/tnt/ - Tournaments & Events

This board is for hosting tournaments and other organized competitions, be it either events, contests, or anything where a winner must be determined through votes or otherwise. Just for this board, image duplicates are enabled and the bump limits are set extra high. Roleplaying is encouraged, unless event hosts ask otherwise.


File posting was rewritten, please post in the support thread if you experience any bugs.
Please consider donating! Thanks!

Thread stats: 1005 posts, 208 files (206 image(s), 2 video(s))

Replying to /tnt/58554
Options
No.58554
Ms. /co/ discussion threadAnonymous
Image:169291331523.jpg(140kB , 1756x1672 , AbsoluteSmoker.jpg)
it will begin soon
No.58557
Anonymous
Replies:>>58681
Image:169291378201.jpg(897kB , 1920x2951 , IMG_3176.jpeg)
>>58554
First for mothra
No.58558
Anonymous
Replies:>>58562
Image:169291390743.jpg(343kB , 844x397 , 32B2E5E8-23F1-4D2E-B042-7C84E5D67B78.jpeg)
>>58554
2nd for fang
No.58559
Anonymous
So what are your mains?
Your expectations for them?
No.58560
Anonymous
>>58559
I expect her to win
No.58562
Anonymous
Image:169291424957.png(251kB , 540x455 , IMG_3177.png)
>>58558
Oooooooh you! Well you fang gang can relax in the queen’s throne this year, say since we were technically allies last year and gave you my support afterwards, it would an honor if you could assist in our queen’s victory flight to the throne.
No.58589
Ballsanon !th0DR5qBxs
>>58554
just about a week to go, you all ready?
No.58595
Anonymous
Image:169291829881.png(1.49MB , 1024x1016 , the cyn.png)
>>58559
hopefully i can get a round or two of fun outta them. same goes for any other MD gals.
in general, i expect this year to be really toxic. with people so paranoid about rigging, i wouldn't be surprised if accusations get tossed at every unexpected result. or fuck, any candidate the accuser doesn't like will get smeared unless they're already an established dominant force.
and that's not even mentioning the jackass still angry over zorak winning. if his funposting snowballs into a broader anti-campaign sentiment, it's gonna be 2021 all over again.
but yeah i got high hopes for this year
No.58596
Anonymous
>>58562
Don’t worry, Mothra is my main this year
No.58597
Anonymous
Replies:>>58681
Image:169291848466.jpg(197kB , 894x894 , IMG_3186.jpeg)
>>58596
You have pleased me, let’s go
No.58621
Anonymous
Replies:>>58684
Image:169291931625.jpg(17kB , 374x387 , legsart.jpg)
Legs sweep
No.58633
Anonymous
https://itsalmo.st/ms-co-2023-n3za
No.58659
Anonymous
Replies:>>58672
>>58559
my main was fang so now i'm just kinda along for the ride. it's nice to not have any fears/expectations and to be able to see how it unfolds.
No.58667
Anonymous
Replies:>>58715
Image:169292283766.jpg(50kB , 640x360 , nu-lois.jpg)
She will be top seed then she'll be spite voted out
No.58671
Anonymous
Image:169292302569.jpg(62kB , 680x722 , e8d.jpg)
>>58559
This is perhaps the last real chance to make the tournament so that leads me to supporting them
No.58672
Anonymous
>>58659
This is how I feel mostly, I’m still supporting Mothra and want her to win but in terms of strong emotions they aren’t there like they were with Fang
No.58681
Anonymous
>>58557
>>58562
>>58596
>>58597
Feral beasts will suffer a debuff this year I'm afraid.
No.58684
Anonymous
Replies:>>58685
>>58621
Lol lowest seed in the villains tournament with four votes total
No.58685
Anonymous
>>58684
Legs sweep*



*(in the bottom tourney)
No.58715
Anonymous
>>58667
Paper tiger.
In fact let's get a list of paper tigers:
>Loona
>FARTS post-2019
>DTVA (especially Anne and Eda)
>"traps will ruin the tourney"
Reminder the controversy tends to come from someone no one would think about.
No.58722
Anonymous
>>58559
I have extremely high hopes for her, but I don't wanna jinx her. She could still lose early if she's super unlucky. I hope to God that's not the case, but you never know with these tournaments.
No.58748
Anonymous
Image:169298020506.jpg(29kB , 500x500 , mörkö.jpg)
>>58559
Not high
No.58753
Anonymous
Will johanna make a fang-esque comeback or will she fade into obscurity?
No.58754
Anonymous
Replies:>>58767
Image:169298302201.jpg(76kB , 519x600 , 1445576200630.jpg)
>>58753
SHIT and FINISHED
No.58761
Anonymous
Replies:>>58767
>>58753
>fang-eque comeback
Fang's comeback was a combination of being a funny pick, possibly being the most campaigned character in a /co/ tournament yet, and hype for her show's ending. Johanna doesn't really have any of that with her show's final season's airdate not even being announced yet and she has to deal with her 2021 controversy. She has fans given her high seeds and despite huge backlash, only losing to Betty by ten votes.
No.58763
Anonymous
Replies:>>58767
>>58753
Johanna seems a lot more contentious and her run's success is undermined a bit by the spite campaign that was going on that year. I don't think she'll make the E8 this year, especially with the other girls that are also eligible this year.
No.58767
Anonymous
Replies:>>58768
>>58763
>>58761
>>58753
>>58754
JWNBAF

(Johanna will never be a fang)
No.58768
Anonymous
>>58767
KWAWNBAFB
No.58769
Anonymous
>>58768
Translation
No.58770
Anonymous
No.58771
Anonymous
Replies:>>58772
Image:169298853567.png(2.17MB , 1889x1745 , my ms co wishlist 2023.png)
here's my wishlist for this year i made.

