Joker's Dueling League Idea

Now I would like to point out that I did suggest this to the staff already but I would like to get some feedback on it from members about the ideas concept as a whole. Some older members from our old TWA (thats the original not the new fake one) might remember my old Duelling Leagues, this is a modified version of that.


----------------------------------------------

To put it simply:

You sign up if you want to be in the Leagues.

There are two separate Leagues: Top 12 League and The Bottom League

Any Open-Tier duel you do counts towards the leagues.

You do not post your duels the person running the event finds them.

The Top 12 ranked duellists are decided off rank points (for season 1 only)

The rest are put in a bottom league and compete separate to the Top 12

Points for each win or loss are: Win 2-0 = 3 points
Win 2-1 = 2 points
Loss 1-2 = 1 points
Loss 0-2 = 0 points

At the end of the allocated time the top 8 duellists in the Top 12 League duel in a Single-Elimination Tournament.

The bottom 4 of the Top 12 are moved down to the bottom league for next season.

The top 4 of the bottom league are moved up to the Top 12 League for next season.

If you are inactive from duelling for a week you lose all points you have in your league.
(If you have said why you are gone before leaving then you are excused)


Any questions? Support? Feedback?

Alrighty, after decifering what you mean here, I get the picture.
It is a great idea imo, and the staff is crazy for rejecting it.

It will result in activity, since people will actually be fighting for the position of elite eight of WDA, which is a hell of a lot of fun and people WANT to be up there.
It will also help with identifying WDA for new members. "hey, isn't that the place where people actually battle each other through a neat system, to find out who truly are the best duelists amongst us?"
To further complement this idea, I think a widget should be made, listing the current top 12.

The idea is still a mere scetch now, but I like it.
I suggest you write it out in more detail, so it can be implemented. =)

Fantastic idea. I like leagues. Fully supporting this.

Edited with a much simpler version that is easier to read and understand

You have my support Joker. I'm all for this.

Jokar i approve because ima points person i love gettin le most pointz :D

It's a mid-long term event that is designed to simply add a more competitive element to the open tier duels, it is all done behind the scenes, people just duel normally and any posted up official open tier duel they would do would simply be added to the table.

I think this is a good idea. I like the idea of having a ranking, that way people can see who has the most, etc. The tournament is a nice idea as well, due to the fact that I haven't seen that many tournaments here, this could change with that.
Bottom line, get your "admins" to approve.

We make a system where you'll need over 12 active people during league "season" to be considered at least valid (getting in a top spot due to just inactivity of others must be hardly proving anything), in order to start a competition 12 specific people only have a right of being in so we will pick 8 out of them so that we will do this: Host a restricted tournament.
For what reason? Why not just join one of the regular tournaments (there is one there at EVERY time in WDA), much faster and without all the trouble, which do not have that much more people, double at most, and prove there the exact same thing you would have proven through all the needlessly complicated process? Is there a good reason we should make some of our tournaments "VIP" only? And even if there was we are supposed to expect people to remain active and interested in an event that takes several 'seasons'? Would it be hard to imagine that by the end of a season, among the chosen ones of the top 12 we have about 6 people competing for bottom place with 0 points or so because they just didn't keep official open dueling weekly?

My opinion and the reason we chose to put the event aside for now is that there is over-complication to do something we do all the time and going to too much trouble simply to separate the "top" from the "bottom" and give away free rights to people to exhibit elitism. "Hey, look at this awesome tournament I am in that you won't be able to join for at least 2 seasons. Because you suck.".

At the same time, our current rank point system is made so that even if you join later, if you are good enough you can climb to the top spots relatively fast, that's why you get so many points for beating opponents many ranks away from yours, therefore a league idea seemed slightly redundant and at least overlapping on several points.

And yet this wasn't a decision to completely throw it in the trash, because who knows, it may be worth a try. But at this point in time, in addition to the dual tournament system we have constantly running, we also have not 1, not 2 but 3 events running at the same time with splash, infection and firefight (all fully operational when digi gets here since it's her event extravaganza thingy), and we made the decision to put priority on the ones already out there and say that "hey, if we just approve and run whichever event comes our way at this state, not only are we needlessly putting extra work on staff helpers but most importantly we are spreading activity between them too thin eventually risking them all to fail", while the 'spreading activity' argument is something I refuse to believe Joker is not familiar with. To be honest I have been bombarded enough lately to the point where I may stop giving a **** about it and approve whichever event comes my way as well as whichever tournament and let whatever happen happen not caring about the consequences before or after the fact, since at least no one else has reason to care and I understand that actually, but I hope that time won't come soon so that things will at least be able to keep running properly.

Guys, I won't blame anyone for supporting lightheartedly but I will remind that supporting costs truly nothing. I see some of the support here from people I honestly know won't be into the competition for a single season while I'd like to see instead support from people who will at the same time put it in practice and be one of those over 12 active people needed for the event to run.

Joker, not only should you know what I mean by 'spreading activity', but you should also know that after being rejected by staff it is a **** move to go and ask from members for costless approval which you can get from many just by bugging them to post a single "I approve" post. We both know how this works, no one will be against your proposal unless they either are staff and know the reasons or really hate you that much, but instead if you advertise for a bit on chat and grab a few people, even if you don't get a justified approval you can still get enough of the generic support posts. If you really wanted to know our reasons you could have just asked. You know how annoying it is so doing a move which I believe to be partially out of spite really does not help the case.

