- 13,138
- 20,847
I thought it was 4, my bad. Still, with 3 warnings already (2 of which being about her behavior), I feel like greater action should be taken
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.
How many warnings would be required for a ban?Fuji’s gotten like 4 warnings already if we’re going this route…
For saying somebody is a trash human?
I can't ban you, unfortunate though that may be, but I can make sure nobody on this site feels like associating with you ever again. That's good enough for me.
There’s no real set number, but typically, receiving multiple warnings regarding the same kind of thing and still doing it would be an indicator of the person having yet to shape up. Thus, a ban would be in order.How many warnings would be required for a ban?
The "warning" I was referring to in the lower part of my previous comment is to stay away from each other and don't interact or you will get a warning, not you are about to get a warning on the list.Why do I get a Warning? Isn't that like a Strike?
At the same time, 3 prior warnings is a lot, so I'm not inherently opposed to a short ban for Fuji, either.
I get this, but the only reason I'd prefer another warning over a ban is because this instance seems like a collective of past back and forth with Dei from what previous comments mentioned (obviously there is only so much one person can take before an outburst or rude comment comes out). So preferably I'd lean towards another warning but a short ban is fine enough it that's what majority think is ok.I feel the severity of that combined with her prior warnings regarding her behavior warrants a ban. Not too sure on the timeframe though
If it does end up being a short ban, a month is as high as I would go, yes.Assuming it comes to that, maybe one month? I think that's fair.
Although, personally, I'm still in favor of a warning just like Griffin.
At some point, though, this isn’t just a singular outburst. Going as far as to say you’re gonna make sure no one wants to associate with someone again is something that I think goes beyond a simple outburst.I get this, but the only reason I'd prefer another warning over a ban is because this instance seems like a collective of past back and forth with Dei from what previous comments mentioned (obviously there is only so much one person can take before an outburst or rude comment comes out). So preferably I'd lean towards another warning but a short ban is fine enough it that's what majority think is ok.
I know that which is why I'm not against a short ban if majority agree, I wasn't trying to look at it as a simple one time comment, just trying to explain my thoughts on the build up to the comment.At some point, though, this isn’t just a singular outburst. Going as far as to say you’re gonna make sure no one wants to associate with someone again is something that I think goes beyond a simple outburst.
I’m also not a fan of giving people what I consider to be far too many chances.
Want Dei in your blocklist?I've got nothing to defend. Deidalius is openly a lolicon. I pointed out how disgusting that is in the hopes that, at minimum, it would prevent people from interacting with someone like that - I certainly wouldn't want to be talking to a lolicon, in any case. That's what that comment meant at its core.
If that is more of an issue than Dei being a lolicon (and to be clear, having seen the context, I do not believe it was said in a joking manner), then I don't know what to say.
Okay then.I've got nothing to defend. Deidalius is openly a lolicon. I pointed out how disgusting that is in the hopes that, at minimum, it would prevent people from interacting with someone like that - I certainly wouldn't want to be talking to a lolicon, in any case. That's what that comment meant at its core.
If that is more of an issue than Dei being a lolicon (and to be clear, having seen the context, I do not believe it was said in a joking manner), then I don't know what to say.
I didn't even know this site had blocklists, but sure.Want Dei in your blocklist?
I’m not an admin so I’m gonna ask someone else.I didn't even know this site had blocklists, but sure.
Internet is acting up and mobile be acting like I can't do certain things. Not sure I'll be able to.
This is more a matter of our site rules not really covering this sort of thing, as outlined by other staff. Obviously, there’s some… strong opinions on this (including from me), but that’s kinda how it is atmI've got nothing to defend. Deidalius is openly a lolicon. I pointed out how disgusting that is in the hopes that, at minimum, it would prevent people from interacting with someone like that - I certainly wouldn't want to be talking to a lolicon, in any case. That's what that comment meant at its core.
If that is more of an issue than Dei being a lolicon (and to be clear, having seen the context, I do not believe it was said in a joking manner), then I don't know what to say.
I have a minor issue with this but overall I can agree with this.I do not think we ought to warn Fujiwara. I think her comment is over-threatening but given the context of the comment I do not think it is an unreasonable comment to make- from her position, this is not only a justifiable, but a moral action. It is not without some evidence, even if we the site do not find that evidence conclusive enough.I do believe that Fujiwara should not engage in those sorts of comments again, but to warn or potentially ban someone for doing what can be reasonably construed as protecting the community from what was in those comments doesn't sit right for me.
Fujiwara is not a vigilante and it is not up to her to decide when to gather an angry mob against a user. I think that can be said without a warning.
Well this changes things, huh?
Oh uhYou were reported here.
With this extra context, I would absolutely advocate for this person being banned.But asking around, screenshots supporting this were far more scarce than testimony. Still, I'll present them here for evaluation:
Yeah, at this point. We do not need people like that around on this forum. Ban away I'd say at that point.Making a separate post as well, since some people have already read my earlier message.
I neglected to include another screenshot relevant to the Shmooply transphobia thing;
Said "please stop jacking it to fake women" in reference to KingTempest's defense of Fuji in the recent report
Regular members aren't allowed to post in this Rule Violation Reports thread, unless they are making a report here, have direct involvement in a report, or have relevant information about a report that has not been brought up yet, in order to not derail or delay the processing of the reports, or worse instigate further rule violations. Repeated violations will be followed with a strict warning, followed by a threadban for one week to a site ban for some duration, depending on the severity of their conduct.