Rule Violation Reports (New forum)

[KLOL506]

That is not what I meant. I was speaking in general terms since we intend to make a general rule text, not just for a single case.

You should've clarified that from the get-go then, we're already approaching a razor-thin wire with regards to this entire topic. One wrong move could jeopardize everything here.

 

[Deagonx]

Sure what people consider "blatant" examples of "extreme" behavior is subjective, but creating a hyperspecific set of guidelines on what is too far when it comes to off-site behavior is only going to lead to semantic debates, with numerous comments saying something to the tune of "Oh but TECHNICALLY according to the rules, this isn't a genuine overreach so you can't punish me for this"

I think the alternative is also a challenge. If we base it on moral trespass we open ourselves up to a great deal of debate about what exactly we're okay with people doing off-site. For instance, and this is probably one of the more common ones: Racial slurs or homophobic slurs. I opened up a Discord server based on this community and searched instances of the N word with the hard R and found at least a dozen members including a staff member using it. Is this too far or are we okay with racism?

This is why I think this sort of thing is a lot more of a minefield than some are giving it credit for, because any level of restraint is going to be misconstrued as defending the behavior, but if we are going down this path we need to decide pretty quickly and definitively whether we are okay with off-site bigotry or if we're saying the line -- conveniently for many of our members -- exists somewhere ambiguously between "lolicon" and "unironic racist."

 

[Antvasima]

Anyway, thank you very much for helping out here, Catzlaflame

Also, I would greatly appreciate if people do not recurrently suddenly completely misinterpret what I mean when I make what I think are quite easily understood statements in the future.

 

[Antvasima]

You should've clarified that from the get-go then, we're already approaching a razor-thin wire with regards to this entire topic. One wrong move could jeopardize everything here.

I think that I did express myself very clearly. I was explicitly talking about the creation of a new rule that would be applicable to cases in general. Suddenly making accusations against me that clearly diverge from that context is not appreciated.

 

[KLOL506]

I think that I did express myself very clearly. I was explicitly talking about the creation of a new rule that would be applicable to cases in general. Suddenly making accusations against me that clearly diverge from that context is not appreciated.

Your comment made it seem like we were not going to do anything about Chase at all. If that is not the case, then my apologies.

Also, I believe we should leave this up to Crab to sort out first.

 

[Antvasima]

Or if we're saying the line -- conveniently for many of our members -- exists somewhere ambiguously between "lolicon" and "unironic racist."

Most people in this world are likely a little bit racist or xenophobic in the viewpoint that people from different cultures or countries are not as good as people from their particular area, so we cannot be oversensitive in that regard, but extreme racism is definitely a no-no in my view.

 

[Antvasima]

Your comment made it seem like we were not going to do anything about Chase at all. If that is not the case, then my apologies.

Also, I believe we should leave this up to Crab to sort out first.

Okay. Your apology is accepted then.

I just don't want us to too hastily create new standards that are abused to extremes, and spam our RVR thread with exaggerated reports that we cannot even properly verify, so we have to create good safeguards to prevent such abuse, as my experience mirrors Bambu in that our community recurrently tends to use slippery slopes to gradually get more extreme.

 

[KLOL506]

That is understandable, but at the same time, we need to accept that eventually we do have to take measures with these sorts of things or they will be made for us by those with more power than us. There is absolutely no version of this where we come out on top by doing absolutely nothing.

 

[Antvasima]

I am not saying doing nothing. I am saying write our new rules very carefully, so we do not shoot ourselves in the feet for the future.

 

[Antvasima]

Anyway, it seems like Crabwhale is investigating here, so we might have to wait a bit with banning Chase while we focus on writing a new rule text with proper safeguards included. We need to try to carefully act, not blindly react in a state of emotion.

 

[Crabwhale]

Honestly with what I'm finding out we may not even need to change any rules. We could simply ban Chase on other, perfectly well-implemented premises. His general behavior would just be a compounding factor in such an action.

But I get ahead of myself. Please, a bit of time.

 

[KLOL506]

I am not saying doing nothing. I am saying write our new rules very carefully, so we do not shoot ourselves in the feet for the future.

Glad we could resolve this.

 

[Antvasima]

Honestly with what I'm finding out we may not even need to change any rules. We could simply ban Chase on other, perfectly well-implemented premises. His general behavior would just be a compounding factor in such an action.

But I get ahead of myself. Please, a bit of time.

Well, an expanded rule text to cover these types of situations in the future seems useful anyway.