L. Lawliet, at all times we have 2 tournaments running, one regular open tournament and one tournament with special rules, and that of course is not including events. When the special tournament ends the next special tournament begins. When the regular tournament ends the next regular tournament begins. If you believe we should have more tournaments I'd like to know your ideas on it, as well as whether that would have an effect on participation in tournaments and how it would spread said participation between them. Personally I see two at a time to be optimal because you get a good 16-ish number on regular tournaments and you get enough participation for your special ones, but if someone believes starting new ones while some are ongoing or something could work I'd be willing to work on the idea.

Supporting. I like this idea.

I like this idea, kinda like a duelist kingdom/battle city type thing except no eliminations until the final tourney and a point system. You have my support

Al-Bhed wrote:

We make a system where you'll need over 12 active people during league "season" to be considered at least valid (getting in a top spot due to just inactivity of others must be hardly proving anything), in order to start a competition 12 specific people only have a right of being in so we will pick 8 out of them so that we will do this: Host a restricted tournament.
For what reason? Why not just join one of the regular tournaments (there is one there at EVERY time in WDA), much faster and without all the trouble, which do not have that much more people, double at most, and prove there the exact same thing you would have proven through all the needlessly complicated process? Is there a good reason we should make some of our tournaments "VIP" only? And even if there was we are supposed to expect people to remain active and interested in an event that takes several 'seasons'? Would it be hard to imagine that by the end of a season, among the chosen ones of the top 12 we have about 6 people competing for bottom place with 0 points or so because they just didn't keep official open dueling weekly?

There's a very simple answer to this question: it will be active because it is fun. As you can see by the people who posted in this topic: people want a league where we truly find out who the best amongst us are. It'll be a huge motivation for players to duel more while participating, since they want to be officially listed as one of the best. Dueling weekly is not a hard thing to do, and if you do not have faith that members can do this, we will never achieve anything. Your job as an admin is to support these things if members appear to like it. (Which obsiously is the case)

Quote :

My opinion and the reason we chose to put the event aside for now is that there is over-complication to do something we do all the time and going to too much trouble simply to separate the "top" from the "bottom" and give away free rights to people to exhibit elitism. "Hey, look at this awesome tournament I am in that you won't be able to join for at least 2 seasons. Because you suck.".

There are several reasons why I think this won't happen.
1. We have staff that are specialised in stopping people from flaming each other.
2. The members themselves who express this kind of behaviour, will put a target on their back, making everyone in the league want to utterly destroy them, making them shut up. (Not to even mention the posts on the forum that will be made to express the disappointment in the person who expresses this behaviour. This all will very much discourage such behaviour. Those who continue to express such behaviour will be taken care of by our awesome mods.

Furthermore, a little of 'I am the best' acting of the top duelists will be motivating those not in the top, to duel more and to get better, which will result in more activity. They will also seek contact with the top members which do not behave that way, in order to seek advice, which makes the community a happier place.

Quote :

At the same time, our current rank point system is made so that even if you join later, if you are good enough you can climb to the top spots relatively fast, that's why you get so many points for beating opponents many ranks away from yours, therefore a league idea seemed slightly redundant and at least overlapping on several points.

In my opionion, the league idea is better than the 'points' idea, since members who join later will be at a major disadvantage to those who have been dueling much for the past months, making them have way more points.
The league resets every once in a while, opening up four spots for those who duel well in the coming few weeks.

[quote]And yet this wasn't a decision to completely throw it in the trash, because who knows, it may be worth a try. But at this point in time, in addition to the dual tournament system we have constantly running, we also have not 1, not 2 but 3 events running at the same time with splash, infection and firefight (all fully operational when digi gets here since it's her event extravaganza thingy), and we made the decision to put priority on the ones already out there and say that "hey, if we just approve and run whichever event comes our way at this state, not only are we needlessly putting extra work on staff helpers but most importantly we are spreading activity between them too thin eventually risking them all to fail", while the 'spreading activity' argument is something I refuse to believe Joker is not familiar with. To be honest I have been bombarded enough lately to the point where I may stop giving a **** about it and approve whichever event comes my way as well as whichever tournament and let whatever happen happen not caring about the consequences before or after the fact, since at least no one else has reason to care and I understand that actually, but I hope that time won't come soon so that things will at least be able to keep running properly.[quote]

Your job as an admin is to be an example for members and to motivate them. Giving your opinion is okay, but saying that members do not care and to stop giving a rat's ass about things, is the worst behaviour an admin can display. Remember that.
To go in more detail about what you said: I understand that you would like to wait with the event since there are so many new ones running right now, but at least name a date in the near future. The community likes to know what to expect with this great idea.

Quote :

Guys, I won't blame anyone for supporting lightheartedly but I will remind that supporting costs truly nothing. I see some of the support here from people I honestly know won't be into the competition for a single season while I'd like to see instead support from people who will at the same time put it in practice and be one of those over 12 active people needed for the event to run.

This sounds like you're looking down on those who support this. I don't blame you if this isn't the case, but please rephrase 'lightheartedly' to words which are positive to our members.
I see you are very concerned about the activity, and I do not blame you, so I propose this:
Allow Joker to make a new topic with a poll in it. The poll being a simple 'yes' or 'no' to this: "I will actively participate in the Dueling League (Which means actively enough to not get disqualified) when it starts.

