-
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
- 7,915
- 15,096
Of course it's fair. The points I would've made against the OP was made by someone else. It would do nothing but clutter the thread for me to repeat it and pantomime an argument that already happened. That's why people just say they agree with someone. There's nothing wrong about that at all.
- 13,880
- 22,736
I will say, I do think there's something to say about how it's more problematic for staff to FRA train a thread compared to regular users doing so, since the staff's opinions actually contribute to whether or not a thread is accepted, whereas it doesn't matter how many regular members FRA train a thread. I can see some genuine frustration to be had here over something that very much seems unfair.
As far as Tdjwo's behavior goes, though, he may need a short ban (like a week I'd say) since he seems to be a repeat offender
As far as Tdjwo's behavior goes, though, he may need a short ban (like a week I'd say) since he seems to be a repeat offender
- 12,484
- 16,851
A week is fair with me.
Tdjwo
He/Him- 3,311
- 1,488
That's exactly the point I've been trying to convey!
Woah! If you don't think I commited any offense here, why should I still get banned?
- 7,915
- 15,096
He didn't say anything like that.
- 13,880
- 22,736
There’s a difference between expressing your frustrations and directly attacking the people in question. It just needlessly poisons the well to do so
I still think you were overly rude in your approach, even if I can understand where you’re coming from
- 18,196
- 19,622
I'm cutting off this talk about staff FRA'ing and moving it to Tdjwo's message wall. Anyone who wants to continue that should comment there, or your post will be deleted.
Substantive talk about Tdjwo's report should stay here.
Substantive talk about Tdjwo's report should stay here.
Last edited:
Tdjwo
He/Him- 3,311
- 1,488
The thing is, I keep on expatiating on the same argument an OP brings. I literally made similar comments up to 5 times in a row, debunking the same person's claims. I wasn't the only one doing that. Up to 5 others did that but he still kept on bringing the same thing that has been explained up. Then another staff members suddenly comes in and says he agrees with the debunked x50 argument without elaborating further. And as a staff, that vote would get counted despite not giving your reasons. That doesn't sound logical does it? And I never attacked him. I only called him out. I honestly don't know the specific words I used that was considered rude.
Tdjwo
He/Him- 3,311
- 1,488
oh my bad.
Mr. Bambu
Suffer-Not-Injustice Bambu
VS Battles
Joke Battles
Bureaucrat
Administrator
Calculation Group
- 25,043
- 29,572
I posted this to Tdjwo's wall, presuming Agnaa had meant all discussion regarding the topic ought to be moved there- a strange decision, but I wanted to oblige. I am reposting it here since he clarified he wasn't trying to enact new strategies of RVR Management lol.
- 13,880
- 22,736
Btw I’ve changed my stance. I’m against a ban
- 34,640
- 41,967
I am unable to see his message wall for some reason; no idea why but normally it's only like that for permabanned users.
- 35,070
- 41,656
Having read the message wall, I too am advocating against a ban. Though Tdjwo does need to calm down way more than this and keep a more level-headed approach to his future contributions, his frustration is... actually justified here for once.
- 12,484
- 16,851
Apparently from talks I've been having, is a privacy feature on the forums. He has it set so that certain people can't watch his wall, allegedly.
- 35,070
- 41,656
I thought only staff could use such a feature, if it even existed.
- 12,484
- 16,851
I admittedly didn't even know such thing was possible, but I can watch his wall just fine.
Tdjwo
He/Him- 3,311
- 1,488
I honestly forgot I has that on. I made that feature because multiple stalkers couldn't stop following my every activity and it was quite obvious and annoying. Do I have to remove it?
- 34,640
- 41,967
Well, it's okay if you don't want some random regular users stalking you, but I would advise that at the very least, all staff members should have permission so they can do things for business purposes.
- 12,484
- 16,851
Yeah, like DDM said, just remove it for staff and if possible.
Tdjwo
He/Him- 3,311
- 1,488
I already did. The only issue is I cant allow only staff members, since I've unlocked it now, anyone can view my activities including non-staff members.
- 34,640
- 41,967
Saw on his wall now, and for now, I suppose I retract my proposal for a ban. I think he is alright for now.
- 7,915
- 15,096
For transparency sake, the user @Akashachann was permanently banned, as he changed his profile picture to a picture of my real life face, presumably out of spite since we were on opposite sides of a debate at the time. Now that his profile picture has been removed, it is less concerning to announce the situation.
Now, I am not hyper-sensitive to people knowing what I look like or potentially being able to obtain details about my real life, but it is the decision to use them against me as a form of mockery/harassment on the wiki that is unacceptable. I am not sure who that user was or where they obtained the picture, but if anyone has information about it please feel free to come forward, and let this be a reminder to respect people's privacy and keep the wiki and real life separate.
Now, I am not hyper-sensitive to people knowing what I look like or potentially being able to obtain details about my real life, but it is the decision to use them against me as a form of mockery/harassment on the wiki that is unacceptable. I am not sure who that user was or where they obtained the picture, but if anyone has information about it please feel free to come forward, and let this be a reminder to respect people's privacy and keep the wiki and real life separate.
