Pokémon TCG: Sword and Shield—Brilliant Stars

Jake Shpringman's apology

Status
Not open for further replies.
togepikeachu90: He admits to sending the links.
All that he claims is that he did it at someone else's urging. (not SomethingElse... you know what I mean...)
 
Last edited:
1. Nintento already paid for the hotel, and he HAD his room saved, what will they do with it now? Nothing..
2. Nintendo already paid for the tickets, are they going to get their money back?
3. If the room won't be used, and the plane tickets won't be used... then i don't see the argument of "Why should Ninento furnish a free ride there when he doesn't deserve it". They already did furnish it, what would be the purpose of taking it away, so that they could go to no use whatsoever?
4. I think Jake should get to GO, but not play in any tournaments for 6 months or so.

POP didn't even give jake the decency of a telephone call, or letter, or a decent investigation before the ban; which I feel is a mistake on their part. I don't see how you can make a huge, impacting decision without even talking to the person in question. That just doesn't even seem logical.

I believe Jake is sincere in his apology, anyone else believing him: I don't really care. I feel the decision to ban him was made from a lack of evidence, a lack of decency, and a lack of compassion. That would be like sentencing someone to prison before you even got arrested. That's not a principle I would uphold if I were Nintendo.

I think since they, too, messed up, they can make it up to Jake by letting him have what he earned, his ride to worlds. It won't be used otherwise, and would be a waste of both party's ambitions. Is it wrong for a company to show a little compassion? I think not being able to play would be a harsh enough punishment, at least let Jake BE at worlds... better yet, let him play.
 
How about: Give it to the next person in line at that tournament where the trip was won who is without a trip? =/

I'm sure PUI/POP/Nintendo would rather 'waste' money than have someone that uses their brandname to lure kids to porn show up to their events...

'mom
 
Last edited:
SD PokéMom said:
How about: Give it to the next person in line at that tournament where the trip was won who is without a trip? =/

I'm sure PUI/POP/Nintendo would rather waste money than have someone that uses their brandname to lure kids to porn show up to their events...

'mom
Click to expand...

If they don't give jake anything, then that wouldn't be a bad idea at all. Assuming the plane tickets can still be used, and assuming the location is okay. At least it would get SOME use.

I'd still prefer Jake going, but if Nintendo refuses that, at least someone else.


edit: too late. they already have quite a few others who did the same thing as jake, the only difference is that they aren't being punished. like pheonixsong said the other day, if you're going to try to uphold some "spirit of the game" then alot more people need to get banned. Unless talking about yourself underage drinking, while alcohol is the number one killer of persons before the age of 18, is keeping with the spirit.

I can think of other SotG violations, but I doubt Nintendo would do anything, nor would I want them to do anything, because I think their decisions and policies are very biased, illogical, and unfair.
 
Last edited:
sceptilerancher said:
can i ask you how they are biased and unfair and can you give an example=)
Click to expand...


unfair: banning someone without communicating with them in ANY way, or even replying to the attempted communications the banned individual sent out before recieving a ban.
biased: aceepting other people's stories/evidence before the banned individuals is even given a chance
unfair: banning one but not all perpetrators
biased: banning one but not all perpetrators
biased: this 'sotg violation' was taken up, but other 'sotg violations' are not


i can list more if i need to =\
 
I do not know Jake and I have not met him to know what kinda person he is so I will not comment on his actions just simply on his ban. The question now is not should there be a ban becuase there already is one just simply should it be changed and in my personal experience I know if Î do something wrong I'm going to get in trouble but if I know I can do something wrong then talk my way out of it then I'll just keep doing it again and again so I feel once they made their desicon they should stick with it or people will simply know that if they get in trouble with POP that they can talk their way out of it. Lastly I very much agree with LAWMAN Worlds is and Honor and a Privilage and is my no means a right I don't care how good you are.
 
ryanvergel said:
biased: this 'sotg violation' was taken up, but other 'sotg violations' are not
Click to expand...

If you know of Spirit of the Game violations, and can report the EXACT perpetrators, but don't, what right do you have of complaining about violations that PUI doesn't know about?
 
Orange Soda said:
If you know of Spirit of the Game violations, and can report the EXACT perpetrators, but don't, what right do you have of complaining about violations that PUI doesn't know about?
Click to expand...


