Versus Match Addition Rule Removal

[Edwellken]

I strongly agree with this.

 

[Andytrenom]

I completely agree with the OP about removing this rule.

Also FRA needs to be put in a coffin and buried alive, where it can die a slow and horrible death.

 

[Ciruno_Fortes_(COB)]

At the same time, you can't expect people to each individually give out 7 unique arguments on why someone is defeated. What if someone wrote a literal essay to shut down the opposing side, and there's really nothing else to say but... "Yeah what he said."

On the other hand I support this rule wholeheartedly. Though imo threads should be left open too once the vote is done just in case someone wants to add their two cents, BUT if the next posts are off topic or irrelevant it should be considered for closing.

 

[Sound_of_Infinity]

Removing the "no grace when it's unanimous" is fine. But FRA shouldn't be banned as you can't expect people to have different opinions.

 

[Kaltias]

The funny part is that this is technically not a written rule. We don't even have a written rule for the grace period

 

[Andytrenom]

@Bambu There's no need to reward those who respond quickly to a thread at the cost of punishing those who don't.

24 hours isn't a long time to wait and if they had legitimate reasons for voting for a character, then they should be fine with someone having the chance to come and give a different opinion on which character would win.

...Also I should clarify to everyone that I'm not actually in favour of getting FRAs removed.

 

[Sound_of_Infinity]

Also FRA needs to be put in a coffin and buried alive, where it can die a slow and horrible death.

Then why did you say this? ^

 

[Andytrenom]

I forgot that saying something in a jokey manner doesn't always mean you aren't giving your actual opinion in a discussion

I greatly avoid using FRAs in a debate and don't appreciate it when my own threads become nothing more than an FRA spam.

But that being said, I realize that an FRA is technically just agreeing with someone else's arguments and even if it is misused frequently, that doesn't mean the concept itself should be banned.

 

[Jasonsith]

I forgot that saying something in a jokey manner doesn't always mean you aren't giving your actual opinion in a discussion

I greatly avoid using FRAs in a debate and don't appreciate it when my own threads become nothing more than an FRA spam.

But that being said, I realize that an FRA is technically just agreeing with someone else's arguments and even if it is misused frequently, that doesn't mean the concept itself should be banned.

True. Especially (say) it is pretty hard to think of 7 distinct valid reasons to say Shriek wins "during training" Saitama.

Whether a use of "for reasons aforesaid" is an abuse depends on how well reasoned the reasons aforesaid are.

 

[Standuser081]

While I'm not really a fan of the FRA thing, what can you really do when you have the same argument as the other guy?

 

[Schnee_One]

I agree with everything here

 

[Uradelbauer]

I don't understand why it was put in place.

 

[Wokistan]

I agree with the grace period thing. I had a thread a few days ago that I closed due to being unanimous that just a few minutes later someone was asking me to reopen because I had narrowly shut them out as they were typing. Others have probably had that scenario that weren't so lucky as to get the thread reopened, and keeping grace can help rectify that sort of scenario.

I disagree with banning fra entirely though. At most, don't count them until debate is over.

 

[Paul_Frank]

The grace period thing seems good but fra being removed or not counted makes no sense. The only time for it to not be counted would be if any of the points for a characters win are disproven. In that case you don't count any FRAs until new valid points are brought up banning fra would result in threads being filled with people having to repeat other's arguments all because they aren't allowed to say that the points they agree with, which at this time are still valid, are located above them and already stated, possibly in a more compelling way, by another

 

[Andytrenom]

I just remembered Assalt made this post...

That's a whole 'nother can of worms that can be covered later. This thread shouldn't start on that issue.

So yeah, this thread is not meant to remove FRAs and I apologize for not keeping this in mind when I made my comments about the topic.

 

[C2_of_Omegon]

Simply put, I agree with having a 24 hour grace no matter what.

People should have time to come and give an argument and actually debate. The wins/losses/inconclusives of various characters should be the product of good reasoning and healthy debate, not threads hastily created and added like their on an assembly line.

 

[Js250476]

I definitely agree with this

 

[Sound_of_Infinity]

About the FRA thing, if people are just blindly FRA-ing? Simple! Don't count their votes.

 

[Ecstasy_Amphetamine]

About the FRA thing, if people are just blindly FRA-ing? Simple! Don't count their votes.

Genius.

Seriously, this is overlooked sometimes.

 

[Yobo_Blue]

I agree, but on the subject of FRA, I personally think that the usage of the phrase should be banned and just have the user quote the vote.

 

[The_Wright_Way]

About the FRA thing, if people are just blindly FRA-ing? Simple! Don't count their votes.