i hope one day Azula and Shego will be elite 8 again and winners..
No.58772
Anonymous
>>58771
Emma is going to get destroyed
>show no one really cares about
>character is actively called ugly
No.58773
Anonymous
Replies:>>58777
>>58772
she already won 2021 too
No.58774
Anonymous
Replies:>>58775
>>58772
really? did i miss something about her and the show in certain threads?
No.58775
Anonymous
>>58774
Threads died so quickly and only like 10 people cared about the show. Lots of people were calling the characters fucking ugly
No.58776
Anonymous
>>58775
oh that's why. now i'm running out of newcomers then..
i guess Annie Bramley from It's Pony?
No.58777
Anonymous
>>58773
I hate Emma but if people use that reason to vote against her it’ll be one of the dumbest things imaginable
No.58778
Anonymous
Replies:>>58779
>>58775
Lol don't overblown it. UWE hasn't caught the same hype Primal did on /co/ but to say only 10 cared about it is exagerating it.
No.58779
Anonymous
>>58778
You’re downplaying it, no one gave a shit about the show except waifu/husbandofags with bad taste. Primal and UWE were in different leagues
No.58780
Anonymous
Post your random predictions.
No.58782
Anonymous
Replies:>>58783
>>58780
Mothra will either do amazing or horrible, no in between
No.58783
Anonymous
Replies:>>58784
>>58782
The brackets are (If I’m not mistaken) randomized this time around correct?
No.58784
Anonymous
No.58785
Anonymous
>>58780
Propane vs. Johanna
No.58787
Anonymous
>>58784
Excellent. This could go either way since Mothra could be pitted against relatively weak opponents
No.58796
Anonymous
Image:169299523337.jpg(47kB , 364x364 , 1692620049094.jpg)
>>58559
Admittedly, it seems like a hopeless battle. But love for a character means you fight for them anyways, which I always will.
No.58853
Anonymous
>>58784
Still the worst rule that has ever been applied to these tournaments
Only people into that are the roleplayers like Tourneyanon who think they'll be in round 2
No.58892
Anonymous
Replies:>>58917
>>58853
>Still the worst rule that has ever been applied to these tournaments
Nah, it's still series character limit.
No.58901
Anonymous
>>58853
Only the first round is randomized but yeah I anticipate it eventually backfiring in a really ugly way
No.58903
Anonymous
Replies:>>58929
>>58853
Every round should be randomized.
No.58917
Anonymous
Image:169301177401.png(98kB , 729x788 , v 2021.PNG)
>>58892
You say that until reality will hit you
No.58929
Anonymous
>>58853
It kinds of screws with the purpose of seeding and the 3-way matches makes it even more pointless, but I at least like the unpredictably. I would like to be able to work on OC in round 1 ahead of time instead of waiting for the thread to be posted, but that's a me problem.
>>58903
No.
>>58917
We should keep the 3 rule as it means more room for other series and prevents that from causing issues. How did this happen?
No.58933
Anonymous
Replies:>>58937
>>58929
>no
Give me a good reason why not.
No.58934
Anonymous
Replies:>>58937
>>58929
>How did this happen?
It didn't happen. All those Touhou characters were 3-ruled and one made it to E8.
No.58937
Anonymous
>>58933
It gets to the point of defeating the purpose of the bracket when everything is random rather than actually showing a character's strength against the odds. I could see a very lackluster E8 coming out of it.
>>58934
I know. I meant how did so many Touhous get up there? I get the series is popular on /v/, but I don't think any other series has gotten that many 3 ruled before. Even Pokemon right there doesn't have that many.
No.58939
Anonymous
Replies:>>58942
Image:169301780998.png(901kB , 625x736 , confusedmeat.png)
>>58937
>showing a character's strength against the odds
What?
Randomizing is good because it prevent people from voting for the next match instead of the current one.
No.58940
Anonymous
Replies:>>58942
>>58917
There isn't really a series on /co/ where the case would be as bad as touhou. But I argued before: if it's that much of an issue make a stipulation for a specific series, or just call it the touhou rule for /v/.
>>58929
>as it means more room for other series
This has been my issue with the rule. It's quite forwardly and openly a throttle on popularity; literally screwing over certain characters for being from a popular series. And the people who supported it had basically openly admitted that. Tourney's no stated goal's but the rule clearly pity's less popular or liked characters and properties for a sense of variety and what's more "interesting." The randomization rule does this too but not as blatantly.
No.58942
Anonymous
>>58939
Yeah, exactly why it doesn't show a character's strength against the odds. I hate match autism, but randomizing will lead to more harm than good and will only potentially help out a few literal whos while potentially screwing over popular picks by increasing the chances of making them face each other early.
>>58940
Here are some of the 3 digit seeds of last Mr. /co/.
>The Riddler
>Bane
>Spongebob
>Max
>Superman
>Sam
>Dexter
>Zuko
>Xavier
>Doctor Doom
>Frylock
>Jafar
Say what you will about their tournament history, all of them are pretty loved on the board. Even with the 3 rule, some popular characters still struggle to get in. Why would you loosen it?
No.58943
Anonymous
>>58942
>show a character's strength against the odds
Again, what? This sounds incredibly autistic, "thou must defeat top seeds by thine hand or thee is not worthy".
Randomizing prevents match autism and that's it, it's not going to suddenly fill the tournament with literal whos no one cares about because those are filtered by the Qualifiers.
No.58944
Anonymous
>>58853
>>58929
Randomized brackets and three-way matches are both great rules.
The purpose of seeding is to determine the 128 most popular contestants. It's not to give the popular picks any more of an advantage than they already have. The justification that seeded pairing and resolving ties by seed "are meant to reward higher seeds" always felt like bull to me. Being a high seed is a reward within of itself, that means the character is popular and is a good position. Why would they need MORE boons?
No.58945
Anonymous
>>58942
You know that's not the spirit in which the rule was created. But regardless all non-banned characters should have their shot. The only measurement the tourney's formally go by to advance is votes. If that means a character who is seemingly loved doesn't get enough votes... well then they didn't get enough votes. The one's who did get the actual high enough votes should go on.
No.58946
Anonymous
Replies:>>58951
>>58943
>it's not going to suddenly fill the tournament with literal whos no one cares about because those are filtered by the Qualifiers.
No, but they make it in anyway, sometimes under sketchy circumstances (see: Shirley, the Dutch girls from that wojak series, Livesey, John Silver) and unfairly gives them an advantage with known lower seeds but against other lower seeds
Later rounds are filled with literal whos when we get powerhouses facing off in round 1 and already having the stigma of a "seed" but without the easier matchups to justify it, it's bullshit and only fans of those roleplay characters are into it because it "gives them more time"
No.58948
Anonymous
Replies:>>58949
>>58944
NTA but randomized brackets removes any concrete reward or advantage of being a high seed. Personally I favor higher seed moving on in a tie because it indicates the character had more pulling power and specific fans from the outset and is not just in a case of being tied with someone the more lukewarm voterbase (the one's that voted neither in qualifier) decides they prefer.
No.58949
Anonymous
>>58948
>removes any concrete reward or advantage of being a high seed
Why does there have to be some extra reward for that in the first place?
> the more lukewarm voterbase (the one's that voted neither in qualifier) decides they prefer.
Those people are part of the tournament too, this is just their input into the overall performance of a character. If anything not having a higher seed automatically proceed in a tie actually puts a character's popularity with their fanbase into perspective of their popularity in the overall tournament and truly puts that to a test.
No.58951
Anonymous
Replies:>>58959
>>58946
If memes get in and are able to get far with their meme power, I don't see what's wrong with that. The later rounds will not be filled with "literal whos" because actual literal whos don't qualify.
No.58953
Anonymous
Replies:>>58960
>>58949
>Why does there have to be some extra reward for that in the first place?
I'm not saying there should there, just that you're statement "Being a high seed is a reward within of itself" is wrong under the current rule-set and one you support. Why I think there actually should be though is explained right after that.
>Those people are part of the tournament too...
Some characters got strong fanbases and lesser attention in a general sense, some the opposite. It's a matter of rewarding concentrated fandom over a lighter partiality. It should be that way in my opinion at least.
No.58955
Anonymous
>>58943
Proving you're actually a popular character in a tournament and not being carried by a completely randomized bracket every round is autistic?
>>58944
That is not what a seed is. This is the exact definition. "A seed is a competitor or team in a sport or other tournament who is given a preliminary ranking for the purposes of the draw. Players/teams are "planted" into the bracket in a manner that is typically intended so that the best do not meet until later in the competition, usually based on regular season." I like the round 1 randomizations, but doing it every round would be overkill. Being a high seed should be rewarded because it's not something easy to pull off and doing it in a nomination list of hundreds of characters is crazy.
No.58956
Anonymous
Replies:>>58960
>>58944
deciding ties by seed is a good policy. you've already demonstrated you're more popular than your opponent by having a higher seed.
>>58949
your popularity with your fanbase, and the size of that fanbase, is your popularity in the overall tournament. the only aguable exception are controversial high seeds with an equal number of passionate fans and haters, but those rarely tie.
No.58958
Anonymous
>>58955
I guess we should just stop the tournament after the Qualifiers and crown the top seed as the winner because they are the most popular of all the characters clearly.
Qualifying at all means you are at least somewhat popular, getting lucky because of the randomizing every round is no different than getting a lucky bracket because of Round 1 randomization, the former just prevents people for voting for future matches.
No.58959
Anonymous
Replies:>>58976
>>58943
>>58951
The term literal who is not actually literally. It basically just means far less popular characters in the way some use it. I don't really think actual literal whos qualify either. It's an easy term to use but I'll avoid using it next time since it's just a buzzword. My point is we are giving handicaps to less popular characters when the tournaments are partly based around popularity and seeding. It's becoming less of an achievement to make it far.
No.58960
Anonymous
>>58953
>It's a matter of rewarding concentrated fandom over a lighter partiality.
Every time a character has a large concentrated fandom they're pretty much guaranteed to go far in a tournament either way, they don't need things to be made even easier for them.
>>58955
> Being a high seed should be rewarded because it's not something easy to pull off and doing it in a nomination list of hundreds of characters is crazy.
Not exactly crazy when most of those hundreds of characters are varying degrees of literally who.
>>58956
>you've already demonstrated you're more popular than your opponent by having a higher seed.
The logical endpoint of this is not having a tournament after qualifiers in the first place.
>your popularity with your fanbase, and the size of that fanbase, is your popularity in the overall tournament.
And since you tied, that means that popularity is closely comparable to the popularity of the other character among tourneygoers and more deliberation may be needed.
No.58961
Anonymous
Replies:>>58976
>>58958
No because first seeds can also be cursed. Randomizing every round can make making it far less of an accomplishment and getting a lucky bracket in a round 1 randomization is still hard.
No.58962
Anonymous
Image:169302263291.gif(1.45MB , 480x480 , 1637381638131.gif)
>>58960
>Every time a character has a large concentrated fandom they're pretty much guaranteed to go far in a tournament either way,
LMAO
No.58963
Anonymous
Replies:>>59060
>>58960
3 ways are not a good way to handle a tiebreaker as they don't settle it, they instead lead to 2 characters gangbanging another.
No.58964
Anonymous
Image:169302266331.png(92kB , 646x580 , 1668352314392968.png)
>it's another "people argue about shit that doesn't matter" episode
I thought we all agreed after 2022's King of /co/ that randomization was a good thing? Seeded is friggin boring, nothing but
>WOAH 127 LOST TO 2 WHO COULD'VE SEEN THIS COMING
for like the first three rounds. Even when this mold is broken with characters like Izzy they still just lose next round anyway. Being random means you can give those lesser ones an actual fighting chance (see: 128's Livesey making it to top 32) while not completely fucking over the big dogs (see: Carl, Courage and Daffy still making Top 8)
No.58966
Anonymous
Replies:>>58977
Series-limit rule should be far more a concern than bracketing considering how concrete of a value-favor it represents. It doesn't get debated enough. There has never been an adequate argument for it on /co/ beyond basically "well we should take pity on the less popular and have more variety". Why exactly? Is there a stated purpose to tourney's that would justify this?
and it's not necessarily a matter of popularity vs. meta values. Tourney's in their original form advocate no stance. Votes are the only driving factor it recognizes. Continually instituting rules for pure interest, hate of franchises, or pity participation constricts the open nature of it to something more value-aligned.
Randomized brackets are somewhat the same issue, but it's not overtly barring any character, rather it's just mixing them up once the process is already underway.
FOTM rule also can carry some of the same reservations but there's much more of a case to be made on the direct unfair bias that results from not having it. But time is an unfairness that can't really be eliminated, just hopefully reduced. I don't think it's really something that matters anyways except in specific cases of wildly popular funpost fuel like SU. Otherwise new stuff tends to be disadvantaged cause of /co/'s older userbase and attitude towards the industry.
No.58967
Anonymous
>>58960
>The logical endpoint of this is not having a tournament after qualifiers in the first place.
no, that's stupid.
considering how rarely ties happen, it's better to have a quick and easy way to resolve them so we can move on. and basing it off seeding makes more sense than whatever other arbitrary measure you can come up with because getting a higher seed indicates that a character is more popular in a vacuum.
No.58968
Anonymous
>>58958
>I guess we should just stop the tournament after the Qualifiers and crown the top seed as the winner because they are the most popular of all the characters clearly.
Old ass argument that's been debunked already. Tourney format will obviously yield more a result of general likability over concentrated likability, which is what people really mean when they argue about tourney's as a popularity contest. The tie breaker going to higher seed is just a quick formality that gives a nod to passion over compromise.
No.58970
Anonymous
Replies:>>58984
>>58964
As say this as someone who loved 2022 to death, round 1 should be the only one randomized and ties should be decided by high seeds. That year would have been completely different if every round was randomized and not necessarily for the better.
No.58971
Anonymous
Image:169302312072.jpg(114kB , 386x605 , 1608787386811.jpg)
Comicfags... what hope do we have this year? Which girl can realistically win it for us? Sure as hell isn't going to be any of the girls tarnished with the F.A.R.T.S brand of shame. Maybe Gwenpool?
Think about it, Gwenpool has it all
>genuinely a qt 3.14, very waifuable
>well liked on /co/
>quality OC and history on /co/ tournaments
Only problem is she isn't as recognizable as other big capeshit girls and /co/ tends to just vote for whatever they recognize, maybe we need to shill her as an underdog
No.58972
Anonymous
>>58964
>Being random means you can give those lesser ones an actual fighting chance
Again, it must be asked: Why should this be strived for anyways?
No.58973
Anonymous
>>58971
okay Gwenpoolschizo.
No.58974
Anonymous
Replies:>>58977
Image:169302355287.jpg(56kB , 317x371 , being plastic man is suffering.jpg)
>>58972
qualifying is hard enough already, but if you end up with a triple digit seed on a non-randomized bracket you might as well have not qualified at all, because you're not getting past the first round. and that's fucking lame.
No.58975
Anonymous
Replies:>>59056
This year will see new blood and I could see them making strong runs
No.58976
Anonymous
Replies:>>58988
>>58959
>It basically just means far less popular characters in the way some use it
That's like calling a dog a giraffe because it's not a cat, what? Also no, I think a lot of people use "literal who" because they themselves do not know the character making them a "literal who", which is not right either.
With thousands of characters and thousands of votes, the amount of "lesser popular" characters are very few. Randomizing does not give an advantage to them because it's random, they can still easily get fucked immediately.
>less of an achievement to make it far
By that logic, a top seed getting far is also not an achievement because they just went against less popular characters.

>>58961
Even with randomizing each round, extremely popular characters are still much more likely to win because of their inherent popularity. Winning with randomized brackets is not less of an accomplishment than a top seed cruising through a non-randomized bracket.

