In Order to Form a More Perfect Union: part 2

[Rew]

Well, Rew's turn to fainlyl post after hours of reading everything in the topic.

Honestly, I think that POP is doing a great job. JMO they give us alot more than you relize. Sure I would like the Prof. ship to be lower like 14-15, I could care less though. The only thing I don't like is the rating invites. POP is pretty fair.

Mentor program: F_S, Mike talked to you about your shiny card thing(stamped cards count as well). But to the point, how in the world would they know that people were actualy doing it. In our society, no one, I repeat: no one, can be trusted. So I wouldn't go to say that the program would work. The league leader could do it, but I know that nice LL's would be nice and say that you worked and didn't.

New players are good, but it isn't the best for the "pokemon world". If they don't come most of us won't quit because of it. Look how many people play this game, no matter how much people are complaining about POP's decisions, we like it; it's fun! If you don't like what POP says, then just quit. Or, you could adapt and keep having fun with your friends.


Come on people, this is a hobby. Be happy there's even a game.

 

[ninetales1234]

Let's imagine Billy is going to league for the first time. Who do you think he would like to talk to most? A League Leader, many of which have no idea how to make a competitive deck? Or some truely great player who can help Billy become a strong player, then introduce him to Organized Play, likely hooking him for a very long time? Who would Billy rather talk to? Who would POP rather he talk to?

Whoever is more qualified to be a mentor to the new player. Your example makes the assumption that a better player is more qualified. Being a good player is good, but it won't make you a good mentor. There are lots of players out there with bad social skills.

I won't name any names, but I can think of a few players at my league that play pretty well (better than me, in my opinion), that I would not want to be teaching newcomers in place of me.
It is important to have a person that is polite, does not use hard-to-understand slang, or agressively comment on player's failures to their face (there is a time and place for this).

I'm saying that there are people that don't know how to relate with humans well, or just don't want to, and are not qualified to teach newcomers.

[*]The candidate should have and maintain a 1800 or better rating.

[*]The candidate should help to run a league at least 6 times a year.

[*]The candidate judges 3 or more premier events per year.

[*]The candidate acts as a Tournament Organizer at least once per year.

[*]The candidate helps demo the game (at a major gaming convention or something similar) at least once per year.

[*]The candidate submits letters of recommendation to re-affirm their intentions are only good.[/list]

• The candidate's card collection will be seized by POP and redistributed through a collectivist system.
• The candidate shall fly to PUI HQ to have an RFID chip implanted in the back of his neck. A retinal scan will be performed too, of course.
• The candidate shall renounce all religious connections and promise allegiance to the yellow rat.
• The candidate shall wear a Pikachu hat at all times.
• The candidate must have never lost a match to a player less than half his age or lost a match on the 2nd turn of a game.
• The candidate must be a member of the Senate Subcommittee on National Ocean Policy Study.
• The candidate's PokeGym name must have a vegetable in it.
• The candidate shall participate in one-on-one Roman-style to-the-death battles against other candidates and wrestle with a live Dragonite. This of course, will be broadcast on a new reality show called "TCG Deathmatch" or something like that.

[*]Special items in the professor store. A distinct possibility. It would cost POP more money, but the option is always there.

The ones we have now aren't special?

[*]Ability to judge matches in a tournament you’re participating in. I think this one is hugely important, probably the second most important on the list. Judges can be terribly overworked at small events. I think finding a way to allow high-caliber players to both play AND judge an event would be beneficial to almost everyone. Of course, any questionable rulings can still be appealed to the HJ. And, there would need to be some restriction on ‘scouting’ the competition; but that is done very easily. Again, this is one that costs POP no money to implement.

Now that's just lame. If the TO isn't good enough at getting judging staff, he shouldn't be a TO. He should never have to cross his fingers and hope someone shows up that can help him. It's obvious that it is abusable, so I'm pretty sure that someone as intelligent as you thought this through. How would this work, and be fair? Perhaps you can explain this a little more?

[*]Rating Protection. Many possible ways this one could work. This one is very easy to understand, and again, costs POP no money.

And what about the people who are soooo close to a Worlds invite but get out of luck and miss the chance because of this? What are they supposed to think?

I've got some radical opinions, but I can tell when other people have radical opinions.:biggrin: I'm gonna mostly agree with Shadowcard on this issue. The bar is too high.

