Tokyo Revengers is kil (Banning TR for the rest of eternity)

[Arceus0x]

Permission to make this thread was granted by @KLOL506 and @Just a Random Butler

Greetings.
As you've probably heard many times over the past 3-4 years, a man named Vzearr, who we also know as Cloudygami, Vapourr, Vapourrrr and most likely LostLightt and recently NeverForgett has been plaguing this wiki by trying to overinflate the statistics of the verse known as Tokyo Revengers.

Considering that this has been a consistent issue throughout the years and has not been resolved, I believe it is best that we ban the verse.

In fact, the verse got banned already but got unbanned when Vzearr inflitrated the staff ranks and managed to convince people to unban it, only to double-down on old behaviour and bash people who disagree with him.

I believe it is time that we lay down the law and fully freeze or even delete the verse.

If we do not, the story will repeat itself again and again. It is cruical that we do not allow this to fester any longer.

Here are some proposals on what can be done.

Proposal 1: Deletion

The verse gets nuked into oblivion and nobody is allowed to speak of it again.

Proposal 2: Eternal freeze

Freeze the verse as is, lock all the profiles and the verse page, never allow anyone to touch it again.

One important thing we need to consider is that we NEVER and I mean N E V E R allow it back in. We tried the lenient option and let the verse go unbanned only for Vzearr to immediately get himself banned over it and immediately make 2 (potential, highly likely,) socks.

There's barely any people who care about the verse and most if not all are connected to Vzearr in some capacity. I think we should stop bothering ourselves and make it an eternal discussion rule.

Option 1:

Due to the many controversial threads and many bans over rude behaviour, insults, lies and sockpuppeting from the supporters of the verse, Tokyo Revengers is banned from being added and will remain deleted regardless of any attempts to bring it back. It is important that under no circumstances shall anyone be allowed to bring back the verse, no matter how much time has passed since the ban.

Option 2:

Due to the many controversial threads and many bans over rude behaviour, insults, lies and sockpuppeting from the supporters of the verse, Tokyo Revengers is banned from being revised and will remain frozen in its current state regardless of any future attempt to revise it or unban it. It is important that under no circumstances shall anyone be allowed to bring back the verse, no matter how much time has passed since the ban.

Overall, this should be done since the circumstances are just that bad at this point.

FOR BAN: @KLOL506 , @KingTempest , @Dalesean027 (not permanently), @LephyrTheRevanchist (not permanently) , @Psychomaster35 , @Crabwhale , @Theglassman12 , @M3X_2.0 , @Tllmbrg , @Reiner04, @DMUA, @Flashlight237 (not permanently), @Vietthai96 (not permanently)
AGAINST BAN: @FinePoint, @Planck69 , @Antvasima , @Agnaa , @DarkDragonMedeus , @SomebodyData , @Nierre , @Catzlaflame, @Duedate8898 , @RaikiKurohane99

 

[FinePoint]

I personally prefer the suggestion Agnaa gave on Discord of just reinstating the standard of only letting people touch the verse if they have a long history of contribution already, specifically over one thousand posts and a year of activity.

This would prevent any socks from immediately getting back into it without banning the entire verse over one bad actor.

 

[Arceus0x]

Just to add to this, apparently I forgot some of the socks, like here

Rule Violation Reports (New forum)

I didn't get notified from the tag for some reason so I saw the report kinda late. I know a few mods already handled the matter but I wanna reply as well as the report was specifically made aganist me. Dino participates in Classroom Of The Elite discussions even tho he only reads the fights...

vsbattles.com

here

Rule Violation Reports (New forum)

Okay. Permanent bans with the right to appeal one of them via a Community Central wiki message wall after one year then? Sounds good.

vsbattles.com

(though I think 1-2 of the people mentioned were not socks)

 

[Arceus0x]

I personally prefer Agnaa's suggestion in the Discord of just reinstating the standard of only letting people touch the verse if they have a long history of contribution already, specifically over one thousand posts and a year of activity.

This would prevent any socks from immediately getting back into it without banning the entire verse over one bad actor.

