-
This forum is strictly intended to be used by members of the VS Battles wiki. Please only register if you have an autoconfirmed account there, as otherwise your registration will be rejected. If you have already registered once, do not do so again, and contact Antvasima if you encounter any problems.
For instructions regarding the exact procedure to sign up to this forum, please click here. -
We need Patreon donations for this forum to have all of its running costs financially secured.
Community members who help us out will receive badges that give them several different benefits, including the removal of all advertisements in this forum, but donations from non-members are also extremely appreciated.
Please click here for further information, or here to directly visit our Patreon donations page. -
Please click here for information about a large petition to help children in need.
Rule Violation Reports (New forum)
- Thread starter Antvasima
- Start date
- 7,942
- 12,063
I only just caught up on the whole WOG situation. I only gave a general elaboration on the rule itself earlier since that's what I was pinged for at the time.
Anyway, in this instance I think warnings for everyone involved is fine. Even if some of them aren't quite as bad as others, that can always be brought up specifically if those warnings come up again.
I agree that Alex's offer is blatant conspiracy, and wouldn't find a short ban unreasonable at all.
Zane's comment about 'getting away with it' also implies an acknowledgement of wrongdoing, though technically it seems like only Alex explicitly planned on doing anything. Still, I think this sort of thing reinforces that this wasn't just confusion over the rules but malicious to some degree.
Anyway, in this instance I think warnings for everyone involved is fine. Even if some of them aren't quite as bad as others, that can always be brought up specifically if those warnings come up again.
I agree that Alex's offer is blatant conspiracy, and wouldn't find a short ban unreasonable at all.
Zane's comment about 'getting away with it' also implies an acknowledgement of wrongdoing, though technically it seems like only Alex explicitly planned on doing anything. Still, I think this sort of thing reinforces that this wasn't just confusion over the rules but malicious to some degree.
- 13,826
- 19,679
Given @Tempestdragon6 's attitude toward the Dereck03, who are simply doing their job, I believe a severe punishment, ranging from at least a 1 year ban to a likely permanent ban, is warranted. I deleted his comment but it can be seen above.
- 12,785
- 23,076
Undeleting this so everyone can see, what should we do here?
- 2,616
- 5,223
Sigh, when someone like Tempestdragon resorts to incendiary comments, it undermines whatever point they are trying to make and ends up making his side look bad. Stop doing things like these.
For him, I'm fine with either a one-year ban or an indefinite one, with the option to appeal after a year, though I'm still open to hearing what the higher-ups think about it.
- 12,785
- 23,076
I checked the warning tracker and saw that this isn't their first offense of this kind—they already have multiple warnings and a ban—and this time they came out of nowhere and were completely aggressive. I'm going to ban them permanently. If anyone has any objections, I'm here to discuss it. For now, time to sleep, Tempest.
- 364
- 196
The first part of the Be respectful rule says any threatening messages should not be posted. If 2 users are right now feeling creeped out around a person because it now feels like they are being "stalked" by him, then that should be described as threatening. Sorry but there are no excuses for this kind of behavior.
Now about this part, Reporting the users on off-site violations is ok. If it were public information that is. This is a private server. As mentioned by Astral, this server needs people to tell them their vsbw username, send a screenshot of it, and then they will be accepted as a member. If he did join as a member, which it was stated he didn't, this wouldn't be a rule violation. But he didn't join the server. Also, as i said before, this is private information. Let's assume for a second what you say is right, let's say someone in the server thought it was getting out of hand, will they send it to some random member? I'm sure there are a multitude of mods here who also use discord and you can even DM them on vsbw itself, this could've been handled through a message to mods instead of sending it to Mr.Yoon.
On that note, did Mr.Yoon ever explain how he got those screenshots? I ruled out the possibility of another person passing this to Mr.Yoon because they can always DM a mod instead of asking him to report it. Isn't that more logical if they wanted their name to be anonymous?
Don't the rules of vsbw state this directly. He directly invaded an entire private server's users' privacy and leaked private messages from them. Now there could be the issue of sock puppet as well. He also now made 2 members, who are still members and have not received any suspension or ban, feel threatened in real life, which violates the out-of-site rules of vsbw and Be respectful section.
Doxing is stated right here. Unless of course you or reiner or any other mod here can prove that this wasn't doxing or sock puppet and this wasn't an invasion of privacy, i believe many rules were broken here. Please consider this again.
