Off Topic » Ask Me Anything

Hello,

"Your abuse report has been reviewed. After reviewing the evidence, we have dealt with the matter appropriately. Thank you for your report."

Regards.[/quote]
I made a report on N3sh of the poor decision he made in a duel. SmarmhostUser replied this to me. My report was reviewed yet got no information on whether the decision was right or wrong and why. How was the matter dealt appropriately? Nothing changed.

[quote="Sound4":1w3gotmx]Hello,

"Your abuse report has been reviewed. After reviewing the evidence, we have dealt with the matter appropriately. Thank you for your report."

Regards.
I made a report on N3sh of the poor decision he made in a duel. SmarmhostUser replied this to me. My report was reviewed yet got no information on whether the decision was right or wrong and why. How was the matter dealt appropriately? Nothing changed.[/quote:1w3gotmx]
Simple, its not your concern on what action was taken or why it was taken. You reported, they dealt with him.

[quote="Renji Asuka":2wq2wz07][quote="Sound4":2wq2wz07]Hello,

"Your abuse report has been reviewed. After reviewing the evidence, we have dealt with the matter appropriately. Thank you for your report."

Regards.
I made a report on N3sh of the poor decision he made in a duel. SmarmhostUser replied this to me. My report was reviewed yet got no information on whether the decision was right or wrong and why. How was the matter dealt appropriately? Nothing changed.[/quote:2wq2wz07]
Simple, its not your concern on what action was taken or why it was taken. You reported, they dealt with him.[/quote:2wq2wz07]
I'm the one who made the report if I was wrong they could have simply explained it or if I was right they could have said I was right. I don't see any reason why they didn't give any further explanation on the action that was taken. I'm the who made the report after all.

[quote="Sound4":2nvemfkh][quote="Renji Asuka":2nvemfkh][quote="Sound4":2nvemfkh]Hello,

"Your abuse report has been reviewed. After reviewing the evidence, we have dealt with the matter appropriately. Thank you for your report."

Regards.
I made a report on N3sh of the poor decision he made in a duel. SmarmhostUser replied this to me. My report was reviewed yet got no information on whether the decision was right or wrong and why. How was the matter dealt appropriately? Nothing changed.[/quote:2nvemfkh]
Simple, its not your concern on what action was taken or why it was taken. You reported, they dealt with him.[/quote:2nvemfkh]
I'm the one who made the report if I was wrong they could have simply explained it or if I was right they could have said I was right. I don't see any reason why they didn't give any further explanation on the action that was taken. I'm the who made the report after all.[/quote:2nvemfkh]
And why would they give you further information? Your only job is to report players for misconduct if you see it. If action wasn't taken, you would be wrong. They don't have to explain anything to you regarding punishment of other players. That is between the admins and the player that was reported, not you.

Can you share the replay so we can see what happened?

We very rarely actually disclose information when sending the reply of a report.
We would just send a message like that saying
X report has been handled and dealt with thank you and have a nice
day

The only time where we would actually send a message is if we knew you needed to get some information going forward for X thing or policy.

[quote="Genexwrecker":117stc6u]We very rarely actually disclose information when sending the reply of a report.
We would just send a message like that saying
X report has been handled and dealt with thank you and have a nice
day

The only time where we would actually send a message is if we knew you needed to get some information going forward for X thing or policy.[/quote:117stc6u]
I don't know what happened though. SwarmhostUser said they dealt with appropriately. I did not see anything change. What is the point of sending reports if you don't even know what happened? I wasn't even told if I was right or wrong.

[quote="Renji Asuka":3p29un24][quote="Sound4":3p29un24][quote="Renji Asuka":3p29un24]
Simple, its not your concern on what action was taken or why it was taken. You reported, they dealt with him.[/quote:3p29un24]
I'm the one who made the report if I was wrong they could have simply explained it or if I was right they could have said I was right. I don't see any reason why they didn't give any further explanation on the action that was taken. I'm the who made the report after all.[/quote:3p29un24]
And why would they give you further information? Your only job is to report players for misconduct if you see it. If action wasn't taken, you would be wrong. They don't have to explain anything to you regarding punishment of other players. That is between the admins and the player that was reported, not you.[/quote:3p29un24]
They should give me further information as I'm the one who made the report. They did not explain anything. If they don't want to tell me what action was taken. They could have at least tell me if I was right or wrong and why.

[quote="Genexwrecker":11u4xwwk]We very rarely actually disclose information when sending the reply of a report.
We would just send a message like that saying
X report has been handled and dealt with thank you and have a nice
day

The only time where we would actually send a message is if we knew you needed to get some information going forward for X thing or policy.[/quote:11u4xwwk]
Why do you rarely never disclose information of a report? Makes no sense you shouldn't.

How we deal with a user or judge isnt another persons concern.

[quote="Genexwrecker":x6lf48gw]How we deal with a user or judge isnt another persons concern.[/quote:x6lf48gw]
Then how are we suppost to know whether you are being honest or not?

[quote="Sound4":1zu5ghra][quote="Genexwrecker":1zu5ghra]How we deal with a user or judge isnt another persons concern.[/quote:1zu5ghra]
Then how are we suppost to know whether you are being honest or not?[/quote:1zu5ghra]
Because we run the website?

[quote="Sound4":3qez16qt][quote="Genexwrecker":3qez16qt]How we deal with a user or judge isnt another persons concern.[/quote:3qez16qt]
Then how are we suppost to know whether you are being honest or not?[/quote:3qez16qt]
If you think they aren't, then leave because you don't trust them, simple

[quote="Genexwrecker":35o2re54][quote="Sound4":35o2re54][quote="Genexwrecker":35o2re54]How we deal with a user or judge isnt another persons concern.[/quote:35o2re54]
Then how are we suppost to know whether you are being honest or not?[/quote:35o2re54]
Because we run the website?[/quote:35o2re54]
Yes you staff run the website. However not all websites are trustworthy. SwarmhostUser gave no other information if I was right or wrong. Running a website does not guarantee you are being honest at times you may even stretch the truth.

[quote="greg503":20nb1ybb][quote="Sound4":20nb1ybb][quote="Genexwrecker":20nb1ybb]How we deal with a user or judge isnt another persons concern.[/quote:20nb1ybb]
Then how are we suppost to know whether you are being honest or not?[/quote:20nb1ybb]
If you think they aren't, then leave because you don't trust them, simple[/quote:20nb1ybb]
Who said I don't trust them? I just want some more information to clarify some things.

We arent going to invade somebody’s privacy to make a person feel better about their report. Your report was handled appropriately.

[quote="Sound4":2ate96l8][quote="greg503":2ate96l8][quote="Sound4":2ate96l8]
Then how are we suppost to know whether you are being honest or not?[/quote:2ate96l8]
If you think they aren't, then leave because you don't trust them, simple[/quote:2ate96l8]
Who said I don't trust them? I just want some more information to clarify some things.[/quote:2ate96l8]
When handling reports it's either NAR, Warnings are given or someone is frozen (give or take). Of course, this information is not given to the user who made the abuse report but we let them know it's been handled appropriately. You can somewhat tell what action was taken if you check their account and don't see them frozen. We won't tell you what was explicitly done but you can rest assured it's been handled via our rules.

[quote="Sound4":2fswfjs2][quote="Genexwrecker":2fswfjs2]We very rarely actually disclose information when sending the reply of a report.
We would just send a message like that saying
X report has been handled and dealt with thank you and have a nice
day

The only time where we would actually send a message is if we knew you needed to get some information going forward for X thing or policy.[/quote:2fswfjs2]
Why do you rarely never disclose information of a report? Makes no sense you shouldn't.[/quote:2fswfjs2]

Can't you share the replay of this user you reported so we can see what happened?

Sound4 is free to post the replay they reported.

[quote="Christen57":299zjdt0][quote="Sound4":299zjdt0][quote="Genexwrecker":299zjdt0]We very rarely actually disclose information when sending the reply of a report.
We would just send a message like that saying
X report has been handled and dealt with thank you and have a nice
day

The only time where we would actually send a message is if we knew you needed to get some information going forward for X thing or policy.[/quote:299zjdt0]
Why do you rarely never disclose information of a report? Makes no sense you shouldn't.[/quote:299zjdt0]

Can't you share the replay of this user you reported so we can see what happened?[/quote:299zjdt0]
https://www.duelingbook.com/replay?id=815175-30668040 here

[quote="Sound4":1fodgn6d][quote="Christen57":1fodgn6d][quote="Sound4":1fodgn6d]
Why do you rarely never disclose information of a report? Makes no sense you shouldn't.[/quote:1fodgn6d]

Can't you share the replay of this user you reported so we can see what happened?[/quote:1fodgn6d]
https://www.duelingbook.com/replay?id=815175-30668040 here[/quote:1fodgn6d]

To answer your original question, no. The judges are not obligated to tell you the outcome of a report. It's not their job to make you feel special. Now it's time for the tangent.

I'm gonna be honest, Sound4, your behavior in this replay is absolutely deplorable. Not only do you have a suboptimal understanding of basic dueling etiquette, but you also feel the need to harass a judge and stall the duel after the judge in question gave you a very clear and concise decision.

From the unironic 'is too late' argument (5:33) to the bullshit 'silence is consent' argument (11:01), it's all there. On DB, you're expected to clearly communicate with your opponent. If a player is not being clear, you should make every effort to understand what your opponent is trying to communicate, something you were clearly not willing to do in favor of denying their opportunity to respond. It should also be pointed out that a good portion of this duel is you complaining that the judge won't respond to your vague, irrelevant question and stalling the duel because of it (32:44). Ingeniero (who, by the way, is TOTALLY not you, in ANY WAY shape or form) received a game loss for this exact same behavior.

https://www.duelingbook.com/replay?id=454834-29350296

If you feel that I am taking things out of context, you were kind enough to provide the replay. Feel free to respond, with citations, like I have. If you just wanted people's attention, congratulations. You now have MY attention.

[quote="Sound4":k465ep1w][quote="Christen57":k465ep1w][quote="Sound4":k465ep1w]
Why do you rarely never disclose information of a report? Makes no sense you shouldn't.[/quote:k465ep1w]

Can't you share the replay of this user you reported so we can see what happened?[/quote:k465ep1w]
https://www.duelingbook.com/replay?id=815175-30668040 here[/quote:k465ep1w]
1st, Silence IS NOT CONSENT. Technically YOU CAN'T CONTINUE A PLAY WITHOUT THE OPPONENT'S PERMISSION. Unless your opponent gives you a clear okay to continue, YOU DO NOT CONTINUE.

2nd, your opponent was clearly typing to you from 4:07 onwards. So the idea that "you didn't see" is bullshit. You and I both know this. Also "on effect" is usually a social queue in yugioh that your opponent has a response. You are clearly trying to ruleshark your opponent.

3rd, you then lie to the judge (man you have a habit of doing this), by telling him he didn't say anything at 4:07, when at 4:17 (10 seconds later) your opponent tells you that he has a response. Yet you clearly ignore that. (10 seconds window of waiting is actually respectable wait time.)

The judge then allows your opponent to clearly respond because they saw through your bullshit. You then try to argue with the judge. In fact, you are indeed wrong. You then claim that you looked at the logs, but you deliberately tried to mislead the judge from the start.

You then get told to repair the gamestate and you already had 30 seconds to do so. The judge was even kind enough to give you an extra 20 seconds. You then hold up the game for another 3 minutes. The judge should had granted a match loss, period.

The judge then calls you out because they clearly see you're not letting your opponent to respond, yet you claim otherwise with your "Silence is consent" when its not, and never has been. You already held up the game for 20 minutes on a judge call you wanted.

At already 50 minutes, the judge grants a warning for stalling. You then feign ignorance

When Sigma was summoned at the 60 minute mark or so, you stalled your opponent for 6 minutes.

Frankly, you should had gotten a game loss.

cant see a . fucking exposed lolololololololololol

That judge was extremely lenient with you. I would not have given that many chances.

[quote="Sound4":2sgqwmav][quote="Christen57":2sgqwmav][quote="Sound4":2sgqwmav]
Why do you rarely never disclose information of a report? Makes no sense you shouldn't.[/quote:2sgqwmav]

Can't you share the replay of this user you reported so we can see what happened?[/quote:2sgqwmav]
https://www.duelingbook.com/replay?id=815175-30668040 here[/quote:2sgqwmav]
Didn't expect less from you.

[quote="Genexwrecker":3os2b7tx]That judge was extremely lenient with you. I would not have given that many chances.[/quote:3os2b7tx]
How? N3sh was intentionally ignoring what I was saying. N3sh was saying to proceed the duel when the I w was saying read multiple . N3sh also was also accepting "on eff" as a response when blue player could have simply said "resp" or "response."

[quote="troglyte":2ilphqtj][quote="Sound4":2ilphqtj][quote="Christen57":2ilphqtj]

Can't you share the replay of this user you reported so we can see what happened?[/quote:2ilphqtj]
https://www.duelingbook.com/replay?id=815175-30668040 here[/quote:2ilphqtj]

To answer your original question, no. The judges are not obligated to tell you the outcome of a report. It's not their job to make you feel special. Now it's time for the tangent.

I'm gonna be honest, Sound4, your behavior in this replay is absolutely deplorable. Not only do you have a suboptimal understanding of basic dueling etiquette, but you also feel the need to harass a judge and stall the duel after the judge in question gave you a very clear and concise decision.

From the unironic 'is too late' argument (5:33) to the bullshit 'silence is consent' argument (11:01), it's all there. On DB, you're expected to clearly communicate with your opponent. If a player is not being clear, you should make every effort to understand what your opponent is trying to communicate, something you were clearly not willing to do in favor of denying their opportunity to respond. It should also be pointed out that a good portion of this duel is you complaining that the judge won't respond to your vague, irrelevant question and stalling the duel because of it (32:44). Ingeniero (who, by the way, is TOTALLY not you, in ANY WAY shape or form) received a game loss for this exact same behavior.

https://www.duelingbook.com/replay?id=454834-29350296

If you feel that I am taking things out of context, you were kind enough to provide the replay. Feel free to respond, with citations, like I have. If you just wanted people's attention, congratulations. You now have MY attention.[/quote:2ilphqtj]
I never once "harassed" the judge that false accusation that your provided no proof of. Your talking about my behaviour is "deplorable" yet talk nothing of N3sh. N3sh was intentionally ignoring what Iwas saying. N3sh was saying to proceed the duel when the I was saying read. N3sh also was also accepting "on eff" as a response when blue player could have simply said "resp" or "response." The response should have not been allowed. I wanted answers to make the situation clear. I clearly communicated well in this duel the judge never even said that. I verbally said nachster 2nd effect at 4:07 yet said "hold on" at 4:24. I am not doing this attention either.

[quote="Renji Asuka":2d6s917x][quote="Sound4":2d6s917x][quote="Christen57":2d6s917x]

Can't you share the replay of this user you reported so we can see what happened?[/quote:2d6s917x]
https://www.duelingbook.com/replay?id=815175-30668040 here[/quote:2d6s917x]
1st, Silence IS NOT CONSENT. Technically YOU CAN'T CONTINUE A PLAY WITHOUT THE OPPONENT'S PERMISSION. Unless your opponent gives you a clear okay to continue, YOU DO NOT CONTINUE.

2nd, your opponent was clearly typing to you from 4:07 onwards. So the idea that "you didn't see" is bullshit. You and I both know this. Also "on effect" is usually a social queue in yugioh that your opponent has a response. You are clearly trying to ruleshark your opponent.

3rd, you then lie to the judge (man you have a habit of doing this), by telling him he didn't say anything at 4:07, when at 4:17 (10 seconds later) your opponent tells you that he has a response. Yet you clearly ignore that. (10 seconds window of waiting is actually respectable wait time.)

The judge then allows your opponent to clearly respond because they saw through your bullshit. You then try to argue with the judge. In fact, you are indeed wrong. You then claim that you looked at the logs, but you deliberately tried to mislead the judge from the start.

You then get told to repair the gamestate and you already had 30 seconds to do so. The judge was even kind enough to give you an extra 20 seconds. You then hold up the game for another 3 minutes. The judge should had granted a match loss, period.

The judge then calls you out because they clearly see you're not letting your opponent to respond, yet you claim otherwise with your "Silence is consent" when its not, and never has been. You already held up the game for 20 minutes on a judge call you wanted.

At already 50 minutes, the judge grants a warning for stalling. You then feign ignorance

When Sigma was summoned at the 60 minute mark or so, you stalled your opponent for 6 minutes.

Frankly, you should had gotten a game loss.[/quote:2d6s917x]

What? If your opponent is not saying anything then that gives the permission to continue the play.

