[Peleus]

Originally Posted by Bugalugs McScruffin

One last question for PeleusSPR, where are your players in this discussion? What are their thoughts on all of this? If I've missed them, feel free to point them out, I haven't read the entire thread.

I'm guessing by 'your players' you're meaning the players in SPR that are largely effected by this. A few answers
a) I don't know, I don't keep tabs on them
b) I think regardless of how relevant the topic is for them, language barriers will a lot of the time prevent discussion from occurring / they will be more reluctant because they can't carry a conversation / debate very well - also why I'm against 'sc2sea.com' posting requirements.
c) They may simply be less active and haven't checked sc2sea today.

Having directly answered the question I'll also raise what I think is an important point, don't focus on SPR members. This isn't an aim to deflect any scrutiny on 'our' situation as a clan (I don't speak on behalf of SPR with these posts) but rather the inclusion of all foreign players. It may be a SPR member this week, but it may also be a NA player next week, or a EU player the next month. Looking at individual cases is a red herring.

Originally Posted by Rage

I personally support having an objective benchmark - 100 games, or 200 games, or whatever, but then COMBINING that with an admin veto system.

Rather than giving admins the power to allow people to play, give them the power to veto people who meet the technical requirements but who we don't believe are members of the community.

Strongly disagree. I'd be ok with admin veto's for allowing people, but NOT for excluding people*.
a) It brings subjectivity into it, bringing us back to square 1 and fails to whole system, exactly what we're looking to avoid
b) The requirements set (whatever they are) should be the definition of what it takes to be counted as part of our community. Therefore there should never be by definition someone who can pass these technical requirements, but not be a part of our community.

*This is not to say admins should be or would be powerless. If players need to be banned for whatever reason, cheating, racism, BM, whatever of course they can. I'm limiting the grounds to eligibility through participation within SEA. If you think they can achieve the 'technical' requirements but not be a member, argue for higher technical requirements.

Originally Posted by Bugalugs McScruffin

That is the problem with objective measures like this. What is enough? I believe that you have to go overboard to ensure that you keep out the people that are just interested in the tournaments. Consistent activity is the key, but the number still needs to be high to ensure that it is not consistent but just enough to get into the tournaments.

I will refer you back to this... http://xkcd.com/810/

I'm not trying to be a smart a*$@, but my genuine point is if they have completed X amount of games that we as a community has defined as becoming part of it, who cares what their further motive is, our 'goal' of having a level of participation within the community is achieved.

The issue that people have with systems like this is the players that play 100 games exactly just so they can enter the tournament and never play on the server again. If you increase it to 200 or 250 then these players will just play the extra games. If you force them to be consistent over a period of time they are more likely to be part of the community participating on ladder instead of getting to the arbitrary limit and then stopping.

Reading this you may be referring to the 'straight x amount of games period', in which case I agree, but thats why I think the majority seem to accept a 'over 2 seasons' approach. With the number though, I suppose see my above point.

I am curious though, enough that I'll skim through the rest of this thread, where are the opinions of the players that this decision will affect? If they are not present in the discussion do they want to be a part of the community or do they just want to know if they are allowed to come and win our league?

Once more a few points
a) Some may not be aware of sc2sea's existence yet. We're (hopefully) discussing the rules for years into the future, not just current members / borderline cases. The EU pro who wants to be part of the community 9 months from now can't post here at the moment.

b) This post has only been active a few hours, in the other eligibility post there was some contribution from 'borderline' members.

c) Language barriers as I said in a post above will often preclude them from participating in this type of discussion. Nothing against Balloon, but clearly his English is good enough for posting a "Hi guys" type thread, but he is not going to be able to convey his thoughts as many others can.

Again - don't focus on the red herrings of particular cases, set a framework in place that works for both current members and future ones.