• This forum is strictly intended to be used by members of the VS Battles wiki. Please only register if you have an autoconfirmed account there, as otherwise your registration will be rejected. If you have already registered once, do not do so again, and contact Antvasima if you encounter any problems.

    For instructions regarding the exact procedure to sign up to this forum, please click here.
  • We need Patreon donations for this forum to have all of its running costs financially secured.

    Community members who help us out will receive badges that give them several different benefits, including the removal of all advertisements in this forum, but donations from non-members are also extremely appreciated.

    Please click here for further information, or here to directly visit our Patreon donations page.
  • Please click here for information about a large petition to help children in need.

Fuji NEVER Cry [DMC Tier 1 Downgrades Yet Again]

Status
Not open for further replies.
I can see arguments from both sides to be honest, back whenever the verse first became tier 1 I was initially against it but as time went on it was defended quite well. You may consider me as neutral but I'd prefer to wait for the DMC side to give their last parts.
Deagonx said:
This thread started almost two months ago.
Click to expand...
CRT's don't have a time constraint for how long they can be open for. The original Bleach revisions from back in my day took nearly a year, two months isn't that bad. And to be fair, most of that was drama between the OP and and DMC fandom trying to antagonize one another.



If it's been open for nearly 2 months an extra day shouldn't hurt. After all, what's that one phrase? "What's a million and one more problem?"

Not to mention rushing to close a thread just looks very bad and tends to leave a bad example behind. This is debating after all, opinions aren't gonna be stagnate. They change consistently, hence why the wiki is always changing. Just because some staff members agreed with one argument doesn't mean they'd stick to it when presented with another.
 
There's a difference between closing a largely uncontested CRT over a period and like, seeing a member post a summary blog for their arguments and going "no, close this, apply".

Not even mentioning that going through the thread, more than a few staff are either neutral (Lonkitt), decline to input (LordGriffin1000), stated that they'd wait for supporter replies and never came back (Qawdsef) or aren't evaluating staff (IdiosyncraticLawyer).

Come to think of it, what are the votes? I feel like there's an issue there now that I've listed out all of the staff that posted here.
 
LordGinSama said:
CRT's don't have a time constraint for how long they can be open for.
Click to expand...
Sure, but that doesn't mean a two month thread is "rushed."

Planck69 said:
There's a difference between closing a largely uncontested CRT over a period and like, seeing a member post a summary blog for their arguments and going "no, close this, apply".
Click to expand...
Of course, but the argument has been going on for several weeks, and Fuji has already said that the blog is just a rehash of arguments that were already discussed throughout this 5 page thread.

If the opposition wants to attempt another thread, that is their prerogative.
 
If those are indeed the votes, then how is it at 5?

One of them (Qawdsef) verbatim says the comment looks good but he'd wait for replies then never comes clarify his stance.

IdiosyncraticLawyer isn't a moderator, bureaucrat or admin so he can't evaluate here.

Antvasima said he'd read the rebuttals and after having both sides arguments posted at the time, simply said "Noted" and never actually clarified what stance he agrees with.

The ones there that count are DarkDragonMedeus, Deagonx and Theglassman12.

Nevermind how it overlooked neutral votes like Lonkitt. This count is a mess.
 
Deagonx said:
He replied to Fuji's explanation and said "this makes sense to me."
Click to expand...
The "Noted" comment happens specifically after that, when he's been linked the opposing sides arguments and he seems to have based part of his judgement on Qawdsef's non-vote.

But this is splitting hairs, we can at worst just ask him to clarify, my main issue is that there seems to be a vote count issue.

And frankly if we start counting some of these as votes then by that same logic, Ultima_Reality would be put on the disagreeing side for his single post here. Obviously that's asinine and so is this.
 
Deagonx said:
Sure, but that doesn't mean a two month thread is "rushed."
Click to expand...
A thread is only rushed whenever you TRY to close it as soon as possible. I'd rather have this thread be open for 5 months than having to deal with 10+ more threads down the line so we can deal with everything while we're here.


Slow and ready wins the race, I think it'd behoove all of us to remember that.

