Silence is Consent in Yugioh Just had Confirmation

[Renji Asuka]

He hasn't made any new points that the judges and I didn't already address. He just repeated your talking points that silence is consent and that you weren't thinking for 10 minutes. I pointed out that even if you weren't thinking for 10 minutes specifically, your poor communication still resulted in too much time being wasted overall. You shouldn't have taken 40 seconds reading and thinking about the 1 Frightfur Cruel Whale, plus an additional 7 minutes just waiting for a judge without ever trying to ask what the call was for or trying resolving the issue on your own.

You don't need to focus so much anymore on what the judge did wrong or what the opponent did wrong. Yes it may have been unfair to assume you were thinking for over 10 minutes just because you had that long to think, and it may have been wrong for the opponent to continue playing when you didn't give the okay, but you still did things wrong on your end that you could've, and should've, done better, and now you know what you could've and should've done better as it's been explained to you by myself and multiple judges: Only point at cards if you're choosing them for an effect or attack (not to simply signal that you're reading them or that you're not AFK), and don't ever agree to wait for a judge that your opponent calls without making sure it's made clear to you why that call was being made. Those are the lessons you need to take away from this.

I won't continue arguing further about whether or not you "could have still defended yourself and held out a bit" since I agree comebacks are possible in yugioh, and you certainly could've drawn the perfect card on your following turn to turn things around, as I've had those kinds of duels myself where I was losing badly but happened to draw the right card to turn things around. It happens to all of us. I also really don't want to continue arguing about your knocking analogy since, even if you're somehow right about that, that's besides the point — the actual lessons I mentioned earlier that you need to take away from this. As for whether or not the two of you are still spreading misinformation, Genexwrecker and itsmetristan will figure that out.

You can't just blame all this on me. The opponent intentionally made the situation more difficult and confusing as the points said by me earlier.

I never thought that 40 seconds of thinking would equal to my opponent thinking that is Slowplay. It makes no sense why I got frozen especially when Maniez wasn't explaining. The opponent wasn't cooperating which made the situation difficult.

If you don't want to reply anymore then you can leave the thread should have been over once I showed the proof.

No one has tried to blame all of this on you. We're blaming the things that are your fault on you, blaming the things that are the opponent's fault on the opponent, and blaming the things that are the judge's fault on that judge. It was simply determined now by multiple judges that you were mostly at fault. This isn't saying you were entirely at fault, just mostly at fault, meaning you were at fault the most.

If you still can't get through your thick skull why you were frozen or what you were doing wrong and could've and should've done better after talking it through with Maniez, appealing it to Genexwrecker, AND all these months of this discussion you've had so far on this thread with myself, itsmetristan, and many others, you really just shouldn't be in rated any further in my opinion.

Also, I still can't view those links to the appeal you're sharing with me. It keeps saying I don't have the authorization to view it. You need to highlight and copy the contents of the appeal, and paste it here.

You're better asking for screen shots.

[Sound4]

He hasn't made any new points that the judges and I didn't already address. He just repeated your talking points that silence is consent and that you weren't thinking for 10 minutes. I pointed out that even if you weren't thinking for 10 minutes specifically, your poor communication still resulted in too much time being wasted overall. You shouldn't have taken 40 seconds reading and thinking about the 1 Frightfur Cruel Whale, plus an additional 7 minutes just waiting for a judge without ever trying to ask what the call was for or trying resolving the issue on your own.

You don't need to focus so much anymore on what the judge did wrong or what the opponent did wrong. Yes it may have been unfair to assume you were thinking for over 10 minutes just because you had that long to think, and it may have been wrong for the opponent to continue playing when you didn't give the okay, but you still did things wrong on your end that you could've, and should've, done better, and now you know what you could've and should've done better as it's been explained to you by myself and multiple judges: Only point at cards if you're choosing them for an effect or attack (not to simply signal that you're reading them or that you're not AFK), and don't ever agree to wait for a judge that your opponent calls without making sure it's made clear to you why that call was being made. Those are the lessons you need to take away from this.

