• 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)

Unfortunate to see considering I was the one who pushed to lower his earlier ban length.

That being said, I think that a month ban is fine, but also, since the Pokémon discussion thread seems to be the primary outlet for all his elitist yapping I would push for a thread ban there as well.
Yes. This may be necessary if Sean is not willing to significantly shape up his behaviour. 🙏
 
I genuinely don't know what people mean by "elitist", because this is just the way I talk, and if you got responses like this and people talked about you like this and this for years, you would start to think people don't like you and learn to nip insults in the bud too.
It's fine to be proud of your accomplishments and contributions.

It becomes something else entirely when you start to condescend to others or discredit them over it.
 
yeah idk im just gonna uh

@Alien_Dual_Blaster
That's not that bad, just general discussions about fictional girls they like.

However, I was informed that Louis961 is most likely a sock of Area rea. Latter was banned for removing random content from various pages, and kept doing it despite multiple warnings. Louis is basically doing the exact same thing.
 
Recently, the user Louis961 has been removing categories from Godzilla and related pages, such as Gamera. This would naturally go into the vandalism report thread, however, Louis' changes are suspiciously similar to the ones made by the banned user Area Rea, who was banned for doing the exact same to the exact same verses. I suspect this is a case of a sockpuppet account.
 
Unfortunately can't IP check them, although it is worth noting that in at least one of these he seems to have removed a category added by Area Rea? I don't think that counts as strong evidence against them being the same, but vandalizing something onto the page only to get banned, and vandalize it off the page later, is an odd thing to do.

The categories being changed here are less integral than, say, ability classifications- they seem to predominantly be things like adding or removing "antagonist" or "villain" from the character. I'm unsure of precedent in punishing someone for changing categories of things we don't actively index.
 
Unfortunately can't IP check them, although it is worth noting that in at least one of these he seems to have removed a category added by Area Rea? I don't think that counts as strong evidence against them being the same, but vandalizing something onto the page only to get banned, and vandalize it off the page later, is an odd thing to do.

The categories being changed here are less integral than, say, ability classifications- they seem to predominantly be things like adding or removing "antagonist" or "villain" from the character. I'm unsure of precedent in punishing someone for changing categories of things we don't actively index.
Louis undid Ant and me undoing his edits. Also, he keeps editing profiles even though Ant recommended him to stop 6 hours ago. Is that not enough for at least some sort of ban? Challenging a Head Bureaucrat's authority? Plus, Area behaved in a similar way towards Ant's requests for him to stop doing that, which is suspicious. If Louis were another user, he would have stopped or at least answered after Ant's request to him, but he didn't much, like Area before.
 
Last edited:
Hello.

I just want to greatly thank all of our community members for helping out with this collaborative project of ours, and I apologise if I haven't openly shown sufficient amounts of gratitude and appreciation.

This isn't a "me" project for myself or anybody else after all. It is a "we" community project that has gradually grown through continuous collaborative efforts together.

🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏

❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️
 
Beautiful message, Thanks ant!
I gave a final warning:


However, somebody can ask a Fandom staff member for a sockpuppet check if you wish. 🙏

This is what they said:
Hey here,

Thanks for contacting us. While I am not seeing a definitive links between the two, I would say the circumstantial evidence I am seeing is enough to warrant a local block if that's being considered.
 
No problem at all. 🙏🙂❤️

So what should we do regarding the potential sockpuppet account? If I remember correctly, I reverted their edits and gave a warning. Is that sufficient, given that we have no concrete evidence for sockpuppetry? 🙏
 
Huh.

People seemed to largely agree with harsh leniency before, so I'll apply a two year ban.
 
Thank you for helping out.

Can somebody remind me about that case please? 🙏
 
So what should we do regarding the potential sockpuppet account? If I remember correctly, I reverted their edits and gave a warning. Is that sufficient, given that we have no concrete evidence for sockpuppetry? 🙏
Also, what about this? 🙏
 
I looked through the thread, and it does not look like he said anything all that bad. He was being quite civilized, he may have gotten heated later down the line, but that's only because Arch kept going on despite Reaper mentioning he does not wish to be bothered any further. Not to mention Arch said the same sort of language to users well before DaReaper did.
 
I looked through the thread, and it does not look like he said anything all that bad. He was being quite civilized, he may have gotten heated later down the line, but that's only because Arch kept going on despite Reaper mentioning he does not wish to be bothered any further. Not to mention Arch said the same sort of language to users well before DaReaper did.
We've already cleared things up, we've both apologized, so let's move on.
 
Things are getting kinda heated here someone should intervene
 
Things are getting kinda heated here someone should intervene
I left a message encouraging civility and addressing some of the specific people involved.
 
I want report @PHANtomFELdway and @Dog3352 for their back and forth comments in this staff thread.

@PHANtomFELdway in particular made 8 comments without mentioning that he had permission to comment from a staff member (even if he got permission, I don't think it was for 8 comments)

I mean @TheHyperGuy is also partly to blame for replying back if this is a legitimate problem but if he never get permission in the first place then yeah I can see why that would be a problem but other than that ? Nah
 
That’s honestly a bit unfair to me, not gonna lie. You should be questioning the validity of @Dog3352 comment if he gets the permission from staff or not because I know for a fact that @PHANtomFELdway would ask before he comment because @Astral_Trinity439 is accompanying him
Not sure if he did ask or not in this specific case, but he's in contact with @FinePoint on discord. It's possible he asked for permission there repeatedly (for each comment) or in PMs. Let's not jump into conclusions and wait for @PHANtomFELdway to reply himself. He usually comes online at evening per my time zone, so around 5+ hours from now.

(Edit: He did also say some stuff about permission, and @RitsuØ1 had also reminded him at the start of the thread, so it's more or less possible that he got permission in PMs or discord DMs.)

Though I admit I can't defend him for not clarifying if he got permission or not, and from whom.
 
Reporting @Kinggg121132 for making repeated stomps. He made like 3 within the past few hours which were all closed and listed in APR Thread. 2 staff already supported a thread ban for him in APR thread. What are we thinking, mods?
 
@PHANtomFELdway @Dog3352

It seems like your participation is required here. 🙏
I'm sorry, it was my mistake, I hadn't read that the topic was only for staff (I really don't have much to say about this case, that's simply it).
I'm trying to communicate with someone about this.

Once again, I'm sorry, it won't happen again.
 
Last edited:
I want report @PHANtomFELdway and @Dog3352 for their back and forth comments in this staff thread.
That was me and hyperguy.

Not sure if he did ask or not in this specific case, but he's in contact with @FinePoint on discord. It's possible he asked for permission there repeatedly (for each comment) or in PMs. Let's not jump into conclusions and wait for @PHANtomFELdway to reply himself. He usually comes online at evening per my time zone, so around 5+ hours from now.
Nah i definitely didn’t ask. I didn’t know i needed it. I was literally @ in the thread 💔 and asked to participate.
(Edit: He did also say some stuff about permission, and @RitsuØ1 had also reminded him at the start of the thread, so it's more or less possible that he got permission in PMs or discord DMs.)
Ritsu was asking hyperguy if he got permission to make the thread staff discussion.not talking to me.
Though I admit I can't defend him for not clarifying if he got permission or not, and from whom.
🌚. i just read dark_soul saying staff permission is preferred.
 
To be fair. Like 4 of those comments were directed at you asking for clarification on things.
And I thought they did a great job of doing so.

Whether or not procedure was followed, I don't think any harm was done exactly.

So I definitely don't think any action here is needed other than to remind people they need permission.

I also think it's probably fine (or at least very reasonable) to assume implied permission if a staff member directly asks you a question.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top