>>58968
Yes, that argument is stupid, in the same vein as saying that randomized brackets mean that popular characters are now at a disadvantage.
No.58977
Anonymous
Replies:>>58981
>>58974
You see the problem is this is basically asking the tourney be changed to accommodate and pity you. It leads to the issue described in >>58966
Really I think people trying to change rules to allow lesser characters should just, well, suck it up. But it's not hopeless anyways, cause like was described earlier a lot of characters get in on concentrated fandom and lose early to general preference of their opponent.
No.58978
Anonymous
randomized brackets are bad because it might force two popular candidates to face each other in round 2 or so instead of letting them shitstomp half the bracket first
No.58979
Anonymous
All rule debates really just go back to "I want my lesser characters to have a better chance cause that's funner".
No.58980
Anonymous
Replies:>>58983
Image:169302430454.png(243kB , 680x709 , aaf (3).png)
>>58979
If it's not fun, why bother?
No.58981
Anonymous
Replies:>>58987
>>58977
it's not about pitying less popular characters, it's that there's no reason to care about a match when it's already a foregone conclusion.
randomized brackets make the early rounds more unpredictable and interesting, but the more popular characters are still going to go the farthest. in the words of Randy Savage, "The cream always rises to the top."
No.58982
Anonymous
Replies:>>58998
>>58979
Personally I don't want the top seeds to do well because I'm contrarian.
Also, I'm a big fan of luck, that's why I want full randomization and I think ties should be decided on a coin flip.
No.58983
Anonymous
>>58980
It reduces the tournament representing something of real achievement (i.e. the exempalr representative of the board or most0liked), or more pushes it further to a particular, very ambiguous and mutable meaning ("fun"). If it really came down to that it's fair game to giga-rig cause it's fun.
No.58984
Anonymous
>>58970
Was I defending complete randomization? Nah. That shit sounds stupid. Randomizing Round 1 is good enough for me.
>ties should be decided by high seeds.
This one just sorta depends on who you ask. I like three-ways more but letting the higher seed win is also an understandable opinion
No.58985
Anonymous
>>58983
why do you keep acting like the best characters aren't going to eventually win regardless? it really sounds like you're pissy over characters you don't like doing well because they're not "popular" enough.
No.58987
Anonymous
>>58981
So basically you just want a more exciting early tourney, but your law shows that it should be pointless anyways, or contradictory.
>"The cream always rises to the top."
Low seeds have won over high seeds and won the whole tourney before. So you know that law isn't iron. Randomization actually further undermines it, or at least tries to in essence. Seeing as randomization could fuck over a popular character in the start, the one's who's rising to the top would more likely be a middling character that got momentum.
No.58988
Anonymous
Replies:>>58991
>>58976
A top seed still has to deal with the stigma of being a threat and people rooting for the underdog.
>>58985
The best characters are subjective. If you asked me, I would say they don't normally win as I prefer the runner-ups in the majority of tournaments or someone who lost earlier.
No.58989
Anonymous
Replies:>>58992
>>58987
yeah you're just pissy over characters you don't like winning. go suck a fat one.
No.58990
Anonymous
>>58985
>why do you keep acting like the best characters aren't going to eventually win regardless?
What makes you sure the 'best" whoever you think they are, will? It can't be told how much they get screwed in by various factors, or how long the tourney's will last.
Really it's just a matter of having solid principle about the whole thing though to define what the tourney's should be about, who deserves what and whatnot.
No.58991
Anonymous
Replies:>>58993
>>58988
>A top seed still has to deal with the stigma of being a threat and people rooting for the underdog
People will vote for who they like most, people will vote for the "underdogs" like how people vote for the extremely popular characters, because they just prefer them.
No.58992
Anonymous
>>58989
I'm just pointing out the issue in what you say, fag. I think you ultimately want a pity chance, or with what's "fun" regardless of implications it has about the tourney. At least admit to that. No one really knows what they're about or cares.
No.58993
Anonymous
Replies:>>58999
>>58991
Not always how it goes. I see people voting for less popular characters all the time especially late game just because they think they won't ever get the chance again rather than because they really like them more.
No.58994
Anonymous
This entire conversation is hurting my brain
These aren't popularity contests because the bracket tournament aspect + campaigning completely destroys that but it also can't be an election-esce campaign race because you still need to be popular with the board to even have a chance of participating.
No.58995
Anonymous
Replies:>>58997
>>58987
>Seeing as randomization could fuck over a popular character in the start
Randomization can fuck over any character at the start.
No.58997
Anonymous
Replies:>>59001
>>58994
My own issue is that certain rule-changes come to favor one aspect or the other. It shifts the base nature of the tournament by varying degrees.
>>58995
Yes, the point is the idea that "the cream always rises to the top" is not correct with randomization in place (at least in the sense it's implemented).
No.58998
Anonymous
>>58982
>I'm a big fan of luck
Then there's zero point of main board tournaments and we might as well end them
No.58999
Anonymous
>>58993
Clearly, those people don't prefer the powerhouses and are voting for who they prefer, just in a different wording.

>>58994
Tourneys are like a combination of both.

>>58998
I didn't say the entire tournament had to be decided by luck. That's what the Murder Games do, anyway.
No.59000
Anonymous
>>58998
Or just follow post-tourney hunger games exclusively.
No.59001
Anonymous
Replies:>>59002
>>58997
by your logic it's not correct without randomization either. all the things you are blaming on randomized brackets were already happening when we had seeded brackets. they're "issues" inherent to a multi-round voting bracket.
again, it sounds like you're pissy that characters you don't like are winning and are blaming it on the format.
No.59002
Anonymous
Replies:>>59003
>>59001
Some of the same things may have been happening, arguably to a lesser extent. The point is the rule favors one value system over another. Randomized brackets is clearly meant to encourage these things.
Again, it's about trying to clear up principles, like was the purpose of the tourney /phil/osophy thread.
No.59003
Anonymous
>>59002
And I want to add I don't actually care about the randomizing that much. Character limit is the biggest issue.
No.59005
Anonymous
Replies:>>59009
I don't think randomizing every round is enough nor are tiebreaker 3 matchups. The best choice is to completely abolish the bracket system and only have the top 128, top 64, top 32, top 16, top 8, top 4, and top 2 of all the nominated characters be voted on to make it to the next round. Make every round like qualifiers on a smaller scale.
No.59007
Anonymous
Replies:>>59008
>popular characters doing well in a popularity contest is unfair
I don't get this logic lol
No.59008
Anonymous
Replies:>>59010
>>59007
literally who said that
No.59009
Anonymous
>>59005
Interesting concept. Highly doubt the base form of the tournament will ever be changed though.
No.59010
Anonymous
>>59008
people arguing that we need to give the "little guys" a fighting chance, basically.
No.59022
Anonymous
The biggest drawback of a randomized first round for me it's that as a campaigner, I feel discouraged from supporting my pick before and during the qualifier round because now gaining a high seed becomes absolutely meaningless and the RNG might end up fucking over my character anyway. People always make this a debate between the top seeds and triple digit underdogs but forget about everyone in-between.
No.59029
Anonymous
Replies:>>59712
>>59022
Campaigning still has a purpose in qualifiers, as you still need to attract more votes than 900+ other characters and maybe even remind people that your character is in the poll at all. Randomization can save your character's bacon if they just barely make the cut. Middle seeds are potentially in a bit more peril at the very beginning, yeah. Overall popularity, roughly represented by seed, still counts though.
No.59040
Anonymous
Replies:>>59047
Speaking of campaigning, how much should you campaign for your character? Too little and not enough people will notice. Too much and it'll be looked at as spamming and annoying.
No.59047
Anonymous
>>59040
My golden rule is to show as much support as the tournament can allow you to, meaning that once your character is out of the tournament you should stop the presses. Anything past that enters the "annoying intrusive campaigning" territory. Like, RPers are allowed to chime in occasionaly after their loss and it's cool to see other characters referenced in OC for lore reasons from time to time, but you can't spend the entire tourney acting like a sore loser.
No.59048
Anonymous
>>58937
>I know. I meant how did so many Touhous get up there?
2021 was the most activate set of tournaments to date, so what happened was probably that people who liked 2hus just voted for all the 2hus.
They also won 2020, so you could assume they were enthusiastic.
No.59055
Anonymous
>>58994
That's because they are popularity contests. It's just that meta elements happen to influence some voters.
No.59056
Anonymous
I think the best compromise with randomized brackets would be to protect the top 8 seeds and shuffle everyone else around them. That way the lower seeds still get more of a chance, and we avoid shitty randomization scenarios like number 1. vs number 2. in the first two rounds, or having a really weak portion of the bracket since there's at least one top seed in each section.

>>58975
What's the new blood between last year's tournament and now? The only new IPs I can think of are Unicorn Warriors, Ruby Gillman, and that Hailey disney cartoon, none of which seem like strong threats. Doesn't help that Hazbin Hotel has straight up vanished. It was supposed to drop this summer and I was looking forward to the chaos.

>>58971
Gwenpool is cursed by association with the Gwen + Zone-tan schizo.
Comicsfags best shot is probably Lois Lane. If you guys can co-operate with MAWS tomboy-Lois fans you have puncher's chance. If you guys start gatekeeping and bickering with the tomboy fans she's dead in the water. She'll already be fighting recency bias arguments so you'll need all the help you can get.
No.59058
Anonymous
Replies:>>59090
>>59056
>I think the best compromise with randomized brackets would be to protect the top 8 seeds and shuffle everyone else around them.
No, it has to either be completely randomized or we go back to the traditional seeding.
No.59060
Anonymous
Replies:>>59091
>>58963
This has never happened.
>>58968
>Old ass argument that's been debunked already. Tourney format will obviously yield more a result of general likability over concentrated likability, which is what people really mean when they argue about tourney's as a popularity contest.
You're not debunking it, you're providing a reason for 3-way matches yourself. If it's about general likability, then have the tied characters proceed and compete against a third party, a natural scenario in which another tie is extremely unlikely.
>>58972
>>58983
Because balanced matches tend to be more fun for the majority of people. Why do you think these rules gained traction in the first place?

You may think the tournament should be about your 12th seed main and a bunch of other high seeds competing, while the lower half of the bracket is just there to job and hype up the higher seeds for the first few rounds, and that it's fair because popularity contest and majority rules. But even by majority rules, this isn't fun for a lot of people. Here's the thing:

Paradoxically, the majority's opinion is not always in accord with the procedure of a straight popularity contest. The majority of people want to have fun, rather than adhere to strict formalities for principle's sake. And a straight popularity contest is not always fun. If anything, it will often be fairly predictable once the qualifiers tell you who's more popular.

