- 6,249
- 5,741
Yeah, covering it up to bypass the filters doesn't negate what they're still saying. Blatant violation of the forum and Fandom rules.
I think a ban is absolutely required here. If they said it on the Wiki, Fandom itself would ban them.
-
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
I think a ban is absolutely required here. If they said it on the Wiki, Fandom itself would ban them.
- 13,826
- 19,644
I share the similar sentiments as everyone, this is a bannable offense.
I will ping him in case he has something to say for himself.
@TaoPaiPaiRUS00
Just to let you know you have been reported for pretty much a bannable offense (using N word on site). Do you have anything to say for yourself?
- 12,485
- 16,852
Per Fandoms own policy (which also links to their Terms of Use, notable sections User Conduct and Termination) we ought to indeed straight permaban
- 12,485
- 16,852
To be noted: We have indeed been lenient in the past. However, that past case is certainly different here, as user @TaoPaiPaiRUS00 kept looking for words under our censor (thread mods and admins can see these and through the edit button see what they were trying to write) which included the n-word but in spanish (although in spanish is not considered a slur).
When combining this with their seemingly trollish behavior, I see very little to be discussed here and would advocate for the ban directly.
- 34,549
- 34,979
I agree with banning them.
- 6,249
- 5,741
That past case seems to be using the word as a slang term for referring to a fictional character. This case seems to be spamming the word while deliberately trying to dodge the filters and say prohibited words. Words which could potentially put the forum at risk if the word is found hosted on the site, and it certainly isn't a word we want spammed here.
- 12,485
- 16,852
- 34,644
- 41,968
If it wasn't obvious already, I also agree with a permanent ban. I have already applied it too since there were no disagreements. And the example of the leniency can be due to some relatively new users being new and unaware. But this was obviously not the case here, as you and others mentioned, he was actively trying to give our censor filter and Fandom TOS the middle finger; which is more than enough to justify a permanent ban.
Leaving explanation here in case someone Antvasima might be confused, but given specific details. He should hopefully understand.
- 6,249
- 5,741
Others have quoted the word too. They shouldn't be punished but it might be an idea to remove the word from there as well.
- 2,829
- 1,432
The user Recon1511 made a death threat against me because I wrote a slightly passive aggressive comment against a user who has wronged me in the past. I have almost never interacted with Recon before so I have no clue why he responded with such aggression. I will admit that I was being a bit passive aggressive towards Coomander, but that's because that user has wronged me in the past and I thought he was permanently banned, but he came back today so I was a bit irritated. But my comment really wasn't severe enough to deserve a death threat and I genuinely believe Recon should receive at least a temporary ban for this.
- 34,644
- 41,968
I need to go back to sleep soon, but from what I gather, this post was kind of unearthing old disputes. I'm pretty sure "The GOAT" comments weren't meant to be taken too seriously but were just welcoming him back. I do agree Recon's comment was indeed unnecessary and I removed it with the reason "Inappropriate." I do not think he seriously meant that and would deserve a harsh ban if he did. I also suppose I should remove the comments of people quoting for balance measures. But a general warning to all not to dwell too much into the past and move on.
The user Recon1511 made a death threat against me because I wrote a slightly passive aggressive comment against a user who has wronged me in the past. I have almost never interacted with Recon before so I have no clue why he responded with such aggression. I will admit that I was being a bit passive aggressive towards Coomander, but that's because that user has wronged me in the past and I thought he was permanently banned, but he came back today so I was a bit irritated. But my comment really wasn't severe enough to deserve a death threat and I genuinely believe Recon should receive at least a temporary ban for this.
- 177,378
- 90,248
- Thread starter
- #32,053
- 6,249
- 5,741
That comment looks pretty bad to me. It isn't exactly a threat, but it is directly saying someone should be killed. One could even argue it resembles a call to action, even if I seriously doubt that's the intent.
The user Recon1511 made a death threat against me because I wrote a slightly passive aggressive comment against a user who has wronged me in the past. I have almost never interacted with Recon before so I have no clue why he responded with such aggression. I will admit that I was being a bit passive aggressive towards Coomander, but that's because that user has wronged me in the past and I thought he was permanently banned, but he came back today so I was a bit irritated. But my comment really wasn't severe enough to deserve a death threat and I genuinely believe Recon should receive at least a temporary ban for this.
Either way, definitely warrants a warning at least.
- 34,644
- 41,968
Another update on this, this user was on the Approval Queue, and there was a shared IP report with TaoPaiPaiRUS00. So this could be noted as another reason why they are permabanned. And to be on the lookout for any further potential socks.
- 35,073
- 41,657
This user is viewing the same Shantae upgrade thread too. Better safe than sorry, permaban that account on both wiki and forum as well.
- 177,378
- 90,248
- Thread starter
- #32,057
That seems reasonable.
- 12,485
- 16,852
Agreed with being cautious here.
- 177,378
- 90,248
- Thread starter
- #32,059
I did so in our forum, although it was likely redundant, since the account was already rejected, but could not find a corresponding account in our wiki.
- 2,829
- 1,432
I'm obviously not a mod but I honestly think a 3ish month ban is justified for something like this. If he had said that to someone with actual suicidal tendencies, it could've been really bad.What do you have to say for yourself?
