Support » Suggestions

somehow i read all of this damn you are fucking impressive with your computer shit dude

By any chance have you ever played L.A. Noire?

You are both correct and incorrect. That being said we do try to not openly say other judges numbers.
We use numbers so people dont spam us when we sre not in judge mode.
There is a are a few reasons your method does not always work.

For some reason I'm kinda glad that the method does not guarantee 100% success.
Why does this remind me of James Bond's Skyfall? Especially on the part where you listed the judges and their number?

[quote="Lil Oldman":151tixdq]By any chance have you ever played L.A. Noire?[/quote:151tixdq]

What is that?

[quote="Genexwrecker":151tixdq]
There is a are a few reasons your method does not always work.[/quote:151tixdq]

Why is that?

[quote="Christen57":22de2hnc][quote="Lil Oldman":22de2hnc]By any chance have you ever played L.A. Noire?[/quote:22de2hnc]

What is that?
[/quote:22de2hnc]
Detective game. Really cool. Your post reminded me of a Police Investigation lol

[quote="Christen57":250u3e0a][quote="Lil Oldman":250u3e0a]By any chance have you ever played L.A. Noire?[/quote:250u3e0a]

What is that?

[quote="Genexwrecker":250u3e0a]
There is a are a few reasons your method does not always work.[/quote:250u3e0a]

Why is that?[/quote:250u3e0a]
1.) we can change the judge id
2.) not all judge accounts are associated with the user account

[quote="KTeknis":3ojofz42]For some reason I'm kinda glad that the method does not guarantee 100% success.
Why does this remind me of James Bond's Skyfall? Especially on the part where you listed the judges and their number?[/quote:3ojofz42]

Here's the thing. At the moment, I actually think my method does guarantee 100% success, just not in the way I thought it would.

Yes, it didn't work for those 2 specific judges I mentioned, but Xteven was kind enough to fill me in on why that may have been the case.

https://imgur.com/yjnJHH9


Basically, judges can receive what's called a "demotion" where they technically still exist as "judges" in the system, but their judge profiles are temporarily hidden/disabled, which is why they didn't show up when I tried to search them. While a judge gets demoted, they also lose most if not all of their judge "powers" which is probably why a demoted judge won't have their name show up in green or something like other judges do.

This could also explain why duelingbook says they don't exist when I try to search for their profiles, because they really don't exist at this time. They've been demoted, meaning they're no longer technically "judges" on duelingbook until/unless their judge status, judge profiles, green colored names, and judge powers all get restored. I can't search for judge profiles that have been removed from existence until/unless they're brought back into existence.

I guess those specific judges received their demotion because they proved to be bad judges or something, and now need to earn back their judging privileges.

So yeah, I'm confident my method works, as long as the judge is an active judge and not an inactive/demoted one. So far, my method worked on every judge I saw online, and only failed for the judges who were inactive or never really saw online.

[quote="Genexwrecker":1f7g4zop][quote="Christen57":1f7g4zop][quote="Lil Oldman":1f7g4zop]By any chance have you ever played L.A. Noire?[/quote:1f7g4zop]

What is that?

[quote="Genexwrecker":1f7g4zop]
There is a are a few reasons your method does not always work.[/quote:1f7g4zop]

Why is that?[/quote:1f7g4zop]
1.) we can change the judge id
2.) not all judge accounts are associated with the user account[/quote:1f7g4zop]

Does changing the judge id also change the forum profile number? Also is there a record for judges who change their id?

I figured some of the "judges" on this platform would be either bots or shared by maybe multiple users. You have judges named:

[list:1f7g4zop][*:1f7g4zop]DB Head Judge[/*:m:1f7g4zop]
[*:1f7g4zop]Appeal Bot[/*:m:1f7g4zop]
[*:1f7g4zop]Duelingbook Moderator[/*:m:1f7g4zop]
[*:1f7g4zop]Main Menu Moderator[/*:m:1f7g4zop][/list:u:1f7g4zop]

Also why would anyone need to spam you guys when you're not in judge mode? If they need help with a ruling they can always use this forum or something.

There are no bots.

[quote="Genexwrecker":pn7fqb9h]There are no bots.[/quote:pn7fqb9h]

May Appeal Bot smite you for your heresy!

