TJR wrote:Tirer le Ryan Oison Uneski wrote:
How did I disrupt it so?
By predicting the same as your opponent. Then requesting extra fixtures, a request which was granted before it was decided it would be too short notice to implement extra fixtures. Also an issue was raised about the extra fixtures giving an unfair advantage to you over your opponent despite you opponent predicting first, which upon examination appeared to be the case. With all the chaos a postponement appeared to be the only option.
Unfortunately that is all we can say until after 18:00 on Friday. We have been generous as it is by giving you this information to help you respond to the charge. You have until 18:00 on Friday to respond to the charge.
Every person in the thread predicted a home win for RM, so that charge must be dropped unless you are going to charge the others. A policy of non-enforcement will lead to non-prosecution by a fair court.
Your decision to add extra fixtures was your own, not mine. I only said that the current round was not working as, as previously mentioned, everyone had the same result for the RM game. By adding extra fixtures you could have avoided having to force the second predictor to have to settle for what they wouldn't have predicted in the first place. This policy changes it from a "Prediction League" to a "Who was online at the time the fixtures were released League"
I believe you agreed with this, which is why you made the decision to add more fixtures. The fact that you consequently decided that it was too late to do this and canceled the round, again, is nothing to do with me.
To summarise, unless all predictors are going to be charged for predicting the same (on the RM game) I plead not guilty.
On the charge of causing disruption, I also plead not guilty, unless you are going to face the same charges.
I'm pretty sure even they are clear on the details of the charge.
