Big List of Judges Got the Ban-Hammer?

Spoilers, Rumors, and Speculation forum

Posted on Dec. 22, 2015, 10:49 p.m. by VampireArmy

Was browsing Facebook when I saw mention of this

Thoughts?

Edit : WOTC Official Statement

CrookedRobot says... #2

As some of the ones who received the Hammer stated on Reddit early yesterday, this was done with absolutely no warning whatsoever, and was basically done to make an example of WoTC's power and the seriousness of the situation. From what I can gather, the original leak was done in the Judge Chat, and one of the people who was banned apparently went and distributed it from there.

December 22, 2015 11:01 p.m.

Any news on who the judges actually were?

December 22, 2015 11:04 p.m.

Rhadamanthus says... #4

FYI: the original Official Statement was posted yesterday afternoon/evening, was all of 2-3 sentences, and was extremely uninformative. The current text of the statement by Helene Bergeot is in response to the social media uproar that's come up in the wake of the suspensions, and it seems as if it's completely replaced the original.

I think the "ban everyone to make a point" approach was inappropriate. The length of the suspension given for each person makes it obvious that only two of them (2 years and 3 years) were actually doing the leaking and the rest (3 months) were only tangentially associated with them. Many of the individuals caught up in the dragnet are pillars of the Judge community who I trust and respect much more than I ever will WotC. There's also the problem that the Southeast Region is going to have a hell of a time running PPTQs and the like over the next three months with all the missing L3s and L2s.

@canterlotguardian: Go to the recently updated Suspended DCI Memberships page and sort by Start Date such that you have the most recent bans showing. The "MS" region names banned on Dec 18th are the leakers (I don't know if the Puerto Rico one is involved or a coincidence), and the other names banned on Dec 21st are the rest of the Southeast Judges hit by the action.

December 22, 2015 11:10 p.m.

beckhr says... #5

I think the judges that got banned are being a little dramatic. Apparently their chat has had leaks like this distributed through it before, only now when WotC took the screws to them did they become "whistleblowers". I don't think that they deserved warnings or that their statements needed to be taken, they were benefitting from stolen intellectual property and did nothing about it until it would have affected them, nothing else needs to be said. A few months ban is light, if anything.

They don't deserve their titles if they are going to behave like they are now, WotC doesn't owe them anything more than they agreed. If they are unhappy with that, then they can leave and play another game that doesn't mind when people leak information for personal gain.

December 22, 2015 11:11 p.m.

Okay it was nobody I knew. Phew. (I live in Georgia, that's why I was curious.)

December 22, 2015 11:17 p.m.

beckhr says... #7

I'm from Florida, similar relief.

December 22, 2015 11:22 p.m.

VampireArmy says... #8

I have a hard time feeling sympathy with any of the people in that group to be honest. They all knew what they were doing was wrong. They knew what the consequences would be but they did it anyways. Even if they kept it within their private group, that's stolen intellectual property.

The verdict was harsh. Maybe a few didn't deserve it but overall it was fair

December 22, 2015 11:23 p.m.

00xtremeninja says... #9

World's tiniest violin playing right now

December 22, 2015 11:28 p.m.

GoldGhost012 says... #10

The magicjudges.org network sites have been suspended in protest of these actions.

One of the more intriguing things in the thread was that Mississippi now has no one above a Level 1 judge in the entire state. That's... something.

December 22, 2015 11:46 p.m.

filledelanuit says... #11

I am very much not a fan of how this was handled. It appears that wizards has a different opinion on how this should be handled. I don't think anyone who didn't directly leak the card should be punished but I understand why they did even if I think it's stupid and kind of childish.

My impression is that there were multiple judges banned for failing to report leaks which is problematic to me. The criteria for these bannings and the way in which they took place seem fairly punitive and arbitrary.

The worse bit is the usual horrid PR. When there is only one l3 and a few l2s in SE that is a severe problem for organized play. Additionally SCG atlanta is down two HJs and PT OGW is short two l3s.

Also wizards appears to believe that judges should be judged differently than players which scares me because the judge program is already havig issues with wizards. Wizards needs to find a way to have better communication with the judges and players.

December 22, 2015 11:57 p.m.

00xtremeninja says... #12

state of Mississippi going into widespread panic, players clearing out staples in protest!

one can dream...........

December 23, 2015 12:39 a.m.

DrFunk27 says... #13

"Will leak 4 Boobz" - L3 judge, probably.

December 23, 2015 12:52 a.m.

VampireArmy says... #14

lordoftheshadows "Also wizards appears to believe that judges should be judged differently than players"

why should those who enforce the rules not be held more accountable for breaking the rules?