I won't continue arguing further about whether or not you "could have still defended yourself and held out a bit" since I agree comebacks are possible in yugioh, and you certainly could've drawn the perfect card on your following turn to turn things around, as I've had those kinds of duels myself where I was losing badly but happened to draw the right card to turn things around. It happens to all of us. I also really don't want to continue arguing about your knocking analogy since, even if you're somehow right about that, that's besides the point — the actual lessons I mentioned earlier that you need to take away from this. As for whether or not the two of you are still spreading misinformation, Genexwrecker and itsmetristan will figure that out.

You can't just blame all this on me. The opponent intentionally made the situation more difficult and confusing as the points said by me earlier.

I never thought that 40 seconds of thinking would equal to my opponent thinking that is Slowplay. It makes no sense why I got frozen especially when Maniez wasn't explaining. The opponent wasn't cooperating which made the situation difficult.

If you don't want to reply anymore then you can leave the thread should have been over once I showed the proof.

No one has tried to blame all of this on you. We're blaming the things that are your fault on you, blaming the things that are the opponent's fault on the opponent, and blaming the things that are the judge's fault on that judge. It was simply determined now by multiple judges that you were mostly at fault. This isn't saying you were entirely at fault, just mostly at fault, meaning you were at fault the most.

If you still can't get through your thick skull why you were frozen or what you were doing wrong and could've and should've done better after talking it through with Maniez, appealing it to Genexwrecker, AND all these months of this discussion you've had so far on this thread with myself, itsmetristan, and many others, you really just shouldn't be in rated any further in my opinion.

Also, I still can't view those links to the appeal you're sharing with me. It keeps saying I don't have the authorization to view it. You need to highlight and copy the contents of the appeal, and paste it here.

How was I mostly at fault? How is it my fault if my opponent doesn't want to be cooperative? How is it my fault that my opponent doesn't want to say any of the issues he said to the judge which resulted in ten minutes of waiting? How is it my fault that my opponent was being impatient? How is it my fault that my opponent intentionally refused to say anything on the judge call being made. Plus I am pretty sure this discussion has only gone on for 2-3 months. All of my points have been explained and I have provided logs to back it up.

All you have been doing is agreeing and contradicting in the same thing and making illogical assumptions.

[Sound4]

Here is the full appeal Genexwrecker can confirm that I have not edited it.
Hi I was honestly extremely confused when my opponent called a judge a second time as he called for AFK. I told they were no judges online when he called one then Maniez came back online. I said think but my opponent was already starting to resolve. I was clearly communicating and wanted to ask my opponent a question we waited for a judge and I told him they were no judges online but he was ignoring me. Then I got frozen for apparently not communicating? This is nothing short of stupid. I asked Maniez multiple times to provide the log where I was thinking for 10 minutes but Maniez refused. If you think this freeze is justifiable please explain it to me I am honestly shocked of this.

[PENMASTER]

33 fucking pages later

[Genexwrecker]

The problem was about 95% sound4’s fault.

[Christen57]

You can't just blame all this on me. The opponent intentionally made the situation more difficult and confusing as the points said by me earlier.

I never thought that 40 seconds of thinking would equal to my opponent thinking that is Slowplay. It makes no sense why I got frozen especially when Maniez wasn't explaining. The opponent wasn't cooperating which made the situation difficult.

If you don't want to reply anymore then you can leave the thread should have been over once I showed the proof.

No one has tried to blame all of this on you. We're blaming the things that are your fault on you, blaming the things that are the opponent's fault on the opponent, and blaming the things that are the judge's fault on that judge. It was simply determined now by multiple judges that you were mostly at fault. This isn't saying you were entirely at fault, just mostly at fault, meaning you were at fault the most.

If you still can't get through your thick skull why you were frozen or what you were doing wrong and could've and should've done better after talking it through with Maniez, appealing it to Genexwrecker, AND all these months of this discussion you've had so far on this thread with myself, itsmetristan, and many others, you really just shouldn't be in rated any further in my opinion.

