Silence is Consent in Yugioh Just had Confirmation

Here you can discuss just about whatever you want
ankh_gaming
Posts: 6
Joined: Sat Nov 06, 2021 3:11 pm
Reputation: 3

Re: Silence is Consent in Yugioh Just had Confirmation

Post #521 by ankh_gaming » Thu Jan 06, 2022 6:31 am

Christen57 wrote:
ankh_gaming wrote:I hope either tristen or genex would read this. Another suggestion is to make the entierty of ranked reserved for those who completed the judge/expert exam


This wouldn't work because you need "experience" to take the judge exam to begin with, which you can currently only get by playing in rated, so if you limit rated to only those who pass the exam, you lock out both rated and the exam to everybody.


I thought you can gain experience in casual tho. If you can't it would make sense, but if you can, making all of ranked limited, and making the exam for rated not only expert. Anyways, if what you said is true, fair enough

ankh_gaming
Posts: 6
Joined: Sat Nov 06, 2021 3:11 pm
Reputation: 3

Post #522 by ankh_gaming » Thu Jan 06, 2022 6:59 am

Sound4 wrote:
Christen57 wrote:
Sound4 wrote:I was clearly communicating and being reasonable.


You weren't communicating clearly enough. As I pointed out earlier, agreeing to wait for a judge whose call you don't know the reason of since you never bothered to ask, just clicking on cards when you're not actually targeting/choosing them for an attack/effect, and failing to explicitly communicate that you were reading and no longer thinking, were all instances of improper communication on your part.

I don't know why you are changing the subject to the gap of at least being 40 seconds which is why I said "well let's wait 40 minutes".


Which you shouldn't have done as you weren't yet informed why the call was made to begin with.

I was pointing at the opponents card to signal that I was reading that card and Maniez said nothing on that.


Just pointing at cards didn't signal anything to either the judge or your opponent. Maybe you thought you were signaling, but they didn't pick up on the signal, so you should've been more clear and told them in the chat you were reading those other cards.

I am pretty sure I have seen a judge saying they can looks back through a replay even though it is still in progress.


Either way, replays don't show when someone's typing, only when they hit Enter to chat their message.

I explained to Maniez as I ready showed the logs for that.


The only one who showed the judge any logs was your opponent, not you. https://www.duelingbook.com/log?id=815175-33324410

[29:59] Maniez entered the game
[30:04] Maniez: "Hello, what is the issue?"
[30:10] "Hi"
[30:11] "sound4"
[30:13] "refusing to play"
[30:42] "I said think but thinking apparently to him is refusing to play"
[31:07] "time stamp maniez"
[31:09] "So he called a judge for AFK when I want still typing in the chat"
[31:10] "[17:08] "edge imp effect" [17:11] "Think" [17:11] Viewed deck [17:13] Stopped viewing Deck [17:13] Shuffled deck [17:39] "so?edge imp ok?""
[31:10] "until now"

This is the only time any part of the log was being shown to the judge, and it was from your opponent.

There is enough proof that the opponent would have simply ignored me until the judge came in. You have still not answered that it us not my fault that if he wants to ignore me. You keep ignoring these important details which is making your replies flawed and inaccurate.

If the opponent didn't know why I was pointing at whale then they could have simply said "Why are you pointing at whale?" when he didn't say any of that I thought he had no problem of me pointing at whale. He didn't say anything on him having a issue with that until after he called a judge.

You are misinterpreting and missing the point I meant I showed the logs in this thread notinthe duel.


Yes there is enough proof to show the judge that he wouldv'e ignored you. But what you did was play along and stayed waiting for the judge as well. If you had told him you finished thinkng/reading and he didn't continue, he wouldv'e been in the wrong and frozen. It is his fault, but you played along, impling to the judge that you was still thinking/reading and making him freeze you for slow play. If you had also told him, "I was reading whale"he wouldve kept going wiht imp. Another thing was that you had 0 responses to edge imp. THis told the judge that you were stalling because you were in a losing position. You couldv'e told the judge i was also reading, when he asked you why were you thinking that long. And maybe you weren't thinking/reading that long, and waiting for the judge, but then you shouldv'e said that you were done and kept playing. As for the pointing issue: In dueling book, most users understand and think this is targeting or slecting a card for an effect. While he was at fault for not asking why you were pointing (kind of), you shouldve also just said that you were reading. As for the silence is consent, as i said in my first post, i now disagree. I think that in the N3sh duel, he shouldve talked and you shouldve asked as well. So I'd say you were at fault in most cases. Some of your points were valid, they were proven wrong by other things. So you did miss some points here and there.

Sound4
Posts: 921
Joined: Fri Jun 25, 2021 3:58 pm
Reputation: 8

Post #523 by Sound4 » Fri Jan 07, 2022 6:30 pm

ankh_gaming wrote:
Sound4 wrote:
Christen57 wrote:
You weren't communicating clearly enough. As I pointed out earlier, agreeing to wait for a judge whose call you don't know the reason of since you never bothered to ask, just clicking on cards when you're not actually targeting/choosing them for an attack/effect, and failing to explicitly communicate that you were reading and no longer thinking, were all instances of improper communication on your part.



Which you shouldn't have done as you weren't yet informed why the call was made to begin with.



Just pointing at cards didn't signal anything to either the judge or your opponent. Maybe you thought you were signaling, but they didn't pick up on the signal, so you should've been more clear and told them in the chat you were reading those other cards.



Either way, replays don't show when someone's typing, only when they hit Enter to chat their message.