This would just make Vzearr repeat the same thing he did, get trusted, get a position, try it again. I think we need to stop this for good, there's no reason why we should keep this verse as a potential reason for more rule violations.

 

[FinePoint]

This would just make Vzearr repeat the same thing he did, get trusted, get a position, try it again. I think we need to stop this for good, there's no reason why we should keep this verse as a potential reason for more rule violations.

An entire year is a long time to gain trust. The chance that they do it successfully again, especially after all this suspicion is minimal.

But even if so, that would give us a full year of free work from them on unrelated verses before we're forced to ban them again.

Anyway, the reason is that our goal is to index the power of popular fiction, and this qualifies. We have an inherent reason to scale it if possible.

 

[Arceus0x]

An entire year is a long time to gain trust. The chance that they do it successfully again, especially after all this suspicion is minimal.

But even if so, that would give us a full year of free work from them on unrelated verses before we're forced to ban them again.

Anyway, the reason is that our goal is to index the power of popular fiction, and this qualifies. We have an inherent reason to scale it if possible

I don't think this would help. We're basically baiting a clearly unstable person into working on the verse again. We also know Vzearr operates through proxies when possible as well so we may have no way of figuring it out. I genuienly think stopping this verse in its tracks is the best option. Just freeze it. It will still be there, just inaccessible. The story is finished, nothing new will come from it. Just freeze it forever and let it stay that way.

 

[The_King_of_Prudence]

This would just make Vzearr repeat the same thing he did, get trusted, get a position, try it again. I think we need to stop this for good, there's no reason why we should keep this verse as a potential reason for more rule violations.

That's nothing you couldn't do for, say, Marvel.

 

[Arceus0x]

That's nothing you couldn't do for, say Marvel. If someone like Vzarr sets his sights on that, or any other giant verse, freezing, let alone deletion, would cause riots.

except there's basically nobody else scaling TR. Literally like dinozxd (who I think knows vapourr anyways) and vzearr and his billion alt accounts are the only ones who scale it. Freezing it would stop a ton of headaches from happening in the future and there's basically nobody who would care about the verse anyways. Marvel on the other hand is scaled by a good chunk of the wiki, a very different story.

 

[The_King_of_Prudence]

Ah, so more like if I vandalized Precure.

Logically, the ban would only need to last about 70 years, but carry on.

 

[KLOL506]

I can't grant permission, but I'm sure you can ask a couple of admins to do so and they'd agree.

In any case, I am all in for a complete and total ban. It's overstayed its welcome and every solution we have tried thus far has crashed and burned horribly, in no small part due to Vzearr completely derailing all such attempts at reconciliation. If need be, nuke it from the wiki entirely.

 

[KLOL506]

I personally prefer Agnaa's suggestion in the Discord of just reinstating the standard of only letting people touch the verse if they have a long history of contribution already, specifically over one thousand posts and a year of activity.

This would prevent any socks from immediately getting back into it without banning the entire verse over one bad actor.

Not good enough, it would need constant staff supervision for every comment going forward, especially given everything that's happened in this year alone. Which is already taxing enough as is.

And Arceus is right. Vzearr is now going all out with his sockpuppet charade. These rules would be nothing more than bait to let someone as unstable as him just come back in here and create far more trouble than is worth tolerating.

 

[Nonynho]

I also agree fully with @Agnaa's opinion, as basically the main opposer of the verse.

The verse is not problematic enough to justify the nuking, and it is quite likely that we'll be seeing threads trying to recreate it if we were to delete it, so we should avoid giving our mods this work in the future lol

Besides very specifically Vzearr we don't have history of people who would cover the needed stuff (a year+1000 comments) who would risk their necks for the verse and if we are to see one in 2027's second semester in case Vzearr's VPN-based-sockpuppets last this long lmao it is not too troublesome to just delete them at all

 

[FinePoint]

That's nothing you couldn't do for, say, Marvel.

I think this is a really valid concern.

Banning any verse over the actions of one person is a slippery slope, and I don't think it's something I could ever support.

