Shinobi Legends Forum - Shinobi Legends Game Site

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

Please petition corrupted/Badnavs in game, nothing can be done from the forums.

Pages: [1] 2

Author Topic: Judging a Match (Discussion)  (Read 5480 times)

Mei

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Karma: +39/-37
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 748
    • View Profile
Judging a Match (Discussion)
« on: December 06, 2015, 04:50:12 AM »

So Kay made rulings on 'judging a match' and I disagree with several points listed.
In quotation (teal) are my comments towards the ruling mentioned above of it.
Now discuss.

  • Both parties choose a judge and abide by their decision.
  • In the unlikely event of the gross incompetence of the judge, both parties must agree upon a new judge and this second ruling shall be the final word for good or for ill.
Quote
I don't agree because that was the judge's fault and s/he should live with it. There's no rush / timetable on giving a ruling. Of course, you would prefer one within 1 week time (a few days at least).
  • Judges are NOT to be replaced because they do not agree with you. Cycling through judges until you get a ruling you like is NOT abiding by the rules and considered an abuse. One warning will be issued.
Quote
I disagree because people are entitled to have a second opinion if they feel they need one regardless. That's like saying, I'm not allowed to have a second opinion about my medical condition/treatment because I don't agree with the first doctor. 
  • No unresolved issues will be tolerated... As such:
  • Compromises must be made in the event of a deadlock. Failure to come to terms after every option has been exhausted will result in stripping, challenger denied, and the bijuu handled according to the Stripping Rules. Both challenger and host will be denied access to all things bijuu for 3 months due to gross incompetence.
Quote
Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't the purpose of the Council is to resolve 'unresolved issues'? This is literally giving the Council more work than necessary because the time/effort into the Stripping process.
  • Council members are ineligible to be chosen as judges.
Quote
I disagree and we are still in the process of voting on this matter.
  • Attempts to commit fraud by providing a judge who is an alt [for your own match] by either party will result in a perma-ban of all things bijuu.
  • Judges will acquaint themselves with the rules of all things bijuu, the preference list of the host, the terms agreed upon by the participants, and commit to activity.
  • Judges may have to play crowd control in the event of a public verbal abusive fight. In the event of such an issue, the judge should make one post requesting that this behavior cease, to arrange to mediate between the parties in private, and place the match on hold. Should this warning/request be ignored, the judge should refer the matter to a site Mod/staff and not be drawn into participating in such behaviors.
Quote
Isn't that the responsibility of a site Mod/staff? Personally, all I expect from a judge is to post their ruling and the reasoning behind it. To expect a judge to do crowd control is too much.
Logged

Warren

  • Site Staff (Game Master)
  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Karma: +58/-51
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 908
    • View Profile
Re: Judging a Match (Discussion)
« Reply #1 on: December 06, 2015, 05:31:00 AM »

Considering the biases flying around in here, there should be no rush to find a new judge if first one doesn't work. Even then its likely not gonna take long, even non enthusiasts tend to obsess over judgements. Shouldn't be rushed to rule either, because some cases are just so bloody absurd, as I've personal experience of.

Asking for someone elses opinion should always be allowed, at least once. Some people can disagree on things to outright absurd degrees at times, and on occasions purely for nonsensical things such as being a fan of the opponents technique and not yours.

If council doesn't handle strips then who does? If left to community its runs high risk of just turning into mob rules and forget who's actually in the right.

Council shouldn't be judges. Far too high risk of running biases for such a position.

Judges should have to acquaint themselves with whatever is necessary for the judging, but unless its Kamui or somebody then they got no mod power to handle such if they don't listen to you. Just report it.
Logged

KayentaMoenkopi

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Karma: +87/-94
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2280
    • View Profile
Re: Judging a Match (Discussion)
« Reply #2 on: December 06, 2015, 05:42:48 AM »

So Kay made rulings on 'judging a match' and I disagree with several points listed.
In quotation (teal) are my comments towards the ruling mentioned above of it.
Now discuss.

And I shall comment in orange. A quick correction Mei. I did not make rulings, I proposed ideas for rules that we could vote on. I do not make rulings. I am part of a team working toward creating rules for judges and council members to work with when dealing with bijuu issues.
Now...

