The MGA Responds

The HERALD saw this statement in the MGA group and asked the SLTA for comment. See below for adding yours.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

To: Medieval Herald Editor <medievalherald@gmail.com>

LEGITIMACY OF THE MGA

I find it hard to believe how any group guilty of using an unauthorized copy of STLA’s published July 2024 records as their season's foundation stone, can lay claim to any right of legitimacy, when the MGA can’t even validate its own season or awards without its reliance on SLTA’s published records for a start date.

Porting SLTA’s records to MGA’s site with a carbon copy of SLTA features for ranking and tabulation raises its own allegations of plagiarism, but it’s also clear MGA’s continued postings are dependent on its unauthorized acquisition of SLTA’s reporting network and the Realms it served.

In doing so, the MGA has forever defined its legacy and the awards they proffer as stemming from a pirated copy of the SLTA infrastructure.

The MGA brought further dishonor upon itself by covertly developing their site, without a formal notice to the STLA group or in response to current SLTA stewards requests for clarification of their plans.  Until MGA’s recent note, there was little evidence their site wasn’t more than a duplicate shared resource. To claim otherwise is disproved upon closer examination. (See below)

The temerity of the MGA to expect ‘consent’ from the STLA for use of its own July 2024 records, or the continued postings stemming from its network and infrastructure is a denial or delusion based on MGA’s myopic and misinformed belief they originated those services, rather than rebranding a copy.  Making a copy does not erase the tracks to the original. Nor is a copy a copyright.

At issue is not the sharing of raw facts (scores) as both groups are on record of those belonging to the ‘avatar in the arena’ that generates them in public events.  The issue is public access to scores on a site using SLTA’s infrastructure.

Adopting the metaphors put forth by others, the scores are like the statistics in a book in a public library. All have access to the book for reference, and can site facts from them in their own research. An honest transcriber provides attribution to its source.  A dishonest one tries to pass off the work as their own.  (Plagiarism)

In MGA’s case, their work is clearly derivative of the SLTA, using a copy of SLTA records, and adopting SLTA’s methodology for future findings. The list below leaves little doubt of MGA’s site linkage to SLTA’s infrastructure, and SLTA is well within its rights to reference scores gathered via that infrastructure for inclusion in the archives and annual awards the SLTA has maintained since 2010.

STLA Steward, Bella Denver

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

To: Medieval Herald Editor <medievalherald@gmail.com>

I wish to comment on this statement seen on the MGA site:

"Members currently active in the Second Life Tournament Association (SLTA) are using tournament data sourced from MGA without our consent. While award formats may be similar across organizations, the issue lies in the unauthorized use of our records to issue awards that do not reflect our season timeline or standards—rendering that data and recognition invalid. The MGA has not submitted or authorized any of its tournament records to SLTA. The data being referenced does not correspond to MGA's official results or seasonal structure.”

As one of those members. I have been following this story for a year in the Herald, and here’s what the documentation shows:

1. The MGA used SLTA’s published July tournament data to begin its season timeline with no prior notification. 

2. The SLTA did not submit or authorize use of its July records for posting on the MGA site. 

3. The MGA used SLTA’s records without consent, and did not respond to SLTA inquiries upon discovery

4. The MGA plans to issue awards based on the unauthorized use of SLTA data.

5. Several of those awards will be for STLA events continued on the same schedule and renamed by the MGA without notification or consent.

Using MGA’s definition, this invalidates its own awards and season data.

Talk about the pot calling the kettle black and not practicing what you preach!

Fafnir Fang

Director of Admin, DDA

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

MGA Season Awards Reminder & Official Statement

To Our Valued MGA Community,

As we near the end of our tournament season on June 30th, we want to thank all of you who’ve competed, volunteered, and supported the Medieval Games Alliance. Your passion continues to shape this amazing community.

We’re excited to announce that the MGA Season Awards are coming soon! These honors will celebrate excellence, sportsmanship, and standout performances in joust, melee, archery, and more. Full details on categories and eligibility will be announced shortly—stay tuned!

We also want to address a matter that’s come to our attention. Members currently active in the Second Life Tournament Association (SLTA) are using tournament data sourced from MGA without our consent. While award formats may be similar across organizations, the issue lies in the unauthorized use of our records to issue awards that do not reflect our season timeline or standards—rendering that data and recognition invalid.

