Well Now Raifudo, you know I keep telling you my opinion all the time. I don't see how you can fail to think of me as part of the council. lol
And Bocc? I think 6 villages, Otogakure needs to be included as it has been and is very much a part of SL. But otherwise I agree about the clan villages. Was just putting that out there.
About Grace Periods:
I wish to talk about the one week grace period after a match for the same challenger but not for a new challenger.
I feel it should be for after every match. The focus a challenge takes is huge. The time it eats up is also huge. I feel that if the host wishes to have a week grace period to rest up and to also do other things in their lives besides SL that they should have it regardless if the challenger is a repeat or not. Certainly the repeat challenger should go to the bottom of their list of future fights as usual.
Challenge List for Each Bijuu:
What do you think about having a post that lists the challengers for each bijuu? That way if someone is wanting to become a host they can go to the list and say..."hmmm, the 3 tails only has 2 challengers while the others all have 5 or more, I should go for it." Also this could keep people posted on how long it is until their match
Of course if one reeeeeeeeeeally wanted to be just like the show, then the Kage would decide the new host and challengers who won would only be winning them for their villages, but why not take it a step further and say that you can't PM-challenge someone. You know like actually FIND the jinchuuriki instead of all-knowingly contacting them.
I assure you Kumo could make a big statue and then let Raifudo play Tobi.
I find it hilarious that shadow appears to be complaining about the requirements to get at one of the beasts Kumo has when he hasn't so much as uttered a challenge. Whatever the case as Kam said it's been done before. Also how is having to challenge me for one any different than if I were Tobi fighting with all the beasts in a large statue? I assure you Kumo could make a big statue and then let Raifudo play Tobi. One of the reasons why I chose to fight to the death was already covered. To avoid people losing and then challenging a week later until we redid the rules >_>. It would seem that every once and a while history is to repeat itself. Someone rises and collects all the bijuu for a redistribution...
I find it hilarious that shadow appears to be complaining about the requirements to get at one of the beasts Kumo has when he hasn't so much as uttered a challenge. Whatever the case as Kam said it's been done before. Also how is having to challenge me for one any different than if I were Tobi fighting with all the beasts in a large statue? I assure you Kumo could make a big statue and then let Raifudo play Tobi. One of the reasons why I chose to fight to the death was already covered. To avoid people losing and then challenging a week later until we redid the rules >_>. It would seem that every once and a while history is to repeat itself. Someone rises and collects all the bijuu for a redistribution...
What does me complaining about the requirements have to do with making a challenge for a beast? The difference is that this isn't the show and you aren't Tobi. It's extremely hard to fight against someone in your level of prowess. I'm not saying the other hosts are weak, but you are even above them. Fighting you is a death warrant for many.
Also as for the statue thing. The claim to be able to harness the bijuu power and use it. Should be banned if one does execute getting all the bijuu. Which would never happen, but regardless. Talk about being over-powered.
Rules should be made to where a village can only hold a bijuu for a certain amount of time before they have to pass it on to a host.
Zenaku is one of the best rp'ers on the site.(If he wasn't he wouldn't have the 9 tails)
Looks good to me, though my understanding of the minor kages were that they weren't included. Only the kages of the five great villages of SL. I could be wrong
Even so there are tons of people as is, without including every Jinchuuriki who ever was. I would think it would be more of an issue, say for instance, if I missed listing one who wished to be on the council as opposed to any other reason.
About Grace Periods:
I wish to talk about the one week grace period after a match for the same challenger but not for a new challenger.
I feel it should be for after every match. The focus a challenge takes is huge. The time it eats up is also huge. I feel that if the host wishes to have a week grace period to rest up and to also do other things in their lives besides SL that they should have it regardless if the challenger is a repeat or not. Certainly the repeat challenger should go to the bottom of their list of future fights as usual.
Challenge List for Each Bijuu:
What do you think about having a post that lists the challengers for each bijuu? That way if someone is wanting to become a host they can go to the list and say..."hmmm, the 3 tails only has 2 challengers while the others all have 5 or more, I should go for it." Also this could keep people posted on how long it is until their match
Furthermore, there is another issue here, almost everyone want to be a jinchuriki cause we canceled most of their disadvantages. Unless being assisted by medical nins during the extraction or having an amazing life force/endurance, a jinchuriki should die when the bijuu is extracted.
Another thing, the result of a jinchuriki battle is quite an official one so if one is killed during one he/she should be considered dead in rp w/o exception. It is an official rp battle after all. Otherwise should not be tolerated even with the consent of both parties, it takes away too many downfalls of being a jinchuriki and growing the balls to challenge one.
RAI MUST GET HIS FOX BACK!!!! D:< I demand! >:O
The bijuu fights as they are right now, lack realism to a very sad extent.
IF the above is implemented I would also like to suggest that if the dead that result from a jinchuriki challenge wish to be resurrected
but I thought that you can't kill the host or the bijuu will die or be free to go on a killing spree or some such stuff. I thought that in order to harvest the bijuu you have to NOT kill its host. Disable him and extract it from the living being.
That's exactly my point! People have been ignoring that and such must stop now! It simply voids a good part of the hard work a challenger needs to do as do the rest of the flaws I pointed out.
Holding a jinchuriki and challenging one must pose certain risks for a decent balance between gain and loss to exist.
Point is, it's bs that he rules over 4 of the 9 bijuu. In order to challenge him for one. (As far as I know, I'm not 100% accurate) It's to the death. Meaning he can use everything he has in his arsenal, which is a lot.
Anyways to summarize my messy post;
Zenaku should not be able to rule over all 4 bijuu
If he is illegitimately allowed to do such a ridiculous thing it should not be to the death
which lead up to the formation of the council and the bylaws that we have today.
I assure you Kumo could make a big statue and then let Raifudo play Tobi.
The claim to be able to harness the bijuu power and use it. Should be banned if one does execute getting all the bijuu.
Rules should be made to where a village can only hold a bijuu for a certain amount of time before they have to pass it on to a host.
Quote from: ShadowX on March 14, 2012, 11:27:47 pm
Zenaku is one of the best rp'ers on the site.(If he wasn't he wouldn't have the 9 tails)
He's one of the best RP'ers due to his creativity; he's the host of the Kyuubi because I gave it to him as a bonus with Raikage when I finished here.
His ability in RP meant nothing to me, it was the devotion he showed to my village that persuaded me.
Now, as far as rewriting the rules goes:
My daily schedule is as followed:
3:30 AM - 8:15 pm M-F.
