Pokémon TCG: Sword and Shield—Brilliant Stars

Why BigChuck01 should be Unbanned

Status
Not open for further replies.
Remember. Chuck is just banned from these boards...not Pokemon, not OP.

These boards are not even the official arm of PUI, so let him be gone for a month. We don't know the reasons, and therefore it is hard to comment on the ban at all...so we should just let it go.

I will give Chuck this...he is the one 15+ player with enough confidence in his skill to actually post his tourney deck that he played on the boards as an example for people to follow. He did not hide behind the "oooh, keep it a secret" attidude that many other purported great players did.

Chuck has been coming to my events, and he is more than welcome to continue to do so. I like what he brings to the room, both in competitiveness, and in attitude.

Heck, I even caught Jason and Alex letting some 10- players hang around them for a little while...and those kids kept buzzing about how cool they were to be around...

Remember folks...it's just a board.


Vince
 
The problem with this board is that everyone thinks they are a mod, and everyone takes themselves very seriously =/
 
Even though I do not make the rules, or enforce them for that matter, I will throw my words in here.

This topic is in no way about BigChuck's playing etiquette, because he may be a great player and a huge role model for younger players. This topic is solely about whether or not he should be unbanned.

We set up the rules on this forum in order to keep peace on the PokeGym, and thus far, it has worked pretty well if you ask me. The rule enforcement here is not based on whether or not someone is well known in the pokemon community, it is not based on how many followers a person may have on this site. The rules are set to allow the moderators and administrators of this site to enforce them when problems arise, and they had in BigChuck's case. If bans were handed out because of real life issues and real life etiquette, I can think of quite a few people that would have been banned a long time ago.

Our rules are also written to be vague, for a reason. The reason we do this is because, as 'mom said above, we do not want to hear players screaming about something just because it is not specifically mentioned in the rules. The moderators and administrators use their better judgement when it comes to banning someone, and many times they think three or four times before they actually take actions as far as banning.

So in short, unless someone can come up with a VERY good reason, outside of him being a role model and bringing a lot to the game, why he should be unbanned before his 30 days is up, he will continue to stay banned.

This thread really reminds me of the "Free Mitnick" sites a long time ago. A lot of supporters, but no good reasons.

Just my $0.02.
 
Last edited:
Was it a deliberate insult? Use of foul language? Was it intended to cause harm? Remember, this is just a temporary ban, or so I presume. Now, if it was PERMANENT, I could see this being much more heatedly debated. But it's not. So, let's just let the mods do this, if they feel this is the best course of action, and this will truly make them feel better.
 
Don't Panic<tm>.

No one is saying the 15+ are on the brink. People will individually stand or fall by their own actions and attitudes without taking the rest of the group down.

Two parting thoughts:
* FK said it - there are other boards. This includes the PUI Prof forum >:).
* PUI is committed to SotG. Anyone who thinks otherwise is spitting into the wind.
 
Professor Dav said:
You want my prizes? You'll play by my rules. End of story.

This probably is not the wisest attitude to have when the older players are the ones with the financial ability to support the game you are representing. 10- is great when the kids can beg their parents to buy them a couple of packs at once in a Wal-Mart one night a week, but guess what? 15+ consists of the people who work actual jobs and feel strongly enough about the game to purchase cards in bulk, boxes, cases, etc. and not have to convince anyone to do it... It's their money.

And then you have the nerve to call a couple of people hooligans, etc. because they might have something more interesting to post than "One sentence add on" or "The person above me..."? While this game might be targeted at younger players, it's fairly obvious that this board consists, mostly, of people older than 15. And the rules of conduct ARE up to the mods, and that's great, that's their decision. But you, sir, are going a little too far for my taste. Being as said, that this is not an official arm of PUI or POP, you seem to be interpreting it as the opposite when you essentially threaten other players based on what you see posted on this board. I don't think you can have it both ways. You might think you've got a lot of authority, and you might be right regarding the people who live and breathe this card game you're representing, but you really don't mean jack to me, personally.

By the way, before you start grouping me into any of this, I don't know or care about BigChuck01 or anyone else involved in this. I'm someone who works and happens to use some of that hard earned money to purchase cards. No longer. After this incredible show of condescension, when I was already thinking about dropping this game, my mind is essentially made up.