Mr. Bambu
Suffer-Not-Injustice Bambu
VS Battles
Joke Battles
Bureaucrat
Administrator
Calculation Group
- 25,045
- 29,593
With all due respect, that phrase alone is not concerning in regards to the rules. Literally everyone says things along the lines of "I could kill you right now", without actually possessing the intent of murder. That sort of phrase is just an element of fairly standard Internet humor now, with the Funny existing in the extreme overreaction. I've typed posts like "Dropped into a vat of acid I'm afraid" over minor disagreements, here, too. This isn't so blatantly ridiculous but it also is a consistent thing the user uses in phrases.
Given that the thread is non-serious itself, we might be overreacting a bit.
Given that the thread is non-serious itself, we might be overreacting a bit.
- 24,293
- 37,709
agreedWith all due respect, that phrase alone is not concerning in regards to the rules. Literally everyone says things along the lines of "I could kill you right now", without actually possessing the intent of murder. That sort of phrase is just an element of fairly standard Internet humor now, with the Funny existing in the extreme overreaction. I've typed posts like "Dropped into a vat of acid I'm afraid" over minor disagreements, here, too. This isn't so blatantly ridiculous but it also is a consistent thing the user uses in phrases.
Given that the thread is non-serious itself, we might be overreacting a bit.
- 7,793
- 11,615
I think we should be lenient here but in general should definitely not allow people to say others should be killed.
The vat of acid example is so absurd that the joke becomes obvious, but something as blunt as 'you should be killed' is not nearly as clear and could easily be interpreted as a genuine death wish.
- 2,829
- 1,432
100% agreed.
Recon1511
He/Him- 8,189
- 8,289
Yeah no that looks pretty bad
- 20,204
- 22,116
I dont think the comment is meant to be taken seriously, and seems like a variation of common Internet humor ("Nah, we gotta kill him") etc. Though yeah, it is on the more extreme end.
That said, if it is too much of an issue, I don't mind being lenient now and establishing rules about it from now on, if we have to.
That said, if it is too much of an issue, I don't mind being lenient now and establishing rules about it from now on, if we have to.
- 24,293
- 37,709
If we do end up taking it serious, then i'm fine with establishing rules, but i'm not fine with punishment for this specific case. it's a common harmless internet thing and if we want to restrict it then we need to put it in writing before we punish people for common jokes
- 12,485
- 16,852
- 24,293
- 37,709
Mr. Bambu
Suffer-Not-Injustice Bambu
VS Battles
Joke Battles
Bureaucrat
Administrator
Calculation Group
- 25,045
- 29,593
This isn't a real death threat, is my point.
- 6,249
- 5,741
The comment isn't exactly a death threat, just a highly inappropriate comment that has very bad implications. I do think it warrants a warning.
- 6,249
- 5,741
Honestly, I'm not entirely against a ban for it either. This was still a very bad thing to say.I suppose that a warning is likely sufficient in this case then, but this is definitely not the kind of communication atmosphere that we want to encourage in our community.
Still, the person seems to acknowledge that it's bad, which does help here. And I don't think they genuinely meant it. So a strict warning is probably okay here.
- 7,793
- 11,615
I agree, but I also like to have things be as clear as possible.
What's obvious to one person may not be obvious to another, especially if they're neurodivergent or from a different culture.
I think it would be perfectly reasonable to tweak the wording to at least mention jokes then grant a pardon here for ex post facto reasons.
- 2,829
- 1,432
In my honest opinion, anything less than a ban is far too lenient. First off, this kind of "banter" should only ever be done amongst two very close people where it's been clearly established that it's just a joke. I am not close with Recon at all (I have barely interacted with him in the past) and he has made no effort to explain to me that it was just a joke. Anyone with common sense will know that a comment literally encouraging the murder of a person can be extremely offensive, especially when said to a complete stranger. Recon was aware of this 100%.
Furthermore, the context in which he said I should be killed wasn't appropriate either. We were not in the middle of a light-hearted conversation. I wrote a slightly passive aggressive comment towards Coomander (who Recon seems to be fond of) and Recon responded by saying that I should be murdered. No indication whatsoever that it was a joke. It was clearly said with malice, since he appeared to be unhappy with how I was talking about Coomander.
I am in disbelief that the staff here are attempting to trivialize this kind of inappropriate behavior. Just because Recon made this kind of comment multiple times in the past does not make it okay. In fact, it's arguably even worse. If I make a bomb threat on a plane, should I be unpunished as long as I say my intentions were harmless? This logic does not make sense to me. Should I be unpunished because I've done it many times in the past and nobody was hurt? It's ridiculous.
Recon has literally said that people on this website should be hanged and dragged across the street. It doesn't matter what the context or intention is, that kind of comment is extremely offensive, and perhaps even psychotic.
Lastly, Recon's complete lack of remorse is quite unsettling to me. When he was asked to explain himself, he did not apologize, he did not explain his intentions, he simply said "that looks bad" in a smug and sarcastic manner. He clearly doesn't care nor is he aware of how inappropriate his behavior is. This is very concerning because his behavior is not okay whatsoever.
He directed the offensive comment towards me so I firmly believe I have the right to voice my opinion on what his punishment should be. To let him off scott-free is absolute insanity. I was not aware that this website is so lenient with extremely offensive speech.
Last edited:
- 7,793
- 11,615
You do, and you make a lot of valid points.
I wouldn't be opposed to a short ban either if this was done in malice (I was under the impression it was just a misunderstanding, but if the context shows otherwise I am open to consider that), I just think we should clarify the rules regardless.