The only one who showed the judge any logs was your opponent, not you. https://www.duelingbook.com/log?id=815175-33324410

[29:59] Maniez entered the game
[30:04] Maniez: "Hello, what is the issue?"
[30:10] "Hi"
[30:11] "sound4"
[30:13] "refusing to play"
[30:42] "I said think but thinking apparently to him is refusing to play"
[31:07] "time stamp maniez"
[31:09] "So he called a judge for AFK when I want still typing in the chat"
[31:10] "[17:08] "edge imp effect" [17:11] "Think" [17:11] Viewed deck [17:13] Stopped viewing Deck [17:13] Shuffled deck [17:39] "so?edge imp ok?""
[31:10] "until now"

This is the only time any part of the log was being shown to the judge, and it was from your opponent.

There is enough proof that the opponent would have simply ignored me until the judge came in. You have still not answered that it us not my fault that if he wants to ignore me. You keep ignoring these important details which is making your replies flawed and inaccurate.

If the opponent didn't know why I was pointing at whale then they could have simply said "Why are you pointing at whale?" when he didn't say any of that I thought he had no problem of me pointing at whale. He didn't say anything on him having a issue with that until after he called a judge.

You are misinterpreting and missing the point I meant I showed the logs in this thread notinthe duel.


Yes there is enough proof to show the judge that he wouldv'e ignored you. But what you did was play along and stayed waiting for the judge as well. If you had told him you finished thinkng/reading and he didn't continue, he wouldv'e been in the wrong and frozen. It is his fault, but you played along, impling to the judge that you was still thinking/reading and making him freeze you for slow play. If you had also told him, "I was reading whale"he wouldve kept going wiht imp. Another thing was that you had 0 responses to edge imp. THis told the judge that you were stalling because you were in a losing position. You couldv'e told the judge i was also reading, when he asked you why were you thinking that long. And maybe you weren't thinking/reading that long, and waiting for the judge, but then you shouldv'e said that you were done and kept playing. As for the pointing issue: In dueling book, most users understand and think this is targeting or slecting a card for an effect. While he was at fault for not asking why you were pointing (kind of), you shouldve also just said that you were reading. As for the silence is consent, as i said in my first post, i now disagree. I think that in the N3sh duel, he shouldve talked and you shouldve asked as well. So I'd say you were at fault in most cases. Some of your points were valid, they were proven wrong by other things. So you did miss some points here and there.

Interesting take on the matter. Where is the proof that the judge would just ignore me? I don't see how "played along" as I had shown in this thread I was basically saying that they ere no judges online when he called the judge meaning that we would simply be wasting both of outlr time. He didn't say his is issues to me about me pointing at whale until after the judge call was made. Since he wasn't saying anything then I thought he was ok with it. Are you seriously saying that me having ten minutes to think is me thinking for ten minutes? Just because I didn't say "I am finished thinking". It is an illogical assumption which Maniez should have explained on as I didn't know where Maniez was getting me thinking for ten minutes.

Sound4
Posts: 921
Joined: Fri Jun 25, 2021 3:58 pm
Reputation: 8

Post #524 by Sound4 » Fri Jan 07, 2022 6:40 pm

itsmetristan wrote:
Sound4 wrote:There is enough proof that the opponent would have simply ignored me until the judge came in. You have still not answered that it us not my fault that if he wants to ignore me. You keep ignoring these important details which is making your replies flawed and inaccurate.

If the opponent didn't know why I was pointing at whale then they could have simply said "Why are you pointing at whale?" when he didn't say any of that I thought he had no problem of me pointing at whale. He didn't say anything on him having a issue with that until after he called a judge.

You are misinterpreting and missing the point I meant I showed the logs in this thread notinthe duel.

Frankly, whether your opponent would have ignored you or not doesn't excuse your actions. You still should have attempted to continue to the best of your ability, told your opponent you were done thinking, and so on. If you had actually done this and the opponent did not continue playing, then it would have been entirely their fault. As it stands, you not only failed to state whether you were done thinking, but also you made no attempt to tell your opponent to continue as they should have.

For the second point here, they shouldn't need to ask that. Selecting a card doesn't mean you're thinking. You could be selecting it for any number of reasons not related to thinking about if you'd like to respond. Nobody is going to interpret you selecting a card as you communicating that you'd like to think about responding or not, and they are in the right to not interpret it that way. I have no idea how them pointing out that you selected whale once the judge arrived is supposed to make you more correct.

Well of course you showed the logs in the thread? I don't think anyone is doubting that, which begs the question of why you're even bringing this up in the first place? I know you've been going on about how you posted links supporting your claim (despite none of the links actually supporting your claim), so if you said earlier that you sent the logs, meaning to convey that you sent the logs here, that's an extremely misleading and pointless thing to say.

The game was stopped. I didn't think that me having ten minutes to think Is me thinking for ten minutes it doesn't make any it us like saying me having ten minutes to knock is me knocking for ten minutes especially when the judge call was not really clear at the time. When he called a judge It said his name and "has called a judge for AFK" since he specifically put it on AFK. He should have been more clear on that as I was saying "you do know I am still talking right" attempting to resolve the issue. I don't see how this is all my fault when the guy was never clear to begin with.

How am I suppost to know if he has a problem with je pointing at whale if he does not say anything? Since he wasn't saying anything I thought he was ok with it.

I brung up me showing the logs in this thread as Christen57 replies seems like he has not read any of the pigs I have shown and dismissing them.

Sound4
Posts: 921
Joined: Fri Jun 25, 2021 3:58 pm
Reputation: 8

Post #525 by Sound4 » Fri Jan 07, 2022 6:41 pm

Renji Asuka wrote:
Sound4 wrote:
Renji Asuka wrote:If you have to ask, you missed everything that was told to you. Now shut your bitch ass up.

You refuse to say what I missed. That tells me I missed nothing and you are simply saying that just to make look like the bad guy.