2) At 4:07 the opponent said that I can just declare effects. At 4:07 I verbally say my nachster eff to make it clear my 2nd effect. "on effect" at 4:07 I verbally said my nachster 2nd eff. At 4:14 I started viewing GY I gave him 7 extra seconds to respond yet didn't. "on effect" does not really mean much the main things you say when you have a response is " response" or shorter "resp". The judge never said anything about rule sharking so your clearly wrong on that.

3)When was I misleading the judge? I was making my point yet the judge ignored or didn't think much of it. N3sh literally wrote me off when I was asking questions to make situation clear.

4) I was confused what was happening as I was focused on the chat not on the duel so when the opponent was summoning I was confused what was going on. I asked what I need to do to make the game state legal. No game loss needed.

5) Me getting a warning for stalling when I literally said to N3sh that I was reading. I asked stalling for what. As I was confused when I was reading yet N3sh didn't care. I was never stalling I was literally reading the opponents cards yet N3sh was saying proceed.

No game loss needed.

[quote="Sound4":1mx1mhha][quote="Genexwrecker":1mx1mhha]That judge was extremely lenient with you. I would not have given that many chances.[/quote:1mx1mhha]
How? N3sh was intentionally ignoring what I was saying. N3sh was saying to proceed the duel when the I w was saying read multiple . N3sh also was also accepting "on eff" as a response when blue player could have simply said "resp" or "response."[/quote:1mx1mhha]
N3sh didn't ignore you, he told you like 3 times why he allowed that play.
N3sh at the time only said to proceed because, while you said reading, you were at the same time trying to get them to respond the same question for the 4th or 5th time.
What's the difference between saying "on eff" and "resp"? In the YGO context, these 2 are basically synonyms.

[quote="Sound4":3d55oz4c][quote="Renji Asuka":3d55oz4c][quote="Sound4":3d55oz4c]
https://www.duelingbook.com/replay?id=815175-30668040 here[/quote:3d55oz4c]
1st, Silence IS NOT CONSENT. Technically YOU CAN'T CONTINUE A PLAY WITHOUT THE OPPONENT'S PERMISSION. Unless your opponent gives you a clear okay to continue, YOU DO NOT CONTINUE.

2nd, your opponent was clearly typing to you from 4:07 onwards. So the idea that "you didn't see" is bullshit. You and I both know this. Also "on effect" is usually a social queue in yugioh that your opponent has a response. You are clearly trying to ruleshark your opponent.

3rd, you then lie to the judge (man you have a habit of doing this), by telling him he didn't say anything at 4:07, when at 4:17 (10 seconds later) your opponent tells you that he has a response. Yet you clearly ignore that. (10 seconds window of waiting is actually respectable wait time.)

The judge then allows your opponent to clearly respond because they saw through your bullshit. You then try to argue with the judge. In fact, you are indeed wrong. You then claim that you looked at the logs, but you deliberately tried to mislead the judge from the start.

You then get told to repair the gamestate and you already had 30 seconds to do so. The judge was even kind enough to give you an extra 20 seconds. You then hold up the game for another 3 minutes. The judge should had granted a match loss, period.

The judge then calls you out because they clearly see you're not letting your opponent to respond, yet you claim otherwise with your "Silence is consent" when its not, and never has been. You already held up the game for 20 minutes on a judge call you wanted.

At already 50 minutes, the judge grants a warning for stalling. You then feign ignorance

When Sigma was summoned at the 60 minute mark or so, you stalled your opponent for 6 minutes.

Frankly, you should had gotten a game loss.[/quote:3d55oz4c]

What? If your opponent is not saying anything then that gives the permission to continue the play.

2) At 4:07 the opponent said that I can just declare effects. At 4:07 I verbally say my nachster eff to make it clear my 2nd effect. "on effect" at 4:07 I verbally said my nachster 2nd eff. At 4:14 I started viewing GY I gave him 7 extra seconds to respond yet didn't. "on effect" does not really mean much the main things you say when you have a response is " response" or shorter "resp". The judge never said anything about rule sharking so your clearly wrong on that.

3)When was I misleading the judge? I was making my point yet the judge ignored or didn't think much of it. N3sh literally wrote me off when I was asking questions to make situation clear.

4) I was confused what was happening as I was focused on the chat not on the duel so when the opponent was summoning I was confused what was going on. I asked what I need to do to make the game state legal. No game loss needed.

5) Me getting a warning for stalling when I literally said to N3sh that I was reading. I asked stalling for what. As I was confused when I was reading yet N3sh didn't care. I was never stalling I was literally reading the opponents cards yet N3sh was saying proceed.

No game loss needed.[/quote:3d55oz4c]

1, Silence IS NOT CONSENT PERIOD. Your opponent has the right to respond PERIOD. If they don't give you a clear go ahead, YOU DON'T CONTINUE TO PLAY. This can get you into trouble with the judges and can cause a match loss. I seen it happen.

2, Wrong, "On effect" is typically stated when a person has a response. Not only have I used this phrase but many people do to. Just because you never seen it used, doesn't mean that gives you the right to ignore the opponent. Also, I never claimed the Judge said you were rule sharking. I said you were. Your tactics were the same tactics that rule sharks use when they're in a losing position. Again, the amount of time you give your opponent doesn't matter. YOU DO NOT CONTINUE A PLAY UNTIL YOU ARE GIVEN THE CLEAR GO AHEAD.

3, I already explained it. The situation was clear, the opponent had the right to respond, the judge gave their ruling. You didn't accept it because it'd put you into a losing position.

4, No you weren't "confused" see above.

5, there was 0 reason for you to cause the match to be 60+ minutes long. So yes you were stalling. You're lucky you didn't get frozen. Frankly if you're going to double down on your behavior, if I was an admin, you'd get perma banned. Also the judge didn't give you a warning when you said you were "reading", nice try though.

[quote="Renji Asuka":1co4w897][quote="Sound4":1co4w897][quote="Renji Asuka":1co4w897]
1st, Silence IS NOT CONSENT. Technically YOU CAN'T CONTINUE A PLAY WITHOUT THE OPPONENT'S PERMISSION. Unless your opponent gives you a clear okay to continue, YOU DO NOT CONTINUE.

2nd, your opponent was clearly typing to you from 4:07 onwards. So the idea that "you didn't see" is bullshit. You and I both know this. Also "on effect" is usually a social queue in yugioh that your opponent has a response. You are clearly trying to ruleshark your opponent.

3rd, you then lie to the judge (man you have a habit of doing this), by telling him he didn't say anything at 4:07, when at 4:17 (10 seconds later) your opponent tells you that he has a response. Yet you clearly ignore that. (10 seconds window of waiting is actually respectable wait time.)

The judge then allows your opponent to clearly respond because they saw through your bullshit. You then try to argue with the judge. In fact, you are indeed wrong. You then claim that you looked at the logs, but you deliberately tried to mislead the judge from the start.

You then get told to repair the gamestate and you already had 30 seconds to do so. The judge was even kind enough to give you an extra 20 seconds. You then hold up the game for another 3 minutes. The judge should had granted a match loss, period.

The judge then calls you out because they clearly see you're not letting your opponent to respond, yet you claim otherwise with your "Silence is consent" when its not, and never has been. You already held up the game for 20 minutes on a judge call you wanted.

At already 50 minutes, the judge grants a warning for stalling. You then feign ignorance

When Sigma was summoned at the 60 minute mark or so, you stalled your opponent for 6 minutes.

Frankly, you should had gotten a game loss.[/quote:1co4w897]

What? If your opponent is not saying anything then that gives the permission to continue the play.

2) At 4:07 the opponent said that I can just declare effects. At 4:07 I verbally say my nachster eff to make it clear my 2nd effect. "on effect" at 4:07 I verbally said my nachster 2nd eff. At 4:14 I started viewing GY I gave him 7 extra seconds to respond yet didn't. "on effect" does not really mean much the main things you say when you have a response is " response" or shorter "resp". The judge never said anything about rule sharking so your clearly wrong on that.

3)When was I misleading the judge? I was making my point yet the judge ignored or didn't think much of it. N3sh literally wrote me off when I was asking questions to make situation clear.

4) I was confused what was happening as I was focused on the chat not on the duel so when the opponent was summoning I was confused what was going on. I asked what I need to do to make the game state legal. No game loss needed.

5) Me getting a warning for stalling when I literally said to N3sh that I was reading. I asked stalling for what. As I was confused when I was reading yet N3sh didn't care. I was never stalling I was literally reading the opponents cards yet N3sh was saying proceed.

No game loss needed.[/quote:1co4w897]

1, Silence IS NOT CONSENT PERIOD. Your opponent has the right to respond PERIOD. If they don't give you a clear go ahead, YOU DON'T CONTINUE TO PLAY. This can get you into trouble with the judges and can cause a match loss. I seen it happen.

2, Wrong, "On effect" is typically stated when a person has a response. Not only have I used this phrase but many people do to. Just because you never seen it used, doesn't mean that gives you the right to ignore the opponent. Also, I never claimed the Judge said you were rule sharking. I said you were. Your tactics were the same tactics that rule sharks use when they're in a losing position. Again, the amount of time you give your opponent doesn't matter. YOU DO NOT CONTINUE A PLAY UNTIL YOU ARE GIVEN THE CLEAR GO AHEAD.

3, I already explained it. The situation was clear, the opponent had the right to respond, the judge gave their ruling. You didn't accept it because it'd put you into a losing position.

4, No you weren't "confused" see above.

5, there was 0 reason for you to cause the match to be 60+ minutes long. So yes you were stalling. You're lucky you didn't get frozen. Frankly if you're going to double down on your behavior, if I was an admin, you'd get perma banned. Also the judge didn't give you a warning when you said you were "reading", nice try though.[/quote:1co4w897]

1) Mostpro players go by this and even judges have supported this

2) Time actually matters when you have a response I communicated well yet the opponent did not. "on effecflt" you did not read what I said the opponent had plenty of time to response but to slow.

3) I actually had the advantage in the duel. The response should have not been allowed.

4) I was focused on the chat not the duel. As I was confused what was going on. You didn't read what I said.

5) I was never stalling. I was asking N3SH questions to make the situation clear so. I did not insult the judge nothing that would warrant a ban. Read the logs. N3sh gave me a warning even though I was reading his cards and I said this multiple times.

[quote="Lil Oldman":1vzzviva][quote="Sound4":1vzzviva][quote="Genexwrecker":1vzzviva]That judge was extremely lenient with you. I would not have given that many chances.[/quote:1vzzviva]
How? N3sh was intentionally ignoring what I was saying. N3sh was saying to proceed the duel when the I w was saying read multiple . N3sh also was also accepting "on eff" as a response when blue player could have simply said "resp" or "response."[/quote:1vzzviva]
N3sh didn't ignore you, he told you like 3 times why he allowed that play.
N3sh at the time only said to proceed because, while you said reading, you were at the same time trying to get them to respond the same question for the 4th or 5th time.
What's the difference between saying "on eff" and "resp"? In the YGO context, these 2 are basically synonyms.[/quote:1vzzviva]
No he was ignoring what I said. He literally wrote me off and didn't want to read because he had "other calls". It is important the call idls done correctly so there is no mistakes.
I was asking the question because the forst and second time he did not answer properly. "resp" is more clear and I don't know what you are talking about YGO context. The opponent did communicate well yet N3sh did not acknowledge.

[quote="Sound4":z83quaob][quote="Renji Asuka":z83quaob][quote="Sound4":z83quaob]

What? If your opponent is not saying anything then that gives the permission to continue the play.

2) At 4:07 the opponent said that I can just declare effects. At 4:07 I verbally say my nachster eff to make it clear my 2nd effect. "on effect" at 4:07 I verbally said my nachster 2nd eff. At 4:14 I started viewing GY I gave him 7 extra seconds to respond yet didn't. "on effect" does not really mean much the main things you say when you have a response is " response" or shorter "resp". The judge never said anything about rule sharking so your clearly wrong on that.

3)When was I misleading the judge? I was making my point yet the judge ignored or didn't think much of it. N3sh literally wrote me off when I was asking questions to make situation clear.

4) I was confused what was happening as I was focused on the chat not on the duel so when the opponent was summoning I was confused what was going on. I asked what I need to do to make the game state legal. No game loss needed.

5) Me getting a warning for stalling when I literally said to N3sh that I was reading. I asked stalling for what. As I was confused when I was reading yet N3sh didn't care. I was never stalling I was literally reading the opponents cards yet N3sh was saying proceed.

No game loss needed.[/quote:z83quaob]

1, Silence IS NOT CONSENT PERIOD. Your opponent has the right to respond PERIOD. If they don't give you a clear go ahead, YOU DON'T CONTINUE TO PLAY. This can get you into trouble with the judges and can cause a match loss. I seen it happen.

2, Wrong, "On effect" is typically stated when a person has a response. Not only have I used this phrase but many people do to. Just because you never seen it used, doesn't mean that gives you the right to ignore the opponent. Also, I never claimed the Judge said you were rule sharking. I said you were. Your tactics were the same tactics that rule sharks use when they're in a losing position. Again, the amount of time you give your opponent doesn't matter. YOU DO NOT CONTINUE A PLAY UNTIL YOU ARE GIVEN THE CLEAR GO AHEAD.

3, I already explained it. The situation was clear, the opponent had the right to respond, the judge gave their ruling. You didn't accept it because it'd put you into a losing position.

4, No you weren't "confused" see above.

5, there was 0 reason for you to cause the match to be 60+ minutes long. So yes you were stalling. You're lucky you didn't get frozen. Frankly if you're going to double down on your behavior, if I was an admin, you'd get perma banned. Also the judge didn't give you a warning when you said you were "reading", nice try though.[/quote:z83quaob]

1) Mostpro players go by this and even judges have supported this

2) Time actually matters when you have a response I communicated well yet the opponent did not. "on effecflt" you did not read what I said the opponent had plenty of time to response but to slow.

3) I actually had the advantage in the duel. The response should have not been allowed.

4) I was focused on the chat not the duel. As I was confused what was going on. You didn't read what I said.

5) I was never stalling. I was asking N3SH questions to make the situation clear so. I did not insult the judge nothing that would warrant a ban. Read the logs. N3sh gave me a warning even though I was reading his cards and I said this multiple times.[/quote:z83quaob]

1. That's because they already know the game enough to know what to respond to with what card and can quickly react. Silence may be consent, but the instant they break it you'd better drop everything and communicate.
2. Only judges get the final say as to whether something is too late, they said it wasn't, so your opinion doesn't matter.
3. YOU'RE NOT ENTITLED TO WINNING THAT GAME, LEAST OF ALL WHEN YOU SHARK.
4. Good, you deserved it for trying to shark.
5. How much time did it take again?

[quote="Sound4":2mpij6d9][quote="Lil Oldman":2mpij6d9][quote="Sound4":2mpij6d9]
How? N3sh was intentionally ignoring what I was saying. N3sh was saying to proceed the duel when the I w was saying read multiple . N3sh also was also accepting "on eff" as a response when blue player could have simply said "resp" or "response."[/quote:2mpij6d9]
N3sh didn't ignore you, he told you like 3 times why he allowed that play.
N3sh at the time only said to proceed because, while you said reading, you were at the same time trying to get them to respond the same question for the 4th or 5th time.
What's the difference between saying "on eff" and "resp"? In the YGO context, these 2 are basically synonyms.[/quote:2mpij6d9]
No he was ignoring what I said. He literally wrote me off and didn't want to read because he had "other calls". It is important the call idls done correctly so there is no mistakes.
I was asking the question because the forst and second time he did not answer properly.
"resp" is more clear and I don't know what you are talking about YGO context. The opponent did communicate well yet N3sh did not acknowledge.[/quote:2mpij6d9]
N3sh told you, and I quote: "cause he did it in a proper time and informed u, [4:17] "on eff", here meant ''on ef i have e resp''"
If that's not a proper answer then I don't know what it is then.
"resp" may (or may not) be more clear, but "on eff/summon" is also a valid answer, they mean exactly the same in the same context.

[quote="Sound4":1xizlfcx][quote="Renji Asuka":1xizlfcx][quote="Sound4":1xizlfcx]

What? If your opponent is not saying anything then that gives the permission to continue the play.

2) At 4:07 the opponent said that I can just declare effects. At 4:07 I verbally say my nachster eff to make it clear my 2nd effect. "on effect" at 4:07 I verbally said my nachster 2nd eff. At 4:14 I started viewing GY I gave him 7 extra seconds to respond yet didn't. "on effect" does not really mean much the main things you say when you have a response is " response" or shorter "resp". The judge never said anything about rule sharking so your clearly wrong on that.

3)When was I misleading the judge? I was making my point yet the judge ignored or didn't think much of it. N3sh literally wrote me off when I was asking questions to make situation clear.

