Rule Violation Reports (New forum)

[Gamin_Yoon23]

provocative comments

Told myself I wouldn’t involve myself but there are some things that need to be addressed. Tatsumi is right here, provocative and antagonistic comments tend to happen with SOME of these supporters and they truthfully do need to reflect on their behaviour. It can even be as simple as having another supporter of that field ask their very own to stop. It doesn’t take much to call a friend out, it might be unpleasant but it’s for the best.

Some examples are this. Yeah just to anticipate some comments, I already know Ciel likes to say “haha” but varying on context it comes across as condescending. Not to mention the bolded “well done” which kills any attempt to disprove anything.

My words are clear

Then this was pretty much his reaction to being called out. No apology no nothing. Just continuing to remain immature. Even if Bambu put it to a stop there’s no change in behaviour. You would honestly think that during that time there would be some obvious signs of change in behaviour but there isn’t.

Haha

Another instance of being antagonistic, at this point it’s quite impossible to call it a coincidence. It’s something they’re doing intentionally. It’s no different than disrespecting someone and getting the reaction you want then laughing in their faces. Similar to rage baiting. Something similar happened during the time of my report but I hadn’t actually reported any of it. The reason for that is because I thought it was best to let it go but if there’s no change in behaviour then this is more of a reason to bring it up. You can’t expect everyone to be your punching bag, the more you push people’s buttons the more they’ll feel inclined to push for something. Not everyone is as patient as you think

 

[Powerscalingcat]

Taking your sweet time typing all that instead of actually trying to engage with me in a formal manner is certainly a choice.

You yourself asked me not to engage with you any further I simply respecting your wishes, same goes for submitting the report, if you are confident you have done nothing wrong and are in the right, then you should have no issue with me submitting this report since you have nothing to be afraid of. I have the right to report my concerns to admins especially if I am made to feel uncomfortable, if the mods decide that no wrong has been comitted then I will give you a formal apology and retract my accusations.

Respectfully, either unfollow the thread or keep following it, but don't ping or reply to me if you don't want to engage. Or go ahead and reply again, which will just lead to me replying again. That's kind of how conversations work.

As you can see I ceased replying to you on the thread like you asked me to.

It's basically an endless cycle of argumentation, so yeah, good luck with the report. I'm still firm in my opinion that you have bad faith against that particular CRT, or you simply don't understand what "many" means (I already pointed that out earlier).

Bad faith implies I am arguing disenganeously or trying to be push an agenda, I genuinely believe the things I claim and I try to substantiate them with reason, as for the many thing you keep bringing up I already stated multiple times that I am conceding as whether or not I agree or disagree does NOT matter and that I want to leave the decision up to the mods, and I asked you to tally me up.

Anyways, have a good day. I'mma go to my tuition.

Have a nice day as well, FYI I will not be making further replies as this thread is meant to be ONLY for reports so is having a back and fourth here will only clutter the thread which I am pretty sure goes against the rules, so I'd rather let the mods decide

If they deem that I was wrong I will both publicly and privately in DMs apologize for any wrongdoing

 

[Mr. Bambu]

I don't have time to tackle both reports ongoing right now so I'm going to tackle the one I think is probably quicker to deal with.

@Powerscalingcat @WindyAttack both of you are just bickering. You both posted vaguely rude/condescending/exclusionary shit, but it was so petty that it probably doesn't warrant much more than an informal request to not do that. Don't try to exclude someone you disagree with on the basis that they're "bad faith" actors and don't start making random accusations. Gun to my head, I would agree with Cat that you, Windy, were more the problem, as flippantly labeling people as "bad faith" actors to disregard their opinion, and yet constantly replying in the back and forth, sort of paints a poor picture.

Rules were violated but they were extremely minor, and I'd like to think both of you want the right shit. Just stop trying to get the last word in and try to be polite. I don't think any official action needs done to either of you.

 

[FinePoint]

Snip

Well, thank you for making such a well-formatted and complete report, I appreciate the effort.

That said, I don't see this as a rule violation severe enough to warrant any action.
As discussed above, there's a difference between being toxic and simply not being as polite as humanly possible.
It's my opinion they argued their points with an acceptable degree of civility.

@WindyAttack
Still, I will say that it's a bit far to say someone should be ignored just because you personally find them stubborn.
Even if their opinion doesn't align with the staff team, that's fine and their voice should still be considered.
While only staff have the right to 'vote' on something, we try to at least hear everyone out.

 

[WindyAttack]

I don't have time to tackle both reports ongoing right now so I'm going to tackle the one I think is probably quicker to deal with.