[quote="Christen57":3nztxns1]
So I figured judges do get deleted from the platform if they're inactive for too long, but then I looked at the profile of resource judge 4225, who has been inactivate for at least 6 whole months.

https://imgur.com/ZjUkQZo


Since this judge number is 4225, I compared it to Asmodesu, the only judge whose forum profile number ended in those 4 numbers.

https://imgur.com/BRs1I6w


As you can see, this judge has been inactive for at least 6 months, yet he's still thriving as a judge, meanwhile judges who have been inactive for much shorter times got deleted off the platform.
[/quote:3nztxns1]

idk about you, but I'm not all that excited to demote the guy who's taken over 10,000 calls for inactivity.
Wouldn't be surprised if they do demote judges for not doing anything, but past activity should count for something

[quote="Christen57":2bg6qzsm][quote="KTeknis":2bg6qzsm]For some reason I'm kinda glad that the method does not guarantee 100% success.
Why does this remind me of James Bond's Skyfall? Especially on the part where you listed the judges and their number?[/quote:2bg6qzsm]

Here's the thing. At the moment, I actually think my method does guarantee 100% success, just not in the way I thought it would.

Yes, it didn't work for those 2 specific judges I mentioned, but Xteven was kind enough to fill me in on why that may have been the case.

https://imgur.com/yjnJHH9


Basically, judges can receive what's called a "demotion" where they technically still exist as "judges" in the system, but their judge profiles are temporarily hidden/disabled, which is why they didn't show up when I tried to search them. While a judge gets demoted, they also lose most if not all of their judge "powers" which is probably why a demoted judge won't have their name show up in green or something like other judges do.

This could also explain why duelingbook says they don't exist when I try to search for their profiles, because they really don't exist at this time. They've been demoted, meaning they're no longer technically "judges" on duelingbook until/unless their judge status, judge profiles, green colored names, and judge powers all get restored. I can't search for judge profiles that have been removed from existence until/unless they're brought back into existence.

I guess those specific judges received their demotion because they proved to be bad judges or something, and now need to earn back their judging privileges.

So yeah, I'm confident my method works, as long as the judge is an active judge and not an inactive/demoted one. So far, my method worked on every judge I saw online, and only failed for the judges who were inactive or never really saw online.[/quote:2bg6qzsm]

If they aren't judges, I don't see why they'd still be listed as judges anywhere. If you aren't a judge, you aren't a judge, you wouldn't want users getting confused about if you're still a judge or not. In case they come back? That should be a nonissue, they could already be made a judge without the need for that before, just do it again. Don't think they'd want to advertise a demotion list anywhere either.

Considering the other errors in the list you've posted for us so far besides the two you have mentioned, it's probably something else. You should have proofread that list first. A few of those names stand out as weird on sight. Main Menu Moderator // =726795 // #6795 seems a bit unlikely. I take a look to confirm, and no such number exists. Given the name, don't think they were demoted either.

[quote="Wek":xx7vmiry][quote="Christen57":xx7vmiry]
So I figured judges do get deleted from the platform if they're inactive for too long, but then I looked at the profile of resource judge 4225, who has been inactivate for at least 6 whole months.

https://imgur.com/ZjUkQZo


Since this judge number is 4225, I compared it to Asmodesu, the only judge whose forum profile number ended in those 4 numbers.

https://imgur.com/BRs1I6w


As you can see, this judge has been inactive for at least 6 months, yet he's still thriving as a judge, meanwhile judges who have been inactive for much shorter times got deleted off the platform.
[/quote:xx7vmiry]

idk about you, but I'm not all that excited to demote the guy who's taken over 10,000 calls for inactivity.
Wouldn't be surprised if they do demote judges for not doing anything, but past activity should count for something[/quote:xx7vmiry]
we have fired judges with 12000 calls taken so no nothing is out of bounds.
That judge in particular has special reasons they are completely inactive and still on the roster which I cannot disclose here. but generally inactivity = dimote.

