Shinobi Legends Forum
Roleplay => All That Is Bijuu => Council => Topic started by: Genesis on June 07, 2016, 07:32:04 AM
-
We shall discourse the hosting of the zero tails for very first agenda! That's right, our very first. You better pop open that champagne as we type away in a civil manner.
Silver! Eric! Chinote! Genesis! Hades!
Biju council, assemble!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kbW5sxyu9bU! (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kbW5sxyu9bU!)
Status: Council has ended | The Floor is Closed
EDIT: For now, this thread is COUNCIL MEMBERS (& MODS) ONLY. I'm free balling here, but when the council wishes to "Open the Floor", then y'all can chime in with your opinions. That is, before we close it.
-
Are we allowed to post in these topics? Well I'm going to until told otherwise. >> Just want to reiterate the situation for anyone not aware.
I was next in line to fight Ryoji for the 2 and 0 tails (on two separate characters). Before the fights started I wondered if he had been making his rp posts once every 14 days as is required, since he did not even have an account for Ryoji at the time. He admitted he had not done his posts and was stripped, as is laid out in the rules. I was given the 2 tails but for some reason people wanted the other bijuu to be put on hold till you guys were formed to make a decision for reasons I still don't understand.
Whenever someone is stripped the beast goes to the challenger if there was one and that was me on this occasion. So I don't see how it could logically go to anyone but me. Hopefully this won't take long as I promised to defend the beast immediately against the next challenger on the list.
-
no. council members only.
please vacate the topic and leave the council to their work.
:P
i will delete mine when yours is gone.
-
Check the edit.
-
* Totaly does the hero landing!*
Wow that's hard on my knees! Silver is up and just woke up! So Reibi was it?
Do we have information why this was brought up? Can'T have a discussion without proper information right?
-
The details that we do know that have been made public so far:
http://forum.shinobilegends.com/index.php/topic,8931.0.html
http://forum.shinobilegends.com/index.php/topic,8932.0.html
Bocchiere's motions for stripping in a nutshell:
I'm not saying you should be stripped in your fight with Athos I'm saying that's further evidence of your inactivity and why you should be stripped of the 0 tails. I mean you seem to have very little interest in doing anything. It took you over 2 weeks to post in your other fight, you literally said our fight will start once you feel like hashing out the details...
... You seem to be inactive, you're not keeping up your challenger list. If you can't follow the rules you don't get to be a host it's that simple.
How long has this match with T'Challa been up in the air for instance? Can we see a screen shot of when he challenged you? He named changed your account on May 7th and I'm willing to bet he challenged you not long after, which would mean in slightly over 2 weeks you haven't started the fight.
You also are required to make a public post every 14 days with each character that is a host, but you no longer have an account for Ryoji, so can you provide evidence that you've been following that rule?
Ryoji has seemingly said that he has not posted IC within the 14 day period required by the rules that he agreed to follow. The consequence for this is stripping of the bijuu. For the sake of being official this topic is made to confirm whether the above statement is true or not.
I'm his pending challenger for both bijuu, if he hasn't been following the rules than I would like him to be stripped.
Rusaku's defense in a nutshell:
I shouldn't have to provide screenshots for this, ask him yourself. I already said I would move him to the end of the list so we could fight.
I've literally been the most active biju participant, so I think you can cut me some slack. Take a look at any of the fights on the forum right now, and I am sure that you will notice that my characters are a part of like, 80% of the fights.
I fought Eric, Enishi, Sabu, Bocc, Athos, Taiga, and more. I have defended the Zero tails whenever a challenge has been made as seen with Sabu, Sharuto, and Ichirou. I don't update my list because challenges don't get made for the Zero tails often. It's not exactly sought after. I already admitted it needs to be updated. Ryoji does not have an account as of right now, but I am also still participating in Biju matches until he loses it. The thread for the 2 tails is about to be set because discussions with Kage have ended and now that T'challa is at the end the fight for the Zero tails will be up with Taiga. If I need to make posts, I will have the Rikudou account reactivated so posts can be made. I'm obviously not avoiding challenges. Sure I'm not exactly as active as I once was, but this game fucking sucks now. I'm literally trying to leave SL, but I have to finish up these stupid fights so I can give my shit away to people who aren't idiots.
