im curious what you all think about this.
im not talking about scheduling a battle in the same timeslot as another one many hours in advance.
just imagine this scenario: theres a 4hb happening and you are 100% sure you dont wanna participate and you have 2 or 3 other people who dont wanna participate but they wanna do a different format ohb instead.
would you consider it disrespectful to host a quick ohb while a bigger 4hb is currently running?
(or similar situations, but i hope u get the idea)

just random thought i just had, im interested in other peoples opinions on this :D/

i hope that the small batol host asks the large batol host and comes to an agreement.

Imo its not good for the 4hb host cus they gotta get 11 entrys but if it was two 1hbs and they both were firmly set with 3 ppl then its proably fine imo

whether hosting a concurrent xhb is rude depends on the other host and participants. if you communicate well with them in advance and everyone's okay with it then I think it's fine

people used to get ailed for doing exactly this in the past

I suppose with ohb it was clearer that it was disrespectful. Rather than just an effect of scheduling

I still kind of see it as disrespectful with xhb. Tomorrow is a whole nother day. And you can schedule stuff in advance. And there’s almost always takers regardless of asking... unless you’re doing svg format or something

theres more and more people on the site nowadays, so it might be okay. tho theres still a lot of free hours...

simply, yes

If disrespect isn't intended I don't think it can be disrespectful, though I guess it could be perceived that way if the two hosts aren't in contact and one misunderstands the other's intentions. It seems more a question of if it's harmful to the other host/battle, which I think mainly has to do with the format. If the 4hb is an exclusive format it would probably be fine to run a more accessible 1hb. For an unambiguous example, running a sample pack 1hb during a visual 4hb. I'm new here though, so there could always be something I'm not understanding.

if its something where all the people doing one xhb weren't going to do the other one i dont see a problem

since i rarely spend more than 10 minutes on a xhb (as you all can imagine! :D ), i really don't mind submiting on both, or even more! :D - and i guess that anyone losing a battle might want to host or suggest a similar battle soon, perhaps over and over again - sad is only when a battle appears suddenly without any schedule, like remaining 5 minutes when you found it, conditioning yourself to rush and submit whatever crap

The only problem I can see with two xhbs going on at the same time is that if somebody would find both ohbs cool. Practially even how you twist and turn on it, if it were two ohbs being hosted, you technically just have to divide up the hour on each entry depending on how much the battles interfere.

realistically speaking, it depends on the intent of the overhostist and the circumstances. do they really want to host over the intended battle in a show of disrespect toward the host, or did they not notice it? when was the 4hb beghasted? is the ohb the same format as the 4hb? does the hostist act generally dismissive of the 4hb or are they apologetic? it really depends on the situation of the overhosting and whether or not it could be considered disrespectful, but that's just me.

I remember the days of concurrent chip and pixel ohbs where both hosts agreed to host both at the same time and nobody batted an eye. Many even submitted to both ohbs.