Remove Decks From TWDA

How I can request to remove my decks from TWDA list? Fernando Cesar - Sydnelson LackeyCCG and OCTGN VtES Mantainer Prince of Rio de Janeiro Powerbase Rio de Janeiro

why would you? Lurking in the underground of Bologna, Italy

> thelonius wrote: > why would you? > I just want to keep my decks private. Fernando Cesar - Sydnelson LackeyCCG and OCTGN VtES Mantainer Prince of Rio de Janeiro Powerbase Rio de Janeiro

You do not want to be(come) a member of the Hall of Fame? And why exactly do you wish to hide your decks? National Coordinator Germany nc [dot] germany [at] magenta [dot] de

If the deck were made public, I see no reason not to add them to the TWDA. Prince of Paris, France Ratings Coordinator, Rules Director

> Hakuron wrote: > You do not want to be(come) a member of the Hall of Fame? And why exactly do you wish to hide your decks? > Simple, I don't want other players copying my decks. Last week a player call me on Whatsapp saying that like my deck, want to use it and also ask me how it works. I thought that was a great thing, the guy is going to copy my deck and still wants me to teach him how to use it. This is not first time that happens. And I don't care to Hall of Fame, I prefer to live in anonymity. > Ankha wrote: > If the deck were made public, I see no reason not to add them to the TWDA. > But if the owner of deck dont' want to share that information and request, it can be removed from there? Fernando Cesar - Sydnelson LackeyCCG and OCTGN VtES Mantainer Prince of Rio de Janeiro Powerbase Rio de Janeiro

@Sydnelson Don't worry, I have backed up all of your decks.

> ResurrectioN wrote: > @Sydnelson > > Don't worry, I have backed up all of your decks. > They are few and not too strong, but I just want to keep it to me. Fernando Cesar - Sydnelson LackeyCCG and OCTGN VtES Mantainer Prince of Rio de Janeiro Powerbase Rio de Janeiro

This is a fair demand, and to me it should be made possible to omit decks when the player asks that. EU and GDPR and all that jazz, really. "Oh, to the Hades with the manners! He's a complete bastard, and calling him that insults bastards everywhere!" -Nalia De-Arnise garourimgazette.wordpress.com/ www.vekn.net/forum-guidelines

Perhaps, the decks shouldn't have been publicly-posted to the TWD thread. One could say that by taking the active step to post these decks and making them public in this forum that you complied with the terms of having them put in the TWDA, which has no removal clause.

> kschaefer wrote: > Perhaps, the decks shouldn't have been publicly-posted to the TWD thread. One could say that by taking the active step to post these decks and making them public in this forum that you complied with the terms of having them put in the TWDA, which has no removal clause. > But sometimes event organizers post the deck lists here without ask to deck owner permission. And by the way, I like TWDA initiative, is a good place to take some new ideias and complete decks. But I think is good if deck owners can ask for removal if they want. Fernando Cesar - Sydnelson LackeyCCG and OCTGN VtES Mantainer Prince of Rio de Janeiro Powerbase Rio de Janeiro

> Sydnelson wrote: > But sometimes event organizers post the deck lists here without ask to deck owner permission. > Such as in www.vekn.net/forum/event-reports-and-twd/74009-twd-cariocao-2015-rj-brazil ? If you don't want further decks in the TWD, that's fine - tell the organisers not to publish them. But asking for decks to be removed after being public for several years doesn't seem particulatly productive, especially as the decks are published in multiple places - they're in the WD forum posts, where mirrored in the secret library and so forth. -- National Coordinator South Africa

> drnlmza wrote: > > > Sydnelson wrote: > > But sometimes event organizers post the deck lists here without ask to deck owner permission. > > > Such as in www.vekn.net/forum/event-reports-and-twd/74009-twd-cariocao-2015-rj-brazil ? > > If you don't want further decks in the TWD, that's fine - tell the organisers not to publish them. > > But asking for decks to be removed after being public for several years doesn't seem particulatly productive, especially as the decks are published in multiple places - they're in the WD forum posts, where mirrored in the secret library and so forth. > Yes I know, when the deck was publish in internet is impossible to track how many time it is shared. But a place like TWDA is easy to find it. Again I'm not complaining about TWDA, I like that. I just ask if is possible to request a remove decks from there if owner wants. Fernando Cesar - Sydnelson LackeyCCG and OCTGN VtES Mantainer Prince of Rio de Janeiro Powerbase Rio de Janeiro

I would like some help understanding something: if someone asks to have their decks removed from the TWDA, why is the answer not simply "yes, that is fine"? There's probably a good reason, but I don't know what that reason is. Just curious.

