Mad_Dog_of_Fujiwara
She/Her- 9,828
- 12,447
- Thread starter
- #361
Just 2 iirc.Just curious, how many universes is their 2-C?
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.
Just 2 iirc.Just curious, how many universes is their 2-C?
Incorrect, we are making a response, so hold ur horses.Just 2 iirc.
3Just curious, how many universes is their 2-C?
There are three from Ant, DDM and Glassman from what the op has linked. That's as far as I know, but of course if new arguments are brought up the op should wait for them and if they don't hold up then the changes can pass. It's good practice to not close it yet.I should note that only thread mod votes and admin votes are valid for CRTs to pass through, content mods, CGMs and such don't get their votes to be valid for some reason.
Also, there have been new arguments in development since the 2-A Low 1-C CRT and this CRT, you will have to wait.
Apparently 4, Ant, DDM, Glassman and Qawsedf.There are three from Ant, DDM and Glassman from what the op has linked. That's as far as I know, but of course if new arguments are brought up the op should wait for them and if they don't hold up then the changes can pass. It's good practice to not close it yet.
1- This issue is still in the discussion stage and be assured that this discussion will continue for a very long time.I should note that only thread mod votes and admin votes are valid for CRTs to pass through, content mods, CGMs and such don't get their votes to be valid for some reason.
Also, there have been new arguments in development since the 2-A Low 1-C CRT and this CRT.
And this thread (Which I am told will not affect the outcome of the 2-A Low 1-C thread, but will require the "qualitative superiority" argument for anything below 1-A to be removed, since apparently dimensional jumps are not qualitative but quantitative, and will thus use quantitative superiority instead, making the obtaining of Low 1-C a wee bit easier so make what you will of that).
So you will have to wait.
Quantitative superiority stuff is just one aspect, there are multiple others we are still discussing to bring up in unison here. And it's being accelerated to be ready quickly AFAIK.1- This issue is still in the discussion stage and be assured that this discussion will continue for a very long time.
2-Even if the thread flies, the quantitative superiority will remain the same as the current dimensional jump
So, if you don't mind waiting more than a few months, then you can wait for that thread to conclude, for better or worse.
It will take at least a few months for it to be ready quickly, judging by the situation with the OP. Because even if you put aside discussing the OP and its points one by one, and even if this is accepted, it will take just as long to add decisive and eliminative requirements to make it more orderly and correct.Quantitative superiority stuff is just one aspect, there are multiple others we are still discussing to bring up in unison here. And it's being accelerated to be ready quickly AFAIK.
Welp, might not have to wait for long, people cooking and it seems we might be ready for prime-time.It will take at least a few months for it to be ready quickly, judging by the situation with the OP. Because even if you put aside discussing the OP and its points one by one, and even if this is accepted, it will take just as long to add decisive and eliminative requirements to make it more orderly and correct.
Then instead of waiting for them, continue this thread and wait for the other staffsWelp, might not have to wait for long, people cooking and it seems we might be ready for prime-time.
1. I could've sworn there was a thread to give content mods evaluation rights, but I'll update the vote tally later. Still 4-1 though.I should note that only thread mod votes and admin votes are valid for CRTs to pass through, content mods, CGMs and such don't get their votes to be valid for some reason.
Also, there have been new arguments in development since the 2-A Low 1-C CRT and this CRT.
And this thread (Which I am told will not affect the outcome of the 2-A Low 1-C thread, but will require the "qualitative superiority" argument for anything below 1-A to be removed, since apparently dimensional jumps are not qualitative but quantitative, and will thus use quantitative superiority instead, making the obtaining of Low 1-C a wee bit easier so make what you will of that).
So you will have to wait.
That went nowhere last I checked. CGMs were supposed to get rights too but uh... it fizzled out.1. I could've sworn there was a thread to give content mods evaluation rights, but I'll update the vote tally later. Still 4-1 though.
Might not have to wait after all, I hear the DMC side of the arguments are nearly complete.2. We are not waiting for Ultima's thread to conclude - not only would it not really impact this thread, but both you and I know it's gonna take AGES to get passed and applied (if at all). Also, it's unlikely that we'd be able to get staff to evaluate this thread a SECOND time, months after votes have already been given, so the vote tally would likely remain as it is now. You're more than welcome to do a re-upgrade thread after the fact, though.
it is not up to you to decide when a thread will conclude, also no you won’t have to wait for long so hold your horses.1. I could've sworn there was a thread to give content mods evaluation rights, but I'll update the vote tally later. Still 4-1 though.
2. We are not waiting for Ultima's thread to conclude - not only would it not really impact this thread, but both you and I know it's gonna take AGES to get passed and applied (if at all). Also, it's unlikely that we'd be able to get staff to evaluate this thread a SECOND time, months after votes have already been given, so the vote tally would likely remain as it is now. You're more than welcome to do a re-upgrade thread after the fact, though.
