Silence is Consent in Yugioh Just had Confirmation

[Sound4]

Not once did you try to ask your opponent any questions. Not once did you try to resolve the "thinking" issue for 10 minutes. All because YOU HELD UP THE GAME WHEN YOU HAD NO RESPONSE. Stop playing stupid.

The opponent wasn't very clear what he was calling the judge for as usually you must inform your opponent what you are calling a judge for. At the time I thought that he was calling a judge for AFK which why I said along the lines of "I am still talking right?" but it was ignored. What do you mean resolve the thinking for ten minutes? Maniez was the one who brought it up and was saying it with no context. I was asking for logs to clarify his claim.

Does not matter, you made your opponent wait 10 minutes because you were in a losing position. You didn't have a response and still held up the game. They flat out stated in chat they are calling a judge for slowplay. That is being VERY CLEAR, that YOU were too slow.

So to sum it up.

1. You held up the game.
2. You had no reason to hold up the game.
3. You had no play you could make.
4. You were justifiably frozen for it.

Are you saying that you do not need to inform a person what you are calling a judge for? You should just keep your opponent in the dark?
[33:45] "cause this guy is sharking"
"this cheater"
sound4"
[30:13] "refusing to play"
Not very clear why the judge ca has been made.
The game temporarily was stopped to read cards and get information which is allowed.

[Sound4]

Honestly I think you're just trolling at this point

Explain

[greg503]

Ok however I was asking Maniez multiple times to show the logs of me thinking for 10 minutes yet he refused and didn't bother explaining. I couldn't form any good argument as I didn't get what he meant which why I asked for him to show the logs.

The judge thought you were thinking for 10 minutes because he couldn't see what else you could've been doing that 10 minutes, so you had to explain what you were doing those 10 minutes if you weren't thinking for 10 minutes. You didn't give any explanation as to what you were doing those 10 minutes.

That is how fault for thinking that especially when Maniez never mentioned anything on me reading that card especially when I was pointing at a different card on the field.

Just pointing at stuff doesn't convey anything, at least it didn't in this case. You should only be pointing at things in general anyways if you're specifically targeting/choosing things for an effect or if you're attacking a monster with another monster. If you were reading those other cards, you should've made that explicitly clear in the chat. Your opponent didn't know what you meant just by you pointing.

I tried to reason with him before I said "well let's wait 40 minutes" as he wasn't saying anything before then. Plus the guy never informed what he was calling the for whether it was for Slowplay, reusing to play, AFK or cheating.

First off, where in this log https://www.duelingbook.com/log?id=815175-33324410 did you try to reason with him?
Second, he did mention that the call was for slowplay. He said:

[20:03] "you are slowplaying"

and said he was calling the judge:

[20:20] "to do something about your slowplaying"

He was indicating that he was calling the judge specifically for slow play because you were taking too long to finish thinking.

I had no idea what Maniez meant by me thinking for 10 mi utes as it made no sense when it had no context behind it. He just accused me out of nowhere.i could not even form any good arguments as Maniez wasn't explaining or showing logs.

The judge wasn't looking for "any good arguments". The judge was looking for an explanation from you for why you were taking so long to finish thinking, and an explanation from you as to what you were doing those 10 minutes, neither of which you explained.

Well you have to consider that he consistently bothering me so I had to repond"

What was your opponent saying that "bothered" you to the point where you felt the need to hold up the game?

Are you doing this on purpose? It does not seem like you are understanding the full meaning of what I am saying.
[35:24] "Maniez please can you show the log me thinking for ten minuyes"
[35:49] Maniez: "You said think 10 minutes ago and then never actually said if you have a response or not, why?
[36:19] "He called a judge so we waited"
[36:34] "As I said please show the log"
[36:45] Maniez: "Do you have a response to the edge imp?"
I gave an explanation but then he changed the subject.
He also called a judge for AFK which if you are calling for slow play you don't call a judge for that reason. He also said many other things on the judge being called.
33:45] "cause this guy is sharking"
[30:11] "sound4"
[30:13] "refusing to play"
[34:53] "this cheater"
The guy wasn't clear what he was calling a judge for. You know this.
I answered all the questions that he asked but apparently I wasn't communicating or playing at all and ven though I was clearly talking and trying to reason with him.
"You do know I am talking right?"
[19:18] "I said think"
[19:39] "Also Maniez went offline"
Me trying to reason with him and figure what is going on.