If they did any decent investigation they would have known, wouldn't they? It's not like Jake randomly god the link, and randomly IMd people...it's common sense
 
How the heck is this a SotG violation? You think POP has to have a RULE against sending porn to players?

I'll repeat it again: what Jake did was DEFAMATION OF THE BRAND NAME. If you don't understand the big words, then look them up in the dictionary. NO ONE should EVER have to second-guess, to question the integrity of a link to POP's website!

And for the 'well other people did it and aren't getting punished'...well people 'get away' with things EVERY DAY because though the authorities 'know' they did it, they don't have the PROOF THEY NEED to prosecute. You're assuming that POP has the PROOF they need to apply sanctions in each and every case that hasn't resulted in a suspension. Perhaps they don't in THOSE cases...but they obviously did in Jake's!

Example: we found a lot of obscene graffitti drawn on tablecoverings in our TCG area at Nationals, naming players by name, etc. It was obvious to us just who was at those tables all day since we saw that group there, but we had no PROOF of which specific individuals at those tables did the drawings...=/ So were we supposed to kick every player who'd been at those tables that day out of the tourney? That's what you seem to be advocating!

Get it, yet?
'mom
 
Last edited:
This will be my only post on this matter.

Three points:

1. Regardless of whether Jake was put up to this or not, the fact remains that he made a conscious decision to send those messages, by his own admission.

2. The ONLY reason that POP became involved in this issue was because the link was disguised as a link to an official Pokemon site.

3. This suspension has NOTHING to do with Spirit of the Game, and EVERYTHING to do with the protection of the integrity of the Pokemon Brand and our players.
 
SD PokéMom said:
How the heck is this a SotG violation? You think POP has to have a RULE against sending porn to players?

I'll repeat it again: what Jake did was DEFAMATION OF THE BRAND NAME. If you don't understand the big words, then look them up in the dictionary. NO ONE should EVER have to second-guess, to question the integrity of a link to POP's website!

And for the 'well other people did it and aren't getting punished'...well people 'get away' with things EVERY DAY because though the authorities 'know' they did it, they don't have the PROOF THEY NEED to prosecute. You're assuming that POP has the PROOF they need to apply sanctions in each and every case that hasn't resulted in a suspension. Perhaps they don't in THOSE cases...but they obviously did in Jake's!

Example: we found a lot of obscene graffitti drawn on tablecoverings in our TCG area at Nationals, naming players by name, etc. It was obvious to us just who was at those tables all day since we saw that group there, but we had no PROOF of which specific individuals at those tables did the drawings...=/ So were we supposed to kick every player who'd been at those tables that day out of the tourney? That's what you seem to be advocating!

Get it, yet?
'mom
Click to expand...

I just don't believe they had decent evidence. How can you accept one set of evidence without even talking to Jake? That just screeeeaamms BIAS. If they did a decent job of collecting evidence, they would have found alot more. If I don't even look for evidence and it just jumps out at me, I have little faith in POP as enforcers.

And for being a TO, you're extremely condescending to players.
yesterday with the whole "love it or leave it" and now with the sarcastic suggestions. I don't see how using big words has ANYTHING to do with the topic, why are you flaming people ~_~ Isn't that what mods are supposed to prevent?
 
Last edited:
Thanks for the Explanation Mike...

Nice to see a post bu PUI on this issue that could have been so easy to make a "no comment" on.

The issue now seems extremely clear, does it not?

M45
 
Even though what he did was wrong, at least he posted an apology for it.

Hey, if he's sorry for what he did, that's good.
 
M_Liesik said:
This will be my only post on this matter.

Three points:

1. Regardless of whether Jake was put up to this or not, the fact remains that he made a conscious decision to send those messages, by his own admission.

2. The ONLY reason that POP became involved in this issue was because the link was disguised as a link to an official Pokemon site.

3. This suspension has NOTHING to do with Spirit of the Game, and EVERYTHING to do with the protection of the integrity of the Pokemon Brand and our players.
Click to expand...


Nuff said......game over :thumb:
 
Last edited:
ryanvergel: Care to address the actual POINTS in my post, rather than my 'tone of voice'?

...

Didn't think so...

'mom
 
Last edited:
Who else hear thinks "'mom" should take a chill pill for once in her life and just drop it. instead of continuing the argument for arguments sake.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top