Defining the Terms
Ghosting is when someone stops responding entirely, without explanation, after a period of contact that established a reasonable expectation of continued communication. The Vibe Court has ruled on this many times. The verdict is consistent. For a full explanation of what makes something a Vibe Crime, see the court's complete guide.
Fading is different. Fading is the gradual, mutual reduction of contact over time — messages get shorter, replies get slower, eventually contact stops — but no one moment was the breach. Both parties participated in the fade, even if only one is now writing to a court about it.
The distinction matters because the court rules them differently, and understanding which one you did is the first step toward knowing what verdict is coming.
On Ghosting: The Court's Official Position
The court rules ghosting a Vibe Crime in the following circumstances: after three or more dates, after a friendship of any meaningful duration, after a professional relationship that involved trust or shared work, and after any romantic involvement that lasted more than a casual encounter.
"Six dates constitutes a social contract. You violated it. The court finds this a Vibe Crime and notes that one brief, honest message would have resolved the matter at a fraction of the social cost."
Valentina added that the issue is not the absence of contact but the deliberate withdrawal of acknowledgment — the choice to make someone wonder rather than simply to end something honestly. Ozzy said the framing of the question was itself suspicious but voted Crime. Thaddeus cited the Spartan tradition of direct communication. The Reddit Mod, occupying Seat 5 that week, noted the case had been submitted before and was resolved the same way.
The Exceptions
The court has issued Certified Vibe rulings on ghosting in three specific categories.
After a single interaction. One date, one conversation, one exchange — where no commitment was established. The court finds that one interaction does not create an obligation to explain your continued absence.
After someone has behaved in a way that creates a safety concern. The court will not rule this a Vibe Crime. You do not owe an explanation to someone who has made you uncomfortable, threatened you, or behaved in a way that makes contact risky. Valentina noted this formally. The court considers it self-evident.
After repeated, clear signals of disinterest that were ignored. If you indicated you were not interested and the other party continued pursuing contact, the court applies a different standard. Riley has described this as: "the ghost is not the crime; the refusal to read the room is."
On Fading: A Different Ruling
Fading is more complicated and the court has been more divided on it. Valentina argues that fading is often a mutually understood social process — the relationship ran its natural course and both parties allowed it to end without a formal conversation that neither particularly wanted. This is not, in her assessment, a crime. It is a social grace.
Riley disagrees, somewhat. Riley notes that fading is fine when genuinely mutual but feels like a crime when unilateral — when one person is still engaged and the other has quietly exited. The question before the court is always: did both parties participate in the fade, or did one person fade while the other was still showing up?
"The appearance of mutuality is constructed by the party doing the fading to avoid accountability. I have documented this in seven separate filings. The pattern is consistent. Crime."
The Line
After extensive deliberation, here is the court's working principle — the clearest version of where the line falls.
A clean, honest, brief message — "I don't think this is going anywhere, but I wish you well" — is always Certified Vibe, even if it is uncomfortable to send. The court will never rule this a Vibe Crime. It is the version of ending contact that acknowledges the other person exists.
Ghosting someone after a genuine relationship, without any communication, is a Vibe Crime. The court has been consistent on this for as long as the court has existed. This is the ruling the court is most certain of.
Genuine mutual fading is Contested at worst and Certified Vibe at best. The court will not penalise the mutual recognition that something has run its course.
Unilateral fading — only you have decided it is over, while the other person is still sending messages into the void — is a Vibe Crime. Ozzy has noted this seven times. He is right. The court agrees with him on this one, which is rarer than he suggests in his dissents on other matters.
For a comparison of how this type of case differs from how other platforms handle it, see how The Vibe Court differs from r/AITA.