Again I'd like to state this so everyone can see it. The supporters were part of a private server. They needed to mention their vsbw account to join the server. Mr.Yoon's account was not there. So either person from the server, who saw the mess it was in, came out to for some reason send the screenshots to Mr.Yoon. instead or reputable mods like Mr.Bambu and Antvasima, and ask them to make a public report so everyone can see these screenshots, which makes no sense. If I was in the server or anyone was in the server and wanted to release those screenshots I would DM them to some mod and ask them to take action on this. But randomly sending it to another user? And even if it was sent to another user, it could've also been sent to the mods. The mods are better at keeping your identity anonymous as we know. So unless Mr.Yoon can confirm that this was the method used and the person indeed for some reason didn't want to send this to the mod, which i need proof, I would assume this is a sock pupper account and Mr.Yoon has used an alt account to get screenshots from a private server and used them for malicious purposes (trying to get 4-5 members banned). This is doxing, sock puppet, and invasion of privacy and violates 3 rules in the server, and this is other than the Be respectful one where members are now creeped out because of him.
And i'd request the mods to understand the severity of this situation.
Please take your time reading this, as unless what i said can be proven by Mr.Yoon, it all leads to one strict conclusion
- 34,768
- 42,254
I agree with banning TempestDragon, as for the other drama. I am still unsure on who to side with, but simply screenshotting Discord posts isn't exactly a violation. If there was some personal information getting leaked, that would be a different story. But I highly doubt any of that is happening. Screenshotting posts or plans to make content revisions isn't doxxing. It would be more like publicly sharing things like IP Address, Social Security Number, Real name (Without consent), Photo IDs, Real face (Without consent), and especially home address.
- 729
- 562
I’m unable to reply fully and I don’t think it would be best to reply even if the report is directed at me. I would rather staff decide since they hold more power and I feel as though I’ve gotten everything off my chest already. For starters, if it’s me being a sock puppet you’re concerned on then I already said multiple pages ago I’d be willing to do whatever to be given the green light. I am 100% confident I’m not a sock puppet but my statement here probably means nothing since @MetaChronos is certain I’m a sock puppet. As for doxing accusations, could you not? What I did doesn’t come close to doxing so I’m not even sure how you came to that conclusion. Doxing as Medeus stated is a lot more severe in comparison to this. With most cases of doxing which I have seen firsthand that has nothing to do with powerscaling is often closely linked to pictures of people being leaked without consent and ESPECIALLY addresses. None of what I did even touches that surface. In fact, it’s actually insulting to actual victims of doxing for you to even insinuate what I’ve done is considered equal to criminal behaviour. I really hate to be blunt but this honestly seems like a ploy to get back at me for my report. I really do understand if the group of people involved hold something against me however, it gets to a point. It’s only been a bit and yet people have already been messaging on my message wall essentially trying to get a reaction out of me. I’m not saying it’s harassment but this behaviour is unacceptable. Please do control your emotions at the end of the day, I’m referring to those involved not just @MetaChronos.
Mr. Bambu
Suffer-Not-Injustice Bambu
VS Battles
Joke Battles
Bureaucrat
Administrator
Calculation Group
- 25,125
- 30,156
If the question isn't powerscaling related, we would probably disregard it. The only circumstance I can imagine at this moment where we might rule otherwise is if the user is actively pestering/harassing the author, since this would still fall against the written rule. We don't care if you ask the author what their favorite colors are or what inspired them to make such a gosh darn interesting verse.
I would rather a one year ban for TempestDragon. I think that the current atmosphere understandably creates derision, frustration. From our perspective, it is right and good that we maintain the peace of the thread so that we can work through this. But from TempestDragon's perspective, he is being quieted, when he has not had as much a chance to speak. I doubt letting him speak would help, but I think it is a not unreasonable thought. Yes, his decision based on that impetus is unreasonable, and a one year ban for such a blatant display, combined with his past history, is fair. But I would rather not permanently ban him.
The allegation of stalking is baseless, to use your example. Yoon's screenshots come from a server that one of you guys must have invited him to, as it has been repeatedly pointed out that it was invite only. There's no stalking at hand, people were just caught and want a counter-report. It's petty.
We are not upholding the rules of the server. It doesn't change our opinion about what constitutes as harassment (in the form of stalking). Someone DMing the information to Yoon also isn't stalking. It would be even less of a situation of stalking than if he had joined the server. The speculation at work here does not constitute a rule violation.