Problem. Those votes are technically valid as long as the arguments they're FRA-ing are. Only do this if arguments have been completely debunked.

 

[LordGriffin1000]

I agree with the Grace Period thing.

However getting rid of FRA is something I don't agree with. Just don't count the ones that agree with poor reasoning.

Example 1: Character A beats character B because of Versatility or Hax.

Then people say FRA over and over. Then definitely don't count their votes. However... If it's like this.

Example 2: Character A beats character B because he's higher AP and Durability. His Time Stop will help him to avoid Character B's Atom destroying beams and he's a better Combatant and has shown to keep cool while Character B loses his cool at little things and can't focus. So I think he has a better chance at victory.

If people say FRA or for Griffin's reasons then we should count them unless someone completely debunked my reasoning.

 

[PsychoWarper]

I see no issue with the grace period changes.

 

[Sound_of_Infinity]

About the FRA thing, if people are just blindly FRA-ing? Simple! Don't count their votes.

Problem. Those votes are technically valid as long as the arguments they're FRA-ing are. Only do this if arguments have been completely debunked.

I don't think blind FRAs are legit votes. If people FRA, they will have to actually know what they're doing.

 

[PsychoWarper]

The only reason I use FRA is because my arguments/reasoning has already been stated, though I do understand the argument for quoting the person you are FRAing (unless its a wall of text).

 

[Sound_of_Infinity]

The only reason I use FRA is because my arguments/reasoning has already been stated, though I do understand the argument for quoting the person you are FRAing (unless its a wall of text).

This is acceptable, for example ^

 

[Matthew_Schroeder]

The reason I say FRAs shouldn't be allowed is that it's really really easy to artificially raise votes through it. Someone can bring the attention of their friends off-site, who can them go to the thread and say "FRA gg" and people will count that as votes.

They obviously aren't, and it's laughably clear whenever new people join the thread because friends asked them too as opposed for a legitimate interest.

 

[LordGriffin1000]

@Matthew Schroeder

Problem is, what if the reasons they are agreeing with are 100% legitimate and cover the fight as a whole. We would basically be forcing people to write up their own reasoning even though someone gave entire paragraphs about why Character A beats Character B.

People would literally be saying the same thing as each other. It would still be FRA but with more writing.

Now I'm not saying you guys are wrong. If people are just throwing FRA around and the reasoning is trash then yeah, don't count their votes.

 

[Firephoenixearl]

I fully agree with the OP.

 

[FateAlbane]

I agree with the OP as well. Won't enter on the FRA matter however, since just as Assalt said, it isn't the main purpose of this thread.

(On that one, I'm more of the opinion that if the reasoning used is proper and the FRA shows whose reasoning it's agreeing with, it could stay. Otherwise we get some weird situations like some I've seen - where someone comes along and throws a FRA for one character when said character didn't even get any reasoning for them yet. lol)

 

[Ciruno_Fortes_(COB)]

imo threads should be left open too once the vote is done just in case someone wants to add their two cents, BUT if the next posts are off-topic or irrelevant it should be considered for closing.

My thoughts.

Not all threads are going to have this. Even if you give a thread 24 hours for people to type it's not as if everyone that might change the way the debate is would be there in 24 hours.

It should be a case by case basis infact.

 

[Endless_Astrograph_Sorcerer]

Completely agreed with OP.

On the FRA issue, you should at least have to specify who you agree with and one reason why. It's really not that tough to do and if you happen to have even one extra detail, it adds to the justification for the result.

 

[Wokistan]

Guys we should just save the FRA issue for another thread. Since Matt brought it up to start, he should make it when he's ready and paste the link here or something. This thread was intended to be used to discuss the issue of the grace period, not that.

 

[AKM sama]

Everybody agrees with the OP. Now the changes can be made and the thread be concluded.

 

[Wokistan]

Make sure to wait for the grace period before concluding this thread akm

But yeah, it seems pretty unanimous.

 

[Firephoenixearl]

@Wok...Welp i guess it was there.

 

[The_Calaca]

Oh shut. I just added a match before reading this thread. It was unanimous so... should I remove it until the 24hs?

 

[Firephoenixearl]

Oh shut. I just added a match before reading this thread. It was unanimous so... should I remove it until the 24hs?

Well not exactly as this is not fully accepted yet, i mean the changes haven't been applied yet. So it's ok.

 

[The_Calaca]

As far as I read if the thread has more than just FRAing it's okay, right?

 

[Assaltwaffle]

Well, if everyone is OK with this we can agree that a grace period is universally required and close the thread.