The newly constituted group playing at Herrill Lanes, a combination of portions of two teams
that formerly played Showdown and Showdown tournaments at Mad River and Houlihans,
requests inclusion in the Sandbag Tournament. This group has initiated a novel method of
playing, which is described in the Scaratings post "Say "Hello" to Hybrid Showdown." I have
described why we believe our method of playing is an acceptable method of play in "Can Hybrid
Showdown play well with others?"
We believe that if our request is denied, the reason for the denial would be due to this rule:
"From its inception, this Showdown tournament has been by, of, and for those teams dedicated
to wetware play. Thus, the main qualification for entering this tournament is that teams must be
those that have committed themselves to use assembled brainpower only as a general rule. This
means no computers and no references of any kind during gameplay, either paper or electronic
(or telecommunication from outside the location). This also means no using of electronic devices
such as iPhones, iPads, Android, etc., devices to look up or receive answers from elsewhere. Just
to be clear, if a team engages in these activities or any form of cheating, it is a disqualifying offense."We do not believe this style of play constitutes cheating in any generally accepted definition of the word
and there is no objective reason for disallowing this form of play on the grounds of fair competition. We
have reviewed the history of this rule and have found no incident or historical reason for the revision of this
rule beginning in 2011. (A full discussion is found in "A History of A Rule" below). Given this along with the
disastrous decline in locations, allowing alternative means of play creates the opportunity to increase competition
from those geographically disabled by the enormous drop in Buzztime locations, which include not only us but
the DC/N.Va team, past winners of more than a few Showdown tournaments.
Should you decide to deny our request, please answer the following questions:
1) Prior to McCarthy 2011, there were no rules specifically disallowing answers from outside sources, probably
because there was no effective way to do so at the time. Nonetheless, you wrote specific rules against them.
What incident(s) led you to do so? If there were no incidents, then what was the need that led you to write
them? Why did you not explain the need for the new rules or invite discussion of them? Since 2011, have there
been any incidents that have called your rule into play before us?
2) The various versions of your rule express the principle that getting an answer from outside the bar. no matter
what the circumstances, is inherently cheating. Why? Would you not agree that the situation has changed drastically
since 2011? Have not the events of the past few years blurred the difference between "in" and "out" for many societal
pursuits? Is not the situation today much different than that in 2011? Should a rule from 2011 stating, "You must be
in the bar" be mindlessly applied after ironclad rules like "You must be in the office" or "You must be in the classroom"
were tossed out the window and alternatives found? If realities change, shouldn't the rules? What makes hearing an
answer from a person in a bar good, but an answer from the same person from a video screen cheating? What good
is achieved by denying that person the chance to play at all? We have specifically described what we are doing. Tell
us exactly what we are doing that creates unfair competition in your eyes.
3) Beginning in late 2014, you added this phrase to your rules, "Just to be clear, if a team engages in these activities
or any form of cheating, it is a disqualifying offense," yet you never define "cheating" in even general terms. This term
needs to be defined. It's implied but not clear that the enumerated disqualifying offenses are forms of cheating. Are they?
Is cheating defined as activities which give unfair advantages to the cheater, or is your definition broader than that?
What is your definition of cheating as it applies here?
4) The Mad River players play more than Hybrid Showdown; we've only done that a few times. What we have been doing
the past 2 1/2 years have been playing those premium games available on the Buzztime app Tuesday through Thursday.
We have made no secret of the fact that we have been playing the only way we have been able to play: remotely.
There was a Brainbuster tournament this year. I just looked at the rules for that; they ban that, too. But we're not alone,
Buzztime has broken that rule, too.
So why did you send me this?
Attachment:
medal 1.jpg [ 164.95 KiB | Viewed 1816 times ]
A History of A Rule I have reviewed the Scaratings.com records since its creation as it pertained to rules of various private competitions and will
reference them as needed.
The issue of computer use in Showdown began in the late 1990s, when National West Covina began using desktop and laptop
computers to access reference materials to help answer questions, which enabled them to become the dominant Showdown
team at that time. I was heavily involved in that conversation, see the badbart archives. NTN has never prohibited computer
play, and they were well aware of it at that time. Indeed, an NTN official called me to ask me to restore NWC to the first
compilation of Showdown statistics after I had thrown them out for computer play (the Denton website began as a reaction
to what I had done).
Despite NTN's position, those setting up private tournaments have almost always prohibited use of reference materials/computers.
This tells me that NTN/Buzztime's position or lack thereof has never been a determining authority in the rules of a private competition.
The rules governing the use of references have been often if not usually imprecise. They have been as short as one sentence long.
The term "wetware" is often used as an all-purpose descriptor of how a team must get answers. Many do not distinguish between
use of a computer as a source of answers and use of a computer as purely a communication device. This is understandable because
remote use of a computer or for that matter a phone to play Buzztime has been deeply impractical until fairly recently. There was no
specific reference to banning out-of-bar communication until the current gamemaster set forth the following for McCarthy 2011:
Rule 3: No Other References. All answers must be solely provided by the collective brainpower of the assembled team at the location
without the use of any reference materials of any kind (or telecommunication from outside the location). Using the Buzztime Playmaker
app on electronic devices such as iPhones, iPads, or Droid phones is fine, of course, as long as this is the only purpose for which the
device is being used, and it is being used in and for the location of the team.
This new rule created a new category of cheating besides the original "no computer as reference" rule. Read one way, it defines all people
(previously known as "wetware") outside the location as "reference material." Read another way, outside humans are instead considered to
be an outside telecommunication that cannot be used, but if that's so, then the transmitted game of Showdown itself is a "telecommunication
from outside the location" that cannot be used. After all, you have to use the question to come up with the answer.
Phrasing notwithstanding, for 2011, this seems to be a solution in search of a problem. From no mention at all, the possibility of getting
answers from "outside" suddenly became a threat equal to computer reference use, yet there seems to have no incident which showed
a use of outside assistance which could threaten the integrity of a tournament. There was no explanation of the rule when it was first
used, and no discussion. Playmaker apps became available around this time, but since they didn't provide questions at that time; the only
feasible uses of them at that time in this situation would be use with a telephone contact at the location. Zoom didn't even exist as a
company in 2011. Video conferencing did exist back then, but the cost and hardware requirements made it a nonstarter for a Buzztime environment.
Other people ran McCarthy in 2012 and 2013, and when they issued their set of rules, they didn't mention any of this at all. For a period,
it seemed that whether this rule was in play or not depended on whether the current gamerunner was running the contest or not, then it
seemed to have become a mindless copy-and-paste. That was the case with me; I thought the reference to telecommunications meant the Internet.
For most of the time since 2011, this remained a solution in search of a problem. There were many locations and no practical means to let
outsiders provide answers. Then life happened:
1) BWW said sayonara to Buzztime, removing almost half the locations.
2) The COVID pandemic and lockdowns killed hundreds more locations.
3) Cheap, easy video conferencing became available and popular
4) For a time, even Buzztime opened up remote play to keep people playing.
Buzztime locations once numbered 4,000. Now there is 800. For many, the choice is either use the technology or don't play at all. Unfortunately,
many don't even know about the technology, or they heard from someone that it was cheating. As I've said elsewhere, if Buzztime had the brains
that any streaming service has, we remote players would either be paying Buzztime directly or not be able to play. As of now, they have the worst
of all worlds: they won't collect money from us and they can't/won't stop us from playing.
The antebellum world is gone. We have survived the COVID war, and it is time for Reconstruction. Time to reexamine and revise some rules.