I think no major reforms (at least not as big as what you're suggesting) are necessary (except for maybe getting rid of the minimum Professor age); there are people that need to be helped and they will be, by people who like this game a lot. You want to get as many people to join the game as possible, but I don't really understand the connection between that and your proposals.

As for the "minimum 1800 rating" thing, I noticed something. Ever notice how all the people who support the minimum Professor age, are over 18? Similarly, the person advocating the "minimum 1800" idea has a rating over 1800.

If I can give you some advice, FS, you need to think outside the box as far as leagues go. Start your own league.

[*]Possible Worlds Invites. The most important one. People like Worlds. They will do almost anything to guarantee an invite for themselves. This would be a very effective way of drawing the best players into this program. And don’t tell me that this is impossible because Worlds can’t be of undefined size. There are many possible ways to decide who can and who can’t play in Worlds. As long as the possibility is there, people will go for it.
[/list]

Do you think the invite to the Professor Cup winner was a good idea?

 

[Rew]

The candidate's card collection will be seized by POP and redistributed through a collectivist system.
The candidate shall fly to PUI HQ to have an RFID chip implanted in the back of his neck. A retinal scan will be performed too, of course.
The candidate shall renounce all religious connections and promise allegiance to the yellow rat.
The candidate shall wear a Pikachu hat at all times.
The candidate must have never lost a match to a player less than half his age or lost a match on the 2nd turn of a game.
The candidate must be a member of the Senate Subcommittee on National Ocean Policy Study.
The candidate's PokeGym name must have a vegetable in it.
The candidate shall participate in one-on-one Roman-style to-the-death battles against other candidates and wrestle with a live Dragonite. This of course, will be broadcast on a new reality show called "TCG Deathmatch" or something like that.

I love those, XD. Finally someone agrees that's it's a RAT!!

 

[badganondorf]

New players are good, but it isn't the best for the "pokemon world". If they don't come most of us won't quit because of it. Look how many people play this game, no matter how much people are complaining about POP's decisions, we like it; it's fun! If you don't like what POP says, then just quit. Or, you could adapt and keep having fun with your friends.


Come on people, this is a hobby. Be happy there's even a game.

If any player wants to improve the game as they want it to be, shouldn't we give him a try and not just say "everything is alright". I think F_S is doing great job when he is bringing his ideas to the whole Pokegym community even tough he knew that there will be few people who don't care about improving the game.

As already stated few times POP has listened us players very well this season. What would POP and PUI do if nobody says their opinion about anything. They would be totally clueless what the players want and at the time being there would be more and more complaiments.

So why quit the game if there is something you can do for the game? I see no reasons to quit the game or ignore the flaws you see in the game if you really can do something to the flaws.

There are lots of players out there with bad social skills.

I won't name any names, but I can think of a few players at my league that play pretty well (better than me, in my opinion), that I would not want to be teaching newcomers in place of me.
It is important to have a person that is polite, does not use hard-to-understand slang, or agressively comment on player's failures to their face (there is a time and place for this).

I'm saying that there are people that don't know how to relate with humans well, or just don't want to, and are not qualified to teach newcomers.

That's so fact. Miska Saari goes our league and I wouldn't even think of him helping any new players even though he might be the best player in our league. As an opposite our league leader has very good social skills but he isn't so good player. Ok he is a good player but not the best in our league.

Some "uber"-players really might lack a skill of helping even though they would want to help. Forcing good players will not accomplish anything but if they do it for their own will it 's just great! And when new kids come to league you really don't need a "uber"-player to teach the kid how to play. Someone who has the skill to teach and to make have people fun.

But again when we jump from the individual league to the game, community needs those "uber"-players help. Teaching how to play is so different if you compare it to improving the skill level of the game. Here would help the "carrots" as already said.

Because you will have other Professors competing against you to fill those requirements, your only way to fulfill LL requirements may end up being having to start a league. Yeah, that's good, but if you're only in it for the Prof status, you're going to make yourself miserable.

If your not a Professor and have elected to drop the title because you feel there isn't enough reward to justify your selfless deeds, you don't get to criticize the program. The Professor Program is a nice "thank you for helping" gift, like the Prerelease Staff-stamped Luxio card. It's no booster box, but it is a nice "thank you." (if you dropped the title because you felt that you were unable to do any selfless deeds and therefore the title was empty, that's your decision.)