> Kraus wrote: > This is a fair demand, and to me it should be made possible to omit decks when the player asks that. > > EU and GDPR and all that jazz, really. > GDPR deals mostly with the personal data gdpr-info.eu/art-4-gdpr/ , unless things have changed. VTES card lists are not considered to be personal data due to definition what personal data is for GDPR and therefore they are not subject to the article 17. gdpr-info.eu/art-17-gdpr/ If the person is claiming they have certain immaterial rights to a decklist, this is not the way to do it in the first place as intellectual property based on work of another intellectual property is, well, interesting quaqmire. What's more 3.d of the above linked article 17 protects historical archives even with personal data, provided the data is in public interest as it has to be weighted against the personal interest (of the requester). Whether or not collecting and hosting a few decades old archive that has served how many searches and people globally fits that definition is up to the possible courts if someone wants to push request for article 17 for their personal data and gets refusal to it and decides to raise it in court. However the person's name, location etc. either directly or indirectly is clear personal data and I would argue removal of those by request from VEKN due to TWDA related forum posts is not " likely to render impossible or seriously impair the achievement of the objectives of that processing". After all it's Tournament Winning Deck Archive not Tournament Winners and their Decks Archive. So the easiest solution in accordance with GDPR article 17 request with concent withdrawal I would take is to keep the decks we're now discussing about but remove the personal data associated with it while maintaining non-personal data that's required for the archive. If there's commentary/text associated with it that points to the name and/or contact information it can be handled the same. Here it's matter of contacting administrators directly, on other sites it's the same and they can see things very differently from these viewpoints. Naturally that GDPR request also means clearing the VEKN ID as well as it's easy to cross reference VEKN tournament and dates or even position in TWDA by cross referencing what comes before it and after to VEKN event and therefore id, giving one a name and other information in the prince list (in this case). GPDR article 17 request should ensure those are cleared as well unless VEKN member id list somehow fits to exception and the registry keeper wants to deny that request. Same goes for other identifying information possible inserted like location, signature, contact information etc. Clearing VEKN ID of personal data shouldn't be a obstacle if the wish for privacy is genuine as being a prince and maintaining personal privacy are at odds due to the way princes should act as VEKN contacts on their area. Some people might have contacted you because you advertise in your signature and being in the VEKN prince list that you are volunteer who promotes and arranges demos, it's not too big leap for logic to assume you like the game and wish to help people with it, aka talk about your decks. As that position is completely voluntary stepping down from it is matter of personal choice and I feel VEKN as membership organisation should honor such requests when they happen to maintain the spirit of "continued health of V:TES". It should ensure personal data related to VEKN has been removed and in the player registry/event calendar your ID entry just remains as placeholder to ensure the tables work. Without personal data it cannot be backtracked to you via this site, however getting other possible sources to match is irrelevant to be talked here as it's up to each provider to determine how they handle Article 17 requests. I'm sure if the administrators honor the article 17 requests they do it fully and contact third parties they've granted your personal data to and inform them of such request. With new VEKN ID it's up to you to say to tournament officials you do not wish for them to take a look at your deck in fear of them memorizing it in case they post it without permission along with your name. And depending on how much you respect other players, you might wish to step down from final table seating in favor of someone else to minimize the possibility that you win and are asked to provide the decklist for TWDA as the event organizer has to report in certain form that is shown in the stickies. Now for requests that are not immaterial rights covered or handle personal rights, well, contacting administrators directly and hoping they are favorable is your best bet. After all we live in a world where you either have rights to something or you don't, and without rights you need to hope the person receiving request is favorable to you. > TwoRazorReign wrote: > I would like some help understanding something: if someone asks to have their decks removed from the TWDA, why is the answer not simply "yes, that is fine"? There's probably a good reason, but I don't know what that reason is. Just curious. > It's a moral conundrum on whether or not and what kind of information can/should/should not be forgotten. Some argue everything has to be maintained in archive form, be it drivers licence, birth records, shopping lists, keycard usage etc etc as in time those become historical records of our time (compared to the historical records we use now to understand the past) and are way for future generations to interpret our time. Choosing what to store is like burning unwanted books and to them China's social security credit is just one step towards a society where everything is recorded and maintained (to big brother watches fan this should show the absurdity). Some people argue nothing should be maintained, privacy tops everything and even people like Hitler (playing the Hitler card here to point the absurdity on other end) have right to be forgotten with their records erased from history. And in the middle is myriad of various opinions on who should be stored (public figures okay, every citizen no), how recent data (days, months, years, decades for say Police camera data captured on their person) and what subject (shopping details for advertisement, scientific thesis, VTES winning deck lists.) Some people believe person owns everything they create and should have absolute control on it, others don't, and then there's the inbetween. Usually people who maintain archives are more pro-archive then not, as if they weren't, they would not spend the time and effert to keep it in the first place. That's why I can perfectly understand Ankha's earlier reply as keeping the archive whole has value in itself and if something is removed from it the can of worms of "what deserves to be taken off and for what reason" is opened. As long as that's not the case and the can stays closed, people understand what it is, what it does and what it contains going forward. I'm personally very pro privacy right where individual can determine their data during their lifetime, hence I listed how using article 17 above can work in this. But I also know some people rightly claim archives without personal information are exempt and hence the easiest solution is to work with personal data, as opposed with the possibly that deck lists are intellectual property, possibly not. It's however up to Sydnelson how they want to aproach it with the administrators of the sites who in turn have their own moral viewpoints on the subject. Somewhere there a agreement is either found or disagreement is achieved, I recommend GDPR article 17 as that has been agreed on societal level already and enables all sides to understand how to go forward and with what consequences if there's no agreement on whether or not it applies here. Trust in Jan Pieterzoon.

