So I said:

It is a fact that players should want to win or lose their game played by the rules

And then Timathius said:

Literally none of those are facts.

... and that's the disconnect. Some folks do not accept it as factual that "players should want to win or lose their game played by the rules."

.

Oh I agree that most people want to, including myself. But calling it a fact that everyone does is disingenuous and wrong.

The real problem is that you think that you know better than everyone else how the game should be played. You also believe that every spectator somehow knows the rules well enough to judge/ interrupt a game. FFG and the majority of people in this thread understand that most people DON'T know the rules well enough to interject and change the game.

I'm well aware of the rules as they exist. In fact, I keep saying things like "the current spectator gag-rule," trying to make that clear for any folks who may not be reading with the strongest comprehension.

Please feel free to hit the Report button. I've been nothing but polite, and I haven't called anybody a cheater in any form.

Oh I agree that most people want to, including myself. But calling it a fact that everyone does is disingenuous and wrong.

What I actually said is that "everybody should want that." Do you disagree that everybody should want to win or lose their games without breaking rules?

Pointless discussion. The rules are the rules.

of course, in my OPINION everyone should want to win honestly. However, you stated it as a FACT that everyone should. You seem to not understand the difference between your OPINION and a FACT. I honestly feel sorry for you.

Pointless discussion. The rules are the rules.

Yeah, that's exactly the same thing everybody said a year or more ago when I argued -- and look it up, against a lot of the same people! -- that the "red-while-stressed" rule was a bad rule and should be changed to "2-straight-mandatory."

It's definitely impossible to get bad rules changed for the better. Dunno what I was thinking.

And, again, there's the disconnect: I say it's fact that everybody should want to win or lose their X-Wing games based on playing by the rules, and I'm told that's only opinion. Apparently, somewhere out there are people who should want to win or lose their games of X-Wing based on breaking the rules.

It does explain a lot.

Jeff, here are the kinds of things that happen when spectators are allowed to intervene:

1) A player goes 3-straight with a TIE Defender and collides with an enemy ship. The player places an evade token on the TIE Defender. A spectator tells them they should not be able to place the evade token because they lose their action. The player informs the spectator that he his wrong because the x7 title places a token, rather than allowing a free evade action. The spectator continues to disagree, saying that it doesn't matter whether it comes from an action or not because tokens are actions. The spectator is clearly wrong in this case and has unjustifiable interrupted a game that was proceeding perfectly well.

2) A player goes 3-straight with a TIE Defender and does not place the evade token because he or she is in the heat of battle and really tense and just forgot to place it. A spectator jumps in and says, "You need to place that evade token." The opponent, quite appalled at the blatant judging, interjects and says that no, the evade token should not be placed. The spectator, thinking the evade token is mandatory, continues to insist that the evade token must be placed. The opponent, knowing that the evade token is optional, insists that it is not mandatory and the token should not be placed and it was a missed opportunity. The player then points out that no actions have taken place since the maneuver, and therefore it is not a missed opportunity and so the player places an evade token on their TIE Defender. You now have a situation with unintentional coaching because of a well-intended but misinformed rules clarification.

3) In a world where talk is acceptable by spectators, how do you expect spectators to know what is and isn't okay to say when currently they don't even know that the rules are to keep quiet? How are you going to get the message out to every individual that you can comment on rules but not on strategy? Are you going to say it at the start of each tournament? That seems like a good solution, except that it's apparent that this isn't even happening for the current rule. So you're going to see Spectator B walk up to Spectator A and say, "How come he didn't change that blank to an evade with Palpatine?" And Spectator A will say, "Palpatine is only once per round." And the player will realize they haven't used Palpatine yet and will decide to use it now because they were reminded by a spectator.

The list of hypothetical situations could go on and on. And I know that for each one of these sorts of examples, Jeff, you have examples of instances where it would be quick, easy, and painless for a spectator to straighten something out and the game moves on. But there are details that need to be worked out before you can open the game up to spectator talk. Currently, I strongly feel that more problems are avoided than are solved by the current ruling. You apparently feel the opposite. I'm not sure anything will change that at this point.

.

And, again, there's the disconnect: I say it's fact that everybody should want to win or lose their X-Wing games based on playing by the rules, and I'm told that's only opinion. Apparently, somewhere out there are people who should want to win or lose their games of X-Wing based on breaking the rules.

It does explain a lot.

