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.
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.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.
Still, it wasn't really discussed much, and the end result didn't have it included, so it should be stricken, presuming you use the thread towards its intended purpose, rather than causing trouble again.
I think the next instance of this legitimately happening is good grounds for a threadban, yes. But she's right, we didn't actually conclude that she ought to get one, so we should wait until such a time (if such a time arises) when she does use it unfairly again. It's a small matter, I think, but it's worth being fair on.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.
I’ve been here since the threads beginning and have seen many people antagonize Masque and consistently disregard his words and messages, he has every right to be a bit frustrated with a thread that has been prolonged for quite a bit of time.I will make a report about MasqueTLDF in his Highschool DxD 2-A Cosmology. From what I've seen and my interaction, he has been a bit rude to those disagreeing while trying to mask it with "politeness". While yes the CRT was accepted (there will be another one after this), others have joined in and expressed their disagreement to the OP
1. He started this off calling and accusing a staff bias (at the bottom)
2. Claiming he debunked while also saying he "tried asking for help" in a rude manner
3. Admitted what I said was right while he gives his argument, but to then add an unnecessary comment "nice try though"
4. Said another member was "arguing in bad faith"
5. Proceeds to tell me to "use common sense" which again was a rude and unnecessary comment
Now I should say I had retaliated back a bit since I disliked rude people (saying I should use common sense so I hit him back with "yes cause you lack it") and then when I called him out for accusing people of bias (in number 1) and lying about it, he turns around to act like he never done such a thing
I was also there in the beginning of the thread and yes I went to go back to add what I've said cause he was taunted a few times but lets not ignore the fact he did started it and you were being a bit rude to a staff yourselfI’ve been here since the threads beginning and have seen many people antagonize Masque and consistently disregard his words and messages, he has every right to be a bit frustrated with a thread that has been prolonged for quite a bit of time.
This is even his first time on the forums, and the fact that his first real thread was having snide comments made against him from you and many others is rather disheartening.
If you want to report him then report all of it, not some cherry picked examples.
Planck commented on the thread? I dind't even see that lolAlso why is Planck a "none staff" on the voting list? @MasqueTLDF It count as "vote manipulation" while I am willing to give the benefits of the doughts and say you didn't know he was a admin
I will make a report about MasqueTLDF in his Highschool DxD 2-A Cosmology. From what I've seen and my interaction, he has been a bit rude to those disagreeing while trying to mask it with "politeness". While yes the CRT was accepted (there will be another one after this), others have joined in and expressed their disagreement to the OP
1. He started this off calling and accusing a staff bias (at the bottom)
2. Claiming he debunked while also saying he "tried asking for help" in a rude manner
3. Admitted what I said was right while he gives his argument, but to then add an unnecessary comment "nice try though"
4. Said another member was "arguing in bad faith"
5. Proceeds to tell me to "use common sense" which again was a rude and unnecessary comment
Now I should say I had retaliated back a bit since I disliked rude people (saying I should use common sense so I hit him back with "yes cause you lack it") and then when I called him out for accusing people of bias (in number 1) and lying about it, he turns around to act like he never done such a thing
That literally means you purposely glossed over the mean comment in favor of supporting him just cause you both agree on the thread. You have also been a bit rude as well from what I've seenI’ve been here since the threads beginning and have seen many people antagonize Masque and consistently disregard his words and messages, he has every right to be a bit frustrated with a thread that has been prolonged for quite a bit of time.
This is even his first time on the forums, and the fact that his first real thread was having snide comments made against him from you and many others is rather disheartening.
If you want to report him then report all of it, not some cherry picked examples.
Edit: I also don’t see masque saying anything rule breaking. Everything he’s said has been measured.
Who?Also why is Planck a "none staff" on the voting list? @MasqueTLDF It count as "vote manipulation" while I am willing to give the benefits of the doughts and say you didn't know he was a admin
I was planning on doing it after seeing most of your comments cause again your words were quite rude and your accusations were equally of the sort with lying about it. I already made edits in case you didn't see saying how you was taunted a bit and you reacted accordingly respectful way but to the others that were actually give you a fair debate is a different storyAnd i find it very odd that you wait until after I said I'd report you to report me. I strongly urge staff to check the whole thread. I am confident that I've done nothing wrong.
