Professor Core Values

[SD PokeMom]

http://op.pokemon-tcg.com/professors/docs/core_values.asp

A Professor should strive to adhere to the [url="http://op.pokemon-tcg.com/articles/spirit_of_game.asp"]Spirit of the Game[/url] at all times and should encourage his or her fellow players to do the same. Professors are held to a higher standard than the average Pokémon Organized Play member. As such, violations of the Spirit of the Game or the Professor Core Values could result in permanent suspension from the Program.

The Professor Core Values are:

Integrity
A Professor must act with integrity at all times. A Professor should be fair and unbiased, whether judging a tournament or resolving a dispute. Personal feelings about another player can often cloud a judgment call. A Professor must not take these feelings into consideration when resolving an issue between players, parents, venue staff, or spectators.

Honesty
A Professor must be an honest individual. It is critical to the integrity of the Professor Program that its members have a reputation as trustworthy and honest. If players cannot trust a Professor to be honest, they cannot trust that his or her rulings are accurate or events fair. In addition, Pokémon USA may occasionally contact Professors to assist in player or venue investigations. If a Professor has been known to be dishonest, the integrity of the investigation may be jeopardized.

Responsibility
Professors are trusted with a great deal of responsibility. If a Professor is a Tournament Organizer or League Leader, it is critical that all event reporting is done in a timely manner. In addition, a Professor working at an event is responsible for ensuring that all event prizes and participation rewards are handed out according to the event guidelines.

Professionalism
To maintain a higher degree of respect, Professors should act professionally when acting in an official capacity. Foul language, horseplay, smoking, drinking alcohol, and similar activities are unacceptable while actively representing Pokémon. Players, parents, spectators, and venue staff should be addressed courteously, regardless of race, religion, gender, sexual orientation, or physical or mental capacity. In addition, it is unprofessional to publicly make negative comments about Pokémon, the Pokémon TCG, or Pokémon USA without first trying to resolve these issues with Pokémon USA via private communication. Negative comments made publicly only hurt the brand, the game, the company, and the organized play program.

The relationship between Pokémon USA and a Pokémon Professor is an “at-will” relationship. This means that either party, at any time, for any reason, is free to sever the relationship. If Pokémon USA or the member severs the relationship, the member will no longer be considered a member of the Professor Program and will not be eligible to receive any of the benefits associated with the Professor Program.

.........
:clap: :thumb: :clap:

 

[meganium45]

Chaw, anyone else see the teeth behind the "professionalism" paragraph - if you complain, do so to PUI first, resolve with them, THEN go to the boards, or another forum or WATCH OUT.

See - the rules lawyer can read for content. LOL

M45

 

[NoPoke]

fnnfff nfnfnfnf fffnfnff *removes gag* ah thats better LOL

 

[M_Liesik]

Chaw, anyone else see the teeth behind the "professionalism" paragraph - if you complain, do so to PUI first, resolve with them, THEN go to the boards, or another forum or WATCH OUT.

Is that a bad thing? Ensuring that the people that do a good deal of work for us aren't smearing a decision that we've made without first knowing all of the facts?

If you've still got beef with POP after we've had our say, go ahead and let the public know. However, we/I WILL NOT put up with a Professor that slams POP without coming to us first to try to resolve or understand the problem. We've got no room in the Professor Program for that kind of person.

 

[ukpokemonpro]

Is that a bad thing? Ensuring that the people that do a good deal of work for us aren't smearing a decision that we've made without first knowing all of the facts?

If you've still got beef with POP after we've had our say, go ahead and let the public know. However, we/I WILL NOT put up with a Professor that slams POP without coming to us first to try to resolve or understand the problem. We've got no room in the Professor Program for that kind of person.

Sounds like a good idea .. perhaps we could have a set of core values and behaviours that we can expect from POP and PUI and some expected core values and behaviours for the international distributors?

It would be good if we all sing from the same hymn sheet and abide by the same set of rules and rulings..

Also who determines when POP/PUI have failed to resolve an issue and what are the turn around times a professor or TO should expect? Is a week too long to wait for an answer on an issue? How about 2 weeks? At what point is the wait for a response unreasonable?

What happens were the behaviour appears to be skewed the other way with POP/PUI perhaps reacting against a professor or TO without full knowledge of what the issues are?