Sa/Su are my days to handle chores, free time things, etc.
If you're waiting on me to revise the rules, then you're in for a wait. Yes, it's important to me to help satisfy those who have come to me for help, but it's not priority in my life to give up my schoolwork or work-out regime just for this.
Edit: I'm still reading over everything; Zenaku's mentioning of Shadow is what made me respond to the above.
Quote from: Zenaku on Today at 01:06:21 am
My point Shadow is you're going by what other people say instead of coming to me directly. If a challenger wouldn't challenge every week after losing then I wouldn't have to threaten to kill to get a bit of peace and quiet. As for villages being forced to seal a beast? I side with Bocc on that one. I'm not even sure why people think I'm so strong, I only use simple logic.
I could take this chump, c'mon, now.
But, in regards to Zenny-kins being oh-so-over-powdered (yes, powdered, not powered - Kicks and giggles, eesh), think of how it is to fight a bijuu in Naruto. Look at the comparison of skills between the jinchuuriki, etc.
I mean, it takes S-class world criminals who decimated their homes in some way to take down, possibly, a host.
Quote
which lead up to the formation of the council and the bylaws that we have today.
The "laws" we have now came from me, Camel. The "council" we have now formed through means of reputable people being asked for an opinion.
My point Shadow is you're going by what other people say instead of coming to me directly. If a challenger wouldn't challenge every week after losing then I wouldn't have to threaten to kill to get a bit of peace and quiet. As for villages being forced to seal a beast? I side with Bocc on that one. I'm not even sure why people think I'm so strong, I only use simple logic. :shock:
I say that those who get their bijuu extracted, and lack either the Rinnegan (must be their own, not an extracted one) or Mokuton (reset), or lack a parent of the Uzumaki Clan (RP-wise)should be killed in the process.
What are your thoughts on NPCs for the services of these resurrections?
What are your thoughts on NPCs for the services of these resurrections?
Then people can revive themselves. Otherwise, people can just claim NPC with absurd abilities that can do it for them.
What are your thoughts on NPCs for the services of these resurrections?
What are your thoughts on NPCs for the services of these resurrections?
And even if they are one of those hardcore people you can always just not mind them for a few days. xD
I'm a bit confused here. You're saying that if the jinchuriki dies that the challenger losses. This to me seems..., unfair. The current host of the bijuu almost always demands a life or death match in order to capture it. So while you have to protect your own life with all you've got, you at the same time are trying to beat the living shit out of the jinchuriki, who you are not allowed to kill? The point of the match is as said 'life or death' Perhaps this is the line at which becoming too cannon lays?
The bijuu should still be able to be captured after the host dies, no? Like I said the line has been met here. You're trying to be too much like the show. They are two separate entities, not one. It'd be kinda like saying that if the host dies so does the bijuu. These challengers fight hard to get the bijuu.
Consider the bijuu as being an extra 'soul' trapped within its host (jinchuuriki); if you kill off the host, then how on earth do you expect the 'soul' to linger any longer?
Follow the (canon) Akatsuki's example - subjugate the jinchuuriki, then extract it. At the very least they were aware of the consequences in killing the jinchuuriki without a suitable backup plan.
Personally i rather prefer a simple deciding match to determine the bijuu life or death. Bottom line, whether through means of death or other means that should decide the match. Even as a Jinchuuriki i hate the idea that a person has to fight a Jinchuuriki while trying not to kill them. Do you have any idea how hard it is to even kill some of these people? Let alone, trying to defeat them without killing them. Things used to be alot more simple. You fight, you win, you gain the bijuu. You fight, you lose, as you were....
It's part of the hardships one having the nerve to challenge a jinchuriki should have. :P We need to "keep it real" and all.
As I do recall, Kurama (the KyuubI) stated to Naruto that if he were to die, then so would he (hence was why it would on various occasions, 'lend' Naruto its power (with or without his consent)). As for where it was stated in the manga though, I cannot pinpoint precisely at present.
Consider the bijuu as being an extra 'soul' trapped within its host (jinchuuriki); if you kill off the host, then how on earth do you expect the 'soul' to linger any longer?
Follow the (canon) Akatsuki's example - subjugate the jinchuuriki, then extract it. At the very least they were aware of the consequences in killing the jinchuuriki without a suitable backup plan.
The 'soul' itself is being held in by a seal, so when the host dies off so does the seal, hence letting the bijuu go loose. They subjugate the jinchuriki in order to avoid this 'releasing' of said bijuu.
As I do recall, Kurama (the KyuubI) stated to Naruto that if he were to die, then so would he (hence was why it would on various occasions, 'lend' Naruto its power (with or without his consent)). As for where it was stated in the manga though, I cannot pinpoint precisely at present.
At this point you are questioning basic Naruto knowledge. They die but are revived. The time such takes is unknown. Rather than quoting overly ambiguous quotes, we'd best relate to solid manga proof.
The Kyuubi and akatsuki more than clearly stating it on numerous occasions. And if you wanna complain about it being to hard to not kill and it being unfair, it's pretty much like complaining you have to fight a bijuu owner w/o having a bijuu yourself and suggest they are banned from using their tails.
I also agree that death shouldn't matter when getting a biju, though I'll save my arguments when and if this topic comes up in the council, as either I'll say it, or send it to a council member to say it for me,
The point of the match is as said 'life or death' Perhaps this is the line at which becoming too cannon lays?
The bijuu should still be able to be captured after the host dies, no? Like I said the line has been met here. You're trying to be too much like the show. These challengers fight hard to get the bijuu.
Well a thought popped into my little mind on how the killing thing could be abused. Say the jinchuriki is losing and just to spite you kill him/her self. All that hard work, just for the host ending it all doesn't at all seem fair to me.
On a side note, suicide would be pretty lame. .-.Perhaps it should be ruled that committing suicide is akin to forfeiting the match?
On a side note, suicide would be pretty lame. .-.Perhaps it should be ruled that committing suicide is akin to forfeiting the match?
Or perhaps if the jinchuuriki attempted suicide, the bijuu will interject by restraining its host (somehow) at the last second, and hence cause them to lose a post in turn? Acts exemplifying cowardice should fly by without the inducement of suitable repercussions.
I'm tempted to beg Rai to restart the initiative, now having even more reasons and see in how much time we rage at each other enough to get it locked.
What about kage defending inactive players, who dies with that challenge should the kage lose? The Kage? The Inactive Jinchuuriki? Both?