Quote :

Joker, not only should you know what I mean by 'spreading activity', but you should also know that after being rejected by staff it is a **** move to go and ask from members for costless approval which you can get from many just by bugging them to post a single "I approve" post. We both know how this works, no one will be against your proposal unless they either are staff and know the reasons or really hate you that much, but instead if you advertise for a bit on chat and grab a few people, even if you don't get a justified approval you can still get enough of the generic support posts. If you really wanted to know our reasons you could have just asked. You know how annoying it is so doing a move which I believe to be partially out of spite really does not help the case.

This is not a not-nice move by Joker. It is not nice for the staff to operate beside close doors, to not let members decide what they do or do not want. You are basically denying us the right to participate in the descision making about the future of the place which is here for us, the community.
What I see here, is the staff saying they know what the members want, better than they know it themselves. This is even further supported by the suggestion you posted, that members post here for the sake of Joker, rather than expressing their honest opinion. This means our opinion is not taken seriously, which is something I cannot accept, as part of the community I love.
I suggest this point of view by the staff changes radically, very soon.


I want to say, at the end of this post, that I do not mean to attack anyone personally. I am just very worried about what I just read in the second half of your post, about which I felt the community needed to let their voice be heard. I hope nobody will have any grudges against anybody because of this topic.

Unforgiven Pretender wrote:

There's a very simple answer to this question: it will be active because it is fun.

It will be active because it is fun? Then I guess everything that went inactive did because it was not fun and no other reason was involved. If I make a fun event requiring a higher participation than the total of our active members, it will be active because it is fun? Is that why the previous dueling league failed? Because since this is actually more demanding than that one, it would really suck as an argument for this idea's case.

Unforgiven Pretender wrote:

There are several reasons why I think this won't happen.
1. We have staff that are specialised in stopping people from flaming each other.
2. The members themselves who express this kind of behaviour, will put a target on their back, making everyone in the league want to utterly destroy them, making them shut up. (Not to even mention the posts on the forum that will be made to express the disappointment in the person who expresses this behaviour. This all will very much discourage such behaviour. Those who continue to express such behaviour will be taken care of by our awesome mods.

First thing is, about (1.)
No, there is no such staff here, it's a drag and no one likes or is specialized at stopping people from flaming, at least in our staff, because that would be a pointless specialization.
The other is, you are missing the point of what I said. I'm not saying people will say that at other's faces, I am saying it creates a VIP exclusive tournament where only a few are allowed by specific criteria, which is a major flaw from my point of view but it is one I am willing to overlook.

Unforgiven Pretender wrote:

In my opionion, the league idea is better than the 'points' idea, since members who join later will be at a major disadvantage to those who have been dueling much for the past months, making them have way more points.
The league resets every once in a while, opening up four spots for those who duel well in the coming few weeks.

Once again, because I either did not write it here or it was not read, the system is built so that even members who join in later can quickly catch up. If the limits later become higher the system will be adjusted to do the same thing. At this time it is possible for a newcomer in 2-3 duels to go above the rank points I currently have and into the competition. Additionally I did not say it is exactly the same but that there is a great deal of overlapping. You have those rank points but you also have those league points and those rank points rank you and those league points rank you for pretty much the same thing.

Unforgiven Pretender wrote:

Your job as an admin is to be an example for members and to motivate them. Giving your opinion is okay, but saying that members do not care and to stop giving a rat's ass about things, is the worst behaviour an admin can display. Remember that.

I feel like I am getting more jobs by the second... No UP, that is a difference in view. I will accept that you have your opinion and I have mine of course as is the reasonable thing to do, and I will tell you that by my view and by the way I function in staff I do not believe my job is to set an example and motivate people. I am not anyone's guardian, I am not anyone's big brother, I am not trying to be anyone's role model. As I believe this to be a community, I am simply a person who does his part in this community by administrating and setting a guideline. People will have to get their own examples and even if motivation of the community is a means to an end that we will often use and have to use, it is not my job.
On the other hand as another member of the community I'd rather I am open and honest about things, and that is my opinion. If I am displeased I will show it, I will not patronize neither will I sigh like the "understanding" grandpa for the mischievous deeds of his grandchildren. I have shown an issue, I have expressed a worry, and what I am getting is "hey! Let's do that too!" from one side, "do that! I think it's awesome, and if you don't do it I will be a ***** about it until you do! no, I can't hear you talk, I am always right!", and then when I say there is an issue and we shouldn't do something I get random tiny unjustified "we should totally do it!" from here and there. If that's the response I am getting to my worries, then apparently I should stop worrying because there is absolutely no point. If no one else cares I won't care either, because as I said a bazillion times we are a community, we are in this together, and as members of the same community we all bear as individuals responsibility, staff doesn't carry it alone.

Unforgiven Pretender wrote:

This sounds like you're looking down on those who support this. I don't blame you if this isn't the case, but please rephrase 'lightheartedly' to words which are positive to our members.

When you post a one liner after being told something in chat, where obviously you have nothing to lose, chances are you are doing it lightheartedly. No I am not insulting anyone, instead I would find it weird if they viewed it as a major decision of great importance and after much deliberation posted our forum equivalent of a facebook "like". As they have nothing to lose they are actually supposed to do so lightheartedly, that's what's normal.