This appears both a good and bad thing, I probably need to digest it a little more but anything that appears to stifle debate naturally sits badly with me.. especially where there maybe no real dialogue possible between POP/PUI and the individual involved.

At the end of the day it is PUI/POPs game and they can take the ball home if they want to but the implied threat is something we never saw in years of working with WotC. What is the reasoning behind employing it now?

Off to cogitate some more.. mmmm

 

[meganium45]

Not saying it was a bad rule at all. Just wanted to point out the rule and the teeth.

Thought it was fair.

M45

 

[ShadowCard]

Professionalism
To maintain a higher degree of respect, Professors should act professionally when acting in an official capacity. ... Players, parents, spectators, and venue staff should be addressed courteously, regardless of race, religion, gender, sexual orientation, or physical or mental capacity

geez, I thought we in this game (and other games) were past this. Stating it kind of says we're not. It also reminds me of work which is a bit unsettling. The whole, "it is common sense that you don't discriminate but we'll just tack this reminder at every door so you don't forget."

To maintain a higher degree of respect, Professors should act professionally when acting in an official capacity. Foul language, horseplay, smoking, drinking alcohol, and similar activities are unacceptable while actively representing Pokémon.

This seems a bit strict. I mean, we are playing a game and in the realms of good sportsmanship and having fun, some things can be considered "horseplay" by someone looking down on you without knowing the environment/situation may take the fun out of it. I would hope we're all past foul language but that's a matter of personal opinion.
What about breaks? like, on a break at a tournement, if a TO feels an urge for a cigarette, wold this apply? (I personally don't like smoking, the smell is practically intolerable, but I'm just saying for those who do like to.)

It would be good if we all sing from the same hymn sheet and abide by the same set of rules and rulings..

*glances at ukpokemonpro* way to throw it in the face of anyone who is an Aquarius

Also who determines when POP/PUI have failed to resolve an issue and what are the turn around times a professor or TO should expect? Is a week too long to wait for an answer on an issue? How about 2 weeks? At what point is the wait for a response unreasonable?

What happens were the behaviour appears to be skewed the other way with POP/PUI perhaps reacting against a professor or TO without full knowledge of what the issues are?

excellent points. While I really doubt I'll have problems with the first paragraph, it would be a good thing to know.
The second paragraph kind of highlights my response to my second quote. It is too easy to make a mountain out of a mole hill by judging only one second of something when you aren't there at every league session.
Are there limits to how high an accusation may go? like, if a kid took my deck and I chased him around the hotel before I got it back and it was all in good jest but then I decide I don't want to be friends with him anymore (for some reason) and decide to use this incident could get back at him. It seems like these things should be confined to the store/league levels of the game instead of dragging someone who doesn't know the situation into it.

At the end of the day it is PUI/POPs game and they can take the ball home if they want to but the implied threat is something we never saw in years of working with WotC. What is the reasoning behind employing it now?

Hadn't thought of that. *glances at POP*

 

[TheGame]

No, not a bad rule at all! Common sense for the most part.Just as long as all sides play by the same rules! As Ukpokemonpro pointed out there are a few "grey areas" here that should be ironed out first!

 

[Professor Dav]

We didn't say, "don't discuss things", we said, be professional.

A professor saying,

"The new prize structure is stupid. The people running the programs at PUI should all be fired."

Prior to ever, ever contacting anyone from this office to understand what our strategy might be, and why we've chosen a particular way to do something, is completely unprofessional and will not be tolerated.

It is 100% rumor mongering, and as mentioned, is UNPROFESSIONAL. Once we answer, or, are given a reasonable amount of time to do so, you're still free to voice your opinions about a decision or program. However, you are still expected to be...say it with me...PROFESSIONAL in the manner in which you conduct yourself as a Professor. If you want to be recognized as a Professor, you will do this, if you don't, you shouldn't really care about it.

Of course, the exact same discussion could be initiated with a "I'm not so sure about the new POP prize structure. What do the rest of you think, I'd like to get a feel of what the rest of you think about it.", and is a completely professional way to handle the exact same issue.

In the WotC days, you had an entire age group removed from the program, and were lucky to have it replaced by the Professor program. With POP, you have 15+ AND a Professor Program that is expecting it's members to live up to a higher standard of behavior than a standard member. We are not going to create a program like this, that says to kids "These Professors are the standard that players and organizers should strive to" just to have that member go off and behave inappropriately.

It is a choice after all, no one is going to force anyone to become a Professor if they do not wish to agree to the terms.

Thanks,
Prof. Dav

 

[ukpokemonpro]

Prior to ever, ever contacting anyone from this office to understand what our strategy might be, and why we've chosen a particular way to do something, is completely unprofessional and will not be tolerated

Totally agree, but at the moment we have a situation where it appears some are privy to the strategy and consulted whilst some are not? I am not saying this is the reality but it is what some of us feel we are experiencing.

Also what is the guidence when we have contacted POP/PUI and there has been no answer? Professional behaviour is being demanded of unpaid volunteers, I am not saying that is bad but surely it should swing both ways?

What about some service standards for what a Professor should expect from PUI/POP? After all I struggle to understand why an email to leagues@ gets answered in 24 hrs and one to international@ or oragnisedplay@ takes days/weeks or sometimes never gets answered.

If a more detailed answer and investigation is needed before comment a simple acknowledgement and what action is being taken would be the professional thing surely?

Once we answer, or, are given a reasonable amount of time to do so, you're still free to voice your opinions about a decision or program. However, you are still expected to be...say it with me...PROFESSIONAL in the manner in which you conduct yourself as a Professor. If you want to be recognized as a Professor, you will do this, if you don't, you shouldn't really care about it.

Agreed, but what constitutes a reasonable amount of time? In the US players and TOs appear to be more patient because they are used to eventual delivery after a wait; that has never been the experience in the UK. Indeed we have never, ever rec'd a full year of league kits in the UK and despite all the assurances that we just have to wait the experience from Both WotC and PUI/POP is that if we do there is no delivery, indeed we have been conditioned to expect non-delivery.

I and others have said many times it is only by breaking that cycle, by actually delivering will we start to fully trust again. Experience in the past has shown that if we trust too much we get shafted!

I am just relecting the facts here and we do need to know what you think is a reasonable amount of time for us to wait.

Conversly I am impressed with the world wide simultaneous pre-releases and I am very happy with the delivery on the Knot Island League Kits, but one set of league kits does not wipe years of non-delivery away.

In the WotC days, you had an entire age group removed from the program, and were lucky to have it replaced by the Professor program.

True WotC had it's core brand to protect and some decisions were just plain wrong. However we also had regular channels of communication, Chats an official board. Something only some of the Professor and TO community now have access to.

With POP, you have 15+ AND a Professor Program that is expecting it's members to live up to a higher standard of behavior than a standard member. We are not going to create a program like this, that says to kids "These Professors are the standard that players and organizers should strive to" just to have that member go off and behave inappropriately.

Agreed, now can we see some of those high standards demanded of the volunteers being applied to the PAID workers at PUI/POP and throughout OP, Leagues and the International Distributors/OP Providers?

A professional relationship with agreed standards of service provision on both sides will make this game a joy to be involved with. I just feel we are not quite there yet..

 

[SteveP]

I'm all for resolving disagreements privately. But, I also enjoy the openess of "ranting" concerns in the PokeGym.

The discussion about the change in the Pre-release prize structure was invigorating. Generally, I think that that discussion was professional, dispite huge disagreements.

I think the Professionalism section should be expanded to dissuade negative, disrespective comments and actions towards fellow Professors. We CAN'T allow the disrespect that occured a couple years ago when Professors "high-jacked" the aliases of well-known fellow professors. That was a dispicable case of "identity theft," resulting in many hurt feelings.

 

[GymLeaderPhil]

Professionalism
In addition, it is unprofessional to publicly make negative comments about Pokémon, the Pokémon TCG, or Pokémon USA without first trying to resolve these issues with Pokémon USA via private communication. Negative comments made publicly only hurt the brand, the game, the company, and the organized play program.

Communication is the only thing I fear will be the downfall of this rule. I have had a couple of incidents in the past where communication was spotty or vague. Recently, I've had no qualms with the amount of contact I've had, mostly because I have little to complain about.