[quote="Genexwrecker":30k1id6k][quote="Wek":30k1id6k][quote="Christen57":30k1id6k]
So I figured judges do get deleted from the platform if they're inactive for too long, but then I looked at the profile of resource judge 4225, who has been inactivate for at least 6 whole months.

https://imgur.com/ZjUkQZo


Since this judge number is 4225, I compared it to Asmodesu, the only judge whose forum profile number ended in those 4 numbers.

https://imgur.com/BRs1I6w


As you can see, this judge has been inactive for at least 6 months, yet he's still thriving as a judge, meanwhile judges who have been inactive for much shorter times got deleted off the platform.
[/quote:30k1id6k]

idk about you, but I'm not all that excited to demote the guy who's taken over 10,000 calls for inactivity.
Wouldn't be surprised if they do demote judges for not doing anything, but past activity should count for something[/quote:30k1id6k]
we have fired judges with 12000 calls taken so no nothing is out of bounds.[/quote:30k1id6k]

For inactivity? The guy's been off DB for over 6 months and still a judge. So unless your inactivity radar is even slower than that, probably not.

Like I said their situation is special they have an exemption.

[quote="Genexwrecker":1an4zu7l]Like I said their situation is special they have an exemption.[/quote:1an4zu7l]

You must have edited after I quoted and replied. That part wasn't in there before.

[quote="Wek":2r6n8uyz][quote="Christen57":2r6n8uyz][quote="KTeknis":2r6n8uyz]For some reason I'm kinda glad that the method does not guarantee 100% success.
Why does this remind me of James Bond's Skyfall? Especially on the part where you listed the judges and their number?[/quote:2r6n8uyz]

Here's the thing. At the moment, I actually think my method does guarantee 100% success, just not in the way I thought it would.

Yes, it didn't work for those 2 specific judges I mentioned, but Xteven was kind enough to fill me in on why that may have been the case.

https://imgur.com/yjnJHH9


Basically, judges can receive what's called a "demotion" where they technically still exist as "judges" in the system, but their judge profiles are temporarily hidden/disabled, which is why they didn't show up when I tried to search them. While a judge gets demoted, they also lose most if not all of their judge "powers" which is probably why a demoted judge won't have their name show up in green or something like other judges do.

This could also explain why duelingbook says they don't exist when I try to search for their profiles, because they really don't exist at this time. They've been demoted, meaning they're no longer technically "judges" on duelingbook until/unless their judge status, judge profiles, green colored names, and judge powers all get restored. I can't search for judge profiles that have been removed from existence until/unless they're brought back into existence.

I guess those specific judges received their demotion because they proved to be bad judges or something, and now need to earn back their judging privileges.

So yeah, I'm confident my method works, as long as the judge is an active judge and not an inactive/demoted one. So far, my method worked on every judge I saw online, and only failed for the judges who were inactive or never really saw online.[/quote:2r6n8uyz]

If they aren't judges, I don't see why they'd still be listed as judges anywhere. If you aren't a judge, you aren't a judge, you wouldn't want users getting confused about if you're still a judge or not. In case they come back? That should be a nonissue, they could already be made a judge without the need for that before, just do it again. Don't think they'd want to advertise a demotion list anywhere either.

Considering the other errors in the list you've posted for us so far besides the two you have mentioned, it's probably something else. You should have proofread that list first. A few of those names stand out as weird on sight. Main Menu Moderator // =726795 // #6795 seems a bit unlikely. I take a look to confirm, and no such number exists. Given the name, don't think they were demoted either.[/quote:2r6n8uyz]

That's because Main Menu Moderator isn't actually a resource judge. They're just a regular user like the rest of us who happened to be granted judge powers/privileges normally reserved for actual resource judges.

Look at the login screen where it says you need at least 100 experience to become a resource judge by taking the judge exam.



Now notice how Main Menu Moderator lacks that required amount of experience to be a resource judge.



The same thing goes for Appeal Bot and Duelingbook Moderator.





So obviously these users aren't going to have resource judge profiles, because they haven't become actual resources judges by passing the exam like everyone else and getting the required experience. They were simply granted judge powers/privileges which they use for purposes unrelated to resource judging. There not actual resources judges so they don't do what resource judges normally do such as answering judge calls. Their regular profiles themselves, Main Menu Moderator, Appeal Bot, and Duelingbook Moderator, are the only profiles they need. They don't need any additional profiles saying Resource Judge followed by a number because that isn't their role.

The user DB Head Judge also isn't a resource judge either since they didn't pass the resource judge exam and get the required experience. That user was also just given admin privileges, also on duelingbook, trying to visit their profile instead takes you to the profile of Admin Recruiting.