The last quote I do not know if you are doing this on purpose or just don't what you are talking about but that quote is me saying he was saying things in chat and continuing when I never said the ok. Plus you still have not answered that the thinking time and the waiting for a judge time is different and doesn't not add up.

Damn, you must have been really distracted if you think that DB judges actually notice or care what the "issue called for" is.

[Sound4]

The judge thought you were thinking for 10 minutes because he couldn't see what else you could've been doing that 10 minutes, so you had to explain what you were doing those 10 minutes if you weren't thinking for 10 minutes. You didn't give any explanation as to what you were doing those 10 minutes.



Just pointing at stuff doesn't convey anything, at least it didn't in this case. You should only be pointing at things in general anyways if you're specifically targeting/choosing things for an effect or if you're attacking a monster with another monster. If you were reading those other cards, you should've made that explicitly clear in the chat. Your opponent didn't know what you meant just by you pointing.



First off, where in this log https://www.duelingbook.com/log?id=815175-33324410 did you try to reason with him?
Second, he did mention that the call was for slowplay. He said:

[20:03] "you are slowplaying"

and said he was calling the judge:

[20:20] "to do something about your slowplaying"

He was indicating that he was calling the judge specifically for slow play because you were taking too long to finish thinking.



The judge wasn't looking for "any good arguments". The judge was looking for an explanation from you for why you were taking so long to finish thinking, and an explanation from you as to what you were doing those 10 minutes, neither of which you explained.



What was your opponent saying that "bothered" you to the point where you felt the need to hold up the game?

Are you doing this on purpose? It does not seem like you are understanding the full meaning of what I am saying.
[35:24] "Maniez please can you show the log me thinking for ten minuyes"
[35:49] Maniez: "You said think 10 minutes ago and then never actually said if you have a response or not, why?
[36:19] "He called a judge so we waited"
[36:34] "As I said please show the log"
[36:45] Maniez: "Do you have a response to the edge imp?"
I gave an explanation but then he changed the subject.
He also called a judge for AFK which if you are calling for slow play you don't call a judge for that reason. He also said many other things on the judge being called.
33:45] "cause this guy is sharking"
[30:11] "sound4"
[30:13] "refusing to play"
[34:53] "this cheater"
The guy wasn't clear what he was calling a judge for. You know this.
I answered all the questions that he asked but apparently I wasn't communicating or playing at all and ven though I was clearly talking and trying to reason with him.
"You do know I am talking right?"
[19:18] "I said think"
[19:39] "Also Maniez went offline"
Me trying to reason with him and figure what is going on.

The last quote I do not know if you are doing this on purpose or just don't what you are talking about but that quote is me saying he was saying things in chat and continuing when I never said the ok. Plus you still have not answered that the thinking time and the waiting for a judge time is different and doesn't not add up.

Damn, you must have been really distracted if you think that DB judges actually notice or care what the "issue called for" is.

I mean they put it there for a reason.

[greg503]

Are you doing this on purpose? It does not seem like you are understanding the full meaning of what I am saying.
[35:24] "Maniez please can you show the log me thinking for ten minuyes"
[35:49] Maniez: "You said think 10 minutes ago and then never actually said if you have a response or not, why?
[36:19] "He called a judge so we waited"
[36:34] "As I said please show the log"
[36:45] Maniez: "Do you have a response to the edge imp?"
I gave an explanation but then he changed the subject.
He also called a judge for AFK which if you are calling for slow play you don't call a judge for that reason. He also said many other things on the judge being called.
33:45] "cause this guy is sharking"
[30:11] "sound4"
[30:13] "refusing to play"
[34:53] "this cheater"
The guy wasn't clear what he was calling a judge for. You know this.
I answered all the questions that he asked but apparently I wasn't communicating or playing at all and even though I was clearly talking and trying to reason with him.
"You do know I am talking right?"
[19:18] "I said think"
[19:39] "Also Maniez went offline"
Me trying to reason with him and figure what is going on.