The MGA has not submitted or authorized any of its tournament records to SLTA.

The data being referenced does not correspond to MGA's official results or seasonal structure.

For over a decade, the MGA has managed and grown these tournaments with dedication and care. When we became an independent entity, we did so to ensure transparency, fairness, and continued excellence.

It is inappropriate for SLTA members to present information pulled from MGA sources and use it for awards that do not originate from our official records. Such actions misrepresent our work and create confusion within the community.

The MGA Season Awards are a celebration of our community’s achievements. Any unauthorized use of our data or attempts to present unverified awards using our results will not be acknowledged.

We encourage all participants to verify the source of any event or awards materials. The MGA remains committed to protecting our standards and honoring the contributions of those who have built this season with us.

Thanks for being part of our journey. Let’s close the season strong and celebrate all we’ve accomplished!

 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

SLTA Response

After a year of remaining silent to SLTA's request for clarification, it is good to finally get a response from the MGA for their perspective.

We can certainly understand how our friends might feel when another group uses its postings without prior notification, request, consent, or authorization. That’s exactly how the SLTA felt when the MGA used SLTA’s postings to begin MGA’s season 1 without so much as a ‘may I?’ or ‘thank you’.

The SLTA’s response however, was more forthright when sharing its plan to complete its season archive by following the example the MGA had set for sharing in SLTA resources.  It first directed all to its Herald article from a post in its group, pausing for comment prior to implementation.

That is the way of the knight, not the thief in the night.

If a ‘consent request’ is the policy now being embraced by the MGA, the SLTA is agreed, but would ask the MGA to reciprocate first to restore our trust.  Send the SLTA a ‘consent request’ for your use of SLTA posts in MGA’s season 1 timeline.  Once received, the SLTA can respond in kind to the MGA.

Our respective results will still vary due to the start date MGA chose and leading to some confusion. But may also offer the opportunity for a different outcome in rankings.

The confusion found most concerning was MGA’s understanding of the word ‘source’ vs ‘resource’.  Source (origin) is the final score generated by the ‘avatar in the arena’. Resource (access) is the tournament host (DDA), or tournament service group (SLTA) facilitating public events, announcements in public groups or additional tabulation of scores. 

MGA comments imply they ‘own’ the data source (scores). While they may wish to claim ownership to their copy of the SLTA’s infrastructure, a score is a basic fact like 1+1=2 (participant + tournament = 2nd place).  Facts are not subject to copyright and can be gathered from any resource in the public domain without permission.

(For a Realm’s perspective, see HERALD “Weighing in on Tournament Standings’ by DDA Director Fafnir Fang)

MGA's entitlement and ownership seem to extend to the realms and the individuals the MGA serves (if the opening and closing remarks in their note are parsed correctly) when thanking ‘all who support the MGA’ and ‘being part our journey.’ 

The SLTA views its role the other way around.  It is ‘we’ who are in ‘support of them’ as part of ‘their’ journey.

We make this clear in the awards the SLTA has already bestowed on the community.  While we may chuckle a little at MGA’s hubris to arbitrate their validity, its reach has exceeded its grasp when disenfranchising the community from all the honors they are due and will be resented as ‘overreach’ by those who expect a tournament group to be ‘in support of them’.

The SLTA’s awards have the distinction of being the most prestigious and time honor awards in the medieval tournament history of the SL, so we will leave it to the recipient of the award to decide which honors they wish to add to their collection rather than be bullied by a proxy.

The SLTA also provides ample guidelines on its website for any individual participant who wishes to ‘opt out’ of standings if they do not wish to be recognized, which raises another question with the MGA’s use of words; ‘transparency’ and ‘standards’. 

The SLTA is very transparent with its guidelines and standards, making them easily available on its website.  So, we must inquire where the standards are the MGA speaks of? - or the guidelines for uploading standings to their site and opting out?  The SLTA has searched its website and cannot find them.

With respect, 

- SLTournament

 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Related material.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Editor note: Email your comments to medievalhearld@gmail.com or submit your own article for review using the SUBMISSIONS Form on the main page.