Also, I still can't view those links to the appeal you're sharing with me. It keeps saying I don't have the authorization to view it. You need to highlight and copy the contents of the appeal, and paste it here.

How was I mostly at fault? How is it my fault if my opponent doesn't want to be cooperative? How is it my fault that my opponent doesn't want to say any of the issues he said to the judge which resulted in ten minutes of waiting? How is it my fault that my opponent was being impatient? How is it my fault that my opponent intentionally refused to say anything on the judge call being made. Plus I am pretty sure this discussion has only gone on for 2-3 months. All of my points have been explained and I have provided logs to back it up.

All you have been doing is agreeing and contradicting in the same thing and making illogical assumptions.

You should've asked them to be cooperative, asked them to say the issues on the judge call, and asked them to be more patient. That's what's mostly your fault — failing to be proactive and ask for these things. Multiple judges and myself have already told you this. If you had been proactive and asked for these, and the opponent still refused, you would've been much less at fault while they would've been much more at fault.

The problem was about 95% sound4’s fault.

His fault for failing to be proactive and ask for those things I mentioned, right?

[Genexwrecker]

Correct

[Saraak]

God, it feels like a horrible idea jumping into this thread, but I feel like that if you want to cling to Konami's rulings and policies on a third-party website's forum of a third-party simulator, then take a look at Master Duel – an OFFICIAL simulator by Konami.

If you have 30 seconds of inactivity then it's considered an automatic loss. You've spent 40 seconds thinking on the Frightfur Whale. In Master Duel, that's a loss.

The other guy was taking nearly 10 seconds to respond when you didn't let him, because Silent is Consent, apparently. He had an ample amount of time to respond, yet you didn't let him.

Both by Konami's official simulator and this site's policies, you were slow playing. Though, if you disregard this citing some reason like "that's an auto sim and not a manual sim like DB" then I won't even be surprised. Everything that's happened in this thread so far can be summed up to words going in one ear and out the other.

[PENMASTER]

God, it feels like a horrible idea jumping into this thread, but I feel like that if you want to cling to Konami's rulings and policies on a third-party website's forum of a third-party simulator, then take a look at Master Duel – an OFFICIAL simulator by Konami.

If you have 30 seconds of inactivity then it's considered an automatic loss. You've spent 40 seconds thinking on the Frightfur Whale. In Master Duel, that's a loss.

The other guy was taking nearly 10 seconds to respond when you didn't let him, because Silent is Consent, apparently. He had an ample amount of time to respond, yet you didn't let him.

Both by Konami's official simulator and this site's policies, you were slow playing. Though, if you disregard this citing some reason like "that's an auto sim and not a manual sim like DB" then I won't even be surprised. Everything that's happened in this thread so far can be summed up to words going in one ear and out the other.

The funny thing with master duel some people don't consider it a sim but a game that has its ups and downs I think its a sim because its not its own game it has almost 0 real content of its own but its doesn't technically simulate anything due to the banlist but if you had to say its a sim of something it would have to be the ocg due to banlist and rulings and general gameplay

[greg503]

God, it feels like a horrible idea jumping into this thread, but I feel like that if you want to cling to Konami's rulings and policies on a third-party website's forum of a third-party simulator, then take a look at Master Duel – an OFFICIAL simulator by Konami.

If you have 30 seconds of inactivity then it's considered an automatic loss. You've spent 40 seconds thinking on the Frightfur Whale. In Master Duel, that's a loss.

The other guy was taking nearly 10 seconds to respond when you didn't let him, because Silent is Consent, apparently. He had an ample amount of time to respond, yet you didn't let him.

Both by Konami's official simulator and this site's policies, you were slow playing. Though, if you disregard this citing some reason like "that's an auto sim and not a manual sim like DB" then I won't even be surprised. Everything that's happened in this thread so far can be summed up to words going in one ear and out the other.