Stretching a boring obvious match like Tyr'ahnee vs. Sticks The Badger to 24 hours is just a formality. A lot of people would rather have balanced matches that aren't as predictable. And there's also the fact that just because people prefer a certain character, that doesn't mean they dislike or don't care about all the lower-seed characters and want to see them eat shit in round 1. That's what randomization does. It allows for matches that are, at least generally, more fair and enjoyable for more people.
No.59062
Anonymous
Image:169304898897.png(607kB , 566x556 , 1674671683828511.png)
Doesn't matter if its seeded or randomized, if your nomination loses its because they were weak!
No.59063
Anonymous
Replies:>>59064
I don't disagree with the anon above me but I too think randomized are bound to backfire and cause a shitstorm sooner or later, and then we will be back to square one.
No.59064
Anonymous
Replies:>>59065
>>59063
Also it's not like triple digit seeds haven't managed to go far and beat the odds while using traditional seeding.
No.59065
Anonymous
>>59064
A handful of times, maybe.
No.59067
Anonymous
Image:169305044948.jpg(39kB , 221x241 , Spoiler image)
No.59068
Anonymous
>>59067
who is this
No.59070
Anonymous
Replies:>>59071
>>59068
Cirno, I think?
No.59071
Anonymous
>>59070
That's weird, why is she in the Ms. /co/ thread? At least post an actual winner like Koishi or something.
No.59072
Anonymous
Replies:>>59073
>>59068
Madotsuki from Yu Me Neko
No.59073
Anonymous
>>59072
That's weird, she should've won or something.
No.59077
Anonymous
I expect a bunch of Owl House noms to get in. The number of them that make it past the first round will be the judge of whether /co/ still holds the show in high esteem after that disaster of a conclusion.
No.59084
Anonymous
>>58780
A waifu that gets posted here is gonna cheat.
No.59085
Anonymous
Replies:>>59089
>>59067
This is actually a secret message. It means that this year will be the first time Ms. /co/ has a winner with a solo campaigner.
No.59086
Anonymous
Replies:>>59382
>>59077
>disaster of a conclusion.
Owl House final was good though? Arguably the best of nu-dtva.
No.59088
Anonymous
>>59077
If a show is well liked enough the finale doesn’t matter, spear did the best he ever did in mr /co/ in spite of a hated finale the week before
No.59089
Anonymous
>>59085
Or a three digit seed winning. Or both things.
No.59090
Anonymous
>>59056
>>59058
Just keep round 1 randomization. That's all we need if we do randomization.
No.59091
Anonymous
>>59060
Of course, the majority rule decides what's driving the tournament. I think people just tent to vote on rules with no real understanding of the implications. "fun" again is subjective and in this case basically comes down to less predictability (essentially character variety) or, more often perhaps, the vested interest in wanting their smaller favorites to have a chance. Pretty much what it means is making it less and less a popularity contest and more a shifting game of sorts. It's reflected in tourney's being less a formal event and more a sub-culture of its own over the years.
No.59092
Anonymous
>perifag absolutely losing it right now on /co/
He's gonna giga-rig isn't he?
No.59093
Anonymous
>>59092
When the fuck isn't he absolutely losing it?
No.59096
Anonymous
https://boards.4channel.org/co/thread/139044022
No.59099
Anonymous
>>59096
>dethroned
I thought they never lost it?
No.59100
Anonymous
Replies:>>59103
Image:169307146056.png(18kB , 521x239 , Screenshot 2023-08-26 113511.png)
>>59092

Three entire pages wiped from the face of the earth thanks to one insufferable autist...
No.59103
Anonymous
No.59104
Anonymous
Replies:>>59136
Image:169307209488.png(803kB , 1214x594 , elise14.png)
I know Blaue Elise can't be in the competition anymore but at least she got some awesome art in /trash/
No.59105
Anonymous
Replies:>>59110
But yeah, this year, I'm campaigning for dragonesses and Disney animal waifus
No.59110
Anonymous
Replies:>>59111
Image:169307338901.jpg(58kB , 735x667 , 0b919865125e815fce441ee3a106efb9.jpg)
>>59105
>dragonesses
Thank you for supporting Best Girl. Maybe this time she'll qualify.
No.59111
Anonymous
>>59110
No problem! Hoping Maleficent and Ludmilla make it far as well
No.59115
Anonymous
I’ll vote for beasts and scalies
No.59116
Anonymous
Welp, thread turned to shit and 404'd.
No.59117
Anonymous
No.59118
Anonymous
Holy shit jannies are finally getting smarter.
No.59119
Anonymous
Honestly fuck all rule-fagging. Tourney’s should have as least restrictions as reasonably possible. Rule-bending for whiner’s had always gone against the spirit of the competition. If your character is weak they’re weak.
No.59122
Anonymous
>404'd with the actual tourney right around the corner
Its gonna be hosted on here isn't it?
No.59124
Anonymous
Replies:>>59129
>>59122
Not quite no, this has been common since 2021, there's been times even a day before they get removed but not the actual one
Not worried
No.59127
Anonymous
Replies:>>59129
>>59122
You guys get panicky real easy, despite the fact that this has been pretty consistent for years now.
No.59129
Anonymous
>>59124
Agreed, this happened even in 2022 since mods only allowed official threads and not hype threads. Besides I believe Nightshift even told mods ahead for the September first date. And I agree with >>59127 as well, some anon’s have the tendency to panic a lot and at points give up easily.
No.59130
Anonymous
>>59096
>I have a good feeling about this year. I’m thinking a deserving girl will win. Just a hunch.
I'll trust that random anon. We're gonna have a good winner this year guys.
No.59131
Anonymous
Predict who's gonna be top seed.
No.59132
Anonymous
>>59131
Lois Lane
No.59133
Anonymous
Image:169308411889.png(1.11MB , 887x999 , Cruella.png)
>>58559
>100th anniversary of Disney
It's her time to shine.
No.59135
Anonymous
>>59122
Pretty sure that one was taken down cause it descended into bickering and mods were on extra alert cause of the wave of perispam at the same time.
No.59136
Anonymous
Replies:>>59361
>>59104
What happened to Blaue so that she can't be in anymore?
No.59187
Anonymous
Boy, these last 11 months seem to have flown by, but now the wait seems longer the closer we get to September
No.59204
Anonymous
Replies:>>59230
>>59187
It's just less than a week
No.59230
Anonymous
Replies:>>59252
>>59204
How much longer?
No.59252
Anonymous
Replies:>>59360
>>59230
September first
6 days
No.59262
Anonymous
Image:169309653231.jpg(88kB , 700x900 , 043310089525b49e3830d0dca2c78919.jpg)
>>59187
Seemed like a long time to me.
No.59269
Anonymous
>>59131
Goku again.
No.59277
Anonymous
>>59131
Koichi
No.59280
Anonymous
Replies:>>59291
Will the Toph curse get broken this year or is she still recovering from Fang’s bites?
No.59291
Anonymous
Replies:>>59313
>>59280
It's not the Toph curse, it's the FARTS curse
Until she can disassociate from FARTS she is getting nowhere
No.59294
Anonymous
>NSA implements new tourney method that counts ip's
>voters count drops to 500-600 basically confirming several hundred accounts in previous years were alts
How much you wanna bet?
No.59298
Anonymous
No.59299
Anonymous
Image:169310328300.jpg(7kB , 260x300 , Spoiler image)
>>59294
>NSA implements new tourney method that counts ip's
>voters count drops to 1
No.59300
Anonymous
>>59294
The voting site doesn't work for me so I couldn't vote anyway
No.59301
Anonymous
Replies:>>59303
Image:169310394298.jpg(181kB , 990x1600 , tumblr_osueutiusI1wuun12o1_1280.jpg)
Have you worked on your OC, anon?
No.59303
Anonymous
No.59313
Anonymous
>>59291
I think FARTS can be generalized to a lot of characters besides those 5. I unfortunately foresee it next year with Tyr'ahnee. I think Chel would suffer from it too, but the fuckery from last year might give her a boost for unarguably being robbed.
No.59319
Anonymous
Replies:>>59323
>>59187
Kinda scary, I still clearly remember last year.
No.59322
Anonymous
Image:169311040588.jpg(141kB , 898x1024 , Harleyquinade_Radomski.jpg)
Do you think it will be another Thea White Situation.
May Your Memories Be Blessed Arleene Sorkin.
No.59323
Anonymous
>>59319
I was high as a kite when fang won, I never thought she’d win even back in 2020. I campaigned in both of her tournaments so goddamn much.
No.59324
Anonymous
>>59322
Shit, RIP. I'd be happy if she got into the Elite 8.
No.59325
Anonymous
Replies:>>59364
>>59322
It’s certainly possible, that is unless anon’s use the Quinn show version as character representation
No.59348
Anonymous
>>59294
If anything they would increase because it's easy to change IPs
No.59360
Anonymous
Replies:>>59363
>>59252
Wait, doesn't it start on Saturday?
No.59361
Eliseanon
Replies:>>59362
Image:169312930327.png(1.82MB , 1635x1049 , elise19.png)
>>59136
Tourney organisers said that she didn't count as a unique character despite having a different name, character and backstory than the OG version