There are again few good points. Some kind of "have to start a league" attitude would be only a bad thing to the game. But after all people who haven't ever even thought about starting league would start a league and found it rewarding even without the prizes they are given. So there could be the possibility that people who has thought before that starting a league wouldn't be such a good idea, would find it more interesting as they first thought. And that way we would get more motivated league leaders for helping new players.

And as I already said, I think that there aren't almost any professor who would have taken the professor test AND helped in a league and judging just because those rewards. But I think F_S is trying with those more rewarding "carrots" to bring the "uber"-players closer to the ordinary players. And I find some of the things that F_S listed very effective in this as you can see in my previous posts.

Just my thoughts once again.

 

[ShadowCard]

Ninetales' comment about a 1800er saying all Professors should have atleast a similiar rating reminded me I didn't get to reply to this:

But F_S! If A player is really good, They'll do this on their own accord!!

Yes. In a perfect world.

But there is a big difference between should and does, and between ideal and reality.

That's the difference between players and professors. While the players like seeing friends and going places (or so I'd hope), they are mostly in it for the prizes and glory.
Professors are different. You'll see professors sacrificing their prizes so that the players can get more. It's not about the prizes for professors, it's more towards the people and experiences. In F_S' requirements, the professors get more because they think they're worth it, in a conceited way. Skill calliber matters little when you're a (P)TO, LL, or judge. Professors work for the "thank you"s from parents, the excitement from players who discover that Pokemon is still played in the area after years of absence, the feeling of running a successful event without any major hiccups, and the small acknowledgements from POP that they don't have to do but still do, like the yearly holiday card and the Staff-stamped Luxio card (personally, I find those more classy than getting a couple of booster packs ). Yes, it helps that they keep up the professor store, those items are golden nuggests of being a Professor and it gives us personal goals to work towards, but most of us have run out of stuff to spend points on yet we still do what we've been doing. The player would abandon the program once he ran out fo stuff to spend points on.

To sum up, if hearing "thank you for what you're doing" doesn't allow you to feel self-actualized or is not good enough for you, you're not ready to be a professor, because the points you get from judging and running league are not worth it. It's what I cited above that makes it worth it. Being an LL, TO, professor, is volunteering. Volunteering means you do something without expecting to be rewarded, but occasionally you do. I know LLs who are not Professors - they get nothing from running league.

I agree with Ninetales, no major changes, like which are suggested in this thread, are needed to improve the Professor Program. Like NoPoke said, adding red tape only overcomplicates.

The candidate's card collection will be seized by POP and redistributed through a collectivist system.

hey! I ask for donations. There's a difference

 

[dogma]

I haven't read all of the responses in detail, but I did read the first post, and it seems like F_S is confusing playing and judging, and trying to make like they're the same thing. As for a mentor system, I think they're two types of (commited) players. On the one hand, there's people like F_S and Prime, who are willing to do stuff 'for the good of the game'. That's great, and I have respect for that. At one point, I believed more should do the same, just as you still do.

But other players like Jimmy also have the right to just play the game. TBH, there is nothing wrong with trying to play competitively and just enjoying the tournaments, making decks etc. After all, isn't that the purpose of OP?

I've always maintained that it should be OP which thinks up ideas like a mentoring program. Why should the players have to come up with anything? Why is it your duty to have to improve the game?

Comparisons have been made to M:TG. As far as I can tell, a big part of their community is fansites like the 'gym writing articles and creating content etc. etc. The difference? Wizards actually acknowledges and rewards them for it properly. They get exclusive previews to feature. They get real info about how the cards are made. The 'gym is a wonderful place, but I don't think we'll ever get that type of treatment. As for the competitiveness, yeah the game is a lot more competitive, and there are some crazy people who give up their lives to play M:TG (in some cases, almost literally), but the vast majority are friendly people who just want to play. I wonder what other cardgame that sounds like...

 

[NoPoke]

I'm sure that POP knows that using 'carrots' to induce particular behaviours only results in the need to keep on increasing the size of the carrot each year.

Instead POP uses the much more effective system of 'Thank yous'.

The two approaches do overlap but each speaks volumes about how POP view their volunteers and how the community views POP. I'm involved in Pokémon because I like all the things it offers that don't have a $ value: I like the community, I like the social benefits, the fun, the friendships, the life lessons that it affords.