... Oh, and the kid'll be back in a month. Who cares? Hopefully he'll still want to support the game when he sees how he's treated by the people who profit from his purchasing of cards.
 
Food for thought:
While you're all (those that this applies to) gnashing your teeth and ripping your shirts in anquish over the total unfairness that is PokeGym, consider how many boards would allow a thread such as this to flourish (as long as it stays civilized).
I would suspect that most forums, such as Pojo or any non-clique board that you would care to mention, would have deleted the topic in short order and handed out warnings and or bannings all round for daring to question the moderators/admins.

Think about it.
 
Everyone knows Chuck should have been banned, lol. Stop this pointless argument, we're not getting anywhere with it. It's just causing more issues and more tension.

Chuck knew what he was doing when he posted. He knew eventually he would get banned. Hell, he was probably even trying to at times. As stated earlier, it's only a month, so just deal with it. Stop complaining and let it go.

P.S. - Chuck stole my lunch box and should stay banned. Juuuust kidding. :biggrin:
 
PokePop said:
Food for thought:
While you're all (those that this applies to) gnashing your teeth and ripping your shirts in anquish over the total unfairness that is PokeGym, consider how many boards would allow a thread such as this to flourish (as long as it stays civilized).
I would suspect that most forums, such as Pojo or any non-clique board that you would care to mention, would have deleted the topic in short order and handed out warnings and or bannings all round for daring to question the moderators/admins.

Think about it.

That'sssss right. If this exact thread were at the forums that I mod at, it would be gone and everyone would be warned or banned.
 
Last edited:
Look at it this way; you tell someone that you don't allow smoking in your house. They smoke in your house, regardless of the fact that you told them they weren't allowed to. You ask them to stop, and they continue doing it anyway. You have two options; continue to let them break the rules, or ask them to leave.

Now, POP is our house. We set the rules, we set the policies. If you want to remain in our house, all we ask of you is that you follow our rules. There is some leniency (hence the Penalty Guidelines), but if you choose to continue breaking the rules, we'll show you the door. Foremost among our house rules is sportsmanship. Because we feel so strongly about this rule, we are stricter about enforcing it, and take violations of that particular rule more seriously.

In a perfect world, the four of us that make up Pokemon Organized Play would be able to make it out to every event, and would get to know every player individually. However, that's just not feasible. Many of the views that we develop about individual players come from their online activities.

Posts from "1337er-than-thou" players that reek of poor sportsmanship, working the system, etc. truly aggravate POP, because they are so contrary to what we are trying to accomplish. If the only information that we ever see about a player is online posts, bashing everything that our program stands for, what opinion do you think that we form of that player? Do these posts lead us to believe that this player is a good sport at our events?

While these are not official POP boards, they are public (in that they can be viewed by anyone, regardless of whether that person had a 'Gym account or not). In general, people have to be very careful of what is said (or typed) in public. You never know whose going to hear it, and whether or not there will be repercussions.
 
Professor Dav said:
Venusaur said:
Players like Chuck should stop acting like they do. From what Dav says it sounds like the 15+ age group might get removed because of them.

This is the absolute last resort I would use.

Let everyone suffer because of one's actions? Never is the best idea, but then again, my opinion never matters.

Professor Dav said:
The 10&Unders don't 'misbehave' as much as the players who claim they want to be treated as 'adults'. So, why is it that a child is able to follow our rules, and the players who complain about our rules treating them like 'children' cannot?

There is a phase in every person's life(or at least of this century) where they believe that they are immortal and immune to all negative acts that would inflicted on others. This phase is called "Teenager." Whether the human being goes through this phase or not, the actions here are unexcusable. The reasons to unban him are unjust. And the actions that could happen are not needed. So what if I have never won first place in a tournament, I know my limits, I know the rules, and I know the consequences.

Do I want to make a fool out of myself in public only to find out it is for an unjust cause? Of course not.
 
Look at it this way; you tell someone that you don't allow smoking in your house. They smoke in your house, regardless of the fact that you told them they weren't allowed to. You ask them to stop, and they continue doing it anyway. You have two options; continue to let them break the rules, or ask them to leave.