Deagonx said:
Of course, but the argument has been going on for several weeks, and Fuji has already said that the blog is just a rehash of arguments that were already discussed throughout this 5 page thread.
Click to expand...
And once more, the argument can go on for 8 months if it needs to be. We don't go around closing threads because they've been open too long, the only case in all of my years where I've seen this practice done is with threads that haven't been commented on for years which is a thing so we can avoid necro bumps. The discussion is still alive, and the DMC side hasn't given their final arguments. Also, I think your putting a little too much faith into the OP. Just because Fujiwara thinks so, does not make that an objective fact nor do you know if they've done edits to said blog.


Again just leave the thread open, there's no reason for that to happen and to be frank a lot of the user's here will see that as an ulterior motivation. Now I doubt you do but whenever you want to close a thread so quickly that's what it could possibly look like to others.
 
Georredannea15 said:
I didn't imply that. I just wanted to remind you where he says that the situation here is "more of a different extension of the same axis than an extra axis" according to Ultima.
Click to expand...
Pls don't derail. Let Planck handle the nitty gritty details here.
 
LordGinSama said:
A thread is only rushed whenever you TRY to close it as soon as possible. I'd rather have this thread be open for 5 months than having to deal with 10+ more threads down the line so we can deal with everything while we're here.


Slow and ready wins the race, I think it'd behoove all of us to remember that.


And once more, the argument can go on for 8 months if it needs to be. We don't go around closing threads because they've been open too long, the only case in all of my years where I've seen this practice done is with threads that haven't been commented on for years which is a thing so we can avoid necro bumps. The discussion is still alive, and the DMC side hasn't given their final arguments. Also, I think your putting a little too much faith into the OP. Just because Fujiwara thinks so, does not make that an objective fact nor do you know if they've done edits to said blog.


Again just leave the thread open, there's no reason for that to happen and to be frank a lot of the user's here will see that as an ulterior motivation. Now I doubt you do but whenever you want to close a thread so quickly that's what it could possibly look like to others.
Click to expand...
I mean this is unfair to the op though. Holding the thread for so long, because yes 2 months is old, and waiting for the opposition to post their stuff is I feel a disservice to the maker of the thread. While a fast conclusion isn't a necessity keeping the thread open just because people don't want it closed is also bad.
 
I was away for a while, and what the hell happened here. Anyways, non-staff, stop commenting and @Deagonx elaborate on your stance on why u disagree with the current blog. It is filled with new arguments, which obviously invalidates the current vote count. And u need to elaborate your stance, not just disagree and say nothing.
 
Serlock_Holmes said:
Also I remember Qawsed replying more beyond his initial assessment.
Click to expand...
You're welcome to point me to that post, I don't see him anywhere after that first post.

CloverDragon03 said:
Imo even if you really wanted to set aside the vote count issue (which is a lot to set aside), it’s not a good look to see ongoing discussion/new arguments and be like “nope, close this and apply it now”
Click to expand...
Agreed with this. Seeing a summary blog being posted by the opposition, then agreeing with the OP to bring to vote count to snuff 5 minutes later and immediately going "close the thread and apply it" is terrible optics.
 
The OP should have realized that risk then. You obviously aren't going to get a tier 1 verse like DMC done within a short time-frame, that'd be the equivalent of me yelling at my mechanic for taking a few months to completely install a new engine and a timing belt into my car.


It's not gonna be an easy process and will take time. You wouldn't give a mechanic shit for taking his time to fix your car properly would you?
 
Planck69 said:
And frankly if we start counting some of these as votes then by that same logic, Ultima_Reality would be put on the disagreeing side for his single post here.
Click to expand...
That's not really possibly given he explicitly said maybe, but by any metric this thread reached enough votes to pass.

LordGinSama said:
And once more, the argument can go on for 8 months if it needs to be. We don't go around closing threads because they've been open too long
Click to expand...
The thread is being closed because the revision passed. I don't think it's helpful to allow anyone to prevent the application of a revision or closure of a thread by stonewalling. Anyone can argue for as long as they want to, but someone really really wanting to continue arguing against a thread isn't a reason for it not to pass.

