I'll take Cyan, since Charlotte took my favorite color. 
That's the same color Aurora picked, isn't it?
AuroraDashKarjamP...
It's much like
TaylorWayne...
Both colors look a lot alike, but aren't... D:
(I haven't figured out how to quote individual snippets XD)
I'll try to help out... whether I get ninja'd by time or space... or both...
To quote multiple posts... just click the Quote button for each post...
To quote specific segments of a post...
I'll take one of your posts as an example... using the [nobbc][/nobbc] BBCode... and place it in a spoiler...
Just mouse-over it... preferably without Pikachu being used as the computer's mouse...

Original quoted post:
[quote author=Dr. Egregious link=topic=717.msg12371#msg12371 date=1384303420]
[color=purple]I will participate with purple pieces. :) Lovely idea!
And I love the concept of fighting to the death without quarter. However: in formal tournament settings, any refusal to move is designated a "resignation". If I'm playing Wayne and I hang a rook, giving him an easy shot, then I could walk away from the board in a rage and that would be a resignation. So if we're not going to allow surrender (and even if we did, really) I'm going to strongly recommend time controls, for instance an instant forfeiture for any player who takes longer than twenty-four hours to move without prior notice.
A further suggestion. If we're going to do this as a single-elimination tournament, some players might worry about the chance element involved in playing Black or White and the advantage conferred thereby; I recommend allowing the losing player the option to demand a rematch with the colors reversed. If the loser loses again, that's it. If the loser wins the second game, we apply some sort of tiebreaker, like giving the win to the player who won in fewer moves.
One last thing. What about draws? I hate draws, personally, and we haven't seen one happen yet, but what if one does happen?
And a last last thing. I'm the moderator for the chess forums, so if we get to a point where eight people have signed up and a ninth wants to play, I'll give up my place. Additionally, if a game I'm involved in requires moderation, I'll defer to someone else.
[/color]
[/quote]
Specifically quoted post:
[quote author=Dr. Egregious link=topic=717.msg12371#msg12371 date=1384303420]
[color=purple]I will participate with purple pieces. :) Lovely idea![/color][/quote]
[quote author=Dr. Egregious link=topic=717.msg12371#msg12371 date=1384303420]
[color=purple]And I love the concept of fighting to the death without quarter. However: in formal tournament settings, any refusal to move is designated a "resignation". If I'm playing Wayne and I hang a rook, giving him an easy shot, then I could walk away from the board in a rage and that would be a resignation. So if we're not going to allow surrender (and even if we did, really) I'm going to strongly recommend time controls, for instance an instant forfeiture for any player who takes longer than twenty-four hours to move without prior notice.[/color][/quote]
[quote author=Dr. Egregious link=topic=717.msg12371#msg12371 date=1384303420]
[color=purple]A further suggestion. If we're going to do this as a single-elimination tournament, some players might worry about the chance element involved in playing Black or White and the advantage conferred thereby; I recommend allowing the losing player the option to demand a rematch with the colors reversed. If the loser loses again, that's it. If the loser wins the second game, we apply some sort of tiebreaker, like giving the win to the player who won in fewer moves.[/color][/quote]
[quote author=Dr. Egregious link=topic=717.msg12371#msg12371 date=1384303420]
[color=purple]One last thing. What about draws? I hate draws, personally, and we haven't seen one happen yet, but what if one does happen?[/color][/quote]
[quote author=Dr. Egregious link=topic=717.msg12371#msg12371 date=1384303420]
[color=purple]And a last last thing. I'm the moderator for the chess forums, so if we get to a point where eight people have signed up and a ninth wants to play, I'll give up my place. Additionally, if a game I'm involved in requires moderation, I'll defer to someone else.
[/color]
[/quote]
Basically... just copy the "[quote author=Dr. Egregious link=topic=717.msg12371#msg12371 date=1384303420] stuff of a quoted post...
That did help, right...?
In regards to a second-level tiebreak if both games take the same number of moves (unlikely), we could go by which player ended up with more material on the board (1 point for each pawn, 3 per knight and bishop, 5 per rook, 9 per queen), and after that we could go by whose king advanced further. I doubt we'll need more than three levels of tiebreakers.
And if it somehow ends up as a tie again (which would just be extremely unlikely)... we could just have another, final match...?
In regards to the limit of twenty-four hours (or any other number): Maybe we could allow a player to declare in advance that he won't be moving within the time limit, say if he's going camping and won't have Internet access.
And if something unexpected happens, such as, say, a power outage, and a player doesn't have any other way of notifying us...?