 

[ukpokemonpro]

Younger players under 18 helping out at League and Tournaments .. yep already got that

Developing new players .. yep already doing that With help from younger and older players

Their reward for doing it? Nothing written in stone, occassional goodies that this TO and League leader can give them as Thank Yous.. The odd box of boosters, professor promo items I pass on and my advice, help and access to my collection when deck building..

We work together at our games club/league because we are a team, a family, it is us working together for everyones betterment. Rewards... well seeing the players do better, make top 8 at Nationals, make top 4 at Nationals, develop their play and social skills.

It's great when it isn't all about stuff, me and cult of personality.. who says the best are rated 1800+? Who says the best are not?

A sad world indeed if stuff is what drives us to help our fellow players, our TOs and League Leaders and not SotG and humanity..

I see both at League and Tourneys, there are players that give selflessly of their time and effort and those that won't do a thing without inducement. Needless to say the thank yous reward the selfless and the selfish have to learn that sometimes the work is the reward itself...

 

[Jedi_Amara]

So I read the entire thread, and there are a lot of good points that people've brought up - I'd like to look at them in an international context, more specifically from an Australian viewpoint. Australia does not exactly have an active scene, but those of us who play are all dedicated to the game, and we have a small but growing number of knowledgeable Professors. (I'm hoping to join their ranks when I turn 18 in two months. XD)

[*]There are very few benefits for joining this game in comparison to other games. Think about this. If someone decides to quit Yugioh, and start another TCG, the only real TCGs they have to choose from are Pokemon and Magic: The Gathering. Why would anyone choose Pokemon over Magic as far as OP is concerned?

I'll note that I chose Pokémon because of the smaller and closer community, but that's just a me-thing. Besides, it's cuter.

Expand the professor program. It should have a beginning level (what we call professors right now), and an advanced level, which is for only those who give the most possible to the game.

I like this idea, and as other people have pointed out it could bring back under-18 professors.

[*]The candidate should have and maintain a 1800 or better rating. I believe that one of the keys to knowing rulings, and gaining a better understanding of the game, is to play at a competitive level. 1800 should be wholely reachable for anyone of a moderate skill-level.

Uh-uh. Not if you live in Australia. Across all levels in the entire country, there is one player with an 1800+ rating. In fact, in the whole Asia-Pacific region he is the only 1800+ rated player. There's less of a problem in the US, but here where we have one CC per state (or two in a couple of states) and some states don't even have one, and only 4 of our 8 states and territories got States, there aren't a lot of Premier tournaments in which to gain points. In Victoria, my state, there are only two or three Seniors; they get paired down and can't even get points. Our CCs and States only went out to 4 Swiss rounds.

[*]The candidate should help to run a league at least 6 times a year. Basically, forcing good players to help new players. The good players gain more experience in helping people and sharing the game, and the little kids just may become better players. Everyone wins.

Yep, but with only a few regular league players and only two leagues in the state, too many cooks rather spoil the broth.

[*]The candidate judges 3 or more premier events per year. A professorship is most of all a certificate to judge events (that’s really the only thing it is ATM). This one comes as just obvious to me.

Again, the point I raised earlier - we don't have enough premier events. In order to judge 3 premier events, most people would need to travel interstate, and as well as that probably being at their own expense they would not even get to play in one - you really can't have a judge playing in an event they're judging.

[*]The candidate acts as a Tournament Organizer at least once per year. Again, just adds more experience to a persons repertoire of skills. Not quite as important as the ones above.

And again, we don't have many tournaments to organise.

[*]The candidate helps demo the game (at a major gaming convention or something similar) at least once per year. Building on the ‘good players helping new players’ ideal, but in a slightly different context.

Australia has few major gaming conventions as it is, and most of those don't have Pokémon. The travelling interstate problem comes into it again.

That’s what I have as far as requirements go. It may seem like incredibly steep standards, but I figure a person should be able to accomplish all that in about 16 weeks. The other 36 weeks of the year can be spent however they want; as a LL, TO, judge, tourney player, on vacation, etc.

16 weeks if you live in America and there are enough tournaments for you.

[*]Rating Protection. Many possible ways this one could work. This one is very easy to understand, and again, costs POP no money.

You mean sitting on a rating for years? There's a reason we don't have that already. :S

Just my two cents. And yes, we use cents in Australia. XD;

 

[dogma]

Very good points, Jedi. I didn't even THINK about how hard it would be for a non-US player to achieve this. Now how many tournaments in the UK actually count for ratings...

