Duelingbook Forum

Christen57 wrote:

MarshieDemon wrote:

Sound4 wrote:I sent you a private message please can you answer it.

I never received a private message from you.

Genexwrecker wrote:This thread is not to call out people We are going to just start deleting posts at this point.

itsmetristan wrote:.

Since we're on the topic of communication, I recommend editing either your communication policy, or duelingbook's rules, to include that duelists in rated must know and speak english to communicate properly as I keep seeing duels where a judge has to get called simply because a player keeps speaking in a foreign language. https://www.duelingbook.com/replay?id=37755642

Its just common sense that when using an english based site you use/know english. if they dont know english they cannot possibly read the cards so they are either using google translate to read stuff or are trolling. also by registering you have agreed to our terms of service which of course requires english to read even if you use a translator it wouldnt translate to another language enough for one to comprehend it properly. I dont go to mexico and expect to not be required to know spanish or know enough of it to get by. I went to visit italy and made sure I know enough italian so i can communicate in a reasonable manner. If this kind of common sense eludes somebody they are going to have a hard time anywhere on the internet and it is not our job to cater to that.

Also as of to this day I have only ever encountered 1 person that didnt speak english genuinely on the site. and I have definitely had over 50 calls where a person speaks anything but english but magically knew it in the past 5 duels.

so this non english issue you have brought up is actually far smaller than you think it is. pretty much 99.9% of the people that use the website know english in some form or fasion or even if their english is bad are able to communicate properly anyway.

Genexwrecker wrote:

Christen57 wrote:

MarshieDemon wrote:
I never received a private message from you.

Genexwrecker wrote:This thread is not to call out people We are going to just start deleting posts at this point.

itsmetristan wrote:.

Since we're on the topic of communication, I recommend editing either your communication policy, or duelingbook's rules, to include that duelists in rated must know and speak english to communicate properly as I keep seeing duels where a judge has to get called simply because a player keeps speaking in a foreign language. https://www.duelingbook.com/replay?id=37755642

Its just common sense that when using an english based site you use/know english. if they dont know english they cannot possibly read the cards so they are either using google translate to read stuff or are trolling. also by registering you have agreed to our terms of service which of course requires english to read even if you use a translator it wouldnt translate to another language enough for one to comprehend it properly. I dont go to mexico and expect to not be required to know spanish or know enough of it to get by. I went to visit italy and made sure I know enough italian so i can communicate in a reasonable manner. If this kind of common sense eludes somebody they are going to have a hard time anywhere on the internet and it is not our job to cater to that.

Also as of to this day I have only ever encountered 1 person that didnt speak english genuinely on the site. and I have definitely had over 50 calls where a person speaks anything but english but magically knew it in the past 5 duels.

so this non english issue you have brought up is actually far smaller than you think it is. pretty much 99.9% of the people that use the website know english in some form or fasion or even if their english is bad are able to communicate properly anyway.

prolly should be stated somewhere just in case

Christen57 wrote:

MarshieDemon wrote:

Sound4 wrote:I sent you a private message please can you answer it.

I never received a private message from you.

Genexwrecker wrote:This thread is not to call out people We are going to just start deleting posts at this point.

itsmetristan wrote:.

Since we're on the topic of communication, I recommend editing either your communication policy, or duelingbook's rules, to include that duelists in rated must know and speak english to communicate properly as I keep seeing duels where a judge has to get called simply because a player keeps speaking in a foreign language. https://www.duelingbook.com/replay?id=37755642

Encourage Google Translate lmao

greg503 wrote:

Christen57 wrote:

MarshieDemon wrote:
I never received a private message from you.

Genexwrecker wrote:This thread is not to call out people We are going to just start deleting posts at this point.

itsmetristan wrote:.

Since we're on the topic of communication, I recommend editing either your communication policy, or duelingbook's rules, to include that duelists in rated must know and speak english to communicate properly as I keep seeing duels where a judge has to get called simply because a player keeps speaking in a foreign language. https://www.duelingbook.com/replay?id=37755642

Encourage Google Translate lmao

Google translate isn't entirely reliable and is often going to get things wrong.

MarshieDemon wrote:

Sound4 wrote:

MarshieDemon wrote:Cromat, you asked a question and you got an answer. If you're hoping for permission from a Judge to swear at your opponent for any reason, I'm afraid you'll be disappointed.

I sent you a private message please can you answer it.

I never received a private message from you.

I did.