The last quote I do not know if you are doing this on purpose or just don't what you are talking about but that quote is me saying he was saying things in chat and continuing when I never said the ok. Plus you still have not answered that the thinking time and the waiting for a judge time is different and doesn't not add up.

Damn, you must have been really distracted if you think that DB judges actually notice or care what the "issue called for" is.

I mean they put it there for a reason.

Yes, many years ago, but now that reason has been proven unnecessary. Times change

[Christen57]

Are you doing this on purpose? It does not seem like you are understanding the full meaning of what I am saying.
[35:24] "Maniez please can you show the log me thinking for ten minuyes"
[35:49] Maniez: "You said think 10 minutes ago and then never actually said if you have a response or not, why?
[36:19] "He called a judge so we waited"
[36:34] "As I said please show the log"
[36:45] Maniez: "Do you have a response to the edge imp?"
I gave an explanation but then he changed the subject.
He also called a judge for AFK which if you are calling for slow play you don't call a judge for that reason. He also said many other things on the judge being called.
33:45] "cause this guy is sharking"
[30:11] "sound4"
[30:13] "refusing to play"
[34:53] "this cheater"
The guy wasn't clear what he was calling a judge for. You know this.
I answered all the questions that he asked but apparently I wasn't communicating or playing at all and ven though I was clearly talking and trying to reason with him.
"You do know I am talking right?"
[19:18] "I said think"
[19:39] "Also Maniez went offline"
Me trying to reason with him and figure what is going on.

The last quote I do not know if you are doing this on purpose or just don't what you are talking about but that quote is me saying he was saying things in chat and continuing when I never said the ok. Plus you still have not answered that the thinking time and the waiting for a judge time is different and doesn't not add up.

Damn, you must have been really distracted if you think that DB judges actually notice or care what the "issue called for" is.

I mean they put it there for a reason.

Genexwrecker says duelingbook should remove the "reasons" people can click on for the judge call since nobody picks the correct option anyways, and instead just have the option to call a judge and explain the issue when they come. https://forum.duelingbook.com/viewtopic.php?p=74579#p74579

[Renji Asuka]

The opponent wasn't very clear what he was calling the judge for as usually you must inform your opponent what you are calling a judge for. At the time I thought that he was calling a judge for AFK which why I said along the lines of "I am still talking right?" but it was ignored. What do you mean resolve the thinking for ten minutes? Maniez was the one who brought it up and was saying it with no context. I was asking for logs to clarify his claim.

Does not matter, you made your opponent wait 10 minutes because you were in a losing position. You didn't have a response and still held up the game. They flat out stated in chat they are calling a judge for slowplay. That is being VERY CLEAR, that YOU were too slow.

So to sum it up.

1. You held up the game.
2. You had no reason to hold up the game.
3. You had no play you could make.
4. You were justifiably frozen for it.

Are you saying that you do not need to inform a person what you are calling a judge for? You should just keep your opponent in the dark?
[33:45] "cause this guy is sharking"
"this cheater"
sound4"
[30:13] "refusing to play"
Not very clear why the judge ca has been made.
The game temporarily was stopped to read cards and get information which is allowed.

Stop being stupid. You held up the game for 10 minutes, you had no reason to hold up the game for that long, that is why you were punished. End of story. You're in the wrong, forever in the wrong, what you did and what occurred will not change. Now shut the fuck up.

[itsmetristan]

Honestly I think you're just trolling at this point

Explain

You're making the same lies over and over again in a lot of your messages here, even after everything was explained to you.

[Christen57]

Ok however I was asking Maniez multiple times to show the logs of me thinking for 10 minutes yet he refused and didn't bother explaining. I couldn't form any good argument as I didn't get what he meant which why I asked for him to show the logs.

The judge thought you were thinking for 10 minutes because he couldn't see what else you could've been doing that 10 minutes, so you had to explain what you were doing those 10 minutes if you weren't thinking for 10 minutes. You didn't give any explanation as to what you were doing those 10 minutes.

That is how fault for thinking that especially when Maniez never mentioned anything on me reading that card especially when I was pointing at a different card on the field.

