- 14,904
- 20,973
The begging for agreements thing didn’t really come off as a joke since he was actively trying to interrupt an unrelated convo.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
The begging for agreements thing didn’t really come off as a joke since he was actively trying to interrupt an unrelated convo.
I was spamming shit in a channel where everyone was spamming shit, i wasnt tring to put conversations down. And again, that doesnt make any sense, the bayonetta thread in question is already in favor of the arguments ive made, why would i need to beg for agreements for a thread that already agrees with me?Yeah, once again, short ban seems appropriate here. Weekly is going out of their way to put down other people’s conversations to beg for agreements
It doesn’t matter how that thread is going. It’s what you did in relation to that thread. The thread could be going the completely opposite way and I would still tell you the same thingAgain, that doesnt make any sense, the bayonetta thread in question is already in favor of the arguments ive made, why would i need to beg for agreements for a thread that already agrees with me?
I was spamming shit in a channel where everyone was spamming shit, i wasnt trying to put conversations down.It doesn’t matter how that thread is going. It’s what you did in relation to that thread. The thread could be going the completely opposite way and I would still tell you the same thing
I was spamming shit in a channel where everyone was spamming shit, i wasnt tring to put conversations down. And again, that doesnt make any sense, the bayonetta thread in question is already in favor of the arguments ive made, why would i need to beg for agreements for a thread that already agrees with me?
I can’t claim I know anything about the channel, you weren’t doing any regular spam. It was thread and agreement begging spamI was spamming shit in a channel where everyone was spamming shit, i wasnt trying to put conversations down.
And again, no, it was not in relation to that thread. Ive posted screenshots of how i ask for legitimate input, that was not a legitimate ask for input.
I do think it's important how the thread was going, since it gives us info on whether it's a joke or not, which determines whether it's a rule violation or not.It doesn’t matter how that thread is going. It’s what you did in relation to that thread. The thread could be going the completely opposite way and I would still tell you the same thing
Thats the thing though, that is how i always do it. Like i said, the spamming is not a serious ask. If i were looking for a serious ask it would have been the same as the stuff i posted.I can’t claim I know anything about the channel, you weren’t doing any regular spam. It was thread and agreement begging spam
Weekly, it doesn’t matter if you’ve asked for input before in a normal manner. That’s how you should always be doing it
Im aware, thats why i dont talk like that on the wikiAnd yeah, I would consider telling other people to “shut up” and that “no one cares, look at this thread” qualifies as putting other convos down for your own gain
I’m not gonna police how you talk on discord, but in regards to the wiki, it’s not professional behaviour
Yeah, the tides of a thread can heavily correlate to agreement begging. I just wanted to bring up that no matter the direction of the thread, Weekly’s methods of getting input wasn’t okI do think it's important how the thread was going, since it gives us info on whether it's a joke or not, which determines whether it's a rule violation or not.
From a look through the thread, I can't see a clear vote count, so I can't tell whether it was actually in Weekly's favor or not at the time of those Discord messages.
If it’s how you always do it, then don’t do it the other way. This is how it should always beThats the thing though, that is how i always do it. Like i said, the spamming is not a serious ask. If i were looking for a serious ask it would have been the same as the stuff i posted.
Still. It makes the context clear. This wasn’t a jokeIm aware, thats why i dont talk like that on the wiki
That is how it always is. I dont do it any other way.If it’s how you always do it, then don’t do it the other way. This is how it should always be
I can go back through those posts and add /j to the end of them if that makes a difference, im apparently that bad at making my jokes clear that people think i was being seriousStill. It makes the context clear. This wasn’t a joke
Thats not what i was doing nor is it what i do ever. The most begging ive ever done is a desperate ask for input on the MTG thread that has been dead in the water for he past two months and even then i didnt just spam demands for input.Like, I'm aware that it isn't really wrong to ask for input off-site, but just don't make it seem like you're outright begging people for votes just so that you can shut down others for their own opinions. And please stop claiming that most of these actions are "jokes"
Except you did. You spammed with begsThat is how it always is. I dont do it any other way.