December 23, 2015 1:10 a.m.

filledelanuit says... #15

Because they aren't the judge of rules outside of a tournament. There already is a judge code of conduct which covers the issues that arise but in this situation a judge is not substantially different from a player. I fully support being held to a higher standard when the action is related to judging but spoilers don't have anything to do with this.

Judges do not get advance notice of things with the rare exception of l5s for large CR/Policy updates.

Also remember that every single judge is a volunteer. Part of the problem is pent up frustration of poor handling of the judge community in the past not just this incident.

Analogies haven't been working out well for me today so I'll just explain. By holding judges to a higher standard involving spoilers you ask judges to go beyond their compensated service. It seems to me that it is unfair to make volunteer judges do something extra.

And even if I am wrong there at least needs to be communication. The judge code of conduct was recently released and nothing contained there would suggest anything as to spoilers.

December 23, 2015 1:26 a.m.

I'm a little split on this. On one hand I agree with VampireArmy that a guilty party does not deserve sympathy in this situation. However, WotC is not being particularly forthcoming and transparent here. I suspect there's a little more to this than what the public is getting and that some of these people have been scapegoated. Which is deplorable. This has the markings of someone simply acting to show that something has been done.

December 23, 2015 1:53 a.m.

kengiczar says... #17

I have no sympathy for the judges who were disciplined.

In this situation I can imagine none of the judges wanted to feel like a Narc but the bottom line is they should have spoken up because now they've proven they are untrustworthy. They need to just accept their punishment instead of whining and then stay the course. In time trust in them can be restored but if they just throw a fit then not only are they untrustworthy for the time being but it would show that they do not understand the concepts of repercussions and responsibility or that they have egomaniacal tendencies.

Also bringing more transparency to this issue could have the end result of harsh legal sentencing brought against those who participated in the act which WotC wants to avoid.

December 23, 2015 3:11 a.m.

bigv54 says... #18

There WAS a whistle blower, the person who reported the leak also got banned. Find out more about what happened before you start declaring "having no sympathy for these whiners".

December 23, 2015 3:15 a.m.

VampireArmy says... #19

bigv54 yeeeah but they failed to do so the for the last few leaks before this one sooo...

Anyways here's the deal. Judges are in a position of authority. They're pretty much the most respected and most trusted members of any magic community. When you have the best of the best doing some seriously shifty things such as receiving stolen property without reporting it (or in some cases not reporting it the first time it happens), that undermines the trust that is crucial for the job. Some of you may know these people personally and may think They're great but to wotc, they're people who either stole from them or received their stolen goods for the last few years without saying anything.

December 23, 2015 3:53 a.m.

sylvannos says... #20

The judges in question are lucky they only got 3 months to 2 years.

With spoiler leaks, there's always the question of whether they chose to withhold a spoiler for personal gain. At best, it's insider trading. For example, if they know if/when Zendikar fetches are being reprinted and dump their copies.

At worse, there's borderline cheating going on. The judges show their buddies who are able to compete in sanctioned events, and now those people have time up on the rest of us to playtest and brew days, weeks, or months in advance.

As much as I like seeing new cards, I definitely see how it affects WotC and players alike. It's best if there aren't any leaks. The whole colorless mana symbol has caused more problems than it solved when Kozilek was spoiled.

December 23, 2015 7:27 a.m.

Named_Tawyny says... #21

The fact that this was apparently an ongoing thing makes me more than a little suspicious.

Private senior judge group regularly getting spoilers before everybody else. If it truly was longstanding, then there has to be somebody at WOTC HO who either authorised it, or was leaking it to them. Yet there's been no statement about how they kept getting these spoilers.

Did Wizards know about the group before (and were they okay with it) but only acted once the wider community was allowed to see the spoiled cards?

December 23, 2015 9:21 a.m.

Rhadamanthus says... #22

The Official Statement makes it sound as if this was some shadowy criminal group of judges stealing information and hoarding it for nefarious purposes, so I'm not surprised that many of the posters in this thread assume that's what was going on. It wasn't. I'm not accusing Helene of lying, by any means, because I know she's just publicly communicating whatever story WotC gave to her to report.

Exactly two (2) of the suspended judges were involved in stealing and leaking information. In the most recent leak they posted information in a Southeast Region judges Facebook group shortly before making it public through Reddit. Most of the other suspended judges probably never even saw the offending material. WotC suspended everyone else involved in the FB group because of a perception that they knew about the bad apples but had done nothing to report them before now.

In all honesty, I haven't yet seen anything convincing from either side to prove/disprove that perception, but in the absence of anything else I'm much more inclined to believe the judges (many of whom I know and respect) over WotC.