Here is what Catzlaflame wrote as an initial draft text:

"Off-site behavior is usually irrelevant except in cases of ~ (Already on page)

• Extremely inappropriate behavior, fundamentally beyond trolling/joking, that demonstrates, beyond a reasonable doubt, that the user in question is not someone that the members of the wiki would feel comfortable being around; these reports are to be assessed on a case-by-case basis, and any specific targeting for reasons unrelated to their behavior, will not be tolerateed by any means."

Glad we could resolve this.

No problem.

 

[Deagonx]

Most people in this world are likely a little bit racist or xenophobic in the viewpoint that people from different cultures or countries are not as good as people from their particular area, so we cannot be oversensitive in that regard, but extreme racism is definitely a no-no in my view.

Right, but the point I'm making is that words like "oversensitive" or "extreme" are very subjective. There are many people in the world who would say any instance of a racial slur is "extreme" racism. I'm not phrasing it that way because I disagree, but because I genuinely cannot imagine a worse venue for discussing the finer points of critical race theory than a powerscaling website, and I do not want to discuss it here. I am encouraging you and the other staff to recognize the issue that it creates for us to concern ourselves with off-site behavior beyond that which is immediately relevant to forum matters.

This started with a user bringing up Chase's off-site conduct for the sole purpose of starting drama, and responding to the RVR report by erroneously accusing staff of defending that conduct and likening them to a real-world human sex trafficker, and he's now leveraging the visceral disgust felt towards Chase's behavior to justify his actions when -- by his own admission -- this instigation was a joke to him, not a sincere expression of moral offense.

If we are opening up the RVR to moral offenses conducted outside of this forum, it's going to be a serious challenge. Here on the website any bigoted slur would result in a ban, we wouldn't concern ourselves with what ethnicity/orientation that person was or debate the ethics of using it. We also wouldn't have much uncertainty about what was said or by who, because we have full access to the forum's logs.

Off site, suddenly this is more challenging. We are putting ourselves in the position of assessing what is so bad that it cannot be tolerated even off the forum, and those discussions are a lot more complicated. When bringing up racism, I've had many say to me "Well racism isn't as bad as pedophilia" which, you know, no ******* shit it isn't, but that is a different question that "is off-site racism bad enough to warrant a ban?" What kind of racism is bad enough? Or rape jokes? I saw someone posts in a channel the other day saying "mods rape this man." Is that severe enough to warrant a ban? HR is another matter. Are they now in the position of deciding whether a staff member's off-site language or behavior is bad enough to warrant banning them?

I mean, we could take the easy way out, and say that pedophilia related matters are a special exception and decide not to open it up to any other manner of poor conduct, but that doesn't appear what people want to go for here, and I think a lot of people are not giving due consideration to the complexities involved because it's easy to retreat to something platitudinous and reference the visceral nature of Chase's offenses.

 

[Antvasima]

Sigh. Since when have I advocated for accepting sincerely stated racial slurs intended as supremacism? That is a form of extreme racism.

I am more thinking about cultural insensitivity and believing that one's own country is automatically culturally better than others, and similar.

But you do make a good point about that it is extremely hard to define an exact line in the sand here. I suppose that we likely have to allow a bit of case by case evaluation flexibility in a manner similar to Catzlaflame's draft.

 

[Deagonx]

Sigh. Since when have I advocated for accepting sincerely stated racial slurs? That is a form of extreme racism.

I am more thinking about cultural insensitivity and believing that one's own country is automatically culturally better than others, and similar.

I'm not saying you are, I am saying this is messy business. If we determine that using slurs off-site is banworthy then that is going to be a lot of bans. If we say it's only ban-worthy when it's "sincerely stated" then we get to have a weekly debate on whether the latest person who said the N word with a hard R on some discord server was "just joking" or not. I'm not looking forward to it, frankly.

Or -- and heaven forbid -- we get put in the lovely position of auditing whether someone is the correct ethnicity or orientation to be using certain slurs to decide whether we ban them from a powerscaling forum.

 

[Crabwhale]

Again, the entire point of the extra investigation going on right now is to avoid changes to wiki legislature we may not want to make.

Like when Al Capone got caught for tax evasion, this'll be done through an official channel and official rules we already have. Now please, stop with the panic argumentation.

 

[Deagonx]

Again, the entire point of the extra investigation going on right now is to avoid changes to wiki legislature we may not want to make.

Like when Al Capone got caught for tax evasion, this'll be done through an official channel and official rules we already have. Now please, stop with the panic argumentation.