...It is the kage's job/position to elect a new host; until such is done, the kage is to assume the role of the jinchuuriki and fight to defend the beast. Should they die -- they die. I propose that because it promotes a kage to hurry up with their elections or face the consequences that might arise.
Exploits? Best exploit would be to give the bijuu to an immortal rinnegan master user who also possesses the chakra pool of a monster in combination with the bijuu. Not much we can do about that though...
Raifudo neglects to mention that I am part of the bijuu council as well. The disbanding of it and the election were a bust and my ability to judge a match is just as good as anyone else's and quite a few people come to me for aid in dealing with troubles in the zones or questions on if a move is legit or no. In addition I am an RP moderator same as Zenaku or Taraka. And she seems to be always left out of the circle when this bijuu judging things comes to light. Were she not quite capable of what it takes to deal with these issues she would never have been made a GM.
The basic thing about judging a match is this: Unless a council member steps in to deal with something that they feel is a terrible violation and could set some sort of dangerous precedent that will be hard as nails to stop from propagating into a nightmare, only the participants deal with their issues. It is upon request that someone goes to moderate the fight. And that someone can be anyone they call to do so. If both parties agree to what this third person decided, then all is well. Used to be that hardly any matches needed an outside party to deal with the issues. But these days each and every match becomes a huge bickering match. Even council members who moderate them are often times argued with, insulted or ignored entirely.
There is a basic break down in zoning these days and it stems from unreasonable claims to powers and disgusting manners. And if a council member/fight moderator is not to be heeded...well then every rule we make and every decision that is passed out becomes pointless.
As for what happens if a Kage in position of bijuu he is keeping to give out to people one day...and he becomes inactive goes...I feel that the village is responsible for replacing their Kage in that event and the bijuu in his possession would be passed down to the next Kage in line. It does not seem reasonable that village property be taken by the council to decide what the fate of the bijuu should then become.
Of course if the village fails to deal with it properly the council would and could step in. But it should go through a specific chain of events before the council takes a hand in redistribution of bijuu owned by a particular village.
Were she not quite capable of what it takes to deal with these issues she would never have been made a GM.
The people you still turn to (Zenaku, Rares, myself, etc.) can still make such calls if it is deemed necessary. Though, I'm thinking I can always turn to the voting poll and use those names.
Anyways... I can't really make rules about inactive kage except to say if that kage is inactive to make a call, we'll make a call for them to who it goes to based on either self-elected or generally-elected people of that village.
How about the exploit of users obtaining other accounts for the sole purposes of their powers [stacked doujutsu, kekkei genkai] then using them to establish some sort of RP that wasn't supposed to occur in the first place?
QuoteAnyways... I can't really make rules about inactive kage except to say if that kage is inactive to make a call, we'll make a call for them to who it goes to based on either self-elected or generally-elected people of that village.
We're not taking the bijuu from the village. Hell, we're not even choosing for them. The village itself will make the choice of the candidate they want. I'm not here to govern a kage for how they do things, etc., I'm just here to keep the flow of progress going as passively as I can.
The fact we have to wait for a jinchuuriki to go inactive > kage go inactive before redistributing > kage is elected > kage is given bijuu > kage distributes bijuu is too tediously long and unneeded of a practice to wait for.
So I read the discussion about Bijuu inactivity (I won't even dive into the other issues regarding battle and whatnot quite yet). I don't know if this is my place to say this, but may I suggest some solid rules? Some of you will probably already agree/disagree with the below list since it's pretty much my own spin on what I've read in the conversation so far:
1. If a current jinchuriki is inactive for longer than a month the bijuu in question shall be stripped of its host and placed under the security of the jinchuriki's village Kage.
2. While a village houses a hostless Bijuu, it is the village Kage's responsibility to "fight" and "protect" said bijuu from any challengers if they chose to not hand the bijuu over. This also means that in a Jinchuriki match, the Kage has the possibility of dying just as it is in any official bijuu challenge.
((- Should the defending Kage already have their own Bijuu sealed within them during the period challenged for the inactive bijuu, they are allowed to use the tails of their own Bijuu for the duration of the match.-))
3. The village kage of the sealed bijuu is given an unlimited amount of time to distribute the beast to a host. However, until the beast is sealed within a host, the kage is responsible for accepting all challenges for it instead.
4. In the event of the inactive host returning to activity while the Kage is under the possession of the Bijuu in question, the kage has the choice of resealing the Bijuu back into the returning user. However, if this user becomes inactive once again for a period of more than 3 weeks the bijuu will again be stripped of them and given back to the Kage. After this second strike, the inactive host in question will be unable to receive that particular bijuu again until it is passed on to a new host and won back through challenging for it.
5. If it so happens that BOTH the active jinchuriki AND the host's current villages kage are inactive for a period of longer than 1 month, that village is deemed not responsible to house a Bijuu (and quite frankly in dire need of getting their shit together). In instance of this, the beast shall be returned to the village it was originally taken from.
((-In order to prevent an inactive kage from being the ultimate reason why a certain village may lose their bijuu, this will inspire the village as a whole to elect a new Kage to replace the old one quickly in the instance of inactivity.-))
6. In the event of the Bijuu's original host (before it was passed to the inactive user) happens to be a missing-nin or a non-village affiliated ninja, then the Bijuu will go to the most recent village that ninja originally associated him/herself with before going rogue.
*Note that I am only adding the second half of rule 5 and all of 6 simply because I am under the impression that there has not yet been an "official" bijuu council established. There has been quite a lot of talk about this council, though from what I've seen, no for sure list of people besides the occasional ("I know Zen and Rai are on the committee for sure at least...." etc.). In the case of a officially approved Bijuu council creation, the inactive bijuu shall be given to the council for redistribution instead of going to the previous host's village*
1. It's 2 weeks of no-notice inactivity. Then it goes to kage.Even better.
2. Kages cannot assume the role of an active-host in the sense they use the hostless bijuu as their own.
3. That's already set in place. We said if the kage is also inactive for 2 weeks, we distribute it to their village for them.Who consists of "we"? There is no official council if that is what you are referring to. There is only a hypothetical council as of now.
4. No need to give the in-actives the incentive of having a rule for themselves. The kage has the right to pass it to whom they desire.
5. We're not going to punish a village for something they cannot control -- inactivity of certain individuals. The bijuu will go to a host that is self-elected and seen positively or generally-elected by his/her peers and fellow villagers.
