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

Oooh, I had no idea this was going on. Bummed I missed all the excitement.
btw, Hazama is under this thang -> ハザマ <-

First off, Eric. What's the point of issuing a challenge and not giving the challenger a chance to respond within the given time frame? I should be allowed at least a week to respond, before anything is even done due to the rules stating that we need a week to start the fight or otherwise, the said beast goes to the challenger. I would ask for a council meeting to add this specific clause to the rules, but we don't even a full council to even call a vote. So why bother at this point in time lol?

The rules state that breaking the activity clause constitutes a stripping. Since the Council historically (and especially now) did not tend to actively hunt for rule breakers, the individuals who made strip threads tended to have a vested interest in where the beast went, IE, were usually the challengers. Naturally, when stripped, the Council often awarded the beast to whoever was the last challenger; therefore, it would make sense to make a challenge and then bring up the activity situation as an issue afterwards as, based on history, this would increase the chance of being awarded the tailed beast (in a timely fashion).

As far as I am aware, the "week to setup a match" does not supersede the RP activity clause. The 14 day activity clause is only modified during an "active" match, which is after the match has been setup and formally started:

Hosts must make a RP post in public once every 14 days while not engaged in an active challenge.

Extenuating circumstances during an active match: Here the activity clause is 7 days, in order to keep the fight moving along to a conclusion...

Also, why issue a challenge and not even have that said character exist on the server? Rules state that the both the host and challenger must have an active account on forums and the server where we RP on. No character was specified and I assume that it was his character, Hazama, whom happens to not even exist on Shinobi Legends. Believe me, I checked and found no trace of any activity from the challenger. You can even check for yourself and you'll see why I am bit...confused about why you're stripping my character without even checking to see if the challenger was even existed on Shinobi Legends.

I concede that it was a short-sighted not to check on that when I did go through the trouble of checking the Uchiha Kamui account activity, but technically the rules don't state that you have to have a SL account in order to make a challenge. It states only that a forum account is needed:

A host must have/create an SL forum account.

Challengers will also have/create an SL forum account.

I *indeed just looked for myself and couldn't find a "Hazama" in the ninja list; without a SL account the only other way to meet the activity clause is to RP here on the forums, which while meeting the letter of the rule as the forum is a public place, doesn't really fit the spirit of it  since most people (even when I was still actively RPing) didn't RP here on the forum.

I am glad there is some discussion on this; before calling a public vote, are the other Biju Council members somewhat active? If not what's left of the biju Council can call for a vote to decide (in the absence of the full representation that would be expected) the fate of Shukaku.


*Editted for clarity

I'm partial to Camel and Haz working something out, myself. Preferably an actual fight for us to read somewhere after they settle their differences.

First off, Eric. What's the point of issuing a challenge and not giving the challenger a chance to respond within the given time frame? I should be allowed at least a week to respond, before anything is even done due to the rules stating that we need a week to start the fight or otherwise, the said beast goes to the challenger. I would ask for a council meeting to add this specific clause to the rules, but we don't even a full council to even call a vote. So why bother at this point in time lol?

Also, why issue a challenge and not even have that said character exist on the server? Rules state that the both the host and challenger must have an active account on forums and the server where we RP on. No character was specified and I assume that it was his character, Hazama, whom happens to not even exist on Shinobi Legends. Believe me, I checked and found no trace of any activity from the challenger. You can even check for yourself and you'll see why I am bit...confused about why you're stripping my character without even checking to see if the challenger was even existed on Shinobi Legends.

As far as I am concern, the challenge is void until further notice and the stripped beast is given to the council. Rules state that the council votes on a new host and it goes from there, but we have a dilemma with the council's activity. So it wouldn't be fair to have one-sided vote, since we need more than two council members to make it bipartisan.

So where do we go from here? Me and Hazama can work something out and go through with our match on the forums in a respective manner, after he restore his account and what not. Or we can go the stripping route where it'll have to come to a public vote, due to no council and we'll see who becomes the new host afterwards.

Excuse me, but doesn't Kamui still fall under the 1 week to respond rule? It's only been five.

If the issue were only him not responding to the challenger, then yeah, it would be a bit soon. However, the reason for the stripping proposal is because he hadn't made a public RP post in 14 days (evidenced by no RP post here on forum and his SL account not being logged into for quite a few days), which constitutes stripping:

Hosts must make a RP post in public once every 14 days while not engaged in an active challenge. Hosts who fail to do this will have their bijuu stripped by the council.

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.

I already responded back to your post and accepted your challenge, but if you want to go to route of trying to strip my character of the said beast. As Koji stated, I still had time left until the time limit for the challenge issued is up and a stripping process can only proceed after a week is up. 

The week time limit is for active challenges; your SL account went unlogged into for awhile before the challenge was issued.

I already responded back to your post and accepted your challenge, but if you want to go to route of trying to strip my character of the said beast. As Koji stated, I still had time left until the time limit for the challenge issued is up and a stripping process can only proceed after a week is up. 

I challenge thee!

Challenge accepted. We'll work something out, after I get a response back in your other thread.

Excuse me, but doesn't Kamui still fall under the 1 week to respond rule? It's only been five.

Well, the last challenger in Kamui's thread, from 3 years ago mind you, was Uchiha Madara. While i"m not sure how that fight/challenge was resolved (I presume Madara lost since there was no change in owner of this biju?), as of this morning Madara's SL account has been inactive for 21 days.

Even if he were active though, assuming everything on the forum is up to date, he already has 3 beasts: the 5 tails, the 6 tails, and the Gedo Mazou (it has a challenge thread, so it counts as a beast towards the 3 beast limit).

That said, I have no opposition to Hazama taking the beast and will go ahead and make the change. Don't forget to post up your preferences in the appropriate thread. If for some reason this is an issue, this thread can be used as a discussion for that.


*Correction, I"ll update the list once you post the preference list. That away things like "affiliation" will already be set and won't have to be re-updated if I get the wrong one

Hey guys, it's me once more! Below, you will be able to see that I have challenged Kamui for his beast. I understand that his preferred method of fighting/challenging is ICly but he has been inactive for WAY over the 14 day limit.

The IC rules weren't meant to be abused so that people could avoid activity claims. That being said, since I have challenged him for his beast and since the beast should go to the next challenger, I would like to have Hazama be marked down as the summoner for the One Tail!

I will not be posting images of how he has failed to post within the time limit, seeing as his account is currently over 60 days of inactivity and he has not been able to make any active posts anywhere!

Much like last time, I'm not expecting much pushback from this but if there is any, please keep it civil