 

[ShawofMordor]

Now that's just lame. If the TO isn't good enough at getting judging staff, he shouldn't be a TO. He should never have to cross his fingers and hope someone shows up that can help him. It's obvious that it is abusable, so I'm pretty sure that someone as intelligent as you thought this through. How would this work, and be fair? Perhaps you can explain this a little more?

Now that's just lame. Blaming the TO for the lack of people willing to judge. Some areas don't have enough people, especially with the new rating system.

 

[Lawman]

We already hand out Worlds invites to the folks that we feel are doing a TON for the game. Those invites are to work, not to play, but they're still paid for out of POP's pocket. Ask Meg45, or bulbasnore, or NoPoke, or Lawman what the best reward they've gotten for their work promoting the game is.

I've parsed this quote down since Mike mentioned me in his answer. The best rewards come to you when you least expect it. I was invited to staff Worlds 2006 after being on staff 2 yrs running at the SE Reg's (in the Carolinas), with Mike L coming out in 2006 to observe. Of course, I have judged many other events, multiple CCs, GCs, States, local tourneys, etc. I didnt run the league that we go to, but am basically 2nd in command. The day I got the the email asking me to be on staff for worlds last year made my entire year! I hardly needed the jet to carry me to California. (Of course, my staff email for Worlds/Hawaii 2007 MUST have gotten lost in the internet :wink: :lol I will be on staff for Nats 2007 (my 1st Origins) and am looking forward to it. Without being an active Prof. and Judge, I would have never been ASKED/invited to be on staff! When the PTO in our area suddenly decided to give up his position w/ PUI, I was the 1st one they looked to to take over....to make sure the kids in my league were taken care of. PUI/OP stepped up to the plate in a BIG way to get me up and running in the program in no time. Pete was just great in taking me through all the steps necessary to get that done.

As for yor suggestions F_S, I appreciate the time and effort you put into your articles. You wouldnt do so if you didnt love this game and want to expand it also! Most of the people you see running events, esp. at the State/Reg level and up are the tip top judges in the area. I learned SOOOO much working with/along side Kim Cary (Bulbasnore) in the JR division @ Worlds last year! I have the priviledge of working with one of the top PTOs in the USA in Jeff Reynolds in the Carolina area. (Look at the number of events he puts on!!!) I know several other top PTOs, either by working with them, going to their events or interacting with them at the large events. Vince, Prof Clay, Totoro, Heidi Craig, GLB, Rocketman, the Schells, just to name a few!

Players can never judge an event they are still playing in. I can see using a player that didnt make topcut and letting them run a side event/help out at a Regional/Nats level. Always can use an extra hand there. Player rating will not fly.....we are judging/running too many events to get such a ranking (unless you are the omnipresent TR leader....Rocketman!) The "rewards" are already there....PUI/OP doesnt have to provide even more swag then they do IMO. The thank yous are the main ones.

I help kids all the time at our league. Some of the top/traveling players in my league do the same. The minimum age for Professorship is a legal contract issue. Being a lawyer myself, 'Pop basically hit the nail earlier....you cannot legally contract w/a minor AND enforce said contract ag'st a minor! Minors can WORK, but the manager at the McD's cannot FORCE the minor to work said shift...the minor can QUIT anytime they want!

You have to wait until you are 16 to get a DL. You have to wait until you are 21 to legally drink and gamble. So, here, you need to be 18 to be a Prof. If you are younger than that and do things to help out...I betcha the LL/TO and local PTO WILL take notice and "reward" you, sometimes when you least expect it!

End of rambling......Keith

edit - just fixing the quote tags. Pop

 

[ninetales1234]

Now that's just lame. Blaming the TO for the lack of people willing to judge. Some areas don't have enough people, especially with the new rating system.

Well, if you like the idea, defend it! Tell us why you like it. I never said it would never work. I just thought it sounded bad and would like FS to explain how it would work, cos I could be wrong.

Back to back posts merged. The following information has been added:

The minimum age for Professorship is a legal contract issue. Being a lawyer myself, 'Pop basically hit the nail earlier....you cannot legally contract w/a minor AND enforce said contract ag'st a minor!