I do not understand this one:

  • Both parties choose a judge and abide by their decision.
  • In the unlikely event of the gross incompetence of the judge, both parties must agree upon a new judge and this second ruling shall be the final word for good or for ill.
I don't agree because that was the judge's fault and s/he should live with it. There's no rush / timetable on giving a ruling. Of course, you would prefer one within 1 week time (a few days at least).


If a judge is not qualified, ie: doesn't know his RP rules or jutsu, does not keep up with the activity clause, which I wish to apply to everyone to keep things moving, or is being biased and not doing a good job...then why should the host and challenger suffer because of it and 'just live with it'? What I am suggesting is sometimes the judge might just not be fit to do the job, the participants realize this too late, and should get to choose another judge who is competent. I am NOT saying they should choose a new judge just because the ruling did not do the way they wanted.

  • Judges are NOT to be replaced because they do not agree with you. Cycling through judges until you get a ruling you like is NOT abiding by the rules and considered an abuse. One warning will be issued.
I disagree because people are entitled to have a second opinion if they feel they need one regardless. That's like saying, I'm not allowed to have a second opinion about my medical condition/treatment because I don't agree with the first doctor. 
I feel this is a valid point. Perhaps a second opinion should be permitted. We could rewrite this article as follows?
  • While judges are NOT to be replaced because they do not agree with you, a second opinion is permitted. A judge may be replaced in a match one time with a new judge that both parties will agree upon. However, cycling through judges until you get a ruling you like is NOT abiding by the rules and considered an abuse. One warning will be issued.
  • No unresolved issues will be tolerated... As such:
  • Compromises must be made in the event of a deadlock. Failure to come to terms after every option has been exhausted will result in stripping, challenger denied, and the bijuu handled according to the Stripping Rules. Both challenger and host will be denied access to all things bijuu for 3 months due to gross incompetence.
Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't the purpose of the Council is to resolve 'unresolved issues'? This is literally giving the Council more work than necessary because the time/effort into the Stripping process.
This would have to be reworded to resolve confusion. My intent is this: We don't want repeated issues where bijuu are split and this faction ignores the other. So by stating that Unresolved issues will NOT be tolerated, that means...you settle this thing, use every means at your disposal to do so, or we will just consider the both of you unfit and take you two out of the equation. Access denied to both. This would serve as a huge deterrent to obstinate behavior where people refuse to compromise. If the council has to step into resolve this issue? Well they will...they will take the bijuu and give it to someone else and those two trouble makers can think about how to be more open to compromise for the next 3 months before trying again. Too harsh? There is no work in that...after the participants have run through all their options on how to handle their conflict and just cannot fix the problem, then it is not longer their problem. I think that is simple. Maybe too simple.

  • Council members are ineligible to be chosen as judges.
I disagree and we are still in the process of voting on this matter.
That is true, it is still being voted upon. Once it is decided it can then be included or left out depending on the voting outcome of that issue.
  • Attempts to commit fraud by providing a judge who is an alt [for your own match] by either party will result in a perma-ban of all things bijuu.
  • Judges will acquaint themselves with the rules of all things bijuu, the preference list of the host, the terms agreed upon by the participants, and commit to activity.
  • Judges may have to play crowd control in the event of a public verbal abusive fight. In the event of such an issue, the judge should make one post requesting that this behavior cease, to arrange to mediate between the parties in private, and place the match on hold. Should this warning/request be ignored, the judge should refer the matter to a site Mod/staff and not be drawn into participating in such behaviors.
Isn't that the responsibility of a site Mod/staff? Personally, all I expect from a judge is to post their ruling and the reasoning behind it. To expect a judge to do crowd control is too much.
It is not required they step in and do anything other than give rulings on issues the hosts bring to their attention. That bit can be amended to caution against getting involved and just report to a mod as follows:

  • Judges are NOT to play crowd control in the event of a public verbal abusive fight. In the event of such an issue, the judge should stay out of it. A judge's task is to make rulings on issues upon request of either party. They would then make a ruling after listening to both sides of the issue concerning the match.
Logged

Mei

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Karma: +39/-37
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 748
    • View Profile
Re: Judging a Match (Discussion)
« Reply #3 on: December 06, 2015, 12:38:50 PM »



If a judge is not qualified, ie: doesn't know his RP rules or jutsu, does not keep up with the activity clause, which I wish to apply to everyone to keep things moving, or is being biased and not doing a good job...then why should the host and challenger suffer because of it and 'just live with it'? What I am suggesting is sometimes the judge might just not be fit to do the job, the participants realize this too late, and should get to choose another judge who is competent. I am NOT saying they should choose a new judge just because the ruling did not do the way they wanted.