This means their actual job isn't to be a judge but rather to recruit them, so they too wouldn't have or need a resource judge profile.

All these 4 users are listed as judges in the system, but only because they were granted special judge-like roles, not because they're actually resource judges who passed the exam like everyone else and got the required experience and answer judge calls.

[quote="Wek":2r6n8uyz][quote="Genexwrecker":2r6n8uyz][quote="Wek":2r6n8uyz]

idk about you, but I'm not all that excited to demote the guy who's taken over 10,000 calls for inactivity.
Wouldn't be surprised if they do demote judges for not doing anything, but past activity should count for something[/quote:2r6n8uyz]
we have fired judges with 12000 calls taken so no nothing is out of bounds.[/quote:2r6n8uyz]

For inactivity? The guy's been off DB for over 6 months and still a judge. So unless your inactivity radar is even slower than that, probably not.[/quote:2r6n8uyz]

[quote="Genexwrecker":2r6n8uyz]Like I said their situation is special they have an exemption.[/quote:2r6n8uyz]

If I had to take a guess as to what this "situation" was I would say it's something similar to paid leave, where an employee is allowed to stop working for a certain amount of months so they can do something really important like take care of a family member without having to worry about getting fired from their job. I know someone who recently gave birth to a baby girl who said she's going to have to stop working for a few months so she can take care of her, and she gets to do that without fear of being fired from her job for inactivity.

Maybe this judge has a funeral to attend, a newborn/elder to care for, or some other very important thing he needs to do maybe in the government or something, that requires him to not be active on duelingbook.

Those 4 are senior resource judge accounts. I was also made resource judge without the exp or exam.

[quote="Christen57":2ml9avti]
That's because Main Menu Moderator isn't actually a resource judge. They're just a regular user like the rest of us who happened to be granted judge powers/privileges normally reserved for actual resource judges.

Look at the login screen where it says you need at least 100 experience to become a resource judge by taking the judge exam.



Now notice how Main Menu Moderator lacks that required amount of experience to be a resource judge.



The same thing goes for Appeal Bot and Duelingbook Moderator.





So obviously these users aren't going to have resource judge profiles, because they haven't become actual resources judges by passing the exam like everyone else and getting the required experience. They were simply granted judge powers/privileges which they use for purposes unrelated to resource judging. There not actual resources judges so they don't do what resource judges normally do such as answering judge calls. Their regular profiles themselves, Main Menu Moderator, Appeal Bot, and Duelingbook Moderator, are the only profiles they need. They don't need any additional profiles saying Resource Judge followed by a number because that isn't their role.

The user DB Head Judge also isn't a resource judge either since they didn't pass the resource judge exam and get the required experience. That user was also just given admin privileges, also on duelingbook, trying to visit their profile instead takes you to the profile of Admin Recruiting.



This means their actual job isn't to be a judge but rather to recruit them, so they too wouldn't have or need a resource judge profile.

All these 4 users are listed as judges in the system, but only because they were granted special judge-like roles, not because they're actually resource judges who passed the exam like everyone else and got the required experience and answer judge calls.[/quote:2ml9avti]

That's 4 more profiles that don't fit your judge number role and we haven't even finished the list of names that don't work. Add in the head judges not listed and note accounts like Appeal Bot are almost certainly involved in calls, since I'm going to take the wild guess Appeal Bot takes appeals

Doesn't look like a matter of 1-2 exceptions, just a different rule.

[quote="Wek":2crs91m7][quote="Christen57":2crs91m7]
That's because Main Menu Moderator isn't actually a resource judge. They're just a regular user like the rest of us who happened to be granted judge powers/privileges normally reserved for actual resource judges.

Look at the login screen where it says you need at least 100 experience to become a resource judge by taking the judge exam.



Now notice how Main Menu Moderator lacks that required amount of experience to be a resource judge.



The same thing goes for Appeal Bot and Duelingbook Moderator.





So obviously these users aren't going to have resource judge profiles, because they haven't become actual resources judges by passing the exam like everyone else and getting the required experience. They were simply granted judge powers/privileges which they use for purposes unrelated to resource judging. There not actual resources judges so they don't do what resource judges normally do such as answering judge calls. Their regular profiles themselves, Main Menu Moderator, Appeal Bot, and Duelingbook Moderator, are the only profiles they need. They don't need any additional profiles saying Resource Judge followed by a number because that isn't their role.