@Powerscalingcat @WindyAttack both of you are just bickering. You both posted vaguely rude/condescending/exclusionary shit, but it was so petty that it probably doesn't warrant much more than an informal request to not do that. Don't try to exclude someone you disagree with on the basis that they're "bad faith" actors and don't start making random accusations. Gun to my head, I would agree with Cat that you, Windy, were more the problem, as flippantly labeling people as "bad faith" actors to disregard their opinion, and yet constantly replying in the back and forth, sort of paints a poor picture.

Rules were violated but they were extremely minor, and I'd like to think both of you want the right shit. Just stop trying to get the last word in and try to be polite. I don't think any official action needs done to either of you.

Am I wrong for saying that he's arguing in bad faith for claiming that "many" means two times? Oxford and other dictionaries agree that "many" generally refers to at least four or more, and multiple VSBW moderators have also confirmed on several occasions that "many" is interpreted as four times. I'd even like to ask you what you personally think "many" means, because our entire disagreement stems from that.

And as you can see, I was trying to avoid using bad language and be as polite as possible. I even told him that if he didn't want to argue, he could simply stop replying to me and we could wait for the moderators, or he could continue debating me if he wanted.

I also didn't disregard his arguments. I responded to and countered them before saying that I believed he was arguing in bad faith. Even then, I presented it as my opinion. I wasn't stating it as an objective fact, only that it's how his behavior came across to me.

 

[FinePoint]

Huh?
If you say that you do not care in the first place, then why ask me to look for these examples? I would spend a long time searching through a huge number of threads and comments, only for the final response to be, "I don't care." Isn't that just wasting my time?
Therefore, with all due respect, I ask that you phrase your words more clearly from the beginning so that I am not asked to do something that has no importance to you.

My apologies, it wasn't my intent to waste your time.
In general, I just think it's proper for any accusation to be accompanied by linked evidence so that the staff in general (not just me) can evaluate whether it's a rule violation or not.

Anyway, the block has been applied now, and I think we can therefore conclude this issue.

 

[WindyAttack]

Well, thank you for making such a well-formatted and complete report, I appreciate the effort.

That said, I don't see this as a rule violation severe enough to warrant any action.
As discussed above, there's a difference between being toxic and simply not being as polite as humanly possible.
It's my opinion they argued their points with an acceptable degree of civility.

@WindyAttack
Still, I will say that it's a bit far to say someone should be ignored just because you personally find them stubborn.
Even if their opinion doesn't align with the staff team, that's fine and their voice should still be considered.
While only staff have the right to 'vote' on something, we try to at least hear everyone out.

I think there was a misunderstanding about what I meant.

I was specifically telling Aksh not to waste his time arguing with him because Aksh is my friend and I felt the discussion wasn't going anywhere. I wasn't telling everyone to ignore him or implying that his opinions shouldn't be heard.

What I meant was simply that, in my opinion, Aksh should avoid prolonged arguments with people who seem to be acting in bad faith. That was personal advice to a friend, not an attempt to exclude anyone from the discussion.

My point was only that it would be better for Aksh to step away and wait for the moderators' decision instead of continuing an endless back-and-forth.

 

[FinePoint]

I was specifically telling Aksh not to waste his time arguing with him because Aksh is my friend and I felt the discussion wasn't going anywhere. I wasn't telling everyone to ignore him or implying that his opinions shouldn't be heard.

I see. Well, in that case perhaps just be more careful how you word something like that.

In any case I maintain that I don't think any moderation action is necessary here.

 

[Random-Helper323]

First, Astral appealed that ban, and the arguments it was based on were dismissed, which ultimately led to the ban being completely overturned. Therefore, your attempt to cite a ban that was already overturned adds no value whatsoever to your argument. If anything, it only shows that you're relying on points that lost their validity a long time ago.

Second, it's rather ironic that you're talking about cropped scans when you haven't even read the Tensura novel in the first place. What's even more ironic is that this is coming from the very same person who previously attempted to mislead the staff by relying on evidence from older volumes dating back to before Rimuru obtained DLF. So before accusing others of being misleading, it would be better to look at your own history first.

At the very least, read the novel you're trying to argue against instead of passing judgment on material you barely know anything about. It's difficult to take any objection seriously when it comes from someone who hasn't even read the very source they're arguing against.

As for the CRT, it doesn't matter whether you call it hidden, misleading, or anything else. Those are nothing more than claims you've repeated over and over again, yet you have not managed to prove them even once. In the end, the CRT was accepted despite all of your objections. So you can keep shouting or repeating the same claims as much as you like, but repeating a claim does not turn it into a fact, and your refusal to accept the outcome does not change it. Haha.

First of all, keep my name out of that uncouth mouth yours. I largely avoided both yours and astral's provocative comments on that thread because I cannot be bothered to engage in ridiculous banter with those who legitimately behave like children when others are engaging in a serious discussion.

