From: ianmackenzie@aol.com (Ian MacKenzie)
Date: 29 Feb 2000 16:22:18 EST
"While I agree with Ian that this would be the best way to handle the solution
if it is recorded as a tie, I strongly discourage it to lead this far."
I absolutely concur. This should be recorded as Mr. Mortis wishes, just as has always been done.
My only reason for the demand is that if standard practice is being abandoned, then the rules must reflect that clearly, without any hint of vagueness, and the community must be made aware of what is a clear change of policy.
Anything less is unfair to the entire
patronage.
That said, I think a unilateral, unannounced change of policy is even more unfair; and the implementation of such by a caller who does not state that the policy has been changed is inexcusable.
Regards,
Ian Rex.
A call for Investigation
-
DoS Archive
- Archivist
- Posts: 30701
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 8:27 am
-
DoS Archive
- Archivist
- Posts: 30701
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 8:27 am
From: drakewyni@aol.com (Drakewyn I)
Date: 01 Mar 2000 00:29:28 EST
It appears that, despite my wishes to remain silent on this matter, the facts need to be re-stated. Once again, despite your attempt to twist my words Lady Starfare, the facts speak for themselves.
1) The man calling himself Silver in no fashion or manner visible to the eye, left of his own accord. (( OOC: He started to RP, then his SN left the room. At that point, I checked and found he was not online. ))
2) I catagorically did not declare the duel as a tie until pressed on the matter. It has been my experience that a majority of the patrons would prefer to begin a new duel rather than accepting any form of forfeit. Thus, I asked Damien if he would like to find a new opponent.
3) I clearly was present when Damien said he wanted the win and I clearly heard him say so, because I responded to that statement. Therefore I did indeed obtain input from him on the matter.
4) Your inferences of my comments are meaningless. I stated catagorically that I told the caller I wished to take the tie. I was told flatly that the duel would be recorded as a win, despite my wishes. On the first of these occasions I even took the matter to the Standing's Keeper of the time and was told that the caller's decision was final and he would not overturn it.
5) As I have stated before, and do so again, the path I walk is my own. I require no one to follow my codes or my beliefs. Should anyone choose to do so of their own free will, then it will be their choice.
Lady Drake, aka the Gryphon.
Date: 01 Mar 2000 00:29:28 EST
It appears that, despite my wishes to remain silent on this matter, the facts need to be re-stated. Once again, despite your attempt to twist my words Lady Starfare, the facts speak for themselves.
1) The man calling himself Silver in no fashion or manner visible to the eye, left of his own accord. (( OOC: He started to RP, then his SN left the room. At that point, I checked and found he was not online. ))
2) I catagorically did not declare the duel as a tie until pressed on the matter. It has been my experience that a majority of the patrons would prefer to begin a new duel rather than accepting any form of forfeit. Thus, I asked Damien if he would like to find a new opponent.
3) I clearly was present when Damien said he wanted the win and I clearly heard him say so, because I responded to that statement. Therefore I did indeed obtain input from him on the matter.
4) Your inferences of my comments are meaningless. I stated catagorically that I told the caller I wished to take the tie. I was told flatly that the duel would be recorded as a win, despite my wishes. On the first of these occasions I even took the matter to the Standing's Keeper of the time and was told that the caller's decision was final and he would not overturn it.
5) As I have stated before, and do so again, the path I walk is my own. I require no one to follow my codes or my beliefs. Should anyone choose to do so of their own free will, then it will be their choice.
Lady Drake, aka the Gryphon.
-
DoS Archive
- Archivist
- Posts: 30701
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 8:27 am
From: verceterixfavre@aol.com (Verceterix Favre)
Date: 01 Mar 2000 00:33:26 EST
Drake,
Apparently, the path you choose is not your own and we have no choice but to follow your beliefs when you force a dueler to take a tie against his wishes.
-Rix
Date: 01 Mar 2000 00:33:26 EST
Drake,
Apparently, the path you choose is not your own and we have no choice but to follow your beliefs when you force a dueler to take a tie against his wishes.
-Rix
-
DoS Archive
- Archivist
- Posts: 30701
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 8:27 am
From: jonalyn@aol.com (Jonalyn)
Date: 01 Mar 2000 01:49:00 EST
Madame Silvertree,
If ast thee hae declared thee require no one to follow yuir codes or yuir beliefs, wherefore dost believe thee hae ta right to force honor or dishonor upon annaone what enters yuir rings? For quite bluntly, Madame, though ye canst see beyond thine own pomposity and arrogance, that be precisely what thee be attempting. Nae official hae th' right by anna rule, Madame, an most certes nae thee.
Ast for yuir assertion that ye were forced ta accept a win by another official, Madame, methinks thee dinna protest overmuch and certes thee dinna take a stand but didst accept the win to but pad yuir record.
I didst face the warlord, Alkron, in the ring. Mine worthy opponent wast forced by unforeseen circumstance to depart midst the dance. When the caller didst declare that I wouldst hold the win, I didst declare unto the official that I wouldst nae accept such, nor be held in dishonor, nor wouldst I permit mine worthy opponent to be held in dishonor. The official accepted without further dissent that the match wouldst he ruled ast a tie and wast so
recorded officially.
