Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Eric]

Realizing that it may have gone quiet because of the fact that it was a vote thread before, I am now making a discussion version of this topic:

http://forum.shinobilegends.com/index.php/topic,8695.0.html

In short:

I feel I may have failed to articulate the precision that I was going for here. When I say "how to fight", I am talking about how to zone, and how powers permissible in the fight/RP may be determined.

http://forum.shinobilegends.com/index.php/topic,8356.0.html

^ That, essentially. Whether the fight is OOC or IC is irrevelent, how that individual fight is actually conducted, especially the Zoning and Acquisition of power section. As Kirk put it in another section, standards on how to RP (or how to zone, period).

I would also like to add:

Section G: Biju Fight Zoning

The following are strictly forbidden during any biju related events:

1) Harassment
2) Bad-mouthing outside of character interactions and exchanges
3) God-modding without the consent of either the Champion (if modder is Challenger) nor of the Challenger (if modder is Champion). If god-mode is suspected the match should be stopped and a separate thread created for either discussion or a brief presentation of points so that the mediator can determine the appropriate course of action. If a turn passes after the suspected god-mode, then that is considered acceptance of the act.

Guidelines for the conduct of the battle are as follows:

1) All disputes are to be settled by a Mediator. Discussion should only take 2 weeks and must take place outside of the fight thread itself. If the Mediator fails to resolve the dispute or make a decision within 15 days, then a Council Member may step in and make a decision.

2) All hunts/fights must be posted/documented on the forum. The mediator may negotiate the post-start entry of new Challengers or Champions, but they may only enter at the end of a turn cycle. Additionally, no first-turn attacks, counter-attacks, nor defends.

3) The fight is concluded when either all Challengers or all Champions are defeated. The mediator declares a winner in cases where it is unclear or if the fight is ended prematurely due to disagreements. A Council Member may also fill that role.

4) In cases where the beast has no Champion (freshly stripped beast) then all Challengers must fight for the beast battle royale style. The winner recieves the beast. If there are no other Challengers within 15 days of a biju having no Champion, then a lone Challenger is awarded the beast.

Section H: Tailed Beast Transfer
A tailed beast may change hands/be transferred to a player only through the method outlined in Article I Section G. Just OOC gifting is not permitted. Mock fights are encouraged for situations where gifting is necessary for the sake of documentation.

As another example of the kind of stuff I'm looking to dicuss.

[KayentaMoenkopi]

3) God-modding without the consent of either the Champion (if modder is Challenger) nor of the Challenger (if modder is Champion). If god-mode is suspected the match should be stopped and a separate thread created for either discussion or a brief presentation of points so that the mediator can determine the appropriate course of action. If a turn passes after the suspected god-mode, then that is considered acceptance of the act.

I think having a judge picked during pre-fight discussion, and then discussing it with them, rather than making a forum thread, is the way to go. I believe forum disputes concerning bijuu have pretty much gotten on everyone's last nerve. Creating a forum thread kind of contradicts/(is)redundant to this point. Mediator/Judge...really the same thing.

1) All disputes are to be settled by a Mediator. Discussion should only take 2 weeks and must take place outside of the fight thread itself. If the Mediator fails to resolve the dispute or make a decision within 15 days, then a Council Member may step in and make a decision.

As for time limits upon settling disputes...I am a fan of less than 2 weeks max in the interests of timeliness. Other than life event absences...for are not posts to the match supposed to be within 7 days time...2 weeks is a big delay. Adding in an extra week to handle issues should be enough.

2) All hunts/fights must be posted/documented on the forum. The mediator may negotiate the post-start entry of new Challengers or Champions, but they may only enter at the end of a turn cycle. Additionally, no first-turn attacks, counter-attacks, nor defends.

I don't want RP leaving SL and moving to the forum. This should be an option rather than a rec. However, documentation would be accounted for through the host's forum info thread by means of the challenger list, notifications posted as to whose turn it is, that terms have been agreed upon, activity log, etc.

