(Aether sideboard) hainkarga 3 - 0 theelkspeaks (Fire Lt.) [sub TheonlyrealBeef]

[Odii Odsen]

Sounds like a decision from deuce. Didn't know he is a WM, too. 
Torb, go for Darkness Master next Trials. Pick me for war. You will never be alone again. 

[iancudorinmarian]

This seems like a really weird decision, to say the least.

Round 1 when there was the situation with deuce vs aaronk and we didn't have the right pictures, I was told "The same happened last war, and it counted as a loss. Sorry team entropy."

Now we have another issue that happened last war, but somehow the decision was changed this time.

Only half-joking here, but it almost feels like WMs are afraid of deuce. Either that, or they are easily manipulated by him.

At least if we're going to go by the rules of previous wars and similar incidents, consistency is a thing to consider.

[deuce22]

wow... just wow...

I'm not sure if this is more disrespectful to me or the WMs...

[xn0ize]

Ahhhh
SMELLS LIKE SWEET DRAMA

[glennfoo]

Oh no..... Oh no.......
I find it hard to accept this

[Aves]

At least if we're going to go by the rules of previous wars and similar incidents, consistency is a thing to consider.

Agreed. With that said, could you provide a link to the ruling/match in question?

[iancudorinmarian]

At least if we're going to go by the rules of previous wars and similar incidents, consistency is a thing to consider.

Agreed. With that said, could you provide a link to the ruling/match in question?

It has been posted in this very topic: http://elementscommunity.org/forum/round-4-249/(aether-sideboard)-hainkarga-3-0-theelkspeaks-(fire-lt-)/msg1246968/#msg1246968

[Odii Odsen]

Ironically: http://elementscommunity.org/forum/round-8/(time-ups)-ravingrabbid-3-1-avenger-(earth-lt-)/msg1215631/#msg1215631

[Aves]

Ah, my bad.

Then yes, this inconsistency is... unsettling, to say the least. Precedent isn't written in stone, but it should always be considered, and I think it's pretty clear that there's no appreciable difference in the situations.

[deuce22]

fwiw, there are more examples arguing for the current ruling, which were provided to both team fire and WMs.

IMO, if this was caught shortly after the deadline before the match started, then editing the deck for a penalty is acceptable. Because the match had already started, I don't think that it is acceptable to be able to edit the deck (again this is my opinion based on my experience as a WM). What if I brought a deck against an opponent that used nightmare, I could easily play game 1 and say "oh shoot, we forgot to change our mark to whatever element because we were expecting nightmares".

The current rules are vague in these situations, and a ruling either way is not wrong. Different WMs will rule differently based on different reasons. I asked the WMs to clarify the rules regarding these situations for future rounds/wars, but as always it should be consistent with the ruling that was made. And a WM next war can change these rules that would go in the opposite direction if they want.

Lastly, if the roles were switched and it was me or aether that made this mistake, I'm sure there would be a lot less "drama" with this ruling.

[worldwideweb3]

fwiw, there are more examples arguing for the current ruling, which were provided to both team fire and WMs.

IMO, if this was caught shortly after the deadline before the match started, then editing the deck for a penalty is acceptable. Because the match had already started, I don't think that it is acceptable to be able to edit the deck (again this is my opinion based on my experience as a WM). What if I brought a deck against an opponent that used nightmare, I could easily play game 1 and say "oh shoot, we forgot to change our mark to whatever element because we were expecting nightmares".

The current rules are vague in these situations, and a ruling either way is not wrong. Different WMs will rule differently based on different reasons. I asked the WMs to clarify the rules regarding these situations for future rounds/wars, but as always it should be consistent with the ruling that was made. And a WM next war can change these rules that would go in the opposite direction if they want.

Lastly, if the roles were switched and it was me or aether that made this mistake, I'm sure there would be a lot less "drama" with this ruling.

Your example is highly exaggerated. This is clearly a case where mark should be aether and it was a simple mistake, and an edit with small penalty would be fine. Also, no, there wouldnt be less drama if it was aether that made the mistake and infact, im sure you would fight hard enough to make the ruling go your way.

[deuce22]

lmao, you are trying to tell me that people would be upset that aether lost a match because a ruling that could go either way. You are delusional. Non-aether folk agree with this statement here

And you're wrong, I wouldn't have argued the opposite direction if roles were switched. The match was started and the deck was played as entered in the vault. Even torb conceded the match immediately because this was his impression of the rules. What if it wasn't a mark, but it was a card that was wrong. Either you entered the wrong deck version or upgraded the wrong card, would it be acceptable to change the deck after completing 1 game? What makes it acceptable vs not acceptable? Please tell me.