Yup. I have not posted in two weeks because I sold the Ryoji account. I honestly just want out of this cancerous game, but I was attempting to have my things go to someone other than the anitchrist and let them deal with his shit. (Ban me ace, I honestly don't care. You know what I sent you about Bocc's bullshit and exactly what I planned to do if he kept it up.)
Of this generation of jinks, I am the longest running holder of beasts next to warren. I have participated in 80% of the forums beast fights with little to no issue save for interactions with Bocc. (surprised, right?) I was willing to defend the beasts against anyone who challenged me despite my leaving, because I was obligated too. Not because I wanted too. I was literally about to make the topic to fight Bocc for the two tails when I saw this thread go up, and now that T'challa is at the end of the line I would make a topic for Taiga all the same. Yet here we are trying to strip me because of my posting. Sure, I did't post. I'll be the first one to admit it, but I'd be willing to beat my meat like it owed me money in the middle of whatever zone with an acad if it meant not letting this kid get the beasts without actually earning them. As I said before, worse things have been let slide when it comes to Biju. Give me a warning, I'll graciously thank the community for allowing my mistake to slide as long as I have learned my lesson and we can begin the fights that were scheduled.
Or I can get stripped and finally leave this god forsaken game. I'll curse this sites very existence as long as I know Bocc has the Zero tails, but I'll be happy. I just got engaged tonight to the woman I love, and I won't let my day be ruined by some stupid drama shit. Do with it as you will, but I'll be sitting over here on my throne of fallen Jinks waiting for bocc to fight me. If he decides the only way he can beat Ryoji is through stripping him, thats on his ego, not mine. Peace.
----------------------------------------
He has not been avoiding challenges from what I"ve seen, and checking over all of his recent biju fights again this morning from the biju arena thread, they have been OOC. The rules only state that:
Hosts must make an RP post in public once every 14 days while not engaged in an active challenge.
It does not specify that it has to be a defensive challenge to defend the beast in order to count. He has been in a fight with Athos for quite some time, and since Athos never brought up a thread regarding Rusaku's activity in that fight and Bocchiere did not make mention of it until after Rusaku had posted:
http://forum.shinobilegends.com/index.php/topic,8906.0.html That there is the biju fight.
Whatevs. I'll message him. Our fight will start when I get around to discussing the details.
Well I'm still waiting for a community decision on whether you should be stripped too. You just posted in your fight with athos after 16 or so days. Slightly over the 7 day limit the new rules set. So to me it looks like you were just as inactive as T'Challa.
Considering the opinion that the Council isn't supposed to make rulings on rule violations unless it is brought to our attention and it was "brought to our attention" after the rule was no longer being violated, Rusaku was following the writing of the rules.
Having said all that, Rusaku clearly wants to leave the game, that much has been expressed. He has a wedding coming up, meaning he is going to get pretty busy, and his priorities will certainly be elsewhere. His time is going to get short, the less time he remians as a host during that period the better in the long run, so stripping him to relieve him of that duty, in my opinion, would be a matter of preventing a future problem and lifting a load off his back rather than enforcing a rule.
If the motion to strip him is still to be passed, I think we should at least have Bocchiere fight the 0-tails GM'd by someone else volunteered, willing, and then approved by us (if both Rusaku and Bocc can be brought together without fuss we could have them agree on a GM) while if it is rejected I think it advisable to expedite Rusaku's fight with Bocchiere over the beast in order to conclude it as soon as possible before the wedding preparations get in the way of any potential activity. If he has already flown the coop by then then we'll have no choice but to strip him at that point.
I am against stripping and I am very against giving it to Bocc since Rusaku's only true rule violation was not brought up for debate until after it had been corrected (not to mention Athos, the other fighter, did not bring up the issue). That's my formal opinion on the matter.
-
I also want stripping to be a last resort.
I think this can be quickly resolved with hearing what Rusaku has to say.
-
Having read through both threads, I'm going to have to side with Bocc that Rusaka has violated the rules.
As far as what to do with them, it's pretty simple in my opinion. Make them fight.