Unforgiven Pretender wrote:

I see you are very concerned about the activity, and I do not blame you, so I propose this:
Allow Joker to make a new topic with a poll in it. The poll being a simple 'yes' or 'no' to this: "I will actively participate in the Dueling League (Which means actively enough to not get disqualified) when it starts.

There would be absolutely no point to an anonymous poll for this. If I do that it'd be on a topic where each member would be expected to responsibly say in a post they would be active for the dueling league.

Unforgiven Pretender wrote:

This is not a not-nice move by Joker. It is not nice for the staff to operate beside close doors, to not let members decide what they do or do not want. You are basically denying us the right to participate in the descision making about the future of the place which is here for us, the community.

It's starting to look like one of us has never been staff. If I didn't know any better I'd be convinced of that.
When you take your idea to staff and you are given the reasons for its rejection, it is extremely troubling for the staff, hence a not-nice, in your words, move, to go and farm for costless 'likes' to fabricate a case against that of the staff. If you want to run it by the members, Site Suggestions are right over there, do that first. But that's not what happened, instead Joker gave the suggestion of his in private and only after it was rejected he thought about running it by the public, simply not to accept the staff's decision. I'd like to add that while Joker apparently was notified for the reason's of this idea's rejection, they were conveniently withheld from the opening post and I had to do an additional post to give them, a post which many members skipped of course.

Since we've had this discussion before around here, are you suggesting UP that all decisions go through the members? And that would apparently include all decisions about new tournaments and new events? Since you find it not nice, I assume when you were able to back in TWA, you would run all new tournament ideas, organizing, approvals and rejections by the members and would wait for their decision on the matter. I am sorry, we cannot do that simply because of the amount of time it would take.

But that can actually change. If it is decided to be so we can have open topics about everything for everyone to argue for the decisions we are supposed to be making. I am sure it will be beneficial for everyone, even though it hurts the speed and quality of the decisions, I will honestly say that if we get to have constructive discussions with the members, that is a risk I am willing to take. I did say I am not anyone's guardian and I am certainly not responsible for others, but even if activity is hurt because of it, to be able to have even a few people practice their judgment in such a way is a proposal too tempting for me. Maybe I should run that by the members in a different topic and see, although that is not my decision alone and I should wait for the rest of the staff to see.

Unforgiven Pretender wrote:

What I see here, is the staff saying they know what the members want, better than they know it themselves. This is even further supported by the suggestion you posted, that members post here for the sake of Joker, rather than expressing their honest opinion. This means our opinion is not taken seriously, which is something I cannot accept, as part of the community I love.
I suggest this point of view by the staff changes radically, very soon.

I don't recall claiming here to know what the members want, because that is not the issue in this case at all. If the members want 100 events and we run them all at the same time then we are, something that would be expressed by yet another censored word. The issue here is something that I have seen many times happening and that is spreading activity thin. I know some of you may not understand, but even if it is a single duel each, some people just won't join in 10 tournaments at the same time and will find it to be demanding. It is not the time you give to the single duel you do alone. There is the time you give trying to get said duel (I've lost half days because of that), there is the additional responsibility you take and yet another thing on your to-do list, there is the additional deadline you set over your head (and I don't know what you think of it but around here we fear deadlines), it is another thing to take up part of your free time, because many of us are busy or just don't want to add another thing in schedule for yugioh. I want in my free time to watch pointless anime or finish the new assassin's creed. I want to play yugioh at random times that I choose, without HAVING TO play yugioh in that timeframe. Those things all exist.
And because those things exist you choose how many things you'll commit too. At the beginning it was supposed to be 2 tournaments, 1 dedicated event, 1 sluggish event. We do have the 2 tournaments, as soon as digi comes back next Firefight will probably begin, and probably after current infection ends the next one will probably begin because people seem to like the event. I don't want to give people the dilemma to choose between, joining 2 tournaments or 1 tournament and an event. I want them to be able to join as many as possible and this at the moment is believed to be optimal. That is mainly what I do know better than the average member and my main objection.

I want to do what is best for the community and that has always been my goal. On that line of thought I will not choose to be liked more over what is the best thing to do. If I do believe that people are not putting enough thought into it or if I believe fellow members of this community are wrong, I will disagree, I will state what I believe and I will not simply hypocritically say "Yes, the customer is always right, let's do it like that". If I believe **** will hit the fan, I will say they will hit the fan. Whether I will let them or not is a different matter and will depend on whether it is worth trying of course. Again, we are volunteers trying to help. If we are believed to not do the job properly or not be good for the job, we only need be replaced, but we will of course not change our thinking for such a reason.

Halfway summing up, halfway announcing: This idea currently has 2 big issues.
1. We already have dedicated events and it cannot be ran currently.
2. It is flawed in its structure since it has needless overcomplication which will practically force it to die out while it has a great deal of overlapping with the ranking system.

