MTG Salvation

The numbers are correct, updating it now to work. Sorry, I forgot to change them while copy-pasting.

Falling a bit behind today so i'll likely have the rules draft tomorrow.

Here is my proposed draft of rules for delays. Take them in, and critique freely (and point out typos/clarifications.)

Organizer and Judge Delay Procedures

Volunteering to organize and judge the MCC is a great boon to our custom card community. However, it comes with responsibilities and expectations of timeliness. In the interest of encouraging a quality competition with clear communication and advancement, the following procedures outline the official rules for delays in the MCC due to Organizer and/or Judge tardiness.

Section 1 - Penalty Levels
------------
1-1: All infractions of the rules result in a Penalty Level increase.
1-2: The Penalty Levels are as follows:

• 1-2a: Warning – No Action is taken, but an official warning is listed in the MCC Discussion thread with a date of the warning.
• 1-2b: Level 1 – Organizer or Judge is banned from participating in the MCC as an organizer, judge, or player in the following month.
• 1-2c: Level 2 – Organizer or Judge is banned from participating for the following two months.
• 1-2d: Level 3 – Organizer or Judge is banned from participating for the following three months.
• 1-2e: Level 4 – Organizer or Judge is banned from participating for the following four months.
• 1-2f: Level 5 – Organizer or Judge is banned from participating for the following five months.
• 1-2g: Level 6 – Organizer or Judge is banned permanently.

1-3: And Organizer or Judge who does not receive an infraction for 6 months from their most recent infraction goes down one Penalty Level.


Section 2 – Organizer Specific Responsibilities
------------
2-1: The Organizer is responsible for setting MCC deadlines. Once set, the Organizer is responsible for adhering to their schedule along with the Judges. This applies to both judging and posting contest threads for the round.
2-2: New contest threads are due within 24 hours of the judging deadline or when the last judge/organizer posted their judgments, whatever comes last. Failure to do so or communicate as outlined in 2-3 results in a Penalty Level increase.
2-3: Should an Organizer feel the need to alter the schedule in anyway, it must be publicly announced in both the MCC discussion thread and the current MCC contest thread. Changes must be communicated no later than a 24 hour period after the original deadline passed. Failure to do so results in a Penalty Level increase.


Section 3 – Judging
------------
3-1: Judging is to be completed by Organizer set deadlines.
3-2: If an Organizer or Judge fails to submit judgments by they deadline, they are given a 24 hour grace period to complete them or otherwise communicate when they intend to finish as outlined in 3-3. Failure to do so results in a Penalty Level increase.
3-3: An Organizer or Judge may post in the MCC discussion thread if they need more time then a deadline allows. This must be done before the 24 hour grace period has elapsed. This extension may not exceed 48 hours later than the original deadline. Failure to complete judging within the extension period results in a Penalty Level increase.


Section 4 – Resignation
------------
4-1: An Organizer or Judge may choose to resign at any point in a month. This must be communicated in the MCC Discussion thread or they will be subject to the full range of Penalty Level increases outlined above for the full course of the month.
4-2: An Organizer who resigns once their contest month has begun receives a Penalty Level increase.
4-3: A Judge who resigns during a judgment period receives a Penalty Level increase.

Clearly a lot of care went into creating this. Maybe it would help convince lackadaisical judges to keep their end of the agreement, but I have to admit that the degree of punitiveness and lawyerly thoroughness sounds cringey as all get-out to me. From the perspective of someone who hasn't ever judged an MCC, but might otherwise be interested, I'm the opposite of encouraged to volunteer by the prospect of being added to what amounts to a blacklist if I have a lapse of attention or experience intervening circumstances. What's the chance of reducing the specificity and quantity of "penalty levels?" ...and maybe lightening the tone overall?

Admittedly the tone could use improvement. Basically what it spells out is, if you're late you've got 24 hours to finish or at least say something or you go up a level. If you lapse and just miss one deadline then you get a warning. If you don't get one again for a while, you lose your warning status. But if you keep missing deadlines every time you judge and don't say a peep, you keep getting banned for longer.