If Rusaka can't agree to move Bocc to the front and begin (as) immediately (as possible), then I see no reason why he should hold on to his beasts when he clearly has no interest in remaining here.
-
Thanks for finding this all, Eric.
Well to the 'bringing to attention thing' I think you are a bit too stiff, in fact all violations were brought up by Bocchiere. he pointed out :
- list not up to date
- Athos fight not started/ delayed
-T'challa fight delayed
- own challenge delayed
He noticed these three and thus brought it up. This is how i interpret the rule of 'bringing violations up' , i think this much freedom shall be allowed in order to bring justice!
Oh, sorry i almost sounded like Captain America here.
Anyways, thanks again for gathering this all, Eric.
I myself agree, it would be best to remove the Reibi of Rusaku . I doubt that we can make them fight in any sort of way. They can't even hold a discussion, this would only become a spamfest and lead to another council meeting for sure.
In order to avoid needless fights, i suggest that we strip the 0-tails , but do NOT give it to Bocchiere. I am all up for roleplay, so i suggest that we have a GM rp the 0- tails.
Both may want to vote on a GM, if this isen't concluded within a week, we shall choose a GM. Said GM will rp the 0-Tails against Bocchiere. If he wins he gets the Bijuu, if he loses it will be used IC on Sl as a rogue Bijuu. Another challenge may be conducted by Bocchiere after 14 days.
Alternativly a volutneer GM may be chosen.
so in short: Strip the Reibi -> have GM rp it against Bocchiere -> if he wins it belongs to him , if he loses it goes rogue and may be rechallenged after 14 days cooldown.
-
Seconding what Moonfire said. Said it better and longer than I did.
-
Nice to be seconded? But before we rush into STUFF why not take a look at following:
Subject Matter: Stripping a Host Clause:
Breaking the activity clause constitutes stripping. You may participate again once your life permits the time commitment SL requires of their hosts. No ban is issued and when to try again is up to the participant.
Attempting to commit fraud by providing an alt as a judge to your own match results in a perma-ban from all things bijuu.
Breaking any of the other rules results in one warning to be issued by the council. A second violation of the same rule will result in stripping.
Hosts who are stripped will be on a 3 month cool down period in which they may not participate in bijuu matters, but can serve on the council. During this time it is hoped they will train and refine their RP/participation in order to become a host in the future. This cool down period does not apply to breaking the activity clause.
The bijuu goes to village or clan leader.[requires separate vote]
If no such person exists, [ex: from unaffiliated host] the bijuu is put into the hands of the council to decide.
14 days after stripping a new host must be chosen.
7 days after host is chosen an RP to seal must be completed. OOC sealing must be completed within 2 days of being chosen. If the RP exceeds the 14 days, the host must default to OOC sealing and post his grace period dates immediately.
A one time warning will be issued, for each beast in question, to the village/organization that is responsible for choosing a host, by the council, if they fail to meet the guidelines.[part of issue under discussion]
In the event of gross negligence of the village/organization in choosing a host: the council will review the case and choose a host. They will give preference to potential hosts from that village/organization in order that the whole community of that group not be penalized due to the failure of their 'in-charge body'. If no potential host is found, then the council may choose to host a lottery of applicants [meeting in a paid zone and using the random die generators], a tourney, or assign the SL GM staff to conduct a wild bijuu event. However, judging the tourney matches will default to judge rules. Council members may not serve as judges. Additionally, any SL GM staff who are trying to be hosts may not participate in aspects of a wild bijuu hunt. -->Tourney and Wild Bijuu hunts must be concluded in a timely fashion not to exceed 2 months.
Another thing, as far i figured out( due help , thanks), the Raibi is already stripped? This was not really clear, but then we do also have like three threads label ' rules', but this is another matter. Before we jump the gun we should go a step backwards.
The 0-tails was removed, as in stripped. If not, it should be anyways. So, since we are enforcer of the rules, it means we should do as that. Whilst i do like the idea of a rogue Bijuu we should maybe take a look first. So according to the rules the bijuu goes to a new host, chosen by us.
So i will rephrase my suggestion from before. We should first look for a host , maybe take 7 days instead of 14, since this topic is open since 20th may or something.