I made 2 proposals to Joker. The first was, which is out now, to hold one topic in order to keep track of points for the league without the help of staff, and when it is tournament time to invite the selected members to their tournament. The compromise was this: They would only have 1 topic, as most events/tournaments have anyways, and of course would get a new topic for tournaments, as well as a clause of minimal advertising. We don't do advertising for events/tournaments anyways, the topic is there and people join, but I knew that if I left it out of staff there would be, unlike every single other event and tournament here, a ton of advertising by either constantly mentioning in topics, pm'ing or in chat, for said event.
As an answer to that I received raging. In retrospect I just gave up there not wanting to deal with the issue and gave that compromise, but looking back it does not address the initial flaws of the idea, therefore, the suggestion is off the table. I will mention that Joker already grandly refused the suggestion though so me mentioning that does not mean much, other than using it for future reference.

The second suggestion, which I did not receive an answer to, was to address the issue of serious events which people want and cry for apparently as I was informed.

It may sound arrogant, and it may also not be true and just my foolish opinion since I acknowledge there are many players in WDA better than me (and never have I claimed otherwise as far as I remember anyways), but I believe I know a couple of things about what is serious and what is competitive. And with my assumed knowledge I know that when wanting to prove that you are better and when it comes to being serious and competitive, what's more important than how many random duels you spam is actual tournaments and your performance in them. In short if you want to prove to be the best, prove it in the regular tournaments, as they are much better in proving it than a complicated league which may as well be a bunch of people beating bad players over and over.

But of course the issue which came to my attention is not solved with that. We already have those tournaments and what I was informed of is that we do not have enough serious events. And so came my suggestion for actual serious players who want to prove being the best, because sorry, duel spamming and duel grinding proves no such thing.
My second suggestion came with 2 options.
1) Double the number of regular tournaments. You'd have the regular tournament like you do know, and halfway through it you'd have the half tournament where not only people who can no longer play in the ongoing tournament can join but others who simply did not make it for the signups. On the one hand it may be that it will decrease the number of participants in tournaments, but that depends on its timing. Tournaments usually last for too long, about 1 month, maybe more when deadline extensions and signups come into play. So halfway in it there are many people who just want to join a tournament. The half tournaments would be smaller regular tournaments (expecting a participation of about 8 people) for people who want more dueling.
2) Seeded tournaments. A basic modification on the issues of the initial dueling league idea. At certain time intervals you have a tournament with 8 people, the top 3 of the latest regular tournament, the top 2 of the latest special tournament, the winner of the previous seeded tournament, the player with the most rank points at the beginning of the month of the tournament and for the last one something like a special spot kept for an event winner or whatever is decided for that tournament. A tournament for those who actually earned their place there by being the better ones. The restricted tournament thing is something joker obviously brought up so sure, stolen idea, will put "tournament was provided by The Joker" or something if you want.

And of course the above can be combined. Sorry, I've left out mandatory dueling, I've left out duel spamming, because what I was informed is that people want serious events, and I delivered a serious yugioh event. If instead you were asking for something else, please notify me.

That is the compromise I am willing to make. From there the only compromise I can see myself making is the "sure, I don't care, do whatever you want, no point worrying", as many events as you want, I'll even open a bunch of free roam rps with no rules for people to knock themselves out, and stuff like that. The latter one being a compromise I'd really not like to see myself making. Again, I know most of you see nothing wrong with it, so you may take it as something that will displease myself if you will.

Quote :

It will be active because it is fun? Then I guess everything that went inactive did because it was not fun and no other reason was involved. If I make a fun event requiring a higher participation than the total of our active members, it will be active because it is fun? Is that why the previous dueling league failed? Because since this is actually more demanding than that one, it would really suck as an argument for this idea's case.

I said more than just that one line, I'd appreciate if you wouldn't look at one sentence, comment on it, and then move on, ignoring the other stuff I posted.
To comment on the fun aspect of tournaments: No, it's not a suckish argument. People are here to have fun, for no other reason. When a tournament is fun, they will actively participate. What creates fun? Well, competiveness is one, which will definately be in the Dueling League. The competiveness, and adding of some kind of widget listing the top 8, will make people want to be up at the top 8. It will be fun for them to try and reach that goal.
And yes indeed, things went inactive because it wasn't fun enough, that's a truth we all have to face, no matter how much effort we put in it. Of course, fun is depending on all kinds of different factors, like the amount of people who participate, and the amound of effort is required to get said fun.
Dueling once a week is easier to do than any event created thus far, making the demands very low. The high level of competiveness and people that want to participate (as seen in this topic, by the people who support it) get the fun level very high, setting the enviroment for a succesfull event.

About the second part: (Not going to quote everything, we can just scroll up to prevent too huge wall of texts)
Alright, I missed the point. I thought you meant people would start flaming each other, which you didn't mean, my bad.
It indeed will be a VIP tournament, which in this case is a very good thing. People will be motivated to get better. Other tournaments will be hosted, other events will be held too, so the ones in the bottom league will still be able to win where they want to.
In the case of the continuous presence of the same duelists in the top league, every now and then a 'season' can be hosted with slight different rules: Every member of the bottom league may challenge the top 8. If you beat them in a match, they switch places with the one who beat them. (Just to name an example)

Quote number three:
Rank points can of course still exist. I also think there shouldn't be 'League Points'. Everyone will just post every match of the league in the normal duel arena, where they will be awarded rank points as normal. After that they post their match in a League topic. At the end of the season, the host will count all wins and losses, and those with most wins will get top 4 of bottom league. (Or most of wins minus losses)
In this case, signups also won't be required. Someone can just decide to post or not post their match in the topic. Only the top 12 will be 'signed up' for a tournament. If they refuse to join the tournament, the next in line will just participate.