The user DB Head Judge also isn't a resource judge either since they didn't pass the resource judge exam and get the required experience. That user was also just given admin privileges, also on duelingbook, trying to visit their profile instead takes you to the profile of Admin Recruiting.



This means their actual job isn't to be a judge but rather to recruit them, so they too wouldn't have or need a resource judge profile.

All these 4 users are listed as judges in the system, but only because they were granted special judge-like roles, not because they're actually resource judges who passed the exam like everyone else and got the required experience and answer judge calls.[/quote:2crs91m7]

That's 4 more profiles that don't fit your judge number role and we haven't even finished the list of names that don't work. Add in the head judges not listed and note accounts like Appeal Bot are almost certainly involved in calls, since I'm going to take the wild guess Appeal Bot takes appeals

Doesn't look like a matter of 1-2 exceptions, just a different rule.[/quote:2crs91m7]

Is there a single replay in rated where any one of those 4 users answered a judge call?

Also, yes, this method isn't supposed to work for Head Administrators because Head Administrators don't have green names, or any accounts with green names, consisting of Resource Judge followed by 4 numbers. Head Administrators have yellow names on duelingbook, and they're already identifiable since their usernames are visible while they are online or answering calls. Any time a Head Administrator such as Lantern is online, we all can see that he's Lantern. He doesn't hide behind "Resource Judge #" labels and numbers while online or answering calls. There is no need for us to try and figure out what his "real account" is or what his forum profile number matches since his name and status are already visible for us to see at all times. This method isn't needed to identify Head Administrators online, only the regular active Resource Judges, the ones with the green names, hashtags, and numbers, who answer calls.

[quote="Christen57":2ntisddc][quote="Wek":2ntisddc][quote="Christen57":2ntisddc]
That's because Main Menu Moderator isn't actually a resource judge. They're just a regular user like the rest of us who happened to be granted judge powers/privileges normally reserved for actual resource judges.

Look at the login screen where it says you need at least 100 experience to become a resource judge by taking the judge exam.



Now notice how Main Menu Moderator lacks that required amount of experience to be a resource judge.



The same thing goes for Appeal Bot and Duelingbook Moderator.





So obviously these users aren't going to have resource judge profiles, because they haven't become actual resources judges by passing the exam like everyone else and getting the required experience. They were simply granted judge powers/privileges which they use for purposes unrelated to resource judging. There not actual resources judges so they don't do what resource judges normally do such as answering judge calls. Their regular profiles themselves, Main Menu Moderator, Appeal Bot, and Duelingbook Moderator, are the only profiles they need. They don't need any additional profiles saying Resource Judge followed by a number because that isn't their role.

The user DB Head Judge also isn't a resource judge either since they didn't pass the resource judge exam and get the required experience. That user was also just given admin privileges, also on duelingbook, trying to visit their profile instead takes you to the profile of Admin Recruiting.



This means their actual job isn't to be a judge but rather to recruit them, so they too wouldn't have or need a resource judge profile.

All these 4 users are listed as judges in the system, but only because they were granted special judge-like roles, not because they're actually resource judges who passed the exam like everyone else and got the required experience and answer judge calls.[/quote:2ntisddc]

That's 4 more profiles that don't fit your judge number role and we haven't even finished the list of names that don't work. Add in the head judges not listed and note accounts like Appeal Bot are almost certainly involved in calls, since I'm going to take the wild guess Appeal Bot takes appeals

Doesn't look like a matter of 1-2 exceptions, just a different rule.[/quote:2ntisddc]

Is there a single replay in rated where any one of those 4 users answered a judge call?

Also, yes, this method isn't supposed to work for Head Administrators because Head Administrators don't have green names, or any accounts with green names, consisting of Resource Judge followed by 4 numbers. Head Administrators have yellow names on duelingbook, and they're already identifiable since their usernames are visible while they are online or answering calls. Any time a Head Administrator such as Lantern is online, we all can see that he's Lantern. He doesn't hide behind "Resource Judge #" labels and numbers while online or answering calls. There is no need for us to try and figure out what his "real account" is or what his forum profile number matches since his name and status are already visible for us to see at all times. This method isn't needed to identify Head Administrators online, only the regular active Resource Judges, the ones with the green names, hashtags, and numbers, who answer calls.[/quote:2ntisddc]

If your system isn't counting the likes of head judges because they lack Resource Judge Names, why do you assume Ants or $waggot are numbered greens to begin with?