Second, astral got banned previously for various reasons, including but not limited to nitpicking specific words in translations to favor his argument. On a separate note, it's already a known fact that some members of the Tensura fandom on this forum have a habit of cropping scans to suit their purpose, something which happened again in this case as well. Now out of these two things, the only "accusation" I made was about the cropping of scans once again by the community which is an established fact and not an accusation.

Thirdly, like I repeated in the thread, I had neither the time nor patience to deal with your hidden CRT's and none of my contentions had anything to do with the previous thread hence, creating a separate thread to address them wasn't required.

With that said, I have no other issues here. I'm neither interested in pursuing what was or wasn't said that might or might not be perceived as hurtful. I have neither the mind nor empathy to actually care. That would be all

This isn't the place to argue over Tensura. Please stop this, okay?

 

[Tatsumi504]

This isn't the place to argue over Tensura. Please stop this, okay?

I didn't come here for anything other than to request I not be mentioned in the case again. I'm one of the parties the reported comment was directed against and I chose to ignore it. Pointless banter wasn't my intention

 

[Astral_Trinity439]

Since Helper's comment, I'll try to make this sound as neutral as possible. Btw, I'm not reporting Tatsumi, I just thought that his comment was shifting the blame on us entirely and is unfairly sided.

Thirdly, like I repeated in the thread, I had neither the time nor patience to deal with your hidden CRT's and none of my contentions had anything to do with the previous thread hence, creating a separate thread to address them wasn't required.

What do you mean "Hidden"?
Are you claiming we're trying to hide crts or something?
The tag is there, the name is there; "TenSura Speed CRT"... how is that "hiding" anything?
You also mentioned this in the thread as well, and I didn't really like the idea of what that means.

If you simply didn't notice it or didn't have the time, that's a personal issue, not the TenSura supporter side's issue. Oh but when you guys make a title like this for something that proposes what the image says... that's fine and nobody even points it out?

Also, just because you personally didn't have the time doesn't make the CRT of no value... if it's like that, anyone can claim "Oh, I was busy, I couldn't participate in your CRT so I'll just talk about it in the current thread", which, again, takes away the whole point of getting a CRT accepted to begin with. What is the point of getting something accepted if opposition is gonna repeatedly argue over it in the next thread anyways?

I would also like to ask this as a question towards staff; If an idea was established in a previous CRT that doesn't even fall under "Too old, times changed" but a pretty recent one (There's like just a 1 month difference between both CRTs), is it really good behavior to just ignore the fact that something was accepted recently and ignore the idea of 'making another thread yourself if you have disagreements with accepted ideas, and just argue it all in the current thread?

Even though the thread was accepted in the end, it would have been done in like 3~ pages if we kept on topic but was dragged to 8 pages due to unwillingless of the other side to just open another thread if they had disagreements with established things.

First of all, keep my name out of that uncouth mouth yours. I largely avoided both yours and astral's provocative comments on that thread because I cannot be bothered to engage in ridiculous banter with those who legitimately behave like children when others are engaging in a serious discussion.

Neither of us were the one to start those posts btw.

If a separate thread is needed to remove the infinite speed rating too, someone will get to it eventually but don't go spreading lies about what was and what wasn't addressed especially not when this community still hasn't given up its habit of cropping scans that don't fit in with the agenda.

I don't think most will go unprovoked when this is said to their faces...

I seriously did not originally mind your semi-provocative comments and just laughed it off with a joke, and thought our banter was just a friendly one, but now acting like I or Ciel are the ones who started it and should take the blame while you were the one trying to engage in a serious discussion?

I admit the remarks from @Ferno1234 and @Berga14 were not the best but I can't control everyone, so I'll leave their judgement as a separate matter. It's not related to me or Ciel anyways

 

[FinePoint]

I'm a little confused.

Who exactly is being reported at this point and for what?

 

[Dark_Soul20189]

I'm a little confused.

Who exactly is being reported at this point and for what?

Elde, and only Elde... I will let the other describe why in detail.

 

[Astral_Trinity439]

I'm a little confused.

Who exactly is being reported at this point and for what?

I'm not reporting anyone for the matter. I am just here to clarify a small thing and put both sides up front since it seemed like the blame was being shifted to Ciel entirely. And from what I understand, Ciel is reporting Elde for this mainly:

I also want to point out a specific incident. At one point, Elde relied on his own personal interpretation of a statement. When I asked a translator to clarify the original Japanese text, the translator explicitly rejected Elde's interpretation. Despite that, Elde continued to rely on the same interpretation and even included it in the summary that he gave to the Staff, and assumes that his own interpretation is correct whenever the Staff asks him for "proof" of his claims. I find this contradictory: he criticizes others for relying on "headcanons," personal interpretations, or even possible mistranslations, yet continues to use his own personal interpretation after it was rejected by our Staff.