Chuck is a chain smoker...
 
I really do not know exactly what Chuck was banned for on this message board, but PokePop states that it was due to threating another member/baiting another mod. I don't really wish to know what transpired. I really don't care. You could probably group this sort of topic with the ones from WAY WAY back about unbanning Phil Mondello from the DCI. Do a search on Pojo in the Featured Articles in case you weren't privledged enough to go through that fiasco.

InsertCreativeNameHere said:
But you, sir, are going a little too far for my taste. Being as said, that this is not an official arm of PUI or POP, you seem to be interpreting it as the opposite when you essentially threaten other players based on what you see posted on this board. I don't think you can have it both ways. You might think you've got a lot of authority, and you might be right regarding the people who live and breathe this card game you're representing, but you really don't mean jack to me, personally.

I just would hope that the entire community realizes that threating online is a bad as threating offline. A similar incident occured at the beginning of Pokemon Organized Play in 2003 and was ended in 2004. Threats were made online, accusations started online, rumors poped up online, rivalries began online and an entire Pokemon community was divided, as well as the judges and organizers, not only online but offline through word-of-mouth. It took months of reconstruction and resulted in a few POP bans.

The pain from that process is exactly why Mr. Dave Schwimmer stepped in here and he has EVERY right to do so, as well as Mike Liesik.

One would hope that someone who is technically OF AGE or reaching that point in three of less years would have a higher standard of maturity. A month ban on a message board is a minor thing. I don't see any reason to be whining about it... especially when Chuck threatened another member.

Bruce 1337 said:
Chuck shouldn't be unbanned because he's the best, he should be unbanned because of the ENERGY he brings to this game. Pokemon without Chuck is kinda like Football without Tackleing, or Hockey without Checking. It's safer and better for the kids, but the quality and fun factor decreases significantly.

There lies the problem. The bad boys make the game exciting to you. You are obviously playing for all the wrong reasons. Pokemon isn't exactly what you call a spectators sport, but that shouldn't be a reason to foster bad players for show purposes. Nobody here who is a judge or an organizer should put up with some of the crap I've seen while playing against players who feel the need to "show off".

PokeWisconsin said:
I was at several tournaments with Alex and Jason recently and they are always respectful of the TO and judges. Don't get the wrong impression of them by what you read here on the boards.

Intergrity goes a long way on here and a presents a good example of a player's decorum when they are in a sanctioned event. Post stupid stuff on here and people will think you are stupid... this isn't a hard concept.
 
Professor Dav said:
This is the absolute last resort I would use. I want to support ALL of the players who play this game, but will not be doing so on anyone else's terms but ours.

The 10&Unders don't 'misbehave' as much as the players who claim they want to be treated as 'adults'. So, why is it that a child is able to follow our rules, and the players who complain about our rules treating them like 'children' cannot?

A short leash means just that. You'll be yanked out of my program faster than you can say 'Pwnz' if you feel the need to push the limits of the rules.

Prof. Dav

wow, interesting note o.o

Although I feel "misbehaving" can't be generalized to any one age group, the 10- at the first state championship I went to seemed to have very few problems, behavior-wise, whereas the 11-14 and 15+ seemed a little more...disgruntled, per se. It is truth that the 15+ is more competitive and larger than any other age group, so naturally some of us tend to be more rabid than others. In the 15+, one bad apple does make the rest look sour...
 
InsertCreativeNameHere said:
This probably is not the wisest attitude to have when the older players are the ones with the financial ability to support the game you are representing. 10- is great when the kids can beg their parents to buy them a couple of packs at once in a Wal-Mart one night a week, but guess what? 15+ consists of the people who work actual jobs and feel strongly enough about the game to purchase cards in bulk, boxes, cases, etc. and not have to convince anyone to do it... It's their money.