Sure you can. You can contract with anyone you want. I guess what you're saying is that the gov't wont recognize some contracts. What this debate boils down to is that there are laws in place. So, just because the concept is into law, does that make it right? Is it acceptable to scare a peaceful organization like POP into changing its policies because people supposedely can't participate in contracts because they were born in the wrong year?
I hope you're not defending this silly system.

I know I didn't sign any contracts with POP since I became a professor. But from what I've heard some people say on the forums: whenever you have a voluntary transaction, that is seen as a contract.
So, using the principles I've heard on the forums, if a 10-year-old walks into a store with three quarters to buy a chocolate bar, the store owner will have to say, "sorry, I can't sell that to you, cause that would be a contract and you have no idea what you're doing". And I guess we can throw trading cards with peoople at league out the window too, since most leauges have quite a few under-18s.

I know this is not the topic of the thread, but I had to say something. That's absurd to say people under 18 can't have a contract. I've engaged in many voluntary transactions with people under 18. They knew what they were doing, and no one was harmed. You are able to have a contract when you are able to have a contract- age (gender, color, religion, etc.) is inconsequential.
The problem isn't the age of the professors. Nothing happens on a person's 18th birhday- it's just another day. The problem is that government officials want to treat these people as different from everyone else- they're "sub-human". We need to stand up against the law, becuase that's the problem.

I think it's also worthy of mention that the professor program functioned before August 2005, when the new age restriction was put into place.

You have to wait until you are 16 to get a DL. You have to wait until you are 21 to legally drink and gamble. So, here, you need to be 18 to be a Prof.

So, because the gov't does it, it is acceptable for POP to do it?
Relativism, FTL

 

[ShadowCard]

Without being an active Prof. and Judge, I would have never been ASKED/invited to be on staff! When the PTO in our area suddenly decided to give up his position w/ PUI, I was the 1st one they looked to to take over....to make sure the kids in my league were taken care of.

This is why the "I'm going to let my professorship lapse because I don't do anything with it" doesn't fly with me. When you are on the professor list, you are essentially in reserve for if anything happens. I'm trying to start two more leagues in the area, but I can't be the LL for them. The first place I look to call up someone asking if he/she would like to be an LL is the professor list. You go from doing nothing with the professorship to getting the opportunity to use it because you decided to keep it up. If you drop the title, I have no way of knowing if you were on it previously (exception with The Gorn because he has said so).

Reiterating what was on the Prof boards, Ninetales, the Professor Program under WotC was the 15+ division and that was all. POP actively uses the Professor Program in its activities. Even though the professorship is just a title, they use it to support the actual jobs (TO, LL, judge), which WotC didn't do. Under WotC, that fell to the Master Professors. The Prof Program functioned before Aug 2005 with a different age restriction because it served a different function before Aug 2005. I don't like that the age is 18+ and I would like a way to see 15+ helpers be officially recognized as professors are. That you can LL at 15 but not be a prof doesn't make sense to me. It's like, "why can I go to war at 18 but not vote until 21?" back before the age was changed. An LL can be effective when he/she is 16 (I was).

Another problem with the prof program is that it has become unknown to people. Goes hand-in-hand with the raised age so that a 14-year-old canot reach for it yet. Using the prof program as a carrot or a thank-you is not working among potential LLs who are 17 because they haven't heard it or don't see the benefit (not because they think it isn't good enough, but because they don't know). POP is not promoting the program. They are not advertising as much as they should be. It's becoming an old-timer's club.

 

[Lawman]

9tales: Nick ......please reread that paragraph I wrote. I never said one cannot contract WITH a minor. I said one cannot ENFORCE a contract with a minor! Big difference. PUI's lawyers have advised them to not have minors be Professors. Take it up with them. They, along with ME (read not you, Nick) have been to law school, passed our bar exams and are LICENSED to PRACTICE LAW. That means we know a wee bit about what we discuss pertaining to the law! Any yes, I am defending this "silly system". If you dont like our laws, go live somewhere else :thumb:

BTW.....Nick...you did sign a "contract" with PUI/OP when you signed up to be a Professor. Remember that button you clicked on, saying you accepted the terms and conditions of being a professor?? There is your contract, son.