I don't think finding a forum-relevant reason to ban Chase really circumvents the whole issue at hand.

 

[Antvasima]

I'm not saying you are, I am saying this is messy business. If we determine that using slurs off-site is banworthy then that is going to be a lot of bans. If we say it's only ban-worthy when it's "sincerely stated" then we get to have a weekly debate on whether the latest person who said the N word with a hard R on some discord server was "just joking" or not. I'm not looking forward to it, frankly.

Yes, that is a serious problem.

How about something similar to this modified draft text?

"Extremely fundamentally inappropriate behavior, that is not merely about "joking" or taken very out of context, that is clearly "beyond the point of no return" on a moral level, and demonstrates, beyond a reasonable doubt, that the member in question is not remotely someone that the other members of this community would feel comfortable to continue being around. As stated above, these reports should be reserved for very extreme cases, not spammed or used for revenge or destabilisation purposes, and they should be assessed on a case-by-case basis. Any specific targeting for reasons unrelated to their behavior, will not be tolerated by any means."

 

[GarrixianXD]

I feel the need to point out, I find it kind of odd that we are all getting taken on this ride of having it out about Chase's presence here -- a user who has like 10 forum posts within the last 6 months -- because Marshadow chose to instigate drama.

Marshadow isn’t even relevant here anymore since we’re rather discussing about morals and ethics at this point.

 

[Deagonx]

How about something similar to this modified draft text?

"Extremely fundamentally inappropriate behavior, that is not merely about "joking" or taken very out of context, that is clearly "beyond the point of no return" on a moral level, and demonstrates, beyond a reasonable doubt, that the member in question is not remotely someone that the other members of this community would feel comfortable to continue being around. As stated above, these reports should be reserved for very extreme cases, not spammed or used for revenge or destabilisation purposes, and they should be assessed on a case-by-case basis. Any specific targeting for reasons unrelated to their behavior, will not be tolerated by any means."

It's not so much that I think that your attempt at wording this isn't sufficiently nuanced. I believe the problem is that there's no special phrasing that we can use that is going to circumvent routine attempts at doing precisely what the wording is designed to avoid.

This discussion about Chase has been exhausting. It is gross and horrible and I truly wish I never had to discuss it ever again, and I especially do not enjoy being subjected to insinuations that I am in any way okay with what Chase has said because of my stance on whether or not it's pertinent enough to the forum to ban.

I say that in order to illustrate that we are likely going to have this sort of exhausting and horrible discussions much more frequently if this change occurs. Where someone will say "well he was only using that slur as a joke" and then someone will say "Oh so you're okay with slurs? You're defending a racist who uses the n word?" and we have to do this song and dance routine of being excruciatingly careful with our wording to avoid having our words being willfully taken out of context to insinuate that our line in the sand for forum-bans is also our line in the sand for moral acceptability.

I don't want to be slandered by people who are willfully refusing to understand the difference between "what matters to us as forum mods" and "what is morally acceptable."

 

[Crabwhale]

I don't think finding a forum-relevant reason to ban Chase really circumvents the whole issue at hand.

It does because the entire issue we have is a slippery slope born out of our possible conviction of him via off-site behavior, and what this'll mean for all future cases.

I am not for such a rule change. In fact I am absolutely against such a rule change and was only advocating earlier for a ban because between two very bad options, that one was the least worse in my opinion. If we can simply knock this case off with an already implemented rule, we avoid any moral dilemmas about what will have to change regarding off-site shit.

 

[Deagonx]

Marshadow isn’t even relevant here anymore since we’re rather discussing about morals and ethics at this point.

This is true, I believe a multi-month ban like DarkGrath said is best, and we should probably carry that out now instead of letting it get swept under the rug by the ongoing discussion.

 

[GarrixianXD]

Agree: 11 (CloverDragon03, KLOL506, UchihaSlayer96, Lonkitt, LordTracer, Theglassman12, Armorchompy, Crabwhale, DarkGrath, Antvasima, Maverick)
Disagree: 6 (Deagonx, GarrixianXD, Agnaa, Bambu, DarkDragonMedeus, Dereck03)

Put me in the neutral section. I’ve stated that I won’t contest if the majority of the staff agrees with his ban.

 

[BasedNecoScaler69]

I feel the need to point out, I find it kind of odd that we are all getting taken on this ride of having it out about Chase's presence here -- a user who has like 10 forum posts within the last 6 months -- because Marshadow chose to instigate drama.

