I like people who cannot agree on anything, and even after an third party is brought in to help facilitate an agreement and they still refuse to agree to terms for the match, getting a 3 month ban from participation: stripping the beast and not being able to make challenges for both parties. This 3 month ban does not include serving as a council member.
This would serve as a deterrent for being stiff necked and failing to work toward compromise.
I am not a stickler on mandatory preference lists. People have been using them for a while, so I was making accommodations for that trend. But preferences, if they will exist on paper or just through verbal discussions at the time of pre-match arrangements, do not supersede bijuu rules.
This assumes that we successfully agree upon a set of rules, and then a clause is made that it is the understanding that by participating in all things bijuu, you as the host, challenger, judge, council member do agree to following these terms.
"I have read and agree to the terms of service."
Might a host have valid objections to meeting a challenger in battle due to some serious flaws in the RP of the challenger? Sure...happens all the time. But they can go through the RP anyway. Such a problem will reveal itself during the match and can be dealt with at that time without the host risking being stripped for failure to accept all challenges. And if not, then the host's objections did not exhibit themselves and it turned out fine in the end.