Rule Violation Reports (New forum)

[ImmortalDread]

You are unquestionably venturing beyond the realm of context and intent. No, I was not engaged in any form of harassment. Moreover, it certainly did not encapsulate my overarching intention throughout the entire discourse.

I never exhibited disrespect towards your request; indeed, I acknowledged and validated it. Additionally, I did not exclude you from the poll, as I perceived it not as a disrespectful action, but rather, as I elucidated earlier, due to my rationale for its retention. Thus, my aim is not to incite conflict with anyone, for the thread's purpose is rooted in amusement rather than singling out any specific individual.

• Are you seeking my acquiescence to the notion that my actions held a moral transgression in this matter?
  • Well, I concede that I may concur to some extent. I have already extended my apologies for this.
• However, to the crux of the matter, are you striving for my admission that I engaged in harassment towards someone?
  • No, emphatically not.

 

[Lonkitt]

You are unquestionably venturing beyond the realm of context and intent. No, I was not engaged in any form of harassment. Moreover, it certainly did not encapsulate my overarching intention throughout the entire discourse.

I never exhibited disrespect towards your request; indeed, I acknowledged and validated it. Additionally, I did not exclude you from the poll, as I perceived it not as a disrespectful action, but rather, as I elucidated earlier, due to my rationale for its retention. Thus, my aim is not to incite conflict with anyone, for the thread's purpose is rooted in amusement rather than singling out any specific individual.

• Are you seeking my acquiescence to the notion that my actions held a moral transgression in this matter? Well, I concede that I may concur to some extent. I have already extended my apologies for this.
• However, to the crux of the matter, are you striving for my admission that I engaged in harassment towards someone? No, emphatically not.

I'm not claiming you were seeking out conflict with us, but you definitely didn't respect what myself and others requested. We clearly expressed that we weren't comfortable being part of what we believed to be a troublesome thread and only wanted to not be represented in the final results

You claim you didn't see it as a disrespectful action, but when I said it was, you found that it was more disrespectful to the people who voted for me or anyone else who did not want to take part in this. No matter how you perceived it at first, you pretty much brushed off the fact that myself and others were uncomfortable with you ignoring our simple requests

Yeah, you apologized. But the fact that people think me and others just wanted to dig up problems for the hell of it is pretty ignorant. I'm gonna address it because frankly its not ok

 

[KingTempest]

I'm sorry
What are the grounds for a punishment in this conversation?

 

[Crabwhale]

I'm gonna barge in here and say that the people saying this is fine ain't got my support. If it's between friends and shit you can be pretty annoying and wave it off as banter, but Dread to my knowledge isn't particularly friendly with any of the users who requested to be removed. I don't think her not listening in this case was the right decision, especially since this is staff telling her to explicitly not do something (even if it's a personal matter and not a matter of the wiki).

I don't think any action should be taken either, I just think next time Dread should just accept that no means no. That's my two cents, and given that I'm higher ranking than everyone speaking here, I'd consider the matter settled unless some other admin decides to bring it up to express their opinion (please don't as this has already gone on too long).

Just be reasonable and kind to each-other where possible. Thank you.

 

[ImmortalDread]

I agree to this extent and apologized for these grounds too, but not to the point of harassing anyone or explicitly being rude to anyone.

I still think that this accusation is highly implausible and far from reality.

 

[Deagonx]

It's not so much about it being fine, I could agree with it being called inconsiderate, but I just don't see it as being relevant to the RVR.

 

[Agnaa]

Marshadow: I'd suggest a short ban and a topic ban extension (3-30 day ban, 30-60 day topic ban extension). We shouldn't let people weasel their way around topic bans like this. If they can start leaving "minor comments", that opens the door for them to gradually scale the comments up. I think we should cut this off immediately.

Marsh, if you wanna tell someone something about a verse, do it literally anywhere else besides a thread for the verse you're topic banned on.

Dread: Contrary to the people saying this doesn't violate rules, I think this can be said to have been instigating drama.

Refrain from spamming, trolling, threatening, using derogatory comments of any form (ethnic, homophobic, belittling the physically disabled or mentally ill, et cetera), and rude, vulgar, sexist, etcetera offensive language. We do not tolerate any form of bigotry in any direction whatsoever. Furthermore, do not instigate drama or toxicity, and follow the instructions in official staff warnings.