Today I made a Duel someone in Duelist Pool, they had declared effect of "Baronne de Fleur" and I hadn't realized it, so they had continued the play game. When they ended the their turn, they say to me your Spell is destroyed by the way. I said how it destroyed and when? They say I declared effect. You didn't respond so I continued. Is it my problem if you're AFK. Then I said; If I was AFK, why you continued the game without waiting opponent's respond or wait them to send the your targeted card to GY, or, called Judge for it? They said; why I call Judge while there is no online Judge. Our speech continued like nonsense, at the end I realized trying to talk with that opponent is same thing as eating my own big toilet. So, I sent my card to GY and left from DuelingBook. Opponent was believe that if their opponent is not giving respond that gives themselves a right to continue to play game.

Cromat wrote:Today I made a Duel someone in Duelist Pool, they had declared effect of "Baronne de Fleur" and I hadn't realized it, so they had continued the play game. When they ended the their turn, they say to me your Spell is destroyed by the way. I said how it destroyed and when? They say I declared effect. You didn't respond so I continued. Is it my problem if you're AFK. Then I said; If I was AFK, why you continued the game without waiting opponent's respond or wait them to send the your targeted card to GY, or, called Judge for it? They said; why I call Judge while there is no online Judge. Our speech continued like nonsense, at the end I realized trying to talk with that opponent is same thing as eating my own big toilet. So, I sent my card to GY and left from DuelingBook. Opponent was believe that if their opponent is not giving respond that gives themselves a right to continue to play game.

About how long was it between when they declared Baronne and when they continued?

greg503 wrote:

Cromat wrote:Today I made a Duel someone in Duelist Pool, they had declared effect of "Baronne de Fleur" and I hadn't realized it, so they had continued the play game. When they ended the their turn, they say to me your Spell is destroyed by the way. I said how it destroyed and when? They say I declared effect. You didn't respond so I continued. Is it my problem if you're AFK. Then I said; If I was AFK, why you continued the game without waiting opponent's respond or wait them to send the your targeted card to GY, or, called Judge for it? They said; why I call Judge while there is no online Judge. Our speech continued like nonsense, at the end I realized trying to talk with that opponent is same thing as eating my own big toilet. So, I sent my card to GY and left from DuelingBook. Opponent was believe that if their opponent is not giving respond that gives themselves a right to continue to play game.

About how long was it between when they declared Baronne and when they continued?

I am not sure right now man.. I don't want to say something wrong. https://imgur.com/I93db9K

Cromat wrote:

greg503 wrote:

Cromat wrote:Today I made a Duel someone in Duelist Pool, they had declared effect of "Baronne de Fleur" and I hadn't realized it, so they had continued the play game. When they ended the their turn, they say to me your Spell is destroyed by the way. I said how it destroyed and when? They say I declared effect. You didn't respond so I continued. Is it my problem if you're AFK. Then I said; If I was AFK, why you continued the game without waiting opponent's respond or wait them to send the your targeted card to GY, or, called Judge for it? They said; why I call Judge while there is no online Judge. Our speech continued like nonsense, at the end I realized trying to talk with that opponent is same thing as eating my own big toilet. So, I sent my card to GY and left from DuelingBook. Opponent was believe that if their opponent is not giving respond that gives themselves a right to continue to play game.

About how long was it between when they declared Baronne and when they continued?

I am not sure right now man.. I don't want to say something wrong. https://imgur.com/I93db9K

You can check the log to see how long the server said it took between game actions

Cromat wrote:Today I made a Duel someone in Duelist Pool, they had declared effect of "Baronne de Fleur" and I hadn't realized it, so they had continued the play game. When they ended the their turn, they say to me your Spell is destroyed by the way. I said how it destroyed and when? They say I declared effect. You didn't respond so I continued. Is it my problem if you're AFK. Then I said; If I was AFK, why you continued the game without waiting opponent's respond or wait them to send the your targeted card to GY, or, called Judge for it? They said; why I call Judge while there is no online Judge. Our speech continued like nonsense, at the end I realized trying to talk with that opponent is same thing as eating my own big toilet. So, I sent my card to GY and left from DuelingBook. Opponent was believe that if their opponent is not giving respond that gives themselves a right to continue to play game.

While the opponent is wrong here, you're also in the wrong. You're in the wrong because you weren't paying attention. If you're focusing on other things or you're not paying attention you really shouldn't be playing Yugioh.

Cromat wrote:Today I made a Duel someone in Duelist Pool, they had declared effect of "Baronne de Fleur" and I hadn't realized it, so they had continued the play game. When they ended the their turn, they say to me your Spell is destroyed by the way. I said how it destroyed and when? They say I declared effect. You didn't respond so I continued. Is it my problem if you're AFK. Then I said; If I was AFK, why you continued the game without waiting opponent's respond or wait them to send the your targeted card to GY, or, called Judge for it? They said; why I call Judge while there is no online Judge. Our speech continued like nonsense, at the end I realized trying to talk with that opponent is same thing as eating my own big toilet. So, I sent my card to GY and left from DuelingBook. Opponent was believe that if their opponent is not giving respond that gives themselves a right to continue to play game.

