That's an interesting idea. We'll consider it!
That's an interesting idea. We'll consider it!
Hence our drive to have the protest board next season be staffed either by a) a representative from each team, b) a rotating panel of team representatives randomly drawn for each event, c) a panel of third party observers.
We agree that this season's situation was not optimal, however, all decisions this season have been made in good faith and without any known bias.
There's no "hiding behind the cloak." The motivation is for professionalism and expediency. As you know, the protest discussions have dragged on for up to a week in this forum this season, which makes finalizing results and standings difficult and makes things look a bit amateur. Furthermore, back and forth bickering is messy and rarely accomplishes anything when the decisions are made according to existing rules.
I mentioned the WKA and it's methods of handling protests. I would like to expand on that method, if I may for informational purposes.
When a driver feels like they have been negatively affected by the actions of another driver/team, they must:
1) Submit the proper information within a time limit
2) Race Officials notify the protested driver of the complaint, to which they have an explicit amount of time to respond.
3) Unless the complaint affects the starting line-up of an upcoming race, all protests are handled after all racing is complete. At that time, the drivers are called into conference with the Race Director (and/or series director if available), the scorers, tech officials, and track stewards. All of these officials are required to know the rules regarding both the protest procedure and the rules of racing, per how the governing body describes.
4) Each party is allowed to pose regulated (time limited and only one party speaking at any given time) explanations and rebuttals of the protest.
5) Race/Series officials take all the information and discuss it in private relative to the rules/penalties that cover that situation. Once a decision is made, it is explained to the affected parties, without the possibility of those parties to continue to argue the protest.
6) An appeal process was in place for those not agreeing with the decision, but it had to be made to the national Competition Committee, and it was a very formal situation. It often resulted in further penalties if found guilty during the appeal process.
I know we don't have an appeal process in IGTC, and I really don't think the admins are looking to add this.
Now, I know there are those that will argue that karting is not a professional racing series, but with over 10,000 active members and 120+ sanctioned tracks competing in a multi-million dollar industry, you had better believe they absolutely must have their act straight.
-In LOTA you seem to knock out 3,4,&6.
-As long as ANY marshall/admin is affliated with a team in LFS, this system is flawed.
-The proposed system has No substantial improvements over the system currently in place.
-The appeal system is unneeded, as the community sees any misdirections or errors and indicate to the admins what they see.
-As long as ANY marshall/admin is affliated with a team in LFS, this system is flawed.
-The proposed system has No substantial improvements over the system currently in place.
-The appeal system is unneeded, as the community sees any misdirections or errors and indicate to the admins what they see.
And since we're all about challenges:
Where has the current system failed?
Where has the current system failed?
I agree that the appeal system is not needed. Regarding LOTA, #3 (I agree) is missing and is perhaps needed, both in LOTA and IGTC. However, #4 is in place in that each party has the opportunity to argue for (in the form of protest submittal) or against (in the form of responding) the protest.
For one thing, the original protests against car 23 in Round 8 were by someone that was not negatively affected by the alleged violation, especially since the alleged violations did not result in any advantage whatsoever by the alleged violator. Based on that alone, those protests should have never been considered.
For me a system has failed whenever sb. claims that some rules of an existing ruleset are guidelines more then rules.
Sidenote :
I can agree on about everything you´ve posted-not only-inhere so far.
Regards [TDRT] R.Kolz
If you feel you have been wronged.
Seeing a team do something that, in their opinion, violated a rule, (happening to be the administration's team) is being wronged.
The protest was lodged to ensure that Someone was indeed not letting the madmen run the asylum, and that there was a level of accountability.
In your proposed system, no-one would be able to publicly see to this check-and-balance, if it was even allowed at all.
Absolutely right.
Additionally:
[/quote] Originally Posted by DeadWolfBones:
"For one thing, the original protests against car 23 in Round 8 were by someone that was not negatively affected by the alleged violation, especially since the alleged violations did not result in any advantage whatsoever by the alleged violator. Based on that alone, those protests should have never been considered.[/quote]
What´s that about now? As teamchief of TDRT i strongly believe that´s a part of my job.
We still had a finishing car, remember therefore it´s my right to post an objection as I felt my team was negatively affected by the alleged violation.