Off-site behavior is usually irrelevant except in cases of:

• Actions that lead to the destabilization of the site (such as videos, forum posts, Discord chats, etc. that create drama), whether or not it was systematic. To determine what counts as destabilization of the site one should mostly look at the consequences of said act rather than the individual act itself.

I'd think that a vote ranking users would have the risk of drama clear to most already, but apparently some staff members warned Dread about it beforehand, and she seemingly tried to force the angle of positivity to minimise that, which shows some awareness of the risk before creating it, in my mind.

Then, to see the multiple requests from staff members to get their names removed, and to not just ignore them, but to publish full results afterwards, seems bordering on willful ignorance.

I'd expect at least a warning, and at most a short ban (1-3 days).

 

[Deagonx]

Marshadow: I'd suggest a short ban and a topic ban extension (3-30 day ban, 30-60 day topic ban extension). We shouldn't let people weasel their way around topic bans like this. If they can start leaving "minor comments", that opens the door for them to gradually scale the comments up. I think we should cut this off immediately.

I agree.

Dread: Contrary to the people saying this doesn't violate rules, I think this can be said to have been instigating drama.

That could be said of a wide range of behavior on the wiki that is hitherto completely unmoderated, including a wide array of behavior that you yourself have advocated against action for. I am not sure what distinguishes Dread in this regard.

 

[Agnaa]

That could be said of a wide range of behavior on the wiki that is hitherto completely unmoderated, including a wide array of behavior that you yourself have advocated against action for. I am not sure what distinguishes Dread in this regard.

I don't think it is completely unmoderated. We got rid of the slander threads for that reason.

The simple answer is that I believe that calling someone's argument "the stupidest thing I've ever heard" causes far less drama than running an explicit popularity contest.

To me, that difference is kind of self-evident, given how Dread doing that lead to multiple staff members complaining, and a thread filling up with over 100 posts in a few hours before being closed. While most cases of someone's argument being insulted at most lead to one person being a bit sad/angry, without much increased reply density.

Perhaps it could be said to be an issue of scale? Our rules for off-site drama do say it should be of a systemic level. That's why we punish people for broad drama-creating situations that occur off-site, and not for insulting a single person off-site.

 

[Deagonx]

We got rid of the slander threads for that reason.

We got rid of the slander threads because they regularly crossed the line into rule-breaking. I don't recall anyone citing this rule during that process.

The simple answer is that I believe that calling someone's argument "the stupidest thing I've ever heard" causes far less drama than running an explicit popularity contest.

The amount of drama it causes more or less depends on the recipient of the insult. This is far too nebulous a metric for the RVR. Could we say that Fuji instigates drama by creating MGK downgrades simply because the very fact-of attempting to downgrade it causes a public debacle?

To me, that difference is kind of self-evident, given how Dread doing that lead to multiple staff members complaining, and a thread filling up with over 100 posts in a few hours before being closed. While most cases of someone's argument being insulted at most lead to one person being a bit sad/angry, without much increased reply density.

Perhaps it could be said to be an issue of scale? Our rules for off-site drama do say it should be of a systemic level. That's why we punish people for broad drama-creating situations that occur off-site, and not for insulting a single person off-site.

Personally, I don't really see it. I've seen users make "VSBW staff tier lists" and never thought they'd need individual staff members permission for inclusion or that such a thing is instigating drama. Dread thought it would be fun. I cannot possibly see warning someone for this, personally.

 

[Mr. Bambu]

We have historically had threads similar to this (I recall one specifically meant to classify staff members under High School "most (or least) [BLANK]" stuff), and although they were considered inadvisable in the past, I don't believe we ever treated them as rule violations. As such I would be against genuine action being taken, though I agree with a warning against this behavior in the future to set a precedent of action.

I'm willing to believe that the initial actions taken for that thread were in good faith and meant towards fun but if people asked to be removed (and they did) then they should have been excluded.

 

[Deagonx]

Reporting @TheMonkeMan for this now deleted comment describing two bureaucrats in a very uncomfortable and sexual context. I'm removing his threadban so he can respond here.

 

[Agnaa]

Whether we put it under sexual harassment, or just direct insults, I think that sorta behaviour's unacceptable.

I'd want a ban in the range of 2-12 weeks.

If you're gonna talk about your dislike of someone, do it in a more mature way.

 

[DaMonkeMan]

Reporting @TheMonkeMan for this now deleted comment describing two bureaucrats in a very uncomfortable and sexual context. I'm removing his threadban so he can respond here.