Madame, thou art also remiss in that tis nae the duty nor required of anna official to seek opponents for anna duelist. Damien wast quite clearly uninterested in another match, and thee seemed adamant to force another upon him. Be that another of yuir self proclaimed "Caller's Prerogatives'?
Further Madame, I notice thee dinna address the statement ye made to all present that thee dinna accept one round ast constituting a duel. Madame, be that another of the new "Rulings According to Drakewyn"?
Perchance thee wouldst care to address which portion of the rules of engagement which grant unto thee the right to decide how manna rounds do constitute an official duel, Madame?
Madame, thee didst declare that they wast nae evidence that the man, Silver, hae left the match voluntarily, yet thee canna produce anna evidence to support thine claim. Perchance an example of yuir omnipotence, Madame? The man quite clearly wast nae only nae assaulted within the ring, none entered that ring to whisk him away. Therefore, Madame, thine statement that there wast nae evidence that he departed voluntarily holds little meaning beyond
mere conjecture on yuir part, Madame.
Madame, from the very beginning of that duel, t'was plain thee were biased against Damien, e'en threatening to remove his place in the ring and return his request to the queue. Indeed Madame, Damien had to declare unto thee that he wast nae conversing with thee.
Madame, thee aire certes free to walk anna path thee dost wish. Thou art however nae free to force others to follow upon thine whim.
Are thee truly so addled in the head that thee truly believe thee hae such rights, Madame? Such mind set be oft seen in those what either wish to rise unto dictatorship or in those whose own insecurity weighs so heavily that they must seek power o'er those who are forced to submit themselve to thine officiating.
Madame, though art merely a wench who hast garnered the privilege, aye, the privilege of giving service unto the community. Thee pale in comparison to those who hae gone afore thee, Madame. Thine ever increasing martyr act wears thin, Madame. Where shouldst thee deserves thanks and praise for doing what thee hae obligated yuirself to do whilst doing so in yuir usual arrogant, imcompetant manner. Shall the community sing praises unto Drakewyn
whilst thee apparently wish the community to bow under to thine arrogance, Madame? Shall the community sing hosannah's to thee, Madame, whilst thee wish to grind it beneath yuir feet?
Fie on thee, Madame, thou deserves little praise and certes nae thanks for thine services.
Bluntly,
Jonalyn Starfare
Date: 01 Mar 2000 01:49:00 EST
Madame Silvertree,
If ast thee hae declared thee require no one to follow yuir codes or yuir beliefs, wherefore dost believe thee hae ta right to force honor or dishonor upon annaone what enters yuir rings? For quite bluntly, Madame, though ye canst see beyond thine own pomposity and arrogance, that be precisely what thee be attempting. Nae official hae th' right by anna rule, Madame, an most certes nae thee.
Ast for yuir assertion that ye were forced ta accept a win by another official, Madame, methinks thee dinna protest overmuch and certes thee dinna take a stand but didst accept the win to but pad yuir record.
I didst face the warlord, Alkron, in the ring. Mine worthy opponent wast forced by unforeseen circumstance to depart midst the dance. When the caller didst declare that I wouldst hold the win, I didst declare unto the official that I wouldst nae accept such, nor be held in dishonor, nor wouldst I permit mine worthy opponent to be held in dishonor. The official accepted without further dissent that the match wouldst he ruled ast a tie and wast so
recorded officially.
Madame, thou art also remiss in that tis nae the duty nor required of anna official to seek opponents for anna duelist. Damien wast quite clearly uninterested in another match, and thee seemed adamant to force another upon him. Be that another of yuir self proclaimed "Caller's Prerogatives'?
Further Madame, I notice thee dinna address the statement ye made to all present that thee dinna accept one round ast constituting a duel. Madame, be that another of the new "Rulings According to Drakewyn"?
Perchance thee wouldst care to address which portion of the rules of engagement which grant unto thee the right to decide how manna rounds do constitute an official duel, Madame?
Madame, thee didst declare that they wast nae evidence that the man, Silver, hae left the match voluntarily, yet thee canna produce anna evidence to support thine claim. Perchance an example of yuir omnipotence, Madame? The man quite clearly wast nae only nae assaulted within the ring, none entered that ring to whisk him away. Therefore, Madame, thine statement that there wast nae evidence that he departed voluntarily holds little meaning beyond
mere conjecture on yuir part, Madame.
Madame, from the very beginning of that duel, t'was plain thee were biased against Damien, e'en threatening to remove his place in the ring and return his request to the queue. Indeed Madame, Damien had to declare unto thee that he wast nae conversing with thee.
Madame, thee aire certes free to walk anna path thee dost wish. Thou art however nae free to force others to follow upon thine whim.
Are thee truly so addled in the head that thee truly believe thee hae such rights, Madame? Such mind set be oft seen in those what either wish to rise unto dictatorship or in those whose own insecurity weighs so heavily that they must seek power o'er those who are forced to submit themselve to thine officiating.