We DISAGREE if you believe that appeals are not needed! (in YOUR system)
When a decision rendered has nothing to do with the protest, or the car involved in the protest, and there is no public forum for viewing, discussion, righting, then your system fails. If nothing else than to post something more than a half-assed cop-out of a "decision"!
#4 is NOT present in your system, as there is NO discussion, NO rebuttals, Nothing past your initial protest and rebuttal. No Further grounds of input AT ALL!
Why are you pressing this onto a great series which you have only just joined???
There is NOTHING wrong with the system in place, and there are HUGE Gaping oversights and flaws with the system you use...
NAME ONE INSTANCE where the admins screwed up! I can't.
Take a breath, Stu. As a member of the league, Banshee has the right to post his opinion as much as you do. Furthermore, there are things wrong with the current system, as I posted above. Your ideas of "huge gaping oversights and flaws" in the system above are either your paranoia over corruption, backroom dealing, and unintentional bias (which, as far as I know, haven't played into the equation yet) or the fear of simple mistakes in judgment (which happen in all walks of life, and in plenty of real life leagues--there's never going to be a case when everyone is happy over a protest decision). In the end, you have to have faith in the admins. If you can't trust the league's administration, there is no authority in the series and there's, in a sense, no series to speak of.
ETA: In any future protest system we devise, both the offender and the offended will have a chance to state their case to the admins. The only difference is that the case won't be open for the argument of others.
How can your team have been negatively affected by someone not having a pit limiter on during the last sector, but then had it on at the time of green flag? He gained absolutely no advantage over the TDRT or any other team by doing that.
Not sure if you mean the protest system or the admin system in general, so I'll go for the broader view:
1. Benji and I don't have a well-organized system for discussing and evaluating protests. Most decisions, while well-considered, are done on an individual basis by one of us and then run by the other.
2. The discussion threads for protests are filled with a lot of irrelevant bickering that often obscures the facts of the case. It would be much better if the system were set up to allow both sides to present their case in a pair of well thought-out statements and then leave it to the admins to decide the result.
3. The current in-race admin system is quite slapdash and prone to snap judgments that may be in error because they're made so quickly. In the future we need to have a dedicated team of track marshals (i.e., people who watch the track for accidents) as well as a couple or three individuals who discuss and determine the appropriate course of action, whether it be penalties or a SC.
I don't think the current protest system has produced poor results in terms of fair judgments, but I do think that it's messy and unwieldy and unnecessarily cluttered with the opinions of those who are not involved in the incidents being discussed.
Since at this point we hopefully have the rules more firmly nailed down, I feel it's fair to move to a more streamlined and professional approach to protest resolution.
RE:section D.4.3 - http://www.lfsforum.net/attach ... id=41460&d=1193082640
if a team files an objection that is upon staff review found to be a non-issue (not warranting a penalty to the accused) then the filing team is assesed the penalty that would have been handed out to the offender....
did ya follow that?
I'd bet people would be a lot more careful in filing reports
if a team files an objection that is upon staff review found to be a non-issue (not warranting a penalty to the accused) then the filing team is assesed the penalty that would have been handed out to the offender....
did ya follow that?I'd bet people would be a lot more careful in filing reports
Indeed. We'll also look into that.
Why must you have unquestionable blind faith in an fallable human?
Its intrinsic to equity to have questionable doubt. Especially if the human is tied to a team inside the series.
I haven't seen more than possibly two protests where any party was left blatantly unsatisfied this season.
The fact remains, with the current system, no wrong decisions have gone unseen. In the proposed system, decisions and the process behind them can go unseen by the public.
Umm...you stated that an appeals system is unneeded. It's clear to me that you are continuing to argue a protest from another league that didn't go your way, and now you are doing so on the forums of this league. Simply put, if you don't like the way something is being done, volunteer to help instead of excessively arguing.
Perhaps and expansion of the rebuttal system is needed. We'll consider it.
I am merely stating an opinion based on my racing experience, both in real life (12 years as a karting competitor and 3 as a Race Director) and in simulation (3-1/2 years in LFS alone, and 8 different leagues). I have the same right as you to voice my opinion in a series in which I've competed, regardless of whether I have competed in less events that you.
