sid=151d2d24 ... 79f#p83088

To me, FPC recently lost lots of credibility (reminder : way decisions are made, penalties given and their ''value''), but seing this now, maybe others can see there is something wrong going here.

moah ol you damn pussy...do you still don't get it, that you insulted him a while ago? maybe not with one direct word, but with your way to talk to him...just shut the fuck up about his races, since you don't program them anyway...the reason for the last crap between him and you

edit: he talked a bit directly...but in no way insulting...if you can't stand such sentences, maybe you should put yourself in a locker and don't go into public at all

Just shut up king of the designer and take care on your own crap

If anyone of opinion is this is an insult, please open a fp-thread.

Perhaps the king of the designer could just leave me in peace and all is ok.

this is the wrong thread anyway...