- 18,393
- 14,332
It is for sure in Mori's server.
- 11,748
- 14,171
I meant as in getting them global banned across the FANDOM network in totality, if applicable. I don't know the exact policy on this, but I imagine using someone's likeness without their permission is a huge nono.
- 7,915
- 15,096
No, I didn't post it in Mori's server.
- 7,915
- 15,096
Whoever they are, they made a VSBW and CSAP account pretty much at the same time a couple weeks ago, so it wouldn't surprise me if they were a sockpuppet. Might be worth checking IP overlap.
Looking through their post history, I am very confident it's a sockpuppet, as they immediately displayed familiarity with pretty specific VSBW concepts like qualitative superiority, R>F, different types of niche abilities like acausality or NEP etc. Not the kind of thing a total newcomer would have a grasp on the first day they are here.
Looking through their post history, I am very confident it's a sockpuppet, as they immediately displayed familiarity with pretty specific VSBW concepts like qualitative superiority, R>F, different types of niche abilities like acausality or NEP etc. Not the kind of thing a total newcomer would have a grasp on the first day they are here.
Last edited:
- 18,393
- 14,332
From Fandom's ToS
You can report the user here: https://support.fandom.com/hc/requests/new?ticket_form_id=360000948854
Last edited:
- 34,640
- 41,967
This is indeed inexcusable and a permanent ban is absolutely valid. And reporting them to fandom like Dread linked also seems like a good idea.
- 4,744
- 7,347
A brief report of @Amost6x for actions related to this thread: https://vsbattles.com/threads/genshin-impact-6-c-upgrade.155573/
Amost6x applied revisions to several profiles on an on-going, unconcluded CRT without a consensus and without informing people on the thread that they had done so. Considering the context, I'm fairly confident that this was just an error with understanding site standards and not any actual malicious attempt to vandalise the pages, so I've already given them a short warning on the thread informing them of the issue and directing them to not do it again in the future. I'm pretty sure that's all it'll need.
Still need to reverse the page edits and update the warning tracker, however.
Amost6x applied revisions to several profiles on an on-going, unconcluded CRT without a consensus and without informing people on the thread that they had done so. Considering the context, I'm fairly confident that this was just an error with understanding site standards and not any actual malicious attempt to vandalise the pages, so I've already given them a short warning on the thread informing them of the issue and directing them to not do it again in the future. I'm pretty sure that's all it'll need.
Still need to reverse the page edits and update the warning tracker, however.
- 5,163
- 11,790
I already reversed his edits on Cyno page. The revisions on Traveler's page seem all to be updates to the story that are evident which I think should be fine. Though, I removed the 6-C rating from Traveler's Sumeru key for obvious reasons.
- 5,163
- 11,790
I think you gave the wrong link
- 177,372
- 90,238
- Thread starter
- #20,877
Should we ban them then? And if so, for how long?
- 177,372
- 90,238
- Thread starter
- #20,878
I did not get any automatic overlaps with other accounts here, and they do not seem to use a VPN given how frequently they used the same IP address.
- 18,393
- 14,332
I believe the matter at hand may not meet the criteria for an official report in the RvR context. However, it is worth noting the issue raised in the provided link, as it carries some significance.
In a previous discussion initiated by @Planck69, both myself and @Georredannea15 were requested to present our viewpoints in a concise manner, limited to a single post. I complied with this request by refraining from addressing other individuals directly and instead shared my own perspectives in a single post. However, @Georredannea15 did not adhere to Planck's instructions and chose to respond to my points, thereby gaining an advantage over me, as my arguments were specifically "counter-addressed."
This situation places me at a disadvantage, which I perceive as unfair since I am no longer allowed to address back. In following Planck's directive, I purposely refrained from engaging in back-and-forth arguments until someone from the supporters of God of War adopted a similar approach. If our intention is to foster a thoughtful discussion while ensuring fairness for all participants, this type of comment can be seen as misleading.
To rectify this issue, it is suggested that both parties be granted permission to engage in a back-and-forth exchange or that a single post be designated to avoid the impression of favoritism.
Once again, it is important to note that this report is not directed towards any specific individual, but I do believe there is a flaw in the current approach.
In a previous discussion initiated by @Planck69, both myself and @Georredannea15 were requested to present our viewpoints in a concise manner, limited to a single post. I complied with this request by refraining from addressing other individuals directly and instead shared my own perspectives in a single post. However, @Georredannea15 did not adhere to Planck's instructions and chose to respond to my points, thereby gaining an advantage over me, as my arguments were specifically "counter-addressed."
This situation places me at a disadvantage, which I perceive as unfair since I am no longer allowed to address back. In following Planck's directive, I purposely refrained from engaging in back-and-forth arguments until someone from the supporters of God of War adopted a similar approach. If our intention is to foster a thoughtful discussion while ensuring fairness for all participants, this type of comment can be seen as misleading.
To rectify this issue, it is suggested that both parties be granted permission to engage in a back-and-forth exchange or that a single post be designated to avoid the impression of favoritism.
Once again, it is important to note that this report is not directed towards any specific individual, but I do believe there is a flaw in the current approach.