December 23, 2015 9:23 a.m.

beckhr says... #23

That's a fine opinion and I won't try to dissuade you. However, from Helene's statement, which could be easily refuted, it appears that this occurred for multiple sets. Therefore, even those judges that never saw the OGW leak, they probably saw BFZ or ORI. That's why we see a differentiation of punishments from 3 months to 2 years, some did worse things than others, but they all participated or benefitted.

What strikes me is that the only judges I've seen have complained about how they are being treated or how their statements weren't taken (which I don't care about either way, they brought this upon themselves). They don't try to say that the chat wasn't used like this or that they hadn't been privy to multiple leaks like this because they know if the judges say that that they will lose public favor. WotC should have beaten the press on this one, to shut down a few pity parties on Reddit.

December 23, 2015 9:35 a.m.

Rhadamanthus says... #24

If the suspended judges were never contacted for statements, that means Wizards' investigation wasn't very thorough in terms of trying to find out exactly who knew what and when. It means several of the suspensions were handed out based on guesses and assumptions.

Look more closely at the range of punishments: the two individuals who were actually doing the leaking were the only ones to get multi-year suspensions. The other twelve are in the 3-month group. I'm not saying all of the 12 are necessarily 100% clean, but there's no way every single one of them was in on it or "benefiting" from it (or even aware of it). A truly thorough investigation would have given Wizards better information in that respect.

December 23, 2015 9:54 a.m.

TMBRLZ says... #25

I think beckhr said it pretty well.

Fact is that this has been a long running operation.

This, as far as is seen from either side, isn't just a reprimand for a single incident, as I believe Helene stated, but a reprimand for many more before that. There's no deadline on the justice.

If you are accused of a notable crime you did twenty years ago and they just find out today? Under an ideal morally correct court system you will be held tried and proven guilty. You will serve a sentence for a small blip in your past.

I understand we're talking about a card game here, but the principle is the same in Wizard's eyes. This game has lasted twenty years. The intend to keep it living as long as possible and that means upholding and safeguarding the foundations of it all. And one of those biggest pillars is the judge community - the centerpiece of Organized and Official play. If Wizards takes a seemingly rash action against a small group of rulebreakers (written down or otherwise - nobody can argue that this was premeditated and wrong on their account), it is for the safety and sanctity of their game and the community who partakes in it. A show of force, intentional or otherwise, leads towards the same motivation: to protect their child. Wouldn't you do the same for yours?

Disregard me and say I'm speaking too seriously about a card game all you want - but if it's just a card game - then why are you here? Why are you reading this? And why have you spent so much of your life on it?

Shutting up.

December 23, 2015 10:27 a.m.

filledelanuit says... #26

My impression is that there are both multiple ways in which this had been interpreted. We do not yet know all of the information. There is also the possibility that people disagree over whether something should be punished.

For now I think we need to wait until both sides have the opportunity to tell their story. Otherwise we're forced to pick a side based on trust and I know who I trust more, the judges.

December 23, 2015 10:41 a.m.

Well said, lordoftheshadows.

December 23, 2015 11:48 a.m.

Rhadamanthus says... #28

@lordoftheshadows: As the hours pass and I get over the initial shock of it I realize I've been carrying on with a higher ratio of feelings vs. facts than I should be. You're right, there are still big gaps in the information coming from both sides right now. I'll go ahead and apologize for speaking before knowing.

December 23, 2015 1:47 p.m.

Sam_I_am says... #29

but in the absence of anything else I'm much more inclined to believe the judges (many of whom I know and respect) over WotC.

That kind of information has a significant effect on me, but perhaps not in the way that you intended. It doesn't really change my level of trust for WotC or the Judges one way or the other, but it definitely tells me where your bias lies.


As for the 3-month bannings, Helene Bergeot referred to them as "The issue with the passive participants." With phrasing like that, you don't even have to distrust WotC to come to the conclusion that some of these judges were banned for merely failing to report.

December 23, 2015 2:59 p.m.

Rhadamanthus says... #30

I'm not ashamed of my bias, and it's important for anyone reading my posts to understand it.

December 23, 2015 5:24 p.m.

filledelanuit says... #31

As with Rhadamanthus it is important that people know that I am biased. I was not trying to conceal that but sometimes I forget that most people here don't know me personally.

December 23, 2015 6:29 p.m.

Wizards just wants us to lose faith in their product and not put our time and money into supporting them, don't they?

December 23, 2015 6:34 p.m.

sylvannos says... #33

WotC is a private organization and company...you don't have any kind of constitutional rights to "fairness."

