And also a thanks to the judges. Jin, C-Master, Scoob, Lethal, and any of the others that have been judging for the tourney. Getting 4 each week and rotating so that no one judges 2 weeks in a row is tough, so I appreciate all the help.
🙂
...and we should have this week's judges soon. With any luck it will be similar to the judges that judges kahn/leo's and blair/newjak's first match, so there will be a familiarity with teh characters and participants.
Originally posted by DigiMark007
And also a thanks to the judges. Jin, C-Master, Scoob, Lethal, and any of the others that have been judging for the tourney. Getting 4 each week and rotating so that no one judges 2 weeks in a row is tough, so I appreciate all the help.🙂
...and we should have this week's judges soon. With any luck it will be similar to the judges that judges kahn/leo's and blair/newjak's first match, so there will be a familiarity with teh characters and participants.
Could former participants of the tourney volunteer to judge this week's battle? 🙂
Originally posted by batdude123
Could former participants of the tourney volunteer to judge this week's battle? 🙂
Erm, even though I know you'd be unbiased, I'd like to leave that possibility out of it.
So thanks and all, but I'd like to avoid having participants (even eliminated participants) judging. You're more than welcome to watch and vote though.
Look Digi... one of your biggest peeves with the last couple of tourneys was people finding "loopholes" .... so much so that you declared a "no loophole" rule.... how exactly is fighting with 8 characters in a 3 on 3 tourney format no breaking the most basic rule.... (the one about only having 3 characters)
Not only have BW and NJ been using this, but now so are others.... I'm not even in the tourney and I've got a problem with this (as I know a few others have as well)
How exactly do you explain the fact that this is still going on?
Originally posted by Scoobless
Look Digi... one of your biggest peeves with the last couple of tourneys was people finding "loopholes" .... so much so that you declared a "no loophole" rule.... how exactly is fighting with 8 characters in a 3 on 3 tourney format no breaking the most basic rule.... (the one about only having 3 characters)Not only have BW and NJ been using this, but now so are others.... I'm not even in the tourney and I've got a problem with this (as I know a few others have as well)
How exactly do you explain the fact that this is still going on?
hopefully you're not blaming us. we're just abiding by the rules as they've been laid out. i'm sure you read my initial post on the matter so know how strongly we were against it. if it IS allowed though, we'd be stupid to not use it to even things up.
for the record, i agree 100% with this situation being exactly what the no loophole clause was meant to address . . .
alas, i'm afraid it's too late and our protestations were overturned . . . 🙁
Originally posted by leonidas😈 😛
hopefully you're not blaming us. we're just abiding by the rules as they've been laid out. i'm sure you read my initial post on the matter so know how strongly we were against it. if it IS allowed though, we'd be stupid to not use it to even things up.for the record, i agree 100% with this situation being exactly what the no loophole clause was meant to address . . .
alas, i'm afraid it's too late and our protestations were overturned . . . 🙁
Originally posted by Scoobless
I'm not letting this go........and I would still like a decent explanation from Digi about the points i mentioned ...... 😐
i never got one either . . . 🙁 digi basically told me he was willing to go along with whatever the 'group' voted, and they seemed to agree that the constructs WERE legal.
Originally posted by leonidas
i will add there WAS support for our position AGAINST the constructs. damn, scoob, i was begging you to make an appearance here about 5 days ago!
I was away for a couple of days... when i got back I was "informed" that the matter had been settled.... no one went into much detail though