Considering all you do is argue in circles. I'm not going to repeat myself after already repeating myself 50 billion times (obviously an exaggeration). If you can't put in enough braincells to figure out how and why you're in the wrong despite being told how and why, that's on you.

You refuse to say what "missed". Even though you say I missed "everything". You would of said by now what I missed but you have not.

Renji Asuka
User avatar
Posts: 2680
Joined: Fri Dec 14, 2018 4:37 am
Reputation: 242

Post #526 by Renji Asuka » Fri Jan 07, 2022 6:50 pm

Sound4 wrote:
Renji Asuka wrote:
Sound4 wrote:You refuse to say what I missed. That tells me I missed nothing and you are simply saying that just to make look like the bad guy.

Considering all you do is argue in circles. I'm not going to repeat myself after already repeating myself 50 billion times (obviously an exaggeration). If you can't put in enough braincells to figure out how and why you're in the wrong despite being told how and why, that's on you.

You refuse to say what "missed". Even though you say I missed "everything". You would of said by now what I missed but you have not.

Everything that was told to you, is what you happened to miss. You still argue against the facts while having nothing to back it up. So yes, you missed everything.
Image
Showing people that I'm The King of Games since September 30, 1996.

Christen57
User avatar
Posts: 2033
Joined: Sun May 07, 2017 10:37 pm
Reputation: 182
Location: New York, United States of America

Post #527 by Christen57 » Fri Jan 07, 2022 7:07 pm

Sound4 wrote:
itsmetristan wrote:
Sound4 wrote:There is enough proof that the opponent would have simply ignored me until the judge came in. You have still not answered that it us not my fault that if he wants to ignore me. You keep ignoring these important details which is making your replies flawed and inaccurate.

If the opponent didn't know why I was pointing at whale then they could have simply said "Why are you pointing at whale?" when he didn't say any of that I thought he had no problem of me pointing at whale. He didn't say anything on him having a issue with that until after he called a judge.

You are misinterpreting and missing the point I meant I showed the logs in this thread notinthe duel.

Frankly, whether your opponent would have ignored you or not doesn't excuse your actions. You still should have attempted to continue to the best of your ability, told your opponent you were done thinking, and so on. If you had actually done this and the opponent did not continue playing, then it would have been entirely their fault. As it stands, you not only failed to state whether you were done thinking, but also you made no attempt to tell your opponent to continue as they should have.

For the second point here, they shouldn't need to ask that. Selecting a card doesn't mean you're thinking. You could be selecting it for any number of reasons not related to thinking about if you'd like to respond. Nobody is going to interpret you selecting a card as you communicating that you'd like to think about responding or not, and they are in the right to not interpret it that way. I have no idea how them pointing out that you selected whale once the judge arrived is supposed to make you more correct.

Well of course you showed the logs in the thread? I don't think anyone is doubting that, which begs the question of why you're even bringing this up in the first place? I know you've been going on about how you posted links supporting your claim (despite none of the links actually supporting your claim), so if you said earlier that you sent the logs, meaning to convey that you sent the logs here, that's an extremely misleading and pointless thing to say.

The game was stopped. I didn't think that me having ten minutes to think Is me thinking for ten minutes it doesn't make any it us like saying me having ten minutes to knock is me knocking for ten minutes especially when the judge call was not really clear at the time. When he called a judge It said his name and "has called a judge for AFK" since he specifically put it on AFK. He should have been more clear on that as I was saying "you do know I am still talking right" attempting to resolve the issue. I don't see how this is all my fault when the guy was never clear to begin with.

How am I suppost to know if he has a problem with je pointing at whale if he does not say anything? Since he wasn't saying anything I thought he was ok with it.

I brung up me showing the logs in this thread as Christen57 replies seems like he has not read any of the pigs I have shown and dismissing them.


The game was stopped once you agreed to wait for the judge without first asking for clarification why the call was made. Forget about the "thinking for 10 minutes" stuff. I don't think that matters anymore. What matters is what you could've done better prior to the judge's arrival, and you could've handled so much of this better by first stepping up to ask why the opponent called that judge so you could at least have the information needed to go about resolving the issue.

I read the logs you showed. It doesn't change the fact that you should not have agreed to wait for a judge just yet when you weren't even sure why the call was made to begin with.

The opponent didn't say anything about you pointing because they must've thought it didn't mean anything.

ankh_gaming
Posts: 6
Joined: Sat Nov 06, 2021 3:11 pm
Reputation: 3

Post #528 by ankh_gaming » Sat Jan 08, 2022 5:13 am

Sound4 wrote:
ankh_gaming wrote:
Sound4 wrote:There is enough proof that the opponent would have simply ignored me until the judge came in. You have still not answered that it us not my fault that if he wants to ignore me. You keep ignoring these important details which is making your replies flawed and inaccurate.

If the opponent didn't know why I was pointing at whale then they could have simply said "Why are you pointing at whale?" when he didn't say any of that I thought he had no problem of me pointing at whale. He didn't say anything on him having a issue with that until after he called a judge.

You are misinterpreting and missing the point I meant I showed the logs in this thread notinthe duel.


