• 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)

I mostly skimmed over the thread, and I really can't say whether or not the thread is a stomp, and there was FantaRin who agreed with Weekly, but otherwise it seems most agree more with Bambu. I am aware there is a difference between a decisive victory and a stomp; while the latter does have an obvious outcome, the loser will at least put up a good fight before going down. A stomp is basically a combination of no chance of victory and basically being overkilled in the process; I though those discussions were over with back in like 2018/2019.

But anyway, it's nearly 4 AM where I'm at plus I stop caring about Vs threads a long time ago, but Crabwhale might be reading more precisely, but I agree with him both should settle down for now.
 
DarkDragonMedeus said:
I mostly skimmed over the thread, and I really can't say whether or not the thread is a stomp, and there was FantaRin who agreed with Weekly, but otherwise it seems most agree more with Bambu. I am aware there is a difference between a decisive victory and a stomp; while the latter does have an obvious outcome, the loser will at least put up a good fight before going down. A stomp is basically a combination of no chance of victory and basically being overkilled in the process; I though those discussions were over with back in like 2018/2019.

But anyway, it's nearly 4 AM where I'm at plus I stop caring about Vs threads a long time ago, but Crabwhale might be reading more precisely, but I agree with him both should settle down for now.
Click to expand...
If you need further clarification i explained it pretty well in the vs removal thread, or i can repost stuff here or on discord
 
Aight, firstly, this is not fully relevant to the thread, but the only calc in Hunter's profile that is 8-A is not accepted by any calc group. I do not know if it was okay'd elsewhere, but I felt as if it was at least relevant to ask here.

Second, I do not know where the 5-8 times AP difference that Weekly claims in the thread comes from (unless I'm misinterpreting what he means by "stronger"). The Hunter is (using the as of right now uncomfirmed calc) at 1.3 trillion joules roughly, Drinker is at 2ish.

But really these are just trivial matters.

To the absolute best of my understanding, this match is not a stomp. I read through both profiles, both threads and a good chunk of the arguments. As a neutral party with incomplete knowledge of either verse, I cannot see the validity of this thread being in question. It is decisive, not a stomp.

As for the behavior of both primary participants, Bambu became overly argumentative and not a little mean-spirited during and after the conclusion of the VS thread. Next time I would recommend a cooler attitude when dealing with such things.

Weekly however obfuscated facts at a few points, such as insinuating the thread switched course completely to supporting his stance after Bambu and Lephyr stopped responding (they never did through the duration of it). Furthermore, he did in fact spam the Removal thread during the tail end of this fiasco, which, at the point where an admin is deleting your posts, it's MAYBE a good idea to like, stop? Get another staff member to look at it perhaps? Regardless, trying to brute force the issue through spam is not what I would call a correct course.

Also, and this is a personal pet peeve so take it with a spoonful of salt, I do not like the angle of "admin bad abusing power grr". In almost every circumstance it is brought up, it is a groan-worthy response and holds about as much water as a sieve.

So Bambu was somewhat crass, but Weekly is clearly in the wrong here. And that is my FINAL verdict. I have spent two and a half hours analyzing this case. Quite frankly, I am spent. Other staff may check the truth of my response, but this is where I personally sign off. I will not be responding to any further enquiries.
 
Last edited:
Crabwhale said:
Aight, firstly, this is not fully relevant to the thread, but the only calc in Hunter's profile that is 8-A is not accepted by any calc group. I do not know if it was okay'd elsewhere, but I felt as if it was at least relevant to ask here.
Click to expand...
It was accepted in the CRT that was done for it and the recalc was accepted in the followup CRT, Bambu OKed the initial application and the second was okayed by a calc member
Crabwhale said:
Second, I do not know where the 5-8 times AP difference that Weekly claims in the thread comes from (unless I'm misinterpreting what he means by "stronger"). The Hunter is (using the as of right now uncomfirmed calc) at 1.3 trillion joules roughly, Drinker is at 2ish.
Click to expand...
The Hunter is 130 tons

