Add as friend
Date of birth
Aug 29, 1992
As long as they move to South America and live there when not traveling to a a LAN, I feel there is no issue. But if they live in NA, they shouldn't be allowed to play for SA.
Article 11/22/18, 9:26 AM
You are right that it won't happen - because of culture and moneyed interests. That doesn't make my statements less true about the benefits of a ban, though. A good starting compromise, though, I think would be a blanket ban on semiautomatic firearms along with automatic weapons. Every gun that can be owned by civilians has to be bolt action or pump action or single shot, etc. Perhaps also with magazine capacities capped at 5 rounds for rifles, 8 rounds for pistols? Also, require a six week training class in order to purchase a gun, and a biannual 8-hour-long high-stress-situation-simulation test and general training course that, if you fail, removes your right to your gun until you take - and pass - the simulation again. Can retake a week or two later if you fail, perhaps. The simulation would likely involve something like live fire non-lethal (paintball, maybe? I'm not an expert, I don't like real life violence) ammunition with actors whose job it is to either be innocents or an armed criminal. You shoot an innocent, you fail.
Article 3/30/18, 5:47 PM
A gun ban would reduce the amount of lethal violence in the USA by over 50%. There would still be violence, but that's because America glorifies aggression, individualism, hatred, and tribal "us vs them" mentalities which by their very nature are dehumanizing of the other side. But, without guns, it becomes much harder to kill multiple people in a short time and get away with it. Ban guns, no more school shootings. There is no such thing as a responsible gun owner - just gun owners who have fucked up, and gun owners who will eventually fuck up - whether that be a misfire, a panic shooting, an accident involving a child shooting themselves or their friends, or simply passing the gun on to the wrong person. The only people who could theoretically be considered responsible gun owners are people who've been heavily conditioned to maintain complete calm during live-fire situations - soldiers. And even then, soldiers are human too. PTSD is proof of that. Humans have emotions, and emotions are what prevent them from being responsible owners of a weapon that takes very little effort to use to reliably kill someone - or several someones - at considerable distance. So... yeah. Ban guns, and you'll save 10 times as many Americans each year as died to terrorists in 9/11. Americans with guns... are ten times as harmful PER YEAR for their fellow Americans as terrorists were in their most successful year ever. Every year, ten 9/11s happen, in total death-toll, from legally-armed US citizens inappropriately exercising their second amendment rights.
Article 3/14/18, 5:57 AM
Hmm, I feel like this is only half way where Valve needs to go with this - I think having each tournament have a crowdfunding element, as well - even if it's something slightly unfair for the tournament itself, like Valve gets 30%, TI8 gets 15%, Tournament Prize Pool gets 15%, everything else about the tournament (sponsors, artists, organizers, staff, etc) gets 40%. While still skewing everything ridiculously in favor of TI, it allows fans of tournaments to help sponsor tournaments again. Though, ideally, it'd be 30% to Valve (their standard fee), 25% to the tournament prize pool, and 45% to everyone else involved in making the tournament happen. TI8 would still have a ridiculous prize pool because of hype, art, other features, and so on, but there'd be some crowd funding allowed throughout the year to other tournaments again. Still, if Valve's goal is to make TI break records every year, my first distribution will make that happen, I think, while still ensuring other tournaments can routinely break the $1mil mark, even if Valve doesn't consider crowdfunding when determining how much they'll throw in to the prize pool. I remember fondly back in 2013/2014 when every tournament had a ticket that granted access to a set or a courier, or some other art feature, only accessible through said ticket, and the prize pools were routinely increased by $100,000 or more (+$2.8mil for DAC), allowing every tournament to be relevant, as back then there was quite a bit less money in the scene, and no $3mil Valve Majors skewing everything.
Article 7/4/17, 7:30 PM
Class calculations based on a per-year income, which is a valid comparison for an annual tournament.