Planck69 said:
Agreed with this. Seeing a summary blog being posted by the opposition, then agreeing with the OP to bring to vote count to snuff 5 minutes later and immediately going "close the thread and apply it" is terrible optics.
Click to expand...
Fuji's assessment of the blog is that it's not substantively different from the arguments already made. However, this thread already has been stonewalled for a considerable period of time, and already reached the required vote count (a decent time ago, in fact). It has in fact passed, that's our policy on the matter.
 
LordGinSama said:
The OP should have realized that risk then. You obviously aren't going to get a tier 1 verse like DMC done within a short time-frame, that'd be the equivalent of me yelling at my mechanic for taking a few months to completely install a new engine and a timing belt into my car.


It's not gonna be an easy process and will take time. You wouldn't give a mechanic shit for taking his time to fix your car properly would you?
Click to expand...
But a mechanic that wastes time for 2 months and then remembers it? After you have just found a solution to it?

Planck69 said:
You're welcome to point me to that post, I don't see him anywhere after that first post.
Click to expand...
Because of a matter with Elizhaa he had stated his opinion of it in the RvR due to this being a past issue. If Fuji remembers it she would do well to post it else can you tag him so that he can maybe give his full opinion?
 
Deagonx said:
The thread is being closed because the revision passed. I don't think it's helpful to allow anyone to prevent the application of a revision or closure of a thread by stonewalling. Anyone can argue for as long as they want to, but someone really really wanting to continue arguing against a thread isn't a reason for it not to pass.
Click to expand...
I think you’re using the term “stonewalling” very liberally here…
 
Deagonx said:
That's not really possibly given he explicitly said maybe, but by any metric this thread reached enough votes to pass.
Click to expand...
What metric? Qawd explicitly said he'd wait for replies but never comes back to make a clear stance. Ant never backs up his initial claim after reading the opposition's side and even seemed to have based a part of his judgement on the aforementioned staff. IdiosyncraticLawyer can't evaluate.

There's a neutral thread mod vote not counted.

It comes up to 3 votes but that's the bare minimum, let alone the fact that the 3rd vote was yours, today.
Deagonx said:
Fuji's assessment of the blog is that it's not substantively different from the arguments already made. However, this thread already has been stonewalled for a considerable period of time, and already reached the required vote count (a decent time ago, in fact). It has in fact passed, that's our policy on the mamatter.
Click to expand...
And? The summary blog is for staff evaluation. What kind of backwards logic are you using that it needs the OP's go-ahead to be applied?
 
Serlock_Holmes said:
waiting for the opposition to post their stuff is I feel a disservice to the maker of the thread.
Click to expand...
Welcome to debating. Not just about fiction but as a whole.
Deagonx said:
The thread is being closed because the revision passed.
Click to expand...
Okay but here's the thing. It's looking like it didn't pass to begin with, because the votes are messed up at this point. I probably wouldn't suggest closing threads on the basis that it's "passed." without even properly tallying the votes to get the number right. As Planck69 pointed out, the votes definitely aren't all too accurate.
Deagonx said:
I don't think it's helpful to allow anyone to prevent the application of a revision or closure of a thread by stonewalling.
Click to expand...
Okay now calm down for a moment and maybe stop accusing others of stonewalling? Maybe from your own perspective but thats your OWN perspective. It's not stonewalling, it's waiting and practicing patience.
Deagonx said:
Anyone can argue for as long as they want to, but someone really really wanting to continue arguing against a thread isn't a reason for it not to pass.
Click to expand...
Uhhhh????? I'm sorry but that didn't make much sense.
 
Deagonx said:
Fuji's assessment of the blog is that it's not substantively different from the arguments already made. However, this thread already has been stonewalled for a considerable period of time, and already reached the required vote count (a decent time ago, in fact). It has in fact passed, that's our policy on the matter.
Click to expand...
Even if the blog is the same, I think it will at least be checked again by the staffs. This should progress faster, especially as the tier 1 standards change and become final.
 
Also, I feel like it was lost up there but I agreed with the blog posted before all of this nonsense.

So in terms of verifiable evaluating staff votes on this thread that's;

Agree: 2 (Deagonx, DarkDragonMedeus)

Disagree: 2 (Elizhaa, Planck69)

Neutral: 2 (Lonkitt, Theglassman12)

Any staff can more than clarify otherwise but to say that we're at a clear and concise conclusion is silly.

