This is the point: since Cob's challenge against Bob is postponed until after Dob's challenge match against Bob is completed, Cob is not yet Bob's opponent. Bob may be many things to Cob - friend, nemesis, Master, student, drinking buddy, even opponent-to-be, but until the postponed challenge becomes live, Bob is not Cob's opponent, and therefore the forfeit rule does not apply.
Really? That's not how I read it.
To make a challenge, first, announce your challenge by posting to this thread.
Then, you can immediately begin the match by sending a challenge via rpsgame.
So, as soon as the challenge is sent, the match has begun. Even if the challenge itself is postponed due to previous play, the match itself has already started. True, there may be multiple challenges pending against one opponent, but I assume you're keeping track of all that (speaking of which, how many challenges are there pending between the conclusion of chuk's illegal challenge against you and the conclusion of my challenge against you? As a player, I don't feel it's my responsibility to keep track of that sort of thing.) I suppose we'll let this whole issue slide for now.
While I'm thinking about it, what would happen now if you were to respond to my challenge (perhaps absent-mindedly, perhaps maliciously) before concluding your match with custardchuk? Since my challenge has been postponed, then my throw (as I read the rules) would be null and void. But you would have gained valuable insight into my strategy, at no disadvantage.
On the other hand, what if you don't respond to my throw? If your match against custardchuk lasts longer than one week (which is likely) rpsgame.com itself will cancel my challenge. In your rules, you made provision for multiple challenges being made against the same player (Cob and Dob can both challenge Bob.) But if Cob's match vs Dob lasts longer than a week, rpsgame will cancel Dob's challenge vs Bob. At the end of the week, Dob will recieve a message that Bob has not responded, and the match has been cancelled.
Why should the burden then be on Dob to make sure that his challenge gets through? If I have made a challenge in a timely manner, I don't feel that I should have to deliver a challenge more than once. Besides, consider the following:
Cob and Dob challenge Bob on Monday. Cob's match comes first.
Fob (due to ladder shifts) challenges Bob on Wednesday.
On Monday, Dob's challenge vs Cob expires on rpsgame.
On Tuesday, Bob beats Dob (finally, way to go, Bob.)
At the conclusion of the match, Fob is the only player with an active challenge on rpsgame against Bob. Even though Dob submitted his challenge first by the rules of your tournament, he has effectively been leapfrogged by Fob.
It should come as no surprise that you and I are currently involved in a situation analagous to Fob and Bob respectively. Martin, I tell you as a friend, your players are going to get tired of your bending the tournament rules to suit your own advancement.
Feel free to read that line as "I've corrected the typo" if it makes you feel better.
Modified? Corrected? Sanitized? Altered to fit your whim?
I just stated that the rules on the website now match the written master copy perfectly.
So now in addition to occultism we're being asked to accept Neo-Platonic Idealism?
So no one need worry about any more rule changes.
Gotcha. And thank you. The two rule changes you've made thus far are quite enough, thank you.
King of the Ladder or Queen of the Ladder
Awarded on a points basis, to the player spending most time at the top of the ladder in that season. (Winning a match to take you into 1st place earns you 1 point; winning a match when you are in 1st place earns you 1 point. Urbanus currently has 1 point.)
Inconsistent. Number of matches won getting to/while in first will not have any relation to which player "spent the most time" at #1. Consider: Bob likes being in #1, so he stalls his matches as long as possible, one week for every throw. At the end of the season, he will have played the least number of matches at #1, but will have spent the most time at #1. If I were Urbanus, I'd be stalling this way right now.
However, if Bob gets ousted by Cob and Dob, then Cob and Dob can form a two-player team at the #1 and #2 position. They can trade quick matches against each other, while stalling matches as long as possible against other players. At the end of the season, one or the other will have made the most number of points, but neither may have spent the most time at #1. For that matter, two or three player teams could form at any ladder position, exchanging throws quickly against other team members and dragging out matches vs other players.
I'm just trying to do you a favor, Martin. Given enough time, all of these things will happen. It would be a shame to see a newcomer's enthusiasm for RPS wane due to an online simulation that encourages stalling tactics over active play.