Article 11/5/16, 6:26 PM
I like this, though I feel it'd be better to make EU/CIS each a full region, personally, as EU in the last year has been roughly equal to China, and CIS is about equal to EU, overall, throughout Dota 2's history. Usually one scene or the other is dominant at any given moment, but... Also, honestly, I kind of feel that it'd be preferable to expand the Valve tournaments from a 16 team format to a 32 team format. It could only bring in more money to extend the events a couple days, and the pro scene would benefit from both having more teams able to earn prize money and having less money just get dumped on the winners for no good reason. Plus, it'd give every region an opportunity to have at least one team represent, and usually at least two. Would work well with my wish for EU and CIS to be treated like CN in their team representation. 12 Invitees (2 NA/SA, 3 EU/CIS, 3 CN, 2 SEA/Korea, winner of last Major, and the team that has been most on the rise recently), then an Americas Qualifier where the top 2 go on, then the remaining NA teams do another round, winner goes on, SA teams do the same. Minimum of 4 NA and 4 SA teams out of 10-12 total in the main qualifier. China has top 3 progress. SEA/Korea/Oceania has top 3 progress. Remaining CN/SEA/Korea/Oceania teams battle, top 2 progress. EU has top 3 progress. CIS has top 3 progress. Remaining EU/CIS teams duke it out, top 2 progress. Gets you 32 teams, with 12 Invitees and 20 Qualifier Winners. Sure, there may be a bit more of a variation in balance of power the first tournament or two, with possibly very visible tiers, but over time the fact more teams will have a chance to get more money will mean more teams will become stronger. Since we have 2 Majors instead of 3, Valve should have the 2 Majors total at $9mil as the 3 did, so the Spring Major this time should be $6mil, in my opinion. 1st: 27%, $1,620,000 2nd: 18%, $1,080,000 3rd: 12%, $720,000 4th: 7%, $420,000 5th/6th: 4.5%, $270,000 7th/8th: 3%, $180,000 9th-12th: 2%, $120,000 13th-16th: 1.25%, $75,000 17th-24th: 0.75%, $45,000 25th-32nd: 0.25%, $15,000 Prize money distributed so that each victory in the main event nets at least 50% more money, while maintaining nice, pretty numbers. Wanting the money to be really top-heavy is, IMO, kind of silly when the health of the scene is taken into consideration. A team that goes home with millions for each player in a single tournament will slack off, the scene suffers for that, and teams that lose out may have players quit due to not being able to afford to continue. A payout of $324,000 from a single tournament per person, though, for the winners is just fine. Even if you only win the one tournament, you still are set for several years barring stupid uses of money, and anyone in the top 16 will go home with at least enough that, if they've placed well in any other tournaments, or don't live in a first world country, they'll be financially secure - even if for whatever reason they're not getting a salary, or being paid in a timely manner. It just isn't good for the sport in general to continue to dump all the money on the winners and let everyone else rot, when it's already an achievement of the highest order to simply get in to a 16 team tournament, and with such large prize pools there's plenty of money to go around without making the winners suffer a loss in lifestyle if they're using their money intelligently. For reference, if TI7 had 32 teams and a $20,000,000 prize pool, the money distributed by my pattern would follow the same percentages, resulting in: 1st: $5,400,000 2nd: $3,600,000 3rd: $2,400,000 4th: $1,400,000 5th-6th: $900,000 7th-8th: $600,000 9th-12th: $400,000 13th-16th: $250,000 17th-24th: $150,000 25th-32nd: $50,000 Which rewards everyone, and every match matters roughly equally for how it impacts your life. Also kind of conveniently fits into specific class brackets. $10,000 being poverty, $30,000 being working class, $50,000 being middle class, $80,000 being upper middle class, $120,000 being upper class, $180,000 being lower rich, $280,000 being moderately rich, $480,000 being "in the 1%", $720,000 being upper rich, and $1,080,000 being "YOU WON A MILLION DOLLARS!!!" --- which is a hell of a lot of money. Most people (globally) don't get a million dollars throughout their entire life's earnings!
Article 11/5/16, 6:12 PM
Also, did anyone notice that the reason for what little money they did get, at least according to EE (who, being the protagonist of his own story, may be unreliable, but the current evidence supports his case), was from a sponsor he himself got for the team, rather than the organization getting said sponsorship? And, looking at the numbers, he delivered on his part of the contract (averaging over 60 hours/month in the 3-month period), despite it requiring him to spend at least two hours a day on stream? And that by offering 60 hours himself and 30 for the other two 'main' players for the contract, he was already pulling double the weight? Yet he only gets $24k out of $312.5k? /sadface
Article 10/9/16, 11:02 PM
If this stuff is true, and the video is rather strong evidence, then this paints a rather disturbing picture of someone who was once my favorite dota 2 player. RIP my love for Puppey. :( Players being cheated out of their money is wrong. Being always in command is one thing, but threatening violence when subordinates disagree is an entirely different thing. Etc etc etc.
Article 10/9/16, 10:59 PM
You're on page