...because both participants put in time/effort to choosing/deciding the judge and then they are both going to be like...'oh that judge is incompetent.' Then why did they decide on that person being the judge then? It makes no sense.
Logged

UettoSenju

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Karma: +38/-63
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1196
    • View Profile
Re: Judging a Match (Discussion)
« Reply #4 on: December 06, 2015, 03:50:17 PM »



If a judge is not qualified, ie: doesn't know his RP rules or jutsu, does not keep up with the activity clause, which I wish to apply to everyone to keep things moving, or is being biased and not doing a good job...then why should the host and challenger suffer because of it and 'just live with it'? What I am suggesting is sometimes the judge might just not be fit to do the job, the participants realize this too late, and should get to choose another judge who is competent. I am NOT saying they should choose a new judge just because the ruling did not do the way they wanted.

...because both participants put in time/effort to choosing/deciding the judge and then they are both going to be like...'oh that judge is incompetent.' Then why did they decide on that person being the judge then? It makes no sense.



I pretty much feel the same way. Exception being the judge goes inactive. RL can happen to anyone.

I'd say they need to agree on a judge then a backup judge before the fight even starts. Encase of inactivity of the primary judge.
Logged

Eric

  • Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Karma: +101/-100
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3504
    • View Profile
Re: Judging a Match (Discussion)
« Reply #5 on: December 06, 2015, 06:03:35 PM »

I don't get how Council members, voted in because they are considered to enforce the rules fairly impartially, are at such a higher risk of bias than others. I still think Council members should have a the ability to judge a match if called upon/necessary.
Logged
Anything you can think of I can't think of, let me know; that's how the sharing circle works.

KayentaMoenkopi

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Karma: +87/-94
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2280
    • View Profile
Re: Judging a Match (Discussion)
« Reply #6 on: December 07, 2015, 01:06:03 AM »

I guess eric that is 'loosely' based off our own system of three branches...before the constitution was broken by the creation of a fourth branch.

One body to make the rules...us
one body to interpret the rules...judges[in this case they are not interpreting 'rules' but match outcomes]
one body to enforce the rules...council
Logged

Eric

  • Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Karma: +101/-100
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3504
    • View Profile
Re: Judging a Match (Discussion)
« Reply #7 on: December 07, 2015, 01:26:15 AM »

I guess eric that is 'loosely' based off our own system of three branches...before the constitution was broken by the creation of a fourth branch.

One body to make the rules...us
one body to interpret the rules...judges[in this case they are not interpreting 'rules' but match outcomes]

one body to enforce the rules...council

I don't understand, what created 4th branch (other than the people through referendum and such) do you mean?

Out of digression though, I find it unnecessary for a separation of powers in that manner. The Council should have the ability to judge fights if called upon.
Logged
Anything you can think of I can't think of, let me know; that's how the sharing circle works.

Asadi

  • Site Staff (Game Master)
  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Karma: +6/-1
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 608
    • View Profile
Re: Judging a Match (Discussion)
« Reply #8 on: December 07, 2015, 01:39:09 AM »

Are we saying this council is gonna be the judges of the outcome?

How are we gonna chose judges?

I mean... there are random name pickers out there we could grab and edit.

http://www.classtools.net/random-name-picker/

Edit the names and have it chose the primary and secondary judge.
Logged

Eric

  • Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Karma: +101/-100
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3504
    • View Profile
Re: Judging a Match (Discussion)
« Reply #9 on: December 07, 2015, 01:41:01 AM »

Are we saying this council is gonna be the judges of the outcome?

How are we gonna chose judges?

I mean... there are random name pickers out there we could grab and edit.

http://www.classtools.net/random-name-picker/

Edit the names and have it chose the primary and secondary judge.

I am saying Council members should have the option of also being judges, not being the primary judges.
Logged
Anything you can think of I can't think of, let me know; that's how the sharing circle works.