The funny thing with master duel some people don't consider it a sim but a game that has its ups and downs I think its a sim because its not its own game it has almost 0 real content of its own but its doesn't technically simulate anything due to the banlist but if you had to say its a sim of something it would have to be the ocg due to banlist and rulings and general gameplay

The banlists and card pool will catch up soon

[Sound4]

No one has tried to blame all of this on you. We're blaming the things that are your fault on you, blaming the things that are the opponent's fault on the opponent, and blaming the things that are the judge's fault on that judge. It was simply determined now by multiple judges that you were mostly at fault. This isn't saying you were entirely at fault, just mostly at fault, meaning you were at fault the most.

If you still can't get through your thick skull why you were frozen or what you were doing wrong and could've and should've done better after talking it through with Maniez, appealing it to Genexwrecker, AND all these months of this discussion you've had so far on this thread with myself, itsmetristan, and many others, you really just shouldn't be in rated any further in my opinion.

Also, I still can't view those links to the appeal you're sharing with me. It keeps saying I don't have the authorization to view it. You need to highlight and copy the contents of the appeal, and paste it here.

How was I mostly at fault? How is it my fault if my opponent doesn't want to be cooperative? How is it my fault that my opponent doesn't want to say any of the issues he said to the judge which resulted in ten minutes of waiting? How is it my fault that my opponent was being impatient? How is it my fault that my opponent intentionally refused to say anything on the judge call being made. Plus I am pretty sure this discussion has only gone on for 2-3 months. All of my points have been explained and I have provided logs to back it up.

All you have been doing is agreeing and contradicting in the same thing and making illogical assumptions.

You should've asked them to be cooperative, asked them to say the issues on the judge call, and asked them to be more patient. That's what's mostly your fault — failing to be proactive and ask for these things. Multiple judges and myself have already told you this. If you had been proactive and asked for these, and the opponent still refused, you would've been much less at fault while they would've been much more at fault.

The problem was about 95% sound4’s fault.

His fault for failing to be proactive and ask for those things I mentioned, right?

How is me basically saying there are no judges online and waiting for a judge not being proactive? Plus being proactive is a perspective and a bit one sided. You ignored all the questions I said in the post. Why should I ask the opponent to be cooperative? Him not being cooperative was literally one if the main reasons why we had to wait for a judge. All of this could have been avoided.

[Sound4]

The problem was about 95% sound4’s fault.

How is it my fault that my opponent doesn't want to be cooperative? I was literally saying they were no judges online so us waiting for a judge was pointless.
I don't see how any of this is my fault when I showed no signs of stalling. How is 40 seconds of thinking stalling? I would have understood maybe 2 minutes but 40 seconds is absurd.

[Sound4]

God, it feels like a horrible idea jumping into this thread, but I feel like that if you want to cling to Konami's rulings and policies on a third-party website's forum of a third-party simulator, then take a look at Master Duel – an OFFICIAL simulator by Konami.

If you have 30 seconds of inactivity then it's considered an automatic loss. You've spent 40 seconds thinking on the Frightfur Whale. In Master Duel, that's a loss.

The other guy was taking nearly 10 seconds to respond when you didn't let him, because Silent is Consent, apparently. He had an ample amount of time to respond, yet you didn't let him.

Both by Konami's official simulator and this site's policies, you were slow playing. Though, if you disregard this citing some reason like "that's an auto sim and not a manual sim like DB" then I won't even be surprised. Everything that's happened in this thread so far can be summed up to words going in one ear and out the other.

Inactivity and thinking aren't the same. Plus in master duel you have an 8 minute timer it makes perfect sense why 30 seconds of inactivity would result in a game loss. If you are not reading or thinking then you should not take more than 5 seconds. This thread should have ended once I showed the proof. Read page one it will help greatly snd provide more context.

[Christen57]

How was I mostly at fault? How is it my fault if my opponent doesn't want to be cooperative? How is it my fault that my opponent doesn't want to say any of the issues he said to the judge which resulted in ten minutes of waiting? How is it my fault that my opponent was being impatient? How is it my fault that my opponent intentionally refused to say anything on the judge call being made. Plus I am pretty sure this discussion has only gone on for 2-3 months. All of my points have been explained and I have provided logs to back it up.