 

[TWILIGHT-OP]

Mind I remind you, this is a staff only thread.

 

[Planck69]

I'm largely fine with Agnaa's suggestion. At most I'd add that it cannot only be handled by one person as well, since it's even less likely that two sock puppets can achieve that.

 

[KLOL506]

I wanted to give an idea, not sure if it's a great one or not, but i can give it a try regardless;

What if we only allow specific people that we deem as reliable for the verse with no controversy history?

Already tried that, Vzearr went about playing the victim-blaming game until he snapped and got the boot. No wonder he'll try this with other socks.

 

[XxZetsuxX]

Already tried that, Vzearr went about playing the victim-blaming game until he snapped and got the boot. No wonder he'll try this with other socks.

The person i have in mind would be Zefra3011 honestly, he is the most reliable TR scaler

Though, whether he will scale the verse again or not, is not up to me

Mind I remind you, this is a staff only thread.

KLOL responded to me, i hope, i can give one last comment, please ;-;?

 

[Arceus0x]

will reply later

 

[KingTempest]

-_-
Nuke the verse bro

 

[Arceus0x]

I also agree fully with @Agnaa's opinion, as basically the main opposer of the verse.

Would you mind actually posting the opinion here? I don't even really know what exactly y'all are agreeing to.

The verse is not problematic enough to justify the nuking, and it is quite likely that we'll be seeing threads trying to recreate it if we were to delete it, so we should avoid giving our mods this work in the future lol

If you read the rule, I made the rule to specifically prevent TR from being recreated no matter what. Also, I think it's a lot more work in the future to deal with more Vzearr socks than it is to deal with a thread that can be deleted with one button.

Besides very specifically Vzearr we don't have history of people who would cover the needed stuff (a year+1000 comments) who would risk their necks for the verse and if we are to see one in 2027's second semester in case Vzearr's VPN-based-sockpuppets last this long lmao it is not too troublesome to just delete them at all

I think preventing the issue at the root is a far bigger concern here and if we prevent any future developments in that verse we would pretty much have nothing to worry about anymore as any thread with TR would just get closed.

I think this is a really valid concern.

Banning any verse over the actions of one person is a slippery slope, and I don't think it's something I could ever support.

It is the one person who supports the verse. Nobody was working on it until Vzearr appeared, only to immediately get banned after unbanning the verse. Do you want this to happen again? Because last time it is YOU staff members who let vapourr get into your ranks, trick you and then it was YOU who forgave him when he decided to come clean. What will you do next time he appears after hiding for like 2 years and doesn't come out to you?

 

[Arceus0x]

I genuienly do not think this is productive in any way. This isn't some big verse that we're banning because of a bad egg. This is a verse that is has been supported by vapourr and vapourr's friends, nobody else ( think zefra?? Idk if we trust em though).

I think that we simply should nip it in the bud and at least freeze the verse. It will still be there for indexing purposes, it will just be inaccessible for anything else.

 

[Dalesean027]

I also agree fully with @Agnaa's opinion, as basically the main opposer of the verse.

The verse is not problematic enough to justify the nuking, and it is quite likely that we'll be seeing threads trying to recreate it if we were to delete it, so we should avoid giving our mods this work in the future lol

Besides very specifically Vzearr we don't have history of people who would cover the needed stuff (a year+1000 comments) who would risk their necks for the verse and if we are to see one in 2027's second semester in case Vzearr's VPN-based-sockpuppets last this long lmao it is not too troublesome to just delete them at all

No offense but its easy to hold this opinion when you're not someone who has to constantly be on the front dealing with the bs every single time it comes to a forefront, too many staff have let it sit several times which is how lots of shit gets added that should not have letting these dudes snake a bunch of shit that should never be accepted even when its under supervision.

Vzearr has had like what maybe 4 socks now and the other TR dudes who usually follow him never reprimand him or report it any time it happens so its not like its ever been a 1 person problem

I opt for full deletion so there's nothing prompting them to continue to make socks and cause trouble here as has already been the case many times now

 

[Arceus0x]

Vzearr has had like what maybe 4 socks now

Like 5 or more actually

 

[Antvasima]

I personally prefer Agnaa's suggestion in the Discord of just reinstating the standard of only letting people touch the verse if they have a long history of contribution already, specifically over one thousand posts and a year of activity.