> Kilrauko wrote: > > > TwoRazorReign wrote: > > I would like some help understanding something: if someone asks to have their decks removed from the TWDA, why is the answer not simply "yes, that is fine"? There's probably a good reason, but I don't know what that reason is. Just curious. > > > It's a moral conundrum on whether or not and what kind of information can/should/should not be forgotten. Some argue everything has to be maintained in archive form, be it drivers licence, birth records, shopping lists, keycard usage etc etc as in time those become historical records of our time (compared to the historical records we use now to understand the past) and are way for future generations to interpret our time. Choosing what to store is like burning unwanted books and to them China's social security credit is just one step towards a society where everything is recorded and maintained (to big brother watches fan this should show the absurdity). Some people argue nothing should be maintained, privacy tops everything and even people like Hitler (playing the Hitler card here to point the absurdity on other end) have right to be forgotten with their records erased from history. And in the middle is myriad of various opinions on who should be stored (public figures okay, every citizen no), how recent data (days, months, years, decades for say Police camera data captured on their person) and what subject (shopping details for advertisement, scientific thesis, VTES winning deck lists.) Some people believe person owns everything they create and should have absolute control on it, others don't, and then there's the inbetween. Usually people who maintain archives are more pro-archive then not, as if they weren't, they would not spend the time and effert to keep it in the first place. > > That's why I can perfectly understand Ankha's earlier reply as keeping the archive whole has value in itself and if something is removed from it the can of worms of "what deserves to be taken off and for what reason" is opened. As long as that's not the case and the can stays closed, people understand what it is, what it does and what it contains going forward. > Sorry, but I just don't agree that the situation here presents a moral conundrum akin to those you stated above. If the reason to not allow a VEKN member (and fellow player) to have their deck lists removed from an archive is that it could create a bunch of ethical issues for VEKN regarding curation of that archive and potentially devalue the archive, I would think that the VEKN should probably get over it (and themselves) really fast. It's a card game about vampires. Just let the player remove their decks for any reason they wish. Seems like common sense, but am waiting to hear a good reason to not allow it (there still may be one).

> TwoRazorReign wrote: > Sorry, but I just don't agree that the situation here presents a moral conundrum akin to those you stated above. If the reason to not allow a VEKN member (and fellow player) to have their deck lists removed from an archive is that it could create a bunch of ethical issues for VEKN regarding curation of that archive and potentially devalue the archive, I would think that the VEKN should probably get over it (and themselves) really fast. > > It's a card game about vampires. > This argument doesn't work, since it cuts both ways. If it's just a card game about vampires (presumably something you're citing to indicate that this conundrum or pseudo-conundrum is of no real consequence to anyone), it's just as easy to argue that people requesting removal of their decklists from the archive should probably get over it (and themselves) really fast.