Respectfully, "undue stress" arising from being reported for your own rule violations is not the kind of stress we're talking about there. I think that the verbiage employed here is blatantly overdramatic. I find this report to be deeply unflattering to make, at this time. He reported evidence of a legitimate rule violation-- we don't especially care whether he was sent it by someone else, or if he was in the server on false pretenses. Doesn't bother us one bit.
Showing screenshots from a Discord server is not Doxing. To compare the two is just an outright lie. I don't believe you're referring to a sock puppet on the wiki, but rather an alt account on Discord, which, again, we do not care about.Doxing is stated right here. Unless of course you or reiner or any other mod here can prove that this wasn't doxing or sock puppet and this wasn't an invasion of privacy, i believe many rules were broken here. Please consider this again.
Again I'd like to state this so everyone can see it. The supporters were part of a private server. They needed to mention their vsbw account to join the server. Mr.Yoon's account was not there. So either person from the server, who saw the mess it was in, came out to for some reason send the screenshots to Mr.Yoon. instead or reputable mods like Mr.Bambu and Antvasima, and ask them to make a public report so everyone can see these screenshots, which makes no sense. If I was in the server or anyone was in the server and wanted to release those screenshots I would DM them to some mod and ask them to take action on this. But randomly sending it to another user? And even if it was sent to another user, it could've also been sent to the mods. The mods are better at keeping your identity anonymous as we know. So unless Mr.Yoon can confirm that this was the method used and the person indeed for some reason didn't want to send this to the mod, which i need proof, I would assume this is a sock pupper account and Mr.Yoon has used an alt account to get screenshots from a private server and used them for malicious purposes (trying to get 4-5 members banned). This is doxing, sock puppet, and invasion of privacy and violates 3 rules in the server, and this is other than the Be respectful one where members are now creeped out because of him.
And i'd request the mods to understand the severity of this situation.
Please take your time reading this, as unless what i said can be proven by Mr.Yoon, it all leads to one strict conclusion
If anything, it is tempting to consider a warning for you for dragging on a report which essentially amounts to harassing a user for making a report against others. This is beyond distasteful and we do have rules against inappropriate RVRT posts; I feel this would certainly qualify, both in terms of an underhanded report and generally wasting time with baseless allegations, that either deliberately misread the rules, or have no concept of their meaning.
For now, I am going to thread-ban this user, on the basis that their report amounts to an attack on another user for reporting information that they felt was sacred, and private. No more drama needs to be stirred out of this debacle.
- 12,785
- 23,076
If they had anything to say, they would have said it, and I can understand the frustration, but they weren’t even mentioned in the report and aren’t involved in any way, so I doubt they have much to say here. Their only two messages before they lost their temper with the message directed at me were unnecessary comments that added nothing, which is why they were deleted, so that doesn’t help at all; they have a history of being an aggressive person to begin with.
Tbh, I don't care how long the ban lasts, he deserves it; I made it permanent just because, but I want to make it clear that I'm open to discussion regarding the duration.
Mr. Bambu
Suffer-Not-Injustice Bambu
VS Battles
Joke Battles
Bureaucrat
Administrator
Calculation Group
- 25,125
- 30,156
I know. Unfortunately, as the abjudicators, benevolence falls to us to dole out. This was one heated comment, I'm just saying I'd rather not ban him forever based on it, even if it was indefensibly shitty behavior. As always, others are welcome to disagree, and the majority vote would stand; I have no intention of causing a fuss about it.
- 12,785
- 23,076
Me neither, so let's see what the others have to say,
@Just a Random Butler @Reiner04.
You’ve already discussed this issue, but I’d like to ask for your opinion again: Do you agree that the ban time should be reduced to one year, or should it remain permanent with the possibility of appeal after a year, as Butler suggested?
@DarkDragonMedeus you also commented on the ban but not the duration.
- 2,616
- 5,223
My stance remains the same. I don't mind any of the two. Although, I am more in favor of one year.
