Help Us Organize Tasty Leagues - Part 1

[yahoo]

Might want to run this by a lawyer. Last time I researched a players-pay-into-pooled-winnings structure for a tourney, my impression was that Big Brother considers this gambling--and as such imposes hefty regulations.


If I'm wrong, so much the better.  But I think it should be looked into...


Regards,

Maybe tap the services of DAWKS attorney? 

[[BTF]Jehar]

Okay, for the sake of keeping things rolling and not getting caught up on things, I'm going to make an executive decision and say: No. At least, Not Now. If we at some point down the road get good affirmation that we can do this sort of thing without getting in potential trouble, cool, but it shouldn't be a show-stopper for us. Again, the main purpose of this was simply to keep players caring enough about their games to keep playing on a good, regular schedule. I can't generalize and say there's one thing that makes people abandon these things, but I may venture some guesses:

They don't think they have any chance of winning.
This is a big one in my mind, and I think if we make skill-division-based brackets a more central part of the tastyspleen leagues, that this will be helpful. As I've stated before, what I keep seeing in q2 tournaments, be they here or across the pond, is a player pool that grows simultaneously better and smaller. There may be a correlation between these two things, so making the leagues more inclusive of lower divisions without making them feel like their buckled into a baby seat, well, that sounds good to me.

There's nothing to win, anyway.
Which brought us to the idea of payins\prizes, but it is by no means the only source of prizes. Some community members have offered their resources to this, and I'm sure some contacts from the past would be open to rekindling things for these purposes.

So, unless there are any final words, I vote we move on from this discussion to greener pastures.

[[BTF]Defiant!]

As discussed offline we have a way to generate a prize for the near term.

[|iR|Focalor]

I was thinking that requiring a fee would actually further reduce the number of participants. I know I'd never pay to play unless it actually WAS "gambling". Some people (like me) wouldn't be willing to pay to play for whatever reason. Other people wouldn't be ABLE to pay to play.

As far as the legality of it, to be super safe you would want to check federal laws (since players are located in different states), but I honestly think Johnny Law has bigger and better things to worry about than a handful of people playing Quake2.