I know people sell/trade items with minors all the time. Merchants, leagues for PTCG, comic book stores, etc. Implied or actual contracts are "made" all the time with minors. BUT, say a minor sold you a pokemon card that was purported to be extremely rare, you paid little johnny $100 for it. A week later, you discover the card is a fake...worth nada. You go back to little johnny (say he is 15), tell him you want your money back for the fake card.....Can you sue him for the money if he refuses?? NOPE You may be able to turn him into the juvenile court system, if a crime was commited, but you would not be able to sue him in a court of law for the retun of your money bc he is a minor.

Keep the ideas flowing McPike. Like Mike said, some things are worth considering, others ....not so. I think it is great that some of the OP team comes on these forums to talk about some issues.

Keith

 

[Rew]

9tales: Nick ......please reread that paragraph I wrote. I never said one cannot contract WITH a minor. I said one cannot ENFORCE a contract with a minor! Big difference. PUI's lawyers have advised them to not have minors be Professors. Take it up with them. They, along with ME (read not you, Nick) have been to law school, passed our bar exams and are LICENSED to PRACTICE LAW. That means we know a wee bit about what we discuss pertaining to the law! Any yes, I am defending this "silly system". If you dont like our laws, go live somewhere else :thumb:

BTW.....Nick...you did sign a "contract" with PUI/OP when you signed up to be a Professor. Remember that button you clicked on, saying you accepted the terms and conditions of being a professor?? There is your contract, son.

I know people sell/trade items with minors all the time. Merchants, leagues for PTCG, comic book stores, etc. Implied or actual contracts are "made" all the time with minors. BUT, say a minor sold you a pokemon card that was purported to be extremely rare, you paid little johnny $100 for it. A week later, you discover the card is a fake...worth nada. You go back to little johnny (say he is 15), tell him you want your money back for the fake card.....Can you sue him for the money if he refuses?? NOPE You may be able to turn him into the juvenile court system, if a crime was commited, but you would not be able to sue him in a court of law for the retun of your money bc he is a minor.

Keep the ideas flowing McPike. Like Mike said, some things are worth considering, others ....not so. I think it is great that some of the OP team comes on these forums to talk about some issues.

Keith

Little Johnny sounds mean. So because I am a minor, I can't become a prof. because there's a contract that I am abiding by?

 

[NoPoke]

No what it means is that POP would be bound by the terms of the contract but you as a minor wouldn't be!

 

[dogma]

I think rather than discussing the legal age to become a professor, we should be answering another question - that is, what does it mean to become a professor in the first place?

Maybe a scheme can be set up for those who are <18 to participate somehow. Like a Junior Prof. programme, perhaps?

 

[Rainbowgym]

Sorry but I don't understand why people are so "desperate" about this professor thing.
You can teach the game without having a Prof status, you can judge without the Prof status.
Actually you can do all things without that status, I am doing that for years now.
You will only not get the prof goodies.

 

[ShadowCard]

Rainbowgym, it has to do with our moral sense of compensating someone for work. A judge does not have to give judge support. He can say "you can judge for me and earn my respect, but you're talking to the wrong TO if you think you're getting booster packs from judging for me." Likewise, a TO may feel that the judge is helping the TO with a service and should get some sort of compensation. There's a thread about it in the Prof board here on Pokegym.

Same deal. 15-17ers are helping us with a service, teaching, aiding at league, judging. Some of us feel that helping with a service deserves a sort of compensation. It doesn't have to be the booster box from the old days, but something, like a staff-stamped card. In the case of professors, it is professor points. Why is a 16-year-old doing the same thing as me not getting the same benefits that I am? Why can't the 16-year-old get a "thank you" from POP?

Here's an idea:
You don't need Professor status to earn points. POP already does this with player rewards. So, Billy gets someone with professor status to assign him as a judge for a tournament. In Billy's POP account, it is seen that he is under 18. The TO, a professor, of that tournament vouches that Billy is an "apprentice" of him, a professor, which allows Billy to get points to spend in the professor store as any other Professor would.
Another example: When I assign an assistant LL who is under 18, that is me vouching that that person is as competent as any other LL or professor who would be running league. So, expanding on that idea, since I, a professor, is vouching for a minor, he/she can get points that he normally would have.
He/she wouldn't have the professor title, and POP has made no agreement with him/her. He/she has not taken the professor test. He/she is in the good graces of professor who is vouching for him/her. This is different than assigning a judge to a tournament, this is the vouching professor saying if this person was given the prof test, he/she would pass. We could even have our own "apprentice" tests in determining who gets our approval for professor points as a minor.