This would prevent any socks from immediately getting back into it without banning the entire verse over one bad actor.

This seems reasonable to me.

 

[Arceus0x]

For the record, even if we went with Agnaa's proposal we should make the qualifications way stricter. 1000 messages and a year is easily achievable by literally anyone and Vzearr already did it and went as a staff, undetected, for quite a while.

If the vote decides that we shouldn't outright ban the verse, I think extremely strict standards need to be applied. I'm talking 2 years, 5000 messages, maybe 6 or 7, serious activity. Basically make it so nobody who hasn't been a reliable part of the wiki can actually access it.

 

[Arceus0x]

This seems reasonable to me.

could you ping more staff please?

 

[Antvasima]

It is probably best if I do not bother them too much.

 

[Dalesean027]

For the record, even if we went with Agnaa's proposal we should make the qualifications way stricter. 1000 messages and a year is easily achievable by literally anyone and Vzearr already did it and went as a staff, undetected, for quite a while.

If the vote decides that we shouldn't outright ban the verse, I think extremely strict standards need to be applied. I'm talking 2 years, 5000 messages, maybe 6 or 7, serious activity. Basically make it so nobody who hasn't been a reliable part of the wiki can actually access it.

Its also already what we did last time and it doesn't work clearly, and again I can't stress enough

Vzearr has had like what maybe 4 socks now and the other TR dudes who usually follow him never reprimand him or report it any time it happens so its not like its ever been a 1 person problem

The other supporters who would meet said requirements never once reported vzearr or other people who had socks for TR in the past and actively work with them on site and on discord fully knowing the shit thats going on and jump behind them in problematic threads. Just adding a post count baseline alone doesn't fix the problem or address this

 

[Arceus0x]

It is probably best if I do not bother them too much.

you're happy to summon the cavalry on far lesser topics but not a staff thread? Seems weird man, not to mention that those who don't wanna come over will not come over, whilst others might miss the thread on accident.

 

[Antvasima]

Okay then.

@Mr. Bambu @DarkDragonMedeus @Just a Random Butler @Agnaa @Qawsedf234 @SomebodyData @Celestial_Pegasus @Ultima_Reality @Elizhaa @Damage3245 @Starter_Pack @Abstractions @Colonel_Krukov @SamanPatou @GyroNutz @Firestorm808 @Maverick_Zero_X @Crabwhale @GrathOfLux @Dereck03 @Planck69 @LephyrTheRevanchist

Are any of you willing to help out here please?

 

[LephyrTheRevanchist]

I have expressed in the past complete confidence that banning this verse would be more beneficial to our wiki than keeping it, and still maintain such. So I'm with Dale and KT here.

 

[Psychomaster35]

I still don't understand why a very grounded verse that's not even cosmic in power that is also very obscure to the point where hardly anyone knows about it has its supporters being this unnecessarily toxic to the point of resorting to sockpuppetry, something that's usually seen with more popular mangas like Dragon Ball, Naruto, My Hero Academia, etcetera. I'm all in for a complete ban, but if that doesn't happen, we just increase the wait time and minimum messages for someone to start supporting Tokyo Revengers, say, 2+ years and 5000 messages.

 

[FinePoint]

Would you mind actually posting the opinion here? I don't even really know what exactly y'all are agreeing to.

 

[DMUA]

Besides very specifically Vzearr we don't have history of people who would cover the needed stuff (a year+1000 comments) who would risk their necks for the verse

But that did happen, and I really don't think it's likely he decides not to do so again now that he's been booted for doing his deal

This is a hobby site- we're supposed to have fun and I don't think even the supporters we complain about are actually enjoying the experience of this thing continuing to lurk on the wiki. Obviously they can speak for themselves on whether or not that's true, but my personal take is that even occasionally being dragged into this stuff just makes me wince

 

[Arceus0x]

But that did happen, and I really don't think it's likely he decides not to do so again now that he's been booted for doing his deal

This is a hobby site- we're supposed to have fun and I don't think even the supporters we complain about are actually enjoying the experience of this thing continuing to lurk on the wiki. Obviously they can speak for themselves on whether or not that's true, but my personal take is that even occasionally being dragged into this stuff just makes me wince

Should I add ya to the agreement section?