I know that there are some people on this board who do infact have little or no communication with POP, due to previous history or the simple fact that they don't reside in North America. What we should have is a Professor Mailing List, IMO, just like the PTOs have. Private information about why a certain rule or reduction in a program's support could easily be conveyed instead of 300 Professor emails dealing with the same topic... That just seems like more work for a company who could be doing much better things with their time instead of PR 24/7. If not that, a single message on the POP site for Professors explaining a commonly asked question so that we can debate and share opinions on the topic at hand WITH the facts. Then it'll be a clean joust!

While it is nice to have a Professor Rewards System in place, Professors should also be given the respect that is requested by Pokemon Organized Play... if it is not already present. There should be an inner circle for Professors outside of this public forum (thanks TC and staff) to discuss private issues or learn about offers/propositions, in addition to direct email/phone contact with individuals within the company. A minute or two on the phone would stop weeks of rumors.

ShadowCard: I don't smoke, but I know those who do and as long as it's outside away from players, it's fine. You're not only being Professional, but a classy act to boot... :X
-Phil

 

[Professor Dav]

I'm all for resolving disagreements privately. But, I also enjoy the openess of "ranting" concerns in the PokeGym.

The discussion about the change in the Pre-release prize structure was invigorating. Generally, I think that that discussion was professional, dispite huge disagreements.

I think the Professionalism section should be expanded to dissuade negative, disrespective comments and actions towards fellow Professors. We CAN'T allow the disrespect that occured a couple years ago when Professors "high-jacked" the aliases of well-known fellow professors. That was a dispicable case of "identity theft," resulting in many hurt feelings.

I agree about the discussion on Prerelease prizes, and we'll also look at adding a caveat in there regarding treatment of each other as well.

Thanks,
Prof. Dav

 

[SomethingElse]

so, we can still rant our opinions on the new stuff going on this tournament season, right? we just can't say idiotic stuff like "POP Sucks for these new prizes!", right?

 

[Professor Dav]

so, we can still rant our opinions on the new stuff going on this tournament season, right? we just can't say idiotic stuff like "POP Sucks for these new prizes!", right?

A rant is defined, as it pertains here, as:

"A speech or piece of writing that incites anger or violence."

Or,

"To speak or write in a angry or violent manner; rave."

So, I'd say that in general, ranting is not professional behavior. However, what I think you mean when you say 'rant' is more of "So, we can still voice our opinions of the new stuff going on this tournament season, right?"

Replacing 'rant' with 'voice', absolutely. As long as you're acting in a manner that properly represents your Professor title, you'll have no issues with us.

Prof. Dav

 

[SomethingElse]

ya, i meant voice my opinion...

 

[SteveP]

I put "rant" in quotes because I didn't mean it in the literal sense. We all have strong opinions. Voicing our "strong" opinion is the form of "ranting" I meant, but without all the graphic, demeaning verbage.

 

[ukpokemonpro]

It's great that we'll be adding something about respect for each other as professors and how we treat each other.

I am still wondering what we can expect back from PUI/POP in terms of their side of the core values?

Maybe we could get some specific answers?

 

[M_Liesik]

and we'll also look at adding a caveat in there regarding treatment of each other as well.

I'm pretty sure that this was intended to cover PUI as well as the Professors.

 

[ukpokemonpro]

I'm pretty sure that this was intended to cover PUI as well as the Professors.

That's good to know

Will the term PUI also cover the Intl Distributors/OP Providers? And do the rules apply equally regardless of what country you are in.

Or can our Distributors and OP Providers ignore :

Tournament Rules
Tournaments FAQ
Tournament Floor Rules
Professor Core Values
Pokemon Tournament Organizer Handbook

Already we have seen International OP being allowed to drift away as it isn't run by PUI or POP but by the distributors with differing degrees of success and compliance to the rules usually depending on where you are and if someone who cares is involved.

Certainly I can think of only one European Country where a certain TEGO makes it happen. Elsewhere it can be pot luck and the UK is much better than most but even here the rules are often ignored and OP is brought into disrepute because of that.

I hope the concept of Core Values is strengthened and that we see some Service Delivery Contracts too. After all when I sanction, report and run my Tourneys, Leagues and Pre-releases according to the rules it can make you wonder why you bother if actually your OP Provider doesn't care what you do as long as you keep quiet and cause no fuss! I hope Core Values is about a real programme and real delivery to real standards and not a stick with which to beat the selected vocal but often passionately commited with?