Just pointing at stuff doesn't convey anything, at least it didn't in this case. You should only be pointing at things in general anyways if you're specifically targeting/choosing things for an effect or if you're attacking a monster with another monster. If you were reading those other cards, you should've made that explicitly clear in the chat. Your opponent didn't know what you meant just by you pointing.

I tried to reason with him before I said "well let's wait 40 minutes" as he wasn't saying anything before then. Plus the guy never informed what he was calling the for whether it was for Slowplay, reusing to play, AFK or cheating.

First off, where in this log https://www.duelingbook.com/log?id=815175-33324410 did you try to reason with him?
Second, he did mention that the call was for slowplay. He said:

[20:03] "you are slowplaying"

and said he was calling the judge:

[20:20] "to do something about your slowplaying"

He was indicating that he was calling the judge specifically for slow play because you were taking too long to finish thinking.

I had no idea what Maniez meant by me thinking for 10 mi utes as it made no sense when it had no context behind it. He just accused me out of nowhere.i could not even form any good arguments as Maniez wasn't explaining or showing logs.

The judge wasn't looking for "any good arguments". The judge was looking for an explanation from you for why you were taking so long to finish thinking, and an explanation from you as to what you were doing those 10 minutes, neither of which you explained.

Well you have to consider that he consistently bothering me so I had to repond"

What was your opponent saying that "bothered" you to the point where you felt the need to hold up the game?

Are you doing this on purpose? It does not seem like you are understanding the full meaning of what I am saying.
[35:24] "Maniez please can you show the log me thinking for ten minuyes"
[35:49] Maniez: "You said think 10 minutes ago and then never actually said if you have a response or not, why?
[36:19] "He called a judge so we waited"
[36:34] "As I said please show the log"
[36:45] Maniez: "Do you have a response to the edge imp?"
I gave an explanation but then he changed the subject.
He also called a judge for AFK which if you are calling for slow play you don't call a judge for that reason. He also said many other things on the judge being called.
33:45] "cause this guy is sharking"
[30:11] "sound4"
[30:13] "refusing to play"
[34:53] "this cheater"
The guy wasn't clear what he was calling a judge for. You know this.
I answered all the questions that he asked but apparently I wasn't communicating or playing at all and ven though I was clearly talking and trying to reason with him.
"You do know I am talking right?"
[19:18] "I said think"
[19:39] "Also Maniez went offline"
Me trying to reason with him and figure what is going on.

The last quote I do not know if you are doing this on purpose or just don't what you are talking about but that quote is me saying he was saying things in chat and continuing when I never said the ok. Plus you still have not answered that the thinking time and the waiting for a judge time is different and doesn't not add up.

I just pointed out that the opponent mentioned at least twice that you were slowplaying. Stop saying that never indicated that the call was for slowplay when they did.

[36:19] "He called a judge so we waited"

Duelingbook has no option to choose "Slow Play" as the reason for a judge call, so the opponent picked the next best thing which was "AFK," but whether the judge call is for AFK or for slowplay, the point is that if the call is for either of those, you are not to just wait for the judge. You were already told this. You are to attempt to continue the duel to the best of your ability. In this case, that would mean hurrying up and finishing your thinking, then letting the opponent know you were done thinking, before the judge arrived so the opponent could continue their play and cancel the call. The judge assumed that you already knew this because judges answer calls assuming that players already know the rules. The judge assumed that you were thinking for over 10 minutes straight because they assumed that you would be attempting to finish your thinking during that 10 minutes instead of just stopping the thinking to instead wait.

You weren't supposed to just "wait for the judge" here. If you were still unsure what the opponent called the judge for, even though they already indicated twice what the call was for, you should've been proactive and asked the opponent to explicitly clarify once more what the call was for. It's your responsibility to be proactive and try to get the opponent to clarify why they called the judge once the call is made if you aren't sure why they called the judge, otherwise the judge will assume you already know exactly what the call is for and think you're stalling when you should've hurried up finishing your thinking so the duel could continue.

The judge saw that you weren't being proactive, they saw that you weren't asking your opponent to clarify what the call was for, they saw that you weren't trying to finish your thinking in that 10 minutes and communicate to the opponent that you were done thinking, so they froze you, saying "You were not playing or properly communicating there," which is correct, because you weren't.