All you have been doing is agreeing and contradicting in the same thing and making illogical assumptions.

You should've asked them to be cooperative, asked them to say the issues on the judge call, and asked them to be more patient. That's what's mostly your fault — failing to be proactive and ask for these things. Multiple judges and myself have already told you this. If you had been proactive and asked for these, and the opponent still refused, you would've been much less at fault while they would've been much more at fault.

The problem was about 95% sound4’s fault.

His fault for failing to be proactive and ask for those things I mentioned, right?

How is me basically saying there are no judges online and waiting for a judge not being proactive? Plus being proactive is a perspective and a bit one sided. You ignored all the questions I said in the post. Why should I ask the opponent to be cooperative?

Simply saying there are no judges online solves nothing, and being proactive is the opposite of just waiting around for a judge to come and solve your problem for you. Sure there are indeed situations where waiting for a judge is truly the only option, but this wasn't one of those situations. Being proactive includes adapting to other people's mistakes. Your opponent forgot to make it clear why they called a judge, which was a mistake on their part, so you should've adjusted to that mistake by asking them to clarify it to you once more. You didn't. Instead, you responded to that mistake with a mistake of your own (failing to remind them to remind you why they were calling the judge).

Both of you contributed to this problem. The judges decided you contributed more, which is why you got the freeze. Your opponent contributed by continuing to play when you didn't give the okay and by forgetting to make sure it was clear to you why the judge was being called, and you contributed by failing to remind them to tell you why they were calling the judge and by wrongfully agreeing to wait without first making sure it was being made more clear to you so you could try solving the problem on your own before they arrived.

Him not being cooperative was literally one if the main reasons why we had to wait for a judge. All of this could have been avoided.

You didn't yet know at the time that you would have to wait for a judge, so your "we had to wait for a judge" excuse doesn't work. You didn't "have" to wait for anything just yet. You had to make sure you knew what the issue was so only then you'd know if you'd "have to wait for a judge".

You didn't yet know if the judge call was for an issue related to the current gamestate, so you didn't yet know if you "had" to wait for anything. If you knew the call was related to the current gamestate, only then can you say you knew you had to wait for the judge, but you didn't know at the time since you never bothered to ask what the call was for until it was too late. Issues like ruling disputes, glitches, and cheating all relate to the current gamestate, so if the call was for one of those, and you knew this, you would indeed wait for a judge. Issues like AFK and slowplay on the other hand do not relate to the gamestate, so if the call was for one of those, and you knew this, you would know that you can't just agree to wait for a judge.

How is it my fault that my opponent doesn't want to be cooperative? I was literally saying they were no judges online so us waiting for a judge was pointless.

It's not that the opponent didn't want to be cooperative. It's that the opponent was forgetting to do so. Saying they didn't want to be cooperative means they remembered that they should've been cooperative instead of forgetting, but still intentionally refused to be cooperative. They did want to be cooperative. They were just forgetting to do so, so you should've reminded them to be cooperative so they'd remind you again why they were calling the judge.

I don't see how any of this is my fault when I showed no signs of stalling. How is 40 seconds of thinking stalling? I would have understood maybe 2 minutes but 40 seconds is absurd.

It wasn't just 40 seconds. It was at least 7 minutes in total — 40 seconds of thinking, plus an additional 7 minutes of you just waiting around when you shouldn't have been.

[greg503]

(Here before this thread gets locked.)

I can't believe it's been 4 months...

[Lil Oldman]

just lock it already I cant believe this reached 33 pages but they locked an 11 post thread in this sections.

[Wek]

God, it feels like a horrible idea jumping into this thread, but I feel like that if you want to cling to Konami's rulings and policies on a third-party website's forum of a third-party simulator, then take a look at Master Duel – an OFFICIAL simulator by Konami.

If you have 30 seconds of inactivity then it's considered an automatic loss. You've spent 40 seconds thinking on the Frightfur Whale. In Master Duel, that's a loss.

The other guy was taking nearly 10 seconds to respond when you didn't let him, because Silent is Consent, apparently. He had an ample amount of time to respond, yet you didn't let him.

