https://vsbattles.com/threads/dragon-ball-super-discussion-thread-100.107592/post-6003727
https://vsbattles.com/threads/dragon-ball-super-discussion-thread-100.107592/post-6003740
https://vsbattles.com/threads/dragon-ball-super-discussion-thread-100.107592/post-6003952
https://vsbattles.com/threads/dragon-ball-super-discussion-thread-100.107592/post-5993576
I’m sure he has been reported before, although the warning tracker doesn’t have anything on him (prolly because it was made after he was reported)
Ordinarily, these two would not constitute poor behaviour. They can be phrased as legitimate statements and questions. However, looking at the thread, it is clear in the context that these statements were made not as a legitimate inquiry and instead as an attempt to intentionally demean the other user. I believe this meaningfully changes the situation, though I can see above that Andytrenom did not see it the same way.
These two statements are unambiguously inappropriate for a civil discussion, and should be addressed.
I really dont think the topic ban extension is fair, as my level of participation in the thread was practically non-existent, but the main issue i have is with the extension I received in August. I got reported for breaching the topic ban, however I argued back saying that 90 days has already passed, which is a common mistake to have,as pretty much any other site uses 30 day periods, and even you an agnaa make the distinction of referring to 30 day periods. Probably shouldn't have argued back, but whatever.
A warning seems to be all that is required here, yes.
Okay. That seems to have been a simple mistake then.
They were explicitly told on their message wall the exact date the topic ban would end. When told after 90 days had passed (two days before it would be lifted) that their topic ban still applied, they obstinately argued that it didn't.
Given that I believed my ban was already past my expiration date, ( and i was being threatened with an extension), I felt the need to defend myself. Shouldn't have done that, but that was my thought process.
The first time he broke it, it was to August 3rd and he posted on August 1st. Bambu's wall post very clearly said August 3rd. He then argued here in RVR that August 1st was 90 days from the last Nasu post he made, therefore his topic ban should end on August 1st because 90 days is three months.
At worst, he seems like the type who makes occasional slips; nothing he's done warrants a ban, but the warning he got from DarkGrath is sufficient.
past offense aside, an extension on the grounds of "hey man, you just need 1 vote" is needlessly harsh. And considering pretty much everything else uses the 30 day standard, that was a pretty reasonable conclusion to come to, not out of trying to find a way to slide past my ban, as before this, I hadn't gotten reported before ( besides posting in a discussion thread, but that didnt go anywhere, for obvious reasons). One of the staff members in the thread even said " You waited 3 months, you can wait 2 more days" or something along those lines. I dont think defending myself against an unfair extension was being "difficult and unreasonable".
you're allowed to argue for a discussion rule to be removed as long as you bring new information. Veronica made it sound like there was additional information that she had, although not in the OP (not sure why).
She also went to other threads and spammed in order to get attention to her own.
For added context: The original thread that added the rule. She has been attempting the same downgrade for months and doesn't show any signs of stopping. I would honestly argue for a topic ban at this point.
Advertisement?
Maybe. Who knows.
I understand she seems very passionate about discussing DB, and on other topics of the verse I seem to remember she did brought interesting points, so I wouldn't say it needs to be a permanent topic ban. 1/3 months seem reasonable to me, maybe 6 at maximum to see if she cools down on the spam. Am open to other suggestions too.
So should we reduce his ban length?
Being frank, reading through her comments on the thread, she was met with the age old "it's useless to talk to you anyways" (which for the record is by far the closest comment to a rule violation in there) comment just before she complained about being dismissed. So her complaint was legitimately valid. She never insults any entity in that thread, she attacks the claims and dismisses attempts to bring up outside examples (which may or may not be valid comparisons, hard to say).
Fair enough. If that is your determination of the thread, I would like to rescind my request for any further evaluations on it. I do believe the thread was starting to get out of hand, and it was probably a good thing it was closed when it was by OP request. Thank you for taking the time to evaluate this matter; it is greatly appreciated. I will hope that any threads going forward just don't reach such a point again so that situations like this don't happen.
About this I don't think she did anything either as the OP of the thread and person she talked to. I was just frustrated at that time due to other things aside from that.