[Sound4]

Honestly I think you're just trolling at this point

Explain

You're making the same lies over and over again in a lot of your messages here, even after everything was explained to you.

Say one line that I have apparently said.

[Sound4]

Does not matter, you made your opponent wait 10 minutes because you were in a losing position. You didn't have a response and still held up the game. They flat out stated in chat they are calling a judge for slowplay. That is being VERY CLEAR, that YOU were too slow.

So to sum it up.

1. You held up the game.
2. You had no reason to hold up the game.
3. You had no play you could make.
4. You were justifiably frozen for it.

Are you saying that you do not need to inform a person what you are calling a judge for? You should just keep your opponent in the dark?
[33:45] "cause this guy is sharking"
"this cheater"
sound4"
[30:13] "refusing to play"
Not very clear why the judge ca has been made.
The game temporarily was stopped to read cards and get information which is allowed.

Stop being stupid. You held up the game for 10 minutes, you had no reason to hold up the game for that long, that is why you were punished. End of story. You're in the wrong, forever in the wrong, what you did and what occurred will not change. Now shut the fuck up.

Maniez never explained what he meant by me thinking for 10 minutes he just mentioned out of nowhere with no context I answered the questions he wanted to know. I obviously wanted to continue but the circumstances wouldn't allow me to.

[Sound4]

Damn, you must have been really distracted if you think that DB judges actually notice or care what the "issue called for" is.

I mean they put it there for a reason.

Genexwrecker says duelingbook should remove the "reasons" people can click on for the judge call since nobody picks the correct option anyways, and instead just have the option to call a judge and explain the issue when they come. https://forum.duelingbook.com/viewtopic.php?p=74579#p74579

He chose AFK and if he meant slow play and choosing AFK has nothing to do with slow play. He should have still informed me what he called tge judge for without that information the issue could not have been resolved before the judge came in and since he was ignoring me it made the situation even more difficult.

[Sound4]

The judge thought you were thinking for 10 minutes because he couldn't see what else you could've been doing that 10 minutes, so you had to explain what you were doing those 10 minutes if you weren't thinking for 10 minutes. You didn't give any explanation as to what you were doing those 10 minutes.



Just pointing at stuff doesn't convey anything, at least it didn't in this case. You should only be pointing at things in general anyways if you're specifically targeting/choosing things for an effect or if you're attacking a monster with another monster. If you were reading those other cards, you should've made that explicitly clear in the chat. Your opponent didn't know what you meant just by you pointing.



First off, where in this log https://www.duelingbook.com/log?id=815175-33324410 did you try to reason with him?
Second, he did mention that the call was for slowplay. He said:

[20:03] "you are slowplaying"

and said he was calling the judge:

[20:20] "to do something about your slowplaying"

He was indicating that he was calling the judge specifically for slow play because you were taking too long to finish thinking.



The judge wasn't looking for "any good arguments". The judge was looking for an explanation from you for why you were taking so long to finish thinking, and an explanation from you as to what you were doing those 10 minutes, neither of which you explained.



What was your opponent saying that "bothered" you to the point where you felt the need to hold up the game?

Are you doing this on purpose? It does not seem like you are understanding the full meaning of what I am saying.
[35:24] "Maniez please can you show the log me thinking for ten minuyes"
[35:49] Maniez: "You said think 10 minutes ago and then never actually said if you have a response or not, why?
[36:19] "He called a judge so we waited"
[36:34] "As I said please show the log"
[36:45] Maniez: "Do you have a response to the edge imp?"
I gave an explanation but then he changed the subject.
He also called a judge for AFK which if you are calling for slow play you don't call a judge for that reason. He also said many other things on the judge being called.
33:45] "cause this guy is sharking"
[30:11] "sound4"
[30:13] "refusing to play"
[34:53] "this cheater"
The guy wasn't clear what he was calling a judge for. You know this.
I answered all the questions that he asked but apparently I wasn't communicating or playing at all and ven though I was clearly talking and trying to reason with him.
"You do know I am talking right?"
[19:18] "I said think"
[19:39] "Also Maniez went offline"
Me trying to reason with him and figure what is going on.