This despite the fact that a literal can of propane and a crossdressing boy got in :/
No.59362
Anonymous
Replies:>>59369
>>59361
Imagine the smell
No.59363
Anonymous
>>59360
The first of September is on a Friday, so no.
No.59364
Anonymous
>>59325
Yeah, she'd have to be associated exclusively with her original version, and maybe others that stick closely to that. Post-Joker Harley is much more polarizing. Her show is part of that but it's also in the movies and comics too.
No.59365
Anonymous
Replies:>>59366
Image:169313227417.jpg(1.72MB , 3976x3204 , DCAU Harley.jpg)
Harley was one of the original Elite Eight girls of the 2018 line-up, if the bracket isn't too tough I can see her going as far again.
No.59366
Anonymous
Replies:>>59368
>>59365
I miss her being able to de-clown.
No.59368
Eliseanon
>>59366
I miss her from this time period overall. Tara is a terrible Harley Quinn and is like nails on a chalkboard to me
No.59369
Eliseanon
File deleted
>>59362
Plenty more where that came from
No.59371
Anonymous
Image:169313946591.gif(1.81MB , 418x215 , fishstare.gif)
>>59369
No.59373
Anonymous ## Mod
Replies:>>59375
>>59369
Please use the NSFW tag for that, thanks.
No.59375
Eliseanon
>>59373
Sorry about that, haven't used this site in a long time
No.59381
Anonymous
>>59131
Harley Quinn
No.59382
Anonymous
>>59086
No it wasn't. It didn't address anything I found to be actually interesting, and the second episode of the finale season was especially a giant waste of time. Star Vs remains the best Disney show in the past decade.
No.59383
Anonymous
Replies:>>59387
>>59382
Gravity Falls was the best Disney show in the pa-
>Gravity Falls released in 2012
... I feel old.
No.59387
Anonymous
>>59383
GF is better, but I feel like it could've been better still.
Star Vs gets a lot of bonus points for sating my shipping fix and for all the /co/ OC and jokes made in 2017.
No.59388
Anonymous
>>59382
Star Vs has the shittiest ending out of all of them
No.59389
Anonymous
>>59382
This seems like an extremely unpopular opinion
No.59390
Anonymous
Star Vs was by far the worst show /co/ hyperfixated on during this last decade, even worse than SU.
No.59392
Anonymous
>>59382
Star vs. had a garbage finish and final season. So notorious Star Hitler still gets memes on today. Owl House was the best for simply not being controversial at all. The biggest controversy was there was nothing to really complain about cause it was a straightforward hence somewhat “boring” end, while every other show had some kind of shitstorm at the end.
That being said GF is probably the best overall. There’s a case to be made for Amphibia and even OH (which has gotten massively overhated by /co/ for de-facto reasons). Definitely not Star vs.
No.59393
Anonymous
>there will be little to no fang oc this year
Damn
No.59398
Eliseanon
>>59393
Shame, she's a fun character
No.59399
Anonymous
https://boards.4channel.org/co/thread/139066079
No.59404
Anonymous
Image:169315945512.png(1.42MB , 1550x1575 , Spoiler image)
>>59393
No.59415
Anonymous
Image:169316315878.png(815kB , 992x662 , PopcornMan.png)
>>59399
No.59422
Anonymous
Image:169316471863.gif(886kB , 500x250 , tommy-lee-jones-i-dont-care.gif)
>>59393
No.59441
Anonymous
>>59382
kek this is mega-bait
No.59442
Anonymous
Replies:>>59445
>>59399
Everytime you stupid faggots post threads here they get deleted, stop doing that
No.59445
Anonymous
>>59442
I don't think that's the reason they get deleted.
No.59616
Anonymous
Image:169318806210.gif(1.99MB , 350x300 , the-smile-man-willen-dafoe-creepy.gif)
So, how much will you campaign for your girl? Me? Well I'll probably campaign so hard my head spontaneously combusts or something.
No.59623
Anonymous
Any kind of confirmation NSA's going with that new website or what?
No.59624
Eliseanon
>>59616
I'll do it for as long as I can
No.59625
Anonymous
Replies:>>59628
>>59623
What new website?
No.59628
Anonymous
>>59625
The one NSA posted as a test last thread. tbh it didn't seem like it functioned well.
No.59629
Anonymous
>>59628
boy I can't for that to be used for Mrs. /co/ 23 and only for Mrs. /co/ 23 since it'd be voted out and changed back to Google Docs in the ending tourney rules vote
No.59630
Anonymous
Can we get this thread to hit bump limit before the tournament starts?
No.59650
Eliseanon
>>59630
We can try
No.59653
Anonymous
Replies:>>59654
>>59630
You'd probably have to do some proper spam to get there.
No.59654
Anonymous
Replies:>>59657
>>59653
Ngl, I think me saying that made everyone stop posting.
No.59657
Anonymous
>>59654
No, it's just 5 AM or close to that where I think most posters live.
No.59658
Anonymous
Replies:>>59672
>>59628
Yeah I think this can easily become the main source of drama for Ms. /co/ this year.
No.59659
Anonymous
Replies:>>59661
>>59616
I will post them in the Qualifiers and then sit back and relax for the whole tournament as I doubt any of them will qualify.
No.59661
Anonymous
Replies:>>59662
>>59659
So you're the one clogging up nominations with literal whos.
No.59662
Anonymous
>>59661
I'm only going to nominate five characters, not a hundred. Not my fault if people don't vote for them, I'd like them to.
No.59672
ballsanon !th0DR5qBxs
>>59623
>>59628
was gonna let nsa say it but I don't think he's seen it and could be busy plus >>59658 bringing up drama and stuff
the jotforms aren't going to be used, it'll be google forms like always
hoowever we're always looking for alternatives that are fair and won't bother anons, if you find a site you think we could use to make the vote forms on don't hesitate to share it with us
No.59675
Anonymous
Image:169323247211.gif(340kB , 161x498 , spin-ema-skye.gif)
>>59616
I'll nominate my semi-obscure Soviet cartoon ladies and then promptly fuck off for the rest of the tourney. Maybe I could draw something for Harley if I end up feeling like it.
No.59677
Anonymous
I think NSA should just stick with google forms this year and keep trying to refine the new site leading up to Mr. /co/ and try it then.
No.59681
Anonymous
>>59677
Didn't NSA contact with the Vidya Gaem Awards guys for help? At this point I can see the tournaments getting their own voting site, it's only a matter of time.
No.59682
Anonymous
>>59681
Yeah, he did contact the /v/GAs
No.59683
Anonymous
Image:169323782182.jpg(83kB , 500x279 , Groke.jpg)
>>59616
She's frankly kind of easy to draw, so I could keep it up while also not overburdening myself. Doubt I could pass qualifiers, if /co/ villains is any indication.
No.59684
Anonymous
>>59681
Someone was coding a site who NSA should get in contact with.
No.59688
Anonymous
>>59686
What?
No.59689
Anonymous
Image:169324839513.png(128kB , 581x443 , 1449429751354.png)
>>59686
What?
No.59693
Anonymous
Image:169324899914.jpg(9kB , 251x255 , 1612243888439.jpg)
>>59686
?
No.59696
Anonymous
>>59686
Anon please explain
No.59698
Anonymous
Image:169325085710.jpg(111kB , 1280x720 , maxresdefault (43).jpg)
>>59686
No.59701
Anonymous
How high do you expect turnout this year?
Will the qualifier numbers go back to normal? Last year was a weird spike that didn’t fit the other numbers actually going down
No.59702
Anonymous
Image:169325106122.png(532kB , 1343x867 , IMG_3275.png)
>>59686
???
No.59703
Anonymous
Replies:>>59705
>>59701
I'm honestly expecting it to be lower than last year considering the poor reception of 2022, and if it turns out to be good for the tournament to pick up again next year.
No.59704
Anonymous
Replies:>>59706
>>59701
Yeah that was weird.
Let’s look at the data.
2018: Don’t have it, only 64 moved on so it wouldn’t be reliable anyway, and it was the first tournament.
2019: 64-65. Higher, steady, number might be artificially slightly lower due to how many people voted for Spinel.
2020: 78-79. Increase. Makes sense, total number of voters increased a bit(not as much, but if you account for some of the 2019 voters being bots it checks out.
2021: 77-78. More or less the same, a few more ladies got series limited, overall voter count was similar if slightly higher. Checks out again.

Everything up until this point makes sense. There’s an easy to measure very consistent ratio between total voters and number needed to get through qualifiers(especially if you correct for the Peruvians in 2019 and remove 20-30% from the total)

Then in 2022 it randomly jumps to 114-115 votes to qualify. Despite this, the total number of voters in the rounds actually decreased. Something fucky happened here.

This year it should realistically be in the 76-80 range with no foul play
No.59705
Anonymous
Image:169325171976.jpg(230kB , 664x770 , IMG_3276.jpeg)
>>59703
I don’t care, if anon’s cannot appreciate legitimate beauty besides just looks then so be it! Still nominating Mothra immediately
No.59706
Anonymous
>>59704
The only thing that would fit that is Anon’s individually voting way more than normal. You can pick as many characters as you want so seemingly this year for some reason anons were on average voting for far more characters than normal compared to prior years. No clue why though.
No.59707
Anonymous
>>59701
For Ms. /co/'s qualifiers, lowers because of people quitting after the rigging and NSA letting it happen or increases because of the overlap with the /v/ tournaments and because people are showing up to see the controversy this year. For Mr. /co/'s qualifiers, I just expect an increase with both the overlap and Ms. /co/ refugees that never bothered with it before. If we get a new voting method, it's just going down for both not because of rigging, but also because of some not wanting to use it.
No.59708
Anonymous
So did we take care of that /trash/ incident? Assuming anything from /an/, are we back on the main boards?
No.59710
Anonymous
>>59708
I hope so.
No.59711
Anonymous
Replies:>>59722
>>59708
NSA said /co/ mods would allow Mr./Ms. after he talked to them in IRC.
So unless they go back on their word, it's back.
No.59712
Anonymous
>>59029
>>59022
Randomized Brackets hurts middle of the road characters, helps barely qualified characters, and doesn't really have any effect on the top heavy hitters.

I'm personally more for seeding as the middle group that's hurt the most is way bigger than the group of barely got in characters
No.59714
Anonymous
>>59677
read 2 posts up lol
No.59715
Anonymous
Replies:>>59719
>>59294
I believe it was said that would start with Mr. since a ton of people are having issues with the alt site.
This Miss will be the last google forms tourney probably
No.59716
Anonymous
>>58780
I predict that this year's Ms. /co/ is going to be completely average and normal for the most part. Much like people expected King 2022 to be more of King 2021 and then got disappointed when it was far more normal. Here it's gonna be the opposite effect, people will come in expecting a complete shitshow like 2022 only for nothing major to happen.
No.59717
Anonymous
Replies:>>59725
>>59716
What if 2023 is actually /co/'s King /v/ 2021?
No.59719
Anonymous
Image:169325655722.png(458kB , 859x646 , gigacomp.png)
>>59715
Giggarigga's, it's looks like the last chance to go all out.
No.59720
Anonymous
Replies:>>59872
>>59716
Ayup, hit the nail right on the head. It’s not like things can’t go wrong with Ms. this time but I’m expecting it to be a relatively lax, normal tournament.
No.59721
Anonymous
>>59672
Replying so others see.
No.59722
Anonymous
>>59711
Neat!
No.59723
Anonymous
Image:169325760802.png(779kB , 960x738 , 1693192643849386.png)
So the rabbit lady who was in Heroes has attracted some intense sperging from some tranny obsessed anon who thinks she's getting shilled by some discord, thoughts on her chances in Ms.?
No.59724
Anonymous
Replies:>>59763
>>59681
It's fun to see how these things evolve over time. If NSA can improve the voting process and give voting a dedicated, hand-crafted home, that would be a positive seismic shift in how these are run. I also can't wait for the nomination bot to be ready for action.
No.59725
Anonymous
>>59717
I don't know how that would even go about because Ko/v/ and Mr. /co/lympus at the end of the day have distinct voter bases. /co/lympus is always stacked with underdogs and dark horses with to the point several of them making the top 8 is not surprising, meanwhile Ko/v/ was won by the 19th seed and /v/ is still cumming their pants over that fact alone because otherwise the tourney is FOTY central and silent top seeds curbstomping.
No.59726
Anonymous
>>59723
I don't know and I don't care
No.59728
Anonymous
>>59723
It's a girl?
No.59729
Anonymous
Replies:>>59731
>>59723
Is this about Judy or...
No.59730
Anonymous
>>59723
won't qualify, and the raging anon won't affect that either way
but fuck it, i'll vote for her
No.59731
Anonymous
>>59729
It’s about the bunny lady that was posted, Gabby.
No.59732
Anonymous
>>59723
Won't qualify.
No.59733
Anonymous
Replies:>>59735
>>59723
Her, Lacey, and all the other Youtube horror girls won't qualify, as usual. It's gonna take a lot to create the next ENA.
No.59735
Anonymous
>>59733
I imagine Nia has a somewhat decent chance of qualifying.
No.59736
Anonymous
Image:169325984539.png(450kB , 800x789 , FernAwfulHospital.png)
I'm hoping webcomic girls have a good year. Feels authentic to /co/ culture
No.59737
Anonymous
Image:169326016894.gif(978kB , 220x190 , Clipboard.gif)
I'm nominating this motherfucker for Mr
No.59742
Anonymous
Replies:>>59745
Image:169326198198.jpg(7kB , 259x195 , download (14).jpeg)
>>59737
This is the Ms. /co/ thread here, sir.
No.59745
Anonymous
Image:169326294015.png(194kB , 386x259 , Tumblr_inline_mgl84hZWNP1r0slpa.png)
>>59742
SURVIVAL OF THE FITTEST!
No.59746
Anonymous
>>59737
Who even is this guy? I think I've only seen him from this very gif.
No.59747
Anonymous
>>59746
I.M. Meen
No.59749
Anonymous
>>59748
>piloted by a girl
Now this is prime Ms. material
No.59752
Anonymous
>>59737
that's a woman
No.59756
Anonymous
>>59748
>X
Oh, so Elon Musk?
No.59763
Spideranon !!hAaBXjbZBz7
>>59724
The bot has been ready for some time now. Unless some sneaky bug I didnt note results in garbage output. Which I'm not discounting as a possibility, happened before.
NSA has voiced me some troubles about it not working, but I didnt quite understand what he asked and am still waiting for a further reply. And as goes the old saying
>works on my machine
No.59766
Anonymous
z
No.59772
Anonymous
Replies:>>59782
cute aussie robot girl
No.59782
Anonymous
>>59772
She's Australian???
No.59783
Anonymous
Image:169328687666.png(178kB , 768x768 , murder_drones_uzi_icon.png)
>>58559
I will be maining Uzi, will support Cyn and V
reasons I think we have a good shot
>Jenny XJ9 precedent
>genuine general popularity for an actively-airing show
>a decent chunk of total autists
>cute and simple designs attract drawfags
not gunna hold my breath for a gold medal because a large negative reaction could always flare up for whatever dumb reason
No.59784
Anonymous
>>59783
Jenny was five years ago anon
No.59785
Anonymous
>>59784
The true OG queen is always relevant.
No.59786
Anonymous
Replies:>>59787
>>59784
That reminds me of having my autism triggered at having last year called the 5th anniversary. That's still wrong! It's this year. How are you fools going to celebrate?
No.59787
Anonymous
Replies:>>59788
>>59786
Last year was the fifth anniversary. You're supposed to count the first year.
No.59788
Anonymous
Replies:>>59789
>>59787
For that to make sense 2018 would have to be the first anniversary, but that's when it started. The 1st anniversary was 2019, the year after it started. 2020 was the 2nd. 2021 was the 3rd. 2022 was the 4th. This year 2023 is the 5th. How will you celebrate?
No.59789
Anonymous
>>59788
I will not be celebrating because it's the sixth year of tournaments.
No.59790
Anonymous
Bros I don't know what to talk about
what do we talk about
No.59791
Anonymous
>>59790
I still want to fuck Zorak so badly as Space Ghost and Moltar watch from a corner
No.59792
Anonymous
>>59790
The winner of Ms. /co/ should be someone that's actually fuckable this time.
No.59793
Anonymous
>>59791
Based
No.59794
Eliseanon
Replies:>>59797
Image:169330259541.png(2.62MB , 1700x1056 , elise16.png)
>>59790
What waifus do you wish would get far despite knowing they probably won't?
No.59795
Anonymous
>>59791
Fang...
No.59796
Anonymous
Replies:>>59803
Image:169330376030.jpg(241kB , 2000x2200 , Spoiler image)
>>59792
No.59797
Anonymous
>>59794
Most of my nominations essentially, but I don't have enough stakes in Ms. /co/ to seriously campaign for them.
No.59798
Anonymous
Image:169330722256.png(594kB , 700x602 , 1686000888285.png)
>>59790
Something I still don't understand is why we have people every year who go out of their way to nominate joke/troll contestants for the sake of CHAOS but still have the gall to act like crybabies when their legit picks get voted out. Is it just autism?
No.59800
Anonymous
Replies:>>59801
>>59798
It's your strawman. Because how would you know who nominates both joke and legit picks at once anyway
No.59801
Anonymous
>>59800
It does happen more often than you think, you justs don't lurk enough.
No.59802
Anonymous
>>59798
neither of those things have any correlation
No.59803
Anonymous
>>59796
Acceptable.
No.59805
Anonymous
Image:169332114940.gif(3.70MB , 352x270 , F904250E-F209-4CF1-9D9C-67C861606815.gif)
>>59790
if we're allowed Mickey's Meat That He Beat
No.59806
Anonymous
Replies:>>59810
>>59792
>implying fang isn’t fuckable
No.59810
Anonymous
No.59814
Anonymous
Image:169332386246.png(1.49MB , 1024x1016 , the cyn.png)
>>59783
I'm maining Cyn but I'll be voting for all the MD gals and supporting whoever makes it in. They're all the best in their own way. Except Lizzy.
No.59829
Anonymous
>>59790
We should talk about our feelings.
No.59831
Anonymous
How will the returning E8's do?
No.59832
Anonymous
>>59831
Badly, except for one.
No.59833
Anonymous
>>59831
Jack and Aku will never be back
No.59834
Anonymous
>>59831
Jack and Aku will forever be back.
No.59835
Anonymous
>>59831
Jack and Aku may be back
No.59839
Anonymous
This new fixation on the returning Genndy reps is weird considering Spear performed remarkably well last year even after Fang won.
No.59840
Anonymous
Replies:>>59841
>>59839
Had Fang not just won he himself might've won.
No.59841
Anonymous
>>59839
>>59840
It’s a /tnt/ autism circlejerk. This place talks about so much shit most people don’t care about, most of the Genndy hate is from a single schizo on /co/.