I wasn't rude in the slightest, I've been being as nice as possible despite being ridiculed, false reported, and insulted. Even now I'm trying to be as respectful as possible. Again, every instance is taken out of context and I STRONGLY urge staff to give this a detailed look.I was planning on doing it after seeing most of your comments cause again your words were quite rude and your accusations were equally of the sort with lying about it. I already made edits in case you didn't see saying how you was taunted a bit and you reacted accordingly respectful way but to the others that were actually give you a fair debate is a different story
You just said it, "I was being as nice as possible" is still the same as what I've said beforehand, being rude while covering it with politeness and no only like 1 person was being rude first to you (derailing and mocking you for no reason). This is why I said you started it all first and yes I implore for staff to look at each comment from everyone in that thread. Im not asking for anything ban worthy, but a warningI wasn't rude in the slightest, I've been being as nice as possible despite being ridiculed, false reported, and insulted. Even now I'm trying to be as respectful as possible. Again, every instance is taken out of context and I STRONGLY urge staff to give this a detailed look.
I don't think he should take the conversation down that path of dialogue, but it isn't obscene or even worthy of much note. Don't fling around accusations like that unprompted, though. Certainly can't help the discussion.1. He started this off calling and accusing a staff bias (at the bottom)
This is such an ingrained part of the lingo that it most certainly doesn't warrant a rule violation. Claiming something is debunked is for the other side to disprove (or dismiss, if the claim is just blatantly wrong). You don't report them for the claim.
I mean. It isn't nice, in tone, but unworthy of even a slap on the wrist. It's the barest of offenses. Nobody is a saint, the debate is sure to wear thin on people's patience at times. Forgive the petty slights like this, because we certainly won't be taking action against someone for saying "nice try though lol".3. Admitted what I said was right while he gives his argument, but to then add an unnecessary comment "nice try though"
If they were, this should be said.4. Said another member was "arguing in bad faith"
See point three. It could be phrased peacefully, but it's such an insanely minor implication that it isn't worthy of even a warning. Most of the report is a collection of minor (very minor) offenses, or straight up non-offenses.5. Proceeds to tell me to "use common sense" which again was a rude and unnecessary comment
I don't mean to bother you or be a burden but is there anyway that I'd be able to limit interactions with those two users, I just don't want to keep dealing with this every other day. It's pretty stressful feeling like you're in trouble all the time... And if you could close the thread, I'd very much appreciate that as well, thank you for your time.I don't know which way I'd vote on the CRT, but insofar as I can tell, nothing worthy of a warning occurred (yet).
Ok thats fairI don't think he should take the conversation down that path of dialogue, but it isn't obscene or even worthy of much note. Don't fling around accusations like that unprompted, though. Certainly can't help the discussion.
I added this because of how he was responding to people and this was also how it was as well considering he replied to the person who was even being mean to begin with, then u respond what that? come on now, most people wouldn't even put that there to begin with hence why it was just unnecessaryThis is such an ingrained part of the lingo that it most certainly doesn't warrant a rule violation. Claiming something is debunked is for the other side to disprove (or dismiss, if the claim is just blatantly wrong). You don't report them for the claim.
This was to mock of what he replied to me, again, his response to others was obvious especially adding that which again was a testament to his rudenessI mean. It isn't nice, in tone, but unworthy of even a slap on the wrist. It's the barest of offenses. Nobody is a saint, the debate is sure to wear thin on people's patience at times. Forgive the petty slights like this, because we certainly won't be taking action against someone for saying "nice try though lol".
Still didn't need to be said like at all. Its obvious of what the intentions were especially when the member wasn't again being mean first (if he was then that makes sense but from what I've seen the guy was debating in a fair way)If they were, this should be said.
We are grown adults in 2024, if someone told me to use "common sense" then its an attack on my intellect. This wasn't even needed to say to begin with so yes the intention was obviousSee point three. It could be phrased peacefully, but it's such an insanely minor implication that it isn't worthy of even a warning. Most of the report is a collection of minor (very minor) offenses, or straight up non-offenses.