Maybe there can be an abridged version in a friendlier tone and a comprehensive rules that are outlined like above hidden away in spoiler tags for reference?

I think what you have there seems very reasonable IcariiFA. Thanks for the work. My main question is, who the heck is going to keep track of all that? Is it up to each month's host? What if it is the host that is the problem? It seems like it could be a lot of work for someone to have to keep the list up to date.

My 2 cents: I think a better approach would be for considering MCC judges as a "team", and members of the team can write to the MCC Discussion thread if someone is consistently lagging or not doing his job. Maybe have recommended punitive actions as you describe (though I don't think anything beyond Level 1 or Level 2 is ever warranted. I don't even know how someone practically reaches the upper levels), but I think I'd rather things be in the hands of the other judges rather than a rule book. I think the other judges (and long-time members like IcariiFA or Flatline) should be able to veto someone from being a judge the following month.

Anyway, I think I'd gear the rules more in that direction.

The expectations laid out in Section 2 and 3 are roughly what one should expect.

I have no interest in vetoing someone volunteering to judge. That is not an argument I want to get anywhere near. That's why I support an impartial, open, agreed upon standard. That way there are no ifs, ands, or buts.

Even if you have a team of people updating people's MCC status, what does that look like? Will people just copy the old "status post" and then change it? Perhaps it should be its own thread pinned to the top of the forum? That would make it a lot easier to access. Especially if there hadn't been any changes in a while, and the post was a few pages back in the discussion thread. Another idea would be to put it in a spoiler in the OP for each round's challenge, then make it the host's responsibility to keep it up to date. I'd rather not give the host even more work to do though.

The point of having a rule system like this is so it is both standardized and public what is going on with the status of the MCC and judging. Having a committee write and/or vote whenever they feel someone steps out of line will invite pettiness and disputes, all going on behind the scenes and leaving participants clueless. I don't like the idea.

Late is late. It should be handled the same for everyone. If you choose to be a judge or an organizer, you need to treat everyones time involved with the process with respect. That means being on time yourself so everyone gets fair treatment.

The primary good thing about an objective standard is that members of the community don't have to call someone out for not being courteous in doing their job well or promptly.

I don't have time now for detailed feedback nor I will probably in the next few days, but there is one thing I want to repeat, as it was already said: it all looks good, but who keeps track of it? We already tried a similar thing in the past that died exactly because nobody was keeping track of it.

We could start a pinned thread dedicated to it or have someone track it here in the discussion thread. It could just be one person responsible so long as they are active on the forums. I could do it.

maybe do a pinned thread with the history of judges for all competitions throughout the site's history, and put this at the bottom of the first post?

EDIT: I thought I saw a list of judges who hosted a competition somewhere, but I don't see it anymore, so scratch that. But you could do a small pinned post that lists the CCL, MCC, and DCC and say who hosts each month. Design it in such a way so as to make it look positive and emphasize the contributions judges make to the community. Then, at the bottom, put this in its own section/spoiler. I still don't think so many levels are necessary though, and like Rocco said, maybe make the tone a bit less daunting?

Quote from kjsharp »

maybe do a pinned thread with the history of judges for all competitions throughout the site's history, and put this at the bottom of the first post?

EDIT: I thought I saw a list of judges who hosted a competition somewhere, but I don't see it anymore, so scratch that. But you could do a small pinned post that lists the CCL, MCC, and DCC and say who hosts each month. Design it in such a way so as to make it look positive and emphasize the contributions judges make to the community. Then, at the bottom, put this in its own section/spoiler. I still don't think so many levels are necessary though, and like Rocco said, maybe make the tone a bit less daunting?

