Silence is Consent in Yugioh Just had Confirmation

[greg503]

I'd rather not lock the topic if I can avoid it, since I do think there is some value in open, thought-provoking discussion about communication if somebody wanted to provide specific examples from the article that may be ambiguous or require further clarification.

However, if I find that this topic provides no value whatsoever other than people continuing to hurl pointless insults at each other, I may have to consider it.

I think we could just make another thread about communication... preferably with a better title

[Christen57]

I was linked back to this topic by one of my Senior Administrators letting me know that there is still a dispute about this subject.

The purpose of the Q&A article was meant to specifically settle the communication debate once and for all, one that Judges have had to address on an individual-basis for years. It is not intended to be interpreted in any way other than exactly as it is written. This article was also the combined effort of every Head Administrator on the platform.

If there is any ambiguity in that article, I will be more than happy to address it. Otherwise, I am confused how this is still an issue to be debated.

The 2 reasons there are still disputes in this thread are because 1) Sound4 continues to insist silence is always consent, ignoring that the judges only said silence would be consent in most cases and not all cases, and 2) Sound4 still wants to argue about the freeze he got from Maniez even though there isn't any point in continuing to argue about that since Sound4's opponent has since been frozen and permanently removed from rated, and both thinking and OK buttons were added, all to help prevent anything like this from happening again.

[Sound4]

Actually they are, if you don't listen to what people tell you, you're ignoring them.

You were still told by multiple staff that Silence isn't consent, YET YOU STILL fucking push that silence is consent.

You're wrong end of story, take the fucking L. Stop bumping this thread.

I have read everything that you and the others have said and provided logs and links on why that isn't the case. Plus you have still not said anything on what I have "ignored" which says to me that you have no evidence proving that and I actually did not ignore anything.

Your reasons of why are irrelevant. Staff are absolute in most cases, you're still wrong.

Yet I provided links and logs while you and the other people couldn't and were taken out of context.

[Sound4]

Their official conclusion

Which conclusion?

That you are wrong

How? Explain I provided links and logs to support my claims yet no one really attempted to debunk them. Renji Asuka replied tried but a lot of it was misinterpreted properly or him not reading what was on the link properly.

[greg503]

I have read everything that you and the others have said and provided logs and links on why that isn't the case. Plus you have still not said anything on what I have "ignored" which says to me that you have no evidence proving that and I actually did not ignore anything.

Your reasons of why are irrelevant. Staff are absolute in most cases, you're still wrong.

Yet I provided links and logs while you and the other people couldn't and were taken out of context.

YOU DIDN'T EVEN PROVIDE THE LINK TO WHERE YOU GOT YOUR "EVIDENCE" FROM AT THE START OF ALL THIS

[Sound4]

I was linked back to this topic by one of my Senior Administrators letting me know that there is still a dispute about this subject.

The purpose of the Q&A article was meant to specifically settle the communication debate once and for all, one that Judges have had to address on an individual-basis for years. It is not intended to be interpreted in any way other than exactly as it is written. This article was also the combined effort of every Head Administrator on the platform.

If there is any ambiguity in that article, I will be more than happy to address it. Otherwise, I am confused how this is still an issue to be debated.

Currently right now it is Renji Asuka not making any points but Christen57 was the one who prolonged this thread the most.

[Sound4]

Your reasons of why are irrelevant. Staff are absolute in most cases, you're still wrong.

Yet I provided links and logs while you and the other people couldn't and were taken out of context.

YOU DIDN'T EVEN PROVIDE THE LINK TO WHERE YOU GOT YOUR "EVIDENCE" FROM AT THE START OF ALL THIS

I was going to show it after but Genexwrecker already did that so it changes nothing.

[Sound4]

I was linked back to this topic by one of my Senior Administrators letting me know that there is still a dispute about this subject.

The purpose of the Q&A article was meant to specifically settle the communication debate once and for all, one that Judges have had to address on an individual-basis for years. It is not intended to be interpreted in any way other than exactly as it is written. This article was also the combined effort of every Head Administrator on the platform.

