407 replies to this topic

[FrostyMouse]

Technical Rules

• The OMB Pub will go up to 100 pages.
• The OMB Pub will be stickied.
• When a new OMB Pub is created, it will have the title "The OMB Pub" (with nothing appended to it). The first post will compose only of the rules, with all colors and links preserved.

 

Rules and Guidelines for New Members
 
Welcome to the OMBattle Pub! The OMB Pub, as it is commonly abbreviated, is an area for casual discussion of all character battle-related topics. Here are some guidelines to follow while in this thread.

• Be respectful. This applies not only all across OMF, but in life as well.
• Do not spam. While this is an area for casual conversation, posts should contribute to the flow of conversation.
• No flaming. No talking about people behind their backs. No bashing other forum members, either individually or as a group.
• No insulting. While constructive criticism is helpful and encouraged, there should be no disrespecting other people's arguments.
• Don't talk about drugs, alcohol, or porn.
• Avoid posting intimate details about your personal life.
• Cursing is discouraged. Do not dodge the filter.
• Just because you are new to the OMB Pub, it does not make you a second class citizen. If someone tries to bully you or make you feel like you do not belong, please report the incident.
• To hop into the conversation, just say something or reply to someone. It does not have to be profound.
• No inappropriate pictures, hentai, porn, or other similar content.

 

Rules and Guidelines for those who Regularly Visit The Shout Out Thread
 
The OMB Pub has the ability to be a great place for casually discussing diverse subjects relating to character battles. Do not ruin it.
 
With that in mind, here are the rules focused at regular members. If you need to brush up on the more general rules, look at the "New Members" section, just above.

• Be respectful. This applies across all of OMF, and life.
• Be welcoming to new posters. You aren't better than anyone just because you've posted in an off topic thread on a manga forum before.
• No spamming. Posts should contribute to the flow of conversation. [Smilie posts are permitted but not encouraged].
• No flaming. No talking about people behind their backs. No bashing other forum members, either individually or as a group. No disrespecting other members.
• Constructive criticism is good, provided that it is sought for in the first place.
• Be careful if you're being sarcastic. Make sure that it isn't taken the wrong way and that your tone of voice is clearly understood by the other party.

The OMB Pub should be an enjoyable experience for everyone. Do your part to ensure that it is.

[ArSoNiSt JoE]

Character battles are back y'all 

[Nmaan]

Arrr so they be I was supposed to be heading up a claymore battle in the old OMF I was just about to start recruiting judges before it shut down, it'd be nice if someone brought that and the others back.

[FrostyMouse]

Arrr so they be I was supposed to be heading up a claymore battle in the old OMF I was just about to start recruiting judges before it shut down, it'd be nice if someone brought that and the others back.

All will happen in due time.

[Pimpbankai3050]

Are we starting off with the Big 3 manga again, or...?

 

Either way, I'm actually really looking forward to this xD

 

They were a hub of activity last time- sounds like just what this forum needs!

 

----

 

Relating to reffing- I still think the ref. system is the fairest one, making it a combination of votes + argument for a win. But I think 3 refs per series is better than 5, personally. While 5 could be argued to have lessened any chances of bias or whatever, I just think it makes it harder on the organisational side of things. It's harder to keep track of what 5 people do than 3.  And we definitely saw that in some of the rounds on the last OMCB- it just slowed things down a heck of a lot.

 

 

I still think themes should be saved for special battles and stuff, and then for starters you have your five v ice, clan v clan etc. (this is in regards to Naruto... I'm not gonna pretend I know enough about anything else aside from maybeeee Bleach) to legit chip into the conversation xD

 

Agreed that it is hard to keep track of multiple people, I think it also goes onto the personal responsibility of those who volunteered to be judges to do the task that needed to be done

 

I'd say having less than 5 judges will just increase any accusations of bias from those who are judges(And to be honest I think 6 or another even number of judges may even be a slightly better fit)

[Narubi]

Relating to reffing- I still think the ref. system is the fairest one, making it a combination of votes + argument for a win. But I think 3 refs per series is better than 5, personally. While 5 could be argued to have lessened any chances of bias or whatever, I just think it makes it harder on the organisational side of things. It's harder to keep track of what 5 people do than 3.  And we definitely saw that in some of the rounds on the last OMCB- it just slowed things down a heck of a lot.