Which happened here and beyond this post:

Tensura - Some more Speed stuff

I do not agree with the Immeasurable Speed rating, and what EldemadeDityjon said is correct as well. The previous thread was approved quickly, as usual, just like many other threads, without any actual discussion. That explains everything now. What I mentioned, along with what EldemadeDityjon...

vsbattles.com

And here in his summary to staff (the link is directly to the specific line, hopefully it works, but lemme know if it doesn't, it's from Elde's summary here).

Also sorry for editing my msg a few sec later, I just thought making a separate post for this is unnecessary.

 

[FinePoint]

I'm not reporting anyone for the matter. I am just here to clarify a small thing and put both sides up front since it seemed like the blame was being shifted to Ciel entirely. And from what I understand, Ciel is reporting Elde for this mainly:

Alright. I think this is all blown way out of proportion.
Them disagreeing with the interpretation is fine, them not including the other interpretation in the summary is not ideal but also not a huge deal, anyone can correct that and I'm sure they did.

 

[Powerscalingcat]

Well, thank you for making such a well-formatted and complete report, I appreciate the effort.

That said, I don't see this as a rule violation severe enough to warrant any action.
As discussed above, there's a difference between being toxic and simply not being as polite as humanly possible.
It's my opinion they argued their points with an acceptable degree of civility.

@WindyAttack
Still, I will say that it's a bit far to say someone should be ignored just because you personally find them stubborn.
Even if their opinion doesn't align with the staff team, that's fine and their voice should still be considered.
While only staff have the right to 'vote' on something, we try to at least hear everyone out.

Fair enough I realised I ended up acting impulsively and emotinally and came off as far more aggresive and accusatory than I wish and ended up acting immaturely for which I am sorry

At one point I realised we were talking past each other as windy was still arguing on the meaning of many, while I was arguing on his liberal use of bad faith

To clairfy my postion I don't mind being wrong on the CRT and the usage of many, as I said if the mods deem that many mean = 4x then that's fine so be it.

My main frustration stemmed from cloudly's negative perception of me as a bad faith actor due to having a different postion and that he was being too liberal with his accusations, and that he kept bringing the focus of the conversation back to the CRT, which I had conceded multiple times having admitted that my postion is either wrong or doesn't matter, but even then if I end up being wrong and my argument ends up being flawed that's not indicative of me as a person, and it doesn't make me a bad faith actor or a bad person, and I wish Cloudy would have more faith in me as a person even if I hold different beliefs and have more open communication so we don't end up pointlessly bickering

@WindyAttack As I promised when I submitted this report, I am now going to issue a formal public apology, I powerscalingcat am sorry and hereby retract my report statment, I acted emotionally and impulsively and ended up acting immature as a result and came off as too aggresive and accusatory, so I apologize if I came across as arguing in bad faith, I swear on my favorite person that I was not, I tend to be more critical of CRTs because I believe that to be objective we have to be vigilant and critical and to make sure are takes are well supported and consistent, I am obviously by no means perfect so I again apologize if my take came across as bad faith or unsubstantiated, I was not feeling well yesterday and I had not taken my medication yesterday (I am medicated for ADHD without my medication I have a harder time emotionally regulating myself and feel more tired) so I was not in the best mood

I hope you can forgive me and we can get along moving forward
- Powerscaling cat :3

 

[EldemadeDityjon]

Alright. I think this is all blown way out of proportion.
Them disagreeing with the interpretation is fine, them not including the other interpretation in the summary is not ideal but also not a huge deal, anyone can correct that and I'm sure they did.

There is also a problem with the OP's scan translation. The particular word に can mean either "at" or "to" depending on the context. This was also confirmed by the same guy who translated the scan.
So, like I mentioned, the context is talking about the movement of information at any time, in other words, at any moment, even where time is stopped, it can move. This has nothing to do with speed, and saying it is done by speed is incorrect.

I did include that and even linked the message there. I also mentioned the context. I simply gave my interpretation. They can click on the message and see Raiku arguments there. Its a summary I can't write everything down. Like you said if someone wanted they could just point out others interpretations heck they had their own summary to do that.

Like I said, if disagreeing with someone else's interpretation is considered report-worthy, and Tensura supporters can't handle someone disagreeing with their arguments, then I'm pretty sure the wiki isn't the right place for them. Debates are supposed to allow different interpretations, with staff deciding which one is better supported.

I'm not saying you're the one claiming it's report-worthy. I'm referring to the Tensura supporters who are trying to argue that simply disagreeing with their interpretation is somehow report-worthy.