[quote="Wek":2flamt6k][quote="Christen57":2flamt6k][quote="Wek":2flamt6k]

That's 4 more profiles that don't fit your judge number role and we haven't even finished the list of names that don't work. Add in the head judges not listed and note accounts like Appeal Bot are almost certainly involved in calls, since I'm going to take the wild guess Appeal Bot takes appeals

Doesn't look like a matter of 1-2 exceptions, just a different rule.[/quote:2flamt6k]

Is there a single replay in rated where any one of those 4 users answered a judge call?

Also, yes, this method isn't supposed to work for Head Administrators because Head Administrators don't have green names, or any accounts with green names, consisting of Resource Judge followed by 4 numbers. Head Administrators have yellow names on duelingbook, and they're already identifiable since their usernames are visible while they are online or answering calls. Any time a Head Administrator such as Lantern is online, we all can see that he's Lantern. He doesn't hide behind "Resource Judge #" labels and numbers while online or answering calls. There is no need for us to try and figure out what his "real account" is or what his forum profile number matches since his name and status are already visible for us to see at all times. This method isn't needed to identify Head Administrators online, only the regular active Resource Judges, the ones with the green names, hashtags, and numbers, who answer calls.[/quote:2flamt6k]

If your system isn't counting the likes of head judges because they lack Resource Judge Names, why do you assume Ants or $waggot are numbered greens to begin with?[/quote:2flamt6k]

Because those 2 are listed as judges in the system like all the other judges where DistantCoder and whatnot are listed, so those 2 probably either are just inactive or have been demoted. Also, Ants In The Pants is a senior resource judge, meaning he would have a gray Resource Judge name instead of a green one, just like how the Head Administrators would have a yellow name online instead of a green one.

you dont even have half the judge list buddy

[quote="Christen57":18uf5jtw][quote="Wek":18uf5jtw][quote="Christen57":18uf5jtw]

Is there a single replay in rated where any one of those 4 users answered a judge call?

Also, yes, this method isn't supposed to work for Head Administrators because Head Administrators don't have green names, or any accounts with green names, consisting of Resource Judge followed by 4 numbers. Head Administrators have yellow names on duelingbook, and they're already identifiable since their usernames are visible while they are online or answering calls. Any time a Head Administrator such as Lantern is online, we all can see that he's Lantern. He doesn't hide behind "Resource Judge #" labels and numbers while online or answering calls. There is no need for us to try and figure out what his "real account" is or what his forum profile number matches since his name and status are already visible for us to see at all times. This method isn't needed to identify Head Administrators online, only the regular active Resource Judges, the ones with the green names, hashtags, and numbers, who answer calls.[/quote:18uf5jtw]

If your system isn't counting the likes of head judges because they lack Resource Judge Names, why do you assume Ants or $waggot are numbered greens to begin with?[/quote:18uf5jtw]

Because those 2 are listed as judges in the system like all the other judges where DistantCoder and whatnot are listed, so those 2 probably either are just inactive or have been demoted. Also, Ants In The Pants is a senior resource judge, meaning he would have a gray Resource Judge name instead of a green one, just like how the Head Administrators would have a yellow name online instead of a green one.[/quote:18uf5jtw]

Neither. There's no way they would be listed as judges if demoted and being inactive would not change that.
They're probably just judges that don't use a number.

[quote="Genexwrecker":otg1atyg]you dont even have half the judge list buddy[/quote:otg1atyg]

The judge list is right here, no? https://forum.duelingbook.com/memberlist.php?mode=team

[quote="Wek":otg1atyg][quote="Christen57":otg1atyg][quote="Wek":otg1atyg]

If your system isn't counting the likes of head judges because they lack Resource Judge Names, why do you assume Ants or $waggot are numbered greens to begin with?[/quote:otg1atyg]

Because those 2 are listed as judges in the system like all the other judges where DistantCoder and whatnot are listed, so those 2 probably either are just inactive or have been demoted. Also, Ants In The Pants is a senior resource judge, meaning he would have a gray Resource Judge name instead of a green one, just like how the Head Administrators would have a yellow name online instead of a green one.[/quote:otg1atyg]