One of the very strengths of TWDA is the fact that it is more or less complete. Thus it is an immense resource and of enormous value to players thus helping the community. Also it gives insights on the (past) trends and the more it has holes, the less useful it becomes. Do we really need to start adding a "by participating in the tournament you agree to have your decklist shared until eternity" -clause to the tournaments? Fernando, I implore you not to go this route and start a very harmful trend for the game and the community, mate! Finnish Politics!

> Lönkka wrote: > One of the very strengths of TWDA is the fact that it is more or less complete. > > Thus it is an immense resource and of enormous value to players thus helping the community. > > Also it gives insights on the (past) trends and the more it has holes, the less useful it becomes. > > Do we really need to start adding a "by participating in the tournament you agree to have your decklist shared until eternity" -clause to the tournaments? > > Fernando, I implore you not to go this route and start a very harmful trend for the game and the community, mate! > I just asked a question. I expected an answer like: Just speak your name and I will remove you from that list OR it is not possible to remove the names from there. Did not expect a discussion with dozens of posts. Fernando Cesar - Sydnelson LackeyCCG and OCTGN VtES Mantainer Prince of Rio de Janeiro Powerbase Rio de Janeiro

> Lönkka wrote: > Do we really need to start adding a "by participating in the tournament you agree to have your decklist shared until eternity" -clause to the tournaments? > That clause already exists there, VEKN tournament rules that participants agree to by taking part has the following; "1.6. Publishing Event Information White Wolf, Inc. reserves the right to publish event information such as the contents of any player's deck as well as transcripts or video reproductions of any sanctioned tournament. The tournament organizer is also permitted to publish event information." Deck contents are event information and the tournament organizer is permitted to publish event information. If people disagree with that they're free to either not take part in said event or not grant it to tournament organizers and get the response one receives when not agreeing with tournament organizer on their rule admitted right. Then again I know how hard it is to remember tournament rules, lord knows I broke the Spectator responsibility last time. It was moot situation that judge would have corrected but still I broke the conduct by saying stuff out loud instead pointing it to judge. Stuff happens, memory fails and bad choices are made. I can see how people might assume their deck lists are their own private knowledge even when taking part to a event they allow it to become public information. Even if they won't win. This is also why I feel we should put it to rules to require written decklist to be handed when taking part in a tourney as that would then be handed to organizer after the players "end their tournament". Organizer can then publish their choice of interesting or noteworthy decks for everyone to enjoy and ponder upon more easily without need to call after players (required vs. requested). The Grant to publish clause is already there, so the only difference to current is possible sanctions if that napkin deck list is not written by the time player ends their tournament. It could even be a caution level sanction if there's fear of people losing positions over napkin with writing on it. The Current format of winning deck only and perhaps few others if the player can be reached and/or remembers what their deck was is, well, lackluster. If it means printing a decklist that then might get last minute modifications with red pen, fine, if it's writing to a napkin during the event so be it but in the long distance it would serve the community to see what people play, new players would see examples, older players the overall trends in the tournaments. None of that is privacy concern as personal data is not published, the only losers in the situation are large tournament preppers who might hone their decks in smaller tournaments months earlier and get it published "too early." Despite them agreeing via participation that it's okay to publish. > Sydnelson wrote: > I just asked a question. > > I expected an answer like: > Just speak your name and I will remove you from that list OR it is not possible to remove the names from there. > > Did not expect a discussion with dozens of posts. > That is the result of public forum and multiple differing stances on how records and privacy should be handled in 2020. Along with the fact that decades have passed since deck archive started and customs along with common sense has changed with the time. Hence I pointed towards www.vekn.net/site-administrators who are only ones with power and authority to handle VEKN site related things. Ankha (Administrator) already gave you one short answer. If you wish to try your luck for different one contacting Web Coordinator directly you could get that answer. But Fishing for a favorable resolution from different person on the same organization might give certain impression that affects the resolution on non legally binding matter. Note that Ankha in my opinion commented on the decklist, not personal data as the topic of the thread and question in the OP is about removal of decks, not name. So the comment on speaking a name to get it removed or not is not really what this thread started and it's unfair to associate removing a decklist to be equal of removing a name. Name has legislation, treaties and regulation around it (if it's your real legal name), decklist might or might not be intellectual property depending how and what legislation is used and interpreted not to mention giving a rise of a question who came up with it first vs who reached TWDA win with it first. If you wish to ensure your privacy in a fashion that cannot be denied without specific reasons I did point out the GDPR article 17 route for personal data that I'm quite sure will be granted considering how the site resides in France and follows EU regulation and the archive is not primarly about persons. It won't get the decklists associated with those tournament wins off the site but it will get rid of your association with them and there's really not much more that can be done to prevent people from contacting you and asking how they work. But you need to be one making that kind of request via email or other direct contact form, this here is just discussion around the subject matter in "what if" format. After all there's a stark difference between a question on a forum about a decklist and a legally binding request for personal data that might be backed up with Commission Nationale de l'Informatique et des Libertés in this case. I highly recommend you give it a overnight ponder on what it actually means to request and have all your personal data removed from VEKN unless you've already done that and are adamant about it. You have soon two decades worth of VEKN history and erasing that to get rid of people contacting you over decks sounds like shooting flies with a cannon when simple flyswat copypaste "Sorry, no I won't." would suffice. Naturally your viewpoint is the only one that matters regarding your personal situation. Reading gdpr.eu/right-to-be-forgotten/ should help on the questions along with a sample template (the pdf is 404 but below it is example text version of what can aid and be requested). Same is true for other non vekn.net sites that might have the personal data you wish to have erased. The Sidebar Hall of Fame and Tournament Winning Decks after all hotlink to site that's not under vekn.net. If you wish to cherry pick on what gets removed and what not, well it's a matter to discuss in direct contact as with most things case by case solutions tend to work the best. Ankha in my opinion gave a viewpoint on decklist cherrypicking already. Either way as the "without undue delay" has been legally considered to mean aprox a month, giving it one night sleep worth of a ponder is sensible. Trust in Jan Pieterzoon.

