Eh. That's being a bit overly literal about a specific line written in the ITS document or an aged response by Koni. Using only those sources you'll reasonably often run into unsolvable situations, which can sometimes be solved by following what the rules team have written on the forums in specifically marked posts and threads. This doesn't cover all cases where you can potentially run into too complex situations for the rules to handle, but it reduces the number of situations where a duel at dawn is otherwise the only way to prove who has the correct interpretation of a rule. The official answers on the forums are almost always stuff that the written document you list do not cover. You mainly only have to be aware of what dates are and how to compare them. The difficult part is reading the main rules, which are not written in a manner that is friendly to quick look ups.
Nope, is respecting the rules. If you feel you can ignore rules "because those are old", it's your choice, but official tournaments have a list of officially sanctioned documents. Pretending to ignore that and add whatever, forcing people to check the forums compulsively just in case somebody has written a "rule" is not conductive to a stable game. Asking CB to increase the number of answers per FAQ would, however.
That is not what I wrote. CB doesn't make adjustments urgently on the forums because rules are old. Never have. They do those posts when there's something urgently wrong enough with the rules that it needs official mediation.
Except for the part where without some rules answers and clarifications (a lot of which are official by the rule teams) the game would have a lot of unplayable corner cases. But I guess we can ignore those for your narrative.
On the other hand, one could answer that they deeply meditate their answers in between the rest of their duties, instead of jumping with the first answer one could imagine. As I said, achieving a higher response rate from CB per published FAQ would be the ideal solution. IJW is no "the rule teams", but one member. Trying to portrait his posts as officially endorsed by the rules team, specially when some of said posts were published after the whole spanish side of the team went on vacation is not honest. Also, you keep pushing into "this CB employee whose narrative aligns with mine is right. Yours is not", which is frankly repetitive and irrelevant. Neither the FAQ nor the ITS document (which was patched at least once, but we can wait for ITS13 now anyway) have revoked nor modified the endorsed documents list. What will you do in 2-3 months when we will have a new FAQ and ITS document, with none of those corrections, and the list of places to check in the ITS will remain the same? Claim CB "forgot" to add the Forums? Keep pushing with the "the rules team published this here, so it must be right even when it wasn't added to any FAQ that came after"? The sunken costs fallacy applied to opinion is quite fascinating, but you should re-evaluate your position. Incidentally, some "corner cases which make the game unplayable" have been answered on Telegram. Others on one Facebook group or another (because the Warcors group is not the Infinity page, etc...). Others on Discord, and others here in the forum. And I'm not seeing those Q&A present in all those medias. Which means a player that wants to be current with what you call "officially endorsed answers" would need to trawl no less than four different platforms. Plus the FAQs. Ideal solution for new players, ne?
It's a terrible way to get the rules to new players, but that doesn't mean that this isn't what CB is doing. I hope he's okay.
I'll elaborate. A team has more than a single member, and he's neither the spokeperson, nor is he the most relevant member (if there were any, that'be Gutier). Glad to hear he's ok. (as a joke: "ok-ish", since he seems to have jumped into Warhammer40k)
Any team member who does not share information is irrelevant as a source of information. He was also the designated member to wrangle information flow on forums and wiki, so the collective hissy fit across all social platforms and the basically personal attacks on his integrity did all the game communities a disfavour.
All gaming posts I saw when I checked were about Epic, which is OOP by GW and from what I heard, some versions have good rules. Oh wait, checked again, he retweeted https://twitter.com/InfinityTheGame/status/1424039380088467459 and https://twitter.com/AristeiaTheGame/status/1419599625812516868 Now I'm even more confused. So confirmed, not involved with Infinity anymore? On a personal view, he seemed to be the face about rules, but lacking autonomy to make decissions (aka "living the Spanish employee life"). Normal to burn out, if that was the case.
Wrong/unconsensuated information flow is not good information. Remember the context is his decision to publish some sort of "official FAQ only found in the Infinity Forum" that has not shown up anywhere else, nor has it been revised/debunked/supported by any CB staff. Also, I don't know about hissy fits across any social platform. I looked for IJW's twitter because of the comments he was posting there recently, but I avoid any social platforms (I don't have a twitter account, in fact, it's faster to say I have a Facebook I rarely use, a google account that logs me in YT, and Telegram), I prefer to go around reading an ebook than twitter/FB frankly... For what I heard around, the problem was mostly of speed. He would "jump the gun" too fast, while the rest of the rules team preferred to take their time (to inordinate amounts of time, true). Mind you, even when talking directly to spanish CB employees in the rules team, their default answer was always "we will look it", and unless stuff changed a lot in the last year or two, most of everything Infinity related goes through Gutier (Interruptor), which means a choke point. Being a mouthpiece and a relayer is not, however, my experience as a Spanish employee, btw ^^U
If you are not capable of understanding what "interim ruling" means, or why it is useful to have official arbitration available on rules interactions that otherwise requires a judge to arbitrate or you might as well pack the game up, then that is entirely on you. You know the one close to a year ago now regarding AROs. About when I estimate that you started taking what advantages you could to discredit his rulings. Is that the decision he did that you really don't like or is it something else? 'cause you and one or two others from the Spanish side really don't seem to like him (anyone?) as an authority on rules. Arguably, CB is excessively slow with their rules arbitration and the rules are really medieval in how they do not have any built-in conflict solving or arbitration mechanic.