As far as I can tell, your opinion of "...gaping oversights and flaws with the system [LOTA] uses..." stems from the fact that you seem to want to argue endlessly when a protest doesn't go your way. I understand that no system is perfect, LOTA or IGTC, but to date, I have yet to see any suggestions regarding the LOTA protest method, only complaints when things don't go your way.
My apologies to the IGTC admins. I won't add to this discussion/argument that seems to be happening directly with Stu any further, as I feel that Stu is using this opportunity to argue over a decision in a different series that didn't go his way, and that does not add anything positively to the advancement of IGTC. Good luck to you guys in your efforts to implement a protest system that eliminates protests littered with bickering like we've continued here.
This is actually a good idea. A modified version of this is done in many local racing series in real life, where the protesting team must submit a significant monetary application fee, and if the protest is upheld, they get it back. If not, they lose that money, which is a huge factor in considering whether to protest. You must be sure that you are in the right before you submit a protest, or you risk a loss of some sort. Obviously, the money portion can't be implemented, but how about risking a standard point deduction if your protest is denied? Hmmm....professional football in the US does the same thing with Coache's Challenges, in that they risk losing a highly valuable time-out if their challenge is denied.
Ya that's what I was gettin at...thanks m8
No one's asking for blind faith. I'm only asking for the amount of faith/respect that any competitor should have for the admins in any series/league in any sport.
As has been stated, we are working to create an admin team that doesn't also drive and is not tied to the teams in the league.
I've already stated my case here. You can read it above. But I'll note that the decisions and justifications would be made public once a decision has been reached, and that both the offender and offended would be involved in the decision-making process.
Short and Sweet:
1) Appeals aren't needed in the current IGTC series. In your proposed series, they are very much needed.
2) I've volunteered to help.
3) It'd be great if you really considered the lack of rebuttal in LOTA
4) I'm trying to give logical suggestions toward improving known problems within the IGTC, not spreading my series outwards
5) About decisions in a different league. I'm not taking it there, but in the IGTC the admins stand publicly behind their decisions.
6) Penalizing a team for trying to ensure the rules are enforced?
And there's a very good chance you'll be called up for the protest review board in season 2.
Banshee isn't trying to colonize IGTC in the name of LOTA or anything like that. He simply has an idea of a system that might work for protests and he's spelling it out. Leave it at that.
No, penalizing a team for filing frivolous or unsupported protests that waste the time of the officials and of the team accused.
Please !
No hardcore channels, for important things like that.
I once tried IRC and I`ll never do that again
It is much better to have a thread in this forum, where everyone can go and ask questions, during a race.
Keep it simple
All things you want to know, should be easy to finde, in here. Not on 14 different medias.
It doen`t make it more professional, with fancy panty homesites. At the end of the day, we will judge you on the way the race was conducted
Clear messages, clear rules and a fair and clean race, will make people call IGTC professional races.
And could I speak for more points !?
Of course everyone drives for placings, but instead of having zero points, it could be nice, also for the "back of the pack" to have something to figth for.
EDIT :
What about different car classes !? - Have you discussed that. The argument of the speed difference is simply not true. Having slow and fast cars, amongst each other, would give the race much more dynamics. Even the lonely leader will not fall asleep, because he has some slower cars to overtake all the time
At least consider gtr2 classes, like the ones in CTRA. That would be a sure winner !
I think the event "Race Reports" on this forum has worked very well and as long as it doesn't tie up a admin or marshal, too much, should be kept as is.
I have no doubt that the series will improve with experience and input by the competitors and the sometimes bitching about race incidents. If more than one person is fussing about a situation it's well worth the time to look into it and come to a decision. I can only compliment the involvement DWB and Benji has had with this series and they way they do make the effort to make the series better. Thank you all.
I have no doubt that the series will improve with experience and input by the competitors and the sometimes bitching about race incidents. If more than one person is fussing about a situation it's well worth the time to look into it and come to a decision. I can only compliment the involvement DWB and Benji has had with this series and they way they do make the effort to make the series better. Thank you all.
I think Benji and I would both love to do multiclass racing, but there hasn't been sufficient interest yet to divide the field. We'd have to have a dedicated, guaranteed full server field for each round to make it worth it.
I second more classes
Suggestions
(138 posts, started )
FGED GREDG RDFGDR GSFDG