I understand it was a little innappropriate, so I suppose I can apologize for that, but what I said was essentially saying he's a dick eater... Which is a very common insult in and off this forum, honestly.
I mean I seriously doubt it would actually hurt them, considering how much we use terms like that here, but if it did then I sincerely apologize and would accept any punishment I get in that scenario.

 

[Agnaa]

Off-wiki is whatever, but if there's other people on-site talking about users slobbin' on other users' knobs in a non-jovial manner, let us know so we can warn/ban them too.

 

[Mr. Bambu]

Whether we put it under sexual harassment, or just direct insults, I think that sorta behaviour's unacceptable.

I'd want a ban in the range of 2-12 weeks.

If you're gonna talk about your dislike of someone, do it in a more mature way.

Given past offenses of a similar nature, ban seems fair. Two months seems fine to me.

 

[Deagonx]

but what I said was essentially saying he's a dick eater... Which is a very common insult in and off this forum, honestly.

I don't know what your point is exactly. The c-word is also a very common insult but it'd still get you banned. I don't see how describing two users in sex acts because they agree with each other is defensible in any context.

Actually. I'd just strongly advise against ever talking about sexual matters in any context whatsoever with regard to other users and that should be super obvious.

I agree with Agnaa on a ban, leaning towards longer than shorter, he's received multiple warnings and even bans for inappropriate behavior.

 

[DaMonkeMan]

Whether we put it under sexual harassment, or just direct insults, I think that sorta behaviour's unacceptable.

I'd want a ban in the range of 2-12 weeks.

If you're gonna talk about your dislike of someone, do it in a more mature way.

I don't even hate Ant or DT though, that's the thing.
I simply noticed that Ant praises DT alot and made a joke about it, which is also something that a lot of people do.

Off-wiki is whatever, but if there's other people on-site talking about users slobbin' on other users' knobs in a non-jovial manner, let us know so we can warn/ban them too.

Really all you need to do is type "dick" into the search bar here and you'll find a lot of those types of messages. Even from staff members.
So I didn't think what I was doing was rule breaking due to those reasons, but if you still want to ban me for a week or more, then sure, I guess it is just a forum at the end of the day.

 

[Maverick_Zero_X]

Don't think I need to say much about this.

Thread was made despite repeated insistence from thread mods to not do this, then our names (Mine, Lephyr's and Lonkitt's included) were included against our consent, after which we told them to remove it (My comment is a page earlier), and Dread initially then said she wouldn't because it would be disrespectful to others (Grossly ignoring our personal and private boundaries for a little bit of clout), even accusing said staff members of derailing no less, until she finally did so after a while. Not to mention she also leaked the vote count despite insistence from staff members like ArmorChompy and Crabwhale to NOT DO IT (Armor deleted the comment but he can show you the evidence).

I’d go with a stern warning for instigating drama.

Reporting @TheMonkeMan for this now deleted comment describing two bureaucrats in a very uncomfortable and sexual context. I'm removing his threadban so he can respond here.

I agree with a 1-2 month ban. I’m not sure how they thought that’d be okay to post.

 

[DaMonkeMan]

I don't know what your point is exactly. The c-word is also a very common insult but it'd still get you banned. I don't see how describing two users in sex acts because they agree with each other is defensible in any context.

Actually. I'd just strongly advise against ever talking about sexual matters in any context whatsoever with regard to other users and that should be super obvious.

I agree with Agnaa on a ban, leaning towards longer than shorter, he's received multiple warnings and even bans for inappropriate behavior.

The c-word gets you banned not because of any rules this site would have, but from rules that FANDOM has, as far as I remember.
This isn't really the same as that.

 

[Agnaa]

Really all you need to do is type "dick" into the search bar here and you'll find a lot of those types of messages. Even from staff members.

From a quick glance, the majority (used in the same context as the one you're getting reported for here) are from you, but there are some from Arc too.

I've got some busy days ahead of me, but I should be able to do a thorough comb through to the start of this year by Monday.

The c-word gets you banned not because of any rules this site would have, but from rules that FANDOM has, as far as I remember.
This isn't really the same as that.

And yeah this is true. It's because Fandom saw it as a slur against male feminists.

 

[Deagonx]

Really all you need to do is type "dick" into the search bar here and you'll find a lot of those types of messages.