I also doubt there’s going to be a significant drop in voters because most people don’t give a shit about the finale “controversy”. The vast majority of the voters don’t think about tournaments year round like we do.

However, I don’t see UWE doing well at all given the show and character receptions. But that’s more of an individual show than a Genndy as a whole issue.

Genndy just makes great characters that people like, that’s it.
No.59843
Anonymous
wtf is a genndy
No.59844
Anonymous
>>59843
Creator is Dexter’s lab, samurai jack, primal, ect
No.59845
Anonymous
>>59843
Director of cancelled Popeye movie
No.59846
Anonymous
Image:169334027354.png(1.67MB , 1734x800 , 1656867891463.png)
No.59847
Anonymous
Replies:>>59848
>>59843
Welcome to /co/ anon, nice to see you stop by
No.59848
Anonymous
Image:169334048529.jpg(13kB , 259x279 , Clueless2.jpg)
>>59847
/co/? This is /tnt/.
No.59849
Anonymous
>>59849
>/co/ now hates Steven Universe
>now
No.59850
Anonymous
Replies:>>59851
>>59831
>Starfire
It's possible for her to make E8 again, but she might still be suffering from Titans fatigue after two made finals two years in a row and her association with Raven doesn't help.
>FARTS
Everything is against them.
>Kim Possible
See Starfire but Semis instead of finals.
>Helen Parr
Incredibles 2 came out that year so she was probably FOTM. Mr. Incredible did make E8 Mr. /co/ 2020, but no one there knew why.
>Harley Quinn
Likely to be spitevoted because of her current adaptations being seen as obnoxious.
>Black Canary
Who?
>Velma
After Velma, she is an early spitevote.
>Pearl and Peridot
Steven Universe already won a tournament and /co/ now hates Steven Universe so the're done for.
>EVE
Depends. There is nothing really going against her.
>Jucika
She was a big meme a few years ago and still gets threads, but 2022 was a mess for her. She was getting a lot of hate for being seen as just a coompick and losing to Propane with such poor reactions that will be ridiculed for years.
>Ms. /co/ 2021
Everyone here has to deal with being associated with a bad tournament and some carry the weight more than others like Johanna and Hilda. Others have other factors like Muriel only getting far due to her voice actor dying and Miss Pauling being /v/. The one that has the best chance is probably Lord Dominator as she was a snub the two years prior to becoming elite eight needing to be taken out by the winners and Eris who is now a meme.
So tl;dr, the only ones that stand a chance are EVE, Eris, and Lord Dominator. The others have no long term appeal or are going to be spitevoted.
No.59851
Anonymous
Replies:>>59852
>>59850
Starfire and Kim *can* do well, nobody outside of us autists here take those factors behind them into account.
No.59852
Anonymous
>>59851
The rigging last year was targeted towards former E8s and them being in it multiple times while being related to threats they wanted to dispose of is a death sentence.
No.59853
Anonymous
Replies:>>59882
>>59852
I thought the rigging last year was all for furries. Their were far too many in the e8
No.59854
Anonymous
>>59852
Listen.
There doesn't have to be any rigging in Ms. /co/ this year.
No.59856
Anonymous
Image:169334617798.gif(984kB , 640x374 , thanos-impossible (2).gif)
>>59854
No.59857
Anonymous
Image:169334643513.png(683kB , 1011x626 , preparetherigging.png)
>>59854
No.59858
Anonymous
I still don't know what a "Murder Drones" is.
No.59860
Anonymous
Replies:>>59869
>>59843
genndy this dick
lmao
No.59862
Anonymous
>>59858
3D animated youtube series by the guy who's been making Mario 64 youtube poops for 15 years
No.59863
Anonymous
>>59858
It's just on YouTube https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLHovnlOusNLiJz3sm0d5i2Evwa2LDLdrg&si=1jfRPtmaIdNSdghO
If you "le bueno" in the pilot episode, it gets better. 3 episode rule.
No.59864
Anonymous
>>59863
le bueno
No.59869
Anonymous
>>59860
genndeez nuts
No.59871
Anonymous
>>59863
May mal
No.59872
Anonymous
>>59716
>>59720
Ms. /co/ 2022 was a shitshow because of the open rigging. I don't expect things to get as bad, but at the same I don't feel like we did enough to dissuade the riggers from doing the same thing this year. Asterisk or no asterisk they still took up like half the elite 8 and got 2nd place.

That aside, it's hard to predict the controversies since they usually arise from upsets in the bracket. That being said, I can foresee some slap-fights over the following
>Lois Lane's poll picture being the tomboy one from the new show and causing comic fags to sperg out
>Gwen Stacy getting plagued with blacked and tranny spite campaigns
>The first person who posts an AI image or chatbot for their character which leads to arguments about 'lazy campaigning' or something like that
>People sperging about their main losing to an indie/web series character and calling them literally whos
No.59873
Anonymous
>>59872
i said this in the other thread but i think paranoia about rigging+gullible anons falling for anti-campaignfag's shit means any slightly unconventional character is gonna get slandered.
beat a more popular character? rigged.
have a strong campaign? it's /tnt/ roleplay autism.
not conventionally attractive? anti-waifu meme pick.
people have always been salty but it's going to be especially bad this year.
No.59874
Anonymous
Replies:>>59889
>>59872
You know, why didn't anon just vote against the rigged characters if it's that big of an issue, surely there are enough legit anons to overcome that, right? People voted specifically for a rigged character in the finale only to cry when they got btfo.
No.59875
Anonymous
Fang legitimately saved Ms /co/ 2022 from being the worst year. Killing off most of the riggers and stopping one from winning it all. Anyone who sites her as a reason it was bad is a fucking idiot or a salty faggot.
No.59876
Anonymous
Replies:>>59878
>>59875
you're delusional
No.59878
Anonymous
>>59876
What was I wrong about? She eliminated over half of the confirmed riggers and stopped an openly rigged character from winning.