Madame, though art merely a wench who hast garnered the privilege, aye, the privilege of giving service unto the community. Thee pale in comparison to those who hae gone afore thee, Madame. Thine ever increasing martyr act wears thin, Madame. Where shouldst thee deserves thanks and praise for doing what thee hae obligated yuirself to do whilst doing so in yuir usual arrogant, imcompetant manner. Shall the community sing praises unto Drakewyn
whilst thee apparently wish the community to bow under to thine arrogance, Madame? Shall the community sing hosannah's to thee, Madame, whilst thee wish to grind it beneath yuir feet?
Fie on thee, Madame, thou deserves little praise and certes nae thanks for thine services.
Bluntly,
Jonalyn Starfare
-
DoS Archive
- Archivist
- Posts: 30701
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 8:27 am
From: jonalyn@aol.com (Jonalyn)
Date: 01 Mar 2000 05:05:48 EST
Madame Silvertree,
Dost perchance recall when thou wert asked where the man Silver hae gotten off to, thee replied thee believed he hae removed to the privy? Didst simply presume th’ or didst hae anna evidence to uphold thine belief, Madame? The man nae exhibited a penchant for drink, but in fact assumed a prayerful attitude within the ring before drawing blade to face his opponent. Perhaps thee hold an interest in matters pertaining to privies? Or were thee
simply unable or unwilling to admit thee dinna know?
I shall reiterate for thee, Madame, thine own statement, to whit: "Sorry, not after one round. If it were more than one round, I'd give you the option." (Emphasis added) That wast yuir exact comment when Damien inquired for the second time regarding the win. Madame, perchance thee know nae the meaning
of the word option? Let me clarify that for thee. Option: (n. The act or the instance of choosing; a thing that is or may be chosen; freedom of choice.) By thine own statement, thee first stated quite blatantly and contrary to the rules of engagement that a single round dinna constitute a duel. Thee then quite ast clearly stated that Damien wouldst be granted the option to choose were thee to indeed consider the match to have
in fact been a duel. Presumably, Madame, the option thee make reference to wouldst be either a tie or a win. Methinks, ye were nae being so generous ast to offer unto Damien an option of perhaps residing in thine home or perhaps the option of dining with thee.
Madame, thee were clearly in the wrong in thine statement that a single round dinna constitute a duel for in thee thineself declared an official outcome. If t’was nae an official match, there couldst be neither a win, nor a loss, nor a tie. Perchance this be among the new "Rules According to Drakewyn", of which apparently the community is most certes nae cognizant. Madame Drakewyn will determine, at her whim, to first declare
when she considers a duel ist a duel, then shall declare the outcome officially though she hast declared the duel nae be a duel An interesting premise, Madame. No duelist in thine rings wouldst know lest thee deemed it proper whether they were in fact engaged in an official match and wouldst needs must bow to thine whim according to what, Madame? Thine mood?
Thee then fell into thine own wide open mouth, rather adroitly, I must say, Madame, when thee stated, "I’m sorry, but it’s in the rules. By rights, no one -has- to be offered a win in a forfeit situation." First thee grant that a duelist hast the right to the option, then thee claim no one hast the right to exercise that
option. Thee canna hae it both ways, Madame, no matter how much thee wouldst wish it. Which be it, Drakey Poo? Hast every duelist the option thee didst declare thee wouldst offer or be it that thee shall pick and chose when and to whom thee shall grant said option under circumstances according to thine own liking, code and whim? Shall I now offer thee the definition of bias and neutrality, Madame? I do
believe thee hae demonstrated quite stridently the first and quite clearly hae nae concept of the latter.
When the warlord, Damien didst ask thee to explain yuirself, Madame, thine now notorious words rang out, "It's called Caller's perogative. I don't consider one round to be a duel. It's nothing against you, honestly. I would do the same no matter who was dueling." The deed be done, the announcement of the "Rules According to Drakewyn" which all
must follow, to whit: When setting foot within the rings under the adjudication of Madame Silvertree, one must duel more than one round, for any less than one round be nae a duel. Madame Drakewyn shall declare an official outcome for such a match e’en though she hae declared the match ast nae being a duel AND Madame Silvertree shall hold all the options.
Huzzah! Fait Accompli!! (n. A thing that has been done and is past altering.) Finis!! (n. End).
The Mighty Drake hast spoken!! So mote it be!!
Gads, Madame Silvertree, apparently thee canna e'en hold to thine own wish to remain silent, be it anna surprise that thee wouldst infer that I hae nae quoted thee precisely? The only twisting happening, Madame, ist that which thee continue to attempt nae only with the rules of engagement but ast well ast thine attempt to twist others to bend knee afore thine omnipotence. Madame, thine feet be well dug into the clay, and methinks that it hast
further arisen to enfold that appendage atop thine neck.