Quote number four:
I still disagree with you, Al. An admin is the leader of the acedemy. Leaders lead. They don't say that their members have no reason to care for something, or that they themselves might stop giving a rat's ass about something. It is bad behaviour of an admin. How would you like it if members said you had no reason to care about the academy?
Lead by example.

Quote number five:
You assume it's equivalent to a facebook 'like'. Not every member posts wall of texts like you and I do now. They want to have fun, don't want to put in too much effort and now express their opinion of what they think is fun. Taking it lightheartedly is somewhat understandable, but it means you see their opinions as 'less valuable' which is something I'm worried about. Isn't the staff supposed to listen to take seriously what their members think, regardless of how long ther post is? It is still their opinion, therefore something that should not be taken as something that is lightheartedly. Even if it isn't a major descision, it is still their opinion.

Quote number six:
Alright, then I propose a different kind of poll. Ask the same question, and ask everyone to post in the topic in at least one line (So not one word) if, and why they will or won't actively participate in the Dueling League when it releases. Deal?

Quote number seven:
"Costless likes" ?! I addressed this in the response to quote five.
A staff member is in his full right to ask the members if they like an idea if it gets rejected. If it was rejected for a proper reason, members will not support it. If members support it though, then apparently the staff's descision wasn't the right descision.
Members do not have to be bothered with every descision that needs to be made. But if a descision by the staff has been made, and one staff member feels like the members would like to see the descision made differently, then it is the right thing for him to ask the members support.

Quote number eight:
I won't comment on every single thing, but I will post what I think is right to do next, after which we can work to a compromise:
1. The 'posting' poll I proposed in this post gets made by Joker. I will help him with working out the event if needed, so members can imagine better what it will be like. (We will do our best to make it less complicated)
2. If the members show they want it, the admins will discuss when a proper date is to launch the event. I agree that too many events released on the same time can be deadly, but nevertheless a date should be set.

About the time members are willing to spend:
A seperate topic could be made in the League, where people post at which times they will be online. In this case a WDA clock should be inserted again, so they can post this time, adapted to this clock.
For specific duels, PM'ing works great, there's no need to sit and wait for someone to maybe come online.
This is a whole different issue however, which I think is better to discuss elsewhere. Anyways: it shouldn't be a problem for the League if the host organises it properly.

Quote 1:
I commented on that one line. You stated as a fact, if it is fun, it will be active. That is either (a), an invalid argument since if a fun event requires more than our current number of active members to be considered active, it will be inactive regardless of how fun it is, not to mention that since what is fun differs from person to person you will need a number of people finding it fun instead of a number of active people.
or (b), an argument which if true (which is not) can be shot right back since the previous duel league died due to inactivity.
I did not comment on the rest of your part right there because the rest of my post addresses the rest of what you say. If you check through my message it is a practice I follow a lot, if something is answered somewhere else, so that I won't repeat myself, I leave it out at that point and take it up when the time comes. I believe the rest of your first paragraph is sufficiently covered in the rest of my message.

Quote 3:
It's not about how they are called, it's about the fact the system does more or less the same thing, therefore having a great deal of needless overlap.

Quote 4:
And I still believe that is your opinion. I do not view the administrators as leaders and I can say I am no one's leader. I trust that they have lives and that many of them do not find the success of failure of an event that much important, if it happens it happens. I am not being cynical here and I am not accusing anyone, I am being realistic. If you want me to lie because of someone else's ideals it will take a lot of work. And it's not because they don't care whether this place lives or dies, there you misunderstood, it's because they have no reason to think about the consequences of that and view it as a small harmless decision, it's just an event. On the other hand, as I said I believe we carry individual responsibilities. As a member of the community myself I will be honest and I will express my worries. I cannot brainwash people into caring, I can only trust that they ultimately do.

Quote 5:
Because I actually do care about what the members are thinking, I am trying to understand the mindset that comes with that opinion. I am trying to be understanding, realistic and not sugarcoat things. If I give you a decision to make, throw at you an outline, tell you about the good things and leave out all the bad, I will not trust the decision you made because it was made on false premises. We can talk of vague concepts such as the sacred opinion in democracy, but even in democracy there comes the real factor of how that decision was made and under which circumstances.

Quote 6:
More or less what I suggested. It will be decided whether or not if and when it will be done. I will not give a date about anything for reasons that will be explained below.

Quote 7:
Apart from everything else I already stated: The members had no idea what reason it was rejected for as they were conveniently left out of the original post.
And UP, that's not what you said before, you said staff should not do things behind closed doors putting on the table an issue of direct democracy, an idea which I am kinda beginning to like.

Quote 8:
If you believe the staff will not do its job and try to understand the members properly while trying to pick the best course of action, we can always be replaced. I cannot vouch for the rest, but I can definitely be replaced if I am not deemed to be trustworthy.
If I am deemed not to be trustworthy, as a non-staff member this is a decision I will not make so I will not expand of it.
If we are trustworthy we will do our best to understand the members and work on the appropriate topics to gauge interest on the duel league as well as the altered ideas. Joker will not do that job, sorry. If it is decided to be run a date will not be given because we can't tell how the other events will go from now. We will do our best in that case to run it in a short time to maintain the same interest.