6. Already established.Listed simply for clarification.
I'm just, honestly, thinking of calling the elected 9 from the thread to be considered the "council". I don't need the run-around claim of "I hold this title" and "that reason is why", etc. The thread/poll was fairly erected and self-elected; voted by the community as a whole and properly advertised.I have no say as to who exactly is on the council since, quite frankly, I don't have an opinion on the matter ^ ^;
Quote1. It's 2 weeks of no-notice inactivity. Then it goes to kage.Even better.Quote2. Kages cannot assume the role of an active-host in the sense they use the hostless bijuu as their own.
I believe this was covered when I stated "should the defending Kage already have their own Bijuu sealed within them during the period challenged for the inactive bijuu, they are allowed to use the tails of their own Bijuu for the duration of the match" =]
Meaning for example, if I am kage with the 2 tails sealed within me, then yes I am able to use my 2 tails to defend myself against a person who challenges me for the formerly inactive 4 tails.Quote3. That's already set in place. We said if the kage is also inactive for 2 weeks, we distribute it to their village for them.Who consists of "we"? There is no official council if that is what you are referring to. There is only a hypothetical council as of now.Quote4. No need to give the in-actives the incentive of having a rule for themselves. The kage has the right to pass it to whom they desire.
I added this clause as it negates a giant loophole that can otherwise be exploited. Host A goes inactive and has the Bijuu stripped by Kage B. Host A returns soon after their Bijuu was stripped and Kage B returns the Bijuu to them. Host A then again goes inactive for a period of 2 weeks and is stripped again by Kage B. Host A returns yet again right after their Bijuu was stripped and has Kage B return it to them. Rinse and repeat. See where I'm going with this?
If the Bijuu is constantly returned to someone who is systematically inactive, I can see that sprouting many problems. Bijuu need to be given to a person who is constantly active. Hence this "two strikes" rule.Quote5. We're not going to punish a village for something they cannot control -- inactivity of certain individuals. The bijuu will go to a host that is self-elected and seen positively or generally-elected by his/her peers and fellow villagers.
Yes, you are definitely correct. No one has control over the actions or inactivity of another. However, what they do have control over is how quickly and how effectively they react to the situation. Unless I am mistaken about the process of how one becomes Kage, the moment that a village concludes that their current leader is MIA they (or a single person/second in command if that is how they chose a leader) are/is capable of installing a new one to take the old one's place. It even works this way in the manga. As I stated before, this rule can possibly serve to "inspire the village as a whole to elect a new Kage to replace the old one quickly in the instance of inactivity."
What is a village supposed to do in the event of a missing Kage? I highly doubt they are supposed twiddle their thumbs and wait around until the inactive kage happens to return and pick a heir to the throne so to speak.Quote6. Already established.Listed simply for clarification.QuoteI'm just, honestly, thinking of calling the elected 9 from the thread to be considered the "council". I don't need the run-around claim of "I hold this title" and "that reason is why", etc. The thread/poll was fairly erected and self-elected; voted by the community as a whole and properly advertised.I have no say as to who exactly is on the council since, quite frankly, I don't have an opinion on the matter ^ ^;
However, if there is to be any further discussion with the use of "we" and "Bijuu council" as possible beast designators, then I suggest establishing an official and working council first.
2. Yeah, like your #6, it was lasted for clarification.
3. "We" consists of the people posting here and the general agreement.
4. I can see what you mean now. Yeah, that seems fine -- it prevents promotion favoritism.
5. In theory it's easy, yeah. "This person takes this person's place in case of their absence, etc." I just want the bijuu to move on as passively as it can.
Example Time!!! Let's say this, Kiri's Jinchuuriki for Sanbi goes inactive for weeks and we remove it; as active Mizukage it goes to me. Then I get in some random accident which leaves me hospitalized for a month or so; I come back on to find out that the bijuu was given to some schmuck in Konoha because of the "whoever had it last" method. It's complete unethical and blatantly unfair, I had no control over the accident and no way of communicating such an event to anyone and lost a bijuu because of that. The our council in Kiri/the former Mizukage should be able to pick the new host should something like that come up.2. Yeah, like your #6, it was lasted for clarification.
3. "We" consists of the people posting here and the general agreement.
4. I can see what you mean now. Yeah, that seems fine -- it prevents promotion favoritism.
5. In theory it's easy, yeah. "This person takes this person's place in case of their absence, etc." I just want the bijuu to move on as passively as it can.
3&5 - Has it been decided that stray bijuu should follow the "bijuu council" method? or the "whoever had it last" method? I suggest the latter since not only would it inspire a village to make sure they aren't stuck kage-less, but also make the owner of the hostless Bijuu an automatic decision. Kind if kills two birds with one stone ^ ^. I personally try to stray away from any kind of superior ruling "council" since anything involving the judgement of people allows for human error/favoritism to come into play in regards to decisions.
Before moving to another topic of discussion can we list in one for sure post what the most recent version of the"rules of inactivity" are?
Example Time!!! Let's say this, Kiri's Jinchuuriki for Sanbi goes inactive for weeks and we remove it; as active Mizukage it goes to me. Then I get in some random accident which leaves me hospitalized for a month or so; I come back on to find out that the bijuu was given to some schmuck in Konoha because of the "whoever had it last" method. It's complete unethical and blatantly unfair, I had no control over the accident and no way of communicating such an event to anyone and lost a bijuu because of that. The our council in Kiri/the former Mizukage should be able to pick the new host should something like that come up.
Though honestly if something as extreme as a Kage's real life hospitalization were to happen, I'm very sure people will excuse the absence if properly explained once they are able to be online again, and have the Bijuu returned to that village.Konoha isn't that chivalrous. ;)
And Raifudo. The election was a failure due to corruption. This corruption included the people running for election! How then is that body to be trusted now? Ace ruled upon this already so please stop trying to push it through as a valid option for the council. In lieu of that failure, the old council stands as THE council including only those who wish to serve upon it. Many who are eligible do not wish to be a part of it. I, however, do. Why not just merge the two groups and be done with this tugging of wills? Those who wish to serve will do so anyway. So where is the problem?
Re: Rewriting the Bijuu rules, The council, and Jinchuuriki Elections.
« Reply #547 on: May 17, 2012, 02:26:02 pm »
Gah...
Alright, alright.
Three votes might be from accounts from less than two weeks from the deadline for voting.
Neji will be the only one to verify the creation dates.