> Sydnelson wrote: > Did not expect a discussion with dozens of posts. > Hardly dozens. This post of mine will be the 21st post on this thread Finnish Politics!

> Kilrauko wrote: > > > Lönkka wrote: > > Do we really need to start adding a "by participating in the tournament you agree to have your decklist shared until eternity" -clause to the tournaments? > > > That clause already exists there, VEKN tournament rules that participants agree to by taking part has the following; > > "1.6. Publishing Event Information > > White Wolf, Inc. reserves the right to publish event information such as the contents of any player's deck as well as transcripts or video reproductions of any sanctioned tournament. The tournament organizer is also permitted to publish event information." > Err, it may be worth someone correcting that to someone relevant, like BCP or Paradox. (And, indeed, the half dozen other references to White Wolf.)

I think a good solution is to remove the player information from TWDA instead of the Deck list. That way the information that is pertinent for the meta is kept in the list and the private information are hide. Archbishop of Itaocara Prince ID #510

> Lönkka wrote: > Do we really need to start adding a "by participating in the tournament you agree to have your decklist shared until eternity" -clause to the tournaments? > That's beside the point. Just because someone reserves the right to do something doesn't mean that they have to always do it. > Fernando, I implore you not to go this route and start a very harmful trend for the game and the community, mate! > I just don't agree that this is setting a harmful trend. The TWDA is still a very valuable resource regardless of whether some players request to have their decks removed. > Kushiel wrote: > > > TwoRazorReign wrote: > > Sorry, but I just don't agree that the situation here presents a moral conundrum akin to those you stated above. If the reason to not allow a VEKN member (and fellow player) to have their deck lists removed from an archive is that it could create a bunch of ethical issues for VEKN regarding curation of that archive and potentially devalue the archive, I would think that the VEKN should probably get over it (and themselves) really fast. > > > > It's a card game about vampires. > > > This argument doesn't work, since it cuts both ways. If it's just a card game about vampires (presumably something you're citing to indicate that this conundrum or pseudo-conundrum is of no real consequence to anyone), it's just as easy to argue that people requesting removal of their decklists from the archive should probably get over it (and themselves) really fast. > I actually agree with you. I would argue that everybody here needs to realize this is a stupid game about vampires, the original poster included. And especially those who think someone requesting what the original poster is requesting constitutes a "conundrum" or "pseudo-conundrum."