- 15,413
- 22,794
1 year ban for Tempestdragon is oke to me. I understand he was heated, frustrated, but his comment is a hard insult which is not tolerable and is out of the line. Dereck was only doing his job
- 13,826
- 19,679
I was already more on the side of permaban but left it to majority on what they decide btw 1 to forever but if i have to say a fix duration, then i would say that permaban is more warranted here. Tempestdragon wasn’t involved in the report, so it doesn’t make sense for him to be so openly rude, especially when he clearly knew the consequences and It was completely uncalled for and unwarranted to target you, of all people, when you hadn’t even said anything about the report. Given that he has already been warned and banned for similar behavior before, I’m fine with a permanent ban.
- 4,239
- 4,085
Tempestdragon is clearly a teenager; one year wouldn't really fix anything. He was angry, of course. However, he's immature, and to judge someone becoming mature only comes with an actual sign of growth.
If he's unbanned after a year, we won't know if he's mature enough to be on the site, and this could all just be repeated. A permanent ban sounds better, with several chances to appeal after you've displayed growth and apologise. A teenager doesn't unlock maturity after a year.
If he's unbanned after a year, we won't know if he's mature enough to be on the site, and this could all just be repeated. A permanent ban sounds better, with several chances to appeal after you've displayed growth and apologise. A teenager doesn't unlock maturity after a year.
Mr. Bambu
Suffer-Not-Injustice Bambu
VS Battles
Joke Battles
Bureaucrat
Administrator
Calculation Group
- 25,125
- 30,156
With all due respect, when does one "unlock" maturity? It's a process. None of us are 100% mature, we are just looking for a baseline level of respectfulness. Many teenagers possess the trait, many adults do not.
- 34,768
- 42,254
I suppose 1 year ban is fine for Tempest
- 4,239
- 4,085
Of course, none of us are 100% mature, but generally, teenagers are more likely to be immature than mature. A baseline of respectfulness doesn't solve an issue if someone is immature; then there isn't a chance they can maintain a baseline level of respectfulness over time, they'll just fall back into the habit. Of course, with time comes greater maturity, and it's plausible that an apology accompanied by proof of change would demonstrate that maturity. Which is why I prefer a permanent ban with chances to appeal.
- 6,698
- 6,204
Regarding TempestDragon, I think some kind of ban is unavoidable for such an unwarranted outburst. All the same, the situation is hot already, users having their posts removed is frustrating and in some cases comes off as subjective or even abuse of power (I do not think the latter reasonably applies here though) and it was only one post. At the moment I'd lean more towards a year or a perma ban with an option to appeal after a year. I don't think we should close the door on that person indefinitely. I do notice they have several past bans though, so I'm open to being convinced otherwise.
Regarding Yoon, I must emphasize that people feeling harassed doesn't automatically make the action harassment. We can't impose punishment based on a metric like that. It is not doxing either, as that refers to leaking someone's real life information. If Yoon exposed their previously private real name, face, or address, that would be doxing.
Regarding Yoon, I must emphasize that people feeling harassed doesn't automatically make the action harassment. We can't impose punishment based on a metric like that. It is not doxing either, as that refers to leaking someone's real life information. If Yoon exposed their previously private real name, face, or address, that would be doxing.
Mr. Bambu
Suffer-Not-Injustice Bambu
VS Battles
Joke Battles
Bureaucrat
Administrator
Calculation Group
- 25,125
- 30,156
Updating the thread to inform you all that I have adjusted TempestDragon's ban to 1 year. I would also like to inform you all that he reached out to me, and said that the reason for his outburst was that he was also in the Discord server where all of this happened, and that he felt his privacy was infringed upon. I obviously think this is a silly claim and one that holds absolutely no water, but at the same time, it does help explain why it is he became so angry: he does have some personal tie to this case.
With that said, unless there is something else to add, I would consider that matter resolved. I would also consider the report against Yoon resolved, as everyone seems to be in agreement that it was insubstantial (or, at least, nobody voiced disagreement with that yet). As for the core problem here, the Tensura WoG issue.
Votes on that subject have varied. These are against a rule violation:
With that said, unless there is something else to add, I would consider that matter resolved. I would also consider the report against Yoon resolved, as everyone seems to be in agreement that it was insubstantial (or, at least, nobody voiced disagreement with that yet). As for the core problem here, the Tensura WoG issue.