---Original Message from Godaime Mizukage Ranketsu(2012-07-28 02:34:54)---
It was always 2-4 times a month, and it wasn't just "getting on". I always committed to some sort of RP, including training a few recruits/ANBU. Two or three, actually, and them specifically.
Of course, it wasn't some super-hyper over-active activity, nor even adequate activity like now, but I did get on several times a month and I made sure at least twice, and did something that lasted hours, this I'm sure of. Never once did it say I was offline for more than 15 days at a time. Not once, I can be sure of that.
---Original Message from Sandaime Mizukage Rakudo(2012-07-28 02:32:04)---
The ruling has always been two weeks just so you know. Also showing up ONCE every one to three weeks is highly unacceptable as a jinchuuriki; in theory you were "inactive" from the day the uneven intervals started until your return. If I log on 10 times in the span of 4 months, that's still classified as inactive.
---Original Message from Godaime Mizukage Ranketsu(2012-07-28 02:29:18)---
Just for future reference, after not just reading through the fancy Bijuu rules and talking to Jonny-boy himself, I've found out that since my absence was indeed merited and I indeed had all intentions to keep my fancy little buddy, and came on in spurs of every one to three weeks, yes, it is still mine, and yes, I shall keep it to me.
No, I did not leave abruptly, nor have even one single "month long" or even "four week" absence. My inactivity was spoken of, as was my informal retirement. Though I wished to keep Sanbi in event I came back, which I did, and since I was not absent for more than a month without word, it is still mine, and yes, I shall keep it to me.
The bottom line is this. I am a council member and was never voted out by the council and your election was a total bust.
Ignoring all the council talk and going back to Zojin's post, I dislike the idea of the Bijuu Council dedicating who gets the bijuu inside the village of it's prior host. Easily they could give it some weak acad, just to make it easier for another village to take. The issue of a new host(due to previous host and kage inactivity) should be left to former kage of that village/elders/village council members.
QuoteAnyways... I can't really make rules about inactive kage except to say if that kage is inactive to make a call, we'll make a call for them to who it goes to based on either self-elected or generally-elected people of that village.
We're not taking the bijuu from the village. Hell, we're not even choosing for them. The village itself will make the choice of the candidate they want. I'm not here to govern a kage for how they do things, etc., I'm just here to keep the flow of progress going as passively as I can.
Luka and Isa are active
Luka zoned the other day, but I've been having PM conversations with Luka about this tourney put on by thecurse and other things, so he's fairly active.
Kamui is not gone and Ranketsu needs to be dealt with by the council as a whole.
I remember you saying that to me as well Bocc.
So...
Logging in now and then does not mean activity. If you are not available in your role as a jinchuuriki then you are inactive.
Who exactly were these challengers of hers she was busy with when she talked to you, but had never received when she talked with Raifudo?
---Original Message from Godaime Mizukage Ranketsu(2012-07-28 05:05:28)---
Yeah, when I get challenged every two to three days, even after victory. Whether I knew the "week rule", it still applies, no? I think so.
---Original Message from Sandaime Mizukage Rakudo(2012-07-28 04:57:17)---
Wow... so you put the bijuu fight after normal fights? =__=
---Original Message from Godaime Mizukage Ranketsu(2012-07-28 04:53:47)---
For Sanbi? Yeah. Allow me to highlight what I said for you. Check the last message if you think I edited it.
FIGHT. I was accepting them in chronological order.
---Original Message from Sandaime Mizukage Rakudo(2012-07-28 04:52:23)---
Earlier you stated only Bocc challenged you...
---Original Message from Godaime Mizukage Ranketsu(2012-07-28 04:51:09)---
At one point, I had people coming up to me randomly asking to fight, yeah. And I accepted, slowly ebbing them down.
---Original Message from Sandaime Mizukage Rakudo(2012-07-28 04:49:02)---
because of too many other challengers?
---Original Message from Godaime Mizukage Ranketsu(2012-07-28 04:47:24)---
I already said I did.
---Original Message from Sandaime Mizukage Rakudo(2012-07-28 04:45:01)---
Bocc said that you denied his challenges.
Message to possible participants:
Hello:
Well we are trying this bijuu council thing again.
Please reply and indicate if you are interested in serving on the forum. If you do not reply soon then we will assume you don't wish to help out or are too inactive to be a useful member. Of course if your activity level should increase in the future you can drop by and see about participating then.
We have a few rules we are trying to revise. Mostly about how long inactive hosts and or Kage's responsible for the bijuu have until the council has to step in to place the bijuu.
And then we have an inactive host that is under discussion and would appreciate your input on what to do if anything.
the link is as follows:
http://forum.shinobilegends.com/index.php/topic,6929.150.html
The people being contacted are the following 19 people:
Zenaku
Raifudo
Uchiha, Rares
Asadi
Yūmei
Cmage/Rakudo
Kamui
Nathan
Uchiha_Tracey
CJ of The Desert
Kayenta Moenkopi
Raishin
Isaribi
Luka
Solo
Raijin
Izaku Raiken
ShadowX
Bocchiere
~Moenkopi
OH NOES I VIOLATED MYSELF! D: THE SHAME!
I own Raifudo, Zenaku, Kayenta, Asadi, Kamui, Bocc, Cmage and 10 other people from that list. >>
Anyway, I'm not shocked in the least, it's not the first time Kam violates said privacy rules.
We wavered our "Privacy Rights' when we put ourselves up for voting. Ace and the others told us of the IP cross-referencing to the accounts and the like.
Vote. <<
I'm gonna edit the front page with what we have so far as to membership.
Let's try to stay on task and please...pm those who have not responded here so we can move on.
I do not feel it is...what is the word...ethical!
I do not feel it is ethical to just not do everything we possibly can to get these people to reply in a timely fashion and just let the 3 days...which seems to be the overall wish so far...pass by.
I think this deadline should be until the time we start doing stuff without them, but not to mean they missed their chance to be on the council because they didn't respond in that time limit.
It's called Dunbar's Number, Rares. And, yes, it is 5-8. But, y'know, I keep getting shot down for the number of participants because Kay wants everyone that wants to participate to participate.
I don't care how long the voting takes, just as long as it gets done within the allotted time stated.
As for the inactive Jinchūriki of the Sanbi, I vote we strip her of it, why?
She's been inactive for more then thrice the amount of time stated within the grace periods.
I mean sure she is getting quite active now but who is to say that this won't happen again? Who knows?