Fang saved the year from being sub-2019, do you have a reason beyond "I'm buttmad that she won because she no make peepee hard"?
No.59879
Anonymous
Replies:>>59880
>>59878
>What was I wrong about?
everything
1. Fang didn't stop shit, she just happened to be there at the final round. NSA stopped the rigging, in a really stupid way mind you, and then gave Fang the win by default.
2. 2019 is still worse, but the fact people are still raging over 2022 a year later is a good sign that Fang didn't stop it from being a horrible year. of course you like it because you only care that someone you like won and not all the bullshit that led up to it.
3. I think Fang is sexy.
No.59880
Anonymous
Replies:>>59881
>>59879
I think there’s a misunderstanding here, I didn’t say 2022 wasn’t bad, I said fang saved it from being the worst year. There’s a difference there
>fang didn’t stop shit
She beat shirley pre and post de-rigging. She stopped the riggers from having a leg to stand on with “but we won the vote”
>I think fang is sexy
I agree with you there.
No.59881
Anonymous
Replies:>>59883
>>59880
Forgot to add, I said that if people site fang as a reason it was bad they’re stupid, there are plenty of reasons it was bad but she isn’t one of them.
No.59882
Anonymous
>>59853
It was. My post was wrong. I checked
No.59883
Anonymous
Replies:>>59952
>>59881
I'll admit I was never a fan of Fang's campaign, but my beef is with how the finale was handled and not with her. I'm sure most would say the same thing if you asked them.
You're constructing a glorified narrative in your head where Fang is this savior from on high and all who oppose her are bitter and spiteful, probably because you can't cope with your waifu's win being tarnished by a horribly mishandled finale.
No.59888
Anonymous
>>59875
>Killing off most of the riggers
There was literally one guy trying to get every animal character in, that's it.
No.59889
Anonymous
>>59874
I thought about this too at the time and wondered if the tourney had any point in being legitimate at all if the non-autistic voter-base just didn't care. I think it was apathy + "silent majority" not following the thread autism and just finding Shirley an interesting pick + maybe more rigging for her. By the final round there were people openly supporting her as a fuck you to the tourney's too.
No.59890
Anonymous
Be honest, is there anyone you hope does poorly this time?
No.59891
Anonymous
>>59890
all DTVA girls, specifically Owlfags, Frogfags, and Ghostfags
No.59892
Anonymous
Image:169336094827.png(183kB , 680x378 , 1616466083692.png)
>>59890
All of this >>59891 anon's waifu's and favorites.
No.59893
Anonymous
>>59891
based
No.59894
Anonymous
Replies:>>59896
Image:169336119556.gif(2.98MB , 498x280 , E97C562B-50E4-4785-A52E-9438E35C6F7F.gif)
>>59892
jokes on you faggot my waifus have never and will never get in
No.59895
Anonymous
Replies:>>59904
Image:169336182877.png(491kB , 1280x720 , Spoiler image)
>>59892
My favourites are the ones that lose naturally, in other words Amphibia girls.
No.59896
Anonymous
>>59894
Aaaiiiieee DTVAmigos....
No.59898
Anonymous
>>59890
Hildafags
No.59899
Anonymous
Replies:>>59903
>>59890
Jucika cause she fucking sucks.
No.59900
Anonymous
>>59890
Silent Majority picks
No.59903
Anonymous
Image:169336323652.jpg(175kB , 1280x720 , I THINK (YOU) SUCK.jpg)
>>59899
No.59904
Anonymous
>>59891
>>59895
You know, I kind of thought the Amphibia girls got a bum deal last year (don't care much for the show, but I kinda like Sasha), but the continual infighting and tribewars with the Owls have become so obnoxious I honestly think another Round 1 blowout will be what they deserve

Ghost show...Libbyfag's obnoxiousness and the Andrea gay reveal have tanked their chances. Molly herself is great, but has to bear the brunt of not just a crappy second season and the general backlash toward quirky brown MCs
No.59906
Anonymous
Replies:>>59909
>>59904
The (non-playful) tribewars comes from literally one board schizo who's spammed on both sides for years, unironically. He's STILL at it sometimes even though both shows have ended a while ago. Pretty much every fan of either is a fan of both or doesn't really care enough about the other show.
No.59907
Anonymous
>>59890
Gotta be honest, no one. There's no character I'm truly against, I just vote for the ones I know and like more. I'm sure Fang is a good character but I knew jack shit about Primal, meanwhile I had some knowledge of Courage.
No.59909
Anonymous
Replies:>>59911
>>59906
I wouldn't really refer to it as one person. From what I've seen.
No.59910
Anonymous
There's only one DTVA character I'd support, and that's Lord Dominator.
No.59911
Anonymous
>>59909
There is playful fighting and some people that join in occasionally, but if you followed threads for both showed throughout their run you would know about the notorious "tribefag."
He's also other spammers like the "burger/fry" guy and sashanne schizo. Honestly worse than industryfag in dedication and autism.
No.59912
Anonymous
Replies:>>59919
Image:169336636740.png(62kB , 1852x292 , Screenshot 2023-01-14 at 18-08-48 _co_ - Comics & Cartoons » Thread #132799709.png)
Reminder.
(this was tribefag btw)
No.59914
Anonymous
Replies:>>59915
>>59875
>>59878
I already talked about this many times. I wouldn't mind Fang being an oddbal winner in 2020, but by 2022 I just wanted a normal winner without some outside fuckery influencing the result for once. As of now, we have a rigged winner, a pity winner, a spite winner and a recency bias winner in a row. I just want an actual waifu to win a waifu tournament for once.
No.59915
Anonymous
Replies:>>59917
>>59914
Don't worry anon, I'll try my best to get my waifu to win this year. Be sure of it.
No.59916
Anonymous
Replies:>>59918
>>59904
People always talk about these tribe wars but I haven't seen them happen for months aside from one or two schizos in threads very rarely. I think you just like this narrative about tribe wars as some sort of "rational" justification for DTVA doing poorly, when the truth is tourneygoers just hate DTVA on instinct at this point and probably will until more zoomers and alphas pour into /co/ in a few years.
No.59917
Anonymous
Image:169337431606.jpg(72kB , 998x970 , Fy3TJ6taQAEYR_L.jpg)
>>59915
No.59918
Anonymous
>>59916
>I haven't seen them happen for months
Because the shows have been over for several months. But I agree, that's not the real reason. It's mainly an inter-generational thing. DTVA are zoomie shows that got over and defined an era, and ended up standing for what older/millenial crowd disliked in the industry (justified or not). I don't think any campaigning will really help it, just the passage of time (assuming these tourney's go on for several more years).
No.59919
Anonymous
>>59912
He did nothing wrong. In fact, it's rather based from his part.
No.59920
Anonymous
>>59917
You were carried by silent majority in heroes droopy
No.59921
Anonymous
>>59917
>Rigga
oh, haha.
No.59922
Anonymous
Replies:>>59923
>>58554
Reminder Wendy and Hekapoo were strong contenders and did good in the early tournaments and “dtva” is a thing that started getting tossed around in the 2020’s.
No.59923
Anonymous
Replies:>>59955
>>59922
Because their shows weren’t badly received at the time. The DTVA shit doesn’t come by just because of association, it’s because they are perceived as bad examples of animation with annoying, histrionic fanbases often filled with pedos and all sorts of disruptive autists.
No.59925
Anonymous
Do you guys think Batkek could finally qualify this year?
No.59929
Anonymous
Image:169339405465.jpg(154kB , 1465x1600 , f14f23bb-93ec-4331-83e5-383b80e1dbd5.jpg)
>>59925
Now's not the time for bats. That comes later.
No.59932
Anonymous
Image:169339536175.jpg(32kB , 539x960 , 270.jpg)
>>59925
>>59929
We serve Ms. /co/ here, sir.
No.59933
Anonymous
Replies:>>59935
>>59932
Squidtard you can't even participate this year.
No.59935
Anonymous
Replies:>>59937
Image:169339774584.jpg(72kB , 980x735 , image (1).jpg)
>>59933
Right. That's why I'm stuck here telling people that this is the Ms. /co/ thread. People still need to work.
No.59937
Anonymous
Replies:>>59938
>>59935
Well you could at least tell us which girls you will be surporting.
No.59938
Anonymous
Image:169339930648.jpg(15kB , 400x300 , image (2).jpg)
>>59937
Don't have any.
No.59939
Anonymous
Replies:>>59940
Squidward is GAY?!
No.59940
Anonymous
Image:169340118405.png(2.40MB , 1920x1080 , krab.png)
>>59939
He was always a faggot.
No.59941
Anonymous
Image:169340191561.png(63kB , 203x152 , mr krabs gets FUCKED in the ass.png)
You were saying, Eugene?
No.59942
Anonymous
Image:169340197798.gif(2.29MB , 498x278 , i-didnt-need-to-see-that-squidward-tentacles.gif)
No.59949
Anonymous
>>59932
Do you feel in charge?
No.59952
Anonymous
>>59883
I think we agree on most points and I fucked up communications wise.
>I'm sure most would say the same thing if you asked them
Never denied that. I'm referring to a subset of people who screech about how Fang ruined everything and how she's worse than spinel. Who I think are just being disingenuous out of hate.
>and all who oppose her are bitter and spiteful
The subset I'm talking about are indeed bitter and spiteful, there is no way a logical person can look at this and genuinely go "worse than spinel".
No.59954
Anonymous
>>59890
murder drones. I just don't like 'em
No.59955
Anonymous
>>59923
Nah tbh that shit’s always overblown. Most people are ultimately there to just chill and discuss the series. But if it comes down to who has the worst schizo concentration then it’s loudfags.
No.59957
Anonymous
>>59955
Oh yeah I don’t disagree with that, Loudfags really are bad,
No.59961
Anonymous
Replies:>>59966
>>59929
If CIA entering a tournament crashed a plane, will Bane entering one crash even more?
No.59962
Anonymous
>>59890
everyone
No.59964
Eliseanon
Image:169341199005.png(76kB , 604x840 , elise20.png)
>>59890
I hope we get some more interesting and obscure girls high up in the rankings. Seeing the same group gets boring after a while
No.59966
Anonymous
Replies:>>59968
>>59961
An even bigger plane will crash
No.59968
Anonymous
Image:169341332307.jpg(90kB , 837x463 , Rubane.jpg)
>>59966
>CIA killed Prigozhyn
>Bane kills Putin
No.59969
Anonymous
Replies:>>59993
Image:169341402821.jpg(881kB , 2300x2300 , 1686111860935.jpg)
>>59964
Rooting for your Elise
No.59970
Anonymous
Video:169341500113.webm(1.08MB / 00:00:08 / vp8 , 640x480 , Groke peer.webm)
>>59964
>I hope we get some more interesting and obscure girls high up in the rankings.
Mhm
No.59975
Anonymous
Replies:>>59993
>>59964
What show is the other Elise from, the one with the fat ass?
No.59985
Anonymous
Replies:>>59988
>>59904
>the Andrea gay reveal have tanked their chances
I thought /tgamm/ wanted Andrea to be gay. Or do they only want her to be with Molly?
No.59987
Anonymous
God I can’t wait for the annual ghostfag destruction this year
No.59988
Anonymous
Replies:>>59989
>>59985
There was an image that showed Andrea hugging a butch lesbo, and half the board imploded. They wanted her to be gay, yes, just only with Molly.
No.59989
Anonymous
>>59988
She also likes that one fat guy, so she's bisexual.
No.59990
Anonymous
>>59989
I don't watch the show, so I'm ambivalent. I just remembered seeing people throwing a parade when Molly was shown as straight, then ready to firebomb the place when that photo got put out. The rage was entertaining, at least.
No.59991
Anonymous
>>59989
The guy and girl she likes are both fat.

I don't think the voters are going for that
No.59992
Anonymous
Two days left already, how about some 3x3s?
No.59993
Eliseanon
>>59969
Elise can't be in it, unfortunately, but thank you for your support ;)

>>59975
The German dub of the Pink Panther made the blue aardvark female, renamed her Blaue Elise and gave her a completely different personality. It's actually way funnier than the original

Die blaue Elise - Deutsch - Alle Folgen in HD - 1969-1971youtube thumb
No.59998
Anonymous
Image:169343640148.png(7kB , 476x358 , 2 days to go bros.png)
No.59999
Eliseanon
>>59998
Isn't it only 24 now?
No.60000
Anonymous
Replies:>>60001
>>59999
well its on friday and its wednesday
No.60001
Anonymous
Replies:>>60104
>>59999
>>60000
https://itsalmo.st/ms-co-2023-n3za
No.60004
Psyanon !umpn/.DAgw
Replies:>>60007
Image:169343761758.png(1.04MB , 750x750 , old radio.png)
Just two more long naps, and I'll be too excited to sleep!