Votes on that subject have varied. These are against a rule violation:
- @Planck69 argued against it being a rule violation and affirmed he felt it was alright, even if it looked bad
- @Vietthai96 argued against planning CRTs being a rule violation, though I am not sure if he had time to read the actual accusation
- @DarkDragonMedeus was explicitly neutral, but leaned in favor of leniency
- @Reiner04 argued early on that it was strictly against the letter of the rule, not accounting for how bad it looked with additional details
- @LephyrTheRevanchist initially suggested only a WoG ban on Tensura, but later shifted to neutrality on a ban (and possible support on warnings, I would like elaboration on this)
- I argued in favor of these being rule violations, including a short ban for AlexSamDen
- @FinePoint argued that these actions fall against the letter of the rule, as it exists now, and later clarified support for Alex's ban and warnings
- @Antvasima agreed with my arguments
- @Random-Helper323 has said most of the posts are fine in his opinion, even if they fall against the letter of the rules, but one in particular seems, in his judgement, to be a leading question deserving of a warning.
Last edited:
- 6,698
- 6,204
Excluding a few caveats, I'd say that asking questions of writers is fine. The purpose of the rule against it is to stop lots of pestering of authors and to get rid of dishonestly acquired WOG. If we ask Toriyama (RIP) "when did Goku start thinking of Vegeta as a true rival" and he answers "the Cell Games", that's fine. If we bombard him with questions about measurable powers and destruction to the point he starts answering "I don't know" or "please stop harassing me", that's obviously different.
I'd honestly consider asking for clarification on things from the author to be fairly minor and even okay, and to only become a major issue if:
A) there's a dishonest leading question which is then used to make changes. This is best stopped by simply rejecting the CRT and scolding the user.
Or:
B) a spamming of messages that becomes harassment. This risks the Wiki's reputation and is objectively wrong. This warrants a ban if it does in fact reach the point of harassment.
I'd honestly consider asking for clarification on things from the author to be fairly minor and even okay, and to only become a major issue if:
A) there's a dishonest leading question which is then used to make changes. This is best stopped by simply rejecting the CRT and scolding the user.
Or:
B) a spamming of messages that becomes harassment. This risks the Wiki's reputation and is objectively wrong. This warrants a ban if it does in fact reach the point of harassment.
Last edited:
Mr. Bambu
Suffer-Not-Injustice Bambu
VS Battles
Joke Battles
Bureaucrat
Administrator
Calculation Group
- 25,125
- 30,156
This is a sort of general statement; have you gone through the matter currently at hand, and do you have an opinion regarding that? The accusations amount to users in a Discord server talking about and planning questions to ask the author, some of which were more explicitly powerscaling-centric than others, and one user, AlexSamDen, offering to alter questions so that they did not register as powerscaling-centric.
- 2,741
- 2,181
I'm not particularly interfering in the conversation, however, a certain issue with the very core of the report was brought up 3 times already, but ignored for some reason
This is the original time it was brought up
- 6,698
- 6,204
There are definitely elements there that could be construed as harassment (planning to ask targeted questions) and dishonest (altering questions to disguise their intent).
I also must raise an issue. It's being claimed that the statements weren't intended to be used for revisions, so why plan out disguising them to not be recognised as power scaling questions?
- 13,826
- 19,679
That claim is difficult to accept, given that some members, only a few pages earlier, expressed intent to use these WOGs on other wikis and thus, It would take much stronger evidence to prove the questions were asked through private DMs that can’t be traced back to the author.
- 2,741
- 2,181
This matter I already explained here
To sum up, this isn't to disguise them for usage on site, but make it actually understandable and interesting to the author
I was perfectly aware that the source isn't public and can't be used on VSBW, even if I used a perfect disguise
Astral_Trinity439
He/Him- 4,641
- 7,157
There are wikis that allow wog from private DMs though, to be fair
Though they have to at least be shown to have been asked to the author and not some random user with the same username, which one can do by recording a video and following some steps.
The same obviously cannot be used in vsbw though
- 6,698
- 6,204
Looking at the screen captures, the questions don't seem to cross the line into harassment. They also don't strike me as overwhelmingly leading questions. Most leading question is this, from what I can tell, and it leaves multiple alternatives to the theory presented.
One screenshot does feature an admission to be intending to use the statements though. In my opinion this falls into the category of something that would be assessed if and when someone tried to use the statements, in a manner similar to any other evidence presented. This seems minor to me; it is a violation of the rules as they are currently written, although I don't think the rule is best used for cracking down on things like this. I think a consideration about the way the rule is written might be in order at some point, and in the meantime maybe a warning for the ones who asked the questions. I think I do lean towards leniency, but the fact does remain that the letter of the rules as it currently exists does forbid this.