Has the "interim" rule been updated, revoked, or backed? Has been published an endless stream of official "interim rules" for that thread with unresolved doubts and questions for N4/ITS12 that (I think, I'm not sure) you keep updated? Had the Tournament Organizers been striped from their "I resolve it this way" powers CB thrown on their lap to keep a tournament moving? The forum is not "social platforms". At best, it's "a social platform", which means you can call it "the forum" anyway. Using the plural implies some sort of concerted effort to pursue him across several platforms, which I tell you I have never been part of, if it existed, because I'm not aware of such. As for "discrediting" him, all our clashes can be reduced to two categories: I don't agree with how he reads the rules (sometimes, and specially in N3, because the rules were different in spanish and english, something that can be found even today, for example in the ITS12 document pertaining Confused Deploymet in the biotecvore scenarios), or simply he says "thou must include the forum posts in the list of accepted documents" that do not list the forum in the ITS12, and was even cited, twice, by HellLois (who is in charge of ITS, besides his other duties) in the Spanish Telegram. And "what advantages I could" sounds quite... like he and I were on equal footing, and I went for underhanded tactics because I was unable to answer his arguments. Which... I don't think is real, frankly, because I'm not a CB employee (which, incidentally, means I can be wrong and it's no biggie). Tournament Organizer / player consensus (roll a die, if none can be found, nor a third party) would be the conflict solving/arbitration mechanic. We may or may no like it, but those are the ones we have, for bad or good. CB being slow with the answers is something that I agree, and I've always agreed on, but I doubt it will change soon (in fact, I fear we won't get the September FAQ), and I don't know either what does it take for something to get into the FAQ instead of languishing unanswered regardless of how many people want the answer. Regardless, aside from the Unresolved issues thread, I see no solution, and the impression I get from CB's actions and videos/interviews is that they are always looking for the next thing, and rarely looking back :( (this is not something I have access to, just a personal conclusion taken from what CB sells, and says on official channels and the interviews I've watched). Regardless, N4 is difficult enough (despite being easier than N3) for new players to get in, but if you add the "by the way, you need to check the forum every week in case a ruling has pop up", I can easily imagine a lot of people will simply walk away before even they start playing.
Man every time I go to the Human Sphere section and see a new post in the Tohaa subforum I get excited just to find out it’s this goddamn thread again.
Yup. I got a ruling dropped on me in the middle of an event that wasn't even on the aggregated forum thread, and contradicted an example in the rulebook, because "IJW said so." That was a problem.
So much (arti)choke it has to be the year of the Gutier! It was more about lack of autonomy to fulfill the assigned tasks, or even go beyond them. "We should do this, it saves us time later and gets better results..." "NO, shut up!" (and keep heating the chair) "OK..." (time later the thing bites back, nastly... but the boss got his hot chairs). OTOH, Spanish employee in a Spanish company? If that is the case, it must be one of those places of legend. @_@
Well, first one has to take into account that CB seems (at least to me) to hate changing things much, and the longer those things have been there, the longer they take to check/approve of changes, and it looked to me as if the whole rules team had to get to a quorum before the next step (which could be "passing this to Gutier for final approval, or direct inclusion in the next FAQ). Second, I think IJW's inclusion was heavily influenced by him being a native english speaker, deeply involved with CB already, in charge of the Wiki, and with the ear of a lot of international players (in the forum, dunno outside). So 50/30/ marketing/merits/availability, I'd say (Marketing being the 50% because it would have been deemed necessary to hire an english native in the first place). I've always been in the employment of Spanish-based companies... aside from the time I spent ping-ponging between bank offices under Manpower (which is a USA company, I think... despite the one having hired me being their Spanish local company), even the half a year I spent workin at Malta was under a national company. And yeah, you can take decissions if needed. The caveat is that, in the end, success is not discussed (or even mentioned), but failure is never forgiven (nor forgotten) XD.
No idea if that is what happens exactly. But I agree the company seems to have a snail pace, even if with the small size the bureaucracy should be near flat (picking X after long talks, then asking Gutier if OK would be a waste, just have the guy at the same level and stop the guessing dance). Speed should be a lot faster. But after seeing how they handle other things, I think CB has deep issues to address, rules is just one aspect of the whole (the forum has multiple bugs, the solution for one was given time ago... and it was a easy thing... yet not fixed...; users are debugging the army lists...; new material demo minis have some obvious error...; what next?). I don't think they have much from where to choose, or option to not choose. USA market is big. Or the other way around, the rest does not count a lot (and once you "transfer" the part that also uses English, it counts even less). Focusing in English was probably a way to align with sales. We will see who joins the team. Just keep the expectations low.