Neither. There's no way they would be listed as judges if demoted and being inactive would not change that.
They're probably just judges that don't use a number.[/quote:otg1atyg]

I'm pretty sure they do use a number while on duty answering calls so they're recognized as judges, and the ones that don't are either seniors or head administrators, unless you have a replay of any of them answering a judge call without the Resource Judge label?

lol no

[quote="Christen57":3vbarcqy][quote="Wek":3vbarcqy][quote="Christen57":3vbarcqy]

Because those 2 are listed as judges in the system like all the other judges where DistantCoder and whatnot are listed, so those 2 probably either are just inactive or have been demoted. Also, Ants In The Pants is a senior resource judge, meaning he would have a gray Resource Judge name instead of a green one, just like how the Head Administrators would have a yellow name online instead of a green one.[/quote:3vbarcqy]

Neither. There's no way they would be listed as judges if demoted and being inactive would not change that.
They're probably just judges that don't use a number.[/quote:3vbarcqy]

I'm pretty sure they do use a number while on duty answering calls so they're recognized as judges, and the ones that don't are either seniors or head administrators, unless you have a replay of any of them answering a judge call without the Resource Judge label?[/quote:3vbarcqy]

You just said Ants was a senior, so that right there is a reason for them not having a number. $waggot is registered in 2015, DN wasn't even down yet. That's no normal user.

somebody noticed finally

[quote="Wek":3cgvro4g][quote="Christen57":3cgvro4g][quote="Wek":3cgvro4g]

Neither. There's no way they would be listed as judges if demoted and being inactive would not change that.
They're probably just judges that don't use a number.[/quote:3cgvro4g]

I'm pretty sure they do use a number while on duty answering calls so they're recognized as judges, and the ones that don't are either seniors or head administrators, unless you have a replay of any of them answering a judge call without the Resource Judge label?[/quote:3cgvro4g]

You just said Ants was a senior, so that right there is a reason for them not having a number. $waggot is registered in 2015, DN wasn't even down yet. That's no normal user.[/quote:3cgvro4g]

I still think Ants In The Pants does have a Resource Judge profile but is simply inactive or may have just been demoted or something. Neither him nor $waggot was online in a long time or answered any calls in a long time, and Genexwrecker pointed out that inactive judges tend to get demoted where their Resource Judge profiles/numbers can no longer be searched.

[quote="Genexwrecker":3w1swk94]lol no[/quote:3w1swk94]

So are there any Resources Judges not on that list?

[quote="Genexwrecker":3ss4bhg6]somebody noticed finally[/quote:3ss4bhg6]

[quote="Christen57":3ss4bhg6][quote="Wek":3ss4bhg6][quote="Christen57":3ss4bhg6]

I'm pretty sure they do use a number while on duty answering calls so they're recognized as judges, and the ones that don't are either seniors or head administrators, unless you have a replay of any of them answering a judge call without the Resource Judge label?[/quote:3ss4bhg6]

You just said Ants was a senior, so that right there is a reason for them not having a number. $waggot is registered in 2015, DN wasn't even down yet. That's no normal user.[/quote:3ss4bhg6]

I still think Ants In The Pants does have a Resource Judge profile but is simply inactive or may have just been demoted or something. Neither him nor $waggot was online in a long time or answered any calls in a long time, and Genexwrecker pointed out that inactive judges tend to get demoted where their Resource Judge profiles/numbers can no longer be searched.[/quote:3ss4bhg6]

Did y'all just delete judge IDs overnight?



So much for "using numbers so people dont spam when we sre not in judge mode."

[quote="Genexwrecker":3ss4bhg6]You are both correct and incorrect. That being said we do try to not openly say other judges numbers.
We use numbers so people dont spam us when we sre not in judge mode. [/quote:3ss4bhg6]

Yeah, no point in trying to identify judges by their numbers anymore since all judges use their regular names now.