One screenshot does feature an admission to be intending to use the statements though. In my opinion this falls into the category of something that would be assessed if and when someone tried to use the statements, in a manner similar to any other evidence presented. This seems minor to me; it is a violation of the rules as they are currently written, although I don't think the rule is best used for cracking down on things like this. I think a consideration about the way the rule is written might be in order at some point, and in the meantime maybe a warning for the ones who asked the questions. I think I do lean towards leniency, but the fact does remain that the letter of the rules as it currently exists does forbid this.
- 2,741
- 2,181
1) There are wikis that accept DMs and there's also a matter of debates on Reddit, Discord, YouTube and TickTock which many of the members of the server participate in
2) You simply cannot ask the author a public question on his wall
There are only 3 ways to ask a question to Fuse:
1) WN impression - nobody uses it, since the author stopped replying and we are obviously interested in LN and not WN
2) Activity Reports - similar to WN Impressions, but even less possible due to limitations of the site itself
3) DM the author directly - the very thing we used. Non-public, private and completely unusable by VSBW standards
- 1,016
- 1,305
Idk if my vote counts as a TH, but I share the same thoughts as @Reiner04 for the most part. Asking battleboarding questions is against the rules. Asking non-battleboarding questions is fine tho. This seems to be the case of asking the former which isn’t fine. I also support the short ban for planning on asking the author power scaling questions.
- 12,494
- 16,896
I am 100% fine with the warnings. Maintain neutrality with the ban.
Nonynho
Any/All- 10,310
- 3,358
I know my earlier comment was considered clogging by best mod Dereck, but i really think this should be brought up:
If the rule states that stuff can't be used and authors can't be harassed (which obviously is correct), shouldn't the report that denounces a violation of the rule evidence that, in this case, @AlexSamDen harassed Fuse or attempted to use information obtained in that way in a CRT here in the site??
If the rule states that stuff can't be used and authors can't be harassed (which obviously is correct), shouldn't the report that denounces a violation of the rule evidence that, in this case, @AlexSamDen harassed Fuse or attempted to use information obtained in that way in a CRT here in the site??
- 6,698
- 6,204
In all seriousness, asking a question doesn't automatically qualify as harassment. Consider real life celebrity interactions. People see them in public and ask for an autograph, that's not harassment unless the person imposes themself on the celebrity against that celebrity's wishes or oversteps acceptable boundaries. If the celebrity asks to be left alone and the person won't leave them alone, for example. A more extreme example might involve showing up at the celebrity's home or showing them some proof that the person has stalked them.
Nonynho
Any/All- 10,310
- 3,358
I agree 100% with you
And we have nothing showing that @AlexSamDen was using the material to create a CRT with illegal-by-our-standards WoG
So why are we cogitating his ban? I am reading this from the original @Gamin_Yoon23 report and this is definetely not clear
- 12,494
- 16,896
To be very noted, Bambu has explained very well his reasoning for a ban.
It's a preemptive ban to entirely discourage even the thought of using these questions or their nature, and which, in the way he sees it, the intention of potential malicious usage. Of course, I expect him to explain himself further, but honestly to me is very straightforward.
The comment paint Alex and his actions very badly, and while there isn't any direct harassment, the fact of the matter is what he's implying to do can lead to destabilization of the wiki. Emphasis mine, "can", not has or will. For this very reason is why I have opted to be neutral in the end, but the worry is very much sound.
We cannot be certain of any individual's intentions, and it would be a fool's errand to 100% blindly trust anyone (and this is coming from someone that prefers giving the benefit of the doubt). The risk is there, and it's ultimately a very reasonable conclusion imo, regardless of my own interpretation.
I answer this now in the hopes you (and the rest of our users) understand this. Our rules cannot and will not ever cover every potential case. This is a complex situation that quite honestly has caught us by surprise, and we need to establish a precedent for a potential future. It has even sparked an entire staff discussion. So believe me, this is not a lightly decision, much as various users have opted to interpret that we are taking it lightly.
Astral_Trinity439
He/Him- 4,641
- 7,157
To be fair, @AlexSamDen has a habit (on the verge of being a role) of proof reading and rewording everything. That includes our CRTs and sandboxes and profiles as well. Thus at some point he started asking everyone to send whatever tensura related stuff they're doing so he can proofread and reword them if needed