If there is any ambiguity in that article, I will be more than happy to address it. Otherwise, I am confused how this is still an issue to be debated.

The 2 reasons there are still disputes in this thread are because 1) Sound4 continues to insist silence is always consent, ignoring that the judges only said silence would be consent in most cases and not all cases, and 2) Sound4 still wants to argue about the freeze he got from Maniez even though there isn't any point in continuing to argue about that since Sound4's opponent has since been frozen and permanently removed from rated, and both thinking and OK buttons were added, all to help prevent anything like this from happening again.

You are the main person who prolonged this thread the most. Plus I didn't ignore and yet no one can answer this question which I have said multiple times. If I was taking what Madrest said too literally why did he not say anything on that? Plus currently right now it is Renji Asuka he has yet to make any valid points. I have asked him to say one thing in what I "ignored" yet he says "everything" which basically means he had nothing. If I truly was ignoring "everything" why hasn't he mentioned anything on what I ignored?

[Sound4]

Wrong answer. The DB head judge thread says:

So either you conveniently didn't read that section, or you simply decided to ignore it.

I actually read that part and how the entire thread just proves my point even further.

It literally says "no".

Yeah no it doesn't

[greg503]

I actually read that part and how the entire thread just proves my point even further.

It literally says "no".

Yeah no it doesn't

"Does This Mean Silence is Consent?

No. "

[greg503]

Yet I provided links and logs while you and the other people couldn't and were taken out of context.

YOU DIDN'T EVEN PROVIDE THE LINK TO WHERE YOU GOT YOUR "EVIDENCE" FROM AT THE START OF ALL THIS

I was going to show it after but Genexwrecker already did that so it changes nothing.

But you COULD have put it in your ORIGINAL POST and didn't

[Christen57]

I was linked back to this topic by one of my Senior Administrators letting me know that there is still a dispute about this subject.

The purpose of the Q&A article was meant to specifically settle the communication debate once and for all, one that Judges have had to address on an individual-basis for years. It is not intended to be interpreted in any way other than exactly as it is written. This article was also the combined effort of every Head Administrator on the platform.

If there is any ambiguity in that article, I will be more than happy to address it. Otherwise, I am confused how this is still an issue to be debated.

The 2 reasons there are still disputes in this thread are because 1) Sound4 continues to insist silence is always consent, ignoring that the judges only said silence would be consent in most cases and not all cases, and 2) Sound4 still wants to argue about the freeze he got from Maniez even though there isn't any point in continuing to argue about that since Sound4's opponent has since been frozen and permanently removed from rated, and both thinking and OK buttons were added, all to help prevent anything like this from happening again.

You are the main person who prolonged this thread the most. Plus I didn't ignore and yet no one can answer this question which I have said multiple times. If I was taking what Madrest said too literally why did he not say anything on that? Plus currently right now it is Renji Asuka he has yet to make any valid points. I have asked him to say one thing in what I "ignored" yet he says "everything" which basically means he had nothing. If I truly was ignoring "everything" why hasn't he mentioned anything on what I ignored?

It doesn't matter who "prolonged this thread the most". The point is, measures were taken, like the measures I listed earlier, to help ensure this never happens again so this discussion should end and you and Renji Asuka should stop prolonging things further.

Judges aren't always going to be able to spot every mistake every player makes. If Madrest failed to notice that you were taking something he was saying too literally then that may have been a mistake on his part, but you'll have to ask him or another judge about that yourself instead of asking us on this thread.

[DarwisBellium92]

Since Sound4 can't stop talking about this topic again, isn't it about time we all ignored this guy? Now the story is end, if he made a mistake, that's enough, it is useless to add more.

[Sound4]

It literally says "no".

Yeah no it doesn't

"Does This Mean Silence is Consent?

No. "

Oh I thought he meant something else but I already explained why the link helps my points.

[MarshieDemon]

A topic has been created in the Serious Discussions forum for those who wish to provide thought-provoking insight about communication. Clearly, this topic has outlived its usefulness, and, more significantly, may be providing more harm to anybody seeking actual information about DB's approach to communication.