The Drinker is 500 Tons

Admittedly my mistake, i was given the wrong calc for the Drinker's AP, i was told it scaled to this 760 ton calc
Crabwhale said:
To the absolute best of my understanding, this match is not a stomp. I read through both profiles, both threads and a good chunk of the arguments. As a neutral party with incomplete knowledge of either verse, I cannot see the validity of this thread being in question. It is decisive, not a stomp.
Click to expand...
It is not decisive, the Hunter does not have a single scenario in which he can win, that is a textbook stomp.
Crabwhale said:
Weekly however obfuscated facts at a few points, such as insinuating the thread switched course completely to supporting his stance after Bambu and Lephyr stopped responding (they never did through the duration of it).
Click to expand...
Scans please? I am extremely offended at that implication and would appreciate it if you backed up that claim. I changed my argument in the second thread because Bambu and Lephyr made better points, at which point i agreed it was a stomp.
Crabwhale said:
Furthermore, he did in fact spam the Removal thread during the tail end of this fiasco, which, at the point where an admin is deleting your posts, it's MAYBE a good idea to like, stop? Get another staff member to look at it perhaps? Regardless, trying to brute force the issue through spam is not what I would call a correct course.
Click to expand...
Admittedly i did that yes but what was i supposed to do? Who is a staff member going to take the side of? The staff member who is buddy buddy with all the other staff? Or the blue name who everyone thinks is a problem becuase he gets mad when people target him?
 
Crabwhale said:
Also, and this is a personal pet peeve so take it with a spoonful of salt, I do not like the angle of "admin bad abusing power grr". In almost every circumstance it is brought up, it is a groan-worthy response and holds about as much water as a sieve.
Click to expand...
I mean, lets be real, it aint normal users who are deleting responses of people and getting them thread banned just because they disagreed with them is it?
 
I'm not buddy buddy with all of the other staff. Shan't comment on the rest to avoid flooding the thread but I hardly speak to most of 'em. You know what you're doing, and I'm not fond of it. Leaving it at that.
 
Mr._Bambu said:
I'm not buddy buddy with all of the other staff. Shan't comment on the rest to avoid flooding the thread but I hardly speak to most of 'em. You know what you're doing, and I'm not fond of it. Leaving it at that.
Click to expand...
What im 'doing' is arguing a stomp thread should be removed. And i will not stop arguing that until it is.
 
As someone who followed the thread and heard arguments from both sides, I can succinctly say it's not really a stomp. Of course Weekly would disagree, but as you can see, he has gone to great lengths to get the thread removed on the grounds of a stomp. Now I'd like to clarify that there was a thread prior to the one above where Weekly was in favour of Hunter winning the fight. He was promptly given a list of reasons why Hunter doesn't win and his tune switched to that of a stomp. One could surmise a simple change of stance after finding out what Drinker could do, but even so, nobody would die so passionately on a hill like this over a small matchup. Weekly even claimed Bambu was winfarming for D&D when the man has to be actively bullied to even get on a D&D thread.

Weekly has also cited staff bias both on and off the wiki as being a main factor in the thread's outcome. Weekly - who mind you was dishonorably demoted - has gone on record stating how he would like to have his staff membership returned, despite cussing out at us and claiming we're "supporting" each other purely because we're staff. So I'm even more confused about his motives when he says things like this because we are either the nepotistic cabal he claims we are and wants a piece of that pie, or we are nothing like he claims we are and he's making mountains out of molehills.

All in all, we are witnessing a pattern of behavior we have all seen from Weekly before. I have personally told him to just drop the thread and move on - as I'm sure most sensible people would do - however, he has undauntingly decided to pursue this matter to high hell. Maybe some might see it as admirable, but I honestly see it as worrying. Nobody should be this attached to the wiki and it's perfectly fine to let some things go (especially a VS thread that has no bearing over the core mission of our wiki) and I would like to remind everyone that this is a HOBBYIST website. Lest your hobbies become an addiction.
 
The core mission is accuracy. Allowing a stomp to be considered fair is inaccurate.
 
Last edited:
Sir_Ovens said:
No the core mission is character indexing. The VS matches are a fun little side thing that shouldn't be taken so seriously.
Click to expand...
You say that yet Bambu is the one who has dragged this out and into the RVT for refusing to let a thread that means nothing in the grand scheme of things be removed
 
Mr._Bambu said:
The edits are by a guy named "Steezstifler", and honestly I have a hard time thinking they're malicious. Most of them seem to come from a place of genuine knowledge of the verse, and the only problem is that it is done without any CRT or consultation.

I'll drop the man a warning.
Click to expand...
Okay. Then I seem to likely have mixed him up with @cloudyagami , so I apologise to Cloud in that case.
 
cloudyagami said:
No problem i havent been making edits lately, only versus matchups since my last violation
Click to expand...
Okay. That is good then. Only apply changes that have been accepted by thread moderators and/or administrators in preceding content revision threads please.
 
Aachintya31 said:
This guy has been vandalising different section of main pages of many verse (here, here, here ,here ,here ,and here )
Click to expand...
Reiner said:
I think it's based off a accepted thread? iirc there was a thread abt this.
Click to expand...
Reiner said:
https://vsbattles.com/threads/new-s...is-time-ronna-and-quetta.148085/#post-5419729
Here
Click to expand...
Aachintya31 said:
He should have waited for the conclusion of that thread though. But Ok.
Click to expand...
@Flashlight237

You need to wait until content revision threads have been accepted by our administrators and/or thread moderators before you apply their results to our wiki pages, and also always link to the threads in question in the small edit summary boxes of the affected pages when you edit them, in order to avoid misunderstandings from edit-patrollers.
 
