Edit: Pre-script: You will find that I use 'admins' to collectively and simultaneously describe administrators and moderators. Semantics, meh.
I completely support the WBO admins in their decisions. I have a twenty percent warn right now, for doing stupid things. One of them I was trollin' the Battle Strikers - that wasn't necessary xD. Another, I called out someone for being overly hostile to someone who was asking a legitimate question (although maybe in the wrong place) about the paint wearing off of their Hasbro Pegasus - instead of helping them they just insulted them for asking a stupid question. Person wanted to know how they might repair the aesthetics, they weren't upset at Hasbro or making silly notions that paint shouldn't wear off because they paid whatever money for it. (I still think I was right and that person should have been warned though xD but that's what the report system is for, there was no reason for me to respond to them at all)
A second point: Go ahead and look at my top five threads, among them you will see three extremely stupid ones that were closed, I received no warning for those. I was demonstrated accurate reasons for their stupidity (of course the admins were not so crude in describing them) from the admins, and gathered hostility from other members - no one who has any control over the decisions made by officials.
I honestly don't even know why we are discussing this xD
(Nov. 18, 2011 11:03 PM)Arupaeo Wrote: [ -> ]I think there should be a 1-time resetting of the warning levels associated with bad posts, and I think that reset should happen when the WBO grants the antique face.
If a user has improved the quality of their posts to the level that the WBO sees fit to bestow the antique face, then that user deserves to have their prior warnings removed - and deserves the freedom to screw up in some other area (like say a tournament hosting gone wrong) without the fear of getting banned from a 30-40% warning on top of the previous warnings from their "youth" on the site.
I was always under the impression users with a warning level at or around a certain percentage would have their Antique Face denied or extensively delayed... never had it confirmed, it's just kind of the general vibe I got from it.
Nothing official, but if someones got 90% or something there most likely notn getting an ntique immediatly as soon as they qualify...
(Nov. 18, 2011 11:13 PM)Hazel Wrote: [ -> ] (Nov. 18, 2011 11:03 PM)Arupaeo Wrote: [ -> ]I think there should be a 1-time resetting of the warning levels associated with bad posts, and I think that reset should happen when the WBO grants the antique face.
If a user has improved the quality of their posts to the level that the WBO sees fit to bestow the antique face, then that user deserves to have their prior warnings removed - and deserves the freedom to screw up in some other area (like say a tournament hosting gone wrong) without the fear of getting banned from a 30-40% warning on top of the previous warnings from their "youth" on the site.
I was always under the impression users with a warning level at or around a certain percentage would have their Antique Face denied or extensively delayed... never had it confirmed, it's just kind of the general vibe I got from it.
Exactly. So once the committee
does decide to grant the antique face to someone who once upon a time was a spammy poster, I think that is the time that all past bad posts should be forgiven.
Mind you, this is only in reference to bad posts, not to anything else.
Personally I do not see much contradiction between giving someone the Antique Face and observing that they have warnings. In general their posts could be OK-good, but they made a few stupid posts, which do not represent the majority.
Also, most of the time (we are seriously not even talking about ten cases in total here anyway), they were able to get the Antique Face before they reached a ninety-percent warning level for sure. Usually, you get to ninety percent because you are basically a bad person in itself.
Off topic-How do you even get the antique face?
On topic- The wbo is lenient enough to the point where only if you do something sort of bad you would get 10% taken off or something like that.
If it's off-topic, why post here? Anyway, ask that in the WBO Faces Discussion thread.
(Nov. 19, 2011 4:54 AM)Kaiba Hiwatari Wrote: [ -> ]If it's off-topic, why post here? Anyway, ask that in the WBO Faces Discussion thread.
Do not ask again, it was already asked many times. You should recommend him to search the topic instead of post in it.
when i was new to WBO and was warned for the first time that was because i did not read the rules and when i got warned for the second time by-KAI-V I thought that KAI-V is totally strict and I started to hate her but when I got to know her i actually realized that it was my mistake due to which i was warned so in my opinion none of the WBO staff is strict.
I wish it would be easier to approve tournaments, and the WBO tournaments I've been to so far have been very fun, but have lacked in bracketing. Also at the first two a lot of noobs showed up, but at Happy Holi-Beys everyone there was experianced.
