Welcome to Gaia! ::

All this war...
And I can't see a damn thing. D: Bloody firewall. Dx

Probably.



Stop right there. Didn't I just say extraneous variables aren't being applied? Whatever it is you're about to say isn't really applicable, because it isn't even addressing my statement. Hypothetically, I'm not saying anything. I'm stating the most bare-bone, basic logic that can be applied to the situation, which is true/false or in this case, essential/nonessential. Similar to the theory of whether or not a machine can work without a certain part.



Not assessment, application of logic. However, no - I didn't say that. Stop trying to put words into my mouth, and applying variables that aren't applicable to what I'm saying. You aren't even addressing the point I made, which makes me think you don't understand it. Maybe that's why I have to explain it "again and again and again." If you don't directly address my point, then I have a hard time figuring out if you understand it, so I reiterate.

To answer the presumption you're trying to foist upon me with this variable: no. My assessment doesn't actually deal with this variable; it's assumed that any judges in place will actually DO THEIR JOB. I think that's a basic assumption that can be safely applied to a the situation. Theoretically, if a tournament is a population contest, nothing can actually stop that. People can bullshit their commentary if they want. So.. commentary or not, s**t will be rigged no matter what. Hence, it's assumed that the judges are fair. Otherwise the entire situation, no matter what side you're one, would be useless/false.



Again, this doesn't actually address the essential/nonessential idea of looking at the tournament as a running machine and the commentary as a "part" or "cog" of that machine. It's a nonessential one, though - like with Hael's statements - I understand what you're getting at, and I can see the justification in it.

However, I don't think it deems it as an essential portion of running a tournament, because let's face it, if a panel of judges decides to be biased, they can do so with or without commentary. In fact, commentary would make it EASIER, because then you can bullshit all you want and feed the players a line about why they lost. Again: if we're not using 'fair' judges here, then nothing matters, because they'll rig it however they want.



That's all commentary is though. It explains why you lose or why you win. In the end, it's basically the reasoning for the win/loss decision, right? So it's supplementary to that win/loss decision. If you remove it from the tournament, the tournament still runs. And, like I said before, this is playing on a variable that I didn't include, on the assumption of having fair judges. A score isn't automatically fair because it has some nice words attached to it. If you have the same score with or without commentary, does the commentary make it more fair?

Not really. It might help you understand it, but on the assumption we're working with fair judges (to make this entire situation even function), then it's not really required. Again, it doesn't advance the tournament or move it towards completion. From the most bare-bone, basic logic applicable, this makes it nonessential. All other variables are going to be too hard and too numerous to determine. So these theoretical hypotheses are left out.



And that's pretty much all I'm saying; all other variables excluded. We can't ever determine the how fair the judges are, how people will react to things, or anything like that. The most baseline requirements for a tournament to run are participants, a structure for the tournament, and a win/loss decision to eliminate participants. Commentary, hell, even a PRIZE is entirely secondary.



Again, this is an entirely indeterminable variable. It's impossible to apply because we have no idea how every single person will view it. However, previous tournaments have run on point systems as a win/loss decision alone and didn't lose credibility. I don't think they would, but to some they might. Again, a variable that no one can determine, and therefore really inapplicable to the situation.



Because even the most basic common sense would suggest that someone who is acting as a judge will try to be as fair as possible? Yeah, there's bias, and things can be rigged, but I think if you enter a tournament with those assumptions, nothing will really validate the judges' decisions or make them hold weight. A judges' decision holds weight because they were put into that position, and by joining the tournament you agreed to abide by their judgment. No matter how it's rendered, or with what extras like commentary.



No? I mean, I can't answer for everyone, but I join tournaments because its fun, and because it fits my character's agenda. I've never cared if people thought I was good at roleplaying, or anything like that. It's purely happenstance (in my opinion) that my character wins, and that people seem to enjoy what I do. I strive to do well as a personal goal, but not for praise. And, again, I feel that the idea of whether or not the judgment holds weight is just another variable that's impossible to determine.



This is another hypothetical variable that is almost impossible to apply with any reasonable ability. It makes non-essential assumptions about how the winner won. By means of fairness, it's assumed that a person won via fair judging and on their own merits. These are all variables that aren't applicable to what I was saying, and don't actually support the importance of commentary. Because, just like rigging, if someone wins by kissing a**, they can do it with or without commentary.



But that justification isn't necessary to the tournament being ran, is what I'm saying. Is it great? Yeah, sure. Like I said, I love the whole commentary system people have adopted. It's awesome. Does it serve a purpose? Sure. Is that purpose essential to the completion of this tournament? Nope. That's all I'm saying.



I wouldn't say any of us are working too hard for it. Sure, everyone wants to be a winner, but in the end, having fun is more important. At least, to me. Again, can't answer for everyone. Maybe some people have an ego that needs stroking on teh intarwebz. I dunno.

I'm not vehement about winning, or about anything in regards to success. As I've stated before, if I'm vehement or passionate about anything, it's about this event - indeed, any event I partake in, either as staff or player - being run as smoothly as possible and making sure it doesn't flop. I don't want to see an event fail, especially not for a few comments.

That's why I've been trying to draw this - frankly - simple picture of what I'll call "machine logic" about how the tournament runs, and what is or isn't essential. Personally, I enjoy commentary. However, in favor of keeping the tournament running smoothly and keeping it from failing, I would certainly forgo those comments, as they're nonessential in the most basic sense of how the tournament operates.

Also, holy ******** this post is probably long, and I'm going to pass out for college soon. At least all the exposition has helped make me tired.

But mine would be MS paint. Like, circles and lines.

It'd be a literal diagram. And a shitty, badly made one.

I'm too lazy, anyways.

Also. Sleep.

Now-ish.

Not at all what I implied.

Let's pretend in this scenario, one's blood is the catalyst for an explosion of fairly great magnitude if mixed with another substance, and that this substance has penetrated their every orifice and flooded throughout their entire body's bloodstream.

Their entire body explodes in an exothermic blast, charred bone flying outward like calcium phosphate shrapnel. This is done right in another individual's face. Think of the fellow going 'boom' as a humanoid grenade that just had all the right components brought together and the resulting explosion being the consequence of the action.

I'm not referring to a concussion, or concussive force on an organ - I'm referring to a point-blank explosion right in another individual's person, surely that would constitute for some level of concussion to the enemy's person, as well as concussive force being applied to the prey given the explosion's onset combined with the debris accompanied?

And if this were to be the case, couldn't I raise the individual off the ground once flooded like this, as though they were in an eerie, crimson version of a tentacle rape hentai gone wrong, and have them watch as this mass erupts from the border of their eye-sockets like a fine mist, their every pore clogged as they suffer massive seizures and shock from their every blood vessel and organ being poked and prodded in ways never conceivably "correct" by all default definitions of the term when applied to human anatomy, all prior to them feeling the last fleeting moments of their impending life end filled with agony, organs failing, lungs collapsing, all preceding a massive flooding of bright orange light clouding their entire vision before they know nothing but the abyss of hell as they're used as nothing more than a variation of gunpowder in order to cause another individual's imminent death themselves, thus directly assisting involuntarily in the process repeating itself for their victim's lifeless, half-destroyed corpse?

Or would that count as a laser, I couldn't quite make heads nor tails of your explanation, Naota.

Damn kids and your super powers.