I'd like to point out the obvious that you don't need to use your real name for tournaments or your vekn #. Make up a pen name. Your dek list should be submitted if you win. I'm a believer that lists should be handed in anyways so the TO can spot check deck contents and card limits.

I have won a number of events and have submitted zero deck lists through the years. I think creativity is the most important part of these games and is solidly snuffed out by net decking. Not sure who cares if stealth bleed or mma won another event at this point anyway...

There is net decking in every and any game you can think of. If it gets people into a game who can't find the time to put decks together, I'm all for it. Sadly, from what I can tell, the creativity of a deck doesn't matter at all. It's all about a winning deck. If there was a reward for "best creative deck design", that would be cool.

> TwoRazorReign wrote: > I actually agree with you. I would argue that everybody here needs to realize this is a stupid game about vampires, the original poster included. And especially those who think someone requesting what the original poster is requesting constitutes a "conundrum" or "pseudo-conundrum." > I have a thousand word reply, that I planned to post after a sleep to ensure it's has as neutral tone as possible, where I pull apart what I've said earlier on this thread related to the conundrum. Before I post it to weight the thread further I feel the need to ask are you implying that I think "someone requesting what the original poster is requesting constitutes a "conundrum" or "pseudo-conundrum.""? Because if you are, I need to clarify that I'm not thinking that way and try to explain better what I mean with "It's a moral conundrum on whether or not and what kind of information can/should/should not be forgotten." and what comes after it. If you are not, there's no need to copypaste that wall-o-text that includes stuff like www.ica.org/sites/default/files/20190510_ica_declarationuniverselle_en-print_0.pdf . Sure it's all related to the topic because a concept of what is archive and how diffferent viewpoints and morals handle that is related to the added conversation. But on the other hand this all started from one sentence question and I feel like I've added too much rambling text and weight to it already. Especially if it's all because I misunderstood your intent. Trust in Jan Pieterzoon.

> Mewcat wrote: > Not sure who cares if stealth bleed or mma won another event at this point anyway... > I do. It's important for determining what is potentially broken and skewed data results help to prove that, but the results are only as valid as the backing data is robust. I, for one, would like to know the winning deck list and the other deck types at the finals.

Simple questions often breed large engaged debates.

> Lönkka wrote: > One of the very strengths of TWDA is the fact that it is more or less complete. > > Thus it is an immense resource and of enormous value to players thus helping the community. > > Also it gives insights on the (past) trends and the more it has holes, the less useful it becomes. > > Do we really need to start adding a "by participating in the tournament you agree to have your decklist shared until eternity" -clause to the tournaments? > > Fernando, I implore you not to go this route and start a very harmful trend for the game and the community, mate! > Again I just ask a simply thing and expect a simply answer like YES or NO. If my question will cause too much trouble I request to moderators to close and delete this thread. Fernando Cesar - Sydnelson LackeyCCG and OCTGN VtES Mantainer Prince of Rio de Janeiro Powerbase Rio de Janeiro

> Sydnelson wrote: > Again I just ask a simply thing and expect a simply answer like YES or NO. > Simple answer is: no, TWD are not removed for convenience. Prince of Paris, France Ratings Coordinator, Rules Director

> Ankha wrote: > > > Sydnelson wrote: > > Again I just ask a simply thing and expect a simply answer like YES or NO. > > > Simple answer is: no, TWD are not removed for convenience. > Thank you. Please close the threat and let's finish this. Fernando Cesar - Sydnelson LackeyCCG and OCTGN VtES Mantainer Prince of Rio de Janeiro Powerbase Rio de Janeiro

> Sydnelson wrote: > > > Ankha wrote: > > > > > Sydnelson wrote: > > > Again I just ask a simply thing and expect a simply answer like YES or NO. > > > > > Simple answer is: no, TWD are not removed for convenience. > > > Thank you. > > Please close the threat and let's finish this. > Why ? I found it interesting to read it. Don't be selfish. Sabbat.Black Hand Shakar: Lech loathe ranged weapons. Once each action, he may burn 1 blood to become Camarilla Prince of Krakow until the end of the action.