The last quote I do not know if you are doing this on purpose or just don't what you are talking about but that quote is me saying he was saying things in chat and continuing when I never said the ok. Plus you still have not answered that the thinking time and the waiting for a judge time is different and doesn't not add up.

I just pointed out that the opponent mentioned at least twice that you were slowplaying. Stop saying that never indicated that the call was for slowplay when they did.

[36:19] "He called a judge so we waited"

Duelingbook has no option to choose "Slow Play" as the reason for a judge call, so the opponent picked the next best thing which was "AFK," but whether the judge call is for AFK or for slowplay, the point is that if the call is for either of those, you are not to just wait for the judge. You were already told this. You are to attempt to continue the duel to the best of your ability. In this case, that would mean hurrying up and finishing your thinking, then letting the opponent know you were done thinking, before the judge arrived so the opponent could continue their play and cancel the call. The judge assumed that you already knew this because judges answer calls assuming that players already know the rules. The judge assumed that you were thinking for over 10 minutes straight because they assumed that you would be attempting to finish your thinking during that 10 minutes instead of just stopping the thinking to instead wait.

You weren't supposed to just "wait for the judge" here. If you were still unsure what the opponent called the judge for, even though they already indicated twice what the call was for, you should've been proactive and asked the opponent to explicitly clarify once more what the call was for. It's your responsibility to be proactive and try to get the opponent to clarify why they called the judge once the call is made if you aren't sure why they called the judge, otherwise the judge will assume you already know exactly what the call is for and think you're stalling when you should've hurried up finishing your thinking so the duel could continue.

The judge saw that you weren't being proactive, they saw that you weren't asking your opponent to clarify what the call was for, they saw that you weren't trying to finish your thinking in that 10 minutes and communicate to the opponent that you were done thinking, so they froze you, saying "You were not playing or properly communicating there," which is correct, because you weren't.

I also showed that the opponent saying other things about calling a judge not just slow play. I was clearly trying to reason with him and trying to resolve the issue but it was all pointless. I was clearly typing in chat saying thing like "you do know I am still talking right?" I thought the call was AFK and since he wasn't saying anything that he is actually calling one for slow play then that simply proves my point. I obviously wanted to continue and didn't even want to wait that long or a judge to come in but the circumstances made it difficult especially when he was also ignoring. How is it my fault if he does not want to resolve anything until a judge comes in? Maniez also mentioned nothing of me "Slowplaying". The thinking was over when he called the judge. You know in the logs I was trying to reason with him. We could have easily continued however the situation was confusing and not much was explained. Plus you have still not answered that the thinking time and the waiting for ia judge time does not add up it is separate.

[greg503]

Maniez never explained what he meant by me thinking for 10 minutes he just mentioned out of nowhere with no context I answered the questions he wanted to know. I obviously wanted to continue but the circumstances wouldn't allow me to.

Well there's a lie, strike 420, or something...

[Christen57]

I mean they put it there for a reason.

Genexwrecker says duelingbook should remove the "reasons" people can click on for the judge call since nobody picks the correct option anyways, and instead just have the option to call a judge and explain the issue when they come. https://forum.duelingbook.com/viewtopic.php?p=74579#p74579

He chose AFK and if he meant slow play and choosing AFK has nothing to do with slow play. He should have still informed me what he called tge judge for without that information the issue could not have been resolved before the judge came in and since he was ignoring me it made the situation even more difficult.

You should've asked what he called the judge for.

I was clearly trying to reason with him and trying to resolve the issue but it was all pointless.

You weren't supposed to be "trying to reason with him". You were supposed to finish your thinking and explicitly communicate that you done thinking, so they could cancel the call and continue the duel, which you didn't.

How is it my fault if he does not want to resolve anything until a judge comes in?

He didn't want to "not resolve anything until a judge came in". He wanted you to hurry up and finish thinking so he could cancel the call and continue his play.

The thinking was over when he called the judge.

Then why didn't you explicitly tell the opponent at this time that you were done thinking so they could cancel the call and continue the duel?

Plus you have still not answered that the thinking time and the waiting for ia judge time does not add up it is separate.