I did not instigate anything, I posted a shitpost on his wall. If making fun of a user is instigating then you'd be sent to the dpeths for a lot of counts. I actually treated him with more respectt than he deserves, quite frankly.

 

[Antvasima]

@DarkGrath @Agnaa @DontTalkDT @AKM sama

How do you think that we should handle this?

 

[Crabwhale]

To summarize my findings, Chase has repeatedly mistranslated scans pertaining to the Nasuverse. Here is the doc, not compiled by me, full credits to those who did it.

There are multiple cases of scan manipulation going on here, such as outright removal of certain lines. In order to confirm the authenticity of these claims I contacted one our oldest and most reliable translators, TISSG7Redgrave (whom I might mention also literally lives in Japan). Here's essentially Red's summary:

I have also contacted other Japanese translator nerds and/or literal Japanese people regarding this, but their responses are pending. I'll update later with them if it's absolutely necessary.

I think however than what this demonstrates is that Chase not only is a creepy bastard off-site but also genuinely unhelpful and downright damaging on-site. I believe this, ladies and gentlemen, can serve perfectly as our smoking gun. Ban this man, forget about him, and let's all move on with our day.

 

[CloverDragon03]

Awesome job with this. I’m obviously in strong agreement with the permaban due to the repeatedly mentioned off-site behavior compounded by this blatant scan manipulation

 

[Dereck03]

To summarize my findings, Chase has repeatedly mistranslated scans pertaining to the Nasuverse. Here is the doc, not compiled by me, full credits to those who did it.

There are multiple cases of scan manipulation going on here, such as outright removal of certain lines. In order to confirm the authenticity of these claims I contacted one our oldest and most reliable translators, TISSG7Redgrave (whom I might mention also literally lives in Japan). Here's essentially Red's summary:

I have also contacted other Japanese translator nerds and/or literal Japanese people regarding this, but their responses are pending. I'll update later with them if it's absolutely necessary.

I think however than what this demonstrates is that Chase not only is a creepy bastard off-site but also genuinely unhelpful and downright damaging on-site. I believe this, ladies and gentlemen, can serve perfectly as our smoking gun. Ban this man, forget about him, and let's all move on with our day.

2 months ago dread questioned Chase about the translations and this was his answer, I don't know if this added anything.

 

[Crabwhale]

All I'm hearing is excuses. If he was being rushed, the translations would be poor. They wouldn't have shit tacked onto them that wasn't there before.

 

[Lonkitt]

It’s pretty clear from the evidence that Chase manipulated the translations in his favour. These aren’t common mistakes like how some words can mean two different things or names being slightly changed via translation. It’s changing the context of what was written

 

[KLOL506]

To summarize my findings, Chase has repeatedly mistranslated scans pertaining to the Nasuverse. Here is the doc, not compiled by me, full credits to those who did it.

There are multiple cases of scan manipulation going on here, such as outright removal of certain lines. In order to confirm the authenticity of these claims I contacted one our oldest and most reliable translators, TISSG7Redgrave (whom I might mention also literally lives in Japan). Here's essentially Red's summary:

I have also contacted other Japanese translator nerds and/or literal Japanese people regarding this, but their responses are pending. I'll update later with them if it's absolutely necessary.

I think however than what this demonstrates is that Chase not only is a creepy bastard off-site but also genuinely unhelpful and downright damaging on-site. I believe this, ladies and gentlemen, can serve perfectly as our smoking gun. Ban this man, forget about him, and let's all move on with our day.

I also want to add something to this.

When I sent the documents to Red (Surprisingly at the same time as Crab even), he had just as much to say about it and said more or less the same things he might've said to Crab, especially with regards to the Root translations made by Chase being very inaccurate, as well as other aspects regarding the higher-dimensional stuff that Chase made being inaccurate, Red said it blatantly stated "higher-dimensional" kanji, something Chase chose to ignore. Red was of course, not happy in the slightest. He was in fact, livid.

@TISSG7Redgrave can elaborate it far better than I can, he's known Chase far longer due to their involvement in Shinza.

 

[Deagonx]

To summarize my findings, Chase has repeatedly mistranslated scans pertaining to the Nasuverse. Here is the doc, not compiled by me, full credits to those who did it.

To preface this, I do not speak Japanese, but I am a professional translator. It's really hard for me to look at this doc and think that this is the smoking gun it's being made out to be. The reason being, most of the time translations do not require the immense level of specificity required on our website, and a lot of the nitpicking taking place in the judgments section seem sort of pointless and, IMO, hurt the case being made as a whole. The only reason we'd ban someone for bad translations is if we were of the impression that they were willfully altering the content in a manner that was intended to affect scaling, and most of these statements have no impact on scaling, and the mistakes he made in translating them were largely academic.