And then you have the nerve to call a couple of people hooligans, etc. because they might have something more interesting to post than "One sentence add on" or "The person above me..."? While this game might be targeted at younger players, it's fairly obvious that this board consists, mostly, of people older than 15. And the rules of conduct ARE up to the mods, and that's great, that's their decision. But you, sir, are going a little too far for my taste. Being as said, that this is not an official arm of PUI or POP, you seem to be interpreting it as the opposite when you essentially threaten other players based on what you see posted on this board. I don't think you can have it both ways. You might think you've got a lot of authority, and you might be right regarding the people who live and breathe this card game you're representing, but you really don't mean jack to me, personally.

By the way, before you start grouping me into any of this, I don't know or care about BigChuck01 or anyone else involved in this. I'm someone who works and happens to use some of that hard earned money to purchase cards. No longer. After this incredible show of condescension, when I was already thinking about dropping this game, my mind is essentially made up.

... Oh, and the kid'll be back in a month. Who cares? Hopefully he'll still want to support the game when he sees how he's treated by the people who profit from his purchasing of cards.

We use sales and trend data gathered through a number of different sources to tell us who is buying our products, where they're purchasing, and how much. We don't get this type of data from a customer who says "You make most of your money from me." We understand that ALL of our players spend a considerable amount of time and money on our product, and this is why we are constantly striving to improve our products and programs. This is a large reason that the company has committed over 2 million dollars per year for POP alone. This does not include any of the POP staff salaries either. This is money we give back to our consumers through our programs to improve and increase the value of the Pokemon TCG, both to our company, and our consumer.

You are free to interpret what I've posted earlier as you see fit. You'll interpret what I said in the way that you want, because that's human nature, just like we're doing with Chuck et al. However, realize you are engaging in EXACTLY the behavior you're accusing me of. You're saying that what is said on this 'unofficial' board cannot be held against someone, because it's unofficial, yet, aren't you doing exactly the same to me?

Nonetheless, it is a PUBLIC board, and you may post freely here, and say what you wish, and take on whatever 'persona' you wish. However, you WILL be judge by those who read your posts based upon the content and tone of your posts. There is nothing you can do about this, except, not post.

If you were to come on this board, and say "I'm going to beat up 'player A' if I see him at the State Championships this weekend", I guarantee that this office will take that very seriously, and will have issued punitive actions towards you in an effort to maintain the integrity and safety of our events and OUR PLAYERS. That's my job. That's why we have rules, and that's why they're enforced.

My job is to make POP a fun, safe and friendly environment. You do not set that goal for me. My boss does. I do everything in my power to create this environment, and support it. I also think we're doing a darned good job of it thus far.

Whether or not I 'mean jack' to you, doesn't matter to me. If you want to play in POP events, and have a chance to earn the prizes we've made available to you, the rules that we have created will in fact 'mean jack' to you, as you'll be bound by the rules of the program I am managing.

Professor Dav
 
Instead of aruging for someone who is temporarly banned. Chuck only has a month. What about the other guys who have a question mark on when they will be allowed to post again. I'm speaking of drew holton. He has been banned for a long time now, and should go under consideration when he will be unbanned.
 
Big Daddy Snorlax said:
Darn it folks, I sure wish that we decided on bans, or more importantly un-bans, by popular vote of the membership. If we did then [insert name of banned member here] would be free to post this very evening.

UNFORTUNATELY, the decision to ban or lift a ban is one reserved for the people who run this board. I will tell you that we often consider the wishes and feelings of the community when we make decisions, but in this case, after a quick review of the wonderful supportive posts in this thread, nothing has changed...BDS

'mom
 
Last edited:
Drew? He had a temp ban. He decided to rereg with a different, inappropriate name and cause trouble.
Guess what? Temp ban became permanent.
It was his choice to do that.

Similarly, Ness chose to get a perm ban early on in this thread with a post that was way inappropriate for a PG 13 board.
His choice.

Notice a trend here?
We're not "going after" anyone. If we were, we'd just ban any number of people we "don't like" and be done with it.
Every ban is brought on by that person's own behavior. Period.
 
Professor Dav said:
DING!

We have a winner.

Prof. Dav

This is true, but both Jas and Alex are very nice players iRL. In fact, all* the people who post crap here are not like that iRL. Please, don't even consider putting a leash on these players, or the whole divison, they are just having a little fun, I know that I'm right when I say they follow the rules when they're playing a real match.

*99%
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top