It's their judge program. These people are lucky they only got 3 months to a year. WotC could have sent them a giant "fuck you" in the form of a lifetime ban.

They aren't obligated to provide evidence or ask for statements. WotC and the DCI can do as they please in regards to their judge program. That might make quite a few of us upset because we want due process. However, a private business can do whatever it wants to determine how to handle internal investigations.

This is especially true if it gives an opportunity for cheating and judges are involved who could know about it.

December 23, 2015 8:14 p.m.

sylvannos while you are technically correct, we have to keep in mind that WotC needs to maintain the faith of its players. Their actions can drastically harm that relationship, which in turn can hurt their sales. So, while they technically can do what they want, there is a certain extent to which they would probably be willing to act since they need to maintain face in this situation.

December 23, 2015 10:19 p.m.

Named_Tawyny says... #35

sylvannos, I don't think that anybody has said that WOTC doesn't have the legal right to ban whomever they want.

But likewise, players, as independent humans, have the right to react to Wizards' actions. And if they're displeased by how they handle bans and leaks, then players have the right to complain.

December 23, 2015 10:48 p.m.

beckhr says... #36

Most magic players are either going to feel that WotC is at least within a stone's throw of reasonable or they will be indifferent to this series of events. They won't lose business. Their main demographics are kids and adults who do not play competitively, most of whom don't even know there is a judges' program. Three months ban is light, it broadcasts loud and clear to the judges that they will be held accountable for what they allow in their channels of communication, and it should put a plug in one of the leaking pipes.

December 23, 2015 10:57 p.m.

Rhadamanthus says... #37

@sylvannos: There are established policies and procedures for how the DCI/Wizards investigates players and judges for suspension cases. Those policies and procedures weren't followed in this situation. The justification WotC gave for their actions was basically that since this is a matter of IP breach and not player/judge conduct or tournament integrity, the normal rules for investigations don't apply. Of course, many of the suspended individuals don't agree with how the process was handled.

December 24, 2015 1:28 a.m.

TMBRLZ says... #38

I second beckhr.

The majority of MTG players out there won't care about this and/or won't even know it happened.

They can take a little backlash from the informed scene.

December 24, 2015 9:46 a.m.

JWiley129 says... #39

RELEVANT UPDATE!

Wizards has commuted the suspensions of 10 of the judges originally suspended.

Full Press Release Here

January 13, 2016 4:14 p.m.

TMBRLZ says... #40

Epochalyptik ChiefBell yeaGO

Would it be within reason to post links to an article like that to the main page? O_O

With all the information that moves through tappedout, it's conceivable that "stolen property" could show up on here as well. May be a useful bit of knowledge for regular site users.

January 13, 2016 4:30 p.m.

Rhadamanthus says... #41

Looking at the updated Suspended DCI Memberships page, the only names left from the Dec 18th suspensions are the ones with multi-year bans. If I remember correctly, there were 12 other people on the list of 3-month suspensions. Did the other two judges get taken off already without anyone saying anything?

January 13, 2016 4:35 p.m.

TMBRLZ says... #42

It could have easily happened after the article was written or even published.

January 13, 2016 4:38 p.m.

filledelanuit says... #43

I was informed that the other judges were talking to wizards because they didn't choose to appeal. My guess is that wizards decided that they situations were basically the same so removed those suspensions.

While I feel this is a step in the right direction I can't really say I feel great about wizards. They made a mistake yet refuse to apologize or even admit to it.

January 13, 2016 5:25 p.m.

TMBRLZ says... #44

What mistake did they make? They were enforcing their policy.

This was a Christmas gift basically.

January 14, 2016 9:26 a.m.

Sam_I_am says... #45

@TMBRLZ Enforcing what policy?

January 14, 2016 11:11 a.m.

TMBRLZ says... #46

I guess policy is a poor choice of words, rather than expectations for their judges. They were in possession of stolen property and never attempted to confirm nor deny that possession and shared it online.

It's not like this is something new to be conscious of, as the article mentioned this has always been a concern.

There was no mistake on Wizards part as I see it. Those judges likely knew, or at least had a small idea of what they were doing.

January 14, 2016 12:51 p.m.

Rhadamanthus says... #47

If you want to bring up policies, Wizards did not follow their own established policies and procedures for how to handle investigations of players and judges for suspension cases. If they had followed those procedures in the first place, they would have learned about all the additional information brought up in the appeals, and it's likely none of the 3-month suspensions would have been handed out at all. The language of the "Learning Opportunities" article/press release is pretty much the closest they can come to saying "we screwed up, we're sorry, and we'll do better next time" without actually admitting a mistake.

January 14, 2016 1:47 p.m. Edited.

This discussion has been closed