Edit: Adjusted the vote count.
 
Last edited:
Honestly, more staff generally too. I've read through the thread and really only Elizhaa and DDM properly participated. Theglassman12 voted due to a standard change IIRC.
 
Planck69 said:
Also, I feel like it was lost up there but I agreed with the blog posted before all of this nonsense.

So in terms of verifiable evaluating staff votes on this thread that's;

Agree: 3 (Deagonx, DarkDragonMedeus, Theglassman12)

Disagree: 2 (Elizhaa, Planck69)

Neutral: 1 (Lonkitt)

Any staff can more than clarify otherwise but to say that we're at a clear and concise conclusion is silly.
Click to expand...
Dios mio I leave for like 20 minutes and we've devolved into lying about vote totals. Anyways, I've been given explicit permission by two staff members to apply this, so I'll get to that in a few hours.
 
You literally can't apply anything at the moment till the votes are cleared up Fujiwara. Because right now both sides are saying the count is wrong so that needs to be settled first and foremost.


You got permission from Deagonx who being argued against by other staff.
 
Mad_Dog_of_Fujiwara said:
Dios mio I leave for like 20 minutes and we've devolved into lying about vote totals. Anyways, I've been given explicit permission by two staff members to apply this, so I'll get to that in a few hours.
Click to expand...
You can correct me if I'm wrong but applying this while 3 other staff are contending it is asinine. Especially after we've had a whole exchange above that has yet to be refuted by the very same staff giving you that permission.

And no, the original poster doesn't have a monopoly on vote counts. Any member can make a count, you can correct it with evidence if need be.

IdiosyncraticLawyer can't evaluate a thread, period. Qawdsef doesn't touch this thread again after page 1, that isn't deniable. Ant doesn't comment after seeing the opposing stances. If you can send me evidence to the contrary on this thread sure, else this borders on another rule violation of the same nature.
 
For the record, a single staff member should never have the right to say "yeah go ahead and apply the edits." without analyzing the thread properly because if that had been done we wouldn't be here.


Gotta consult with the other staff yo, make sure we're all on the same page before finalizing anything.
 
Honestly, gotta agree with Planck here. I genuinely dislike applying threads haphazardly.

From the start, there's been vote contentions, people being unsure what's applicable regarding the rules, and even more bs. Furthermore, standards for tier 1 have just recently changed (again). This frankly warrants more in-depth evaluation, specially from those old staff votes.
 
Mad_Dog_of_Fujiwara said:
Dios mio I leave for like 20 minutes and we've devolved into lying about vote totals. Anyways, I've been given explicit permission by two staff members to apply this, so I'll get to that in a few hours.
Click to expand...
Can we leave the lying accusations behind? No one's trying to deceive anyone here, this is just how it is.

And if there's such a disagreement, then no, the thread should not be applied. IdiosyncraticLawyer is also not a Thread Mod, so he can't endorse applying changes
 
Even if a genuine vote count was in favour of OP, on what planet is a thread rushed to completion against opinions of verse supporters? I have rarely seen opposition getting treated so callously. I know DMC supporters are considered infamous and all, but I don't think we are that bad that thread would be passed against our opinion, Like personally I believe my team know how to take losses gracefully when necessary.

This one's not it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Fixxed
  • Locked
Higher D by Transcending Infinite/all level of Power and Existential
Replies
7
Views
2K
Antvasima
Antvasima
demonwarrior2266
  • Locked
Tier 11 Needs a Revamp
Replies
23
Views
3K
Antvasima
Antvasima
Wankbreaker
  • Locked
Tier 2 hotfix.
Replies
25
Views
4K
DarkDragonMedeus
DarkDragonMedeus
Kulf_Boba
Doubts about Level 1-A
Replies
13
Views
882
Kulf_Boba
Kulf_Boba
IdiosyncraticLawyer
Lifting Strength, Tier 11, & Tier 0
Replies
16
Views
2K
IdiosyncraticLawyer
IdiosyncraticLawyer
Back
Top