I couldn't say whether or not these things "added up" because you were never clear to the opponent, nor to the judge, how long this "thinking time" you speak of lasted. Were you thinking for over 10 minutes? If not, why didn't you explicitly communicate in the chat when you were done thinking so nobody would be assuming you were thinking for that long?

The problem here is that you said "think" at [17:11] but never, at any point after that, communicated to either the opponent or the judge when you were done with that thinking or when this "thinking" of yours ended, so when the judge arrived at [29:59], and they saw that, at no point between [17:11] and [29:59] you ever communicated to the opponent you were done thinking, they assumed that the thinking was still going on at this point and hasn't yet ended.

If you say you're thinking, and some time passes, people will assume that you're still thinking and will continue to assume you're thinking until you explicitly communicate that that thinking is over, so if you start thinking, then 10 minutes pass, and by then you still haven't explicitly said you were done thinking, people will assume you've been thinking for that long.

[Jedx_EX]

Merry Christmas!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dNNdc80bOr8&t=3s

[Sound4]

Genexwrecker says duelingbook should remove the "reasons" people can click on for the judge call since nobody picks the correct option anyways, and instead just have the option to call a judge and explain the issue when they come. https://forum.duelingbook.com/viewtopic.php?p=74579#p74579

He chose AFK and if he meant slow play and choosing AFK has nothing to do with slow play. He should have still informed me what he called tge judge for without that information the issue could not have been resolved before the judge came in and since he was ignoring me it made the situation even more difficult.

You should've asked what he called the judge for.

I was clearly trying to reason with him and trying to resolve the issue but it was all pointless.

You weren't supposed to be "trying to reason with him". You were supposed to finish your thinking and explicitly communicate that you done thinking, so they could cancel the call and continue the duel, which you didn't.

How is it my fault if he does not want to resolve anything until a judge comes in?

He didn't want to "not resolve anything until a judge came in". He wanted you to hurry up and finish thinking so he could cancel the call and continue his play.

The thinking was over when he called the judge.

Then why didn't you explicitly tell the opponent at this time that you were done thinking so they could cancel the call and continue the duel?

Plus you have still not answered that the thinking time and the waiting for ia judge time does not add up it is separate.

I couldn't say whether or not these things "added up" because you were never clear to the opponent, nor to the judge, how long this "thinking time" you speak of lasted. Were you thinking for over 10 minutes? If not, why didn't you explicitly communicate in the chat when you were done thinking so nobody would be assuming you were thinking for that long?

The problem here is that you said "think" at [17:11] but never, at any point after that, communicated to either the opponent or the judge when you were done with that thinking or when this "thinking" of yours ended, so when the judge arrived at [29:59], and they saw that, at no point between [17:11] and [29:59] you ever communicated to the opponent you were done thinking, they assumed that the thinking was still going on at this point and hasn't yet ended.

If you say you're thinking, and some time passes, people will assume that you're still thinking and will continue to assume you're thinking until you explicitly communicate that that thinking is over, so if you start thinking, then 10 minutes pass, and by then you still haven't explicitly said you were done thinking, people will assume you've been thinking for that long.

You have been agreeing and contradicting in these replies.
1) You have still not explained like at all that the jthinking time and waiting for a judge is separate and does add up.
2) At least we both agree that the was ignoring me ever since he said those two quotes. Yet you haven't acknowledged this contributes for us waiting for10 minutes.
3)You also haven't explained how the guy was never clear and what he was calling the judge for making it impossible for us to continue without that information.
4) You are missing the context the duel was stopped for us waiting for a judge to resolve the issue which was unclear at the time. "If you are thinking for some time and then time passes it is assumed you are still thinking" but this is not what happened I was thinking fir 40 seconds and then called a judge a certain event happened in between especially when the reasoning behind judge call was unclear.
If you are going to reply to someone please bring facts and evidence not just what you think happened and not wht was said. You automatically assumed I was wrong without looking at anything I said.

[Jedx_EX]

Well, someone is being a grouch here.

[greg503]

4) You are missing the context the duel was stopped for us waiting for a judge to resolve the issue which was unclear at the time. "If you are thinking for some time and then time passes it is assumed you are still thinking" but this is not what happened I was thinking fir 40 seconds and then called a judge a certain event happened in between especially when the reasoning behind judge call was unclear.
If you are going to reply to someone please bring facts and evidence not just what you think happened and not wht was said. You automatically assumed I was wrong without looking at anything I said.