4) In cases where the beast has no Champion (freshly stripped beast) then all Challengers must fight for the beast battle royale style. The winner recieves the beast. If there are no other Challengers within 15 days of a biju having no Champion, then a lone Challenger is awarded the beast.

I think this requires the resolution of the stripping a bijuu host clause to determine how best to deal with a host-less beast.

The following are strictly forbidden during any biju related events:

1) Harassment
2) Bad-mouthing outside of character interactions and exchanges
3) God-modding without the consent of either the Champion (if modder is Challenger) nor of the Challenger (if modder is Champion). If god-mode is suspected the match should be stopped and a separate thread created for either discussion or a brief presentation of points so that the mediator can determine the appropriate course of action. If a turn passes after the suspected god-mode, then that is considered acceptance of the act.

so...I do like having a basic standard though. Something that states what is expected to be a basic level of fighting standard.

I do not like, the passing of a turn clause being interpreted as something a combatant must then put up with. When I zone I tend to respond in ways that negate the god modded point...up to a certain point. Then if such thing continue I would often go back and point the instances of where I had let things slide in order to bring it to my opponent's attention that while I have been somewhat lenient in the issues I consider to be 'out of bounds' that repeated god modding and failure to maintain certain standards of RP is annoying and should be stopped. I never did think that a person should nit-pick a battle to death, that some flexibility should be possible between the two people's RP styles. However, that does not mean I should have to swallow a total route and it is time to clean things up a bit.

[Eric]

... I do not like, the passing of a turn clause being interpreted as something a combatant must then put up with. When I zone I tend to respond in ways that negate the god modded point...up to a certain point. Then if such thing continue I would often go back and point the instances of where I had let things slide in order to bring it to my opponent's attention that while I have been somewhat lenient in the issues I consider to be 'out of bounds' that repeated god modding and failure to maintain certain standards of RP is annoying and should be stopped. I never did think that a person should nit-pick a battle to death, that some flexibility should be possible between the two people's RP styles. However, that does not mean I should have to swallow a total route and it is time to clean things up a bit.

That's not the way I and some others RP/zone. If you had me for a judge I would just point out that you accepted the post as fact and should have brought it up last time. If you had you for a judge (not literally, you can't be your own judge, but for lack of another example of this alternative) you would accept the post and point out that the other person should not have god-modded.

 A discrepancy like that could have a huge impact on the judge's decision making, so I feel it needs to be defined. Stuff like that is why I feel there need to be standards.

I think having a judge picked during pre-fight discussion, and then discussing it with them, rather than making a forum thread, is the way to go. I believe forum disputes concerning bijuu have pretty much gotten on everyone's last nerve. Creating a forum thread kind of contradicts/(is)redundant to this point. Mediator/Judge...really the same thing.

That is what I meant, though I would have suggested having the discussions be in public and others are not allowed to post. Granted, that would be really hard to enforce (like, really hard, people are nosy after all) initially, so maybe the discussion can happen in private and relevant details posted in public?

As for time limits upon settling disputes...I am a fan of less than 2 weeks max in the interests of timeliness. Other than life event absences...for are not posts to the match supposed to be within 7 days time...2 weeks is a big delay. Adding in an extra week to handle issues should be enough.

Much of this was borrowed from my biju guidelines thing, so I may not have accounted for the 7 days time decision. Nonetheless, I chose 15 days as an absolute cut-off no matter the circumstances, which is only 1 day greater than "with extenuating circumstances".

I don't want RP leaving SL and moving to the forum. This should be an option rather than a rec. However, documentation would be accounted for through the host's forum info thread by means of the challenger list, notifications posted as to whose turn it is, that terms have been agreed upon, activity log, etc.

I would rather the fight itself be physically documented here on the forum (though i wouldn't mind the fights being done here on the forum, to shave off some of that record-keeping stuff in that champion thread). For record-keeping sake. You see, over a period of fights some people use the same technique over and over again, but in a different manner. If a judge is trying to figure things out, seeing a clear, unexplained discrepancy in usage might would help make some thing clear.

The intent, however, is that people are able to actively see the biju fight happening in, more or less, one place, and won't have to go hunting for it. That might in truth be a relic of when biju fights were publicly debated, but I still like the idea of having exact records of the actual fight here on the forum, just like we have such records of the Jounin Exams Finals. It gives something for newbies to look at and know how these biju matches are actually fought, and gives experienced people an idea on how to zone at this level.

I think this requires the resolution of the stripping a bijuu host clause to determine how best to deal with a host-less beast.

I posted this idea in what I think is the appropriate thread (the one talking about where stripped beasts go).

[KayentaMoenkopi]

I understand your concerns Eric. But much of them speak to preferences rather than issues which create problems and interfere with the bijuu challenge process. I do not feel we should make rules over things that are merely preferences and do not cause a break down in proceedings.

As such:

• I do not agree with having to immediately step on every infraction of each post or forever having to accept it as valid. This would set up a precedent in that fight such that one could say in the event of a repeat infraction: 'Well you were fine with me auto-hitting you in post #3, so it should be fine in post #5.' However, in the interests of standardization, If a rule must be made concerning this issue, then it should be that you do NOT have to make a complaint after every post or forever be held to accepting it. This way the system permits some preference in RP style to still exist outside the mandates of an exclusive group, Ex: 'you and some others' you rp with rather than me and the folks I rp with.

That something is accepted by some does not automatically justify it being valid or indicate it should be accepted by all. So making it a rule that all must follow your style of RP is unacceptable. Merely your preference and not my own.

• As for discrepancies being posted, or the highlights being posted, it is unnecessary. The people involved in the match are handling it with their judge and by means of the ruling and the match moving forward, clearly the issue has been resolved and the public is not required to be informed of the details. Making this a rule just adds more book keeping which serves no productive purpose. If a person wants to know what is going on, well Ask. I am sure they will be happy to gossip and let you know how things are going without a RULE being made.

And again. Mandatory matches on the forum.

• The forum is not SL. It is a tool and not the community. The bulk of new people who might get to see how bijuu matches are conducted do not even yet realize we have a forum. That is true and numerous people are amazed when I let them know this place exists. So many people see forum listed on the left navigation bar and think that is not something they need to join.
• Additionally: It is true that some devices that people use to access SL will not permit an ease in accessing the forum format. I do not understand the delicate coding reasons why, but I do know this is true. By mandating time heavy posting sessions of a match be held on the forum, you create extra problems for the RPer. While they may be able to check the forum and keep up their host thread obligations, something that takes little time to do, concentrated RP posting would be a huge pain in the behind.
• This is not something that causes the system to break but speaks to preferences, so I feel no RULE is required.

[Eric]

...
As such:

• I do not agree with having to immediately step on every infraction of each post or forever having to accept it as valid. This would set up a precedent in that fight such that one could say in the event of a repeat infraction: 'Well you were fine with me auto-hitting you in post #3, so it should be fine in post #5.' However, in the interests of standardization, If a rule must be made concerning this issue, then it should be that you do NOT have to make a complaint after every post or forever be held to accepting it. This way the system permits some preference in RP style to still exist outside the mandates of an exclusive group, Ex: 'you and some others' you rp with rather than me and the folks I rp with.

That something is accepted by some does not automatically justify it being valid or indicate it should be accepted by all. So making it a rule that all must follow your style of RP is unacceptable. Merely your preference and not my own.

I think it would be preferable if people followed a single style, preferably a hyrbid of the most popular styles on the site. The reason is that you are unlikely to challenge only people in your own RP group. Well, finding a judge gets tricky if, much like the issue above, it's pretty one way or the other kind of thing. A judge can't rule both ways (you have to call it out right then or allow it to be called out a post or two later) so one participant or the other is going to have a leg up in any disputes regarding that.

As for discrepancies being posted, or the highlights being posted, it is unnecessary. The people involved in the match are handling it with their judge and by means of the ruling and the match moving forward, clearly the issue has been resolved and the public is not required to be informed of the details. Making this a rule just adds more book keeping which serves no productive purpose. If a person wants to know what is going on, well Ask. I am sure they will be happy to gossip and let you know how things are going without a RULE being made.

Fair enough.

The forum is not SL. It is a tool and not the community.

Let's see, it was voted that, in brief, to participate in any and all biju activites one must have a forum account. If the community interested in biju matches and thus likely to keep up with them must have a forum account and will likely visit the forum at least once a month, then I am pretty sure the biju rule following community is going to be on the forum. 90% sure in fact.

While they may be able to check the forum and keep up their host thread obligations, something that takes little time to do, concentrated RP posting would be a huge pain in the behind.

The same could be said for SL proper when it comes to mobiles, especially since there is a character limit on the site proper.

This is not something that causes the system to break but speaks to preferences, so I feel no RULE is required.

IC hunts broke the system. Removing them should help fix the system, so therefore a rule should be required banning IC hunts, at least until we fix them? People's preferences to do IC hunts be damned to the many threads devolved to that topic alone?

I'll give up on trying to advocate for conducting matches here on the forum, but I still want to push for putting a copy of it here, somewhere, for reference's sake.

[KayentaMoenkopi]

with the permission of the participants I am certain you could copy paste the whole thing to a thread...people may not wish to have their words saved on a forum for all time. They are really the ones who have to say, not us, over how their creative writing is then used. They may be like...oh geee... look at how poorly i was writing then...and just die to have it in public view.

you never know.

[Eric]

with the permission of the participants I am certain you could copy paste the whole thing to a thread...people may not wish to have their words saved on a forum for all time. They are really the ones who have to say, not us, over how their creative writing is then used. They may be like...oh geee... look at how poorly i was writing then...and just die to have it in public view.

you never know.

If it's in public like the zones then what are they gonna do, sue me? 

[KayentaMoenkopi]

Your disdain for asking people what they want and then taking into account their personal wishes in these matters, the general insistence that you decide for all, is disturbing to me and alarming Eric.

Especially when you threw such a fit with me for showing our posts on the forum from Neala faces Eric in the pocket dimension...the dwelling RP.

And before you get up about dwellings being private, it is a fact that they are not but considered public boards too. I base that off of Mod ban hammers coming out into dwelling RP and then stating that they are public boards too.

At any rate, it seems that something you personally objected to...when it suits your preferences is just fine...but screw anyone else, you will just take their writings and post it where you want and use it however suits your current design.

I make this objection to just jacking the writings of other people through my own inadvertent failure to take YOUR wishes into account at the time, not even realizing you would have an objection to my action. I now know better.

I should hope that you would as well, since I have explained it more thoroughly.

[Eric]

... And before you get up about dwellings being private, it is a fact that they are not but considered public boards too. I base that off of Mod ban hammers coming out into dwelling RP and then stating that they are public boards too....

This is news to me.

Especially when you threw such a fit with me for showing our posts on the forum from Neala faces Eric in the pocket dimension...the dwelling RP.

Well, you asked not to do it on the village board because you wanted it to be private, so of course I assumed that it was going to be a private RP, and be treated as such.

Your disdain for asking people what they want and then taking into account their personal wishes in these matters, the general insistence that you decide for all, is disturbing to me and alarming Eric.

I have two contrasting minds, one that asks permission first and the other that asks for forgiveness later. The mind that made that earlier joke (the previous post I made with a smile) was the one that asks for forgiveness later.

Less jokey and more seriously, how many people - who do not want their writings read by the general public even on an implicit level - put it in a place where the general public can access and read it?

[KayentaMoenkopi]

more than you would imagine. i have asked in the past if I could put a transcript of rps up on the forum and most say yes, but some have objected due to the permanency of the issue and it being out of context to the game. No one was going to potentially react to it and provide more rp, so they felt there was no purpose in the record.

[Eric]

more than you would imagine. i have asked in the past if I could put a transcript of rps up on the forum and most say yes, but some have objected due to the permanency of the issue and it being out of context to the game. No one was going to potentially react to it and provide more rp, so they felt there was no purpose in the record.

I see, that clears some things up.