- 7,274
- 6,745
uhh..this one is pretty discusting https://vsbattles.com/threads/ban-kai-bleach-general-discussion.107575/page-1303#post-6876880
-
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
- 5,163
- 11,790
I feel like a year or permaban should take place, just by the nature of that post.
- 7,733
- 9,211
this is out of context btw since if you scroll up you can see he's just making fun of/mocking something(a manga panel and people talking about it) rather than saying some gross out of pocket thing
- 5,163
- 11,790
Oh, then I suppose he can be excused then.
- 20,432
- 16,247
yeah this seems out of context and talking about a scene from Bleach. They are making a sarcastic comment about a character's actions rather than confessing crimes
- 11,748
- 14,171
@BeTheWay1rst Probably best to tone it down a bit, lad. Or at the very least quote the message.
- 177,362
- 90,216
- Thread starter
- #28,767
What do the rest of our staff members think about this?
- 4,239
- 4,084
Yeah, thats fine, he shows no remorse, change doesn't seem likely. I prefer 2 weeks.Thank you for helping out.
I think that a 2 to 4 weeks ban seems more appropriate though, so Giannysmag takes this issue more seriously, and does not cause further problems in the future.
- 34,635
- 41,957
Yeah, this is fine with me.Thank you for helping out.
I think that a 2 to 4 weeks ban seems more appropriate though, so Giannysmag takes this issue more seriously, and does not cause further problems in the future.
- 34,542
- 34,966
- 13,880
- 22,736
You should put this in the Wiki Vandalism Report thread
- 34,542
- 34,966
Good point. Forgot about that thread.
- 177,362
- 90,216
- Thread starter
- #28,776
- 1,819
- 1,348
Hello. If I may ask: From what I know(asked another VSBW user on discord too about this since iirc N word ain't allowed here). Trying to loop around in saying a censored word isn't allowed, right?
vsbattles.com
Or is it fine? Please correct me if I'm wrong.
Jujutsu Kaisen Discussion Page #1
No one has scaling to keep up with a post bath Sukuna besides Yorozu and Gojo. I think the bath just affects CT output, but anyways outside of Maki and Yuji, there's Miguel, Sukuna compares his slashes against Yuji and Yuta to the one he used against Ryu as if he's somewhat relative to that...
Or is it fine? Please correct me if I'm wrong.
- 34,635
- 41,957
We do not allow that kind of attitude, and attempting to bypass a slur filter like that really isn't a good sign; reminds me of when YuriAkuto did something similar.Hello. If I may ask: From what I know(asked another VSBW user on discord too about this since iirc N word ain't allowed here). Trying to loop around in saying a censored word isn't allowed, right?
Jujutsu Kaisen Discussion Page #1
No one has scaling to keep up with a post bath Sukuna besides Yorozu and Gojo. I think the bath just affects CT output, but anyways outside of Maki and Yuji, there's Miguel, Sukuna compares his slashes against Yuji and Yuta to the one he used against Ryu as if he's somewhat relative to that...
Or is it fine? Please correct me if I'm wrong.
- 5,163
- 11,790
Iirc, even a former staff member was banned for doing something like that, so definitely not allowed.
- 8,824
- 9,408
I remember that incident.
Anyways, I think he should be banned for about a 2 months or possibly longer, as this isn't something to be tolerated on site.
- 5,163
- 11,790
Going by precedent, users were banned for a minimum of 3 months for a similar offence. Though considering that he didn't direct that word to anyone but rather a fictional character, I'll be fine with a minimum of 2 months.
- 34,635
- 41,957
While he did apologize, the way he did it sounds more overdramatic than necessary, which usually means something is off about it. Not saying that is proof of not being sincere, but I still think a short ban for a month is a considerably reasonable compromise yes.
- 13,880
- 22,736
That's not how it really comes across to me, honestly
- 9,117
- 9,967
Is this a repeat offense or first time?
- 5,163
- 11,790
The user doesn't seem to have been brought up to the RVRT before the current case. No warnings seem to be issued either, and should be a first-time offence.
Edit: I agree with DDM that a month is also sufficient enough.
Last edited:
Mr. Bambu
Suffer-Not-Injustice Bambu
VS Battles
Joke Battles
Bureaucrat
Administrator
Calculation Group
- 25,031
- 29,531
Even a month seems relatively harsh to me- even acknowledging that he deliberately superseded the censor. I would take it as a maximum acceptable ban length, rather than a minimum.