4) I was confused what was happening as I was focused on the chat not on the duel so when the opponent was summoning I was confused what was going on. I asked what I need to do to make the game state legal. No game loss needed.

5) Me getting a warning for stalling when I literally said to N3sh that I was reading. I asked stalling for what. As I was confused when I was reading yet N3sh didn't care. I was never stalling I was literally reading the opponents cards yet N3sh was saying proceed.

No game loss needed.[/quote:1xizlfcx]

1, Silence IS NOT CONSENT PERIOD. Your opponent has the right to respond PERIOD. If they don't give you a clear go ahead, YOU DON'T CONTINUE TO PLAY. This can get you into trouble with the judges and can cause a match loss. I seen it happen.

2, Wrong, "On effect" is typically stated when a person has a response. Not only have I used this phrase but many people do to. Just because you never seen it used, doesn't mean that gives you the right to ignore the opponent. Also, I never claimed the Judge said you were rule sharking. I said you were. Your tactics were the same tactics that rule sharks use when they're in a losing position. Again, the amount of time you give your opponent doesn't matter. YOU DO NOT CONTINUE A PLAY UNTIL YOU ARE GIVEN THE CLEAR GO AHEAD.

3, I already explained it. The situation was clear, the opponent had the right to respond, the judge gave their ruling. You didn't accept it because it'd put you into a losing position.

4, No you weren't "confused" see above.

5, there was 0 reason for you to cause the match to be 60+ minutes long. So yes you were stalling. You're lucky you didn't get frozen. Frankly if you're going to double down on your behavior, if I was an admin, you'd get perma banned. Also the judge didn't give you a warning when you said you were "reading", nice try though.[/quote:1xizlfcx]

1) Mostpro players go by this and even judges have supported this

2) Time actually matters when you have a response I communicated well yet the opponent did not. "on effecflt" you did not read what I said the opponent had plenty of time to response but to slow.

3) I actually had the advantage in the duel. The response should have not been allowed.

4) I was focused on the chat not the duel. As I was confused what was going on. You didn't read what I said.

5) I was never stalling. I was asking N3SH questions to make the situation clear so. I did not insult the judge nothing that would warrant a ban. Read the logs. N3sh gave me a warning even though I was reading his cards and I said this multiple times.[/quote:1xizlfcx]
1, you're lying. Judges would grant punishment to other players for not allowing their opponent to respond. Stop justifying your shitty behavior.

2, Doesn't matter, you don't make a move without the opponent giving you the go ahead. However, there is a thing called slow play, however the opponent wasn't slow playing. So you're in the wrong.

3, Doesn't matter that you had the advantage, you lied to the judge saying they didn't say anything, when they clearly did. Then you claim you didn't see it. You tried to come up with every excuse not to allow that play when it was legal for your opponent regardless of how you feel. Stop being a shitty person.

4, If you were focused on the chat, you would had clearly seen your opponent type "on effect", but you didn't. All you did was stall a game for over an hour because you were mad you were going to lose.

5, Yes you were. There was 0 reason for that judge call to last as long as it did. But you kept going on and on about irrelevant crap after the Judge gave you their decision on the matter. Accept it and move on.

[quote="Renji Asuka":2xefya3o][quote="Sound4":2xefya3o][quote="Renji Asuka":2xefya3o]

1, Silence IS NOT CONSENT PERIOD. Your opponent has the right to respond PERIOD. If they don't give you a clear go ahead, YOU DON'T CONTINUE TO PLAY. This can get you into trouble with the judges and can cause a match loss. I seen it happen.

2, Wrong, "On effect" is typically stated when a person has a response. Not only have I used this phrase but many people do to. Just because you never seen it used, doesn't mean that gives you the right to ignore the opponent. Also, I never claimed the Judge said you were rule sharking. I said you were. Your tactics were the same tactics that rule sharks use when they're in a losing position. Again, the amount of time you give your opponent doesn't matter. YOU DO NOT CONTINUE A PLAY UNTIL YOU ARE GIVEN THE CLEAR GO AHEAD.

3, I already explained it. The situation was clear, the opponent had the right to respond, the judge gave their ruling. You didn't accept it because it'd put you into a losing position.

4, No you weren't "confused" see above.

5, there was 0 reason for you to cause the match to be 60+ minutes long. So yes you were stalling. You're lucky you didn't get frozen. Frankly if you're going to double down on your behavior, if I was an admin, you'd get perma banned. Also the judge didn't give you a warning when you said you were "reading", nice try though.[/quote:2xefya3o]

1) Mostpro players go by this and even judges have supported this

2) Time actually matters when you have a response I communicated well yet the opponent did not. "on effecflt" you did not read what I said the opponent had plenty of time to response but to slow.

3) I actually had the advantage in the duel. The response should have not been allowed.

4) I was focused on the chat not the duel. As I was confused what was going on. You didn't read what I said.

5) I was never stalling. I was asking N3SH questions to make the situation clear so. I did not insult the judge nothing that would warrant a ban. Read the logs. N3sh gave me a warning even though I was reading his cards and I said this multiple times.[/quote:2xefya3o]
1, you're lying. Judges would grant punishment to other players for not allowing their opponent to respond. Stop justifying your shitty behavior.

2, Doesn't matter, you don't make a move without the opponent giving you the go ahead. However, there is a thing called slow play, however the opponent wasn't slow playing. So you're in the wrong.

3, Doesn't matter that you had the advantage, you lied to the judge saying they didn't say anything, when they clearly did. Then you claim you didn't see it. You tried to come up with every excuse not to allow that play when it was legal for your opponent regardless of how you feel. Stop being a shitty person.

4, If you were focused on the chat, you would had clearly seen your opponent type "on effect", but you didn't. All you did was stall a game for over an hour because you were mad you were going to lose.

5, Yes you were. There was 0 reason for that judge call to last as long as it did. But you kept going on and on about irrelevant crap after the Judge gave you their decision on the matter. Accept it and move on.[/quote:2xefya3o]
1) I am not lying you have time to respond and if you do you type in chat yet if you are to late. Most pro players will not allow. You are talking about my behaviour but not talking about N3sh behaviour.

2) Like I said earlier if your opponent is not saying anything that signals they have no response. I literally waited for a response yet the opponent wasn't saying anything. My opponent was not slow playing I never said that I said that my opponent was slow on the response.

3) They didn't say anything I communicated well yet N3sh didn't care. At 4:07 when he said I can simply declare eff I thought he had no response. More proof how the opponent clearly communicated poorly. If your opponent is not saying anything and taking a while to respond then responses are not allowed. This is how most pro players go by.

4) Did you even read what I said? I was focused on the duel before the judge came not on the chat. When N3sh came I was focused on the chat not on the duel. I had advantage in the duel actually.
5) The reason why the judge call lasted for quite a while is because N3sh was ignoring what I said and wrote me off because he had "other calls". I wanted to make the situation clear I didn't like how N3sh was saying in that call as I thought it was extremely rude.

This is not the place to continue this your report was handled case closed.

[quote="greg503":2svoz4r2][quote="Sound4":2svoz4r2][quote="Renji Asuka":2svoz4r2]

1, Silence IS NOT CONSENT PERIOD. Your opponent has the right to respond PERIOD. If they don't give you a clear go ahead, YOU DON'T CONTINUE TO PLAY. This can get you into trouble with the judges and can cause a match loss. I seen it happen.

2, Wrong, "On effect" is typically stated when a person has a response. Not only have I used this phrase but many people do to. Just because you never seen it used, doesn't mean that gives you the right to ignore the opponent. Also, I never claimed the Judge said you were rule sharking. I said you were. Your tactics were the same tactics that rule sharks use when they're in a losing position. Again, the amount of time you give your opponent doesn't matter. YOU DO NOT CONTINUE A PLAY UNTIL YOU ARE GIVEN THE CLEAR GO AHEAD.

3, I already explained it. The situation was clear, the opponent had the right to respond, the judge gave their ruling. You didn't accept it because it'd put you into a losing position.

4, No you weren't "confused" see above.

5, there was 0 reason for you to cause the match to be 60+ minutes long. So yes you were stalling. You're lucky you didn't get frozen. Frankly if you're going to double down on your behavior, if I was an admin, you'd get perma banned. Also the judge didn't give you a warning when you said you were "reading", nice try though.[/quote:2svoz4r2]

1) Mostpro players go by this and even judges have supported this

2) Time actually matters when you have a response I communicated well yet the opponent did not. "on effecflt" you did not read what I said the opponent had plenty of time to response but to slow.

3) I actually had the advantage in the duel. The response should have not been allowed.

4) I was focused on the chat not the duel. As I was confused what was going on. You didn't read what I said.

5) I was never stalling. I was asking N3SH questions to make the situation clear so. I did not insult the judge nothing that would warrant a ban. Read the logs. N3sh gave me a warning even though I was reading his cards and I said this multiple times.[/quote:2svoz4r2]

1. That's because they already know the game enough to know what to respond to with what card and can quickly react. Silence may be consent, but the instant they break it you'd better drop everything and communicate.
2. Only judges get the final say as to whether something is too late, they said it wasn't, so your opinion doesn't matter.
3. YOU'RE NOT ENTITLED TO WINNING THAT GAME, LEAST OF ALL WHEN YOU SHARK.
4. Good, you deserved it for trying to shark.
5. How much time did it take again?[/quote:2svoz4r2]
DB as a whole is slow so most pro players going quickly rarely communicate.
https://youtu.be/mfQVsh3Ygtg link on how DB Is slow and even pro players struggle to play on DB because how slow it is.
2) The judges "final say" can be wrong which is why I reported on the poor decision and the behaviour he displayed.
3) The judge would of literally gave me the game loss if I was sharking. There was nothing that would of warrant a game loss.
4) No sharking occurred the judge would of called me out on it.
5)The judge call took that long as N3sh was not answering properly or simply gnoring. HMy first 2 point on the response being late yet N3sh and ignored them and didn't care.

[quote="Genexwrecker":1zfs6foh]This is not the place to continue this your report was handled case closed.[/quote:1zfs6foh]
I know it was handled. Yet you were making false claims and other people which I had to reply.

[quote="Sound4":hflic8pu][quote="Renji Asuka":hflic8pu][quote="Sound4":hflic8pu]

1) Mostpro players go by this and even judges have supported this

2) Time actually matters when you have a response I communicated well yet the opponent did not. "on effecflt" you did not read what I said the opponent had plenty of time to response but to slow.

3) I actually had the advantage in the duel. The response should have not been allowed.

4) I was focused on the chat not the duel. As I was confused what was going on. You didn't read what I said.

5) I was never stalling. I was asking N3SH questions to make the situation clear so. I did not insult the judge nothing that would warrant a ban. Read the logs. N3sh gave me a warning even though I was reading his cards and I said this multiple times.[/quote:hflic8pu]
1, you're lying. Judges would grant punishment to other players for not allowing their opponent to respond. Stop justifying your shitty behavior.

2, Doesn't matter, you don't make a move without the opponent giving you the go ahead. However, there is a thing called slow play, however the opponent wasn't slow playing. So you're in the wrong.

3, Doesn't matter that you had the advantage, you lied to the judge saying they didn't say anything, when they clearly did. Then you claim you didn't see it. You tried to come up with every excuse not to allow that play when it was legal for your opponent regardless of how you feel. Stop being a shitty person.

4, If you were focused on the chat, you would had clearly seen your opponent type "on effect", but you didn't. All you did was stall a game for over an hour because you were mad you were going to lose.

5, Yes you were. There was 0 reason for that judge call to last as long as it did. But you kept going on and on about irrelevant crap after the Judge gave you their decision on the matter. Accept it and move on.[/quote:hflic8pu]
1) I am not lying you have time to respond and if you do you type in chat yet if you are to late. Most pro players will not allow. You are talking about my behaviour but not talking about N3sh behaviour.

2) Like I said earlier if your opponent is not saying anything that signals they have no response. I literally waited for a response yet the opponent wasn't saying anything. My opponent was not slow playing I never said that I said that my opponent was slow on the response.

3) They didn't say anything I communicated well yet N3sh didn't care. At 4:07 when he said I can simply declare eff I thought he had no response. More proof how the opponent clearly communicated poorly. If your opponent is not saying anything and taking a while to respond then responses are not allowed. This is how most pro players go by.

4) Did you even read what I said? I was focused on the duel before the judge came not on the chat. When N3sh came I was focused on the chat not on the duel. I had advantage in the duel actually.
5) The reason why the judge call lasted for quite a while is because N3sh was ignoring what I said and wrote me off because he had "other calls". I wanted to make the situation clear I didn't like how N3sh was saying in that call as I thought it was extremely rude.[/quote:hflic8pu]
1, You are lying, the only time a judge would side with a person claiming their opponent was "too late" is IF they were slow playing.

2, They DID say something YOU ACTIVELY CHOSE TO IGNORE IT BECAUSE YOU KNOW YOU WOULD LOSE THE DUEL SO YOU CHOSE TO RULESHARK.

3, And here is you lying again, THEY DID SAY SOMETHING YOU CHOSE TO IGNORE IT.

4, Didn't matter if you had the advantage, YOU WOULD NOT LET YOUR OPPONENT PLAY AND TRIED TO RULE SHARK THEM.

5, No the reason why it lasted that long IS BECAUSE YOU CHOSE NOT TO ACCEPT THE RULING SO YOU STALLED FOR AS LONG AS POSSIBLE.

At least have the decency to tell the truth before your next response.

i swear him trying to to defend "on eff" isnt a responce is soo fucking funny like the fuck did you expect for him to do when you said that

[quote="PENMASTER":npx68l72]i swear him trying to to defend "on eff" isnt a responce is soo fucking funny like the fuck did you expect for him to do when you said that[/quote:npx68l72]
I expected him to say something that make sense. Like "resp" which is even shorter. I even waited for a response.

[quote="Sound4":2w7iw938][quote="PENMASTER":2w7iw938]i swear him trying to to defend "on eff" isnt a responce is soo fucking funny like the fuck did you expect for him to do when you said that[/quote:2w7iw938]
I expected him to say something that make sense. Like "resp" which is even shorter. I even waited for a response.[/quote:2w7iw938]
You didn't though, you rushed into your plays, and even ignored the chat.

[quote="Renji Asuka":32zjgoms][quote="Sound4":32zjgoms][quote="PENMASTER":32zjgoms]i swear him trying to to defend "on eff" isnt a responce is soo fucking funny like the fuck did you expect for him to do when you said that[/quote:32zjgoms]
I expected him to say something that make sense. Like "resp" which is even shorter. I even waited for a response.[/quote:32zjgoms]
You didn't though, you rushed into your plays, and even ignored the chat.[/quote:32zjgoms]
From 4:07 to 4:14 I waited and extra seven seconds and communicated well to make what is happening. There is no reason why the opponent took that long to respond

[quote="Sound4":30leaurx][quote="Renji Asuka":30leaurx][quote="Sound4":30leaurx]
I expected him to say something that make sense. Like "resp" which is even shorter. I even waited for a response.[/quote:30leaurx]
You didn't though, you rushed into your plays, and even ignored the chat.[/quote:30leaurx]
From 4:07 to 4:14 I waited and extra seven seconds and communicated well to make what is happening. There is no reason why the opponent took that long to respond[/quote:30leaurx]
Does not matter, YOU CHOSE to keep playing when you CLEARLY WEREN'T GIVEN THE OKAY. Stop JUSTIFYING YOUR SHITTY BEHAVIOR.

[quote="Sound4":3c05zltn][quote="Renji Asuka":3c05zltn][quote="Sound4":3c05zltn]
I expected him to say something that make sense. Like "resp" which is even shorter. I even waited for a response.[/quote:3c05zltn]
You didn't though, you rushed into your plays, and even ignored the chat.[/quote:3c05zltn]
From 4:07 to 4:14 I waited and extra seven seconds and communicated well to make what is happening. There is no reason why the opponent took that long to respond[/quote:3c05zltn]
Lord forgive that you give actual response time to your opponent. he at the seven second mark responded and instead of you actually listening to him you continued playing like nothing happened.
Also, quite odd for you to say that 7 seconds is way to much time, but most of your "reading" was intentional stalling. Even at the end, when the plays didn't even matter.
Quoting your opponent
"i said hold on because you just rushed and took cyber dragon, you didnt even let me", you rushed your plays, disallowing the interaction between you two.

[quote="Sound4":11aqzb4a][quote="Genexwrecker":11aqzb4a]This is not the place to continue this your report was handled case closed.[/quote:11aqzb4a]
I know it was handled. Yet you were making false claims and other people which I had to reply.[/quote:11aqzb4a]
What have I said in this thread that is incorrect?