Jonalyn Starfare
Date: 01 Mar 2000 05:05:48 EST
Madame Silvertree,
Dost perchance recall when thou wert asked where the man Silver hae gotten off to, thee replied thee believed he hae removed to the privy? Didst simply presume th’ or didst hae anna evidence to uphold thine belief, Madame? The man nae exhibited a penchant for drink, but in fact assumed a prayerful attitude within the ring before drawing blade to face his opponent. Perhaps thee hold an interest in matters pertaining to privies? Or were thee
simply unable or unwilling to admit thee dinna know?
I shall reiterate for thee, Madame, thine own statement, to whit: "Sorry, not after one round. If it were more than one round, I'd give you the option." (Emphasis added) That wast yuir exact comment when Damien inquired for the second time regarding the win. Madame, perchance thee know nae the meaning
of the word option? Let me clarify that for thee. Option: (n. The act or the instance of choosing; a thing that is or may be chosen; freedom of choice.) By thine own statement, thee first stated quite blatantly and contrary to the rules of engagement that a single round dinna constitute a duel. Thee then quite ast clearly stated that Damien wouldst be granted the option to choose were thee to indeed consider the match to have
in fact been a duel. Presumably, Madame, the option thee make reference to wouldst be either a tie or a win. Methinks, ye were nae being so generous ast to offer unto Damien an option of perhaps residing in thine home or perhaps the option of dining with thee.
Madame, thee were clearly in the wrong in thine statement that a single round dinna constitute a duel for in thee thineself declared an official outcome. If t’was nae an official match, there couldst be neither a win, nor a loss, nor a tie. Perchance this be among the new "Rules According to Drakewyn", of which apparently the community is most certes nae cognizant. Madame Drakewyn will determine, at her whim, to first declare
when she considers a duel ist a duel, then shall declare the outcome officially though she hast declared the duel nae be a duel An interesting premise, Madame. No duelist in thine rings wouldst know lest thee deemed it proper whether they were in fact engaged in an official match and wouldst needs must bow to thine whim according to what, Madame? Thine mood?
Thee then fell into thine own wide open mouth, rather adroitly, I must say, Madame, when thee stated, "I’m sorry, but it’s in the rules. By rights, no one -has- to be offered a win in a forfeit situation." First thee grant that a duelist hast the right to the option, then thee claim no one hast the right to exercise that
option. Thee canna hae it both ways, Madame, no matter how much thee wouldst wish it. Which be it, Drakey Poo? Hast every duelist the option thee didst declare thee wouldst offer or be it that thee shall pick and chose when and to whom thee shall grant said option under circumstances according to thine own liking, code and whim? Shall I now offer thee the definition of bias and neutrality, Madame? I do
believe thee hae demonstrated quite stridently the first and quite clearly hae nae concept of the latter.
When the warlord, Damien didst ask thee to explain yuirself, Madame, thine now notorious words rang out, "It's called Caller's perogative. I don't consider one round to be a duel. It's nothing against you, honestly. I would do the same no matter who was dueling." The deed be done, the announcement of the "Rules According to Drakewyn" which all
must follow, to whit: When setting foot within the rings under the adjudication of Madame Silvertree, one must duel more than one round, for any less than one round be nae a duel. Madame Drakewyn shall declare an official outcome for such a match e’en though she hae declared the match ast nae being a duel AND Madame Silvertree shall hold all the options.
Huzzah! Fait Accompli!! (n. A thing that has been done and is past altering.) Finis!! (n. End).
The Mighty Drake hast spoken!! So mote it be!!
Gads, Madame Silvertree, apparently thee canna e'en hold to thine own wish to remain silent, be it anna surprise that thee wouldst infer that I hae nae quoted thee precisely? The only twisting happening, Madame, ist that which thee continue to attempt nae only with the rules of engagement but ast well ast thine attempt to twist others to bend knee afore thine omnipotence. Madame, thine feet be well dug into the clay, and methinks that it hast
further arisen to enfold that appendage atop thine neck.
Jonalyn Starfare
-
DoS Archive
- Archivist
- Posts: 30701
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 8:27 am
From: rlupton@aol.com (RLupton)
Date: 01 Mar 2000 09:17:12 EST
"I stated catagorically that I told the caller I wished to take the tie. I was told flatly that the duel would be recorded as a win, despite my wishes. On the first of these occasions I even took the matter to the Standing's Keeper of the time and was told that the caller's decision was final and he would not overturn it."
If you so adamantly disagreed with the caller forcing his decision upon you, then why would you turn and do the same thing to another? Wouldn't you, of all people--being a victim of such, allow the dueler to decide his path?
Or was it some form of bitter revenge? "They did it to me. The power's in my hands, now! Let's see how you like it!" I can faintly hear the mad cackling that follows.
~ Lupton
Date: 01 Mar 2000 09:17:12 EST
"I stated catagorically that I told the caller I wished to take the tie. I was told flatly that the duel would be recorded as a win, despite my wishes. On the first of these occasions I even took the matter to the Standing's Keeper of the time and was told that the caller's decision was final and he would not overturn it."