UP, from my viewpoint, which may very well be wrong, among our current active members I think I can count duel enthusiasts who want to have those random duel deadlines, on the fingers of one hand. I could be wrong, but I believe that if you were to separate the members between the "Must, duel, more!" and the "leave me alone, I'll play when I want..." factions, the first one would be vastly outnumbered. And because of this enthusiasm I see signs of those rose-tinted glasses in the 'people wanna be the very best, like no one ever was, and so everything will make them keep trying with enthusiasm!' statements. I am trying to get to know our members, I believe I am doing a decent job of that, and as far as I know them, I know that such a league will quickly turn into a party for few, because most do not eternally keep that motivation.

We will not be setting dates for several reasons. Especially at this point, Digi is out and I am very busy with tests which start this week (I am spending time here responding to this message while really I should not), so the amount of work for this week will be a bit down. As you can see I am still trying to be on top of things, but secondary issues, like the looks of the navigation portal for example, are put off. Same for this, it will be done when it's done. Sorry, but that's how things are at the moment.

I did not see an answer to whether what people want is a serious ygo event. Because what does prove the better ygo player is certainly not duel spamming. If by people wanting a serious ygo event it is implied that they want duel spamming, at least I'd like to know. If on the other hand what the people were waiting for was exactly this kind of event, again I'd like to know. I for one am against such mandatory duel/duel grinding events because not only do they prove nothing other than how long you are willing to repeat dueling all day, but also I constantly see them abandoned after a short while and I definitely don't want to back up an idea that will soon give a 'leave me alone' reaction whenever mentioned. I honestly believe there are very few people who will stick to it for more than a season, because as I said I believe I can count the dedicated duel enthusiasts around on the fingers of one hand.

Since we got off on the wrong foot here for many, many reasons, a different discussions to gather, not the opinions, as that is something you merely take into account, but the decision of the WDA community, will be made later, for this matter. And I hope it will not be to deliver justice to a member or the staff, that it will not be to approve a blueprint or another, but that it will be to produce that one event WDA will choose to run.

Alright, I think most things have been said, so I'll keep it short:
1. Activity is the direct result of fun. If people think something is fun, they will become more active. Since it's the summer vacation now (or very soon for some) at least the first season will be quite active. When people inside, and outside the academy see this is fun, they will join the event, making it more active.
I think it's worth a shot.

2. I guess we agree on the idea of fixing the VIP problems, as described in my previous post, if necessary?

3. There actually is little overlap. We basically just add rankings and a tournament attached to the already existing system, we do not overlap it.

4. We will agree to disagree.

5. If you care about what we say, then please do not give members the impression that you don't, by using words like 'lightheartedly', 'facebook like' and 'costless likes' to refer to our opinions in this topic.

6. Alright, I shall make the topic with Joker. We're making progress. =)

7. When I posted that, I was referring to this case. Members do not want to put much effort into having fun in this academy. They will not participate in continuous descicion making. Only in these rare cases we should have a voice in matters, since the staff is capable of handeling issues if everyone in the staff agrees to the descicions being made.

8. It is Joker's idea, he want to host the event, why not let him do it?

About the activity, I think dueling once a week is very easy to do, and people will be willing to do it in order to get a chance of being listed as top eight of the academy.

Furthermore, it's okay to not have a concrete date, but at least give us the month in which it will be hosted.

I see that you're worried about the 'grinding' aspect of this event. We could immediately counter this by always enabling the option to challenge the top eight directly for their top 8 spot. If you beat them you're in, no grinding involved. For everyone who doesn't challenge the top eight, there still are the places 9 to 12. We should just make one or two rules, like for example one top 8 duelist can only be challenged for his position once by the same person, and the top 8 who was beaten gets only one chance to challenge the one who took his position. (So someone basically would have to beat someone twice in a row)

Good luck on your tests.

Unforgiven Pretender wrote:

2. I guess we agree on the idea of fixing the VIP problems, as described in my previous post, if necessary?

If you read my first answer post to you I say on this matter that this issue is one I am willing to overlook, hence why I did not answer in the next post. Your suggestion is addressed in the end of this post.

Unforgiven Pretender wrote:

3. There actually is little overlap. We basically just add rankings and a tournament attached to the already existing system, we do not overlap it.

They are trying to prove the exact same thing in a very similar way with points accumulated through the same process after doing slight alterations. That is overlapping.

Unforgiven Pretender wrote:

5. If you care about what we say, then please do not give members the impression that you don't, by using words like 'lightheartedly', 'facebook like' and 'costless likes' to refer to our opinions in this topic.

As I said, caring about what another says isn't proven by lying about it. It is also understanding the other person which I am trying to do. In this case, even though you may not view it as nice to say so, I believe the descriptions I have given to be true. As I do try to understand the other person and not just use their words I believe I care about what they say.

Unforgiven Pretender wrote:

6. Alright, I shall make the topic with Joker. We're making progress. =)

You reached a conclusion directly contradicting quote 8.