Having read the entire document and all the mistakes, I honestly come away with the impression that Chase actually has a decent grasp on the language, but not one that is solid enough to rely upon for translation where the specifics are everything, and the only instance where one might get the sense that he is altering things for scaling is how he treats the word "dimension" which is not something I'm eager to hand out a permanent ban for given that he renders it correctly in multiple instances.

If this were anybody but Chase we were talking about I'd question why this is being brought up in the first place, with the worst possible option being "Do not offer your own translations on the site anymore" but nothing that would constitute the permanent ban that people are surely looking for in this situation. I don't believe this allows us to circumvent the discussion of whether or not Chase should be permanently banned for what he has said off-site.

 

[Crabwhale]

I think this doc along with his general behavior proves he provides no real benefit to our website. I think we are within our right still to do what we must with him. And quite frankly I am tired of seeing this case be dragged as long as it has.

If straight up inserting false lines and his attempts to deflect that won't convince you along with everything else, then I simply no longer care nor wish to continue debating this with you. You are outvoted.

 

[KLOL506]

To preface this, I do not speak Japanese, but I am a professional translator. It's really hard for me to look at this doc and think that this is the smoking gun it's being made out to be. The reason being, most of the time translations do not require the immense level of specificity required on our website, and a lot of the nitpicking taking place in the judgments section seem sort of pointless and, IMO, hurt the case being made as a whole. The only reason we'd ban someone for bad translations is if we were of the impression that they were willfully altering the content in a manner that was intended to affect scaling, and most of these statements have no impact on scaling, and the mistakes he made in translating them were largely academic.

Having read the entire document and all the mistakes, I honestly come away with the impression that Chase actually has a decent grasp on the language, but not one that is solid enough to rely upon for translation where the specifics are everything, and the only instance where one might get the sense that he is altering things for scaling is how he treats the word "dimension" which is not something I'm eager to hand out a permanent ban for given that he renders it correctly in multiple instances.

If this were anybody but Chase we were talking about I'd question why this is being brought up in the first place, with the worst possible option being "Do not offer your own translations on the site anymore" but nothing that would constitute the permanent ban that people are surely looking for in this situation. I don't believe this allows us to circumvent the discussion of whether or not Chase should be permanently banned for what he has said off-site.

Bro.

You're kidding.

Chase got caught red-handed here by his own admission. And you're just brushing it off saying "Trust me bro, I'm a professional translator, Chase has a good grasp of the language", even another translator on this wiki who has been a veteran for years (Who also lives in Japan BTW) is saying Chase is BS'ing. Are you serious right now?

 

[Lonkitt]

To preface this, I do not speak Japanese, but I am a professional translator. It's really hard for me to look at this doc and think that this is the smoking gun it's being made out to be. The reason being, most of the time translations do not require the immense level of specificity required on our website, and a lot of the nitpicking taking place in the judgments section seem sort of pointless and, IMO, hurt the case being made as a whole. The only reason we'd ban someone for bad translations is if we were of the impression that they were willfully altering the content in a manner that was intended to affect scaling, and most of these statements have no impact on scaling, and the mistakes he made in translating them were largely academic.

No offence, but I trust somebody who literally lives in Japan and knows the language more than somebody who is a professional translator (which I’m not sure where that’s coming from, but whatever) who doesn’t speak Japanese. Being a professional translator in one or two languages doesn’t translate to unrelated ones. Red has much greater awareness of how Chase manipulated the translations

Having read the entire document and all the mistakes, I honestly come away with the impression that Chase actually has a decent grasp on the language, but not one that is solid enough to rely upon for translation where the specifics are everything, and the only instance where one might get the sense that he is altering things for scaling is how he treats the word "dimension" which is not something I'm eager to hand out a permanent ban for given that he renders it correctly in multiple instances.

If this were anybody but Chase we were talking about I'd question why this is being brought up in the first place, with the worst possible option being "Do not offer your own translations on the site anymore" but nothing that would constitute the permanent ban that people are surely looking for in this situation. I don't believe this allows us to circumvent the discussion of whether or not Chase should be permanently banned for what he has said off-site.