Tournaments have to be approved for a reason. Mainly to protect against any member however bad they are hosting a tourney. The other things you mentioned have no place in this thread. However they are another good reason why you shouldn't let just anyone run an official tourney. What kind of illegal stadium exactly? Were they just too damaged for use or not ones approved by the WBO?
If a WBO-approved event did not utilize WBO-legal Stadia, all results from it are forfeit and whomever was responsible for hosting it will suffer a severe penalty.
If you've got beans to spill, get to spilling.
(Nov. 24, 2011 5:54 PM)Spyro Harkins Wrote: [ -> ]I wish it would be easier to approve tournaments, and the WBO tournaments I've been to so far have been very fun, but have lacked in bracketing and used illegal stadiums. Also at the first two a lot of noobs showed up, but at Happy Holi-Beys everyone there was experianced.
Worth noting that bracketing is not a pre-requisite, round robin is honestly a much fairer setup, it just becomes unmanageable with large numbers of people.
As for illegal stadia, that's been addressed by others, but I would PM Kai-V to discuss it if you have concerns about the legality.
As for "noobs" showing up, as much as I may be hard on them on-site, it is the attendance of large numbers of people that keeps the site running (alongside donations), and it is often these people that allow large enough numbers of people to run tournaments. Plus, if you're good enough, then it's an easy victory. And, kids will be kids.
We were all noobs once, but over time we get better and more experienced. I love seeing new bladers at tourneys because it means that beyblade and the WBO are growing!
(Nov. 24, 2011 6:54 PM)Arupaeo Wrote: [ -> ]We were all noobs once, but over time we get better and more experienced. I love seeing new bladers at tourneys because it means that beyblade and the WBO are growing!
On the flip side, I hate seeing regulars disappear because that means we are doing something incorrect in holding their attention to the game and competition.
(Nov. 24, 2011 5:54 PM)Spyro Harkins Wrote: [ -> ]I wish it would be easier to approve tournaments, and the WBO tournaments I've been to so far have been very fun, but have lacked in bracketing. Also at the first two a lot of noobs showed up, but at Happy Holi-Beys everyone there was experianced.
Do not be akin to a hypocrite and just edit out the part about the illegal stadiums and just not talk about it anymore. This is a very serious issue : which tournaments used illegal stadiums and what were those stadiums like ?
Is the Takara Tomy Triple Type Stadium illegal?
I just read the rules, it isn't.
Yes I do. Sorry for the confusion, I also PM'd Kai-V letting her know.
(Nov. 16, 2011 5:52 PM)Hazel Wrote: [ -> ]If you're getting harassing PMs from people, alert a Moderator or Committee Member, don't fuss about it.
i have 10 time not exaggerating.
(Oct. 13, 2011 4:14 PM)bluebomber28 Wrote: [ -> ]you people dont care cuz takara gives attack types a chance and it is really hard to knock someone into the pocket
every one thats with takara is an idiot ESPECIALLY KIA-V
(Oct. 13, 2011 4:14 PM)bluebomber28 Wrote: [ -> ]you people dont care cuz takara gives attack types a chance and it is really hard to knock someone into the pocket
every one thats with takara is an idiot ESPECIALLY KIA-V
so how much longer till u kick me out kai-v well? you are just a hypocrite who likes to tell people what to do.
and yes they are strict
(Oct. 13, 2011 4:14 PM)bluebomber28 Wrote: [ -> ]you people dont care cuz takara gives attack types a chance and it is really hard to knock someone into the pocket
every one thats with takara is an idiot ESPECIALLY KIA-V
so how much longer till u kick me out Kai-V well? you are just a hypocrite who likes to tell people what to do.
and yes they are strict
whats wrong Kai-V trying to do this discreetly, without anyone knowing anything?
I would say WBO is insanely strict. Even though I am new, but I get warn too.
Had you actually read the rules before getting that warning ?
(Nov. 28, 2011 6:56 PM)bey-rockstar Wrote: [ -> ]I would say WBO is insanely strict. Even though I am new, but I get warn too.
They just enforce the rules really. If you just don't be an idiot and read the rules you'll be fine
