He asked for it to be applied. I also would have rathered more discourse, but if the dude wants it quick, I won't be complained to for not doing it quick.
I also think that a 1 month ban was overly draconian. I do not think that Omnificence behaved badly enough to warrant it, and he has evidently been dealing with a lot of stress and trauma, and apologised multiple times.
I'll reiterate Bambu's point that Omnificence expressed that he was fine with a ban of a few weeks to a month, that he wanted to take a break from here, and that he would rather Bambu got it 'done with' for his own sake.I also think that a 1 month ban was overly draconian. I do not think that Omnificence behaved badly enough to warrant it, and he has evidently been dealing with a lot of stress and trauma, and apologised multiple times.
I don't think it is a fair assessment to denote that this was a draconian decision. I think it is fine to continue discussing whether the punishment should have been lighter (and if the agreement is as such, then to lower the punishment accordingly), but this was not an unreasonable course of action for Bambu to take under these circumstances.
Just something to note, but when my messages are deleted they usually notify that it was and the resaon behind it, something like this basically.
If you mean these comments, then yes, somebody deleted them:
For that purpose, yes. That thread isn't really the place for miscellaneous questions.
The Grabbing Dragon guy was just following the instruction of a staff member, and I was barely involved in the discussion until others started talking about it, and it isn't derailing if it's related to the discussion at hand.
Firestorm only asked them to link the thread, not for you people to derail the thread with irrelevant content from another verse. And you're wrong; our discussion rules goes against derailing discussions that does not pertain to the main topic.
All I said was "Exactly" and the digital guy started talking about before me and I just responded. So why am I getting reported and not him too? And it did pertain to the main topic as it's another example of a 2-A rating from a simiilarly worded reasoning.
This shouldn't be for me to deal with. But for clarity, I'm not only referring to you but everyone who was derailing the thread, including @Digital_Franz. Though, you are the OP of the CRT so I'm sure you should get a pass.
What about everyone else who kept derailing the discussion even though I kept reeling the conversation in? How come the people who are doing what they are supposed to are the ones getting reported? I was insulted in the thread, I reeled the topic in when others started talking about AP ratings, I'm obviously not malicious as I've been trying to be kind throughout the whole discussion, but when a staff member asks for something and someone else responds, I get in trouble? Not to be rude but this is totally unreasonable.
You're the OP of the thread so you shouldn't get punished. Grabbing_dragon didn't derail so the report shouldn't cover them either, unless there are deleted comments. But I do see other users derailing the thread, but then again, it'll be other admins and thread mods to deal with once evaluating the situation upon that discussion. Especially since I'm a content mod, I can't see any deleted comments there.
And that's exactly what the grabbing dragon guy did, he absolutely didn't even discuss beyond that. He literally ONLY did as he was told but he got reported as well. It isn't my place to tell you how to do your job and I really hope my wording doesn't come off that way but as I've outlined, I've done nothing wrong and have been completely cordial, and you've said I was excused and if the other guy didn't do anything wrong either. Why wouldn't he get punished for falsely reporting us?
I just wanted to mention the fact that the example does not meet the criteria of the discussion since I was also participating but he wanted to prove me wrong without even having any knowledge of the verse.
"without even having any knowledge of the verse." I said before, I do have some, I'm just not an expert. And if you can make the claim that the example doesn't meet the criteria, why didn't the involved staff member mention that? And couldn't I therefore make the claim that it does fit the criteria?
Not what you told me in the discussion thread a while ago.
I don't want to argue here for long but Firestorm isn't going to take the time to read this long thread. He tagged Elizhaa so what would follow in the thread was not going to be a simple no from Elizhaa but a long discussion. So I wanted to cut it short.
"I'm not very knowledgeable on Tensura so if you could explain, that would be helpful." Direct Quote, I never said i didn't have any knowledge, I just said I didn't have a lot.
Ok(If you mean these comments, then yes, somebody deleted them:
@Ultima_Reality has deleted several comments in the thread to prevent clutter, it seems.
On this matter: your use of that thread was very much negative, and we have specifically banned people from that thread (and its siblings) in the past for using it like so. Such is the condition under which the thread is allowed to exist, that intentional troublemaking results in excommunication. I also wouldn't have read Deagon's post as you do: "Compromise and threadban Fuji", I read the two as additive. I don't think Ant was wrong to read it as such.
I don't recall getting warned tho.
But.. But... I was reciting what deagon said within the thread himself in the last "instance".
From what I remember the only comment that got delete was me telling him to calm down, which isn't indicative of aggression.
This is not the same as a quote. This is painting a paraphrasing in a demeaning light, because you disagree with what was said.
I can see all of the deleted comments on that thread. So can the other staff.
There was a broad warning to cease all derailment. Others largely ceased following that (or, at least, haven't picked up the habit again- let us hope they continue to not do it).
That's for derailing tho, everything I said had substance behind it, nonetheless I agree I was being passive aggressive.
With all due respect, your reading of Deagon's post seems a bit at odds with the definition of the word compromise; It's meant to be something where people can meet in the middle, but according to you Deagon actually intended a harsher punishment than normal, which doesn't sound like a compromise based on my understanding of the term. Still, I'll let Deagon speak for himself on the matter, if he wishes.
The "aggression" in question here was Deagon asking them to knock it off, a request which was obviously ignored.
Yeah.
In fact, if Fuji had not used this word and lit the fuse, everything would have proceeded calmly. Because everything was normal until then
I am truly baffled at how me saying the word "bullshit" is the cause of you insisting that Deagon being harassed and insulted for his takes on Fate scaling is a good thing. Really confused on what the correlation between those two events is, as well as concerned at how the presence of someone using a curse word is apparently enough to cause you to begin an incoherent tirade against an unrelated third party.
Wasn't this stuff directed at Deagon though? Like I agree that was uncalled for and would prefer such things to be avoided (as Bambu's already pointed out) but I don't see how this affected your tirade about him
The way you treat me, I will treat you the same way. You told me that, and I said that you. That's all
I am personally very uncertain if Fujiwara can be trusted to properly control her behaviour, and not use that quite controversial thread as a community-destabilising shit-stirring weapon whenever she feels like it, but if you and other staff members are willing to continuously monitor the discussion there, and issue permanent thread bans and delete posts there for members who break our rules, and also report them here in more extreme cases, I suppose that seems reasonable.