 

 

I still think themes should be saved for special battles and stuff, and then for starters you have your five v ice, clan v clan etc. (this is in regards to Naruto... I'm not gonna pretend I know enough about anything else aside from maybeeee Bleach) to legit chip into the conversation  xD

 

Goes both ways to be honest.

 

More than 3 is without a doubt hard to keep track of and the number of opinions can an will slow development down unless miraculously everybody agrees to something,  but at the same time the added number does lower the assumption of personal bias (even though people will still argue that it takes place when things won't go their way) as well the many more opinions while might slow things down does open up more to further insight, ideas, or corrections.

 

Though if there's one thing that needs to be made sure of when it comes to or of any selected judges is their availability for what they themselves are signing up to.

 

For example the last Naruto Tournament was plagued with certain judges on the judging team suddenly dropping out of touch and becoming unavailable, thus making the process of the tournament pretty much a train wreck that was for the most limping along to it's near finish. Of course there was valid attempts to fix this mess and make things workable again, but by then of course the interest of the debaters was at most dead or gone.

 

So yeah people who want to be judges need to be sure that they're available for the duration, and if something is to come up then give a heads up to whomever is Head Ref so that that individual can look for suitable replacements ASAP rather than not hear or see anything from that specific judge an thus try to rely on the continued service of somebody who isn't even there.   

Edited by Yuber, 10 March 2013 - 08:11 PM.

[Peleihno]

OM Conference Room, I like it. 

Edited by Peleihno, 10 March 2013 - 08:43 PM.

[Relinquisher]

I agree i liked the idea of the reffing system and 5 refs was a good number, i think 4 would work as well but 3 would mean taking too big of a chunk of the vote per person, i know frosty said they revamped it so im not really gonna say anything since im sure they thought it out all good.

 

Though what are we gonna start with? The claymore battle is fine, but i dont know how popular that will get, then again i really dont know how popular claymore is around here.

 

It would be cool if we could get some big 3 crossover battles to start it up since those were always pretty fun, or we could even do a big 3 character vs another big manga (like FT, FMA, SE, stuff like that)

[m1hawkgsm]

More than 3 is without a doubt hard to keep track of and the number of opinions can an will slow development down unless miraculously everybody agrees to something,  but at the same time the added number does lower the assumption of personal bias (even though people will still argue that it takes place when things won't go their way) as well the many more opinions while might slow things down does open up more to further insight, ideas, or corrections.

To be fair, statistically 5 is NOWHERE near a good sampling to get a "fair" overall result. Unless the judges were specifically chosen for varying character/story likes/dislikes, you're not getting much out of the 5 votes, besides some dilution in voting power.

Though if there's one thing that needs to be made sure of when it comes to or of any selected judges is their availability for what they themselves are signing up to.

This and definitely this, though I would assume that's probably the first item of concern on the mods' list of fixes to be made.

Also, fantastic thread name. Can I get a Manhattan and a Russian Imperial Stout on my way out? Thanks! ^_^

[Nmaan]

Like I said on the other thread I'm in favour of 5 but with strict time limits to get judgments in, maybe one of the judges shouldn't be all that familiar with the story either, so s/he is basing their judgments solely on the arguments rather than preconceived notions, though I can see many people disagreeing with that.

[Raiden]

 OMG IT'S BACK! IT'S FINALLY BACK!!!   

 

                       

 

I'm so happy, thanks to everyone who made it possible for the OMCB (and it's "spin-offs") to return to the forums, well done    ^^

[Narubi]

Like I said on the other thread I'm in favour of 5 but with strict time limits to get judgments in, maybe one of the judges shouldn't be all that familiar with the story either, so s/he is basing their judgments solely on the arguments rather than preconceived notions, though I can see many people disagreeing with that.

