Treasure Tag Discussion Thread
Posted 21 June 2016 - 06:35 PM
a) after seeking clarification while simultaneously attempting to explain my position (in chat) to TreasureTech, other contest participants, and the chat-room members that were present. I entered chat and asked about it the very moment I saw the discrepancy. I was tagged at 12:02 p.m. and spent the next almost 3 hours researching past TT Tag contests, decisions, and threads in an effort to make sure that my understanding of Treasure Trooper Tagâ€™s rules and procedures was rooted in facts. I presented my position (that drag29 & the other 4 contest participants were eliminated) in a non-defensive and objective manner. I did not try to sway others based on my opinion, but took the time to paste the contest rules and prior statements & explanations by nikkums that supported my conclusion.
In return, I was basically mocked (this is my subjective conclusion). Factually, however I was compared to a dog that would not leave a bone alone and openly mocked. However, I maintained my civility. I could have sarcastically suggested that they get Hooked on Phonics and maybe it could help them increase their reading comprehension. Someone actually remarked they regretted tagging me. This was stated in a manner that would lead people to conclude that I was the issue or problem; and not the fact that several people had inadvertently failed to follow the clearly stated rules and directions. Once I was advised by TreasureTech to stop commenting on it and to leave it alone, until you made a decision, I did;
after further seeking clarification and simultaneously attempting to explain my position in the Treasure Trooper forum on this very thread;
c) waiting until 1 hour and 59 minutes after I was tagged as I kept hoping TreasureTech would see the light (as he was listed as a user that was reading the TT Tag's current contest thread topic) or that you would pop in and save the day;
d) "under protest" as I did not concur with the instruction that I received that I had to tag someone before my 2 hours were up or I'd be eliminated. I knew based on the clearly stated rules that drag29 and the remaining participants had eliminated themselves and thus I was the last one left standing, by making me tag someone, under threat of elimination, it essentially stripped me of the win that I had gained through the othersâ€™ mistakes.
â€œUnder protestâ€ is a legal concept that qualifies that the action I took was clearly contrary to my desire, will. or expressed intentions. The purpose of qualifying that an action is being done only "under protest" is to preserve the person's right to pursue further action, judgment, relief, or claim.
The chat logâ€™s record will bear witness that I conveyed all of the foregoing in the chat-room, even declaring myself the winner. I was instructed by TreasureTech, a Treasure Trooper (moderator, staff, administration, partner, or owner - or all of the above ~ I'm not sure which), that my stance on the issue was incorrect and that I had to tag someone within the 2 hours or I would be eliminated. TreasureTech stated that if he was wrong, that he would face nikkums.
I was placed in a no win situation (pun intended, albeit somewhat ironically). I was advised to tag, or I'd be eliminated; despite the fact that I presented all of the information to prove that based on Treasure Trooper Tagâ€™s own clearly stated contest rules (which were the same for all the threads I viewed from 2013 â€“ present with the exception of adding in the home base feature) that the others had eliminated themselves.
Even though I knew I was right, and that based on the clearly stated rules, that drag29 and the other 4 had eliminated themselves from the contest; I felt doomed based on the conversations and directions given to me in chat. I was advised Iâ€™d be eliminated if I did not tag, despite my presentation of the TT Tagâ€™s contest rules which were to the contrary.
I was concerned that if I did not tag as directed to, by TreasureTech (a TT person of authority) that when nikkums came back and accessed the contest, the outcome would have been that drag29 would have been eliminated for his 11:08 a.m. post, then tgrene66, SilentEscape, fangsword, & forestfreebies would have been disqualified for their chain-reaction unauthorized tags, and then I would have been eliminated for failure to follow TreasureTechâ€™s instruction to tag someone w/in the 2 hours; or Iâ€™d be eliminated. At the time and under the contestâ€™s time constraints TreasureTech was the senior person in authority in Treasure Trooper's chat-room.
Yet, I knew that the directed tagging, essentially would steal the win that was already mine, hence why I did not want to tag anyone; and only did so because I was advised Iâ€™d be eliminated if I didnâ€™t.
In summary, I am not sure where the confusion stemmed from, but in my opinion, the rules were quite clear. Why else would I be so bold as to declare myself the Victor. I do not believe I should have been told to tag within the 2 hour guidelines or Iâ€™d be eliminated.
In order to right this wrong; I believe I should be declared the winner and receive the first-place prize. I believe forestfreebies should get second place as she had the last valid post prior to drag29â€™s mistake. As there was clearly some confusion, I believe Treasure Trooper should start another round of TreasureTrooper Tag forthwith â€“ which I, forestfreebies, and tgreene66 should not be allowed to participate.
Posted 21 June 2016 - 08:27 PM
Posted 22 June 2016 - 07:15 AM
So, the contest will continue where it left off, just as I already officially ruled. This is not up for further discussion.
Posted 22 June 2016 - 07:19 AM
For future reference, yes, you would be able to use multiple homebases in one day, but only one per turn. So you would need to be tagged twice in one day to use both if you earn two.
However, since we are now down to three participants, homebases are no longer allowed.
Posted 22 June 2016 - 08:17 AM
Posted 23 June 2016 - 01:26 PM
Posted 23 June 2016 - 02:48 PM
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users