Exhibit A
Team Wimminz vs (and I quote) Bitchy hoes
Judges make those voting polls... 1 point towards a swayed decision in a supposedly objective.
There's always voting polls for every match of every HoH. They do not influence grading. Check previous years. Not even remotely evidence for rigging.
Moving on.
Exhibit B
Post 3/17 of Ryke the same thing her character says in this post is the same verdict Lucid got from the judges for the fight. Power spamming.
Now this particular tid bit is up for debate but ...
If you allow someone into the tournament with powers and then b***h at them for using said powers... trolololol. Especially if said powers are akin to physical damage... huehuehuehue.
That's like telling people at a SF tournament... you can only hadouken a maximum of ten times in a round.
Even more lolzy... his fighting a chick with a stun-gun mace.
LOLOLOLOLOLOLOL.
..Not evidence of rigging either. At worst, it's evidence that a judge might have made a shitty call. I'd have to actually sit down and read the fight - and the actual judgment (neither of which you've provided, even though the former is in the HoH archives as are any judge calls within the fight, and grades are PMed out..) - to know what to make of it.
But like I said, just because a judge call went against someone doesn't mean the judge is rigging it in favor of the other fighter. If you and I have a fight and need a judge to step in, the fact that the judge sides with you against my argument, isn't even an implicit statement of favoritism. Again, one of those "It didn't go my way so it must be rigged" instances, although I'd have to actually sit down and look at the fight and the judges' statements to know.
At best, I'd say you have evidence of a judge maybe making a poor call, which is entirely possible. Not really evidence of rigging or favoritism, since you're not actually providing evidence, so much as you are saying something happened and presenting it as per your interpretation, rather than strictly as evidence to be viewed by other parties to make a decision themselves.
Exhibit C
Kat never got carded for exessive taunting which is blatant through-out the fight
Coaching from Cog while we were in vent
or OOC misconduct which was also blatant.
Excessive taunting is rarely ever given out, it usually requires something pretty extreme, i.e. more than s**t talking. Then again, you're also not providing any specific examples of how or where she taunted to the extent that it could be construed of excessive, so.. see above where "you're just saying so and so happened and presenting it as per your interpretation, rather than providing evidence and allowing people to make a decision for themselves.:
Secondly, Cog and Kat have lived together for as long as they've ever been in the tournament. Why would he coach her over Vent when he could do so face to face, or right over her shoulder? It would make absolutely zero sense to coach her where any of us could hear it. I was in Vent plenty in 2009, and didn't hear him telling her what to do in the fight as near as I can recall. In either case you're just saying it happened and aren't providing any proof, meaning it's not relevant.
At best, that would be an issue to have with Cog and Kat, not with the judges.
Also no evidence provided for "OOC misconduct." What does that constitute, when and where did it happen, if it happened at all?
So far we're 0/3 on rigging, and 1/3 on the 2009 crew maybe making a shitty decision.
You're not really entertaining the argument because you don't really have an argument to begin with. It's more appropriate to flip the statement and say that I'm humoring the situation even though it's pretty obvious that there's no actual evidence for the accusation.
At best, you have an interpretation of events. That's not conclusive evidence. That's not even evidence. Like I said, at this rate I might as well just proclaim myself the King of England, it'd have as much evidence as what you're saying now.
Reply