Some of what you're talking about is in the Hall of Fame thread. However the point of this rules discussion isn't about establishing a thread to acknowledge judges doing well. It's to enforce MCC deadlines. All it needs is a thread with the rules, the levels, and listing any judge or organizer who has suffered a penalty and on the date the penalty was issued.

Hall of Shame, anyone?

I personal don't have an issue with a "Hall of Shame." However, it that seems distasteful, if could just be a post that is updated in this thread instead.

Quote from IcariiFA »

I could do it.

You're hired! When can you start?

I think pinning a new thread at the top of the forum seems like a good idea. Especially if IcariiFA is going to handle it all himself. If not, perhaps just copying and pasting it into each round's OP would work? It would put the onus on each month's host that way though.

I have no problem with IcariiFA's status levels at all, but I'd like to propose an alternative that might be easier. How about 3 violations and your out? Every 3 times you are late, you get suspended for X months, where X is equal to the number of times you've been suspended (1 month for the 1st, 2 for the 2nd, etc). That way there is no need to move people up and down levels or keep track of dates. All you need to do is keep track of the number of infractions a person has, and the number of times they've been suspended. This is just an idea that seems easier to me, but if you're going to keep track of all of it, feel free to use your system if you like. Also, I have never hosted, and have only judged once, so I'm not sure I should even get much say in the matter.

Round 2 judgements are all in, and Round 3 is up now! I'm taking a gamble that God-Pharoah's Gift won't be revealed until the full card file, as that's been the trend in the past. If it is revealed beforehand, I request that you ignore it until your card is finished. Each card should be judged without the burden of the actual card.

Are we supposed to ignore the new HOU mechanics too? Or are those fair game?

Those are fair game.

Quote from IcariiFA »

Considering we are probably going to have that exact card spoiled before this round is over this probably isn't the best idea for a challenge...

...holder.

I think it seems like a fun challenge. Although I agree that it will be better if the actual card isn't spoiled before the round closes. I don't follow such things very closely though, so I'm not sure what the odds are of making through the round before the card is spoiled.

Quote from Flatline »

Quote from IcariiFA »

Considering we are probably going to have that exact card spoiled before this round is over this probably isn't the best idea for a challenge...

...holder.

I think it seems like a fun challenge. Although I agree that it will be better if the actual card isn't spoiled before the round closes. I don't follow such things very closely though, so I'm not sure what the odds are of making through the round before the card is spoiled.

I agree that the challenge will be much better if God-Pharaoh's Gift is spoiled after Wednesday, but even if it does happen (track record on things like this seems to be pretty even, and the Gate wasn't spoiled early.) then the cards will still be judged individually and with the same mindset. This is partially why I suggest to finish your card fairly quickly or avoid that spoiler until you do to maximize practicality without trying to stay close or stray from the actual card.

tbh, Wizards' track record on making these cohesive is pretty bad. Look at Dark Intimations and the new Nicol Bolas. So I think it's fairly likely that the designs we all submit will be better than what Wizards decides to print. I'm looking forward to the challenge!

Quote from kjsharp »

tbh, Wizards' track record on making these cohesive is pretty bad. Look at Dark Intimations and the new Nicol Bolas. So I think it's fairly likely that the designs we all submit will be better than what Wizards decides to print. I'm looking forward to the challenge!

Aren't you arrogant?

Dark intimations synergies fine with both new Nicol Bolas cards depending what synergies your expect.

Regardless there is a distinct possibility that the God-Pharaoh card will be revealed before judging is over. That will influence how entries are examined in potential unfun ways. I think it's unwise and expressed that opinion. We will see how it plays out.

I guess Chaz and Saffron Olive and many other Magic content creators are arrogant too. They expressed the exact same opinion. In general people considered the interaction between the two cards a design and flavor failure. Please stop trying to go out of your way to insult and belittle me for no reason.

I sympathize with your hesitancy about the round's challenge but we are already behind schedule and we have reason to be positive and optimistic. The challenge is a fun one, and I look forward to seeing what others create.