If you so adamantly disagreed with the caller forcing his decision upon you, then why would you turn and do the same thing to another? Wouldn't you, of all people--being a victim of such, allow the dueler to decide his path?
Or was it some form of bitter revenge? "They did it to me. The power's in my hands, now! Let's see how you like it!" I can faintly hear the mad cackling that follows.
~ Lupton
-
DoS Archive
- Archivist
- Posts: 30701
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 8:27 am
From: morganalefay@aol.com (Morgana le Fay)
Date: 01 Mar 2000 12:07:47 EST
Did Drakewyn acknowledge that she heard Damien's input? I am given to understand she never responded or acknowledged his "input" until after she deemed the duel "not a duel."
Date: 01 Mar 2000 12:07:47 EST
Did Drakewyn acknowledge that she heard Damien's input? I am given to understand she never responded or acknowledged his "input" until after she deemed the duel "not a duel."
-
DoS Archive
- Archivist
- Posts: 30701
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 8:27 am
From: jonalyn@aol.com (Jonalyn)
Date: 01 Mar 2000 14:48:18 EST
Madame Silvertree,
Thee hae writ, "2) I catagorically did not declare the duel as a tie until pressed on the matter. It has been my experience that a majority of the patrons would prefer to begin a new duel rather than accepting any form of forfeit. Thus, I asked Damien if he would like to find a new opponent."
Pressed upon the matter, Madame?
Th' statement gives me grave concern, ast perhaps it shouldst the entire of the community. Be thee perhaps implying that that thou hast in past failed to announce an official outcome of a duel after it hae commenced and instead hae the remaining duelist simply begin a new match with another opponent unless thou were "pressed upon the matter"?
Further Madame, perhaps thee hae yet to hae managed a comprehension of th' common tongue, for the remaining duelist ist nae being placed in the position of accepting 'any form of forfeit" The act of departing from the ring midst a duel in and of itself be the act of forfeit. The remaining duelist stands under nae penalty, with the notable exception under yuir self proclaimed "Caller's Prerogative", to stand under whiche'er penalty strikes thine
whim.
Jonalyn Starfare
Date: 01 Mar 2000 14:48:18 EST
Madame Silvertree,
Thee hae writ, "2) I catagorically did not declare the duel as a tie until pressed on the matter. It has been my experience that a majority of the patrons would prefer to begin a new duel rather than accepting any form of forfeit. Thus, I asked Damien if he would like to find a new opponent."
Pressed upon the matter, Madame?
Th' statement gives me grave concern, ast perhaps it shouldst the entire of the community. Be thee perhaps implying that that thou hast in past failed to announce an official outcome of a duel after it hae commenced and instead hae the remaining duelist simply begin a new match with another opponent unless thou were "pressed upon the matter"?
Further Madame, perhaps thee hae yet to hae managed a comprehension of th' common tongue, for the remaining duelist ist nae being placed in the position of accepting 'any form of forfeit" The act of departing from the ring midst a duel in and of itself be the act of forfeit. The remaining duelist stands under nae penalty, with the notable exception under yuir self proclaimed "Caller's Prerogative", to stand under whiche'er penalty strikes thine
whim.
Jonalyn Starfare
-
DoS Archive
- Archivist
- Posts: 30701
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 8:27 am
From: altaradp@aol.com (Altara dP)
Date: 01 Mar 2000 18:33:16 EST
A comment or two....perhaps the rules can stand a little clarification on this...
Firstly, when so long ago I did go thru the trainin' necessary ta wear the uniform, instructed I was on this particular issue to the point that is somethin like this...or at least its my understandin' o' the way it should be 'andled. I am nae aware o' what the situation is exactly and am nae makin' sides ta anaone..jest my out take on 'ow the trainin' is put forth ta 'andle things like this
First..the calls is made ta bring the duelists ta the ring
Second..Normally the duelists enter and ready themselves...ifn they nae arrive after a few rounds o' other rings bein' called or after a timely space fer them ta enter...usually about 5 minutes...then they get the Second call ta the ring
Here is the tricky part..tryin' ta find the proper words so that there be nae misunderstandin's..Ifn both duelists send the moves and the round is called, the duel is considered under way. IF neither dueler 'as scored the first round AND one o' the duelists leaves voluntarily (or involuntarily)informin' the other dueler or the official or nae, (or after the time frame fer one ta be considered lost ta the Arena((punted))) then the match
is considered a tie unless the remainin' duelists wishes ta seek another opponent (if the first round 'as nae been called, it is nae a forfeit or considered underway)...bear in mind that is in the first round wi' no score. This is nae a forfeit actually but a tie can be issued since there was nae a score on the boards.
Ifn either dueler scored the first round, and then one was forced ta leave either o' 'is own accord or nae,after the first round 'ad been called...and it seen that the one aint gonna return ta finish the duel((sometimes we do not get the second round sent)) then wi' the remainin' duelist's confirmation, input, or data then the caller is ta take the duelists choice o' win or tie (nae one would chose the loss, lets face it) and call it ta the crowd.