For the record, I think the majority of people agree with you that most players should want to win their games by playing correctly. I think the first time you wrote that, you emphasized the "want" and your emphasis was missed, so people disagreed with you. Yes, absolutely everyone should want to win their games fairly, but we can't guarantee that everyone, in fact, does want to lose fairly more than they want to win unfairly. I think you're taking this part too far just because some people misunderstood you the first time. I don't think anyone here really thinks that there are players who should want to win their games unfairly.

If you disagree with Jeff and I on this point, please make it explicit because I think all of you who disagreed with his point weren't understanding his point.

Yup of course people should want to. Problem is when you label everyone with absolutes and call it a fact. At that point, your argument is impossible.

What would actually happen in those circumstances:

(1) "That's incorrect." From either player -- assuming both know the rules -- or a more knowledgeable spectator. "Please speak to a TO if you need to." And both players continue as if nothing occurred.

(2) "The evade token is not mandatory. Please speak to a TO if you need to." And both players continue as if nothing had occurred.

(3) Players already know that they shouldn't comment on strategy. If they do that, it has absolutely nothing to do with whether or not they are gagged from pointing out rules violations. Coaching and disruption is a separate issue, and should be appropriately handled by a TO.

My experience has been that the greatest single thing about having dedicated TOs in a tournament is that they are human beings with human judgment. We are playing a game ... and it is a game (even on VASSAL!) of imprecision. Of the need to exercise judgment.

A rule that allows -- encourages -- a TO, and players, to use good judgment is a feature, not a bug. In a game where imprecision is not only likely, but inevitable, bright-line, no-exceptions rules hurt the game, and the community. They don't help it.

I like discussions with you, Budgernaut, because you argue in an organized and logical fashion, and, frankly, I have some trust for you because of that.

So, while I don't know how long you've been playing X-Wing, let me ask you something:

Have you noticed the change in X-Wing that has been occurring -- and accelerating -- with the influx of players from more precise, less casual games, and the bright-line rules that FFG keeps trying to put into place as a result?

I've been playing since the beginning, and the change is stark . And the spectator gag-rule is just the latest one making it worse.

And, again, there's the disconnect: I say it's fact that everybody should want to win or lose their X-Wing games based on playing by the rules, and I'm told that's only opinion. Apparently, somewhere out there are people who should want to win or lose their games of X-Wing based on breaking the rules.

It does explain a lot.

Well, clearly there is a LOT of miscommunication going on, because that isn't what I'm saying.

What would actually happen in those circumstances:

(1) "That's incorrect." From either player -- assuming both know the rules -- or a more knowledgeable spectator. "Please speak to a TO if you need to." And both players continue as if nothing occurred.

(2) "The evade token is not mandatory. Please speak to a TO if you need to." And both players continue as if nothing had occurred.

(3) Players already know that they shouldn't comment on strategy. If they do that, it has absolutely nothing to do with whether or not they are gagged from pointing out rules violations. Coaching and disruption is a separate issue, and should be appropriately handled by a TO.

My experience has been that the greatest single thing about having dedicated TOs in a tournament is that they are human beings with human judgment. We are playing a game ... and it is a game (even on VASSAL!) of imprecision. Of the need to exercise judgment.

A rule that allows -- encourages -- a TO, and players, to use good judgment is a feature, not a bug. In a game where imprecision is not only likely, but inevitable, bright-line, no-exceptions rules hurt the game, and the community. They don't help it.

I like discussions with you, Budgernaut, because you argue in an organized and logical fashion, and, frankly, I have some trust for you because of that.

So, while I don't know how long you've been playing X-Wing, let me ask you something:

Have you noticed the change in X-Wing that has been occurring -- and accelerating -- with the influx of players from more precise, less casual games, and the bright-line rules that FFG keeps trying to put into place as a result?

I've been playing since the beginning, and the change is stark . And the spectator gag-rule is just the latest one making it worse.

I am done. Budgernauts examples were perfect illustrations of events that I have seen occur, in different circumstances, in multiple events at every level. If you really think your examples are how every person in the world interacts there is no reason to continue this discussion.

For example, we have told you multiple times you are incorrect and to consult the rules. But here you are, still arguing your point.

.

I like discussions with you, Budgernaut, because you argue in an organized and logical fashion, and, frankly, I have some trust for you because of that.

So, while I don't know how long you've been playing X-Wing, let me ask you something:

Have you noticed the change in X-Wing that has been occurring -- and accelerating -- with the influx of players from more precise, less casual games, and the bright-line rules that FFG keeps trying to put into place as a result?

I've been playing since the beginning, and the change is stark . And the spectator gag-rule is just the latest one making it worse.