[quote="Genexwrecker":18siemuu][quote="Sound4":18siemuu][quote="Genexwrecker":18siemuu]This is not the place to continue this your report was handled case closed.[/quote:18siemuu]
I know it was handled. Yet you were making false claims and other people which I had to reply.[/quote:18siemuu]
What have I said in this thread that is incorrect?[/quote:18siemuu]
That the judge was very lenient and given me many chances.

[quote="Renji Asuka":1purjuni][quote="Sound4":1purjuni][quote="Renji Asuka":1purjuni]
You didn't though, you rushed into your plays, and even ignored the chat.[/quote:1purjuni]
From 4:07 to 4:14 I waited and extra seven seconds and communicated well to make what is happening. There is no reason why the opponent took that long to respond[/quote:1purjuni]
Does not matter, YOU CHOSE to keep playing when you CLEARLY WEREN'T GIVEN THE OKAY. Stop JUSTIFYING YOUR SHITTY BEHAVIOR.[/quote:1purjuni]

This is from the official rule book

"If your opponent does not respond, you may activate a second effect and create a Chain to your own card's activation." This even stated in the official rulebook."

[quote="Lil Oldman":3t9v5gpi][quote="Sound4":3t9v5gpi][quote="Renji Asuka":3t9v5gpi]
You didn't though, you rushed into your plays, and even ignored the chat.[/quote:3t9v5gpi]
From 4:07 to 4:14 I waited and extra seven seconds and communicated well to make what is happening. There is no reason why the opponent took that long to respond[/quote:3t9v5gpi]
Lord forgive that you give actual response time to your opponent. he at the seven second mark responded and instead of you actually listening to him you continued playing like nothing happened.
Also, quite odd for you to say that 7 seconds is way to much time, but most of your "reading" was intentional stalling. Even at the end, when the plays didn't even matter.
Quoting your opponent
"i said hold on because you just rushed and took cyber dragon, you didnt even let me", you rushed your plays, disallowing the interaction between you two.[/quote:3t9v5gpi]
This is from the official rule book

"If your opponent does not respond, you may activate a second effect and create a Chain to your own card's activation." This even stated in the official rulebook."
I was never rushing. My opponent was making plays but I was focused on the chat so after that I was reading my opponent cards. N3sh didn't care though pretty much nobody can read and type at the same time. I literally said read multiple times.

[quote="Sound4":3a9brkt7]:arrow: [quote="Lil Oldman":3a9brkt7][quote="Sound4":3a9brkt7]
From 4:07 to 4:14 I waited and extra seven seconds and communicated well to make what is happening. There is no reason why the opponent took that long to respond[/quote:3a9brkt7]
Lord forgive that you give actual response time to your opponent. he at the seven second mark responded and instead of you actually listening to him you continued playing like nothing happened.
Also, quite odd for you to say that 7 seconds is way to much time, but most of your "reading" was intentional stalling. Even at the end, when the plays didn't even matter.
Quoting your opponent
"i said hold on because you just rushed and took cyber dragon, you didnt even let me", you rushed your plays, disallowing the interaction between you two.[/quote:3a9brkt7]
This is from the official rule book

"If your opponent does not respond, you may activate a second effect and create a Chain to your own card's activation." This even stated in the official rulebook."
I was never rushing. My opponent was making plays but I was focused on the chat so after that I was reading my opponent cards. N3sh didn't care though pretty much nobody can read and type at the same time. I literally said read multiple times.[/quote:3a9brkt7]
CONTEXT, "respond" in that statement means gameplay responses, a fast effect to Chain.

[quote="Sound4":gy3ocali]:arrow: [quote="Lil Oldman":gy3ocali][quote="Sound4":gy3ocali]
From 4:07 to 4:14 I waited and extra seven seconds and communicated well to make what is happening. There is no reason why the opponent took that long to respond[/quote:gy3ocali]
Lord forgive that you give actual response time to your opponent. he at the seven second mark responded and instead of you actually listening to him you continued playing like nothing happened.
Also, quite odd for you to say that 7 seconds is way to much time, but most of your "reading" was intentional stalling. Even at the end, when the plays didn't even matter.
Quoting your opponent
"i said hold on because you just rushed and took cyber dragon, you didnt even let me", you rushed your plays, disallowing the interaction between you two.[/quote:gy3ocali]
This is from the official rule book

"If your opponent does not respond, you may activate a second effect and create a Chain to your own card's activation." This even stated in the official rulebook."
I was never rushing. My opponent was making plays but I was focused on the chat so after that I was reading my opponent cards. N3sh didn't care though pretty much nobody can read and type at the same time. I literally said read multiple times.[/quote:gy3ocali]
So what you are saying is that he didn't said he had a response?

[quote="Sound4":2fv3tfjw]:arrow: [quote="Lil Oldman":2fv3tfjw][quote="Sound4":2fv3tfjw]
From 4:07 to 4:14 I waited and extra seven seconds and communicated well to make what is happening. There is no reason why the opponent took that long to respond[/quote:2fv3tfjw]
Lord forgive that you give actual response time to your opponent. he at the seven second mark responded and instead of you actually listening to him you continued playing like nothing happened.
Also, quite odd for you to say that 7 seconds is way to much time, but most of your "reading" was intentional stalling. Even at the end, when the plays didn't even matter.
Quoting your opponent
"i said hold on because you just rushed and took cyber dragon, you didnt even let me", you rushed your plays, disallowing the interaction between you two.[/quote:2fv3tfjw]
This is from the official rule book

"If your opponent does not respond, you may activate a second effect and create a Chain to your own card's activation." This even stated in the official rulebook."
I was never rushing. My opponent was making plays but I was focused on the chat so after that I was reading my opponent cards. N3sh didn't care though pretty much nobody can read and type at the same time. I literally said read multiple times.[/quote:2fv3tfjw]
99% of the playerbase can read and communicate together. It is essential multitasking.

[quote="Genexwrecker":2y1qcail][quote="Sound4":2y1qcail]:arrow: [quote="Lil Oldman":2y1qcail]
Lord forgive that you give actual response time to your opponent. he at the seven second mark responded and instead of you actually listening to him you continued playing like nothing happened.
Also, quite odd for you to say that 7 seconds is way to much time, but most of your "reading" was intentional stalling. Even at the end, when the plays didn't even matter.
Quoting your opponent
"i said hold on because you just rushed and took cyber dragon, you didnt even let me", you rushed your plays, disallowing the interaction between you two.[/quote:2y1qcail]
This is from the official rule book

"If your opponent does not respond, you may activate a second effect and create a Chain to your own card's activation." This even stated in the official rulebook."
I was never rushing. My opponent was making plays but I was focused on the chat so after that I was reading my opponent cards. N3sh didn't care though pretty much nobody can read and type at the same time. I literally said read multiple times.[/quote:2y1qcail]
99% of the playerbase can read and communicate together. It is essential multitasking.[/quote:2y1qcail]

You didn't get what I said most players can only do one thing at a time in yugioh. Reading and typing at the same is extremely which you will find nobody can do. You can be tasked with multiple things but only once at a time.

[quote="Lil Oldman":1l76w8fz][quote="Sound4":1l76w8fz]:arrow: [quote="Lil Oldman":1l76w8fz]
Lord forgive that you give actual response time to your opponent. he at the seven second mark responded and instead of you actually listening to him you continued playing like nothing happened.
Also, quite odd for you to say that 7 seconds is way to much time, but most of your "reading" was intentional stalling. Even at the end, when the plays didn't even matter.
Quoting your opponent
"i said hold on because you just rushed and took cyber dragon, you didnt even let me", you rushed your plays, disallowing the interaction between you two.[/quote:1l76w8fz]
This is from the official rule book

"If your opponent does not respond, you may activate a second effect and create a Chain to your own card's activation." This even stated in the official rulebook."
I was never rushing. My opponent was making plays but I was focused on the chat so after that I was reading my opponent cards. N3sh didn't care though pretty much nobody can read and type at the same time. I literally said read multiple times.[/quote:1l76w8fz]
So what you are saying is that he didn't said he had a response?[/quote:1l76w8fz]
My opponent never responded especially when I clearly communicated everything my nachster 2nd effect did. There is no reason why my opponent took so long to respond.

[quote="Sound4":1k0wb53e][quote="Genexwrecker":1k0wb53e][quote="Sound4":1k0wb53e]:arrow:
This is from the official rule book

"If your opponent does not respond, you may activate a second effect and create a Chain to your own card's activation." This even stated in the official rulebook."
I was never rushing. My opponent was making plays but I was focused on the chat so after that I was reading my opponent cards. N3sh didn't care though pretty much nobody can read and type at the same time. I literally said read multiple times.[/quote:1k0wb53e]
99% of the playerbase can read and communicate together. It is essential multitasking.[/quote:1k0wb53e]

You didn't get what I said most players can only do one thing at a time in yugioh. Reading and typing at the same time is extremely which you will find nobody can do. You can be tasked with multiple things but only once at a time.[/quote:1k0wb53e]

[quote="greg503":hq9m6759][quote="Sound4":hq9m6759]:arrow: [quote="Lil Oldman":hq9m6759]
Lord forgive that you give actual response time to your opponent. he at the seven second mark responded and instead of you actually listening to him you continued playing like nothing happened.
Also, quite odd for you to say that 7 seconds is way to much time, but most of your "reading" was intentional stalling. Even at the end, when the plays didn't even matter.
Quoting your opponent
"i said hold on because you just rushed and took cyber dragon, you didnt even let me", you rushed your plays, disallowing the interaction between you two.[/quote:hq9m6759]
This is from the official rule book

"If your opponent does not respond, you may activate a second effect and create a Chain to your own card's activation." This even stated in the official rulebook."
I was never rushing. My opponent was making plays but I was focused on the chat so after that I was reading my opponent cards. N3sh didn't care though pretty much nobody can read and type at the same time. I literally said read multiple times.[/quote:hq9m6759]
CONTEXT, "respond" in that statement means gameplay responses, a fast effect to Chain.[/quote:hq9m6759]
And?

[quote="Sound4":240bb2fr][quote="Lil Oldman":240bb2fr][quote="Sound4":240bb2fr]:arrow:
This is from the official rule book

"If your opponent does not respond, you may activate a second effect and create a Chain to your own card's activation." This even stated in the official rulebook."
I was never rushing. My opponent was making plays but I was focused on the chat so after that I was reading my opponent cards. N3sh didn't care though pretty much nobody can read and type at the same time. I literally said read multiple times.[/quote:240bb2fr]
So what you are saying is that he didn't said he had a response?[/quote:240bb2fr]
My opponent never responded especially when I clearly communicated everything my nachster 2nd effect did. There is no reason why my opponent took so long to respond.[/quote:240bb2fr]
So this is not a response?

[4:17] "on eff"
[4:19] Special Summoned "Cyber Dragon" from GY to M-4 (ATK)
[4:19] "of summon"
[4:21] Stopped viewing GY
[4:24] "hold on"
[4:31] "send the cyber dragon back"

[quote="Lil Oldman":2u4tlma5][quote="Sound4":2u4tlma5][quote="Lil Oldman":2u4tlma5]
So what you are saying is that he didn't said he had a response?[/quote:2u4tlma5]
My opponent never responded especially when I clearly communicated everything my nachster 2nd effect did. There is no reason why my opponent took so long to respond.[/quote:2u4tlma5]
So this is not a response?

[4:17] "on eff"
[4:19] Special Summoned "Cyber Dragon" from GY to M-4 (ATK)
[4:19] "of summon"
[4:21] Stopped viewing GY
[4:24] "hold on"
[4:31] "send the cyber dragon back"

[/quote:2u4tlma5]
A response that makes no sense and does not mean much. Plus I was already viewing GY giving the opponent plenty of time to respond.

[quote="Sound4":1uciv8dj][quote="Lil Oldman":1uciv8dj][quote="Sound4":1uciv8dj]
My opponent never responded especially when I clearly communicated everything my nachster 2nd effect did. There is no reason why my opponent took so long to respond.[/quote:1uciv8dj]
So this is not a response?

[4:17] "on eff"
[4:19] Special Summoned "Cyber Dragon" from GY to M-4 (ATK)
[4:19] "of summon"
[4:21] Stopped viewing GY
[4:24] "hold on"
[4:31] "send the cyber dragon back"

[/quote:1uciv8dj]
A response that makes no sense and does not mean much. Plus I was already viewing GY giving the opponent plenty of time to respond.[/quote:1uciv8dj]
"On eff" makes a lot of sense. It means the same as "resp" to most players.
7 seconds =/= plenty time to respond.

[quote="Sound4":1huu7tmm][quote="Renji Asuka":1huu7tmm][quote="Sound4":1huu7tmm]
From 4:07 to 4:14 I waited and extra seven seconds and communicated well to make what is happening. There is no reason why the opponent took that long to respond[/quote:1huu7tmm]
Does not matter, YOU CHOSE to keep playing when you CLEARLY WEREN'T GIVEN THE OKAY. Stop JUSTIFYING YOUR SHITTY BEHAVIOR.[/quote:1huu7tmm]

This is from the official rule book

"If your opponent does not respond, you may activate a second effect and create a Chain to your own card's activation." This even stated in the official rulebook."[/quote:1huu7tmm]
And here you go trying to rule shark. That rule doesn't mean what you think it means. It obviously refers to your opponent not having a response to activate something such as:

Player A: I activate Compulsory Evacuation Device.
Player B: States that they are not going to chain anything.
Playber A: I chain Effect Veiler.

It doesn't mean if your opponent doesn't respond verbally or through text you can go ahead and start to resolve. But hey, we both know your opponent did have a response, did tell you they were chaining and even the judge agreed to let it through, and you didn't want it to go off because you would lose.

[quote="Sound4":ia0zmtx7][quote="Lil Oldman":ia0zmtx7][quote="Sound4":ia0zmtx7]:arrow:
This is from the official rule book

"If your opponent does not respond, you may activate a second effect and create a Chain to your own card's activation." This even stated in the official rulebook."
I was never rushing. My opponent was making plays but I was focused on the chat so after that I was reading my opponent cards. N3sh didn't care though pretty much nobody can read and type at the same time. I literally said read multiple times.[/quote:ia0zmtx7]
So what you are saying is that he didn't said he had a response?[/quote:ia0zmtx7]
My opponent never responded especially when I clearly communicated everything my nachster 2nd effect did. There is no reason why my opponent took so long to respond.[/quote:ia0zmtx7]
Stop lying, your opponent DID respond, YOU CHOSE TO IGNORE IT.

[quote="Sound4":22tluejs][quote="greg503":22tluejs][quote="Sound4":22tluejs]
This is from the official rule book

"If your opponent does not respond, you may activate a second effect and create a Chain to your own card's activation." This even stated in the official rulebook."
I was never rushing. My opponent was making plays but I was focused on the chat so after that I was reading my opponent cards. N3sh didn't care though pretty much nobody can read and type at the same time. I literally said read multiple times.[/quote:22tluejs]
CONTEXT, "respond" in that statement means gameplay responses, a fast effect to Chain.[/quote:22tluejs]
And?[/quote:22tluejs]
THUS, it does not justify your behavior.

Let me break this down for you then.
The following is the declaration of cyber dragon nachster's effect to summon itself. your opponent okaying that effect and then you resolving it.

[3:27] Sound4: "Nachster eff"
[3:32] JesusHH123: "ok"
[3:34] Sound4: Sent "Cyber Dragon Core" from hand (1/3) to GY
[3:39] Sound4: Special Summoned "Cyber Dragon Nachster" from hand (2/2) to M-3 (DEF)

The following is the declaration of the effect of cyber dragon nachster to activate when summoned to target a machine monster with 2100 atk or def and special summon it.

[4:07] Sound4: "I also get to summon 2100 machine monster from gy" <- this is the absolute worst way to declare anything. Use the buttons. There is 0 reason to not use the buttons
[4:07] JesusHH123: "you know you can declare their effs with buttons right?"
[4:14] Sound4: Viewed GY
[4:17] JesusHH123: "on eff"

You declared the effect didnt declare your target and your opponent said 10 seconds after declaration before anything even resolved "on eff" aka "on activation of your effect I have a response" The communication is extremely clear here and it cannot get even more clear here. They communicated they had a response and when that response was in 2 words. cyber dragon wasnt even summoned yet.

4:19] JesusHH123: "of summon"
[4:21] Sound4: Stopped viewing GY
[4:24] JesusHH123: "hold on"
[4:31] JesusHH123: "send the cyber dragon back"
[4:31] Sound4: Overlayed "Cyber Dragon" in M-4 onto "Galaxy Soldier" in M-2

You then proceeded to just flat out ignore your opponent for absolutely no reason destroying the gamestate in its entirety and proceeding to overlay your 2 level 5 monsters to begin an xyz summon.

6:36] Sound4: "That does not mean anything if you have a response you say "response" I saw nothing in chat so I thought I was allowed to continue to play"

you are flat out not only sharking but ruining the game and holding up gameplay because they did not say the word "response" exactly that. This behavior is absolutely ridiculous and defending the actions taken here would not be the course of action to take. Everything you did was incorrect and you did everything in this duel with the most malicious of intents.

[9:58] Sound4: "Why did it take you almost 40 seconds to say response"
[10:48] Sound4: "We're you reading my card? You could have read in chat"
[11:01] Sound4: "Sileeis consent in yugioh"

It was 10 seconds not 40 and it was still communicated before anything even resolved so there is no reason to deny the response here.
you posting the cards effect in chat instead of declaring it not only doesnt help your argument but actually goes towards you making the situation more complex. silence is not consent. Every player should always be asking responses to their effects and plays where required and the opponent should always be responding in kind. Any player who does not do these actions is not playing properly and causes issues like these late responses ect.

[28:42] Sound4: "On eff does not mean anything you say "response" when you have a response"
this statement is nonsense. If you actually insist and continue to play demanding that the other players are not allowed to respond unless they say the word respond You will be removed from rated play.

[31:48] Sound4: "I would like an appeal"
[31:53] N3sh: "denied"

^you appealed their ruling and they denied it That means the judge call is over and you need to continue the game or be lossed for non compliance.

You then proceeded to try and force answers out of the judge instead of playing the game. The judge gave the ruling and denied the appeal. There is no debate to be had at that point you either need to comply or be removed from the game.

[45:01] Sound4: "You said nothing on silence is consent in yugioh"
[45:11] N3sh: "cause he wasnt silence"
[45:15] N3sh: "he tried to respond"
[45:20] N3sh: "and u did ignore him"

I already explaind how this works but almost 15 minutes after the game needed to continue ur still trying to argue with the judge.

[46:35] Sound4: "I want the correct answer how is on eff acceptable"
[46:45] Sound4: "Stop eveading

ur demanding a non existant answer as to why communicating when you want to respond is not good enough communication.

[39:11] Sound4: "Ok your opinion on the on my comment"

^this is where I would have been done and ended the game. You would either be asked by me to knock it off and drop the subject and move on last warning or you would get a loss and a uc minor.


so I have gone through the entire game the rest of it after that point is the same song and dance. goes on for a while still. The only thing I see done incorrectly is the judge being extremely lenient me and most other judges wouldnt have even entertained furthur conversation on that matter and kept the duel proceeding once the appeal was denied and you were asked to continue. your behavior in this duel is borderline trolling and very childish. you want things to work exactly the way you want them to work and that is not how things are going to go. please keep my advice in mind and play the game properly while in rated.

N3sh was more than lenient and nice here and you kept wanting to test that and see how far you could go. This is not a game and you are not the only one who needs their judge call answered. Please do not waste judges time like you did in this game.

The discussion is over here.

Sad that this matter had to extend up to 4 pages of thread. We could be having engaging debates but instead we have to deal with this.

[quote="Lil Oldman":1x0knpho]Sad that this matter had to extend up to 4 pages of thread. We could be having engaging debates but instead we have to deal with this.[/quote:1x0knpho]
Engaging debates? On this forum?

You know its bad when even Genexwrecker calls you out and does a break down.

[quote="Genexwrecker":crdknhk7]Let me break this down for you then.
The following is the declaration of cyber dragon nachster's effect to summon itself. your opponent okaying that effect and then you resolving it.

[3:27] Sound4: "Nachster eff"
[3:32] JesusHH123: "ok"
[3:34] Sound4: Sent "Cyber Dragon Core" from hand (1/3) to GY
[3:39] Sound4: Special Summoned "Cyber Dragon Nachster" from hand (2/2) to M-3 (DEF)

The following is the declaration of the effect of cyber dragon nachster to activate when summoned to target a machine monster with 2100 atk or def and special summon it.

[4:07] Sound4: "I also get to summon 2100 machine monster from gy" <- this is the absolute worst way to declare anything. Use the buttons. There is 0 reason to not use the buttons
[4:07] JesusHH123: "you know you can declare their effs with buttons right?"
[4:14] Sound4: Viewed GY
[4:17] JesusHH123: "on eff"

You declared the effect didnt declare your target and your opponent said 10 seconds after declaration before anything even resolved "on eff" aka "on activation of your effect I have a response" The communication is extremely clear here and it cannot get even more clear here. They communicated they had a response and when that response was in 2 words. cyber dragon wasnt even summoned yet.

4:19] JesusHH123: "of summon"
[4:21] Sound4: Stopped viewing GY
[4:24] JesusHH123: "hold on"
[4:31] JesusHH123: "send the cyber dragon back"
[4:31] Sound4: Overlayed "Cyber Dragon" in M-4 onto "Galaxy Soldier" in M-2

You then proceeded to just flat out ignore your opponent for absolutely no reason destroying the gamestate in its entirety and proceeding to overlay your 2 level 5 monsters to begin an xyz summon.

6:36] Sound4: "That does not mean anything if you have a response you say "response" I saw nothing in chat so I thought I was allowed to continue to play"

you are flat out not only sharking but ruining the game and holding up gameplay because they did not say the word "response" exactly that. This behavior is absolutely ridiculous and defending the actions taken here would not be the course of action to take. Everything you did was incorrect and you did everything in this duel with the most malicious of intents.

[9:58] Sound4: "Why did it take you almost 40 seconds to say response"
[10:48] Sound4: "We're you reading my card? You could have read in chat"
[11:01] Sound4: "Sileeis consent in yugioh"

It was 10 seconds not 40 and it was still communicated before anything even resolved so there is no reason to deny the response here.
you posting the cards effect in chat instead of declaring it not only doesnt help your argument but actually goes towards you making the situation more complex. silence is not consent. Every player should always be asking responses to their effects and plays where required and the opponent should always be responding in kind. Any player who does not do these actions is not playing properly and causes issues like these late responses ect.

[28:42] Sound4: "On eff does not mean anything you say "response" when you have a response"
this statement is nonsense. If you actually insist and continue to play demanding that the other players are not allowed to respond unless they say the word respond You will be removed from rated play.

[31:48] Sound4: "I would like an appeal"
[31:53] N3sh: "denied"

^you appealed their ruling and they denied it That means the judge call is over and you need to continue the game or be lossed for non compliance.

You then proceeded to try and force answers out of the judge instead of playing the game. The judge gave the ruling and denied the appeal. There is no debate to be had at that point you either need to comply or be removed from the game.

[45:01] Sound4: "You said nothing on silence is consent in yugioh"
[45:11] N3sh: "cause he wasnt silence"
[45:15] N3sh: "he tried to respond"
[45:20] N3sh: "and u did ignore him"

I already explaind how this works but almost 15 minutes after the game needed to continue ur still trying to argue with the judge.

[46:35] Sound4: "I want the correct answer how is on eff acceptable"
[46:45] Sound4: "Stop eveading

ur demanding a non existant answer as to why communicating when you want to respond is not good enough communication.

[39:11] Sound4: "Ok your opinion on the on my comment"

^this is where I would have been done and ended the game. You would either be asked by me to knock it off and drop the subject and move on last warning or you would get a loss and a uc minor.


so I have gone through the entire game the rest of it after that point is the same song and dance. goes on for a while still. The only thing I see done incorrectly is the judge being extremely lenient me and most other judges wouldnt have even entertained furthur conversation on that matter and kept the duel proceeding once the appeal was denied and you were asked to continue. your behavior in this duel is borderline trolling and very childish. you want things to work exactly the way you want them to work and that is not how things are going to go. please keep my advice in mind and play the game properly while in rated.

N3sh was more than lenient and nice here and you kept wanting to test that and see how far you could go. This is not a game and you are not the only one who needs their judge call answered. Please do not waste judges time like you did in this game.

The discussion is over here.[/quote:crdknhk7]
https://www.yugioh-card.com/ph/event/ru ... s/?lang=en
Here is a link on how it is played in tournaments
"Though an average of 3 minutes may be spent on each turn, excessive time should not be spent to allow the tournament to proceed properly. Any duelists caught taking too long (or intentionally stalling for time) may be penalised".
You say how I said nachster 2nd eff was horrible. The reason why I did that was because I wanted to make jt clear what nachster 2nd eff so my opponent doesn't have to read so he can respond quicker. I was asking questions why he took so long. What you are saying contradicts what other have agreed with in the past about silence is consent in yugioh. From 4:07 to 4:14 I literally waited an extra seven seconds for my opponent took so long to respond.

I don't understand why N3sh didn't mention that when I made it clear my nachster 2nd eff was activating. In a duel your suppose to communicate clearly in a duel so the opponent knows what are trying to do. I didn't know what my opponent response was as well. I saw nothing in GY so it couldn't have been ash.

There is nothing in this duel that would warrant a game loss. Me asking questions isn't against the rules. I would have literally gotten the game loss if I was sharing and N3sh would have mentioned it.

The way N3sh was acting was also terrible. Him saying that he doesn't want to read what I am saying because he had "other calls" there are other judges for that. I wanted answers to make the situation is clear l. There is nothing clear with "on eff" it was never a good indication if you have a response or not. I explained everything well but N3sh didn't care and wanted rush and ignore.

[quote="Sound4":2qkclfj5][quote="Genexwrecker":2qkclfj5]Let me break this down for you then.
The following is the declaration of cyber dragon nachster's effect to summon itself. your opponent okaying that effect and then you resolving it.

[3:27] Sound4: "Nachster eff"
[3:32] JesusHH123: "ok"
[3:34] Sound4: Sent "Cyber Dragon Core" from hand (1/3) to GY
[3:39] Sound4: Special Summoned "Cyber Dragon Nachster" from hand (2/2) to M-3 (DEF)

The following is the declaration of the effect of cyber dragon nachster to activate when summoned to target a machine monster with 2100 atk or def and special summon it.

[4:07] Sound4: "I also get to summon 2100 machine monster from gy" <- this is the absolute worst way to declare anything. Use the buttons. There is 0 reason to not use the buttons
[4:07] JesusHH123: "you know you can declare their effs with buttons right?"
[4:14] Sound4: Viewed GY
[4:17] JesusHH123: "on eff"

You declared the effect didnt declare your target and your opponent said 10 seconds after declaration before anything even resolved "on eff" aka "on activation of your effect I have a response" The communication is extremely clear here and it cannot get even more clear here. They communicated they had a response and when that response was in 2 words. cyber dragon wasnt even summoned yet.

4:19] JesusHH123: "of summon"
[4:21] Sound4: Stopped viewing GY
[4:24] JesusHH123: "hold on"
[4:31] JesusHH123: "send the cyber dragon back"
[4:31] Sound4: Overlayed "Cyber Dragon" in M-4 onto "Galaxy Soldier" in M-2

You then proceeded to just flat out ignore your opponent for absolutely no reason destroying the gamestate in its entirety and proceeding to overlay your 2 level 5 monsters to begin an xyz summon.

6:36] Sound4: "That does not mean anything if you have a response you say "response" I saw nothing in chat so I thought I was allowed to continue to play"

you are flat out not only sharking but ruining the game and holding up gameplay because they did not say the word "response" exactly that. This behavior is absolutely ridiculous and defending the actions taken here would not be the course of action to take. Everything you did was incorrect and you did everything in this duel with the most malicious of intents.

[9:58] Sound4: "Why did it take you almost 40 seconds to say response"
[10:48] Sound4: "We're you reading my card? You could have read in chat"
[11:01] Sound4: "Sileeis consent in yugioh"

It was 10 seconds not 40 and it was still communicated before anything even resolved so there is no reason to deny the response here.
you posting the cards effect in chat instead of declaring it not only doesnt help your argument but actually goes towards you making the situation more complex. silence is not consent. Every player should always be asking responses to their effects and plays where required and the opponent should always be responding in kind. Any player who does not do these actions is not playing properly and causes issues like these late responses ect.

[28:42] Sound4: "On eff does not mean anything you say "response" when you have a response"
this statement is nonsense. If you actually insist and continue to play demanding that the other players are not allowed to respond unless they say the word respond You will be removed from rated play.

[31:48] Sound4: "I would like an appeal"
[31:53] N3sh: "denied"

^you appealed their ruling and they denied it That means the judge call is over and you need to continue the game or be lossed for non compliance.

You then proceeded to try and force answers out of the judge instead of playing the game. The judge gave the ruling and denied the appeal. There is no debate to be had at that point you either need to comply or be removed from the game.

[45:01] Sound4: "You said nothing on silence is consent in yugioh"
[45:11] N3sh: "cause he wasnt silence"
[45:15] N3sh: "he tried to respond"
[45:20] N3sh: "and u did ignore him"

I already explaind how this works but almost 15 minutes after the game needed to continue ur still trying to argue with the judge.

[46:35] Sound4: "I want the correct answer how is on eff acceptable"
[46:45] Sound4: "Stop eveading

ur demanding a non existant answer as to why communicating when you want to respond is not good enough communication.

[39:11] Sound4: "Ok your opinion on the on my comment"

^this is where I would have been done and ended the game. You would either be asked by me to knock it off and drop the subject and move on last warning or you would get a loss and a uc minor.


so I have gone through the entire game the rest of it after that point is the same song and dance. goes on for a while still. The only thing I see done incorrectly is the judge being extremely lenient me and most other judges wouldnt have even entertained furthur conversation on that matter and kept the duel proceeding once the appeal was denied and you were asked to continue. your behavior in this duel is borderline trolling and very childish. you want things to work exactly the way you want them to work and that is not how things are going to go. please keep my advice in mind and play the game properly while in rated.

N3sh was more than lenient and nice here and you kept wanting to test that and see how far you could go. This is not a game and you are not the only one who needs their judge call answered. Please do not waste judges time like you did in this game.

The discussion is over here.[/quote:2qkclfj5]
https://www.yugioh-card.com/ph/event/ru ... s/?lang=en
Here is a link on how it is played in tournaments
"Though an average of 3 minutes may be spent on each turn, excessive time should not be spent to allow the tournament to proceed properly. Any duelists caught taking too long (or intentionally stalling for time) may be penalised".
You say how I said nachster 2nd eff was horrible. The reason why I did that was because I wanted to make jt clear what nachster 2nd eff so my opponent doesn't have to read so he can respond quicker. I was asking questions why he took so long. What you are saying contradicts what other have agreed with in the past about silence is consent in yugioh. From 4:07 to 4:14 I literally waited an extra seven seconds for my opponent took so long to respond.

I don't understand why N3sh didn't mention that when I made it clear my nachster 2nd eff was activating. In a duel your suppose to communicate clearly in a duel so the opponent knows what are trying to do. I didn't know what my opponent response was as well. I saw nothing in GY so it couldn't have been ash.

There is nothing in this duel that would warrant a game loss. Me asking questions isn't against the rules. I would have literally gotten the game loss if I was sharing and N3sh would have mentioned it.

The way N3sh was acting was also terrible. Him saying that he doesn't want to read what I am saying because he had "other calls" there are other judges for that. I wanted answers to make the situation is clear l. There is nothing clear with "on eff" it was never a good indication if you have a response or not. I explained everything well but N3sh didn't care and wanted rush and ignore.[/quote:2qkclfj5]


Okay first of all to quote your own recourse:

• Any behaviors or actions that result in a delay of the duel/event may result in penalties towards the offender(s).
• If the duelist acts in such a way which causes unreasonable stalling for time unintentional or otherwise), the referee will first issue a 'warning'.

Using that as a reference in a real life tournament you would have gotten whatever penalty the judges there believed was fitting in this scenario, however real life tournaments and DB don’t have the same rules, regardless if that is something good or not.

Don’t know if someone else pointed that out up until this point, but:
[76:31] "Herz eff"
[77:12] Added "Cyber Dragon Core" from Deck to hand

You aren’t able to add Cyber Dragon Core from your deck to your hand using Cyber Dragon Herz’s last effect since its name isn’t Cyber Dragon while in the deck. You would only be able to add the original cyber dragon from your deck, or nachster, cyber dragon, or the other copy of herz from your GY. In none of these scenarios would you end up with core in your hand after herz resolved. I don’t know if that was done maliciously and I don’t really care, just pointing it out. The exact same thing happens at the beginning of the game where you again add nachster with herz’s effect, again not saying you did that with malicious intent, just saying that was an illegal move that the judge didn’t caught at the time.
( This is herz’s relevant effect by the way: “If this card is sent to the GY: You can add 1 other "Cyber Dragon" from your Deck or GY to your hand.” ) ( It mentions "Cyber Dragon" as in the first cyber dragon monster, in doesn’t mention "Cyber Dragon" monster , like cards such as Cyberload Fusion do )
Something else that I haven’t seen being mentioned up to this point. Nachster’s eff in the hand (to summon itself) and Naschter’s eff on the field are different effects. However you mention [4:07] "I also get to summon 2100 machine monster from gy", just as if they are the same effect, which can definitely be seen as misleading your opponent, intentionally (to avoid potential interuptions such as belle, imperm, veiler, etc) or unintentionally (you didn’t know how your cards work), one could suggest that you just didn’t know how to declare your effects properly but there is no other instance of you not declaring an effect like that in that game which by itself is suspicious and implies intention behind that. Something else I noticed:
[3:39] Special Summoned "Cyber Dragon Nachster" from hand (2/2) to M-3 (DEF)
[4:07] "I also get to summon 2100 machine monster from gy"
You took your sweet time before declaring naschter’s trigger effect that activates on the field. That would suggest 2 scenarios:
1) You wanted to waste your opponent’s time and stall (remember they didn’t have any mandatory trigger effects to activate, so you would be able to activate naschter’s effect before they had a chance to respond and there was no reason for you to wait 28 seconds to declare its effect)
2) You straight out forgot to activate its trigger effect and remembered it at that point, something to point out though is that your opponent could have responded at that point so you delaying such an effect could be seen as maliciously trying to gain information about your opponent’s hand
(In either case you shouldn’t have waited so long to activate naschter’s effect )
I am not saying that you did in fact do one of the above I am just saying that this is easily how a spectator that just sees the replay could interpret the situation
Don’t take this as a personal attack, I don’t know you and you don’t know me, I got nothing against you I am just giving my perspective on the matter as objectively as I possibly can.
As a personal suggestion, don’t post replays that have ambiguous interpretation as this one, since some people that see them might ask for penalties. In this case the judge didn’t apply any penalty due to them thinking that none were needed (although other judges could have applied a penalty as previously mentioned by genex), although that might not always be the case so you might want to show as much understanding to the judges as the judge in question showed to you this time (even if cannot see that at this point in time).
(Also sorry for the wall of text)

"There is nothing in this duel that would warrant a game loss. Me asking questions isn't against the rules."

Actually it is against the rules to continue to ask redundant questions to the judge to hold up the game. The judge call was over and your questions were given an answer that required one. all you had to do was continue the game.

[quote="Genexwrecker":25wuxpj6]"There is nothing in this duel that would warrant a game loss. Me asking questions isn't against the rules."

Actually it is against the rules to continue to ask redundant questions to the judge to hold up the game. The judge call was over and your questions were given an answer that required one. all you had to do was continue the game.[/quote:25wuxpj6]
Me asking apparently asking "redundant" questions falls under what exactly?

[quote="Sound4":zavndwta][quote="Genexwrecker":zavndwta]"There is nothing in this duel that would warrant a game loss. Me asking questions isn't against the rules."

Actually it is against the rules to continue to ask redundant questions to the judge to hold up the game. The judge call was over and your questions were given an answer that required one. all you had to do was continue the game.[/quote:zavndwta]
Me asking apparently asking "redundant" questions falls under what exactly?[/quote:zavndwta]
Slow play.

[quote="Renji Asuka":kjuhhhi2][quote="Sound4":kjuhhhi2][quote="Genexwrecker":kjuhhhi2]"There is nothing in this duel that would warrant a game loss. Me asking questions isn't against the rules."

Actually it is against the rules to continue to ask redundant questions to the judge to hold up the game. The judge call was over and your questions were given an answer that required one. all you had to do was continue the game.[/quote:kjuhhhi2]
Me asking apparently asking "redundant" questions falls under what exactly?[/quote:kjuhhhi2]
Slow play.[/quote:kjuhhhi2]
By what are you are saying it's simple you don't know what slow play is. Slow play is a player is excessively slow while searching his or her Deck with an appropriate effect. Me asking questions isn't slow play.

[quote="Sound4":3r5ft2mn][quote="Renji Asuka":3r5ft2mn][quote="Sound4":3r5ft2mn]
Me asking apparently asking "redundant" questions falls under what exactly?[/quote:3r5ft2mn]
Slow play.[/quote:3r5ft2mn]
By what are you are saying it's simple you don't know what slow play is. Slow play is a player is excessively slow while searching his or her Deck with an appropriate effect. Me asking questions isn't slow play.[/quote:3r5ft2mn]
You do realize that Slow Play here isn't limited by the examples in the rules right? You were deliberately not playing the game when you were told to by the judge. That alone is you slow playing.

Slowplay is any action holding up a game for no reason. Some versions can also be considered stalling.

[quote="Genexwrecker":31nwywc1]Slowplay is any action holding up a game for no reason. Some versions can also be considered stalling.[/quote:31nwywc1]
No it isn't it was never stated never implied and factually incorrect. The definition of slow play is a player who is excessively slow while searching his or her Deck with an appropriate effect. Me asking questions isn't slow play. Another thing me asking questions isn't an offense either. Where do you get this false information?

[quote="Renji Asuka":2cnh6y75][quote="Sound4":2cnh6y75][quote="Renji Asuka":2cnh6y75]
Slow play.[/quote:2cnh6y75]
By what are you are saying it's simple you don't know what slow play is. Slow play is a player is excessively slow while searching his or her Deck with an appropriate effect. Me asking questions isn't slow play.[/quote:2cnh6y75]
You do realize that Slow Play here isn't limited by the examples in the rules right? You were deliberately not playing the game when you were told to by the judge. That alone is you slow playing.[/quote:2cnh6y75]
No it was never stated never implied and simply factually incorrect. Me asking questions isn't an offense. I literally told N3sh that I was reading multiple times yet N3sh was just saying proceed me not knowing the opponents cards to see if I have a response or just simply know what my opponent is doing but N3sh didn't care.

[quote="Sound4":e5gsoohb][quote="Genexwrecker":e5gsoohb]Slowplay is any action holding up a game for no reason. Some versions can also be considered stalling.[/quote:e5gsoohb]
No it isn't it was never stated never implied and factually incorrect. The definition of slow play is a player who is excessively slow while searching his or her Deck with an appropriate effect. Me asking questions isn't slow play. Another thing me asking questions isn't an offense either. Where do you get this false information?[/quote:e5gsoohb]
[url:e5gsoohb]https://www.duelingbook.com/rules[/url:e5gsoohb]
Slow Play (Minor): Unintentionally playing slowly or stalling, causing game delay. A reasonable pace must be kept even if a situation is complex. In-Duel warning.
Slow Play (Major): Unresponsive or upgrade after a second Slow Play (Minor) offense. A player will not make a move even after instructed by an Administrator. Game/Match Loss.

Offenses are not limited to examples given in italics.

[quote="Lil Oldman":3dqt0bx6][quote="Sound4":3dqt0bx6][quote="Genexwrecker":3dqt0bx6]Slowplay is any action holding up a game for no reason. Some versions can also be considered stalling.[/quote:3dqt0bx6]
No it isn't it was never stated never implied and factually incorrect. The definition of slow play is a player who is excessively slow while searching his or her Deck with an appropriate effect. Me asking questions isn't slow play. Another thing me asking questions isn't an offense either. Where do you get this false information?[/quote:3dqt0bx6]
[url:3dqt0bx6]https://www.duelingbook.com/rules[/url:3dqt0bx6]
Slow Play (Minor): Unintentionally playing slowly or stalling, causing game delay. A reasonable pace must be kept even if a situation is complex. In-Duel warning.
Slow Play (Major): Unresponsive or upgrade after a second Slow Play (Minor) offense. A player will not make a move even after instructed by an Administrator. Game/Match Loss.

Offenses are not limited to examples given in italics.[/quote:3dqt0bx6]
Here is a link on how slow play is penalized. https://yugioh.fandom.com/wiki/Slow_Play
"This penalty is appropriate when a player intentionally or unintentionally plays slowly, causing a delay in the game. It is a player’s responsibility to play at a reasonable pace, regardless of how complex a situation may be."
I was never playing slow in that duel. Like I said earlier I was reading my opponents card yet N3sh didn't care and didn't allow me to read the opponent cards. Again me asking questions isn't an offense.

[quote="Sound4":18unfe9k][quote="Lil Oldman":18unfe9k][quote="Sound4":18unfe9k]
No it isn't it was never stated never implied and factually incorrect. The definition of slow play is a player who is excessively slow while searching his or her Deck with an appropriate effect. Me asking questions isn't slow play. Another thing me asking questions isn't an offense either. Where do you get this false information?[/quote:18unfe9k]
[url:18unfe9k]https://www.duelingbook.com/rules[/url:18unfe9k]
Slow Play (Minor): Unintentionally playing slowly or stalling, causing game delay. A reasonable pace must be kept even if a situation is complex. In-Duel warning.
Slow Play (Major): Unresponsive or upgrade after a second Slow Play (Minor) offense. A player will not make a move even after instructed by an Administrator. Game/Match Loss.

Offenses are not limited to examples given in italics.[/quote:18unfe9k]
Here is a link on how slow play is penalized. https://yugioh.fandom.com/wiki/Slow_Play
"This penalty is appropriate when a player intentionally or unintentionally plays slowly, causing a delay in the game. It is a player’s responsibility to play at a reasonable pace, regardless of how complex a situation may be."
I was never playing slow in that duel. Like I said earlier I was reading my opponents card yet N3sh didn't care and didn't allow me to read the opponent cards. Again me asking questions isn't an offense.[/quote:18unfe9k]
Yes you were slow playing, card reading shouldn't take that long. Again, asking the same question that was already answered and refusing to play until they answer is intentional stalling.

[quote="Lil Oldman":31db8lye][quote="Sound4":31db8lye][quote="Lil Oldman":31db8lye]
[url:31db8lye]https://www.duelingbook.com/rules[/url:31db8lye]
Slow Play (Minor): Unintentionally playing slowly or stalling, causing game delay. A reasonable pace must be kept even if a situation is complex. In-Duel warning.
Slow Play (Major): Unresponsive or upgrade after a second Slow Play (Minor) offense. A player will not make a move even after instructed by an Administrator. Game/Match Loss.

Offenses are not limited to examples given in italics.[/quote:31db8lye]
Here is a link on how slow play is penalized. https://yugioh.fandom.com/wiki/Slow_Play
"This penalty is appropriate when a player intentionally or unintentionally plays slowly, causing a delay in the game. It is a player’s responsibility to play at a reasonable pace, regardless of how complex a situation may be."
I was never playing slow in that duel. Like I said earlier I was reading my opponents card yet N3sh didn't care and didn't allow me to read the opponent cards. Again me asking questions isn't an offense.[/quote:31db8lye]
Yes you were slow playing, card reading shouldn't take that long. Again, asking the same question that was already answered and refusing to play until they answer is intentional stalling.[/quote:31db8lye]
I already mentioned this in another post pretty much noby can read and type at the same time so while I was reading N3sh was just saying "proceed" which prevented me from reading my opponent card as I had to say read again.

[quote="Lil Oldman":342iv1ur][quote="Sound4":342iv1ur][quote="Lil Oldman":342iv1ur]
[url:342iv1ur]https://www.duelingbook.com/rules[/url:342iv1ur]
Slow Play (Minor): Unintentionally playing slowly or stalling, causing game delay. A reasonable pace must be kept even if a situation is complex. In-Duel warning.
Slow Play (Major): Unresponsive or upgrade after a second Slow Play (Minor) offense. A player will not make a move even after instructed by an Administrator. Game/Match Loss.

Offenses are not limited to examples given in italics.[/quote:342iv1ur]
Here is a link on how slow play is penalized. https://yugioh.fandom.com/wiki/Slow_Play
"This penalty is appropriate when a player intentionally or unintentionally plays slowly, causing a delay in the game. It is a player’s responsibility to play at a reasonable pace, regardless of how complex a situation may be."
I was never playing slow in that duel. Like I said earlier I was reading my opponents card yet N3sh didn't care and didn't allow me to read the opponent cards. Again me asking questions isn't an offense.[/quote:342iv1ur]
Yes you were slow playing, card reading shouldn't take that long. Again, asking the same question that was already answered and refusing to play until they answer is intentional stalling.[/quote:342iv1ur]
I already mentioned this in another post pretty much noby can read and type at the same time so while I was reading N3sh was just saying "proceed" which prevented me from reading my opponent card as I had to say read again.

On accident making two of the same posts

[quote="Sound4":2a2a9tmo][quote="Lil Oldman":2a2a9tmo][quote="Sound4":2a2a9tmo]
Here is a link on how slow play is penalized. https://yugioh.fandom.com/wiki/Slow_Play
"This penalty is appropriate when a player intentionally or unintentionally plays slowly, causing a delay in the game. It is a player’s responsibility to play at a reasonable pace, regardless of how complex a situation may be."
I was never playing slow in that duel. Like I said earlier I was reading my opponents card yet N3sh didn't care and didn't allow me to read the opponent cards. Again me asking questions isn't an offense.[/quote:2a2a9tmo]
Yes you were slow playing, card reading shouldn't take that long. Again, asking the same question that was already answered and refusing to play until they answer is intentional stalling.[/quote:2a2a9tmo]
I already mentioned this in another post pretty much noby can read and type at the same time so while I was reading N3sh was just saying "proceed" which prevented me from reading my opponent card as I had to say read again.[/quote:2a2a9tmo]
Stop making excuses for yourself. You had to read Harpie's Feather Duster, you had no response to it so you still held up the game. You already knew what that card did. But that's beside the point. When the judge tells you to fucking play the game, you fucking play the game. You were doing all you can to hold up the duel.

[quote="Sound4":1b4ydt3u][quote="Lil Oldman":1b4ydt3u][quote="Sound4":1b4ydt3u]
No it isn't it was never stated never implied and factually incorrect. The definition of slow play is a player who is excessively slow while searching his or her Deck with an appropriate effect. Me asking questions isn't slow play. Another thing me asking questions isn't an offense either. Where do you get this false information?[/quote:1b4ydt3u]
[url:1b4ydt3u]https://www.duelingbook.com/rules[/url:1b4ydt3u]
Slow Play (Minor): Unintentionally playing slowly or stalling, causing game delay. A reasonable pace must be kept even if a situation is complex. In-Duel warning.
Slow Play (Major): Unresponsive or upgrade after a second Slow Play (Minor) offense. A player will not make a move even after instructed by an Administrator. Game/Match Loss.

Offenses are not limited to examples given in italics.[/quote:1b4ydt3u]
Here is a link on how slow play is penalized. https://yugioh.fandom.com/wiki/Slow_Play
"This penalty is appropriate when a player intentionally or unintentionally plays slowly, causing a delay in the game. It is a player’s responsibility to play at a reasonable pace, regardless of how complex a situation may be."
I was never playing slow in that duel. Like I said earlier I was reading my opponents card yet N3sh didn't care and didn't allow me to read the opponent cards. Again me asking questions isn't an offense.[/quote:1b4ydt3u]
Doesn't matter what you link, you still slow played. It was a MAJOR, you're lucky you didn't get a game loss.

Genex, can you just ban this guy already? He's straight up trying to defend himself for sharking his opponents at this point.

[quote="Sound4":234gt7vy][quote="Lil Oldman":234gt7vy][quote="Sound4":234gt7vy]
No it isn't it was never stated never implied and factually incorrect. The definition of slow play is a player who is excessively slow while searching his or her Deck with an appropriate effect. Me asking questions isn't slow play. Another thing me asking questions isn't an offense either. Where do you get this false information?[/quote:234gt7vy]
[url:234gt7vy]https://www.duelingbook.com/rules[/url:234gt7vy]
Slow Play (Minor): Unintentionally playing slowly or stalling, causing game delay. A reasonable pace must be kept even if a situation is complex. In-Duel warning.
Slow Play (Major): Unresponsive or upgrade after a second Slow Play (Minor) offense. A player will not make a move even after instructed by an Administrator. Game/Match Loss.

Offenses are not limited to examples given in italics.[/quote:234gt7vy]
Here is a link on how slow play is penalized. https://yugioh.fandom.com/wiki/Slow_Play
"This penalty is appropriate when a player intentionally or unintentionally plays slowly, causing a delay in the game. It is a player’s responsibility to play at a reasonable pace, regardless of how complex a situation may be."
I was never playing slow in that duel. Like I said earlier I was reading my opponents card yet N3sh didn't care and didn't allow me to read the opponent cards. Again me asking questions isn't an offense.[/quote:234gt7vy]
We are not the wikia we have slowplay clearly defined in our rules page which was already linked to you. if you dont want to follow that rules page then you dont need to play on the site.

DB rules on Non-compliance: Refusing to comply with an Administrator's instructions and not making a move even by their instruction.
Examples they give:
- A player fails to comply with an Administrator's instructions after being given 30 seconds to do so.
- A player continues to be extensively slow when making a move after being told to play faster.
- Refusing to play after a receiving a warning, or after an issue was addressed and solved.

[quote="Genexwrecker":ma3yywws][quote="Sound4":ma3yywws][quote="Lil Oldman":ma3yywws]
[url:ma3yywws]https://www.duelingbook.com/rules[/url:ma3yywws]
Slow Play (Minor): Unintentionally playing slowly or stalling, causing game delay. A reasonable pace must be kept even if a situation is complex. In-Duel warning.
Slow Play (Major): Unresponsive or upgrade after a second Slow Play (Minor) offense. A player will not make a move even after instructed by an Administrator. Game/Match Loss.

Offenses are not limited to examples given in italics.[/quote:ma3yywws]
Here is a link on how slow play is penalized. https://yugioh.fandom.com/wiki/Slow_Play
"This penalty is appropriate when a player intentionally or unintentionally plays slowly, causing a delay in the game. It is a player’s responsibility to play at a reasonable pace, regardless of how complex a situation may be."
I was never playing slow in that duel. Like I said earlier I was reading my opponents card yet N3sh didn't care and didn't allow me to read the opponent cards. Again me asking questions isn't an offense.[/quote:ma3yywws]
We are not the wikia we have slowplay clearly defined in our rules page which was already linked to you. if you dont want to follow that rules page then you dont need to play on the site.[/quote:ma3yywws]
I followed all of the rules you say I should have been given the game loss but I didn't break any rules that would have warranted a game loss.

[quote="Sound4":1zspliw2][quote="Genexwrecker":1zspliw2][quote="Sound4":1zspliw2]
Here is a link on how slow play is penalized. https://yugioh.fandom.com/wiki/Slow_Play
"This penalty is appropriate when a player intentionally or unintentionally plays slowly, causing a delay in the game. It is a player’s responsibility to play at a reasonable pace, regardless of how complex a situation may be."
I was never playing slow in that duel. Like I said earlier I was reading my opponents card yet N3sh didn't care and didn't allow me to read the opponent cards. Again me asking questions isn't an offense.[/quote:1zspliw2]
We are not the wikia we have slowplay clearly defined in our rules page which was already linked to you. if you dont want to follow that rules page then you dont need to play on the site.[/quote:1zspliw2]
I followed all of the rules you say I should have been given the game loss but I didn't break any rules that would have warranted a game loss.[/quote:1zspliw2]
When you even have an admin disagreeing with you with facts and other people calling out your bullshit. At that point stop doubling down. You're in the wrong PERIOD. You have yet to be correct even ONCE.

[quote="Sound4":1dqtm4wm][quote="Genexwrecker":1dqtm4wm][quote="Sound4":1dqtm4wm]
Here is a link on how slow play is penalized. https://yugioh.fandom.com/wiki/Slow_Play
"This penalty is appropriate when a player intentionally or unintentionally plays slowly, causing a delay in the game. It is a player’s responsibility to play at a reasonable pace, regardless of how complex a situation may be."
I was never playing slow in that duel. Like I said earlier I was reading my opponents card yet N3sh didn't care and didn't allow me to read the opponent cards. Again me asking questions isn't an offense.[/quote:1dqtm4wm]
We are not the wikia we have slowplay clearly defined in our rules page which was already linked to you. if you dont want to follow that rules page then you dont need to play on the site.[/quote:1dqtm4wm]
I followed all of the rules you say I should have been given the game loss but I didn't break any rules that would have warranted a game loss.[/quote:1dqtm4wm]
DB rules on Non-compliance: Refusing to comply with an Administrator's instructions and not making a move even by their instruction.

[quote="Renji Asuka":5wnlt2fp][quote="Sound4":5wnlt2fp][quote="Genexwrecker":5wnlt2fp]
We are not the wikia we have slowplay clearly defined in our rules page which was already linked to you. if you dont want to follow that rules page then you dont need to play on the site.[/quote:5wnlt2fp]
I followed all of the rules you say I should have been given the game loss but I didn't break any rules that would have warranted a game loss.[/quote:5wnlt2fp]
When you even have an admin disagreeing with you with facts and other people calling out your bullshit. At that point stop doubling down. You're in the wrong PERIOD. You have yet to be correct even ONCE.[/quote:5wnlt2fp]
I have provided links to support my claims yet you are not reading what I am saying. It seems in a lot of your posts that you have not read my previous posts properly and making false claims.

[quote="Sound4":1lc0ci3y][quote="Renji Asuka":1lc0ci3y][quote="Sound4":1lc0ci3y]
I followed all of the rules you say I should have been given the game loss but I didn't break any rules that would have warranted a game loss.[/quote:1lc0ci3y]
When you even have an admin disagreeing with you with facts and other people calling out your bullshit. At that point stop doubling down. You're in the wrong PERIOD. You have yet to be correct even ONCE.[/quote:1lc0ci3y]
I have provided links to support my claims yet you are not reading what I am saying. It seems in a lot of your posts that you have not read my previous posts properly and making false claims.[/quote:1lc0ci3y]
And you been provided links to the rules and even had it explained to you and you won't accept this. Yugioh Wiki isn't a valid source for your claims at all when it comes to the rules on this site.

I [quote="Renji Asuka":33qvfwyg][quote="Sound4":33qvfwyg][quote="Renji Asuka":33qvfwyg]
When you even have an admin disagreeing with you with facts and other people calling out your bullshit. At that point stop doubling down. You're in the wrong PERIOD. You have yet to be correct even ONCE.[/quote:33qvfwyg]
I have provided links to support my claims yet you are not reading what I am saying. It seems in a lot of your posts that you have not read my previous posts properly and making false claims.[/quote:33qvfwyg]
And you been provided links to the rules and even had it explained to you and you won't accept this. Yugioh Wiki isn't a valid source for your claims at all when it comes to the rules on this site.[/quote:33qvfwyg]
I literally just said in one of my other posts that me asking questions isn't an offense so you're making a valid point. Yugioh wiki is actually one of main sources people use regarding the rules
in yugioh.

[quote="Sound4":1xjex787]:twisted: I [quote="Renji Asuka":1xjex787][quote="Sound4":1xjex787]
I have provided links to support my claims yet you are not reading what I am saying. It seems in a lot of your posts that you have not read my previous posts properly and making false claims.[/quote:1xjex787]
And you been provided links to the rules and even had it explained to you and you won't accept this. Yugioh Wiki isn't a valid source for your claims at all when it comes to the rules on this site.[/quote:1xjex787]
I literally just said in one of my other posts that me asking questions isn't an offense so you're making a valid point. Yugioh wiki is actually one of main sources people use regarding the rules
in yugioh.[/quote:1xjex787]
But we are not in the wiki, are we?

[quote="Sound4":1j76mxx2]:twisted: I [quote="Renji Asuka":1j76mxx2][quote="Sound4":1j76mxx2]
I have provided links to support my claims yet you are not reading what I am saying. It seems in a lot of your posts that you have not read my previous posts properly and making false claims.[/quote:1j76mxx2]
And you been provided links to the rules and even had it explained to you and you won't accept this. Yugioh Wiki isn't a valid source for your claims at all when it comes to the rules on this site.[/quote:1j76mxx2]
I literally just said in one of my other posts that me asking questions isn't an offense so you're making a valid point. Yugioh wiki is actually one of main sources people use regarding the rules
in yugioh.[/quote:1j76mxx2]
When your questions is holding up the game state and you're not playing when the ruling has been given, yes, it is against the rules whether you like it or not. The only time the wiki comes into play is for card rulings or game rulings.

This is DuelingBook, it has its own rules which you kept breaking.

If you tried this irl, you'd be kicked out from the store.

You were in the wrong end of story.

[quote="Renji Asuka":3cuzmr61][quote="Sound4":3cuzmr61]:twisted: I [quote="Renji Asuka":3cuzmr61]
And you been provided links to the rules and even had it explained to you and you won't accept this. Yugioh Wiki isn't a valid source for your claims at all when it comes to the rules on this site.[/quote:3cuzmr61]
I literally just said in one of my other posts that me asking questions isn't an offense so you're making a valid point. Yugioh wiki is actually one of main sources people use regarding the rules
in yugioh.[/quote:3cuzmr61]and
When your questions is holding up the game state and you're not playing when the ruling has been given, yes, it is against the rules whether you like it or not. The only time the wiki comes into play is for card rulings or game rulings.

This is DuelingBook, it has its own rules which you kept breaking.[/quote:3cuzmr61]
All my question were all had logic which deserved an answer but N3sh did not care. I literally communicate everything but N3sh didn't mention to the opponent that it was clear I was activating my nachster 2nd effect. Dueling book has similar rulings to yugioh wiki. You say I kept breaking the rules but I see nothing in the duel that I "broke" the rules. I would have been given the game loss if I did.

[quote="greg503":3fwnguqh]If you tried this irl, you'd be kicked out from the store.[/quote:3fwnguqh]
It depends

[quote="Lil Oldman":117t71us][quote="Sound4":117t71us]:twisted: I [quote="Renji Asuka":117t71us]
And you been provided links to the rules and even had it explained to you and you won't accept this. Yugioh Wiki isn't a valid source for your claims at all when it comes to the rules on this site.[/quote:117t71us]
I literally just said in one of my other posts that me asking questions isn't an offense so you're making a valid point. Yugioh wiki is actually one of main sources people use regarding the rules
in yugioh.[/quote:117t71us]
But we are not in the wiki, are we?
[/quote:117t71us]
Dueling book has similar rulings to wiki. Dueling book tries to copy irl as much as possible.

[quote="Sound4":dlpv8qm6][quote="Lil Oldman":dlpv8qm6][quote="Sound4":dlpv8qm6]:twisted: I
I literally just said in one of my other posts that me asking questions isn't an offense so you're making a valid point. Yugioh wiki is actually one of main sources people use regarding the rules
in yugioh.[/quote:dlpv8qm6]
But we are not in the wiki, are we?
[/quote:dlpv8qm6]
Dueling book has similar rulings to wiki. Dueling book tries to copy irl as much as possible.[/quote:dlpv8qm6]
Duelingbook has its OWN RULES that YOU MUST FOLLOW HERE: https://www.duelingbook.com/rules and the rules are not limited to what said examples are.

Let's see what rules you have broken shall we?

Slow Play Major with this "Being unresponsive for 30 seconds after being prompted by an Administrator" particular example, and mind you, what is which results in Game/Match loss

Then you have Rule Sharking, where you tried to prevent your opponent from responding to your card by saying "its too late", to gain an unfair advantage. Which results in a warning

Then you have non-compliance, where you refused to play even if you were told to by the judge after the ruling was given. Which results in a game loss/warning

Then you have cheating in which you tried to misrepresent the rules when you told your opponent "silence is consent". Which results in a 3 Day Ban

Then you have lying to an admin from when you tried to make the claim the opponent didn't say anything, and they did. Which is another 3 Day Ban

Then you have unsportsmanship by also holding up the game because you were about to lose. By not allowing their card to go through even though their response was legal. Warning/Game Loss (Game Loss if upped to major).

Then you have spam minor by constantly asking the judge stupid questions. Which is a warning and when told to stop you ignored the admin so its another 1 day ban.

So do you really want to go down this rabbit hole?

[quote="Sound4":2va9yp2l][quote="greg503":2va9yp2l]If you tried this irl, you'd be kicked out from the store.[/quote:2va9yp2l]
It depends[/quote:2va9yp2l]
No it doesn't, nobody wants to play with someone who ignores the other player

[quote="Renji Asuka":1bu529gr][quote="Sound4":1bu529gr][quote="Lil Oldman":1bu529gr]
But we are not in the wiki, are we?
[/quote:1bu529gr]
Dueling book has similar rulings to wiki. Dueling book tries to copy irl as much as possible.[/quote:1bu529gr]
Duelingbook has its OWN RULES that YOU MUST FOLLOW HERE: https://www.duelingbook.com/rules and the rules are not limited to what said examples are.

Let's see what rules you have broken shall we?

Slow Play Major with this "Being unresponsive for 30 seconds after being prompted by an Administrator" particular example, and mind you, what is which results in Game/Match loss

Then you have Rule Sharking, where you tried to prevent your opponent from responding to your card by saying "its too late", to gain an unfair advantage. Which results in a warning

Then you have non-compliance, where you refused to play even if you were told to by the judge after the ruling was given. Which results in a game loss/warning

Then you have cheating in which you tried to misrepresent the rules when you told your opponent "silence is consent". Which results in a 3 Day Ban

Then you have lying to an admin from when you tried to make the claim the opponent didn't say anything, and they did. Which is another 3 Day Ban

Then you have unsportsmanship by also holding up the game because you were about to lose. By not allowing their card to go through even though their response was legal. Warning/Game Loss (Game Loss if upped to major).

Then you have spam minor by constantly asking the judge stupid questions. Which is a warning and when told to stop you ignored the admin so its another 1 day ban.

So do you really want to go down this rabbit hole?[/quote:1bu529gr]
https://www.yugioh-card.com/ph/event/ru ... s/?lang=en
"Though an average of 3 minutes may be spent on each turn, excessive time should not be spent to allow the tournament to proceed properly. Any duelists caught taking too long (or intentionally stalling for time) may be penalized."
"During the duel, all actions taken by either duelist must be made clear and acknowledged by both sides."
Here is a link on the tournament rules. Vey similar to Dueling book rules. Dueling book tries to copy irl as much as possible. You seem to not be reading what I am saying and missing my points.
I was never unresponsive for 30 seconds. I don't know where you got that from. This never happened in the duel.

I have said this many times but you have ignored multiple times. The judge would have literally said I was rules harking and given me the game loss if I was.

I literally said I was reading multiple times but N3sh didn't care. Pretty much nobody can read and type at the same time.

I never lied I was very clear on what my nachster 2nd effect was but my opponent was silent only after My effect was finished he responded with "on eff" which is a terrible way to respond. I gave the opponent an extra seven seconds to respond. Look at my link on how "on eff" is an way you have a response in yugioh context and not acceptable.

Multiple judge have agreed that silence is consent in yugioh. There is no reason why an opponent should take long to respond. Communication is key.

I actually had the advantage in the duel and again me asking questions isn't an offense.
Spam is saying the same thing irrelevant comment. I had to reapeat the same thing twice as n3sh ignored them all my questions were relevant. The judge yde would have given me a warning and said if I was spamming.

[quote="Sound4":1am4rq4p][quote="Lil Oldman":1am4rq4p][quote="Sound4":1am4rq4p]
No it isn't it was never stated never implied and factually incorrect. The definition of slow play is a player who is excessively slow while searching his or her Deck with an appropriate effect. Me asking questions isn't slow play. Another thing me asking questions isn't an offense either. Where do you get this false information?[/quote:1am4rq4p]
[url:1am4rq4p]https://www.duelingbook.com/rules[/url:1am4rq4p]
Slow Play (Minor): Unintentionally playing slowly or stalling, causing game delay. A reasonable pace must be kept even if a situation is complex. In-Duel warning.
Slow Play (Major): Unresponsive or upgrade after a second Slow Play (Minor) offense. A player will not make a move even after instructed by an Administrator. Game/Match Loss.

Offenses are not limited to examples given in italics.[/quote:1am4rq4p]
Here is a link on how slow play is penalized. https://yugioh.fandom.com/wiki/Slow_Play
"This penalty is appropriate when a player intentionally or unintentionally plays slowly, causing a delay in the game. It is a player’s responsibility to play at a reasonable pace, regardless of how complex a situation may be."
I was never playing slow in that duel. Like I said earlier I was reading my opponents card yet N3sh didn't care and didn't allow me to read the opponent cards. Again me asking questions isn't an offense.[/quote:1am4rq4p]

Wow, I knew fandom was bad, but they don't even have slow play right? You know fandom doesn't know what it's talking about when it says slow play can be intentional.

[quote="Sound4":3h1l5rsr]:twisted: I [quote="Renji Asuka":3h1l5rsr][quote="Sound4":3h1l5rsr]
I have provided links to support my claims yet you are not reading what I am saying. It seems in a lot of your posts that you have not read my previous posts properly and making false claims.[/quote:3h1l5rsr]
And you been provided links to the rules and even had it explained to you and you won't accept this. Yugioh Wiki isn't a valid source for your claims at all when it comes to the rules on this site.[/quote:3h1l5rsr]
I literally just said in one of my other posts that me asking questions isn't an offense so you're making a valid point. Yugioh wiki is actually one of main sources people use regarding the rules
in yugioh.[/quote:3h1l5rsr]

The fandom is a joke. It's outdated, frequently wrong, and isn't worth using for much of anything, especially since Yugipedia pretty much outclasses it already if you were desperate for unofficial sources. Or you could just use primary sources instead rather than secondhand links.

Anyways, I've had my laugh reading over this. Sound4 has already had everything explained to them. Claiming ignorance to the rules won't stop them them from applying, and the appropriate penalties will keep happening.

[quote="Sound4":2q9a7yli][quote="Renji Asuka":2q9a7yli][quote="Sound4":2q9a7yli]
Dueling book has similar rulings to wiki. Dueling book tries to copy irl as much as possible.[/quote:2q9a7yli]
Duelingbook has its OWN RULES that YOU MUST FOLLOW HERE: https://www.duelingbook.com/rules and the rules are not limited to what said examples are.

Let's see what rules you have broken shall we?

Slow Play Major with this "Being unresponsive for 30 seconds after being prompted by an Administrator" particular example, and mind you, what is which results in Game/Match loss

Then you have Rule Sharking, where you tried to prevent your opponent from responding to your card by saying "its too late", to gain an unfair advantage. Which results in a warning

Then you have non-compliance, where you refused to play even if you were told to by the judge after the ruling was given. Which results in a game loss/warning

Then you have cheating in which you tried to misrepresent the rules when you told your opponent "silence is consent". Which results in a 3 Day Ban

Then you have lying to an admin from when you tried to make the claim the opponent didn't say anything, and they did. Which is another 3 Day Ban

Then you have unsportsmanship by also holding up the game because you were about to lose. By not allowing their card to go through even though their response was legal. Warning/Game Loss (Game Loss if upped to major).

Then you have spam minor by constantly asking the judge stupid questions. Which is a warning and when told to stop you ignored the admin so its another 1 day ban.

So do you really want to go down this rabbit hole?[/quote:2q9a7yli]
https://www.yugioh-card.com/ph/event/ru ... s/?lang=en
"Though an average of 3 minutes may be spent on each turn, excessive time should not be spent to allow the tournament to proceed properly. Any duelists caught taking too long (or intentionally stalling for time) may be penalized."
"During the duel, all actions taken by either duelist must be made clear and acknowledged by both sides."
Here is a link on the tournament rules. Vey similar to Dueling book rules. Dueling book tries to copy irl as much as possible. You seem to not be reading what I am saying and missing my points.
I was never unresponsive for 30 seconds. I don't know where you got that from. This never happened in the duel.

I have said this many times but you have ignored multiple times. The judge would have literally said I was rules harking and given me the game loss if I was.

I literally said I was reading multiple times but N3sh didn't care. Pretty much nobody can read and type at the same time.

I never lied I was very clear on what my nachster 2nd effect was but my opponent was silent only after My effect was finished he responded with "on eff" which is a terrible way to respond. I gave the opponent an extra seven seconds to respond. Look at my link on how "on eff" is an way you have a response in yugioh context and not acceptable.

Multiple judge have agreed that silence is consent in yugioh. There is no reason why an opponent should take long to respond. Communication is key.

I actually had the advantage in the duel and again me asking questions isn't an offense.
Spam is saying the same thing irrelevant comment. I had to reapeat the same thing twice as n3sh ignored them all my questions were relevant. The judge yde would have given me a warning and said if I was spamming.[/quote:2q9a7yli]
Everything you stated is irrelevant, your link is irrelevant. The only link that matters is the link I provided. These are the rules you broke.

[quote="Renji Asuka":19gmfiv4][quote="Sound4":19gmfiv4][quote="Renji Asuka":19gmfiv4]
Duelingbook has its OWN RULES that YOU MUST FOLLOW HERE: https://www.duelingbook.com/rules and the rules are not limited to what said examples are.

Let's see what rules you have broken shall we?

Slow Play Major with this "Being unresponsive for 30 seconds after being prompted by an Administrator" particular example, and mind you, what is which results in Game/Match loss

Then you have Rule Sharking, where you tried to prevent your opponent from responding to your card by saying "its too late", to gain an unfair advantage. Which results in a warning

Then you have non-compliance, where you refused to play even if you were told to by the judge after the ruling was given. Which results in a game loss/warning

Then you have cheating in which you tried to misrepresent the rules when you told your opponent "silence is consent". Which results in a 3 Day Ban

Then you have lying to an admin from when you tried to make the claim the opponent didn't say anything, and they did. Which is another 3 Day Ban

Then you have unsportsmanship by also holding up the game because you were about to lose. By not allowing their card to go through even though their response was legal. Warning/Game Loss (Game Loss if upped to major).

Then you have spam minor by constantly asking the judge stupid questions. Which is a warning and when told to stop you ignored the admin so its another 1 day ban.

So do you really want to go down this rabbit hole?[/quote:19gmfiv4]
https://www.yugioh-card.com/ph/event/ru ... s/?lang=en
"Though an average of 3 minutes may be spent on each turn, excessive time should not be spent to allow the tournament to proceed properly. Any duelists caught taking too long (or intentionally stalling for time) may be penalized."
"During the duel, all actions taken by either duelist must be made clear and acknowledged by both sides."
Here is a link on the tournament rules. Vey similar to Dueling book rules. Dueling book tries to copy irl as much as possible. You seem to not be reading what I am saying and missing my points.
I was never unresponsive for 30 seconds. I don't know where you got that from. This never happened in the duel.

I have said this many times but you have ignored multiple times. The judge would have literally said I was rules harking and given me the game loss if I was.

I literally said I was reading multiple times but N3sh didn't care. Pretty much nobody can read and type at the same time.

I never lied I was very clear on what my nachster 2nd effect was but my opponent was silent only after My effect was finished he responded with "on eff" which is a terrible way to respond. I gave the opponent an extra seven seconds to respond. Look at my link on how "on eff" is an way you have a response in yugioh context and not acceptable.

Multiple judge have agreed that silence is consent in yugioh. There is no reason why an opponent should take long to respond. Communication is key.

I actually had the advantage in the duel and again me asking questions isn't an offense.
Spam is saying the same thing irrelevant comment. I had to reapeat the same thing twice as n3sh ignored them all my questions were relevant. The judge yde would have given me a warning and said if I was spamming.[/quote:19gmfiv4]
Everything you stated is irrelevant, your link is irrelevant. The only link that matters is the link I provided. These are the rules you broke.[/quote:19gmfiv4]
I never broke any of the rules you said.

Have a nice day.

[quote="Sound4":64bg0l4q][quote="Renji Asuka":64bg0l4q][quote="Sound4":64bg0l4q]
https://www.yugioh-card.com/ph/event/ru ... s/?lang=en
"Though an average of 3 minutes may be spent on each turn, excessive time should not be spent to allow the tournament to proceed properly. Any duelists caught taking too long (or intentionally stalling for time) may be penalized."
"During the duel, all actions taken by either duelist must be made clear and acknowledged by both sides."
Here is a link on the tournament rules. Vey similar to Dueling book rules. Dueling book tries to copy irl as much as possible. You seem to not be reading what I am saying and missing my points.
I was never unresponsive for 30 seconds. I don't know where you got that from. This never happened in the duel.

I have said this many times but you have ignored multiple times. The judge would have literally said I was rules harking and given me the game loss if I was.

I literally said I was reading multiple times but N3sh didn't care. Pretty much nobody can read and type at the same time.

I never lied I was very clear on what my nachster 2nd effect was but my opponent was silent only after My effect was finished he responded with "on eff" which is a terrible way to respond. I gave the opponent an extra seven seconds to respond. Look at my link on how "on eff" is an way you have a response in yugioh context and not acceptable.

Multiple judge have agreed that silence is consent in yugioh. There is no reason why an opponent should take long to respond. Communication is key.

I actually had the advantage in the duel and again me asking questions isn't an offense.
Spam is saying the same thing irrelevant comment. I had to reapeat the same thing twice as n3sh ignored them all my questions were relevant. The judge yde would have given me a warning and said if I was spamming.[/quote:64bg0l4q]
Everything you stated is irrelevant, your link is irrelevant. The only link that matters is the link I provided. These are the rules you broke.[/quote:64bg0l4q]
I never broke any of the rules you said.

Have a nice day.[/quote:64bg0l4q]
You want to be "that guy" then.

[quote="Sound4":12q058lq][quote="Renji Asuka":12q058lq][quote="Sound4":12q058lq]
https://www.yugioh-card.com/ph/event/ru ... s/?lang=en
"Though an average of 3 minutes may be spent on each turn, excessive time should not be spent to allow the tournament to proceed properly. Any duelists caught taking too long (or intentionally stalling for time) may be penalized."
"During the duel, all actions taken by either duelist must be made clear and acknowledged by both sides."
Here is a link on the tournament rules. Vey similar to Dueling book rules. Dueling book tries to copy irl as much as possible. You seem to not be reading what I am saying and missing my points.
I was never unresponsive for 30 seconds. I don't know where you got that from. This never happened in the duel.

I have said this many times but you have ignored multiple times. The judge would have literally said I was rules harking and given me the game loss if I was.

I literally said I was reading multiple times but N3sh didn't care. Pretty much nobody can read and type at the same time.

I never lied I was very clear on what my nachster 2nd effect was but my opponent was silent only after My effect was finished he responded with "on eff" which is a terrible way to respond. I gave the opponent an extra seven seconds to respond. Look at my link on how "on eff" is an way you have a response in yugioh context and not acceptable.

Multiple judge have agreed that silence is consent in yugioh. There is no reason why an opponent should take long to respond. Communication is key.

I actually had the advantage in the duel and again me asking questions isn't an offense.
Spam is saying the same thing irrelevant comment. I had to reapeat the same thing twice as n3sh ignored them all my questions were relevant. The judge yde would have given me a warning and said if I was spamming.[/quote:12q058lq]
Everything you stated is irrelevant, your link is irrelevant. The only link that matters is the link I provided. These are the rules you broke.[/quote:12q058lq]
I never broke any of the rules you said.

Have a nice day.[/quote:12q058lq]and I the judge am saying you did.

[quote="Sound4":2n7mrp1v][quote="Renji Asuka":2n7mrp1v][quote="Sound4":2n7mrp1v]
https://www.yugioh-card.com/ph/event/ru ... s/?lang=en
"Though an average of 3 minutes may be spent on each turn, excessive time should not be spent to allow the tournament to proceed properly. Any duelists caught taking too long (or intentionally stalling for time) may be penalized."
"During the duel, all actions taken by either duelist must be made clear and acknowledged by both sides."
Here is a link on the tournament rules. Vey similar to Dueling book rules. Dueling book tries to copy irl as much as possible. You seem to not be reading what I am saying and missing my points.
I was never unresponsive for 30 seconds. I don't know where you got that from. This never happened in the duel.

I have said this many times but you have ignored multiple times. The judge would have literally said I was rules harking and given me the game loss if I was.

I literally said I was reading multiple times but N3sh didn't care. Pretty much nobody can read and type at the same time.

I never lied I was very clear on what my nachster 2nd effect was but my opponent was silent only after My effect was finished he responded with "on eff" which is a terrible way to respond. I gave the opponent an extra seven seconds to respond. Look at my link on how "on eff" is an way you have a response in yugioh context and not acceptable.

Multiple judge have agreed that silence is consent in yugioh. There is no reason why an opponent should take long to respond. Communication is key.

I actually had the advantage in the duel and again me asking questions isn't an offense.
Spam is saying the same thing irrelevant comment. I had to reapeat the same thing twice as n3sh ignored them all my questions were relevant. The judge yde would have given me a warning and said if I was spamming.[/quote:2n7mrp1v]
Everything you stated is irrelevant, your link is irrelevant. The only link that matters is the link I provided. These are the rules you broke.[/quote:2n7mrp1v]
I never broke any of the rules you said.

Have a nice day.[/quote:2n7mrp1v]
And you're inherently wrong, and forever will be wrong.

[quote="Genexwrecker":vaihv5c5][quote="Sound4":vaihv5c5][quote="Renji Asuka":vaihv5c5]
Everything you stated is irrelevant, your link is irrelevant. The only link that matters is the link I provided. These are the rules you broke.[/quote:vaihv5c5]
I never broke any of the rules you said.

Have a nice day.[/quote:vaihv5c5]and I the judge am saying you did.[/quote:vaihv5c5]
You are not the judge who judged that duel. N3sh would have said if I did break any of the rules.

[quote="Sound4":1xdisu10][quote="Genexwrecker":1xdisu10][quote="Sound4":1xdisu10]
I never broke any of the rules you said.

Have a nice day.[/quote:1xdisu10]and I the judge am saying you did.[/quote:1xdisu10]
You are not the judge who judged that duel. N3sh would have said if I did break any of the rules.[/quote:1xdisu10]
Imagine thinking you're out of the woods despite the admins can straight up view the replay, view this thread even and still ban you regardless if another judge had judged the duel.

You're literally on thin ice.

[quote="Sound4":17barh1g][quote="Genexwrecker":17barh1g][quote="Sound4":17barh1g]
I never broke any of the rules you said.

Have a nice day.[/quote:17barh1g]and I the judge am saying you did.[/quote:17barh1g]
You are not the judge who judged that duel. N3sh would have said if I did break any of the rules.[/quote:17barh1g]
Aren't they also a ban evader Genex?

[quote="greg503":3h9avpwd][quote="Sound4":3h9avpwd][quote="Genexwrecker":3h9avpwd]and I the judge am saying you did.[/quote:3h9avpwd]
You are not the judge who judged that duel. N3sh would have said if I did break any of the rules.[/quote:3h9avpwd]
Aren't they also a ban evader Genex?[/quote:3h9avpwd]
Yup

[quote="greg503":l5vcbyo6][quote="Sound4":l5vcbyo6][quote="Genexwrecker":l5vcbyo6]and I the judge am saying you did.[/quote:l5vcbyo6]
You are not the judge who judged that duel. N3sh would have said if I did break any of the rules.[/quote:l5vcbyo6]
Aren't they also a ban evader Genex?[/quote:l5vcbyo6]
What do you mean?

[quote="Renji Asuka":2rxazvyo][quote="Sound4":2rxazvyo][quote="Genexwrecker":2rxazvyo]and I the judge am saying you did.[/quote:2rxazvyo]
You are not the judge who judged that duel. N3sh would have said if I did break any of the rules.[/quote:2rxazvyo]
Imagine thinking you're out of the woods despite the admins can straight up view the replay, view this thread even and still ban you regardless if another judge had judged the duel.

You're literally on thin ice.[/quote:2rxazvyo]
The replay was already reviewed and handled. It seems like you simply don't read posts before making a reply.

[quote="greg503":2e31yuan][quote="Sound4":2e31yuan][quote="Genexwrecker":2e31yuan]and I the judge am saying you did.[/quote:2e31yuan]
You are not the judge who judged that duel. N3sh would have said if I did break any of the rules.[/quote:2e31yuan]
Aren't they also a ban evader Genex?[/quote:2e31yuan]
no

[quote="Genexwrecker":v9xgu4g6][quote="greg503":v9xgu4g6][quote="Sound4":v9xgu4g6]
You are not the judge who judged that duel. N3sh would have said if I did break any of the rules.[/quote:v9xgu4g6]
Aren't they also a ban evader Genex?[/quote:v9xgu4g6]
no[/quote:v9xgu4g6]
So this is alt for the forums where their main got banned, which doesn't translate back to the main site. Is that a correct assessment?

[quote="greg503":k8yxpylf][quote="Genexwrecker":k8yxpylf][quote="greg503":k8yxpylf]
Aren't they also a ban evader Genex?[/quote:k8yxpylf]
no[/quote:k8yxpylf]
So this is alt for the forums where their main got banned, which doesn't translate back to the main site. Is that a correct assessment?[/quote:k8yxpylf]
All this is assumptions without any proof. Genexwrecker even said no.

[quote="Sound4":59kfi6sv][quote="greg503":59kfi6sv][quote="Genexwrecker":59kfi6sv]
no[/quote:59kfi6sv]
So this is alt for the forums where their main got banned, which doesn't translate back to the main site. Is that a correct assessment?[/quote:59kfi6sv]
All this is assumptions without any proof. Genexwrecker even said no.[/quote:59kfi6sv]
You aren't ban evading on the main site, so why else would you be using an alt on the forums?

[quote="Sound4":7i38i2ha][quote="greg503":7i38i2ha][quote="Genexwrecker":7i38i2ha]
no[/quote:7i38i2ha]
So this is alt for the forums where their main got banned, which doesn't translate back to the main site. Is that a correct assessment?[/quote:7i38i2ha]
All this is assumptions without any proof. Genexwrecker even said no.[/quote:7i38i2ha]
1st, we know you're Ingeneiro, we know Ingeneiro was banned (even if for a short time), and Genex even confirmed you were.