Asadi

  • Site Staff (Game Master)
  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Karma: +6/-1
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 608
    • View Profile
Re: Judging a Match (Discussion)
« Reply #10 on: December 07, 2015, 01:52:22 AM »

Are we gonna have them selected as random people then?

Narrow it down to top active individuals in clans, etc?
Logged

KayentaMoenkopi

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Karma: +87/-94
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2280
    • View Profile
Re: Judging a Match (Discussion)
« Reply #11 on: December 07, 2015, 02:00:50 AM »

http://forum.shinobilegends.com/index.php/topic,8692.0.html

and in this voting thread on if council members should be bijuu match judges, 8 people voted no and 3 voted yes. That issue should be dealt with in the council section of the board.

and this is why the proposed rule under discussion for judging a match assumes council members cannot be judges.
Logged

UettoSenju

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Karma: +38/-63
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1196
    • View Profile
Re: Judging a Match (Discussion)
« Reply #12 on: December 07, 2015, 04:42:40 AM »

http://forum.shinobilegends.com/index.php/topic,8692.0.html

and in this voting thread on if council members should be bijuu match judges, 8 people voted no and 3 voted yes. That issue should be dealt with in the council section of the board.

and this is why the proposed rule under discussion for judging a match assumes council members cannot be judges.

Agreed. Let's try to keep track of what votes were cast where and carry that over between topics.

I'll break it down in the simplest way of my understanding. Judges inforce rp based rulings during matches. Councilmen inforce the buji rules, not rp, strictly. A judge is asked to take action during a match when needed because of a move made in that department. A council is asked to take action when a host or challenger has broken a ruling on the systems of Buji.

Examples: Someone auto-hits, counters wrongly, makes a post that doesn't make sense, or the two fighting disagree how techs may work in this or that fashion are all things a judge cast a decision on. Someone doesn't post within the time frame, declines a challenger, goes against their preference page, goes against things publicly agreed upon, ect. are things the council cast a decision upon.
Logged

Mei

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Karma: +39/-37
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 748
    • View Profile
Re: Judging a Match (Discussion)
« Reply #13 on: December 07, 2015, 02:36:17 PM »

Are we gonna have them selected as random people then?

Narrow it down to top active individuals in clans, etc?

I assume the system will be similar to how the GMs are being selected.
Give a week for nominations.

I'll break it down in the simplest way of my understanding. Judges inforce rp based rulings during matches. Councilmen inforce the buji rules, not rp, strictly. A judge is asked to take action during a match when needed because of a move made in that department. A council is asked to take action when a host or challenger has broken a ruling on the systems of Buji.

Examples: Someone auto-hits, counters wrongly, makes a post that doesn't make sense, or the two fighting disagree how techs may work in this or that fashion are all things a judge cast a decision on. Someone doesn't post within the time frame, declines a challenger, goes against their preference page, goes against things publicly agreed upon, ect. are things the council cast a decision upon.


That's exactly why a council member SHOULD be allowed to become a judge.
The two positions are completely different in function/responsibility. One doesn't affect the other.
Logged

Hades

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Karma: +14/-4
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 148
    • View Profile
Re: Judging a Match (Discussion)
« Reply #14 on: December 07, 2015, 06:57:37 PM »

Are we gonna have them selected as random people then?

Narrow it down to top active individuals in clans, etc?

I assume the system will be similar to how the GMs are being selected.
Give a week for nominations.

I'll break it down in the simplest way of my understanding. Judges inforce rp based rulings during matches. Councilmen inforce the buji rules, not rp, strictly. A judge is asked to take action during a match when needed because of a move made in that department. A council is asked to take action when a host or challenger has broken a ruling on the systems of Buji.

Examples: Someone auto-hits, counters wrongly, makes a post that doesn't make sense, or the two fighting disagree how techs may work in this or that fashion are all things a judge cast a decision on. Someone doesn't post within the time frame, declines a challenger, goes against their preference page, goes against things publicly agreed upon, ect. are things the council cast a decision upon.


That's exactly why a council member SHOULD be allowed to become a judge.
The two positions are completely different in function/responsibility. One doesn't affect the other.
Logged
Pages: [1] 2
 

Page created in 0.053 seconds with 20 queries.