- 13,274
- 13,891
Y'all are really going to month-long ban the guy for one censored usage of the n-word, as a first time offense, even after a clear apology? As if that word isn't commonly used at mass in practically every large social media site and app out there. I could see why a relatively new/inactive user wouldn't even know that word is banned here at first.
Was it even used in a derogatory manner? If so I could see a ban, but if not, is that even necessary?
Was it even used in a derogatory manner? If so I could see a ban, but if not, is that even necessary?
- 8,824
- 9,408
Do keep in mind that the usage of the n word equals an automatic ban prior to fandom rules which this site is basing off.
Mr. Bambu
Suffer-Not-Injustice Bambu
VS Battles
Joke Battles
Bureaucrat
Administrator
Calculation Group
- 25,031
- 29,531
While I agree it is a fairly harsh reaction, respectfully, this isn't really adding much other than incredulity, which hardly helps. Rules being as they are, I will ask you to not interfere with such things if you don't have something to contribute.
To answer you: it is a rule, and it was broken, and it was arguably knowingly broken given that the censor was deliberately bypassed. We have historically been extremely, almost archaically harsh on the use of slurs, whether intended in jest or unseriously, as well. I don't know if you were present in the days where staff members posting images proving another person said a slur, resulted in that staff member (I believe an admin, at the time) to be instantly banned, requiring days or weeks of talking to Fandom to undo the ban.
Suffice to say this is a stepping-down, then, even if it is harsh. Rules and precedents being as they are, it isn't terribly unreasonable.
- 652
- 324
Its because my keyboard is broken Man, so its everytiime on caps
- 652
- 324
EXACTLY MAN, jus because i called a character that doesnt even exist the n-word bro..? even if gojo is white, he still my bro like thats why i said n... like hes my n.. Bro
I didnt knew that it wasnt alowed here too, that account i created exist since april, but i only actualy started using it in like october because before it used to say that i needed to wait sometime until using it
Mr. Bambu
Suffer-Not-Injustice Bambu
VS Battles
Joke Battles
Bureaucrat
Administrator
Calculation Group
- 25,031
- 29,531
I'd prefer leaning towards a lighter ban. So, I vote for two weeks.So, given the apology, is a two weeks ban sufficient, or should we go with one month?
- 3,931
- 3,789
After talking with Ant and Firestorm, I would like to make a report on the user Ellbekarym. This was originally going to be saved till after the thread in question was concluded, but that is looking to be some time from now.
This is less about a single bad comment or something and more about a generally unpleasant attitude in a thread. I think Ellbekarym has a overly "holier than thou" attitude when it comes to conversations on the linked thread. It's one thing to do "banter" and back-and-forths in a thread, they're pretty regular and I'm not above it as might be known, but their comments veer away from the argument and towards me and my supporters a few times. That plus they bring in genuine fanfiction to support their arguments.
vsbattles.com
Mostly fine. He does call my points "completely insane" but on its own it's just banter.
Same here, but calling the proposal "infamy" is unpleasant.
vsbattles.com
They seem to be implying I'm making some kind of plot here while also pretty much calling the people in this thread "ignorant" by saying they have not "realized the reality of this thesis". They then later call it a "hogwash thesis" and the "funniest wank"
vsbattles.com
They defend using fanfiction as an argumentative point, while also using abandoned drafts as part of their argument.
vsbattles.com
Pretty much fine. Though they do accuse me of putting words in Tolkien's mouth, though that's fine as banter.
I don't think it's too bad.
vsbattles.com
Again says that the people who agreed with me haven't understood my points. The language isn't bad here, but just a unpleasant attitude again.
vsbattles.com
Reaffirms that I portray Tolkien as insane.
This is less about a single bad comment or something and more about a generally unpleasant attitude in a thread. I think Ellbekarym has a overly "holier than thou" attitude when it comes to conversations on the linked thread. It's one thing to do "banter" and back-and-forths in a thread, they're pretty regular and I'm not above it as might be known, but their comments veer away from the argument and towards me and my supporters a few times. That plus they bring in genuine fanfiction to support their arguments.
Tolkien Tier High 1-A+ and 0 Proposal
I already agree with all of this even though my 'agree' doesn't matter here though but hey again and again fully agreed 💯 👍. You cooked well chef Tyranno.
- "No, I must be mistaken, I'm sorry, but in this case what I thought was wrong becomes completely insane. Your reasoning becomes: “Tolkien can invent anything, so he's omnipotent on his fictional world, but his world isn't really fictional since it describes the real, so beings more powerful than him in the real world (angels) are also more powerful than him as a fictional character (Valar) in the fictional world, so these fictional characters are omnipotent”. Please reassure me that I've misunderstood, that you're not doing some crazy fiction-on-reality feedback loop, because in that case we can stop right there. Apart from the blatant logical contradiction, this ultimately ends up denying the very distinction between reality and fiction."