The Official is sposed ta advise the remainin' duelists o' the choice. Chosin' the tie or the win is considered ta be o' the chosin' o the remainin' duelists...it is fer the dueler to lay claim ta 'is own view o' what is 'onorable or nae, however, IF the score is still 0-0, then one can nae claim a victory since there were nae points garnered.This should be considered the forfeit.
This is somethin' that could use a little clarifyin' ta the rules.
As I said this is ma view o' what ta do in that type o' situation. E'en if the round was ta 10 wi' no score 0-0, it is ma understandin' that its ta be called a tie, unless the other duelist, the one ta leave, 'as informed the caller and the remainin' duelist that the win can be taken. If there was a score on the boards, then the remainin' dueler makes the decision. Thats the way I 'ad been taught ta look at it.
There are many if's that must be taken inta consideration. I am nae sayin' that this is graven in stone, this is jest the way I 'ad been trained. The rules 'ave been modified along the way quite a few times since I started ta work the Arena, perhaps this is another that could bear ta be reviewed and clarified fer patron as well as staff. I 'ope I didnt confuse anaone and ifn I am wrong somewhere I am sure that it will be brought ta bear.
Altara
Date: 01 Mar 2000 18:33:16 EST
A comment or two....perhaps the rules can stand a little clarification on this...
Firstly, when so long ago I did go thru the trainin' necessary ta wear the uniform, instructed I was on this particular issue to the point that is somethin like this...or at least its my understandin' o' the way it should be 'andled. I am nae aware o' what the situation is exactly and am nae makin' sides ta anaone..jest my out take on 'ow the trainin' is put forth ta 'andle things like this
First..the calls is made ta bring the duelists ta the ring
Second..Normally the duelists enter and ready themselves...ifn they nae arrive after a few rounds o' other rings bein' called or after a timely space fer them ta enter...usually about 5 minutes...then they get the Second call ta the ring
Here is the tricky part..tryin' ta find the proper words so that there be nae misunderstandin's..Ifn both duelists send the moves and the round is called, the duel is considered under way. IF neither dueler 'as scored the first round AND one o' the duelists leaves voluntarily (or involuntarily)informin' the other dueler or the official or nae, (or after the time frame fer one ta be considered lost ta the Arena((punted))) then the match
is considered a tie unless the remainin' duelists wishes ta seek another opponent (if the first round 'as nae been called, it is nae a forfeit or considered underway)...bear in mind that is in the first round wi' no score. This is nae a forfeit actually but a tie can be issued since there was nae a score on the boards.
Ifn either dueler scored the first round, and then one was forced ta leave either o' 'is own accord or nae,after the first round 'ad been called...and it seen that the one aint gonna return ta finish the duel((sometimes we do not get the second round sent)) then wi' the remainin' duelist's confirmation, input, or data then the caller is ta take the duelists choice o' win or tie (nae one would chose the loss, lets face it) and call it ta the crowd.
The Official is sposed ta advise the remainin' duelists o' the choice. Chosin' the tie or the win is considered ta be o' the chosin' o the remainin' duelists...it is fer the dueler to lay claim ta 'is own view o' what is 'onorable or nae, however, IF the score is still 0-0, then one can nae claim a victory since there were nae points garnered.This should be considered the forfeit.
This is somethin' that could use a little clarifyin' ta the rules.
As I said this is ma view o' what ta do in that type o' situation. E'en if the round was ta 10 wi' no score 0-0, it is ma understandin' that its ta be called a tie, unless the other duelist, the one ta leave, 'as informed the caller and the remainin' duelist that the win can be taken. If there was a score on the boards, then the remainin' dueler makes the decision. Thats the way I 'ad been taught ta look at it.
There are many if's that must be taken inta consideration. I am nae sayin' that this is graven in stone, this is jest the way I 'ad been trained. The rules 'ave been modified along the way quite a few times since I started ta work the Arena, perhaps this is another that could bear ta be reviewed and clarified fer patron as well as staff. I 'ope I didnt confuse anaone and ifn I am wrong somewhere I am sure that it will be brought ta bear.
Altara
-
DoS Archive
- Archivist
- Posts: 30701
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 8:27 am
From: altaradp@aol.com (Altara dP)
Date: 01 Mar 2000 18:50:07 EST
I missed a few things....
> (if the first round 'as nae been called, it is nae a forfeit or considered
>underway)
And the caller retains the right ta either allow the remainin' duelist the chance ta seek another opponent or ifn there is a long slew o' duelists waitin' then the duel can be nullified. Another IF here. There is nothin' firm that the caller must retain the ring fer the individual. That is up ta the caller ta decide based on the conditions in the Arena.
Some'ow this didnt come out right...
>IF the score is still 0-0, then one can nae claim a victory since there were
>nae points garnered.This should be considered the forfeit.
Meant that if the score is 0-0 and either leave at ana time due ta ana circumstances, then it is nae actually a forfeit. It can be called as such but can nae be considered a win-loss situation. The remainin' dueler can nae take a win ifn there is nae a score. There is nae punishment ta them fer that, nor should it be seen as such. Ifn points are scored..by either..then it can be seen as a forfeit by the one absent.
