Neither claiming he's generic nor the repeatedly used mop memes should count as valid reasons to remove large numbers of points. Such a rule incentivizes toxic conduct.
I have only asked for a removal of toxicity and suggested that vague insults (which included an implication of illiteracy) resulting in 30 points being removed seemed both unreasonable and an encouragement of toxicity.
?????
?????????? I am counting overall. I am not even counting everything to Netoriman. Literally it isn't hard to get.
Same rules worked in previous matches when DMC team got multipliers in Dr Doom, Alucard, But well.....
And I hope you realize I started to do it in Alucard match because replying everytime makes my work harder.
So that's what you have reduced this too ehh?
In all fairness, most of the insults have come from the Klein side, and that's the exact thing that stirs up issues. Think a fight between players in a football game. It isn't the score that usually starts the fights, it's anger between two players who've hit each other, or an insult thrown from one at another.
All that, yap but please explain you omitting our posts and not even bothering to count.
I am really not sure what they are getting heated up on tbh. I agree there were good slanders from Klein side, even @Exoko later comments and memes were funny, and I am even pointing out that the high effort slander posts are ignored while low effort comments are counted as slander. That's the problem.
I mean I am willing to listen how exactly one side got more favourable treatment.
Which posts exactly are you talking about ? You do realise that this thread isn't small in scope right not to mention match isn't even over yet so can you point those posts out and behave like a rational human being instead of presupposing that we are actively rigging the tournament ?
We already said so a long time ago, it's impossible to monitor the thread constantly. When I see anything like that I tell the participants.
Are you going to stop pretending and read the earlier post where I posted out the concerns. I already pointed out some of them. And stop antagonising me already for pointing out the obvious?
I didn't dismiss nor ignore any points. What I am doing is adding all including you and Tony args to OP. Yes I didn't write it. But it doesn't mean I didn't count it. I am overloaded to write brief explanation or counting each user's goal.
So all of Netoriman comments, Tony's and me negating the supposed 30 slander from Exo nets a total of 50?
Ngl even if I go by higher contribution rule. Score that is put rn would stay same.
I already basically conceded so what’s the point
Tanin, please calm down a little, okay?
those were just for fun, they were just funny responses to things like Netori's funeral jokes or just other jokes related to slop etc
It did not imply illiteracy & dismissing the entire post I sent due to the escalation of you & Tani has already been done.
No it hasn't?
Too many interruptions here
Ok
This never even counted to begin with
Sure
Sure
These two were counted
The first doesn't counter and the second wasn't counted
.......
......How do you even read images or clips. No wonder you are unable to even find or comprehend aura. Trying to read visuals, smh.
And I am the one here having to read through what you have perfectly described
That was clear from the start, even I was glazing one scene pretty hard in the Doom thread, remember?
The slander part is not just vague, but is outright contradictory as I pointed out in my post.
And how was that 30 slander in case of Exo? See the unequal value?
It got toxic pages back, actually.
I can't speak for everyone, but for me it's about preventing this whole thing from being approached in a way that makes conflict inevitable. No conflict took place in the Doom one even though it was close because people were respectful. I didn't like the joke about Doom having a messed up face, but it wasn't repeated and didn't escalate. F&G topics have been closed and banned for exactly this reason in the past.
Remember I said that silly stuff wasn't the issue.
You directly said Netoriman couldn't read the paragraphs, implying poor literacy.
Where? If you refer to my calling the memes childish, that's the memes, not you.
I can't even find a definition for this when I look it up. I assume it means someone who reads all the time, basically a bookworm? Best not to say this, but seems minor at a glance.
That's silly, but minor. I don't think new users should be addressed that way, if that's the reason.
... I don't even know what to say about this without context.
Because Exo's was responding to multiple weak moments and getting points by himself, I can't speak on behalf of how someone counts points the only thing I have to say is that you could have asked to told him "Hey I think you miscounted here" or "Can you explain why I got only 50 back ?" Instead of "You are being biased and rigging the match"
That was asked pages back, so please stop with the accusations this time.
He was given +11 for his own points separately. So don't lump them as the same please. And I was tackling the 30 separately, the so called weak moment arguments.
I would suggest tightening restrictions on those slander tactics, because that is clearly where things went off the rails.
Sure but explain to @Tanin_iver why you deducted 30 points for the initial comment and I personally think Dante should win with +10 (like usual) since Nova already conceded but that's my opinion.
In our defence this match escalated more than we every anticipated and this is our first time so it's impossible to account for stuff like these.
That's understandable, and I want to reiterate that both sides' points for their character were good. It was the attacks that went and turned it into a toxic mess.
After the efforts both sides have put, I don't think it's fair to the competitors as both sides have put quite a bit of effort.
Knock it off Cipher. You don't have to instigate anymore.
What part of this is instigating ? As a judge Hecky should explain his reasoning otherwise he will forever be labelled as "biased" I merely gave my opinion on the matter. You wanted an explanation and I am asking him to give you one. It's not instigating ?
I am perfectly fine with just having Dante win.
Bait?
I am calm, and I am asking Cipher to knock it off with the baits? That's all. He was accusing me and I pointed out the problems with the counting that he was so vehemently defending and now he is resorting to sarcastic remarks and trying to instigate.
That's not fair to your efforts.
He should have more points currently anyways, and I’ve been rather transparent that I don’t plan on making a response big enough to catch up, anyhow.
I am sorry what part of my comment screams "sarcasm" to you ? I only responded because of the accusations of the judge (Hecky) being biased, so I indeed defended him and his countings yes and I did in fact tell you (not accuse you) I told you that it would have been better if you had asked him instead of labelling him as biased and when you told me that you did infact ask him about it then I merely told Hecky to explain the counting. Counting in a sense is subjective (since you can allot extra points after a base amount i.e 1) but it still needs a reasoning, sure he could have made a mistake (he is human after all) and that's fine. All I am saying is that he should at least explain the reasoning behind deducting 30 points, I am not being sarcastic or making remarks or anything of the sorts, don't delude yourself into believing I want any beef or banter with you, I genuinely don't. I understand that this is all for fun and games (get it ?) and I respect everyone here as such I think that it's best Hecky explains to the supporters the reasoning (which he omitted in his OG comment).
Then stop mentioning them.
1. Obviously a joke if you take take the context and logical contradictions in my sentence
Which in turn is calling me childish.
It's basically saying I have trouble interpreting information in anything outside of novel format.