Yes there is enough proof to show the judge that he wouldv'e ignored you. But what you did was play along and stayed waiting for the judge as well. If you had told him you finished thinkng/reading and he didn't continue, he wouldv'e been in the wrong and frozen. It is his fault, but you played along, impling to the judge that you was still thinking/reading and making him freeze you for slow play. If you had also told him, "I was reading whale"he wouldve kept going wiht imp. Another thing was that you had 0 responses to edge imp. THis told the judge that you were stalling because you were in a losing position. You couldv'e told the judge i was also reading, when he asked you why were you thinking that long. And maybe you weren't thinking/reading that long, and waiting for the judge, but then you shouldv'e said that you were done and kept playing. As for the pointing issue: In dueling book, most users understand and think this is targeting or slecting a card for an effect. While he was at fault for not asking why you were pointing (kind of), you shouldve also just said that you were reading. As for the silence is consent, as i said in my first post, i now disagree. I think that in the N3sh duel, he shouldve talked and you shouldve asked as well. So I'd say you were at fault in most cases. Some of your points were valid, they were proven wrong by other things. So you did miss some points here and there.

Interesting take on the matter. Where is the proof that the judge would just ignore me? I don't see how "played along" as I had shown in this thread I was basically saying that they ere no judges online when he called the judge meaning that we would simply be wasting both of outlr time. He didn't say his is issues to me about me pointing at whale until after the judge call was made. Since he wasn't saying anything then I thought he was ok with it. Are you seriously saying that me having ten minutes to think is me thinking for ten minutes? Just because I didn't say "I am finished thinking". It is an illogical assumption which Maniez should have explained on as I didn't know where Maniez was getting me thinking for ten minutes.


What I meant was that there is enough proof to the judge that your opponent would ignore you. By played along, I meant you also waited that long for a judge to be online. I assume during that time waiting you had finished thinking/reading right? You didn't communicate that. He didn't communicate when you pointed and he misunderstood. See what I mean by communication. You thought he was okay with you pointing because he never told you anything. He and the judge thought you were thinking/reading for 10 minutes because you never said you were done. The judge also assumed this because you should keep playing while waiting for a judge. See what people here mean by Silence isn't consent. Silence in these situations caused misunderstandings and ultimately you're freezing. So I hope you understood what I meant.

Sound4
Posts: 921
Joined: Fri Jun 25, 2021 3:58 pm
Reputation: 8

Post #529 by Sound4 » Mon Jan 10, 2022 3:16 pm

Christen57 wrote:
Sound4 wrote:
itsmetristan wrote:Frankly, whether your opponent would have ignored you or not doesn't excuse your actions. You still should have attempted to continue to the best of your ability, told your opponent you were done thinking, and so on. If you had actually done this and the opponent did not continue playing, then it would have been entirely their fault. As it stands, you not only failed to state whether you were done thinking, but also you made no attempt to tell your opponent to continue as they should have.

For the second point here, they shouldn't need to ask that. Selecting a card doesn't mean you're thinking. You could be selecting it for any number of reasons not related to thinking about if you'd like to respond. Nobody is going to interpret you selecting a card as you communicating that you'd like to think about responding or not, and they are in the right to not interpret it that way. I have no idea how them pointing out that you selected whale once the judge arrived is supposed to make you more correct.

Well of course you showed the logs in the thread? I don't think anyone is doubting that, which begs the question of why you're even bringing this up in the first place? I know you've been going on about how you posted links supporting your claim (despite none of the links actually supporting your claim), so if you said earlier that you sent the logs, meaning to convey that you sent the logs here, that's an extremely misleading and pointless thing to say.

The game was stopped. I didn't think that me having ten minutes to think Is me thinking for ten minutes it doesn't make any it us like saying me having ten minutes to knock is me knocking for ten minutes especially when the judge call was not really clear at the time. When he called a judge It said his name and "has called a judge for AFK" since he specifically put it on AFK. He should have been more clear on that as I was saying "you do know I am still talking right" attempting to resolve the issue. I don't see how this is all my fault when the guy was never clear to begin with.

How am I suppost to know if he has a problem with je pointing at whale if he does not say anything? Since he wasn't saying anything I thought he was ok with it.

I brung up me showing the logs in this thread as Christen57 replies seems like he has not read any of the pigs I have shown and dismissing them.


The game was stopped once you agreed to wait for the judge without first asking for clarification why the call was made. Forget about the "thinking for 10 minutes" stuff. I don't think that matters anymore. What matters is what you could've done better prior to the judge's arrival, and you could've handled so much of this better by first stepping up to ask why the opponent called that judge so you could at least have the information needed to go about resolving the issue.

I read the logs you showed. It doesn't change the fact that you should not have agreed to wait for a judge just yet when you weren't even sure why the call was made to begin with.

The opponent didn't say anything about you pointing because they must've thought it didn't mean anything.

OK but Maniez said that I wasn't communicating at all. When I showed the logs being confused on why he called the judge especially for AFK. Maniez never once mentioned anything o what happened prior to the judge call. He specifically asked why I was thinking for ten minutes. You were the one who was bringing up this thinking for ten minutes the most.

I didn't agree instantly I was saying the current situation when he called the judge and that we would basically be wasting both of our time. You can't blame me if wants to ignore me. I would have said most of these arguments in the judge call but Maniez was bringing this ten minutes thinking which is why I wanted an appeal as Maniez wasn't explaining or showing the logs.

Sound4
Posts: 921
Joined: Fri Jun 25, 2021 3:58 pm
Reputation: 8

Post #530 by Sound4 » Mon Jan 10, 2022 3:21 pm

ankh_gaming wrote:
Sound4 wrote:
ankh_gaming wrote:
Yes there is enough proof to show the judge that he wouldv'e ignored you. But what you did was play along and stayed waiting for the judge as well. If you had told him you finished thinkng/reading and he didn't continue, he wouldv'e been in the wrong and frozen. It is his fault, but you played along, impling to the judge that you was still thinking/reading and making him freeze you for slow play. If you had also told him, "I was reading whale"he wouldve kept going wiht imp. Another thing was that you had 0 responses to edge imp. THis told the judge that you were stalling because you were in a losing position. You couldv'e told the judge i was also reading, when he asked you why were you thinking that long. And maybe you weren't thinking/reading that long, and waiting for the judge, but then you shouldv'e said that you were done and kept playing. As for the pointing issue: In dueling book, most users understand and think this is targeting or slecting a card for an effect. While he was at fault for not asking why you were pointing (kind of), you shouldve also just said that you were reading. As for the silence is consent, as i said in my first post, i now disagree. I think that in the N3sh duel, he shouldve talked and you shouldve asked as well. So I'd say you were at fault in most cases. Some of your points were valid, they were proven wrong by other things. So you did miss some points here and there.