If no host is to be found, we can go with my former suggestion. I believe this is a good middleway, this way no one gets something for free either.
-
The Reibi, under the current rules, can only be formally stripped by a decision of the Biju Council. Ace suggested a compromise of Bocc getting one and the Council deciding on the other.
-
The Reibi, under the current rules, can only be formally stripped by a decision of the Biju Council. Ace suggested a compromise of Bocc getting one and the Council deciding on the other.
Before we go any further, I'd prefer to hear from Ryoji himself. Since he's not a fan of SL (his words), I'd rather he forfeit the 0 tails rather than we outright strip him. While we probably can go through with stripping him, as there's enough evidence to do so, I wanna stay away from outright stripping.
But, if we were to strip Ryoji, it's obvious that it will go to Bocc.
http://forum.shinobilegends.com/index.php/topic,8932.msg229776.html#msg229776
-
Whether it is stripped or forfeited, wouldn't it go to Bocchiere? If so, can't we at least make the GM battle, this way it is not just like a gift. I don't want people to just wait for the moment to point out violations so they are gifted an Bijuu!
I would like to avoid just that. I want to follow the rules if possible and still prioritize the roleplay factor. We have rules for a game, so we should also play the game if possible.
And as mentioned before, we had enough reasons brought up, for the stripping. It is up to us to enforce it?
-
Whether it is stripped or forfeited, wouldn't it go to Bocchiere? If so, can't we at least make the GM battle, this way it is not just like a gift. I don't want people to just wait for the moment to point out violations so they are gifted an Bijuu!
I would like to avoid just that. I want to follow the rules if possible and still prioritize the roleplay factor. We have rules for a game, so we should also play the game if possible.
And as mentioned before, we had enough reasons brought up, for the stripping. It is up to us to enforce it?
I mean, if you really wanna do a GM battle, be my guest. This is Bocc, I'm pretty sure he'll 'win'. Then again, I like the idea of GM doing a battle, since if we were to outright give it to Bocc, it would set a precedent of sorts.
Does the Biju council have the power to enforce? No and yes. Truth is nothing can be truly enforced on SL, but I believe if the council comes to resolution and the community backs it, it will be 'enforced'.
-
to my understanding, the Council was created to make a ruling and enforce these. Our words are iron ! BAM!
So and as far i read, one Bijuu was given to Bocchiere, already, the other put on hold until we would decide what to do with it.
So, yeah if i read the rules right, it does not say that it goes to the challenger, unless i missed it.
However he IS next in line and is waiting quite a few weeks. So i do think in order to not give it for free, the GMed fight would be a nice way around it. Not just for now, but perhaps also the future. If there is ever such an occurence again.
This way we get a ruling, this way we would have an rp, and cause the Rper to have a bit of effort. It is not about the 'whether he wins or not', it is about the RP and that it is ensured to happen. For this is the reason we put up the rules in the first place, right?
A good game, needs good rules and we should see that we find a way to set them in action , whilst ensuring some fun.
I think i stick to my very first suggestion. It also means that we would get the GM to do a bit of their duty? A bit fun. I think this would be okay. I would like to work a bit for what i want. He was already willing to fight a host for it, so he should be willing to fight the bijuu itself, right?
-
It depends. I thought it would a RP mods job to do it, but I think they would be cool if you asked them to do it. Just know Bocc will try to finish the RP in like 3 turns.
So I believe we've come to an agreement that if Ryoji doesn't forfeit his 0 tails, he'll be stripped. Then Bocc will have to GM battle for it. Is that the general consensus?
I know I sound super hypocritical right now, but I want to start a motion to strip Ryoji of the 0 tails. While I was super against in the past posts, I realized that we're going to waste our time if we would wait for Ryoji to forfeit. I have nothing against Ryoji, great guy, but it's evident that he doesn't care enough about our time and Bocc's time. Also, he was given ample time to post and what not. I personally would have overlooked the fact if he missed posting on 1 occasion, but he missed 4.
So I cast my vote to strip Ryoji.
Since we're doing stuff on the fly and there's no rules for the Bijuu council, I think it would be a nice precedent if stripping of a biju was done with a unanimous vote from the council.