I decided to check, and of the instances of that word being used that I see on the first page, the vast majority of results are just you with like. Here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, and here.

I think maybe 3 were from other people?

 

[Crabwhale]

I understand it was a little innappropriate, so I suppose I can apologize for that, but what I said was essentially saying he's a dick eater... Which is a very common insult in and off this forum, honestly.
I mean I seriously doubt it would actually hurt them, considering how much we use terms like that here, but if it did then I sincerely apologize and would accept any punishment I get in that scenario.

You are genuinely one of the most immature people I have ever observed on this forum. To even ascertain in any capacity that calling someone a dick eater or telling them they slobber on **** is anywhere near acceptable is ludicrous. You are not Ant's and DT's personal friend. There are boundaries defined by the relationships you share with people, and you seem to think everyone here is your like-minded chum that will just brush off everything you say. They are not, and you would do well to begin comprehending that.

You have been given chance, time and again. You have been warned and called out multiple times for your behavior, by both staff and your peers alike. And yet you persist. This incident is by no means isolated, and you know this, and you also know that we know this, and yet you do absolutely nothing to correct the way you act. You are the very definition of the intrusive thoughts winning.

I'm proposing a 3-6 month ban so that hopefully, in that time, you grow up a little, and learn to stop being an overly aggressive, arrogant individual.

 

[Mr. Bambu]

Agnaa: 2-12 weeks
Me: 2 months
Mav: 1-2 months
Deagon: Said he was fine with 2 months

I'll put through the ban now, taking into consideration that this duration fits all of the ranges.

EDIT: Crab suggested 3-6 months, dunno how we feel about that, I'd be willing to go higher up if need be. For now the ban has been put to 2 months.

 

[Deagonx]

I'm proposing a 3-6 month ban

I am in agreeance with this. Since returning from his initial ban it has been incident after incident, and every single time that Monke is warned for his bad behavior he makes it a point to argue with whoever is warning him. He shows no signs of recognition that his conduct is problematic and in the absolute best case scenario like was demonstrated here, he will "accept" a punishment whilst still asserting his own innocence.

As we just saw with his "everyone uses this insult" defense, it's primarily him saying this across the forum. Dozens of instances across various threads towards people I know for a fact don't have cordial relationships with him.

 

[HammerStrikes219]

Testzzz

vsbattles.fandom.com

Btw, this one is with three z rather than the four Zs use here

Bumping this as we got two very similar usernames.

| VS Battles Wiki | Fandom

vsbattles.fandom.com

Also Probably sock puppet of a certain user that was banned in relation to the TR stuff as well as maybe certain other things.

Edit:

Ya Boi King Kai

vsbattles.fandom.com

This was his first contribution to the wiki and decided to contact a wiki representative.

 

[InfiniteDay]

Reporting Light013br for blatant vandalism.

 

[BasedNecoScaler69]

https://vsbattles.fandom.com/wiki/User:G_hajime should also be reported, for adding tier 1 keys to the page without a CRT, and using CSAP tiering.

 

[BasedNecoScaler69]

have fixed the above page.

 

[Lonkitt]

Bumping this as we got two very similar usernames.

| VS Battles Wiki | Fandom

vsbattles.fandom.com

Also Probably sock puppet of a certain user that was banned in relation to the TR stuff as well as maybe certain other things.

Edit:

Ya Boi King Kai

vsbattles.fandom.com

This was his first contribution to the wiki and decided to contact a wiki representative.

Oh yeah, this is definitely a sock. The Tokyo Revengers incident is still fresh in my mind

 

[HammerStrikes219]

Oh yeah, this is definitely a sock. The Tokyo Revengers incident is still fresh in my mind

Their persistence reminds me of there being a precedent of different users making a lot of alts despite the fact it will only prolong the ban duration to infinite.


In any case, I will let the admins handle it

 

[DarkDragonMedeus]

Okay, I don't want to repeat my own personal frustrations. Everyone knows how I feel when the RVR blows up and there's a new page that's already almost filled up that happens all in one day. But.

Don't think I need to say much about this.

Thread was made despite repeated insistence from thread mods to not do this, then our names (Mine, Lephyr's and Lonkitt's included) were included against our consent, after which we told them to remove it (My comment is a page earlier), and Dread initially then said she wouldn't because it would be disrespectful to others (Grossly ignoring our personal and private boundaries for a little bit of clout), even accusing said staff members of derailing no less, until she finally did so after a while. Not to mention she also leaked the vote count despite insistence from staff members like ArmorChompy and Crabwhale to NOT DO IT (Armor deleted the comment but he can show you the evidence).

