• 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)

JohnConquest1 said:
There were several points made well before the ones you linked that featured people trying to tell him, he was overlooking Obito's potentially useful hax in that fight. Only for him to say that physicals were the only thing that matters and that Obito's hax was irrelevant. Both of which are almost never case in an Obito fight, especially not one where speed was equalized. Then there's the comment about everything he said being true and undisputed fact.
Click to expand...
Yes, which I'm not glossing over, I pointed out in my comment that he has an ego the size of a city. The match itself and the reasoning for both sides are however not very relevant to my general point.

My point is not that you shouldn't warn him or that he didn't do wrong, he's still largely at fault for this, but you shouldn't gang him up and turn the thread into a messy twitter call-out regardless of situation, as is just as bad, if not worse, than some new guy saying that DB is unbeatable.
 
I do remember DaReaperMan made a content revision with quite a few updates, Not Icarus should be notified.

@Not_Icarus please remember to link the thread to where a content revision in the edit reasons had accepted each time you make updates to profiles.
 
I can at least give you my reasonings for scaling the Roach's regen to everyone else lol. Their quirk is not necessarily regenerating entire body sections better but rather how fast they can do it, especially when burrowed. "Zerg possess remarkable regenerative capabilities. Their alpha amino acids possess unique R groups that allow dead cell matter to be combined with normal proteins to create new cells. Under normal circumstances, zerg may regenerate indefinitely; a radically changing cell structure is a by-product of the process, as well as high quantity of energy in the process.[99] Given time, even a gravely wounded zerg will return to full health. Thus, a zerg colony remains viable if even one creature or structure survives.[2] Few zerg survive for more than a few minutes in a given battle, but those that do evolve during the battle itself, becoming more powerful every hour.[107] The zerg constantly study their enemies and adapt accordingly.[108] Zerg structures have the ability to adapt while under fire, hardening their outer shell with bony plates when under fire in order to ensure its survival.[109]"
 
Not_Icarus said:
I can at least give you my reasonings for scaling the Roach's regen to everyone else lol. Their quirk is not necessarily regenerating entire body sections better but rather how fast they can do it, especially when burrowed. "Zerg possess remarkable regenerative capabilities. Their alpha amino acids possess unique R groups that allow dead cell matter to be combined with normal proteins to create new cells. Under normal circumstances, zerg may regenerate indefinitely; a radically changing cell structure is a by-product of the process, as well as high quantity of energy in the process.[99] Given time, even a gravely wounded zerg will return to full health. Thus, a zerg colony remains viable if even one creature or structure survives.[2] Few zerg survive for more than a few minutes in a given battle, but those that do evolve during the battle itself, becoming more powerful every hour.[107] The zerg constantly study their enemies and adapt accordingly.[108] Zerg structures have the ability to adapt while under fire, hardening their outer shell with bony plates when under fire in order to ensure its survival.[109]"
Click to expand...
Not the place to put this, this is better off on a CRT or something
 
I'd at the very least suggest talking about it in message walls, and perhaps some others could help you make one if you have trouble posting new threads. There's also a new sandbox feature if you scroll up, so you could prep to make a new thread and then post it when finished.

But anyway, this isn't the thread to discuss verse revisions and such, but message walls and/or other threads are fair game.
 
@Not_Icarus

Here is an image that shows what the wiki's edit summary boxes look like:

vsbattles.fandom.com

Editing Rules

The VS Battles Wiki presently consists of 34,735 pages, most of them listing the statistics of characters across different fictional franchises. However, there is a tremendous amount of work involved in maintaining the accuracy of statistics and upholding a high quality for the profiles. In...
vsbattles.fandom.com vsbattles.fandom.com

As Medeus said, you should always provide links to the forum discussion threads in which your revisions were accepted within these boxes.
 
Here is a link to our content revision forum, where you should post suggested revisions:

vsbattles.com

Content Revision

Often, statistics and other important contents for profile pages need to be revised. Any discussion pertaining to such revisions must be done in this board. Before posting, make sure that your arguments are presented in a manner that is easy to understand and backed by valid scans. In...
vsbattles.com vsbattles.com
 
Oblivion_Of_The_Endless said:
Reporting @Thedoctor for their overall attitude on this thread
Click to expand...
Newendigo said:
I'm going to play a bit of devil's advocate and say his overractions is partially justified due to the people in the thread, case in point:

One, two, three, four, and five before the outburst. Note that Bernkanstelll is the one to started with the direct insults, not him.

One, two, three, four, five, afterwards.

Thedoctor's behaviour is not good either through the posts before the outburts, he shows a lot of ego and incompetency into developing his points (Because he has some points, he is just bad at debating them) and later degenerates into direct insults, but I don't think we should condone this kind of pigpiling and mockery in any thread

We should be better than that, we should try to keep things always civilized in debates instead of devolving them into insults, bullying, clowing and general humillation because of some newby was not making sense, just to later call him out for exploding in anger.