-
I know, it may be quick in the rp, but i would like this to be a thing, you know? To rp for something that you want to have. In the end we all will become busy, but for that we got also some rules, as far i am concerned. Anyways back to business, fwoosh~
Should we already do voting? Shouldn't we wait on Hades? I think? I think thus far only 4 of 5 said their opinion?
If we do go with the voting, here what i think:
I think the stripping thing was kinda already in action, as the previous thread showed before. Raibi was already ' frozen'
So to make it official: Yes to stripping it from former owner and to have it Gmed, for the RP sake.
-
It is unanimous, I also agree that Ryoji should forfeit/be stripped.
Bocchiere should either participate in a GMed battle or be given the reibi.
-
Alright, the vote doesn't matter any more because Ryoji has forfeited.
(http://i.imgur.com/BFjUhxq.png?1)
But, it has come to my attention that we're overlooking T'Challa. He technically has a claim to it before Bocc. Unless if he's inactive also.
-
4thing stripping and Bocc getting first dibs to an RP for the Zero.
As it's been noted in the other thread, Genesis, T'Challa had a chance but their 'challenge-to-battle' time went over the limit, thus Bocc moving up in the order. Should Bocc fail the RP, then I would assume T'Challa would have the next opportunity.
-
4thing stripping and Bocc getting first dibs to an RP for the Zero.
As it's been noted in the other thread, Genesis, T'Challa had a chance but their 'challenge-to-battle' time went over the limit, thus Bocc moving up in the order. Should Bocc fail the RP, then I would assume T'Challa would have the next opportunity.
My bad, completely forgot about that part. Why not just have Bocc and T'Challa fight for it?
-
From the sounds of it, T'Challa doesn't have his character set yet and challenged pre-maturely. He can always challenge Bocc for it when he's ready, rather than holding this up even more.
-
And i think T'Challa's time also did went up , since T'Challa was inactive, thus Bocchiere went up in line.
So i am a tad bit iffy to give T'Challa a chance.
I will stick to my former vote.
-
Alright, so Ryoji has forfeit and someone will GM the zero tails vs Bocc.
After that happens, T'chella will be first in line for the zero tails (Maybe??? We'll deal with it when we get there).
Is that consensus we have reached?
-
Looks good to me.
Go team.
-
We need Eric's input to make this unanimous.
-
Alright, so Ryoji has forfeit and someone will GM the zero tails vs Bocc.
After that happens, T'chella will be first in line for the zero tails (Maybe??? We'll deal with it when we get there).
Is that consensus we have reached?
Why exactly is T'chella second in line at all? He had been removed from the challenge queue in ordder for Bocc to be in the "next" position:
He doesn't want to strip you for not updating the list. (You sexy beast ;D jkjk) It's for the length of time you're taking to start the fight with the challenger. At this point you should both be slapped on the wrists. *slap*
I honestly don't think you should get stripped. Others have done far worse with no punishment, but at the same time it shouldn't happen at all. To add on to that if leniency is placed on all minor rules broken then it may continue to increase lenient and mess up the whole system.
Yes Kiri has done far worse. Reason we ignore them now, but that doesn't mean you should take their examples of 'F**k everyone else' and pit them against your own. Their wrongs may be worse than yours, but they're both still wrongs. That doesn't mean you turn into Kiri. You don't get vindictive or spiteful. You work it out.
Rusaku wanted to have a good time at a con while the other guy is figuring out his character. That's not Bocc's issue. It's T'Challa and yours. It's not so much of a fallacy that you should be stripped though. The most reasonable thing I can think of is to move Bocc to T'Challa's challenger spot and then once the newbie character is worked out let him fight Bocc if he's still up to it.
TL;DR
T'Challa gets booted from challenging you. You fight Bocc. After that once T'Challa has everything worked out he can fight against Bocc/Rusaku.
I have until tomorrow or whatever before I have to boot him, so if he can finish up his stuff, the fight will start. If not, he'll be moved to the end of the line.
No established character, no thread for him to make a formal public challenge, T'Challa doesn't have a foot to stand on at this point from what is known of his end of the situation.