Yeah, threads like this basically never end well. Some staff members don't like the fact that they're hated when they see getting like 0 votes compared to everyone else. Also, Super Moderators were excluded which was something I might argue being considered discrimination. I know a reason might because there are only 2 of us (me and Bambu), but even if there was only one and threads like this were going to be made, I would have at least like to been curious how it turns out. I also would not have been offended either way, though I cannot speak one way or the other for Mr Bambu.

But either way, the thread should have been closed/removed outright. And Dread shouldn't be banned because I know she didn't really mean harm in that regard, even if it was pretty shitty to ignore that fact that various staff wanted their names off the debate. The worst she gets is a warning to not make any similar threads like this in the future

Bumping this as we got two very similar usernames.

| VS Battles Wiki | Fandom

vsbattles.fandom.com

Also Probably sock puppet of a certain user that was banned in relation to the TR stuff as well as maybe certain other things.

Edit:

Ya Boi King Kai

vsbattles.fandom.com

This was his first contribution to the wiki and decided to contact a wiki representative.

Blocked

Reporting Light013br for blatant vandalism.

Also blocked

 

[Mr. Bambu]

Okay, I don't want to repeat my own personal frustrations. Everyone knows how I feel when the RVR blows up and there's a new page that's already almost filled up that happens all in one day. But.


Yeah, threads like this basically never end well. Some staff members don't like the fact that they're hated when they see getting like 0 votes compared to everyone else. Also, Super Moderators were excluded which was something I might argue being considered discrimination. I know a reason might because there are only 2 of us (me and Bambu), but even if there was only one and threads like this were going to be made, I would have at least like to been curious how it turns out. I also would not have been offended either way, though I cannot speak one way or the other for Mr Bambu.

But either way, the thread should have been closed/removed outright. And Dread shouldn't be banned because I know she didn't really mean harm in that regard, even if it was pretty shitty to ignore that fact that various staff wanted their names off the debate. The worst she gets is a warning to not make any similar threads like this in the future


Blocked



Also blocked

Not to prolong this topic but

Dread was mostly just foolish and missed the fact that we're not included on the Admin list. despite still being admins- she thought we were. In any case I'll cede the ground to you, harhar.

 

[KLOL506]

I'm just gonna say this right here.

I NEVER ADVOCATED FOR A BAN. All I wanted was for Dread to recognize that there are personal boundaries, and when a person says no, it means no, and you shouldn't pressure them beyond it, as that constitutes harassment. And that she should apologize to the ones involved (Which she did, so it should've ended there). I didn't even suggest a warning beyond it. Hopefully people get that now.

 

[Gasper]

Reporting Light013br for blatant vandalism.

This still isn't fixed.

 

[Agnaa]

This still isn't fixed.

Yes it is? The page is back to how it was a few days ago and that user's been blocked.

 

[Gasper]

Yes it is? The page is back to how it was a few days ago and that user's been blocked.

It me it was still showing up as High 1-A/1-A goku solos.

 

[Agnaa]

Because if you click the link InfiniteDay posted, it takes you to the version of the page at the time, not the current version.

 

[Gasper]

Because if you click the link InfiniteDay posted, it takes you to the version of the page at the time, not the current version.

I see. Thank you for explaining.

 

[Antvasima]

I also think that Dread showed a very bad sense of judgement, and I have deleted her poll thread, given that it acted to demotivate far more of our valuable staff members than it encouraged for helping out.

I do not think that she deliberately intended to cause harm though, so a warning should be sufficient.

No more similar bad initiatives/stunts should be done in the future though. She should get clearance in private from our bureaucrats and super moderators first.

I think that extending Marshadow29's topic ban with 30 days and giving TheMonkeMan a 1 month ban should be enough. We get along quite well in One Piece threads, so he probably though that expressing himself like that was acceptable.

For the record, DontTalk has genuinely been absolutely crucial in my work to constructively rebuild our wiki, and has very reliably and faithfully helped me with that for over 8 years now, along with, as far as I have observed, having the best combination of knowledge, sensibility, intelligence, and common sense of all staff members we have ever had, which is why I appreciate him so much.