We might hear more complaints from users not being able to challenge for the Sanbi because that person either ignores challenges or Role-plays a zone fight with another person, completely disregarding their duties as Jinchūriki.
Ok on the Ranketsu issue here's my take. If a person should prove to be inactive then it's up to the village's kage to determine what to be done with the Sanbi. In this case that would of been Rakudo. In short it's a Kiri issue in that sense.
Now,
In the sense of her being stripped for inactivity, the only way someone can be proven to be inactive or neglecting their responsibilities of being a Jinchuuriki is if someone challenged during the inactive time period and the jinchuuriki in question just wasn't around to fight or blatantly ignored said person. Although i was trying to work something out to get my hands on the turtle we never got to the point of challenge and or fighting for it. Unless somebody can come forward with proof that she hasn't logged in during the time of her supposed inactivity then she isn't inactive so far as i know
[/quote
Yeah, already said she ignored my challenges like 3 times.
Ok on the Ranketsu issue here's my take. If a person should prove to be inactive then it's up to the village's kage to determine what to be done with the Sanbi. In this case that would of been Rakudo. In short it's a Kiri issue in that sense.
Now,
In the sense of her being stripped for inactivity, the only way someone can be proven to be inactive or neglecting their responsibilities of being a Jinchuuriki is if someone challenged during the inactive time period and the jinchuuriki in question just wasn't around to fight or blatantly ignored said person. Although i was trying to work something out to get my hands on the turtle we never got to the point of challenge and or fighting for it. Unless somebody can come forward with proof that she hasn't logged in during the time of her supposed inactivity then she isn't inactive so far as i know
[/quote
Yeah, already said she ignored my challenges like 3 times.
Then why was this not brought before the council? Also, her use of the Sanbi in your current match is recognized as you already posted accepting it by your actions .-.
Also Zen, the fact that I could enter negotiations with you for a trade proves her inactivity, remember that time(which may be on earlier pages) when we talked about trading Gobi for Sanbi? Well I took a poll in the clan halls, to which she didn't post/respond that we was still the jinchuuriki, I even asked Isaribi for his suggestion on the trade. I was even accepted challenged from both Gou and Bocchiere, though Bocc had started his fight with Kamui and Gou respectfully withdrew his challenge. I bet if I had taken those challenges and lost, then Rank pops up saying she was never inactive your argument would've been that I took the challenge therefor I had possession over the bijuu.
But she loves her turtle! D;
My only objection would be the numbers annoying me, but yeah, Raijin seems fit, unlike several others. Given that he did pretty much respect the time limit, and I say this, trusting the words of Kay.
Can someone inform her to come here and speak up for herself, when I told her we were discussing it in the forum awhile ago she proceeded to send a few swear words my way.
I'll admit my activity was splotchy there the last month before my leave, I would be gone for a few days, come back for a few, day in day out, and if you're going to simply base a decision off of the possibility of me not living up to my word of being active, then should all Jinchuriki not be put into question? I don't think things such a speculation and guesses should rear their heads into a proper, professional discussion.
@ Camel,
Yes, I will do my best to prove that I'm going to be active. My words are obviously not enough, so I intend to show it through action as I have been these past two and a half weeks. I've been easily managing 2 to 8 consecutive hours daily, given last weekend I wasn't around on Sunday and most of Saturday.
And yes, I did always notice someone of my absence. Usually it was in the Clan Hall, acting a public "I will be gone for a few days/until a specific day", but other than that, I see the flaw in that and will from now on, even if a day is going to be skimped upon, will inform the acting Mizukage, who more than likely will be Rakudo for some time.
And lastly, as has been stated by nearly everyone here, it's really up to the acting Mizukage: Rakudo. Unless of course this poll comes to order, or Rakudo himself believes the poll is the right way to go.
============================
Bijuu Inactivity Rules v 3.0
* Note that the words "Village" and "Kage" can be interchanged with "Organization" and "Organization Leader" *
1. If a current jinchuriki is inactive for longer than 2 weeks the bijuu in question shall be stripped of its host and placed under the security of the jinchuriki's kage.
2. While a village houses a host-less bijuu, it is the kage's responsibility to "fight for" and "protect" said bijuu from any challengers if they chose to not hand the bijuu over. This also means that in a jinchuriki match, the kage in question has the possibility of dying just as it is in any other official bijuu challenge.
* Should the defending kage already have their own bijuu (X) sealed within them during the period challenged for the inactive bijuu (Y), they are allowed to use the tails of their own bijuu (X) for any duration of the challenge. They are unable to use the powers of the sealed bijuu (Y) unless they are that bijuu's jinchuriki *
3. The kage of the host-less bijuu is given an unlimited amount of time to distribute the beast to a host. However, until the bijuu is sealed within a host, the kage is responsible for accepting all challenges for it instead.
4. In the event of the inactive host returning to activity while the kage is under the possession of the repossessed bijuu, the kage has the choice of resealing the bijuu back into the returning user. However, if this user becomes inactive again for a period of more than 2 weeks the bijuu will once again be stripped of them and given back to the kage. After this second strike, the inactive user in question will be unable to receive that particular bijuu until it is passed on to a new host and won back via an official challenge.
5. If it so happens that both the active jinchuriki and the host's current kage are inactive for a period of longer than 2 weeks, the bijuu shall go to the Bijuu Council for redistribution under their discretion within said village.============================
prestige? When did that ever matter?
I want a body of people who can work together and get things done. Everyone on the list has skills that are quite useful and hold differing view so as to insure that the discussions are as unbiased as possible.
I would like to personally thank Bocc and Nathan for the great example they are setting for us all. By that I mean, opting for what they believe to be right in spite of such being in their disadvantage. You two are inspiring.
So, pretty much what some folks are wanting is a small council. We could do the 9 who have the ability to vote and those that want to voice their opinions who are not on the council can do so in a chance to sway the council member's personal opinion.
Something like that sound good?
So, pretty much what some folks are wanting is a small council. We could do the 9 who have the ability to vote and those that want to voice their opinions who are not on the council can do so in a chance to sway the council member's personal opinion.
Something like that sound good?
Yep, that would be what we're hoping for.
Wel, if someone does prove a point, I'd be opened.
'Stubborn' or not. xD
Besides, isn't it the job of this 'council' to listen to others before going blindly and voting like mad men?
I specifically asked that those that vote also compose a list of members to their according number so we can get this issue dealt with all in one shot.