Again this is jest my out take..
Date: 01 Mar 2000 18:50:07 EST
I missed a few things....
> (if the first round 'as nae been called, it is nae a forfeit or considered
>underway)
And the caller retains the right ta either allow the remainin' duelist the chance ta seek another opponent or ifn there is a long slew o' duelists waitin' then the duel can be nullified. Another IF here. There is nothin' firm that the caller must retain the ring fer the individual. That is up ta the caller ta decide based on the conditions in the Arena.
Some'ow this didnt come out right...
>IF the score is still 0-0, then one can nae claim a victory since there were
>nae points garnered.This should be considered the forfeit.
Meant that if the score is 0-0 and either leave at ana time due ta ana circumstances, then it is nae actually a forfeit. It can be called as such but can nae be considered a win-loss situation. The remainin' dueler can nae take a win ifn there is nae a score. There is nae punishment ta them fer that, nor should it be seen as such. Ifn points are scored..by either..then it can be seen as a forfeit by the one absent.
Again this is jest my out take..
-
DoS Archive
- Archivist
- Posts: 30701
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 8:27 am
From: jonalyn@aol.com (Jonalyn)
Date: 01 Mar 2000 22:07:33 EST
Altara,
Indeed, lass. With the exception th' I wouldst opine th' ta score or lack thereof hae nae relevance in th' matter, tis thou hast stated wh' hae long been th' way 'o thin's.
Tis th' departure, voluntarily er nae, 'o one duelist which places th' match in forfeit. Were a duelist to merely depart th' ring midst the duel, declining to continue th' combat, though said duelist nae depart th' basement, th' duelist wouldst stand in forfeit.
Th' remaining duelist who be willing to continue ta combat shouldst nae suffer penalty for another's choice, an' mos' certes shouldst nae be subject to th' whims 'o th' officials.
If'n nae combat hae commenced atall, certes tis nae anna question th' nae penalty 'o anna kind wouldst be lain upon th' duelists. Howe'er, once combat hae commenced, an' been witnessed an' announced by an official, ta match indeed hae become an official combat.
Ast ta thine comment th' ta rules 'o engagement hae been modified, Altara, tis nae hae ta community been apprised 'o anna such modifications since ta seventh day 'o th' tenth month of the year of the Duels, nineteen hundred and ninety and eight.
If th' staff hae been apprised 'o new policies, such hast nae been told unto the community, in particular, the now notorious "Caller's Prerogative", according to the "Rules of Madame Silvertree."
Cordially,
Jonalyn Starfare
Date: 01 Mar 2000 22:07:33 EST
Altara,
Indeed, lass. With the exception th' I wouldst opine th' ta score or lack thereof hae nae relevance in th' matter, tis thou hast stated wh' hae long been th' way 'o thin's.
Tis th' departure, voluntarily er nae, 'o one duelist which places th' match in forfeit. Were a duelist to merely depart th' ring midst the duel, declining to continue th' combat, though said duelist nae depart th' basement, th' duelist wouldst stand in forfeit.
Th' remaining duelist who be willing to continue ta combat shouldst nae suffer penalty for another's choice, an' mos' certes shouldst nae be subject to th' whims 'o th' officials.
If'n nae combat hae commenced atall, certes tis nae anna question th' nae penalty 'o anna kind wouldst be lain upon th' duelists. Howe'er, once combat hae commenced, an' been witnessed an' announced by an official, ta match indeed hae become an official combat.
Ast ta thine comment th' ta rules 'o engagement hae been modified, Altara, tis nae hae ta community been apprised 'o anna such modifications since ta seventh day 'o th' tenth month of the year of the Duels, nineteen hundred and ninety and eight.
If th' staff hae been apprised 'o new policies, such hast nae been told unto the community, in particular, the now notorious "Caller's Prerogative", according to the "Rules of Madame Silvertree."
Cordially,
Jonalyn Starfare
-
DoS Archive
- Archivist
- Posts: 30701
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 8:27 am
From: karnafexx@aol.com (Karnafexx)
Date: 04 Mar 2000 12:44:04 EST
It's always been my understanding that once the first round has been called, the game is on. I don't care if the score is 4.5-0 in the other guys favor, if he beats feet, then it's the person who remains who has the choice of the win, loss or tie. It's ALWAYS been like this and we've never had a serious problem like this until Drake decided to enhance her on perception of her powers and lay claim to the decision
making.
If a guy wants to be a hosebag and take the win even when it's almost sure he'd lose, it's his problem to deal with the backlash from the community. It's not the callers job to decide morality or what is right or wrong for any dueler to do.
Gnort, you've been here how long? You've never once seen this happen? You honestly think that the callers have made the choice all along? I'd say get your head out of your arse, but I actually like you too much to write that. ::gasps as it's too late::
I couldn't care less if this next part causes a stir and you all think I'm a marauding troglodyte ... But here goes:
I'll bet all the tea in China that if Damien had been one of Drake's good friends, the situation never would have arising. A lot of people hate Damien because, well, he's an idiot and walks his own path. Drake is good for holding a grudge and/or showing favoritism to people she likes as apposed to those she dislikes when she thinks she can get away with it. <And in many cases, when she can't>
I'm not saying she'd take it as far as to cheat, oh no, but she seems perfectly willing to interpret the rules differently all depending on her feelings towards a certain person.