Interesting take on the matter. Where is the proof that the judge would just ignore me? I don't see how "played along" as I had shown in this thread I was basically saying that they ere no judges online when he called the judge meaning that we would simply be wasting both of outlr time. He didn't say his is issues to me about me pointing at whale until after the judge call was made. Since he wasn't saying anything then I thought he was ok with it. Are you seriously saying that me having ten minutes to think is me thinking for ten minutes? Just because I didn't say "I am finished thinking". It is an illogical assumption which Maniez should have explained on as I didn't know where Maniez was getting me thinking for ten minutes.


What I meant was that there is enough proof to the judge that your opponent would ignore you. By played along, I meant you also waited that long for a judge to be online. I assume during that time waiting you had finished thinking/reading right? You didn't communicate that. He didn't communicate when you pointed and he misunderstood. See what I mean by communication. You thought he was okay with you pointing because he never told you anything. He and the judge thought you were thinking/reading for 10 minutes because you never said you were done. The judge also assumed this because you should keep playing while waiting for a judge. See what people here mean by Silence isn't consent. Silence in these situations caused misunderstandings and ultimately you're freezing. So I hope you understood what I meant.

If Maniez assumed all these things then why didn't he say all these thing ls in the judge call? He oly thing he said was thinking for ten minutes. You can not assume someone is thinking for ten minutes when they were several factors which is why we had to wait for ten minutes. There are to many factors to make an unrealistic assumption like that. Plus silence is consent had nothing to do with this replay.

Sound4
Posts: 921
Joined: Fri Jun 25, 2021 3:58 pm
Reputation: 8

Post #531 by Sound4 » Mon Jan 10, 2022 3:24 pm

Genexwrecker wrote:
Christen57 wrote:
itsmetristan wrote:This thread is in spam paradise. There's no reason for it to be locked.


Any way you could move the thread to serious discussion? I know it was possible to move threads around back on dueling network's forum. This clearly doesn't belong in spam paradise.

It was originally posted in serious discussions. We moved it to spam paradise since it was just a troll trolling and not an actual serious logical debate

This was never posted in serous discussions. Now you are lying at this point. When was this ever posted in serious discussions and who moved it?

greg503
User avatar
Posts: 2333
Joined: Fri Mar 31, 2017 3:43 pm
Reputation: 199
Location: Flundereeze

Post #532 by greg503 » Mon Jan 10, 2022 3:26 pm

Sound4 wrote:
Genexwrecker wrote:
Christen57 wrote:
Any way you could move the thread to serious discussion? I know it was possible to move threads around back on dueling network's forum. This clearly doesn't belong in spam paradise.

It was originally posted in serious discussions. We moved it to spam paradise since it was just a troll trolling and not an actual serious logical debate

This was never posted in serous discussions. Now you are lying at this point. When was this ever posted in serious discussions and who moved it?

IDK but I trust the person with access to the history of the thread more than you
Buy Floowandereeze

Renji Asuka
User avatar
Posts: 2680
Joined: Fri Dec 14, 2018 4:37 am
Reputation: 242

Post #533 by Renji Asuka » Mon Jan 10, 2022 6:19 pm

Sound4 wrote:
Christen57 wrote:
Sound4 wrote:The game was stopped. I didn't think that me having ten minutes to think Is me thinking for ten minutes it doesn't make any it us like saying me having ten minutes to knock is me knocking for ten minutes especially when the judge call was not really clear at the time. When he called a judge It said his name and "has called a judge for AFK" since he specifically put it on AFK. He should have been more clear on that as I was saying "you do know I am still talking right" attempting to resolve the issue. I don't see how this is all my fault when the guy was never clear to begin with.

How am I suppost to know if he has a problem with je pointing at whale if he does not say anything? Since he wasn't saying anything I thought he was ok with it.

I brung up me showing the logs in this thread as Christen57 replies seems like he has not read any of the pigs I have shown and dismissing them.


The game was stopped once you agreed to wait for the judge without first asking for clarification why the call was made. Forget about the "thinking for 10 minutes" stuff. I don't think that matters anymore. What matters is what you could've done better prior to the judge's arrival, and you could've handled so much of this better by first stepping up to ask why the opponent called that judge so you could at least have the information needed to go about resolving the issue.

I read the logs you showed. It doesn't change the fact that you should not have agreed to wait for a judge just yet when you weren't even sure why the call was made to begin with.

The opponent didn't say anything about you pointing because they must've thought it didn't mean anything.

OK but Maniez said that I wasn't communicating at all. When I showed the logs being confused on why he called the judge especially for AFK. Maniez never once mentioned anything o what happened prior to the judge call. He specifically asked why I was thinking for ten minutes. You were the one who was bringing up this thinking for ten minutes the most.

I didn't agree instantly I was saying the current situation when he called the judge and that we would basically be wasting both of our time. You can't blame me if wants to ignore me. I would have said most of these arguments in the judge call but Maniez was bringing this ten minutes thinking which is why I wanted an appeal as Maniez wasn't explaining or showing the logs.

Answer these questions nothing else.