Unforgiven Pretender wrote:

8. It is Joker's idea, he want to host the event, why not let him do it?

That's not how it works, there is a job to be done, a decision to be made, a conclusion to be reached, and that is our responsibility. One may provide the idea but that does not give one rights into the organizing of it unless they are given. So for two reasons:
1. It is our job. As we want to reach a safe conclusion on the matter and not be handed a ready-made decision later, we will try our best to do this properly.
2. Joker already followed a reverse process, as he first brought an idea to staff and only after it was rejected did he bring it in public simply to override a staff decision, while in the process he left out the reasons for the rejection. From my point of view the purpose for that was clear and even if it was not our job I would not allow the topic to be made in such a way because chances are I would be expecting to receive a guided decision.

Let me throw the question back. I had already said that it is our job to make the topic. Why insist for Joker to do it? Apart from who gets the honors, I can give him the title "Master of the Universe" or whatever other honor he needs, don't care about that and I think you wouldn't make the suggestion based on that alone. Can I get a good reason on why it is Joker and you who should get that opinion from WDA?

Unforgiven Pretender wrote:

About the activity, I think dueling once a week is very easy to do, and people will be willing to do it in order to get a chance of being listed as top eight of the academy.

There is a difference between dueling once a week and HAVING TO duel once a week. I think you think differently from most people on that matter. Either you are or I am, but I do see an issue with mandatory dueling and you do not, while I believe most people do.

Unforgiven Pretender wrote:

I see that you're worried about the 'grinding' aspect of this event. We could immediately counter this by always enabling the option to challenge the top eight directly for their top 8 spot. If you beat them you're in, no grinding involved. For everyone who doesn't challenge the top eight, there still are the places 9 to 12. We should just make one or two rules, like for example one top 8 duelist can only be challenged for his position once by the same person, and the top 8 who was beaten gets only one chance to challenge the one who took his position. (So someone basically would have to beat someone twice in a row)

That is a much easier way to get a top 8 spot and would most likely make the entire process of the duel league pointless, since generally duel spammers are not the best players, at least in WDA. Either we would get lucky and the good players wouldn't care enough for the event, or we don't, we actually get what we ask for with people being interested in it, and we have a top 8 made mostly of people who did a duel or two, creating massive issues in point counting eventually and nullifying the initial purpose of the duel league as it is. We either get good players and the duel league is messed up because the point system is lost, or we don't get good players and the duel league is messed up because it proves nothing.

Making the 'posting poll' topic, is not hosting the event. This is thus not a contraditcion.
Joker and I should be allowed to ask the members what they want in a posting poll, right?

I insisted on Joker hosting it, since he is willing to do it and he's enthousiastic about it, which the staff currently isn't. This in my opinion seems to be reason enough to let him host it. (It also wouldn't require any work from the staff if he does it)

Quote :

That is a much easier way to get a top 8 spot and would most likely make the entire process of the duel league pointless, since generally duel spammers are not the best players, at least in WDA. Either we would get lucky and the good players wouldn't care enough for the event, or we don't, we actually get what we ask for with people being interested in it, and we have a top 8 made mostly of people who did a duel or two, creating massive issues in point counting eventually and nullifying the initial purpose of the duel league as it is. We either get good players and the duel league is messed up because the point system is lost, or we don't get good players and the duel league is messed up because it proves nothing.

The new addition that I suggested gets the best out of both worlds. Duel spammers and good duelists who do not duel that often, both get a fair chance at the top eight.

I'm keeping this very short, since most other stuff would otherwise become a 'yes/no' argument.

Understanding what the community wants is a more important job for the staff than hosting events, especially since hosting events themselves is not such an important job and can be given to anyone. We don't act independently, we actually think of the community. I've spend a fair amount of sentences on two posts explaining why it will be staff who does that job. Since all arguments for leaving that kind of job to someone else is enthusiasm, the staff will proceed with posting the topic. As I have said (I think) I'll try to do as good a job as I can, and I will consult you (that being you personally or Joker, but I haven't heard from Joker) before the final post.

As a sidenote:
As I had said, the decision was to not host the event at this time, because there are multiple events running. But of course having an event in reserve is always good. Even if I don't think the structure is good, after a bit of fixing when we would get a gap, we would throw it in there as we often do since making new events is extra work which is always good to be skipped if we have some there. Even as it is, we could get a bandwagon effect going and hopefully manage to complete a season, while in hindsight people would get it out of their system too, and when it failed it would be replaced with another event we would have made in the meanwhile. In the small chance it actually managed to make it past 1 season, that's all good since it means the event runs longer which means less mainstream events for us to host.

Naturally we would give no time for it or say what we are doing or when it starts because events and the community ultimately are more or less living things, you don't know when one ends, when another starts, it all has a big human factor in it so you adjust as you go along (say for example there is a high demand for infection because people find it good. In that case we don't just say "no, we have plans, stop playing", but we keep the event going because people want to play. The reverse is true as well. We watch and act accordingly) because that's how things run best and because constantly reporting on things most people don't care about (even if you care about an event, you don't need to know which month it's on because you may as well not be around then so who cares) both costs us valuable time we are not willing to give and may annoy people, while it does not really help.

But that decision of the staff was obviously overturned here for some reason, therefore we turn to the only other decision making body of WDA and that is the entirety of the WDA community, since the one before is the best and only decision the staff will make and has no reason to be changed by staff alone.
(Yes, that was a sidenote)

Alright, I think everything's pretty much fine now.
Please keep us posted on how the Dueling League develops.