Take it however you want, I don't really care.
BRK
Date: 04 Mar 2000 12:44:04 EST
It's always been my understanding that once the first round has been called, the game is on. I don't care if the score is 4.5-0 in the other guys favor, if he beats feet, then it's the person who remains who has the choice of the win, loss or tie. It's ALWAYS been like this and we've never had a serious problem like this until Drake decided to enhance her on perception of her powers and lay claim to the decision
making.
If a guy wants to be a hosebag and take the win even when it's almost sure he'd lose, it's his problem to deal with the backlash from the community. It's not the callers job to decide morality or what is right or wrong for any dueler to do.
Gnort, you've been here how long? You've never once seen this happen? You honestly think that the callers have made the choice all along? I'd say get your head out of your arse, but I actually like you too much to write that. ::gasps as it's too late::
I couldn't care less if this next part causes a stir and you all think I'm a marauding troglodyte ... But here goes:
I'll bet all the tea in China that if Damien had been one of Drake's good friends, the situation never would have arising. A lot of people hate Damien because, well, he's an idiot and walks his own path. Drake is good for holding a grudge and/or showing favoritism to people she likes as apposed to those she dislikes when she thinks she can get away with it. <And in many cases, when she can't>
I'm not saying she'd take it as far as to cheat, oh no, but she seems perfectly willing to interpret the rules differently all depending on her feelings towards a certain person.
Take it however you want, I don't really care.
BRK
-
DoS Archive
- Archivist
- Posts: 30701
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 8:27 am
From: skylercj@aol.com (Skyler CJ)
Date: 05 Mar 2000 07:39:24 EST
>If a guy wants to be a hosebag
::and the cow begins to laugh -- moo, moo::
Date: 05 Mar 2000 07:39:24 EST
>If a guy wants to be a hosebag
::and the cow begins to laugh -- moo, moo::
-
DoS Archive
- Archivist
- Posts: 30701
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 8:27 am
From: pvtsneggle@aol.com (PvtSneggle)
Date: 12 Mar 2000 16:43:20 EST
All,
The rules clearly state that the HOST DFC with the input of the remaining player will decide if the match is to be ruled a tie or loss. In the world beyond this one input is generally the providing of an opinion for others to make a decision on. Still, the one tasked with making a decision is not bound to follow the input provided. Instead, he/she makes the best decision they can based on their duties and position.
Turning it all around, if I were behind 4-0 and for some reason my opponent left and did not return and I asked for a win that would be most unfair. The HOSTS have a difficult time dealing with our egos as it is. Where the rules are clear there should not be a lot of discussion. In my opinon the rules are clear.
Pvt Lorance Sneggle
Date: 12 Mar 2000 16:43:20 EST
All,
The rules clearly state that the HOST DFC with the input of the remaining player will decide if the match is to be ruled a tie or loss. In the world beyond this one input is generally the providing of an opinion for others to make a decision on. Still, the one tasked with making a decision is not bound to follow the input provided. Instead, he/she makes the best decision they can based on their duties and position.
Turning it all around, if I were behind 4-0 and for some reason my opponent left and did not return and I asked for a win that would be most unfair. The HOSTS have a difficult time dealing with our egos as it is. Where the rules are clear there should not be a lot of discussion. In my opinon the rules are clear.
Pvt Lorance Sneggle
-
DoS Archive
- Archivist
- Posts: 30701
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 8:27 am
From: ianmackenzie@aol.com (Ian MacKenzie)
Date: 15 Mar 2000 17:22:11 EST
"Now, since this is worded exactly like the DoS rule in question, I wish to ask a question. Does this mean that I have the final say in the rating of my performance, or does my supervisor?"
The argument is not over the wording. Everyone agrees that it is improper wording for the intent.
The argument is regarding Lady Silvertree's actions, when, as a long-standing member of this community, and a long-time staff member, she should know that the standard practice has always been to allow the remaining duelist to choose between a win or a tie. That she has had her desire for a tie overturned by callers in the past is a condemnation of those callers, not a reversal of standard policy.
Regards,
Ian Rex.
Date: 15 Mar 2000 17:22:11 EST
"Now, since this is worded exactly like the DoS rule in question, I wish to ask a question. Does this mean that I have the final say in the rating of my performance, or does my supervisor?"
The argument is not over the wording. Everyone agrees that it is improper wording for the intent.
The argument is regarding Lady Silvertree's actions, when, as a long-standing member of this community, and a long-time staff member, she should know that the standard practice has always been to allow the remaining duelist to choose between a win or a tie. That she has had her desire for a tie overturned by callers in the past is a condemnation of those callers, not a reversal of standard policy.
Regards,
Ian Rex.