What were you doing for 10 minutes during the call?
Why didn't you tell your opponent you were done with your thinking?
Why did you hold up the game when you had no response or play to make?
Image
Showing people that I'm The King of Games since September 30, 1996.

Christen57
User avatar
Posts: 2033
Joined: Sun May 07, 2017 10:37 pm
Reputation: 182
Location: New York, United States of America

Post #534 by Christen57 » Mon Jan 10, 2022 6:21 pm

Sound4 wrote:
Christen57 wrote:
Sound4 wrote:The game was stopped. I didn't think that me having ten minutes to think Is me thinking for ten minutes it doesn't make any it us like saying me having ten minutes to knock is me knocking for ten minutes especially when the judge call was not really clear at the time. When he called a judge It said his name and "has called a judge for AFK" since he specifically put it on AFK. He should have been more clear on that as I was saying "you do know I am still talking right" attempting to resolve the issue. I don't see how this is all my fault when the guy was never clear to begin with.

How am I suppost to know if he has a problem with je pointing at whale if he does not say anything? Since he wasn't saying anything I thought he was ok with it.

I brung up me showing the logs in this thread as Christen57 replies seems like he has not read any of the pigs I have shown and dismissing them.


The game was stopped once you agreed to wait for the judge without first asking for clarification why the call was made. Forget about the "thinking for 10 minutes" stuff. I don't think that matters anymore. What matters is what you could've done better prior to the judge's arrival, and you could've handled so much of this better by first stepping up to ask why the opponent called that judge so you could at least have the information needed to go about resolving the issue.

I read the logs you showed. It doesn't change the fact that you should not have agreed to wait for a judge just yet when you weren't even sure why the call was made to begin with.

The opponent didn't say anything about you pointing because they must've thought it didn't mean anything.

OK but Maniez said that I wasn't communicating at all.


The judge said you weren't communicating properly, not that you weren't communicating at all.

When I showed the logs being confused on why he called the judge especially for AFK. Maniez never once mentioned anything o what happened prior to the judge call. He specifically asked why I was thinking for ten minutes. You were the one who was bringing up this thinking for ten minutes the most.


If you were thinking for 10 minutes, you should've explained to the judge why. If you weren't thinking for 10 minutes, you should've explained to the judge what you were doing instead. You explained neither. That's one of the issues here, in addition to you not communicating properly prior to the judge's arrival. The judge didn't need to tell you what they "meant" by you thinking for 10 minutes. It wasn't code for anything else. Judges don't speak in code. They said what they meant and meant what they said. You should never assume under any circumstances that judges speak in code in your duels.

I didn't agree instantly I was saying the current situation when he called the judge and that we would basically be wasting both of our time.


You shouldn't have agreed at all, as you didn't yet know for certain why the call was being made.

You can't blame me if wants to ignore me.


As itsmetristan pointed out earlier, you should focus on what you could've done better, not what your opponent and the judge could've done better. Maybe it was wrong for your opponent to say "get ignored" and maybe the judge wasn't right to assume you were thinking for 10 minutes just because you could've been, but what you could've controlled was your actions and how you communicated. You didn't communicate that you were done thinking and you didn't bother to ask why exactly the call was made if you knew you weren't AFK.

If Maniez assumed all these things then why didn't he say all these thing ls in the judge call? He oly thing he said was thinking for ten minutes.


The judge assumed you knew this because it's listed in the rules:

Discontinuing play while waiting for a judge to resolve an issue not related to the immediate gamestate:
- Calling a judge because of harassment, and discontinuing gameplay in the meantime
- Calling a judge because of slow play, and refusing to continue gameplay until the judge arrives.


Whether the call was really for AFK or for slow play doesn't matter. The point is if the call was for either of these things, you must attempt to continue the duel to the best of your ability while you wait for the judge, as neither AFK nor slow play relate to the immediate gamestate. Judges assume you read the rules every time you go into rated, because, well, that's what you're supposed to do before going into rated — know the rules.

You should've never agreed to wait for the judge. Period. I don't care if you didn't agree "instantly" or not, nor does it matter if the opponent said "get ignored" or not. You shouldn't have agreed to it at all because the issue wasn't related to the immediate gamestate. You should've attempted to finish your thinking and try to get the duel to continue no matter what your opponent was saying and no matter if the agreement was "instant" or not.

Here, another user makes the same mistake as you and also ends up with a freeze: https://www.duelingbook.com/replay?id=35522857

He called a judge and forced both himself and his opponent to wait 20 minutes over something that they could've very easily resolved without getting any judge involved.

greg503 wrote:
Sound4 wrote:
Genexwrecker wrote:It was originally posted in serious discussions. We moved it to spam paradise since it was just a troll trolling and not an actual serious logical debate

This was never posted in serous discussions. Now you are lying at this point. When was this ever posted in serious discussions and who moved it?

IDK but I trust the person with access to the history of the thread more than you


If it was originally in Serious Discussion but later moved to Spam Paradise then it must've been moved very early on when this thread was started (like within the first 2 and a half hours after it was created) as I have archived this thread when I first saw it and saw it was in Spam Paradise there. https://archive.ph/5t8iD

PENMASTER
User avatar
Posts: 613
Joined: Wed May 06, 2020 9:08 pm
Reputation: 58

Post #535 by PENMASTER » Tue Jan 11, 2022 12:37 am

27 fucking pages holy shit
just messaging just in case this gets put in ace attorney
love2hate

ankh_gaming
Posts: 6
Joined: Sat Nov 06, 2021 3:11 pm
Reputation: 3

Post #536 by ankh_gaming » Tue Jan 11, 2022 12:00 pm

Sound4 wrote:
ankh_gaming wrote:
Sound4 wrote:Interesting take on the matter. Where is the proof that the judge would just ignore me? I don't see how "played along" as I had shown in this thread I was basically saying that they ere no judges online when he called the judge meaning that we would simply be wasting both of outlr time. He didn't say his is issues to me about me pointing at whale until after the judge call was made. Since he wasn't saying anything then I thought he was ok with it. Are you seriously saying that me having ten minutes to think is me thinking for ten minutes? Just because I didn't say "I am finished thinking". It is an illogical assumption which Maniez should have explained on as I didn't know where Maniez was getting me thinking for ten minutes.