Weekly, if I went into a chat you were in, public or DMs, and spammed “Agree with this please” multiple times along with sending the thread, I don’t think you would assume “Haha Lonkitt’s being silly again”I can go back through those posts and add /j to the end of them if that makes a difference, im apparently that bad at making my jokes clear that people think i was being serious
Not in a serious mannerExcept you did. You spammed with begs
I absolutely would because you dont act like that normallyWeekly, if I went into a chat you were in, public or DMs, and spammed “Agree with this please” multiple times along with sending the thread, I don’t think you would assume “Haha Lonkitt’s being silly again”
Weekly, you were pretty blunt in your spammingNot in a serious manner
Except this mirrors similar behaviour with the RWBY situation, so in this case, I know it isn’t a behaviour I haven’t seen from you beforeI absolutely would because you dont act like that normally
Weekly, posting unrelated instances of you asking for input isn’t helping your case
Here is me being desperate for input on a thread, two months apart, note the lack of spamming, because thats not what i do if im looking to actual input.
Because its not a major violation, as Agnaa has explained in great detailReading all this, I can't understand one thing: why do you continue to argue with the violator, having evidence of a violation of the rules?
Shitposting in a discord server is not destructive to CRTs or the wikiMoreover, if a person has already been banned for this in the past, then this case can be considered a repeated violation of the rules. And, by the way, in my opinion, a "joke" should not be an excuse or a mitigating circumstance for actions that are destructive to CRT threads and wiki in general.
Aight, so i wouldnt have been reported if i were spamming something unrelated to anything on the wiki?Weekly, you were pretty blunt in your spamming
How so?Except this mirrors similar behaviour with the RWBY situation, so in this case, I know it isn’t a behaviour I haven’t seen from you before
As I can see, your posts and shitposting could lead to a mess in the CRT thread the link to which you left. Such appeals, even if they are humorous, are unacceptable in any form.Shitposting in a discord server is not destructive to CRTs or the wiki
You say this like it’s a point in your favour, but this is literally for wiki related stuff. You can’t use the “well if I spammed anything else” excuse. You know as well as I do that’s just a weak argumentAight, so i wouldnt have been reported if i were spamming something unrelated to anything on the wiki?
The RWBY situation rings some bellsHow so?
At the time the agreement begging started (June 5) I don't think staff consensus favored Weekly's arguments going by the first two pages, @Planck69 and @Theglassman12 disagreeing with him early on.I do think it's important how the thread was going, since it gives us info on whether it's a joke or not, which determines whether it's a rule violation or not.
From a look through the thread, I can't see a clear vote count, so I can't tell whether it was actually in Weekly's favor or not at the time of those Discord messages.
Given the fact that it continued for a while afterwards, I'd guess that it wasn't clearly in Weekly's favor.
I’m just gonna cut to the chase (on my end, that is) so me and Weekly don’t have to keep going in circles, since you’re right, it’s feeling a lot like thatThis kinda seems to be going around in circles at this point. You two just keep bringing up effectively the same arguments.
Please consider stopping and waiting for other staff to weigh in. Or just continuing on each other's message walls.
This is something Deagonx mentioned, too, he would call me manipulative, unaware of the verse and the cosmology, etc, all because I disagreed with him.
The violations include one (imo) light one (messages like this asking for evaluations without reading arguments, although he did start providing arguments minutes later) and an (imo) mild one (this, same server/channel, an hour earlier, no arguments posted shortly afterwards).Well, it depends on how long ago those violations occurred and how severe they were.
I’m just gonna note that mental instability should preferably not be used as a shield for every incident.I agree with Agnaa and Medeus here, and am also not comfortable with banning somebody just for being a bit obnoxious and mentally unstable and desperate.
Giving Weekly a strict warning to make an effort to shape up his behaviour seems fine though.
I was referring to the tendency to bring up Weekly's old transgressions from considerably more than a year ago.
Not if they are severe, but I tend to try to be lenient for minor ones, as I know how hard it is to keep mental instability completely under control.I’m just gonna note that mental instability should preferably not be used as a shield for every incident.