We should be specific in finding a proper candidate for GMing the beast (as I said earlier, I'm for that option among the stripping) before considering this a done deal. I say we look into getting Trev to do it, with the judge being someone like Shadow. Bouncing names on that one.
Tl;dr, I agree that Ryoji's forfeit leads to the 0-tails being GM'd by an individual to be determined, but I am against T-chella being first in line for the zero tails regardless of the winner of the outcome.
-
Yeah, I actually looked for T'Challa's name on SL and I can't find him. He either changed his name or deleted his account. With that being said, I'll do a 'minutes' or a recap of this council meeting.
Ryoji has forfeited the Reibi. Bocc, who was next in line for the Reibi, will do a GM fight for the zero tails. The council has arrived at this consensus by unanimous decision.
I will leave this thread open for the next 12 or so hours before I lock it. So if you want add anything, go ahead or forever hold your peace.
Go team.
-
Actual nice job on quickly reaching a decision guys.
My only comments are that I'd like this to continue quickly. Since the person will be rping the Reibi I don't care who it is, just quickly pick somebody, here are the Reibi's abilities for reference there.
"Like Kurama, the Zero-Tails has the ability to sense negative emotions, which it uses to seek out and possess anyone who is emotionally unstable. Afterwards, it begins to feed upon the darkness within one's heart and allows the spirit to create dark chakra (闇のチャクラ, yami no chakura). The dark chakra produced by the Zero-Tails grants its host a great source of power, giving them access to high-level techniques without needing to form hand seals while negating any potential drawbacks those techniques may otherwise bring, as well as powering up the entire floating fortress. So long as there is darkness in one's heart within the Zero-Tails' vicinity, it can continuously produce dark chakra at an unlimited rate. However, as with normal chakra, it requires proper control to use beneficially, and a disruption in the control flow can cause severe backlash that can ruin the user's body, as Shinnō heavily deteriorated when Sasuke Uchiha struck his tenketsu.
Along with its ability to detect negative emotions, it also appears to have the ability to read the hearts of others, seeing as it saw Naruto's urge to rescue Sasuke Uchiha, and his pain when he was unable to bring him back.
The Zero-Tails is able to generate many arms from its body, which can extend to great lengths, as well as being able to instantly reattach itself whenever it lost a part of its body, even its head."
So you've got unlimited chakra and arms. Good luck. :D
Secondly what is my win condition? Is it an OOC fight I just need to win as if it was a bijuu challenge or should I have to actually seal the beast?
-
Sooo, anyone care to fill me in, how to go on from here?
Will we just close this topic now and open a new one to figure out who to GM this? Or can we just do this here as well? I mean this is also a part of the Reibi issue and i would like this at one spot.
Also i apologize if i appear so clueless. I simply want to ensure that everything runs smoothly...
We may want to determine the conditions for the fight, or shall we leave this up to the GM? This may however drag this out further.
-
I'm alright with Trev/Shadow as GM/Judge.
Is there a list of 'approved' GM/judges, for future reference? <<;
As far as win condition, either sealing it or 'up to the GM' are fine in my opinion.
-
I side with Chinote and a list of Judges and GM would be favorable
-
I guess I'm not locking this yet.
-
I mean, we should probably get a GM and judge set before we lock. No sense making a new thread for it.
-
I mean, we should probably get a GM and judge set before we lock. No sense making a new thread for it.
Just want to mention again I don't care who the GM is, I just want to get it done, so I'd just as soon say take the first person willing to do it.
Also Shadow has agreed to be judge
-
I'm fine with that. Ya'll good with that?
-
volunteers to GM
-
All in favor of Kay GMing?
Aye.
-
Aye, sounds good to me, anyone else who voltuneered? No?
-
Kayenta is actually volunteering to GM the beast? :eek:
I'm almost too shocked to say yes to that. Almost.
Shadow as judge and Kayenta as GM, I imagine it wil go rather quickly as the participants both seem rather eager to get this through the hole.
-
I think they already started...
Eh.
I think for the future, i would like people to not jump the gun like this. But they were agreeing to this, so it should be fine.
-
Whatever. Locking.