You and I played in a Vassal league back during wave 1. I think we both took Y-wing Ion spam, but maybe that was a different player, so I know you and I have played before. (In fact, I think I still have you as a contact on Skype from that game.) So I was playing during wave 1, but stopped shortly after wave 2, though I still followed the game on and off. It wasn't until wave 6 that I came back into the game and found a local group where I could play consistently.

As to your question, over that time, I have seen the community change as more and more people came to the game. When it started, this was a game primarily for Star Wars fans. Now it is a popular, competitive game irrespective of its theme. Lots of people are coming from other games and expect more precision and I think we're getting more people who are willing to cheat to win (though that seems to be a very small percentage of X-Wing players).

As to the spectator gag rule, it doesn't feel new to me at all. I've always felt it was my responsibility to keep my mouth shut when observing someone else's game during a tournament. It just seemed intuitive to me that keeping quiet is good behavior. When I interrupted that Star Wars game, I opened my mouth knowing full-well that I was breaking an unspoken rule about interrupting players. I felt bad about it, even as I opened my mouth. The resulting tension was more than enough to convince me that my gut instinct to not get involved was correct and I that I really should have grabbed the TO (who was the only judge).

As for the technicality of rules, Star Wars: The Card Game (which was my main game a few years ago) has many intricate rules details. You can't play that game with a casual attitude because you run into sticky timing issues very quickly. That game taught me the importance of following procedure and that if everyone follows the rules (game rules and tournament rules), everyone is much more likely to be happy.

Stop rewind, I've had people at both regionals and worlds not know that you can't pre measure or measure from multiple ships during combat. So this is far from being unrealistic. Also, player B in the example DOES tell the TO, but sadly the TO doesn't see the problem. Thus no evidence. But see as is, you are now blaming B because he didn't tell the players after the game, what if he forgot or had to use the restroom in between rounds? And since people here saying he hlcant interrupt the game because he is a spectator. Thus making him unable to.

Also I included a real life example of something that happened in a tournament.

Stop rewind, I've had people at both regionals and worlds not know that you can't pre measure or measure from multiple ships during combat.

Then they don't meet the stated requirements for those tournaments: having a solid understanding of the rules. Regionals and Worlds aren't teaching events: if you go to them not knowing how to play the game to a high standard then you have nobody to blame but yourself.

There is a rules test prerequisite to play in major tournaments. Random spectator isn't necessarily qualified to be a judge.

It is not always clear for me what is allowed when you ard a spectator during a tournament game. You should of course not give tips or remind someone when for example he has forgotten to focus. But am I allowed to interupt when a rule is broken? Or do I have to stay still and hope a judge is there seeing that?

I know some guys who mean that you have to absolutely be passive no matter what.

I don't think this would be the right thing.

Opinions?

You are a spectator not a player. For the same reason you can't interfere with a missed rules violation at a football game you can't here. Attempting to involve yourself is rude, get a TO if you think it was bad enough.

You are a spectator not a player. For the same reason you can't interfere with a missed rules violation at a football game you can't here. Attempting to involve yourself is rude, get a TO if you think it was bad enough.

Once again, are you claiming here that spectators at a sporting event cannot bring rules violations to the attention of the players and the referees?

Have you ever even been to a football game?

There are questions, of course. Like, "What are the reasons for someone to be so adamantly in favor of the spectator gag-rule, given these facts?"

I've been nothing but polite, and I haven't called anybody a cheater in any form.

I'm pretty sure that you were suggesting that people who want gag-spectator rules are doing it because they want to gain unfair advantage in the game, ie. cheat.

So you have actually suggested that all of the people in this forum (besides you and a couple more lost souls) are cheaters..

I'm sorry, but I don't -- and shouldn't -- have any control over how you feel, from your perspective, about my questions.

I'd suggest that where my questions lead you might be a good place to start for some kind of self-inventory, but I'd be doing so in full knowledge that I'm not a clergyman, counselor, or therapist, so I won't suggest that.

Yup of course people should want to.

Don't look now, but you just stated a fact!

You are a spectator not a player. For the same reason you can't interfere with a missed rules violation at a football game you can't here. Attempting to involve yourself is rude, get a TO if you think it was bad enough.

Once again, are you claiming here that spectators at a sporting event cannot bring rules violations to the attention of the players and the referees?

Have you ever even been to a football game?

Are you referring to the unintelligible screaming from the stands? Even if you could make sense of it it's hardly a goldmine of unbiased expert judgement.