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.
Okay, having reread through the whole thread.
By the time of the first warning by a non-staff user, I didn't see anything particularly bad in Eficiente's comments.
By the time of the second warning by a non-staff user, I didn't see anything particularly bad in Eficiente's comments.
In the context of both of those, they were occasional parts of piles of text that could be read badly, or not.
...And after that Fujiwara went on to say stuff that's worse, both in frequency and magnitude.
Still, I don't think either of them deserve a warning or anything. At the end of the day, both were discussing behaviours/arguments, not people.
Thank you for looking into it. Yes, I wasn't aiming for a warning or anything, but as a lack of a better option as I felt that anything I could do would be worse than pointless, that the thread will only be misremembered in the future, and to seek a fair second opinion.I largely agree with Agnaa's assessment. I think it warrants notice that multiple users asked Eficiente to cool his jets, but none of it was to the level of RVR bad and I think Fuji went off too harshly on him and in so doing, escalated the situation.
I'm not sure punishment is needed, but hopefully Eficiente can take this as a sign that, for whatever his intentions are, he debates in a manner that often feels insulting to others and can try to mitigate that in the future, and hopefully Fuji can recognize that vitriol might provide some short term release/satisfaction but often only serves to make the subject more defensive over what's going on, and can often be a rule violation unto itself.
I know this sort of response can be unsatisfying to both parties, but I think that is the best option here for now.
Please don't, upon returning from a ban, attempt to return conversation to that ban.
Only reply to this thread in current rule violations relevant to you.
Agreed, I don't think either one of them have really on that thread specifically done anything punishment worthy. Eficiente did sound moderately abrasive and rather bold with his accusations about people "Mindlessly agreeing." And Fuji responded with a bit harsher comments that were also accusatory. Nothing really want too overboard for now. Also, if you have complaints about staff and their positions, it is best to compile a well crafted list of wrong doings (And preferably focus on most recent actions) and share with a member of the HR group. Yelling at staff is going to make other staff question if they were really all that bad or if they where responding out of retaliation against an provoke attempt.I largely agree with Agnaa's assessment. I think it warrants notice that multiple users asked Eficiente to cool his jets, but none of it was to the level of RVR bad and I think Fuji went off too harshly on him and in so doing, escalated the situation.
I'm not sure punishment is needed, but hopefully Eficiente can take this as a sign that, for whatever his intentions are, he debates in a manner that often feels insulting to others and can try to mitigate that in the future, and hopefully Fuji can recognize that vitriol might provide some short term release/satisfaction but often only serves to make the subject more defensive over what's going on, and can often be a rule violation unto itself.
I know this sort of response can be unsatisfying to both parties, but I think that is the best option here for now.
I undid all of their remaining vandal edits in our wiki and gave them a warning instruction message.
I also did not notice any bad behaviour from Eficiente, just other members piling on him for very limited reasons.Okay, having reread through the whole thread.
By the time of the first warning by a non-staff user, I didn't see anything particularly bad in Eficiente's comments.
By the time of the second warning by a non-staff user, I didn't see anything particularly bad in Eficiente's comments.
In the context of both of those, they were occasional parts of piles of text that could be read badly, or not.
...And after that Fujiwara went on to say stuff that's worse, both in frequency and magnitude.
Still, I don't think either of them deserve a warning or anything. At the end of the day, both were discussing behaviours/arguments, not people.
Eh, maybe? I'm more willing to be lenient on that since she elaborated it into an actual point. i.e. Shut up (because you're constantly rude to people).Also, Fujiwara did say "shut the hell up lol" to him, which likely warrants a warning.
Fine with a short ban for that. A week to a month, I'd say.@Un_Maruchan_Crudo seems to have said something very bad to another member here:
yujiro blitz baki
vsbattles.fandom.com
To me, I don't take issue with the "shut the hell up lol" but I do take issue with the following defamation not being close to reality. I want her to properly source so many bits of that in a proper, private conversation in which I can argue back, yet that's not going to happen, and I see this as a minor source of unnecessary stress & not having good time on the wiki. It's not disrespectful as she believes what she says nor an insult.Eh, maybe? I'm more willing to be lenient on that since she elaborated it into an actual point. i.e. Shut up (because you're constantly rude to people).
I think that a moderate warning should be issued. It is not acceptable language, especially to a staff member.Eh, maybe? I'm more willing to be lenient on that since she elaborated it into an actual point. i.e. Shut up (because you're constantly rude to people).
A month-long ban seems fine, but we may be too lenient.Fine with a short ban for that. A week to a month, I'd say.
Why is racism (N-word) banned for 3-6 months, and bad attitude towards transgender people (DarthSpiderr, no insults) is one year? Initially, he was generally banned forever, until others intervened.First one yeah, seems like obvious filter bypassing to say the n-word.
3-6 month ban imo.
Generally speaking, we don't have specific guidelines on how long punishments are for certain violations. It's essentially just the collective whim of whichever staff members respond to the situation when it happens, so there's not much utility in comparing and contrasting different situations like that.Why is racism (N-word) banned for 3-6 months, and bad attitude towards transgender people (DarthSpiderr, no insults) is one year? Initially, he was generally banned forever, until others intervened.