What I meant was that there is enough proof to the judge that your opponent would ignore you. By played along, I meant you also waited that long for a judge to be online. I assume during that time waiting you had finished thinking/reading right? You didn't communicate that. He didn't communicate when you pointed and he misunderstood. See what I mean by communication. You thought he was okay with you pointing because he never told you anything. He and the judge thought you were thinking/reading for 10 minutes because you never said you were done. The judge also assumed this because you should keep playing while waiting for a judge. See what people here mean by Silence isn't consent. Silence in these situations caused misunderstandings and ultimately you're freezing. So I hope you understood what I meant.

If Maniez assumed all these things then why didn't he say all these thing ls in the judge call? He oly thing he said was thinking for ten minutes. You can not assume someone is thinking for ten minutes when they were several factors which is why we had to wait for ten minutes. There are to many factors to make an unrealistic assumption like that. Plus silence is consent had nothing to do with this replay.


The judge assumed youwere because you never communicated that you didn't. Again communication. You neverreplied. And it was very clear what he was saying. There was no option of anything else for the judge to assume, since you were supposed to keep playing. You never told your opponent to keep playing and you were done with what you were doing. You also waited, implying to the judge that you were stalling. Again communication. I know this isa different replay than silence is consent. But it links back to it. Silence caused you to get frozen. Silence caused misunderstanding. So this problem is solved case closed. Miscommunication and silence - bad. Communication and talking - good. It cant get simpler than that.

Sound4
Posts: 921
Joined: Fri Jun 25, 2021 3:58 pm
Reputation: 8

Post #537 by Sound4 » Wed Jan 12, 2022 5:52 pm

Renji Asuka wrote:
Sound4 wrote:
Christen57 wrote:
The game was stopped once you agreed to wait for the judge without first asking for clarification why the call was made. Forget about the "thinking for 10 minutes" stuff. I don't think that matters anymore. What matters is what you could've done better prior to the judge's arrival, and you could've handled so much of this better by first stepping up to ask why the opponent called that judge so you could at least have the information needed to go about resolving the issue.

I read the logs you showed. It doesn't change the fact that you should not have agreed to wait for a judge just yet when you weren't even sure why the call was made to begin with.

The opponent didn't say anything about you pointing because they must've thought it didn't mean anything.

OK but Maniez said that I wasn't communicating at all. When I showed the logs being confused on why he called the judge especially for AFK. Maniez never once mentioned anything o what happened prior to the judge call. He specifically asked why I was thinking for ten minutes. You were the one who was bringing up this thinking for ten minutes the most.

I didn't agree instantly I was saying the current situation when he called the judge and that we would basically be wasting both of our time. You can't blame me if wants to ignore me. I would have said most of these arguments in the judge call but Maniez was bringing this ten minutes thinking which is why I wanted an appeal as Maniez wasn't explaining or showing the logs.

Answer these questions nothing else.

What were you doing for 10 minutes during the call?
Why didn't you tell your opponent you were done with your thinking?
Why did you hold up the game when you had no response or play to make?

I was waiting for a judge as proven not thinking.
The game was stopped so another judge can come in so they would have been no point in saying "I am done thinking" especially when I didn't think that would lead to an illogical assumption in me thinking for ten minutes. I have never seen or heard of a person having ten minutes to think meaning they are thinking for ten minutes.
I was thinking/reading as I was pointing at whale plus seeing my options as I said earlier.

Sound4
Posts: 921
Joined: Fri Jun 25, 2021 3:58 pm
Reputation: 8

Post #538 by Sound4 » Wed Jan 12, 2022 6:11 pm

Christen57 wrote:
Sound4 wrote:
Christen57 wrote:
The game was stopped once you agreed to wait for the judge without first asking for clarification why the call was made. Forget about the "thinking for 10 minutes" stuff. I don't think that matters anymore. What matters is what you could've done better prior to the judge's arrival, and you could've handled so much of this better by first stepping up to ask why the opponent called that judge so you could at least have the information needed to go about resolving the issue.

I read the logs you showed. It doesn't change the fact that you should not have agreed to wait for a judge just yet when you weren't even sure why the call was made to begin with.

The opponent didn't say anything about you pointing because they must've thought it didn't mean anything.

OK but Maniez said that I wasn't communicating at all.


The judge said you weren't communicating properly, not that you weren't communicating at all.

When I showed the logs being confused on why he called the judge especially for AFK. Maniez never once mentioned anything o what happened prior to the judge call. He specifically asked why I was thinking for ten minutes. You were the one who was bringing up this thinking for ten minutes the most.


If you were thinking for 10 minutes, you should've explained to the judge why. If you weren't thinking for 10 minutes, you should've explained to the judge what you were doing instead. You explained neither. That's one of the issues here, in addition to you not communicating properly prior to the judge's arrival. The judge didn't need to tell you what they "meant" by you thinking for 10 minutes. It wasn't code for anything else. Judges don't speak in code. They said what they meant and meant what they said. You should never assume under any circumstances that judges speak in code in your duels.

I didn't agree instantly I was saying the current situation when he called the judge and that we would basically be wasting both of our time.