I just want to say I don't hate or dislike you. I think u are a pretty good guy and wouldn't like to lose interaction with u (feel like we have a good chemistry and its thanks to you that DxD is getting revived). I do think however that the things ya said were mean and shouldn't have been said and I expect the same for you and anyone else to do the same for me if I'm acting this way. We may have different opinion but that doesn't mean imma get upset (I liked your comment when you politely told that member that was mocking you in a responding way). Its hard for me to see that you wasn't tryna be rude but if you are hell bent on thinking u didn't mean it like that then fineI don't mean to bother you or be a burden but is there anyway that I'd be able to limit interactions with those two users, I just don't want to keep dealing with this every other day. It's pretty stressful feeling like you're in trouble all the time... And if you could close the thread, I'd very much appreciate that as well, thank you for your time.
That's fine.I just want to say I don't hate or dislike you. I think u are a pretty good guy and wouldn't like to lose interaction with u (feel like we have a good chemistry and its thanks to you that DxD is getting revived). I do think however that the things ya said were mean and shouldn't have been said and I expect the same for you and anyone else to do the same for me if I'm acting this way. We may have different opinion but that doesn't mean imma get upset (I liked your comment when you politely told that member that was mocking you in a responding way). Its hard for me to see that you wasn't tryna be rude but if you are hell bent on thinking u didn't mean it like that then fine
Has the ban been undone yet?I think the next instance of this legitimately happening is good grounds for a threadban, yes. But she's right, we didn't actually conclude that she ought to get one, so we should wait until such a time (if such a time arises) when she does use it unfairly again. It's a small matter, I think, but it's worth being fair on.
4. Said another member was "arguing in bad faith"
I know this case is closed (or not??), but since i was patially mentioned in, somewhat, i just want to explain on my side that, no, i not trying to argue in bad faith, that what i genuinely believe based on how the verse informations give me, but if it appear that i was arguing in bad faith, then i'm terribly sorry for thatIf they were, this should be said.
It is fine, @MasqueTLDF is new to the site, he couldn't know what kind of person i'm as this is the first interaction with me on site, it is normal course of feeling that he felt that i was arguing in bad faith as i against his opinion, and i hold no hard feeling toward him either, so this is fine, sometime people's emotion went up and slip some harsh words out, it is fine, me too sometime. Still appreciate that you defend, me, thank.Still didn't need to be said like at all. Its obvious of what the intentions were especially when the member wasn't again being mean first (if he was then that makes sense but from what I've seen the guy was debating in a fair way)
IIRC this was Mr. Bambu's detailed report on that subject: https://vsbattles.com/threads/rule-violation-reports-new-forum.107529/post-6426549I'd prefer to hear more elaborate details, but I don't normally buy appeals if they give simplicated reasons. But at the same time, I'd prefer to know the severity of the offsite link.
Oh yeah, I remember now. And yeah, I'd say keep them banned. They already caused too much trouble as it is.IIRC this was Mr. Bambu's detailed report on that subject: https://vsbattles.com/threads/rule-violation-reports-new-forum.107529/post-6426549
Bumping this case. I think this is very urgent and important for the wiki, therefore more staff members' attention is appreciated.Sorry for the interruption, but considering the mass difference in activity here compared to the vandalism reports thread, I like the staff team's attention to this post of mines.
![]()
Yeah, at best he’s just annoying. Besides, I’ve been called worse by smarter people off-site anyways, “idiot” won’t make me spiral. But the part about him dismantling the tiering system and such is outta my control, so that’s your call.To an extent, I think the opinion of the wronged should be considered, and in this instance, I may be willing to be lenient given that it seems to be (clarification wanted) Milly's opinion that he should be unbanned.
I personally do not mind that solution.It's less about 'dismantling the system' (he couldn't do that if he wanted to, really) and more about the drama drummed up in his activities. Still. I hereby sign off on a reduction of his ban to three months (meaning his ban would be completed next month).
I'd read it, yeah. His statement about being an "anti-powerscaler" was there when I did.
His claims about being an "anti-powerscaling" seems quite fishy and doesn't seem to sit well with me at all. And prior to the last reports, he's already caused enough trouble as it is, his appeal doesn't even seem to have that much detailed context behind it. I'm still standing by keeping him banned