> Lech wrote: > > > Sydnelson wrote: > > > > > Ankha wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sydnelson wrote: > > > > Again I just ask a simply thing and expect a simply answer like YES or NO. > > > > > > > Simple answer is: no, TWD are not removed for convenience. > > > > > > > > Thank you. > > > > Please close the threat and let's finish this. > > > Why ? I found it interesting to read it. Don't be selfish. > I'm not selfish, I just don't want this discussion lead to the end of TWDA or something like that. Fernando Cesar - Sydnelson LackeyCCG and OCTGN VtES Mantainer Prince of Rio de Janeiro Powerbase Rio de Janeiro

> kschaefer wrote: > > > Mewcat wrote: > > Not sure who cares if stealth bleed or mma won another event at this point anyway... > > > I do. It's important for determining what is potentially broken and skewed data results help to prove that, but the results are only as valid as the backing data is robust. > > I, for one, would like to know the winning deck list and the other deck types at the finals. > First, and most importantly, your beard is pro level. Second, without any pre established criteria to evaluate the data it becomes nothing more than an opinion on what is problematic.

> Sydnelson wrote: > I'm not selfish, I just don't want this discussion lead to the end of TWDA or something like that. > There's little fear for that as for something to end it requires people maintaining and taking part of it to lose their motivation. Or someone actually finding a judge willing to grant that a decklist is intellectual property and then applying it globally. Considering how the TWDA has survived the "end of printing" along with (I think) three main archivist changes by now, it's proven to be quite robust in it's current format. Even if majority of the current playerbase agreed to claim that it's useless and should be removed, it wouldn't prevent further work made on gathering that information as it's volunteer work, only restrict the amount of it gathered as people would protest the tournament deck publication rules. It would look more like the early years but still provide insight on what decks won. I'm sure there were arguments decades or centuries ago whether or not storing information noted down by Gioachino Greco in crude form had any value. Yet it was maintained there and over the years built up to be of use outside the hobby. Netdecking argument has it's roots in the way people used to share chess openings via snail-mail before internet and how that was seen by some as a "cheap" way as opposed to being a true and self-creating everything from scratch. While not everyone agrees, I'm sure the people taking part in the archival process can extrapolate positive future based on how other similar hobby archives have been created in the history. What's more TWDA provides constant service by inspiring and giving ideas to people using it right now, so we don't even need to believe in some possible future use as motivation. It's just added bonus. The World at large is moving slowly towards accepting the value of archives and it can be more easily argued nowadays that even the hobby archives have meaning beyond what can be easily observed now thanks to the way chess game archives paved the way for artificial intelligence study and early research. Later Go developments along with others are just continuation and that would be quite different if there was no large archives that help programs teach programs. As more and more "important real life" applications become possible and our future is where programs find working antibiotics along with other things it's important to remember what were the early steps in the ladder. Or not and just choose not to partake in it. Personal freedom and personal rights still exist after all. Trust in Jan Pieterzoon.

> Mewcat wrote: > I have won a number of events and have submitted zero deck lists through the years. I think creativity is the most important part of these games and is solidly snuffed out by net decking. > Time before decklists were readily available mostly contained a multitude of bad or very bad decks. Because of the availability of tested tournament winning decks (etc) the level of people's decks and play got better. This effect is still valid. It would be folly to undermine it. Not needing to have everybody trying to reinvent the wheel is a good thing. Especially for the new players! Not submitting a winning decklist can easily be changed. For example by requiring all finalist to hand over a decklist before the finalists. Or even all attendees. Or by disqualifying anyone because of unsportsmanlike behavior because refusing to share the decklist with the judge before the finals. You zee Herr Mewkatze, iff need be, we haff ways und means zu make you divulge informazion! Finnish Politics!

Or you could do what you want and I could also. No need to force conformity.

We all conform to a system of rules to come together to play any game.

> Arthur wrote: > We all conform to a system of rules to come together to play any game. > Clearly a false equivalence. Following card rulings makes the game functional. Reporting decklists does not.

There are more than card rulings that must be obeyed for a gaming community to function.

Answer has been given, please create another thread if you have something else to say on a different topic, thank you. Prince of Paris, France Ratings Coordinator, Rules Director