You shouldn't have agreed at all, as you didn't yet know for certain why the call was being made.

You can't blame me if wants to ignore me.


As itsmetristan pointed out earlier, you should focus on what you could've done better, not what your opponent and the judge could've done better. Maybe it was wrong for your opponent to say "get ignored" and maybe the judge wasn't right to assume you were thinking for 10 minutes just because you could've been, but what you could've controlled was your actions and how you communicated. You didn't communicate that you were done thinking and you didn't bother to ask why exactly the call was made if you knew you weren't AFK.

If Maniez assumed all these things then why didn't he say all these thing ls in the judge call? He oly thing he said was thinking for ten minutes.


The judge assumed you knew this because it's listed in the rules:

Discontinuing play while waiting for a judge to resolve an issue not related to the immediate gamestate:
- Calling a judge because of harassment, and discontinuing gameplay in the meantime
- Calling a judge because of slow play, and refusing to continue gameplay until the judge arrives.


Whether the call was really for AFK or for slow play doesn't matter. The point is if the call was for either of these things, you must attempt to continue the duel to the best of your ability while you wait for the judge, as neither AFK nor slow play relate to the immediate gamestate. Judges assume you read the rules every time you go into rated, because, well, that's what you're supposed to do before going into rated — know the rules.

You should've never agreed to wait for the judge. Period. I don't care if you didn't agree "instantly" or not, nor does it matter if the opponent said "get ignored" or not. You shouldn't have agreed to it at all because the issue wasn't related to the immediate gamestate. You should've attempted to finish your thinking and try to get the duel to continue no matter what your opponent was saying and no matter if the agreement was "instant" or not.

Here, another user makes the same mistake as you and also ends up with a freeze: https://www.duelingbook.com/replay?id=35522857

He called a judge and forced both himself and his opponent to wait 20 minutes over something that they could've very easily resolved without getting any judge involved.

greg503 wrote:
Sound4 wrote:This was never posted in serous discussions. Now you are lying at this point. When was this ever posted in serious discussions and who moved it?

IDK but I trust the person with access to the history of the thread more than you


If it was originally in Serious Discussion but later moved to Spam Paradise then it must've been moved very early on when this thread was started (like within the first 2 and a half hours after it was created) as I have archived this thread when I first saw it and saw it was in Spam Paradise there. https://archive.ph/5t8iD

39:44] Maniez: "The judge was called because you refused to play at all, and didn't communicate at all"
Saying I didn't communicate at all even though I said this:17:11] "Think"
It is not like I said nothing.

20:48] "So I'm not allowed to think? Is this a joke"
[21:26] "Well let's wait for 40 minutes"
A 38 second gap between the two especially when I was bit annoyed by this I didn't see any reason by thus judge call. 20:48] "So I'm not allowed to think? Is this a joke"

I don't see what your point is. It is still his fault for not informing me on what the judge call was made for. He just left me in the dark me trying to go off him calling a judge for AFK. I already know you are suppost to continue if a player is calling a judge for slow play but you are missing the point that I didn't know. An admin can confirm that before this duel I have continued games if they are calling a judge for slow play. There was information I needed in order to continue but without that information it would have not been possible.

Why would someone move this thread to spam if an admin can just lock it? And it has already been confirmed that Genexwrecker can't move a thread.

Plus the replay you provided is very questionable to say it us the "same" the guy was trying to make a big issue to nae it seem like a big one for no reason which I didn't do.
Last edited by Sound4 on Wed Jan 12, 2022 6:21 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Sound4
Posts: 921
Joined: Fri Jun 25, 2021 3:58 pm
Reputation: 8

Post #539 by Sound4 » Wed Jan 12, 2022 6:15 pm

ankh_gaming wrote:
Sound4 wrote:
ankh_gaming wrote:
What I meant was that there is enough proof to the judge that your opponent would ignore you. By played along, I meant you also waited that long for a judge to be online. I assume during that time waiting you had finished thinking/reading right? You didn't communicate that. He didn't communicate when you pointed and he misunderstood. See what I mean by communication. You thought he was okay with you pointing because he never told you anything. He and the judge thought you were thinking/reading for 10 minutes because you never said you were done. The judge also assumed this because you should keep playing while waiting for a judge. See what people here mean by Silence isn't consent. Silence in these situations caused misunderstandings and ultimately you're freezing. So I hope you understood what I meant.

If Maniez assumed all these things then why didn't he say all these thing ls in the judge call? He oly thing he said was thinking for ten minutes. You can not assume someone is thinking for ten minutes when they were several factors which is why we had to wait for ten minutes. There are to many factors to make an unrealistic assumption like that. Plus silence is consent had nothing to do with this replay.


The judge assumed youwere because you never communicated that you didn't. Again communication. You neverreplied. And it was very clear what he was saying. There was no option of anything else for the judge to assume, since you were supposed to keep playing. You never told your opponent to keep playing and you were done with what you were doing. You also waited, implying to the judge that you were stalling. Again communication. I know this isa different replay than silence is consent. But it links back to it. Silence caused you to get frozen. Silence caused misunderstanding. So this problem is solved case closed. Miscommunication and silence - bad. Communication and talking - good. It cant get simpler than that.

How is assuming I was thinking for ten minutes the only option? I know I am suppost to keep playing however I didn't know he was calling a judge for slowplay in the first place. There was information I needed and without that information it would have not been possible.

greg503
User avatar
Posts: 2333
Joined: Fri Mar 31, 2017 3:43 pm
Reputation: 199
Location: Flundereeze

Post #540 by greg503 » Wed Jan 12, 2022 6:17 pm

What's the writing (typing) version of illiterate?
Buy Floowandereeze


Return to “Spam Paradise”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 238 guests