Replay?

Christen57 wrote:

Cromat wrote:Today I made a Duel someone in Duelist Pool, they had declared effect of "Baronne de Fleur" and I hadn't realized it, so they had continued the play game. When they ended the their turn, they say to me your Spell is destroyed by the way. I said how it destroyed and when? They say I declared effect. You didn't respond so I continued. Is it my problem if you're AFK. Then I said; If I was AFK, why you continued the game without waiting opponent's respond or wait them to send the your targeted card to GY, or, called Judge for it? They said; why I call Judge while there is no online Judge. Our speech continued like nonsense, at the end I realized trying to talk with that opponent is same thing as eating my own big toilet. So, I sent my card to GY and left from DuelingBook. Opponent was believe that if their opponent is not giving respond that gives themselves a right to continue to play game.

Replay?

https://www.duelingbook.com/log?id=40449475

well you should always be paying attention. yes they should have made you send the card before continuing but it did not hinder or affect anything here when noticed putting it in the gy would have fixed the problem and did not require a 100 word exchange with the opponent over it especially when it was mainly your fault to begin with. I advise paying much better attention to the games and learning when to debate an issue and when not to. if that was game you would be frozen right now. I'm still deciding wether or not i need to give penalties here.

Okay. After seeing, over and over, replays like this: https://www.duelingbook.com/replay?id=40482688

I can't help but feel that it's about time the Pause Button is removed from the site, as every time the game gets paused in rated, it's always considered "abuse" and "misuse" of the Pause Button. There just never seems to be any scenario where Pausing is acceptable and doesn't end in a player getting warned/penalized by a judge for doing so.

Christen57 wrote:Okay. After seeing, over and over, replays like this: https://www.duelingbook.com/replay?id=40482688

I can't help but feel that it's about time the Pause Button is removed from the site, as every time the game gets paused in rated, it's always considered "abuse" and "misuse" of the Pause Button. There just never seems to be any scenario where Pausing is acceptable and doesn't end in a player getting warned/penalized by a judge for doing so.

I don't think you have an adequate sampling method to make a claim like that. Assuming your replay group is based on things you see from just natural exposure, such as posted replays, etc. there's likely a natural bias towards abused scenarios, such as pause button abuse, so you're more likely to acquire those cases than the ones where the pause button wasn't abused. Not to mention you're more likely to notice when the pause button was a problem in the replay because it's pointed out in the game by a player/judge, whereas the instances it's used but not abused more easily fly under the radar since it was just a minor action taken like any other.

Not saying I know what the percentages are, but the general observation methods seem like they have complications that need to be addressed to more accurately represent the situation. Having it be cases that are disproportionately made up of judge calls, or duels players complained about, etc. tilts things.

Wek wrote:

Christen57 wrote:Okay. After seeing, over and over, replays like this: https://www.duelingbook.com/replay?id=40482688

I can't help but feel that it's about time the Pause Button is removed from the site, as every time the game gets paused in rated, it's always considered "abuse" and "misuse" of the Pause Button. There just never seems to be any scenario where Pausing is acceptable and doesn't end in a player getting warned/penalized by a judge for doing so.

I don't think you have an adequate sampling method to make a claim like that. Assuming your replay group is based on things you see from just natural exposure, such as posted replays, etc. there's likely a natural bias towards abused scenarios, such as pause button abuse, so you're more likely to acquire those cases than the ones where the pause button wasn't abused. Not to mention you're more likely to notice when the pause button was a problem in the replay because it's pointed out in the game by a player/judge, whereas the instances it's used but not abused more easily fly under the radar since it was just a minor action taken like any other.

Not saying I know what the percentages are, but the general observation methods seem like they have complications that need to be addressed to more accurately represent the situation. Having it be cases that are disproportionately made up of judge calls, or duels players complained about, etc. tilts things.

He might not but I do. I can assure you atleast 90% of the time players use the pause button when a judge call is made it is used improperly.

Genexwrecker wrote:

Wek wrote:

Christen57 wrote:Okay. After seeing, over and over, replays like this: https://www.duelingbook.com/replay?id=40482688

I can't help but feel that it's about time the Pause Button is removed from the site, as every time the game gets paused in rated, it's always considered "abuse" and "misuse" of the Pause Button. There just never seems to be any scenario where Pausing is acceptable and doesn't end in a player getting warned/penalized by a judge for doing so.