Edit3: Also, you kind of stated that the council that is currently deciding on these matters in general is unorganized and unfair. >>;;;
Even if the small council is chosen, how would you pick the members to participate? I think that's an even bigger problem that needs to be addressed. As someone who will not be on the council, this is a big concern. I suppose you could use the one the people voted on, but some deem that invalid, due to slight tampering.
So. This idea was talked about by myself and another.
3 people from each of the five villages.
15 members.
Diverse interests.
Either vote them in in your village or have them appointed by the Kage or something
But the question of who is what needs to be decided before any more VOTING on anything can really be settled.
comments? suggestions?
So. This idea was talked about by myself and another.
3 people from each of the five villages.
15 members.
Diverse interests.
Either vote them in in your village or have them appointed by the Kage or something
But the question of who is what needs to be decided before any more VOTING on anything can really be settled.
comments? suggestions?
3. The kage of the host-less bijuu is given an unlimited amount of time to distribute the beast to a host. However, until the bijuu is sealed within a host, the kage is responsible for accepting all challenges for it instead.
So its fine if the Kage doesn't even look for a host, and can keep it for the village's sake forever?
I just dont like that it can remain unchecked is all.
What ideas am I shoving down your throat? I merely composed my list and suggested that everyone in favor does so.
We voted on 3 days, we all agreed to rush things. It's how we've dealt with the Ranketsu issue as well
Woah, Solo sounding smart, I must have walked into an alternate dimension on my way back from the bathroom.
We should just pick 10 random acads and then listen to whatever they say without question.
So, I ask one last time: please voice your opinion on the matter of a limitation or a free-numbered union of people. That is all. No names. No count of how many people. Just whether you think casting a limit is a good idea or a bad idea, and if letting any-and-all to join is a good idea or a bad idea.
(1h) Kyokushū Bocchiere flows his bijuu chakra out as he does the jutsu, the cloak forms around him as do four tails of chakra. He bursts into flames but Bocchi ignores it, the cloak helping defend him, the three coffins rise up as he intended. He ascends to the 5th +
(57m40s) Kyokushū Bocchiere + tailed form with a burst of chakra and the juinjutsu mark on him vanishes, they are incapable of holding up to large amounts of chakra, and with the the flames on Bocchi go out.
Probably not a Council concern, but one I have.Quote(1h) Kyokushū Bocchiere flows his bijuu chakra out as he does the jutsu, the cloak forms around him as do four tails of chakra. He bursts into flames but Bocchi ignores it, the cloak helping defend him, the three coffins rise up as he intended. He ascends to the 5th +
(57m40s) Kyokushū Bocchiere + tailed form with a burst of chakra and the juinjutsu mark on him vanishes, they are incapable of holding up to large amounts of chakra, and with the the flames on Bocchi go out.
Bocchiere is already claiming mastery of 5 tails, and it has been about 2 weeks since he obtained the Rokubi. Anyone see anything wrong with that?
Edited by Camelicious.
~Come speak to me if you have any problems with my edits.
Why can't we be friiiiends?
~Camel
At this point: dismiss all prior accusations, all bad blood, all bias reasoning one may have claimed, etc. At this point, I ask all of you to simply recognize the topic at hand and leave all else behind until we move on (at the very least).
Because asking for opinions in a public place is talking behind someone's back >>Probably not a Council concern, but one I have.Quote(1h) Kyokushū Bocchiere flows his bijuu chakra out as he does the jutsu, the cloak forms around him as do four tails of chakra. He bursts into flames but Bocchi ignores it, the cloak helping defend him, the three coffins rise up as he intended. He ascends to the 5th +
(57m40s) Kyokushū Bocchiere + tailed form with a burst of chakra and the juinjutsu mark on him vanishes, they are incapable of holding up to large amounts of chakra, and with the the flames on Bocchi go out.
Bocchiere is already claiming mastery of 5 tails, and it has been about 2 weeks since he obtained the Rokubi. Anyone see anything wrong with that?
Well since I had already mastered the Rokubi when last I had it and Zen told me to wait two weeks before claiming mastery again, I think it's fine oh Mizukage who talks behind peoples backs.
Edited by Camelicious.
~Come speak to me if you have any problems with my edits.
At this point: dismiss all prior accusations, all bad blood, all bias reasoning one may have claimed, etc. At this point, I ask all of you to simply recognize the topic at hand and leave all else behind until we move on (at the very least).
So, I ask one last time: please voice your opinion on the matter of a limitation or a free-numbered union of people. That is all. No names. No count of how many people. Just whether you think casting a limit is a good idea or a bad idea, and if letting any-and-all to join is a good idea or a bad idea.
A limitation on the number of people. No names, no amount.
Casting a limit itself is a good idea; we are discussing this on the SL forum that a large portion of the site doesn't even bother to visit (might not even know exists) and as such, the select few who do view this forum are having the power to choose something that will affect all of RPing SL directly or indirectly at some point. So already, even with the "unlimited" view, we would get a limitation handicap to rule out a large number of SL visitors.
I added that so that I can also "vote" on this, "...if letting any-and-all to join is a good idea or a bad idea." [Raifudo] and have a reference.
The ones who will be likely selected, or know, or care, or even consider the bijuu council will most likely be people who pay attention to the forum or at the very least have contact with someone who does. As a result, I say, anyone may be a candidate seeing as already the people who can be on the council are in a sense limited to those who:
Care.
Know this is going on, and thus visits the forum.
Know someone who knows this is going on and that said person has visits the forum. or access to someone who knows this is going on and visits the forum etc...
Long story short: A limit is good, any and all may join, the method of selection (if one) to be pending the next "poll" I'm guessing.
Because asking for opinions in a public place is talking behind someone's back >>Probably not a Council concern, but one I have.Quote(1h) Kyokushū Bocchiere flows his bijuu chakra out as he does the jutsu, the cloak forms around him as do four tails of chakra. He bursts into flames but Bocchi ignores it, the cloak helping defend him, the three coffins rise up as he intended. He ascends to the 5th +
(57m40s) Kyokushū Bocchiere + tailed form with a burst of chakra and the juinjutsu mark on him vanishes, they are incapable of holding up to large amounts of chakra, and with the the flames on Bocchi go out.
Bocchiere is already claiming mastery of 5 tails, and it has been about 2 weeks since he obtained the Rokubi. Anyone see anything wrong with that?
Well since I had already mastered the Rokubi when last I had it and Zen told me to wait two weeks before claiming mastery again, I think it's fine oh Mizukage who talks behind peoples backs.
