New Interview: PFL-Alan

[Tone-Loc]

I had a chance to spend some time with the new PFL's Alan, in what will be the first of two interviews with the restarted leagues co-commissioners.

We cover a range of topics from the powers of the Clan Council vs. the league's Staff, to the concerns that there was a lack of permission from the league's founders... oh, and his "working" relationship with Wraith... yikes!

Read it here (http://www.thecatacombs.net/viewinterview.php?id=17), and feel free to discuss!

[DarthGreg]

I feel like a bit of a dick posting this here without taking it up personally with Alan or Wrath but, given my schedule and inactivity, this is the most convenient way to voice my concerns.

In the PFL of old, the staff, including the commishioner, was responsible for two things: first, the nuts and bolts of the league, like the website and schedule; secondly, the mediation of disputes and the clan council. The clan council could appeal any league decision or policy, including bans, such as Necro's. The clan council wielded the power that kept clans like KoD, aO, and $s out of the league. There is a match still fresh in my mind where we (mH) turtled heavily and played abusively to beat Zt; the clan council decided that they had it coming to them, and overturned the league decision to issue us a forfeiture.

That power was used to mold the league into a peer-mediated, highly-competitive juggernaut. Clans and players became responsible for their own playing environment, PFL was nearly polar opposite to the I-want-leagues-to-babysit-me attitude of most modern clans. It was made in response to the inadequacy of other leagues, and as a result those leagues were changed.

I'd be interested to hear either of the new commish's response to the question of how this PFL compares to the elder. How have the roles of the commishioner and council changed? Where does the new staff fit in? Is this just another STA/TFL on a new night, or do you think it really preserves the spirit of PFL?

I'm a few shades of activity above retirement myself, as I have been for years, as such I write this with a mind to the future, and the next fortress game.

[Tone-Loc]

If/when I get to have my sit-down with Wraith, and if he doesn't answer it here first... I will post your question to him ver batim.

[DarthGreg]

Thanks Tone.

[illest]

I've got to applaud your questions to Alan, tone. Very professional :)

[Wraith]

You all don't know how much I want to talk with tone after reading the last interview ;)

[Padawan]

Wraith, you stated on Sept 14 (http://www.profortress.com/Forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=57) that the banlist policy for PFL had been decided and that you hoped it would be available for everyone last weekend.

PFL now has two rostered banned players including a player banned for the use of a hack in a match.

I hold no personal issue with either of these two parties, but I do question: Will your banlist policy be announced soon now that it is the weekend again?


we will let you see what we see and give you the reason why the person was banned and the exact time in the demo."

While a full transparency policy may sound good in theory, disclosing ALL details about the EXACT evidence is sometimes not in the best interest of the community. In some circumstances, by showing the community your detection methods you are indirectly, or perhaps even directly depending on the case, showing your toolset to potential and current cheaters so they will know what NOT to do to get caught. In essence, you are teaching others how to cover up and avoid cheat detection by showing what your detection methods were.

Speaking as an anti-cheat admin for both STA and UGC, I would hope that you would take great care and consideration in the detail of evidence you release. Releasing ALL details in a full transparency policy could potentially mean the loss of those tools for use in anti-cheat detection not just in your league, but in EVERY league, and thus making cheating more difficult for ALL of us to detect, which indirectly, would allow more cheating to occur overall.


Perhaps Wraith you could address these issues for us. Or perhaps Tone, you could address these issues yourself with Wraith when you interview him.

[zon]

Please read my response in the other PFL thread, part of the facts stated in that interview are false.

[zon]

And wazzup tone loc long time no talk!!

[SleepyAlan]

Me and zon had a chat today and i believe everything is squared away

[SleepyAlan]

Yes there was some misscommunitcation and yes we do have the green light to put this topic to rest

[nam]

take allstars and thenextlevel off of your credentials please.

[free]

.

[SleepyAlan]

shh nam

[Ep.]

Hey! to so many people who've posted in the PFL threads that I haven't spoken with in too long.

I assume this topic by now is well down river of being water under the bridge, but there are still a few comments I want to pile on.

PFL/Necro... Whether the initial or later decisions were right or wrong, it shouldn't be treated as PFL's legacy. No one ever said the league or it's individual components would be perfect, which is why the PFL had an appeal process that was straight forward and accessible.

What seems to get overlooked on this topic is that the appeal process did overturn the commisioners initial ban decision. Again, it's not a point on right or wrong decisions, but a validation of a system that did away with the all powerful status of league admins of that time. PFL had a tremendous influence in how other leagues managed themselves with regards to what might be loosely termed as clan/player rights - even in Necro's case, and that's worth remembering as a legacy.

Personally, I'm glad to see TFC still kicking, and I'm glad to see the original PFL held in a high enough regard to reuse the name and concept. Whatever happens with this version, it'll sink or swim on it's own merits and so I wish them all the best with it (belated as it may be).