 

There was already a set amount of time placed, however the problem as well reason for later results was the fact that judges weren't available or didn't have the time; also there's the fact that the higher ups needed a specific amount of judgments submitted to make out a adequate enough result for a specific match, which of course makes it hard when there's no availability from certain judges or a lack of time. Hence referring back to my former statement in regards of this issue an the need to solve that, if this issue is solved then so might as well be the issue of timing in getting results for debated matches.

 

As for the notion of having a singular or more of judges that aren't familiar with the story an thus bases their judgments more in the arguments than any preconceived notions. Doing something like that may indeed help lower any notion of bias but it does also create it's own fair share of problems that would only serve more as a hindrance than a solution, so best to just have your teams of judges all be knowledgeable of the series the debate is too be based upon rather than not so. 

Edited by Yuber, 11 March 2013 - 05:09 PM.

[Nmaan]

There was already a set amount of time placed, however the problem as well reason for later results was the fact that judges weren't available or didn't have the time; also there's the fact that the higher ups needed a specific amount of judgments submitted to make out a adequate enough result for a specific match, which of course makes it hard when there's no availability from certain judges or a lack of time. Hence referring back to my former statement in regards of this issue an the need to solve that, if this issue is solved then so might as well be the issue of timing in getting results for debated matches.

 

As for the notion of having a singular or more of judges that aren't familiar with the story an thus bases their judgments more in the arguments than any preconceived notions. Doing something like that may indeed help lower any notion of bias but it does also create it's own fair share of problems that would only serve more as a hindrance than a solution, so best to just have your teams of judges all be knowledgeable of the series the debate is too be based upon rather than not so. 

 

Time limits weren't enforced. I'm talking about strict enforcement. If your deadline to get a verdict in is 13.00 GMT two days after the thread closed then if you get it in at 13.10 it isn't counted (have maybe a 5 minute leeway) and the votes are tallied without your verdict. You do it twice you don't get to deliver your verdict next time. Do it three times and you're removed. That way anybody who isn't committed won't be slowing the judging down.

[Narubi]

Time limits weren't enforced. I'm talking about strict enforcement. If your deadline to get a verdict in is 13.00 GMT two days after the thread closed then if you get it in at 13.10 it isn't counted (have maybe a 5 minute leeway) and the votes are tallied without your verdict. You do it twice you don't get to deliver your verdict next time. Do it three times and you're removed. That way anybody who isn't committed won't be slowing the judging down.

 

They were enforced as best they could be during the last tournaments that ran before the forum went down, however again those deadlines never got across since at most there wasn't anybody there to inform an nobody to have as a back-up. Also as mentioned already the MODS wanted a specific number of results presented, so even if you had 1 or 2 results out of a team of 5+ .. it just wasn't enough an thus your in need of getting those judges who aren't even there to do something or scour through the forum for a viable replacement/substitute.

 

There for you solve the availability issue and you'll have judgments more in time than late, however if you want to add stricter regulations to make sure that those who want to be Judges do their job more on time .. then I'm kinda so/so with that. But stuff like that is best left to the MODS IMO.

[Echo]

Is there anything planned for 2014?

[Narubi]

Is there anything planned for 2014?

 

Dunno

 

Maybe a restart of Tournaments? 

Since there all like dead an barren at the moment, so it'd be pointless to try an bring that back too life.

[DaEvilWithin]

Dunno

 

Maybe a restart of Tournaments? 

Since there all like dead an barren at the moment, so it'd be pointless to try an bring that back too life.

Restarting would be a waste of time.

 

It's dead and gone. Move on.

[Narubi]

Restarting would be a waste of time.

 

It's dead and gone. Move on.

 

Of the one's unfinished, then yes that's what I said pretty much.

But if you mean all together, then I don't think so since I'm sure people wouldn't mind doing some debating again if it was worth it.

[Damanos]

The best thing would be DEW's suggestion in the suggestions forum, but the staff seem to be determinedly ignoring the existence of his thread. 

 

I guess technically we could use this thread to discuss battles, the OP here seems to indicate that's what this place is for.

[Srki]

I'm not going to be here for the next two days, but we could probably do something ourselves.

Edited by Srki, 05 January 2014 - 01:56 AM.