Honestly, not to side track anything again, but I'm getting really sick of you constantly throwing my name out there. I get it, you don't think I'm qualified, well good for you. I wasn't even attempting to be on this council, and yet you still slander my name. Basically, leave me alone and stop talking trash. I don't like everything about you, but you don't see me slandering your good name.
On a last note, I kindly ask to be removed from the member list. A council that deems the likes of Solo, Shadow, Trev, etc. as worthy is merely too degrading for me to be a part of.
We simply have different understandings of what fit means. You think elementary school drop outs are fit to be professors(Solo, Shadow, Trev, etc. Not saying they are horrible, just nowhere near THERE) while I by all means disagree.
I'm going to actually bring this up since I may think this is an EXPLOIT you are using.
I don't recall you ever mastering Saiken even after you beat Mangetsu for it then he got it back within those two weeks...
So here lies the question, did you mastered the beast within the allotted time or did you have longer then expected?
I remember that the fight sometimes got delayed so the most you had the time to master Saiken was a month but even then you wouldn't be able to master it's Version 2 Form and Full Bijuu form within that time.
Since two weeks = one tail as I saw by Nathan's training.
To keep this on topic and make my post not spam, Bocc never beat Mangetsu, Bocc had full mastery over the beast, before he fought Mangetsu.
I barely want to be on the council, never mind finding two other people to go on the council. I don't think I could find anyone that has an interest and belongs to Otogakure. (Don't say Shadow or Solo, cause Shadow's main is in Konoha and Solo is a kiri ninja) Though if need be, the Camel could have a spot considering he was closely affiliated with Otogakure at the end, and if he did indeed break free of Edo Tensei, would probably be an Otogakure ninja, as that's what he attempted to do, before switching to Enishi.
Anyway that's jumping the gun, so I'll sit back and relax while you guys vote and stuff. ;)
Yes, Rakudo, it is behind my back because you didn't just message me about it, last time you did this it was about me getting Jiongu applied to myself and you were entirely mistaken about the circumstance. Kamui, you are also completely wrong. I got Saiken originally from Uzumakiwarrior and I had it for 6 months before Pete beat me for it. The rematch for it you were speaking of was called off in exchange for me getting Edo Tensei from Pete, which just happened to get voided not too long later by your claim for it.
So, I ask one last time: please voice your opinion on the matter of a limitation or a free-numbered union of people. That is all. No names. No count of how many people. Just whether you think casting a limit is a good idea or a bad idea, and if letting any-and-all to join is a good idea or a bad idea.
A limitation on the number of people. No names, no amount.
Casting a limit itself is a good idea; we are discussing this on the SL forum that a large portion of the site doesn't even bother to visit (might not even know exists) and as such, the select few who do view this forum are having the power to choose something that will affect all of RPing SL directly or indirectly at some point. So already, even with the "unlimited" view, we would get a limitation handicap to rule out a large number of SL visitors.
I added that so that I can also "vote" on this, "...if letting any-and-all to join is a good idea or a bad idea." [Raifudo] and have a reference.
The ones who will be likely selected, or know, or care, or even consider the bijuu council will most likely be people who pay attention to the forum or at the very least have contact with someone who does. As a result, I say, anyone may be a candidate seeing as already the people who can be on the council are in a sense limited to those who:
Care.
Know this is going on, and thus visits the forum.
Know someone who knows this is going on and that said person has visits the forum. or access to someone who knows this is going on and visits the forum etc...
Long story short: A limit is good, any and all may join, the method of selection (if one) to be pending the next "poll" I'm guessing.
I forgot to add something concerning something I read in this earlier.
In a council such as this, I would begin to think that unbiased opinions are more valuable then a bunch of people fighting over something. In what conversations I have read (and I must admit, I got lazy and skipped like.. most of the pages.), it appears a few people are too close to the topics being discussed to be useful. It is easy to tell this because those who aren't close to the topic will not get vehement, while those who are too close, will.
If a limitation is set, Kage appointment (hell, even Kage involvement) is not exactly a good idea, in my opinion. There would need to be a way to select people who are not too close to the topics needing to be discussed.
So, I offer a different solution. Perhaps a flexible limitation.
There will be a bank of ~30 people who are all "Councilmen and women." However, whenever a new topic is discussed, only a handful of people (perhaps 9-11 or fewer) will participate. These people will be chosen at random; drawn out of a hat. This would keep results of discussion fair because at this point, the council is made up of a small amount of people who were drawn, randomly, out of a larger body of people. In this instance, there would have to be a few people who would be chosen to preside over discussion; I would suggest the village leaders, the moderators who wish to participate, or simply electing one person whom nobody likes.
--> I'd like to add that I am simply offering solutions to the problem at hand. Attacking me for these ideas would be both silly and rude. Thank you and g'day.
Number each council member, randomize the 11 numbers to be chosen, and then post who's going. Perhaps after a member has gone twice in a row, they must be skipped for the next debate.
Well I would like to have the number be 21. 3/village and 3 for the missing nin.
and I think if we HAVE to get that technical about who discusses and who votes then sure, why not?
I just think it is needless if we just talk about stuff and vote like adults with respect and behave ourselves and such.
you guys decide and let me know? Er, I will check here of course to find out. lol
anyway...once we get a council agreed upon I suppose they can just conduct business in the best means available.
Additionally here is a thought. The number generator can be corrupt. for instance...I make it generate random number from 1-X...21 if that is our total? to throw out...maybe 9 voters? and it comes up with 2,6,4,8,12,21,7,19,3...then I check the names and go...crap...not enough people in that list who think like I do...so I will just run the generator until I get the right amount, screenshot that and post it here...and the voting is rigged. only with the appearance of fairness.
I think it is a good idea but too easily corruptible and as stated...if we just come and discuss and vote and actually work then I feel it would not be required to add additional procedures to the workings of this council.
It is unfortunate that you take my words to be specifically insulting to you when they were not meant to be. I think everyone here knows I am hardly subtle when I am being a wench.I'm confused as to where I took it as personal insult. If this is in reference to the "I" usage in my first statement, really the only thing it could be referencing, there are two things. 1) The "I" usage was hypothetical; the tactic I suggested works with everyone. 2) I never took your words as an insult. Simply stating this proves you to be a wench, and if you want to go further into insults, please contact me elsewhere. I would be more than happy to insult you all day. Thank you for using a nicely placed ad hominem.
This thread is alive? :shock: