Gender: Male Location: Hiding from The Doctor, shhhh.....
Fangirl: Before you join the bandwagon raising torches against me, take 5 and actually look up what happened. Or better yet, ask unbiased sources. Since it's reasonably well known that Digi&I have been at odds for some time.
Digi: Batdude pwned you, sucka. Were I hosting this, I'd ban you simply for trying to crash the tourney. Ironic, yes?
__________________ Wanted: New sig. Something crazy, zany, and slightly evil. Will give sig credit to whoever's I sport.
You'd get no support, nor would I be involved in a tourney you ran.
Really Trick, I can't understand how you willingly ruined a tourney for two others, went out of your way to ensure someone lost that you had a grudge against (among other things), then you wonder why people want you banned from tourneys.
It's not bias. I'm not taking this personal at all, and have never actually been at the receiving end of one of your spiteful actions (though others have, unfortunately). You're just a poison to pretty much every tourney you've touched. Read smurph's post again if you needs examples. I'm doing this simply because I feel it's in the best interests of the tournament. Hard as it might be to believe for you, not every decision we make is based in spite and/or grudges.
And you continue to act smug and aloof instead of owning up to anything. Still immature, which makes my point for me.
Question. Were these things trick did as a poster, or a judge? Not that being mean is cool either way. But maybe we could judge his actions independantly given the position he was in at the time.
Gender: Male Location: Hiding from The Doctor, shhhh.....
I'm putting a stop to that rumor right now. I was not judging in Red's tourney, I just dropped it due to work. As for going out of my way to screw over Smurf, not that he didn't deserve it at the time, but I never revealed anything he told me in confidence. All I did was switch my advice to Raoul and tell him that I wanted him to win. I gave him some basic advice, nothing that I couldn't have done at any time.
And stop throwing Evangel's tourney at me. There were at least 3 people trying to smash it, not just me.
__________________ Wanted: New sig. Something crazy, zany, and slightly evil. Will give sig credit to whoever's I sport.
It might be best, mr. trickster, if so many particpants do not want you to judge, that you gracefully bow out. even if you are in the right. I'm not saying you are as I dont' know the full details, but it would go along way to repair relations.
Ok, forget those. In that case, how about mathematically eliminating two people by not showing (was that how it went down?). Or the mutiny? And you just admitted to working to screw Smurph. And you also tried to justify your actions in Evangel's tourney by citing others possible transgressions. Should that make acting like a d*ck to the host and participants ok?
You're making my point for me, and continuing to try to pass the blame instead of acting responsible for your actions.
I don't want you near ANY tourneys Trick, not for some personal grudge, but because the tournaments and participants deserve it.
I've decided to keep Trickster on as a judge. I'm offering him a 'second' chance and giving him the benefit of the doubt (a courtesy I myself was not extended not so long ago). Trickster has assured me that he will take his responsibilities seriously, and I have a pool of other judges to choose from should the need to remove him arise.
Jason says:
what am I supposed to do?
Jon says:
clean your apt before she moves in? buy some pink bed sheets? scented candles?
Jason says:
wait, u have pink bed sheets?
Jon says:
ive said too much
I'll say the same thing here that I told ill via PM:
I'll abide by the decision and hope that Trick judges objectively and without bias, but I do voice my dissent. Regardless of his actions in the upcoming tourney, I cannot trust his decisions, concerning any of us, knowing that he has actively spited members in the past based upon grudges, and has displayed nothing recently to suggest he has moved past such immaturity.
With a couple weeks to go before the beginning of battles, gaining a majority to ban him is not far-fetched at all. I would hope that if we reach a majority (1 vote away, currently) ill would defer to the majority as he has with various decisions concerning rules and limits. I will continue to keep a vote tally.
I like giving second chances. But not when it risks the efforts of others in the process.
Gender: Male Location: Planning to take over the WORLD!
meh, whatever. so long as -- like all judges -- he justifies his vote, and bases his vote on the actual debate itself and not on his PERSONAL thoughts about the characters involved, it doesn't matter to me if he's a judge.
i used this example once before, but . . . if i have batman, and someone has spectre it seems impossible that bats could win. but, if the person using spectre made himself into a regular dude, then challenged bats to h2h and the person with spectre gave no proof of h2h skills at all, well . . . bats kicks his arse. doesn't matter what spectre COULD have done. the match is based on what WAS done with the characters and what was POINTED OUT by participants. ie--perhaps the person using spectre didn't know that even as a mortal spectre was unkillable and so never mentioned that fact--if judges know he was still unkillable it doesn't matter--judges are NOT using the characters, competitors are. please make decisions based on what was brought up and pointed out in MATCHES. each judge should go into a match pretending they know NOTHING about the characters involved. and for goodness sake-- ASK FOR CLARIFICATION from participants in thread or via pm if you are unsure of a certain point or need more info or scans.
if votes are explained and justified, it's hard to make them biased. and that isn't just for trick. all judges should try and give well-reasoned votes, and again, i'd urge (as batdude did last tourney) that judges pm participants if something is unclear in an argument or if they need more scans or information.
all votes will be pm'd to you in secret, right ill? i'd assume once all votes are in, you'd then post them in the match thread?
Jason says:
what am I supposed to do?
Jon says:
clean your apt before she moves in? buy some pink bed sheets? scented candles?
Jason says:
wait, u have pink bed sheets?
Jon says:
ive said too much
See, it's easy to make a timely vote as a judge that sounds intelligent. I have no doubt he'll do that. But issuing votes and removing bias are very different things. I'm confident he'll perform the former admirably, but equally as confident that he is incapable of performing the latter to a sufficient degree that he should be allowed to judge.
ill wants to give him a second chance. Let's first be honest and call it what it is: more like a 4th-5th chance. And just last night he related to us how he worked to screw over Smurph in the last tourney, justifying it only by saying that Smurph deserved it. Nothing has changed, he's not reformed.
But beyond that, it's putting the tourney and its participants at risk. If giving trick another chance didn't affect so many others, I'd be all for it. But it's not.
It's the wrong decision ill. If you were at the receiving end of any of Trick's idiocy, you'd be voting against him too. As it is, you're the host, so there's nothing he can do to screw you over. Us? There's plenty. And you're ignoring the will of half your tournament participants/judges in order to put your foot down for someone who shouldn't be jeopardizing the integrity of your tournament. I guess democracy is only in affect when it suits your will.
At the moment, I don't have the capacity to type huge posts, so I'll just cosign Digi.
Assuming that I know what you were referring to, Delph...
Delph, when you were denied your second chance, it was an entirely different situation. That was a good intention gone awry, and you were doing fine with your first chance... There was no need for a second, except in the eyes of the powers that be.
In this case, its somebody who has repeatedly intended for things to go awry, or at the very least, been indifferent if he (trick) made the situation go awry.
I says to myself. Why so serious? first serious indication of malicious intent, and we will get’em by the balls. In the mean time, sit back, chillax, and flunt your e-penises..err egos.
Unless calling out on characters, and potentially judges is part of the game?
KMC Community Forums
Aug 29th, 2008 05:15 AM
Were I hosting this, I'd ban you simply for trying to crash the tourney. Ironic, yes? 