Did you press the "pause duel" button?

[Christen57]

He chose AFK and if he meant slow play and choosing AFK has nothing to do with slow play. He should have still informed me what he called tge judge for without that information the issue could not have been resolved before the judge came in and since he was ignoring me it made the situation even more difficult.

You should've asked what he called the judge for.

I was clearly trying to reason with him and trying to resolve the issue but it was all pointless.

You weren't supposed to be "trying to reason with him". You were supposed to finish your thinking and explicitly communicate that you done thinking, so they could cancel the call and continue the duel, which you didn't.

How is it my fault if he does not want to resolve anything until a judge comes in?

He didn't want to "not resolve anything until a judge came in". He wanted you to hurry up and finish thinking so he could cancel the call and continue his play.

The thinking was over when he called the judge.

Then why didn't you explicitly tell the opponent at this time that you were done thinking so they could cancel the call and continue the duel?

Plus you have still not answered that the thinking time and the waiting for ia judge time does not add up it is separate.

I couldn't say whether or not these things "added up" because you were never clear to the opponent, nor to the judge, how long this "thinking time" you speak of lasted. Were you thinking for over 10 minutes? If not, why didn't you explicitly communicate in the chat when you were done thinking so nobody would be assuming you were thinking for that long?

The problem here is that you said "think" at [17:11] but never, at any point after that, communicated to either the opponent or the judge when you were done with that thinking or when this "thinking" of yours ended, so when the judge arrived at [29:59], and they saw that, at no point between [17:11] and [29:59] you ever communicated to the opponent you were done thinking, they assumed that the thinking was still going on at this point and hasn't yet ended.

If you say you're thinking, and some time passes, people will assume that you're still thinking and will continue to assume you're thinking until you explicitly communicate that that thinking is over, so if you start thinking, then 10 minutes pass, and by then you still haven't explicitly said you were done thinking, people will assume you've been thinking for that long.

You have been agreeing and contradicting in these replies.
1) You have still not explained like at all that the jthinking time and waiting for a judge is separate and does add up.

You should've told the judge that the thinking was over when the judge call was made so they wouldn't have kept thinking that the thinking time and the time waiting for the judge were the same.

2) At least we both agree that the was ignoring me ever since he said those two quotes. Yet you haven't acknowledged this contributes for us waiting for10 minutes.

If he said "get ignored" and you then told him you were done thinking and that he could continue his play, and he still insisted on ignoring you to wait for the judge, at that point he would've been the one stalling and he would've been the one who ended up getting frozen. The call was made specifically because you weren't done thinking. You'd know this if you had asked the opponent to clarify why the call was made if you weren't sure why. If you had finished your thinking, the opponent would've had to cancel the call at that point and continue their play or else they would've been the one stalling and getting the freeze. I thought I covered this already.

3)You also haven't explained how the guy was never clear and what he was calling the judge for making it impossible for us to continue without that information.

You should've asked for that information. If the guy was never clear about why the judge call was made, you should've been proactive and asked so it would become clear. By failing to ask, everyone assumed you already knew why the call was being made.

4) You are missing the context the duel was stopped for us waiting for a judge to resolve the issue which was unclear at the time. "If you are thinking for some time and then time passes it is assumed you are still thinking" but this is not what happened I was thinking fir 40 seconds and then called a judge a certain event happened in between especially when the reasoning behind judge call was unclear.

The duel wasn't stopped because your opponent made that judge call. The duel was stopped because you decided to wait for the judge without bothering to either ask the opponent to clarify why they made that judge call or finish your thinking and let the opponent know you were done thinking.

You should've told, or signaled, to the opponent that you were done thinking after that 40 seconds, neither of which you did. By failing to let your opponent know you were done thinking, people assumed that your thinking was still going on even after that 10 minutes or so.

If you are going to reply to someone please bring facts and evidence not just what you think happened and not wht was said.

I don't think I'm missing anymore "facts" about this matter, and none of the judges think so either.
https://www.duelingbook.com/log?id=815175-33324410