From: jsin@lanai.cs.ucla.edu (Jonghoon Sin)
Subject: Re: GB at LAR
Organization: UCLA, Computer Science Department
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 92 16:27:45 GMT

In article <1ed75sINN3n5@agate.berkeley.edu> tom@soda.berkeley.edu (Tom Holub) writes:
>The point you are missing here is that during last week's game, 
>ghostbusts were going to be a problem; if CERFnet and BARRnet are
>both flaky, there's no option for an LA-Berkeley game.  

No, I rather think it is you who is missing the point.

>During our
>first game, you guys decided to play on a server that you knew
>ahead of time has nasty lag in the best conditions; I considered
>this a very unsportsmanlike decision.  Not 'cheating', but unsportsmanlike.

Hey, you also knew that there would be a lag.  Neither team realized just
how much, until the actual game time.  It's not like they had a second
or third server just waiting to go up at that time.  Even you would
agree that calvin is normally not *that* bad.  I don't see how this shows
unsportsmanlike behavior on LARs part.

>And note that I didn't say anything at the time; I am only speaking
>up now because of the incredibly arrogant attitudes some of you
>are displaying.

Yeah, I did note you didn't say anything then.  As you said, it was
frustrating experience for you, and I agreed.  But don't give me this "I 
am only speaking up now" stuff, because you're the one who brought this up 
again by saying that LAR deserved your comments that your teammates made.  
I took execption to that.  That is not arrogance.

>Fortunately, more intelligent heads prevailed for the rematch.  Between
>your posts and 5150's, LA Riot's attitude would seem to be "We are going 
>to insist on playing our games on the server with the worst lag in the 
>continental US, and we're going to get all bent out of shape if anyone
>complains about it."

I don't know about 5150's or LAR's, but my feeling is that you guys are
less than desirable when it comes to being respectable.  After the first
game, I gave you a lot of credit for playing with the lag, with the 
exception of certain Amazing person.  After the second game, I had no
comments one way or the other, until you said the LAR deserved bad comments 
for the first game.  I don't know about you, but to me that is being a bad 
sport; at least a questionable behavior.

LAR didn't get all bent out of shape when you complained, I got bent out of
shape when you seem to be saying "calvin's lag is absolute worst; LAR
deliberately plays there to gain unfair advantage over their opponents; 
they are all bad sport for getting away with it, and they should all be 
flamed out of existence, at least out of INL".  It is one thing to
hate and despise calvin.  It is quite another to slam on the team members.

>                      I realize that this is not the attitude of the
>whole team, and I thank those of you who desired a quality game more
>than a win.

So I'm now an "intelligent head" who "desire a quality game more than a
win"?   (I provided the server machine for you to play, and setup 
guest accounts for none-UCLA members of LAR).  I mean, I don't think it so 
important that you lose or LAR to win - I don't really care on way or the 
other.  It's just when you go off bad-mouthing them, I want to speak up.

Since you've already thanked LAR who "desired a quality game more than a 
win", why don't you go all out and say that LAR didn't deserve all those
acrimonious comments?  Or is that too much to ask?

If you still believe that LAR did deserve it, well, I tried.

>But you, personally, can go to hell.

I won't start a flame war if you won't.  Just admit you said something you
shouldn't have, and we won't think any less of you.
-- 
John Sin       <jsin@janet.ucla.edu>  ...!uunet,ucbvax)!seas.ucla.edu!jsin
UCLA EE Dept.  53-109 Engineering IV, Los Angeles, CA 90024  (213)206-7983
Organization: Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA