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 3 [4]

Author Topic: Jay v Rusaku (discussion)  (Read 2725 times)

Rusaku

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Karma: +33/-47
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 712
    • View Profile
Re: Jay v Rusaku (discussion)
« Reply #45 on: September 03, 2017, 06:12:36 am »

If anyone thinks I'm going to dispute a possible DQ they are sorely mistaken. Gimmie that beast. 
Logged
If you can't beat them, eat them.

-Jeffrey dahmer

Dart Terumī

  • Moderator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Karma: +23/-32
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 463
    • View Profile
Re: Jay v Rusaku (discussion)
« Reply #46 on: September 03, 2017, 10:08:05 am »

There is a violation of rules here...and as such, a DQ is in order. At this point, if it is required to go to Council vote, Jay loses the beast.
Logged

Warren

  • Site Staff (Game Master)
  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Karma: +58/-51
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 897
    • View Profile
Re: Jay v Rusaku (discussion)
« Reply #47 on: September 03, 2017, 01:53:43 pm »

There's nothing to vote on, rule was broken with nothing to defend his case. Rusaku doesn't want to grant the extension, so this fight is over.
Logged

Old Man Xia

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Karma: +25/-36
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 424
    • View Profile
Re: Jay v Rusaku (discussion)
« Reply #48 on: September 03, 2017, 03:11:31 pm »

There's nothing to vote on, rule was broken with nothing to defend his case. Rusaku doesn't want to grant the extension, so this fight is over.

There ya go. Have fun :)
Logged
Rank: Rokudaime Mizukage(Retired)

"Laziness is nothing more than the habit of resting before you get tired"

Eric

  • Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Karma: +100/-100
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3469
    • View Profile
Re: Jay v Rusaku (discussion)
« Reply #49 on: September 04, 2017, 03:53:53 am »

If Jay, Rusaku, or Warren want to take this up to the Council and have us officially talk about it and make a decision then just say the words. Other than that this fight is over by auto-forfeit.

Isn't that you making a decision, though?
Shouldn't this fall to Warren, as current Judge, to rule on?

Short answer: No, it is not the judge's job to enforce the biju rules, it's the Council's.

Long answer:

The judges in the match rule on whether the guidelines of zone fighting and general RP have been followed, while the Biju Council makes rulings on rule violations. This was a rule violation, one with a consequence outlined clearly in the Biju Rules.

Had Rusaku's post about the extension been followed up by nothing, then I would not have personally said anything until either called upon directly or until Rusaku had an issue with it. Imho, the violator should not be the only one who can miss out on not knowing the rules, as from my point of view the Council is not tasked with hunting for rule violations. It would make the job much more difficult and make us more like inquisitors than enforcers.
Logged
Anything you can think of I can't think of, let me know; that's how the sharing circle works.

JayJay

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Karma: +16/-10
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 505
  • Who the flip is Jay!?!?
    • View Profile
Re: Jay v Rusaku (discussion)
« Reply #50 on: September 04, 2017, 06:20:39 am »




GG, bro. I'm gonna make my exit post and lock it.
Logged

If they stand behind you, give them Protection.
If they stand besides you, give them Respect.
If they stand against you, SHOW NO MERCY!

Rusaku

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Karma: +33/-47
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 712
    • View Profile
Re: Jay v Rusaku (discussion)
« Reply #51 on: September 04, 2017, 04:03:03 pm »

I might have to hit you up for a fight with less on the line, so we can let loose. Not worry about the rules so much.



Logged
If you can't beat them, eat them.

-Jeffrey dahmer

Optimal Saiteki

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Karma: +6/-4
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 20
  • Chadley Chadwick, bruh
    • View Profile
Re: Jay v Rusaku (discussion)
« Reply #52 on: September 04, 2017, 07:03:21 pm »

If Jay, Rusaku, or Warren want to take this up to the Council and have us officially talk about it and make a decision then just say the words. Other than that this fight is over by auto-forfeit.

Isn't that you making a decision, though?
Shouldn't this fall to Warren, as current Judge, to rule on?

Short answer: No, it is not the judge's job to enforce the biju rules, it's the Council's.

Long answer:

The judges in the match rule on whether the guidelines of zone fighting and general RP have been followed, while the Biju Council makes rulings on rule violations. This was a rule violation, one with a consequence outlined clearly in the Biju Rules.

Had Rusaku's post about the extension been followed up by nothing, then I would not have personally said anything until either called upon directly or until Rusaku had an issue with it. Imho, the violator should not be the only one who can miss out on not knowing the rules, as from my point of view the Council is not tasked with hunting for rule violations. It would make the job much more difficult and make us more like inquisitors than enforcers.

Er... Okay?
You still made a decision without being asked, though, from what I'm seeing. Why would you have left it be if no one said anything?
If something is your job, then it's your job whether or not anyone says anything about it, right? So either it's the councils job to rule on ALL infractions, or just the ones brought to you, isn't it? Or can they just pick and choose which violations to enforce? My point is, if no one brought it directly to the council, it's not a council matter. If it is a council matter, because it's a Bijuu rule and not just a general rule, then it's not just something you can ignore because someone "didn't know the rules".
Logged

Sabumaru

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Karma: +22/-20
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 366
  • Justin Trudeau will vouch for me
    • View Profile
Re: Jay v Rusaku (discussion)
« Reply #53 on: September 05, 2017, 02:03:58 am »

If Jay, Rusaku, or Warren want to take this up to the Council and have us officially talk about it and make a decision then just say the words. Other than that this fight is over by auto-forfeit.

Isn't that you making a decision, though?
Shouldn't this fall to Warren, as current Judge, to rule on?

Short answer: No, it is not the judge's job to enforce the biju rules, it's the Council's.

Long answer:

The judges in the match rule on whether the guidelines of zone fighting and general RP have been followed, while the Biju Council makes rulings on rule violations. This was a rule violation, one with a consequence outlined clearly in the Biju Rules.

Had Rusaku's post about the extension been followed up by nothing, then I would not have personally said anything until either called upon directly or until Rusaku had an issue with it. Imho, the violator should not be the only one who can miss out on not knowing the rules, as from my point of view the Council is not tasked with hunting for rule violations. It would make the job much more difficult and make us more like inquisitors than enforcers.

Er... Okay?
You still made a decision without being asked, though, from what I'm seeing. Why would you have left it be if no one said anything?
If something is your job, then it's your job whether or not anyone says anything about it, right? So either it's the councils job to rule on ALL infractions, or just the ones brought to you, isn't it? Or can they just pick and choose which violations to enforce? My point is, if no one brought it directly to the council, it's not a council matter. If it is a council matter, because it's a Bijuu rule and not just a general rule, then it's not just something you can ignore because someone "didn't know the rules".

This can be done in a new thread or in private, this one should be locked like a chastity belt.
Logged

Dispair is the sweetest salt besides ballsweat

Ѕhadow

  • Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Karma: +53/-47
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1897
    • View Profile
Re: Jay v Rusaku (discussion)
« Reply #54 on: September 05, 2017, 03:11:18 am »

Topic has served its purpose. Locked.  :wink:
Logged
I'm going to agree with you on some things and disagree with you on some things.

Something that can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.

Pages: 1 2 3 [4]
 

Page created in 0.047 seconds with 20 queries.