Basically, I think we could cut him some slack (He already got warned but still), and advice the people involved (@Bernkastelll, @Baken384, @OnsokunoSonic, @FarerPurple) to avoid this unnecesary meme-scalation for similar scenarios in the future.
Click to expand...
DarkDragonMedeus said:
TheDoctor has shown some toxicity on other threads iirc, and I already brought that he also has attempted to make multiple accounts; though I rejected them. I don't agree with a ban, but a warning would suffice.
Click to expand...
Newendigo said:
Yes, which I'm not glossing over, I pointed out in my comment that he has an ego the size of a city. The match itself and the reasoning for both sides are however not very relevant to my general point.

My point is not that you shouldn't warn him or that he didn't do wrong, he's still largely at fault for this, but you shouldn't gang him up and turn the thread into a messy twitter call-out regardless of situation, as is just as bad, if not worse, than some new guy saying that DB is unbeatable.
Click to expand...
@Thedoctor

You need to make serious efforts to clean up your behaviour and stop being toxic. This is supposed to be a well-behaved and respectful community. Consider this as an official warning.

@Bernkastelll @Baken384 @OnsokunoSonic @FarerPurple

You need to be careful to not provoke inexperienced members via mocking gang-ups. That can easily trigger a chain of toxicity.
 
Thank you for being reasonable.

Also, this is not the right place for a long argument.
 
sanicspood said:
He thinks being superior by having his own scales not debunked here is how the wiki operates, again he’s misinformed
Click to expand...
Yes, that may be how other battleboard forums work, but not this one.
 
Antvasima said:
@Thedoctor

You need to make serious efforts to clean up your behaviour and stop being toxic. This is supposed to be a well-behaved and respectful community. Consider this as an official warning.

@Bernkastelll @Baken384 @OnsokunoSonic @FarerPurple

You need to be careful to not provoke inexperienced members via mocking gang-ups. That can easily trigger a chain of toxicity.
Click to expand...
Understood, i will try to stop, but that dude is not an inexperienced member, he's just a troll that said that its in the wiki for some "funny purposes" or something, and he also refuses to follow the wiki rules despite being aware of that
 
Hmm. Perhaps my initial instinct that it would be best to ban him was correct then.

What do you think, @DarkDragonMedeus and other staff members here? Should we consider Thedoctor a troll and ban him for a long time?
 
Antvasima said:
@Thedoctor

You need to make serious efforts to clean up your behaviour and stop being toxic. This is supposed to be a well-behaved and respectful community. Consider this as an official warning.

@Bernkastelll @Baken384 @OnsokunoSonic @FarerPurple

You need to be careful to not provoke inexperienced members via mocking gang-ups. That can easily trigger a chain of toxicity.
Click to expand...
yeah I'm sorry about that, it got out of hand and I probably should of just ignored the people trying to incite me, it won't happen again
 
Okay. That is good then. However, you really need to make a very serious continuous effort to shape up, as several members think that you are trolling at this point.
 
XXKINGXX69 said:
I never personally attacked someone in most of them (except for Ultima which I got warned for and Confluctor once). And do you really think minor jokes like that are serious? Or me making fun of a fictional character?
Click to expand...
I think it's very telling that you constantly make them in serious debates
XXKINGXX69 said:
Almost everyone here has done it before multiple times, even disrupting CRTs like that with repeated arguments
Click to expand...
So it's fine to do it?
XXKINGXX69 said:
If you read the thread, you'll realise that me and Swerzye were the only one who sent scans for claims, and most people were disregarding my arguments, so if you think I should be punished for this, then Confluctor and jibz should be too (not that I want them to)
Click to expand...
People were disregarding your arguments because you were basing a verse-wide cosmology revision off of one instance, that they deemed not to be enough.

Also, you have not addressed the part where you constantly make up stuff in debates and other forms of trolling.
 
C'mon everyone, let's not ban thedoctor. He did apologize for everything he did after all and I think he has a point about others disrupting CRTs. I mean, we're no better than him and I'm pretty sure some of us in this thread have done that before...

...sorry for derailing if I did.
 
DarkDragonMedeus said:
Well, thedoctor did apologize for his actions, so I'm willing to give him one last chance. But I think a ban may be in order if you goes back to those ways.
Click to expand...
I agree with this. It seems close to our standard approach.
 
So what did we decide regarding XXKINGXX69?
 
I'd say a one month ban is deserved, as they kept having such behavior over and over and over and Armor's list doesn't even include half of the annoying posts and messages he's sent, and given how he's already been warned in the past I think some punishment is required.

I might be too tender with a single month, but the offenses haven't been so bad, but I can see people wanting a longer ban, but I believe it shouldn't be as long as 6 months, that's definitely too much.
 
Do our staff here think that 1 or 2 months would be appropriate?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Antvasima
  • Sticky
Wiki Vandalism Reports
13 14 15
Replies
586
Views
40K
Antvasima
Antvasima
Mr. Bambu
Slight Adjustment to Rules Regarding Original Works
2
Replies
49
Views
4K
Antvasima
Antvasima
  • Locked
Regarding the Rule Violations Report Thread
2
Replies
71
Views
6K
LephyrTheRevanchist
LephyrTheRevanchist
H3110l12345I20
IRL Paper has a profile.
Replies
28
Views
2K
JustANormalLemon
JustANormalLemon
DarkGrath
  • Locked
Proposal for Off-Site Rules Revision
2 3
Replies
93
Views
10K
Antvasima
Antvasima
Back
Top