Yea o know i was laughing while replying to this topic as i already knew we were changing things

[quote="Christen57":3f81kk8i][quote="Wek":3f81kk8i][quote="Christen57":3f81kk8i]

I'm pretty sure they do use a number while on duty answering calls so they're recognized as judges, and the ones that don't are either seniors or head administrators, unless you have a replay of any of them answering a judge call without the Resource Judge label?[/quote:3f81kk8i]

You just said Ants was a senior, so that right there is a reason for them not having a number. $waggot is registered in 2015, DN wasn't even down yet. That's no normal user.[/quote:3f81kk8i]

I still think Ants In The Pants does have a Resource Judge profile but is simply inactive or may have just been demoted or something. Neither him nor $waggot was online in a long time or answered any calls in a long time, and Genexwrecker pointed out that inactive judges tend to get demoted where their Resource Judge profiles/numbers can no longer be searched.[/quote:3f81kk8i]

If they were demoted, they wouldn't be a judge. Forget about finding a Resource Judge title, you wouldn't even be able to look them up as a judge, because they wouldn't be listed as one. Ants is literally a senior, which is the opposite of demotion, that ranks them higher than the greens that generally had Resource Judge names to begin with. And $waggot is probably Xteven, who else could be registered by that date? So them being demoted is laughable.

[quote="Wek":1y7sr3en][quote="Christen57":1y7sr3en][quote="Wek":1y7sr3en]

You just said Ants was a senior, so that right there is a reason for them not having a number. $waggot is registered in 2015, DN wasn't even down yet. That's no normal user.[/quote:1y7sr3en]

I still think Ants In The Pants does have a Resource Judge profile but is simply inactive or may have just been demoted or something. Neither him nor $waggot was online in a long time or answered any calls in a long time, and Genexwrecker pointed out that inactive judges tend to get demoted where their Resource Judge profiles/numbers can no longer be searched.[/quote:1y7sr3en]

If they were demoted, they wouldn't be a judge. Forget about finding a Resource Judge title, you wouldn't even be able to look them up as a judge, because they wouldn't be listed as one. Ants is literally a senior, which is the opposite of demotion, that ranks them higher than the greens that generally had Resource Judge names to begin with. And $waggot is probably Xteven, who else could be registered by that date? So them being demoted is laughable.[/quote:1y7sr3en]

The Head Administrator known as Klubba also shows as being registered in 2015, along with $waggot, XtevensChannel, and TheYugiohSlut, who each also show as being registered that year. Those are 4 accounts. The users Ryan Adams, Blane Peterson, and Parker Richards show as being registered in January 2016, just months before Dueling Network went down and Duelingbook rose up to take it's place. Those are 3 more accounts that registered before duelingbook itself existed.

I highly doubt that Xteven has or uses 7 different accounts. Those have to be different people, or at least the people who helped Xteven first build duelingbook.

[quote="Christen57":2eiwezpg][quote="Wek":2eiwezpg][quote="Christen57":2eiwezpg]

I still think Ants In The Pants does have a Resource Judge profile but is simply inactive or may have just been demoted or something. Neither him nor $waggot was online in a long time or answered any calls in a long time, and Genexwrecker pointed out that inactive judges tend to get demoted where their Resource Judge profiles/numbers can no longer be searched.[/quote:2eiwezpg]

If they were demoted, they wouldn't be a judge. Forget about finding a Resource Judge title, you wouldn't even be able to look them up as a judge, because they wouldn't be listed as one. Ants is literally a senior, which is the opposite of demotion, that ranks them higher than the greens that generally had Resource Judge names to begin with. And $waggot is probably Xteven, who else could be registered by that date? So them being demoted is laughable.[/quote:2eiwezpg]

The Head Administrator known as Klubba also shows as being registered in 2015, along with $waggot, XtevensChannel, and TheYugiohSlut, who each also show as being registered that year. Those are 4 accounts. The users Ryan Adams, Blane Peterson, and Parker Richards show as being registered in January 2016, just months before Dueling Network went down and Duelingbook rose up to take it's place. Those are 3 more accounts that registered before duelingbook itself existed.

I highly doubt that Xteven has or uses 7 different accounts. Those have to be different people, or at least the people who helped Xteven first build duelingbook.[/quote:2eiwezpg]

Even if they weren't all Xteven, these still don't sound like viable demotion targets if they were important enough to be a part of Duelingbook being created. If they're listed as a judge, they're a judge. I could see them choosing not to list judges to the public, but not the other way around. If a user isn't a judge, there's no way they'd intentionally still be listed as one.