Same here, but calling the proposal "infamy" is unpleasant.
- "At the end, I've discussed just about everything. Anyway, I want my username under the “Disagree” category so the world knows I'm not complicit in the infamy afoot."
Tolkien Tier High 1-A+ and 0 Proposal
I already agree with all of this even though my 'agree' doesn't matter here though but hey again and again fully agreed 💯 👍. You cooked well chef Tyranno.
- "But unlike you, I don't think people have realized the reality of this thesis, and I even find it hard to believe that you're actually defending it. We're on a reality-fiction loop: the character is stronger than the author, who is stronger than the fiction. To repeat myself, the argument is: Tolkien thinks the Valar are real, so the Valar are stronger than Tolkien, who is (almost) omnipotent, so they are. I can't believe anyone would go along with this completely hogwash thesis.
That said, it would be the funniest wank on the site."
Tolkien Tier High 1-A+ and 0 Proposal
I already agree with all of this even though my 'agree' doesn't matter here though but hey again and again fully agreed 💯 👍. You cooked well chef Tyranno.
- "You're trying to dismiss a “super Valar” with contempt, but you are no one to declare which arguments are legitimate ; the Valar are themselves “super-maiar”, the latter being equal to High 1-A+ according to your thesis. Anyway it's a detail of the argument, that's not to mention the fact that Valar don't know things and can't create souls."
- "“You don't understand Tier 0” No: I maintain that limiting Valar to not being able to do X or Y is contigent to their nature. There's nothing to stop Eru from creating an uber-valar tomorrow that can kill other Valar (indeed, Eru will allow a human to kill Melkor). So killing a Valar is not an absolute impossibility, and for the rest, the argument is valid. The fact that Eru imposed the limitation doesn't change anything, since he could have done otherwise (and will, in this case)."
- I was trying to make it clear that if a Tier 0 makes X thing impossible in a verse, then it's flat-out impossible and then they came up with a fanfic scenario."
Tolkien Tier High 1-A+ and 0 Proposal
I already agree with all of this even though my 'agree' doesn't matter here though but hey again and again fully agreed 💯 👍. You cooked well chef Tyranno.
I don't think it's too bad.
Tolkien Tier High 1-A+ and 0 Proposal
I mean we are going in circles at this point. The mods accepted the revisions. I think the thread should be closed. We are pretty much just waiting on Ultima's re-evaluation of the High 1-A+ stuff. I will request the thread to be closed once that is done and initial responses dealt with since...
- "I'll let Ultima speak for himself. The fact is, I doubt that most people who agree with you have really understood your argument."
Tolkien Tier High 1-A+ and 0 Proposal
Welp, I did try to move this conversation, but that was rejected by Ellbekarym. I'll keep my responses short. Apologies to Pein and Seed. In fact I had given in and started writing a reply. But that's fine, I prefer it; even if in a way you've proved me wrong, since one of the reasons I don't...
- "Indeed, I don't think Tolkien thought many of the things you've attributed to him."
- Granted the language isn't bad, but he doesn't take it back even in a recent post.
Last edited:
- 177,362
- 90,216
- Thread starter
- #28,799
Has this been handled yet?Okay. Two weeks it is then, I suppose. Is somebody here willing to apply it to his forum and wiki accounts please?
- 11,184
- 14,552
To be honest, I don't think anything is report-worthy here. Calling someone's argument "insane" or "wank" is par for the course in a debating website and I don't think the general attitude was hostile or aggressive enough to be a problem. You'll find people here who you feel are unpleasant but the expectation is for people to have thick enough skin so as to not get offended by minor remarks like these. The fanfiction arguments that you disagree with need to be debunked on the thread itself where you can take help from knowledgeable staff members. (Unless I missed something, in that case someone can correct me.)After talking with Ant and Firestorm, I would like to make a report on the user Ellbekarym. This was originally going to be saved till after the thread in question was concluded, but that is looking to be some time from now.
This is less about a single bad comment or something and more about a generally unpleasant attitude in a thread. I think Ellbekarym has a overly "holier than thou" attitude when it comes to conversations on the linked thread. It's one thing to do "banter" and back-and-forths in a thread, they're pretty regular and I'm not above it as might be known, but their comments veer away from the argument and towards me and my supporters a few times. That plus they bring in genuine fanfiction to support their arguments.