Calm down Fuji, that kind of behavior is gonna get you nowhere.Whatever they post better acknowledge the difference between countable and uncountable infinity or I stg I'm blowing up this thread and everyone in it.
I am blast-proof. So explode to your heart's content.Whatever they post better acknowledge the difference between countable and uncountable infinity or I stg I'm blowing up this thread and everyone in it.
Ayo chillWTF man, do you want me to report all of you to the RVT that badly?
You're right. It's up to the staff votes. So, remind me what the staff votes look like right now?That was just comedic.
it is not up to you to decide when a thread will conclude, also no you won’t have to wait for long so hold your horses.
Drop the condescending attitude, Fuji. I'm not gonna warn you again.You're right. It's up to the staff votes. So, remind me what the staff votes look like right now?
That's not your decision to make either. It's up to staff. So wait for them to vote.In any case, we can't drag out this thread indefinitely. If the arguments are just a rehash of what's been said a million times, then I'm well within my right to apply the edits.
Did you just forget that I said threads like this require a 5-7 staff vote count to be considered applicable at large, or did you just willingly not read the finer print?"It's up to staff". Staff have decided the revision is valid and that I would be allowed to apply the edits. I don't HAVE to let you make that response, and I don't HAVE to respond to it, because you are at a 4-1 disadvantage here.
Is there an actual rule that can vouch for this? Because it's not one I've seen before, and one that I'm fairly certain hasn't been followed that closely.Did you just forget that I said threads like this require a 5-7 staff vote count to be considered applicable at large, or did you just willingly not read the finer print?
Yes.Is there an actual rule that can vouch for this? Because it's not one I've seen before, and one that I'm fairly certain hasn't been followed that closely.
I straight up do not see the 5-7 vote requirement, am I blind or are you just extrapolating that from tier 1 threads needing more votes than normal?
You're joking, right? Threads do NOT need to be approved by people who disagree with them, otherwise nothing would get passed at all. You've had ample opportunity to make your case - and people still disagree with you. There is no reason for you to drag this on indefinitely.Even if you have a complete admin vote count in your favor, it's common decency to have opposition approval before concluding, especially if the opposition is verse experts.
You can try and close this thread and apply your downgrade, I will just have it open again and make you undo your edits.
Lephyr herself told me this. I would have no reason to extrapolate. Plus the rules clearly state:I straight up do not see the 5-7 vote requirement, am I blind or are you just extrapolating that from tier 1 threads needing more votes than normal?
Well for starters I have to do "work" at my "job", a concept I'm aware is foreign to most VS debaters.Then why argue here? Have this thread closed, and apply the edits. We'll see from there.
...So you really did just pull the 5-7 number out of nowhere, huh. Alright. Glad to see we've reached the "just straight up lying" stage of this thread. Also, we have 4 staff approvals.Lephyr herself told me this. I would have no reason to extrapolate. Plus the rules clearly state:
AKA this isn't something you can just half-ass with 3 staff and call it a day.
- The review and approval of content revisions that affect tiers 1 and 0 or that are highly controversial should be conducted by a larger number of staff members in order to ensure that all relevant parties are aware of and agree with the proposed changes. It is essential that these revisions are evaluated by staff members who possess a reasonable level of genuine understanding and expertise in these areas in order to maintain the accuracy and quality of the revised material.
- Input from highly respected members of the community, such as experts on the topic, should be taken into consideration when determining the necessary level of review and approval.
So you're just going to accuse me of lying multiple times after I literally said Lephyr said you'd need that many staff. Really off to a terrific start here....So you really did just pull the 5-7 number out of nowhere, huh. Alright. Glad to see we've reached the "just straight up lying" stage of this thread. Also, we have 4 staff approvals.
I will apply the edits after work.
yeah true, I am too busy setting up a business that I can't work at jobs.Well for starters I have to do "work" at my "job", a concept I'm aware is foreign to most VS debaters.
Bravobasically insults vsbw debaters
accuses someone of lying
You’ve already been warned before for your behavior in this thread so could you please not revert back to that same behavior?Well for starters I have to do "work" at my "job", a concept I'm aware is foreign to most VS debaters.
...So you really did just pull the 5-7 number out of nowhere, huh. Alright. Glad to see we've reached the "just straight up lying" stage of this thread. Also, we have 4 staff approvals.
I will apply the edits after work.
"Lephyr said" doesn't mean it's in the rules, which it definitely isn't. I'll endorse Fuji applying these edits, if not their attitude.So you're just going to accuse me of lying multiple times after I literally said Lephyr said you'd need that many staff. Really off to a terrific start here.