Both by Konami's official simulator and this site's policies, you were slow playing. Though, if you disregard this citing some reason like "that's an auto sim and not a manual sim like DB" then I won't even be surprised. Everything that's happened in this thread so far can be summed up to words going in one ear and out the other.

Master Duel is a joke as a source. That's just offering Sound4 a rare chance to legitimately shoot something down. "That's an auto sim" is reason enough to dismiss it. Sound4 may be wrong, but this argument is just as bad as their replies. 40 seconds game losses though, lol, it's a good thing that's just something on Master Duel and isn't used in Yugioh.

[Saraak]

Inactivity and thinking aren't the same. Plus in master duel you have an 8 minute timer it makes perfect sense why 30 seconds of inactivity would result in a game loss. If you are not reading or thinking then you should not take more than 5 seconds. This thread should have ended once I showed the proof. Read page one it will help greatly snd provide more context.

Inactivity and thinking might as well be the same. You can't tell that your opponent is thinking or simply AFK in Master Duel because of a lack of communication. If you don't talk to your opponent, in other words properly communicate, then your opponent can't tell either. The only way your method of dueling works is on Master Duel, where it's literally BUILT around no verbal communication. Dueling Book has a chat function that should be used regardless of your opinions.

Also, you shot yourself in the foot by saying "If you are not reading or thinking then you should not take more than 5 seconds." How on earth are you able to know if your opponent is thinking or not? Are you psychic? Are you placing your own beliefs on what a person should or should not do? That's arrogant behavior. Not everyone acts like how you would expect, sometimes outside of common sense. That's the real world for you.

And yes, I have read your "arguments" and "proof"

They're useless.

I literally spent the past few days, BEFORE posting in this thread, reading through this garbage of fallacious reasoning. Every single piece of `proof` that I've read you post has been debunked yet you nitpick at their answers and disregard them once they fail to reply. Each time it's brought up again you answer with "What? He didn't answer my question. I've provided proof." It's this blatant, consistent, disregard in effort and acknowledgment that people in this thread have completely solidified their stances.

[Saraak]

Read page one it will help greatly snd provide more context.

Sure.

This is the thread's page 1 TLDR;

1) You made your claim

2) Genexwrecker found the replay you're talking about as people asked for it

3) They say that you Sharked by not letting him respond in 9 seconds.

4) You refute by saying Genexwrecker is nitpicking and providing timestamps of your own, then HIDE behind the fact that Madrest didn't say you were sharking, therefore, you weren't sharking. A logical fallacy, an Appeal to Authority to support your arguments ignoring the fact that said authority can either be ignorant or simply wrong. Even cops make mistakes.

5) Genexwrecker replies saying it is a CASE BY CASE basis, and no two situations are the same.

6) You disregard his reply, repeating yourself and your silence is consent claim (another fallacy, Circular Arguments, restating your assumptions), and proceed to bring up a new situation with someone called N3sh in your reply to Renji (yet another logical fallacy, a Straw Man argument, which is to bring up a different yet similar situation, with DIFFERENT context)

That's just the first page of this thread. A total of THREE logical fallacies. Going further down the thread is just a repeat of its entirety.

There is no merit to your argument because there is none. It's circular, both your argument and this thread. I'll leave it at that.

[Renji Asuka]

The problem was about 95% sound4’s fault.

How is it my fault that my opponent doesn't want to be cooperative? I was literally saying they were no judges online so us waiting for a judge was pointless.
I don't see how any of this is my fault when I showed no signs of stalling. How is 40 seconds of thinking stalling? I would have understood maybe 2 minutes but 40 seconds is absurd.

You weren't being cooperative. Why didn't you allow your opponent to continue their play? Why did you choose to hold up the game for 0 reason? Why couldn't you ask questions to the opponent to ask what the judge call was for? Why did you just sit there for 10 minutes doing nothing over something that could be solved in under 30 seconds? Why do you think silence is consent when no where it's stated that it is? In fact the rules say the opposite. Why are you still committing to your bullshit?