As for Weekly, I am very certain that he legitimately does not mean any harm.

He feels that he is doing everything he can to keep his behaviour under as good control as possible, despite the medicines he takes, and feeling like other members are recurrently trying to bully him, and that our staff does not do anything to stop it, and that he is not being allowed to defend himself due to constantly being assumed to be the bad guy regardless if other members have collectively behaved considerably worse against him beforehand.

I would appreciate if our staff members would be willing to keep their eyes open for other members behaving badly against him, and to show some consideration for hIs sensitive mental state. It was not at all fun for me back when I was overmedicated by bad psych medicines either.

That said, it probably would be best if Weekly tries to stay away from the types of arguments, such as versus threads, that make him upset until he feels considerably more stable and healthy again.
 
Antvasima said:
As for Weekly, I am very certain that he legitimately does not mean any harm.

He feels that he is doing everything he can to keep his behaviour under as good control as possible, despite the medicines he takes, and feeling like other members are recurrently trying to bully him, and that our staff does not do anything to stop it, and that he is not being allowed to defend himself due to constantly being assumed to be the bad guy regardless if other members have collectively behaved considerably worse against him beforehand.

I would appreciate if our staff members would be willing to keep their eyes open for other members behaving badly against him, and to show some consideration for hIs sensitive mental state. It was not at all fun for me back when I was overmedicated by bad psych medicines either.

That said, it probably would be best if Weekly tries to stay away from the types of arguments, such as versus threads, that make him upset until he feels considerably more stable and healthy again.
Click to expand...
Y'know as someone with autism I never really liked using a mental illness as a complete scapegoat for wrongdoings, and I don't want to take away from Weekly's problems, not at all, but it probably shouldn't be used as a TOTAL justification for what has happened.
Mental problems are something that should probably be addressed first and foremost if you're gonna try to evaluate someone's punishment.
A friend from Discord once told me:
"An explanation and an excuse are two different things. It's okay to give an explanation, as long as you don't use it as an excuse."
 
TheMonkeMan said:
Y'know as someone with autism I never really liked using a mental illness as a complete scapegoat for wrongdoings, and I don't want to take away from Weekly's problems, not at all, but it probably shouldn't be used as a TOTAL justification for what has happened.
Mental problems are something that should probably be addressed first and foremost if you're gonna try to evaluate someone's punishment.
A friend from Discord once told me:
"An explanation and an excuse are two different things. It's okay to give an explanation, as long as you don't use it as an excuse."
Click to expand...
Im not using it as an excuse, i fully acknowledge that i have issues and have been working very hard for the past year an a half to get them under control, its just that even with that i still have an occasional tendency to let frustration get the better of me which im also trying to work on
 
WeeklyBattles said:
Im not using it as an excuse, i fully acknowledge that i have issues and have been working very hard for the past year an a half to get them under control, its just that even with that i still have an occasional tendency to let frustration get the better of me which im also trying to work on
Click to expand...
I hope that one day, you're able to maintain better self control then.
 
Well, mid-level autism (which I also have) is a mental disability, not an illness, and the crisis caused by systematic overmedication of psych medicines mostly developed during the 1950s is continuously causing massive amounts of mental damage and instability, and definitely not to personally controllable degrees in more extreme cases.

However, I definitely think that Weekly should systematically try to avoid participating in any types of arguments that tend to make him upset from now onwards, including versus thread discussions.
 
Antvasima said:
Well, mid-level autism (which I also have) is a mental disability, not an illness, and the crisis caused by systematic overmedication of psych medicines mostly developed during the 1950s is continuously causing massive amounts of mental damage and instability, and definitely not to personally controllable degrees in more extreme cases.

However, I definitely think that Weekly should systematically try to avoid participating in any types of arguments that tend to make him upset from now onwards, including versus thread discussions.
Click to expand...
I have ADHD actually but close enough

But yeah i'll do what i can to distance myself from them for the time being
 
Admittedly, we do keep changing the rules left and right on how much of an AP multiplier is big enough to be considered a stomp; used to be 4x, later it was 7.5x and now there are plans to widen that gap further, but at least that gap large enough to either be neigh invulnerable to the enemy attacks or knock the opponent unconscious with a single punch, and I agree that Weekly didn't mean harm and also quoted the wrong calc and overlooked a one he didn't notice.