I don't think you have an adequate sampling method to make a claim like that. Assuming your replay group is based on things you see from just natural exposure, such as posted replays, etc. there's likely a natural bias towards abused scenarios, such as pause button abuse, so you're more likely to acquire those cases than the ones where the pause button wasn't abused. Not to mention you're more likely to notice when the pause button was a problem in the replay because it's pointed out in the game by a player/judge, whereas the instances it's used but not abused more easily fly under the radar since it was just a minor action taken like any other.

Not saying I know what the percentages are, but the general observation methods seem like they have complications that need to be addressed to more accurately represent the situation. Having it be cases that are disproportionately made up of judge calls, or duels players complained about, etc. tilts things.

He might not but I do. I can assure you atleast 90% of the time players use the pause button when a judge call is made it is used improperly.

I use the pause button when my opponent is clearly ignoring me

That of course implies I actually do anything that isn't involving Solo Mode.

Renji Asuka wrote:

Genexwrecker wrote:

Wek wrote:
I don't think you have an adequate sampling method to make a claim like that. Assuming your replay group is based on things you see from just natural exposure, such as posted replays, etc. there's likely a natural bias towards abused scenarios, such as pause button abuse, so you're more likely to acquire those cases than the ones where the pause button wasn't abused. Not to mention you're more likely to notice when the pause button was a problem in the replay because it's pointed out in the game by a player/judge, whereas the instances it's used but not abused more easily fly under the radar since it was just a minor action taken like any other.

Not saying I know what the percentages are, but the general observation methods seem like they have complications that need to be addressed to more accurately represent the situation. Having it be cases that are disproportionately made up of judge calls, or duels players complained about, etc. tilts things.

He might not but I do. I can assure you atleast 90% of the time players use the pause button when a judge call is made it is used improperly.

I use the pause button when my opponent is clearly ignoring me

That of course implies I actually do anything that isn't involving Solo Mode.

Why not just call a judge if you're being ignored? Why do you have to pause?

Genexwrecker wrote:

Wek wrote:

Christen57 wrote:Okay. After seeing, over and over, replays like this: https://www.duelingbook.com/replay?id=40482688

I can't help but feel that it's about time the Pause Button is removed from the site, as every time the game gets paused in rated, it's always considered "abuse" and "misuse" of the Pause Button. There just never seems to be any scenario where Pausing is acceptable and doesn't end in a player getting warned/penalized by a judge for doing so.

I don't think you have an adequate sampling method to make a claim like that. Assuming your replay group is based on things you see from just natural exposure, such as posted replays, etc. there's likely a natural bias towards abused scenarios, such as pause button abuse, so you're more likely to acquire those cases than the ones where the pause button wasn't abused. Not to mention you're more likely to notice when the pause button was a problem in the replay because it's pointed out in the game by a player/judge, whereas the instances it's used but not abused more easily fly under the radar since it was just a minor action taken like any other.

Not saying I know what the percentages are, but the general observation methods seem like they have complications that need to be addressed to more accurately represent the situation. Having it be cases that are disproportionately made up of judge calls, or duels players complained about, etc. tilts things.

He might not but I do. I can assure you atleast 90% of the time players use the pause button when a judge call is made it is used improperly.

And when a judge call isn't being made?

Wek wrote:

Genexwrecker wrote:

Wek wrote:
I don't think you have an adequate sampling method to make a claim like that. Assuming your replay group is based on things you see from just natural exposure, such as posted replays, etc. there's likely a natural bias towards abused scenarios, such as pause button abuse, so you're more likely to acquire those cases than the ones where the pause button wasn't abused. Not to mention you're more likely to notice when the pause button was a problem in the replay because it's pointed out in the game by a player/judge, whereas the instances it's used but not abused more easily fly under the radar since it was just a minor action taken like any other.

Not saying I know what the percentages are, but the general observation methods seem like they have complications that need to be addressed to more accurately represent the situation. Having it be cases that are disproportionately made up of judge calls, or duels players complained about, etc. tilts things.

He might not but I do. I can assure you atleast 90% of the time players use the pause button when a judge call is made it is used improperly.

And when a judge call isn't being made?

Probably closer to 99%

Christen57 wrote:

Renji Asuka wrote:

Genexwrecker wrote:He might not but I do. I can assure you atleast 90% of the time players use the pause button when a judge call is made it is used improperly.

I use the pause button when my opponent is clearly ignoring me

That of course implies I actually do anything that isn't involving Solo Mode.

Why not just call a judge if you're being ignored? Why do you have to pause?

Simple, it's an issue that can be resolved without needing a judge. Cause the opponent would finally look in chat.