Mostly fine. He does call my points "completely insane" but on its own it's just banter.Tolkien Tier High 1-A+ and 0 Proposal
I already agree with all of this even though my 'agree' doesn't matter here though but hey again and again fully agreed 💯 👍. You cooked well chef Tyranno.
https://vsbattles.com/threads/tolkien-tier-high-1-a-and-0-proposal.171747/post-6872497
- "No, I must be mistaken, I'm sorry, but in this case what I thought was wrong becomes completely insane. Your reasoning becomes: “Tolkien can invent anything, so he's omnipotent on his fictional world, but his world isn't really fictional since it describes the real, so beings more powerful than him in the real world (angels) are also more powerful than him as a fictional character (Valar) in the fictional world, so these fictional characters are omnipotent”. Please reassure me that I've misunderstood, that you're not doing some crazy fiction-on-reality feedback loop, because in that case we can stop right there. Apart from the blatant logical contradiction, this ultimately ends up denying the very distinction between reality and fiction."
Same here, but calling the proposal "infamy" is unpleasant.
- "At the end, I've discussed just about everything. Anyway, I want my username under the “Disagree” category so the world knows I'm not complicit in the infamy afoot."
They seem to be implying I'm making some kind of plot here while also pretty much calling the people in this thread "ignorant" by saying they have not "realized the reality of this thesis". They then later call it a "hogwash thesis" and the "funniest wank"Tolkien Tier High 1-A+ and 0 Proposal
I already agree with all of this even though my 'agree' doesn't matter here though but hey again and again fully agreed 💯 👍. You cooked well chef Tyranno.
- "But unlike you, I don't think people have realized the reality of this thesis, and I even find it hard to believe that you're actually defending it. We're on a reality-fiction loop: the character is stronger than the author, who is stronger than the fiction. To repeat myself, the argument is: Tolkien thinks the Valar are real, so the Valar are stronger than Tolkien, who is (almost) omnipotent, so they are. I can't believe anyone would go along with this completely hogwash thesis.
That said, it would be the funniest wank on the site."They defend using fanfiction as an argumentative point, while also using abandoned drafts as part of their argument.Tolkien Tier High 1-A+ and 0 Proposal
I already agree with all of this even though my 'agree' doesn't matter here though but hey again and again fully agreed 💯 👍. You cooked well chef Tyranno.
- "You're trying to dismiss a “super Valar” with contempt, but you are no one to declare which arguments are legitimate ; the Valar are themselves “super-maiar”, the latter being equal to High 1-A+ according to your thesis. Anyway it's a detail of the argument, that's not to mention the fact that Valar don't know things and can't create souls."
- "“You don't understand Tier 0” No: I maintain that limiting Valar to not being able to do X or Y is contigent to their nature. There's nothing to stop Eru from creating an uber-valar tomorrow that can kill other Valar (indeed, Eru will allow a human to kill Melkor). So killing a Valar is not an absolute impossibility, and for the rest, the argument is valid. The fact that Eru imposed the limitation doesn't change anything, since he could have done otherwise (and will, in this case)."
- I was trying to make it clear that if a Tier 0 makes X thing impossible in a verse, then it's flat-out impossible and then they came up with a fanfic scenario."
Pretty much fine. Though they do accuse me of putting words in Tolkien's mouth, though that's fine as banter.Tolkien Tier High 1-A+ and 0 Proposal
I already agree with all of this even though my 'agree' doesn't matter here though but hey again and again fully agreed 💯 👍. You cooked well chef Tyranno.
I don't think it's too bad.
Again says that the people who agreed with me haven't understood my points. The language isn't bad here, but just a unpleasant attitude again.Tolkien Tier High 1-A+ and 0 Proposal
I mean we are going in circles at this point. The mods accepted the revisions. I think the thread should be closed. We are pretty much just waiting on Ultima's re-evaluation of the High 1-A+ stuff. I will request the thread to be closed once that is done and initial responses dealt with since...
- "I'll let Ultima speak for himself. The fact is, I doubt that most people who agree with you have really understood your argument."
Reaffirms that I portray Tolkien as insane.Tolkien Tier High 1-A+ and 0 Proposal
Welp, I did try to move this conversation, but that was rejected by Ellbekarym. I'll keep my responses short. Apologies to Pein and Seed. In fact I had given in and started writing a reply. But that's fine, I prefer it; even if in a way you've proved me wrong, since one of the reasons I don't...
- "Indeed, I don't think Tolkien thought many of the things you've attributed to him."
- Granted the language isn't bad, but he doesn't take it back even in a recent post.