Nominations:
https://vocaroo.com/19hqJYkmlozd
No.60006
Anonymous
>>59998
Dang It I forgot to do it this time from four days left. Well thanks anyway
No.60007
Anonymous
Replies:>>60026
>>60004
>https://vocaroo.com/19hqJYkmlozd
Wouldn't this be Pre-Nominations, with Nominations coming just as it starts?
No.60010
Anonymous
Image:169343924908.jpg(104kB , 606x606 , 1680237920320108.jpg)
Fuck it's almost time. Fire up all your autism.
No.60011
Anonymous
Image:169343941932.png(405kB , 641x592 , comfhomer.png)
>>60010
no
No.60016
Anonymous
>>60010
Time for my productivity to tank for a week and dedicate myself to nothing but waifu worship.
No.60017
Anonymous
Image:169344413832.gif(759kB , 470x325 , Spong dance.gif)
So I guess now's a good time to pop the question. How're we gonna handle voting?
A while ago I suggested having nominations take place in 5 threads spread evenly throughout the day instead of the normal 10 to reduce people in the latter half spamming throwaways purely to bloat everything. A decent amount of people seemed to like it. Perhaps we could test this for Ms. /co/? It'd help incentivize Anons to submit characters that they think are actually important instead of just whatever obscure thing comes to mind.
>inb4 "BLAH BLAH YOU ONLY WANT THIS SO YOUR LITERAL WHOS HAVE A BETTER CHANCE!"
Quite the opposite actually. I checked 2022's king of /v/ list for comparison a while back and if you stopped after Thread 5, the only members of the top 128 we'd lose are Companion Cube, Parappa, Big Daddy, Helltaker and most notably Coach (11th seed). Basically everyone else in there were nowhere close to even making it. I think we can safely assume a similar result for king of /co/ too. Plus it would also take a huge load of stress off the host's backs.
No.60018
Anonymous
>>60017
BLAH BLAH YOU ONLY WANT THIS SO YOUR LITERAL WHOS HAVE A BETTER CHANCE!
No.60020
Anonymous
>>60017
I’m completely on board with this.
No.60021
Anonymous
>>60017
NightShift definitely isn't gonna do that kind of thing just because some anon suggested it. Even if it would probably benefit him with not having to add every fucking nomination to the poll, although if Spideranon's bot works then that burden may be gone too.
No.60022
Anonymous
Replies:>>60037
>>60017
What's the problem this is meant to solve? Literally whos? Weeded out in qualifiers. Host workload? I feel like they wouldn't take the job if they didn't think they could handle it, and would use their own discretion about how often threads are created if not. Also we have a hosting robit now. And the cases you mentioned of qualifiers appearing late into nominations is actually reason enough for me to say keep things as they are. I don't care how few they are, in my opinion it's worth it.
No.60023
Anonymous
>>60017
I've been saying this for years.
No.60024
Anonymous
Replies:>>60037
>>60017
the solution is to increase the reply requirement for characters to be nominated
No.60025
Anonymous
Replies:>>60037
>>60017
>*systematically wastes limited slots with literally whos*
No.60026
Psyanon !umpn/.DAgw
Replies:>>60027
>>60007
No. Looking over at my files, I used to call this episode the 'Pre-Qualifiers'. There's always a discussion about this, but I've been consistent since 2021.

Nominations
Qualifiers
Rounds 1-7
Finale
No.60027
Anonymous
Replies:>>60039
>>60026
Yeah I think Pre-Nominations was a hypothetical idea tossed around that would come up a few days prior to the tournament starting as sort of a hype ad
No.60028
Anonymous
Image:169344738659.jpg(1.55MB , 1079x5963 , Now .jpg)
>>59849
No.60031
Anonymous
Replies:>>60034
>>60017
>king of /co/
post disregarded
No.60034
Anonymous
>>60031
>king of /co/
>mr. /v/alhalla
No.60037
Anonymous
Image:169344924459.jpg(33kB , 894x931 , yum.jpg)
>>60022
>What's the problem this is meant to solve?
The bloat problem recent years have been experiencing. We've gone from a reasonable & perfectly fine ~400-500ish in past years to freaking 1,488 (Mr. co) and 1,373 (king /v/) in 2022. People are overdoing it and I doubt the masses will slow down, especially the one guy who nominated nearly 100 characters just because he could. Plus lower counts mean potentially things like quicker wait times & pictures in the qualifiers vote.
>I feel like they wouldn't take the job if they didn't think they could handle it, and would use their own discretion about how often threads are created if not. Also we have a hosting robit now.
Okay this one is fair, I'll give you that one.
>And the cases you mentioned of qualifiers appearing late into nominations is actually reason enough for me to say keep things as they are.
I'm sorry if this comes off as a bit asshole-ish but there's always going to be characters that end up left behind. It doesn't matter if it's here (Layton, Omni-Man) or on the actual boards (Spy, Alien Hominoid, Spyro) it's just how it goes man. You can't win 'em all. If anything the limited number of threads might remind people to nominate actual important choices first instead of Rubix from the 1980's cult classic hit "Rubik, the Amazing Cube".
>>60024
This would just make it harder for legitimate, good-faith characters to get enough votes. Wouldn't even solve the samefag problem they'd just simply spam faster
>>60025
If we adjust the average 300 images out for people posting pictures that aren't for characters, failed noms or repeats, You'd still get around say ~115 per thread.
5 x 115 gives us around 575 picks to choose from, which is a very healthy amount. And that's not even counting for things like Series limits.
For every obscure hag from a Romanian webseries you nominate there would be 5 anons around the corner ready to nominate a more recognizable character.
No.60039
Psyanon !umpn/.DAgw
>>60027
I did that a few months ago, hah!
No.60041
Anonymous
Replies:>>60042
this year we should vote for all the popular girls and have one of them win, as a joke
No.60042
Anonymous
>>60041
I will not vote for girls, they're icky
No.60048
Anonymous
Replies:>>60052
>>60017
I agree that we need to re-think the nominations part but
>Perhaps we could test this for Ms. /co/?
No, Ms. /co/ is not the tournament to fuck around with. It's why I think NSA should stick with google forms for now and try the new stuff with Mr. /co/. After last year he can't just roll up with a bunch of new shit.
No.60051
Anonymous
Replies:>>60062
>>60017
The reason it is done the way it is is to make sure everyone from every time zone or who are busy gets a chance to nominate their character. This still won't stop characters with little chance from getting nominated either. If you did it this way, there would have to be different times given for each thread announced prior to them being posted and that seems like a hassle that will still miss some people. I wish we had less nominations too as it takes awhile to scroll through but it's just an annoyance with no good solutions that won't create more problems.
No.60052
Anonymous
Replies:>>60059
>>60048
Ms. /co/ needs the experimentation more considering that everything goes wrong with it.
No.60055
Anonymous
Image:169345440150.jpg(32kB , 1280x720 , IMG_3306.jpeg)
No.60057
Eliseanon
>>60055
Can't wait
No.60059
Anonymous
>>60052
I agree in theory but we don't have enough room for it, frankly. It's better to use Mr. /co/ as a testing ground for new stuff.
No.60062
Anonymous
>>60051
I never liked the timezone argument. Are eastern euro's and aussie's really going to provide something relevant that the first five threads didn't already get in?
No.60063
Anonymous
>>60062
I mean it's kinda rude to just bulldoze over them like nothing but with the 5 spaced threads throughout the day concept, they should at least be able to make one of those
No.60068
Anonymous
Image:169345692593.png(50kB , 1031x366 , banned.png)
No.60069
Anonymous
Replies:>>60240
>>60068
Isn't this from like last year
No.60070
Anonymous
Replies:>>60074
>>60062
You could make the same argument for rounds, which are 24 hours to accommodate everyone, even though most people vote soon after they start. I wouldn't change that either.
No.60071
Anonymous
Image:169345892992.jpg(16kB , 500x281 , 69jjdzbzs7mz.jpg)
>>60068
No.60072
Anonymous
Really, I gotta ask why the /co/ tournamens have such a rough time just being allowed to take place. Assuming it's real, this has been happening for almost every year now.
No.60073
Anonymous
>>60072
Because our mods and jannies are especially terrible.
No.60074
Anonymous
Replies:>>60079
>>60070
>You could make the same argument for rounds
No because there's nothing that needs to be shortened for practicality. The characters are already in place. And getting the most voterbase is actually important then. With nominations is just relevant characters then hundreds of literal who's after thread 4-5.
No.60075
Anonymous
Replies:>>60086
>>60068
NSA already asked them just recently. Unless NSA turns up and says there won't be anything, then he'll go ahead.
No.60076
Anonymous
>>60072
Being a 4chan mod or janny basically means you are a narcissistic autists and probably retarded at the actual job. They don't actually participate in board culture, and seem to have little to no communication or accountability with each other.
No.60078
Anonymous
I need to remind myself to nominate George. W. Bush and Don Imus from The Nutshack, I forgot to get them into Villains
No.60079
Anonymous
>>60074
I guess I don't see anything about it as being broken and in need of fixing. I'm not really concerned about characters I don't care about simply being there, because either way I'll be skipping over a lot of characters I don't care about. What I am concerned about as a voter is characters I care about being there, and if they show up a couple threads after they really should, that's not a big deal. I'm just glad they make it. There's always going to be a cutoff, but I don't really see the need to increase limitations on nominations. I would maybe agree with a higher support threshold as the number of voters increases. The number we use currently probably is too low when the number of votes required to even get to the bracket is in the dozens if not 100+.
No.60081
Anonymous
Replies:>>60091
>>60068
This is from last year faggot
No.60083
Anonymous
>>60055
*checks watch*
hmmmm yeah a bit early yet
No.60086
Anonymous
>>60075
Yeah we should be all set
No.60087
Anonymous
>>59955
Aren't the Amity, Libby and Darcy RPers known for being very disruptive and incessant?
No.60088
Anonymous
Replies:>>60089
>>59964
He/she's not obscure, it's from Pink Panther, right?
No.60089
Eliseanon
>>60088
Yep, but the German version is more obscure... at least she was until the /trash/ threads :P
No.60091
Anonymous
Replies:>>60094
>>60081
It's actually from January of this year and I will ask you what has changed since then?
No.60093
Anonymous
Replies:>>60097
Is there a scheduled time for the thread to go up on September 1st
No.60094
Anonymous
Replies:>>60095
>>60091
nightshift talked to the mods and got the a-okay to do the tournament
No.60095
Anonymous
>>60094
Which thread did he mention he did it in again?
No.60096
Anonymous
Lel the current stealth thread is totally dead even though jannies haven't noticed it yet
No.60097
Anonymous
Replies:>>60101
>>60093
Starts at 7pm
No.60099
Anonymous
>>60087
I was referring to the series general threads. As for the rpers I don't think its any worse than sponge rapist or scat megamind. I think Libby got particular bad rep from encroaching so much on /v/ threads, otherwise I think it's just a matter of the source material being controversial.
No.60101
Eliseanon
>>60097
So, that's 1 in the morning European time, correct?
No.60104
Anonymous
No.60105
Ballsanon !th0DR5qBxs
>>60101
7pm EST
12am GMT/BST (I always forget which one it is at the moment)
1am CEST
No.60108
Eliseanon
24 hours remain
No.60109
Anonymous