This is very idiotic and unreliable. Your system is ****** up.Generally speaking, we don't have specific guidelines on how long punishments are for certain violations. It's essentially just the collective whim of whichever staff members respond to the situation when it happens, so there's not much utility in comparing and contrasting different situations like that.
Given that the first thing I saw when looking at DarthSpiderr's profile was a post from you saying "Someday you'll return, old friend" you are clearly just salty that your transphobe friend got banned for being a transphobe.This is very idiotic and unreliable. Your system is ****** up.
Said staff member has also repeatedly taken on a condescending attitude toward anyone who remotely disagrees with him and then acting like its their fault for being offended, in a manner that quite frankly is unbecoming of a thread mod. Hell, he essentially said he'd delete any further comments calling him out on this.I think that a moderate warning should be issued. It is not acceptable language, especially to a staff member.
I should note he also made a sockpuppet during that ban period yet Darth himself is not permanently banned.Given that the first thing I saw when looking at DarthSpiderr's profile was a post from you saying "Someday you'll return, old friend" you are clearly just salty that your transphobe friend got banned for being a transphobe.
My advice is to stop being friends with transphobes instead of raging about inconsistent ban lengths. That said, stop cluttering up this thread.
That wasn't Ant. The year duration was suggested by Krukov and agreed to by Damage and Abstractions. But we're getting a bit off-topic.but Ant chose to ban him for a year. For some reason.
We don't adhere to strict solid guidelines (since each instance has its entire context); instead, we rely on the outcome of staff member consensus for each punishment.Generally speaking, we don't have specific guidelines on how long punishments are for certain violations. It's essentially just the collective whim of whichever staff members respond to the situation when it happens, so there's not much utility in comparing and contrasting different situations like that.
I don't mind his ban. It's just stupid when different people are banned for the same offenses in different ways. I would have no questions if everyone got 6 months, or 12 months, that would be fair.Given that the first thing I saw when looking at DarthSpiderr's profile was a post from you saying "Someday you'll return, old friend" you are clearly just salty that your transphobe friend got banned for being a transphobe.
My advice is to stop being friends with transphobes instead of raging about inconsistent ban lengths. That said, stop cluttering up this thread.
Having a fixed set punishment duration might give the illusion of being fair, but even in the criminal justice system punishments for crimes are a range, with usual minimums and maximums, because the situation and the nuance around it, history of behavior, etc, all play a role in how people are punished. Deciding a fixed duration for an entire category of violations under the guise of fairness isn't particularly helpful, and I'd argue just based on comparing Spiderr's comment to the one mentioned above, a longer duration was justified for Spiderr.I don't mind his ban. It's just stupid when different people are banned for the same offenses in different ways. I would have no questions if everyone got 6 months, or 12 months, that would be fair.
From what I can see, 6mo-1yr is typical for people attempting to bypass the filter to use slurs.Let's get back to the topic.
What ban length should we give Zexer? I'm personally not sure since I've only seen one instance of n-word adjacent bans prior to this.
I do not quite understand. Zexer seems to only have made a statement about homosexual dark-skinned people kissing, not used the n-word. Please explain.
Also, we do not have set punishments due to that we would lose all case-by-case flexibility, and I do not remember what DarthSpiderr did exactly, but it is of course possible that I was too lenient.
There's two links in the comment. I understand your confusion, I missed the second link the first time as well. Each word is a different link.Zexer seems to only have made a statement about homosexual dark-skinned people kissing, not used the n-word. Please explain.
I believe it is well known that you are philosophically inclined to view verbal trespasses a lot more leniently than others due to a strong affinity for freedom of speech, but there's nothing wrong with seeing things differently as we ultimately decide based on consensus.Also, we do not have set punishments due to that we would lose all case-by-case flexibility, and I do not remember what DarthSpiderr did exactly, but it is of course possible that I was too lenient.
He said the name of the country in Africa which is the hard r without the extra G as a way to simulate the popular slur.I do not quite understand. Zexer seems to only have made a statement about homosexual dark-skinned people kissing, not used the n-word. Please explain.
Also, we do not have set punishments due to that we would lose all case-by-case flexibility, and I do not remember what DarthSpiderr did exactly, but it is of course possible that I was too lenient.
Oh. Yes, that seems worthy of being banned for at least 6 months, yes.https://vsbattles.com/threads/strongest-one-punch-man-discussion-thread.107591/page-795#post-5901294
You may have clicked on the second link, not the first one. The original report mentioned two.
Thank you for the information.There's two links in the comment. I understand your confusion, I missed the second link the first time as well. Each word is a different link.
It isn't exactly a secret that I am a libertarian socialist, yes, so I am usually uneasy with permanently banning members based on a single transgression in the speech area, unless it is very extreme.I believe it is well known that you are philosophically inclined to view verbal trespasses a lot more leniently than others due to a strong affinity for freedom of speech, but there's nothing wrong with seeing things differently as we ultimately decide based on consensus.
What specific slur word used is not relevant compared to other slur words; the words themselves are all equally taboo/controversial/offensive. But what matters more than any of the words is less about the individual words and more about the context in which they are used. If someone randomly said the R word in an adjective format didn't know it was a slur word; and more so called someone's argument that instead of a person. We typically just edit/remove the word and give the user a strict warning.Why is racism (N-word) banned for 3-6 months, and bad attitude towards transgender people (DarthSpiderr, no insults) is one year? Initially, he was generally banned forever, until others intervened.