As for the debate on mental conditions, obviously no amount if it should warrant a free pass to get away with anything, but at the same time, it does need to be considered and respected. It just means people should probably take some time away from Vs debating to do other things such as aerobic exercises, or petting dogs or cats instead of debating. And then they can come back after they feel better and get some stressful stuff on their chest. I have voiced having a combination of social anxiety and PTSD numerous times which while not entirely the same as the ones mentioned, much of the same therapy methods do help out a great deal.
 
I agree with Ovens. I personally think Weekly should stay away from the wiki for his own sake. What's above is no different than what used to happen before Weekly got banned for a year.

At the very least, as discussed between the HR group and among the bureaucrats, a 3-month ban from all vs threads with a suggestion to stay away from any other arguments that stress him out is good for starters. We will likely be forced to take more measures if this continues however.
 
Looking through both sides and seeing Oven’s perspective on the conversation I gotta side with Bambu. This thread has been long finished and Weekly’s borderline obsessive attempt to try to remove a vs thread from a couple of pages on this website doesn’t really sit well with me, especially given after his ban I don’t see any attempt of improvement in his behavior whatsoever. If this keeps up I believe we’re going to see the repeats of what happened before that caused his demotion or ban, so any punishment for his behavior is fine by me.
 
AKM sama said:
I agree with Ovens. I personally think Weekly should stay away from the wiki for his own sake. What's above is no different than what used to happen before Weekly got banned for a year.

At the very least, as discussed between the HR group and among the bureaucrats, a 3-month ban from all vs threads with a suggestion to stay away from any other arguments that stress him out is good for starters. We will likely be forced to take more measures if this continues however.
Click to expand...
Agreed. A very strong suggestion to stay away from such arguments, as we would much prefer to not be forced to ban Weekly for a long time again, due to him not being able to mentally handle them.
 
With all due respect to everyone involved, I don't think y'all get it. You haven't noticed a trend. The trend. I have, however.

Wiki users like Weekly who put so much time into it can never just quit. They have to be forced to quit, even if their mental health is actively being drained into a saggy, desiccated prune. We joke about VS-itis, but honestly I wouldn't be surprised if what we do here was classified under some actual obsessive disorder for at least a portion of our userbase.

At this rate, I think it might genuinely be in his best interests if we removed him permanently from the wiki. People have known Weekly outside of debating and they generally agree he's a decent fellow when the word VS doesn't leave anyone's mouth. It's not even about doling out punishment at this point, it's about cutting off an addict from the source of that addiction.
 
Crabwhale said:
With all due respect to everyone involved, I don't think y'all get it. You haven't noticed a trend. The trend. I have, however.

Wiki users like Weekly who put so much time into it can never just quit. They have to be forced to quit, even if their mental health is actively being drained into a saggy, desiccated prune. We joke about VS-itis, but honestly I wouldn't be surprised if what we do here was classified under some actual obsessive disorder for at least a portion of our userbase.

At this rate, I think it might genuinely be in his best interests if we removed him permanently from the wiki. People have known Weekly outside of debating and they generally agree he's a decent fellow when the word VS doesn't leave anyone's mouth. It's not even about doling out punishment at this point, it's about cutting off an addict from the source of that addiction.
Click to expand...
Do you think that this would help you with your mental stability, @WeeklyBattles ?

If so, I would strongly suggest that you copy-paste the mental health help post that I sent you in private first, as it contains some useful advice.
 
I think a forced ban is still too harsh, a final warning perhaps and I may not disagree that there could be a time with worse coming to worst and that if this keeps up that may need to be a eventual action. But at the moment, I don't think banning him from the forum/wiki is really a justified cause. Forbidding him from Vs threads until he cools off is reasonable, but I don't think further action will really be a good idea so soon. Plus, it's no secret that there are people on the wiki who straight up hate his guts to the point where they deliberately make vs threads where Weekly's preferred characters or from Weekly's preferred verses seems to have a consistently decisive loss. I know from experience that there are a few users who have intentionally made spite threads just to spite Weekly. Of course I don't want to say most people making threads involving RWBY or Overwatch or Bayonetta do that, and some of the people I am thinking of might not have done so since 2018, but the point still stands.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Agnaa
Fanart Rule Revamp
Replies
7
Views
2K
Antvasima
Antvasima
FinePoint
  • Locked
Clarifying Death Threat Rules
2
Replies
64
Views
6K
Antvasima
Antvasima
Kachon123
One Piece: Planet Size Discussion Rule
Replies
14
Views
2K
RaikiKurohane99
RaikiKurohane99
StarShooter80
Establishing Gap Needed for LS Stomps
Replies
13
Views
845
Qawsedf234
Qawsedf234
Agnaa
  • Locked
Controversial Powers on New Pages - Editing Rules Tweak
2
Replies
69
Views
8K
Antvasima
Antvasima
Back
Top