This isn’t like, two or three scans. It’s a giant ass grocery list of scans he’s been using and altering quite largely for the pages. Chase even ignored what Red told him about this. We don’t need to do any detective work to determine why Chase did that in the face of somebody who knows MUCH more about the language that is the basis of these translations

This is absolutely a smoking gun

 

[Deagonx]

I will say though, as someone who is regularly in the position of reviewing the translations of others, I can strongly relate to the sense of frustration felt in the "judgments" section about grammar points or words appearing out of nowhere, and I thought it was funny. Sometimes you see a word added and the sheer inexplicable absence of the word in the source material cuts deep, like "Why, man, why?! Why did you add that word if it wasn't there?! Show me where it is!" but in a case like this I'd need to think there was actual malice, and again, in nearly all of these cases it's just not a substantive change or one where you could come away with the impression that Chase was intentionally changing things. The same way that the people that work for me aren't adding words because they're dirty liars, they just aren't very good at the language and feel like things are implied when they aren't.

 

[Lonkitt]

I will say though, as someone who is regularly in the position of reviewing the translations of others, I can strongly relate to the sense of frustration felt in the "judgments" section about grammar points or words appearing out of nowhere, and I thought it was funny. Sometimes you see a word added and the sheer inexplicable absence of the word in the source material cuts deep, like "Why, man, why?! Why did you add that word if it wasn't there?! Show me where it is!" but in a case like this I'd need to think there was actual malice, and again, in nearly all of these cases it's just not a substantive change or one where you could come away with the impression that Chase was intentionally changing things. The same way that the people that work for me aren't adding words because they're dirty liars, they just aren't very good at the language and feel like things are implied when they aren't.

Here’s the huge difference though. When people translate things, such as with sites or through other people, and there’s a minor mistake, they usually catch onto that and try to remedy it in a reliable way. Not changing the meaning, just making sure the translation is clean and properly communicated

So tell me. Why would Chase, while translating a TON of scans, blatantly ignore advice from somebody who ACTUALLY knows Japanese? That’s not a classic whoopsie. It’s deliberately ignoring good advice for the sake of pushing what you want

 

[Deagonx]

This isn’t like, two or three scans. It’s a giant ass grocery list of scans he’s been using and altering quite largely for the pages. Chase even ignored what Red told him about this. We don’t need to do any detective work to determine why Chase did that in the face of somebody who knows MUCH more about the language that is the basis of these translations

This is absolutely a smoking gun

Eh, no. We are eager to fly off the handle at it because we don't like Chase. I'm sorry to rain on the parade, but the vast majority of these mistakes have no implications on scaling. For instance:

Chase's TL: Although, I will soon not be able discern how much time has passed in the future, however the fact that BB has already arrived at the Moon Cell is certainly something that can't be denied regardless.
My TL: Although I don't know how far off in the future it'd be, the point is that BB already reached the Moon Cell. That fact is absolutely unchangeable.
Judgment: What did you think that first clause meant??? It's an INCREDIBLY simple one too, how did you get "soon I won't be able to tell how much time will pass in the future"? What does that even mean? Why would Rin need to say that? You must have been tripped up by that "後かの" SO HARD if you seriously thought that was "how much time will have passed in the future" Like, seriously, take a step back and rework on your understanding of parsing grammar rules. Oh, and "動かせない/unchangeable" isn't exactly "can't be denied" but that's way smaller in comparisoon

Yeah, someone tell me what exactly we think Chase's goal was in altering this? I'm very familiar with this whole sequence and the scaling that Rin's statement is used for. None of the mistakes he made have any impact on how that scan is used.

 

[Crabwhale]

I will say though, as someone who is regularly in the position of reviewing the translations of others, I can strongly relate to the sense of frustration felt in the "judgments" section about grammar points or words appearing out of nowhere, and I thought it was funny. Sometimes you see a word added and the sheer inexplicable absence of the word in the source material cuts deep, like "Why, man, why?! Why did you add that word if it wasn't there?! Show me where it is!" but in a case like this I'd need to think there was actual malice, and again, in nearly all of these cases it's just not a substantive change or one where you could come away with the impression that Chase was intentionally changing things. The same way that the people that work for me aren't adding words because they're dirty liars, they just aren't very good at the language and feel like things are implied when they aren't.

The difference is that the words being added or removed are clearly there to push an agenda. People working under you aren't biased as **** VS scalers.

But that's largely irrelevant to me. I fully realize this is not normally a permaban worthy event. But to avoid any disastrous change in legislation, and due to the combined weight of Chase's actions, yes, I am indeed willing and able to use this.

This is our Al Capone being jailed for his tax evasion, have no doubt about that. But I don't see a problem with it.