 

[Agnaa]

Greetings.
As you've probably heard many times over the past 3-4 years, a man named Vzearr, who we also know as Cloudygami, Vapourr, Vapourrrr and most likely LostLightt and recently NeverForgett has been plaguing this wiki by trying to overinflate the statistics of the verse known as Tokyo Revengers.

From his confession, Cloudyagami wasn't actually him.

Cloudyagami was a separate person who also made a sockpuppet. People wanted to check whether that sockpuppet had IP overlaps with Vapourrrr's account, and Vzearr convinced staff that the sockpuppet was his so that such a check wouldn't be done, as it could've revealed that Vzearr and Vapourrrr had IP overlaps.

I personally prefer the suggestion Agnaa gave on Discord of just reinstating the standard of only letting people touch the verse if they have a long history of contribution already, specifically over one thousand posts and a year of activity.

This would prevent any socks from immediately getting back into it without banning the entire verse over one bad actor.

I still agree with this.

Its also already what we did last time and it doesn't work clearly, and again I can't stress enough

I think it did work, actually. It got him to act very well for over a year, well enough for us to give him staff positions. That's much better than the constant crash outs we've had with LostLightt and NeverForgett.

It's not like Vzearr only has interest in TR, that we know he'll vanish off the site if he can never work on it again. I think he'll still come back on a sock and channel his energy in other directions. So if we give him incentive for his socks to behave well for a long time, I think things will be easier on us.

FOR: @KLOL506, @KingTempest , @Dalesean027 , @LephyrTheRevanchist , @Psychomaster35

AGAINST: @FinePoint , @Planck69 , @Antvasima

Only having "for" and "against", when you presented two options, and someone in the replies immediately presented a third one

 

[Arceus0x]

From his confession, Cloudyagami wasn't actually him.

Fair nuff (only further shows that the TR supporters just aren't to be trusted)

I still agree with this.

I think it did work, actually. It got him to act very well for over a year, well enough for us to give him staff positions. That's much better than the constant crash outs we've had with LostLightt and NeverForgett.

Except the moment he was allowed free will he basically ruined it turn one. We haven't had any good experiences with TR, it just makes people go insane for some reason (I heard the ending was ass, maybe the psychic damage was too much (King in Yellow ahh verse)). I don't think your proposal is good for the wiki here and even if we did go with it, it should be far more strict (5000+ messages, 2 years) which would absolutely allow us to sort away anyone who is trying to sockpuppet.
Either way, I think straight up freezing the verse is the best option but the liked version is the deletion, which I can also get behind as I'd rather the verse be banished for eternity than having to deal with any of this again.

It's not like Vzearr only has interest in TR, that we know he'll vanish off the site if he can never work on it again. I think he'll still come back on a sock and channel his energy in other directions. So if we give him incentive for his socks to behave well for a long time, I think things will be easier on us.

We let him be free and do things right for a long while but he basically just blew up the moment TR was allowed again. To me this suggests the opposite - banning TR would make people behave better. If this acts like a metaphorical cognitohazard for some reason then I don't see why we should keep it around when the one time Vzearr wasn't around this verse he behaved well. We also now see damn well that the only reason he tried this is because he wanted to get into staff and scale TR yet again. I think it will absolutely make him lose motivation if we just make it impossible to scale it (specifically make it eternal and unchangeable).

Only having "for" and "against", when you presented two options, and someone in the replies immediately presented a third one

My opinion has no weight in this vote other than trying to convince people this is the right way to go.
Every staff member so far has either gone with your option (which isn't a ban and thus a disagreement) and those who think otherwise want it gone straight up, no backsies. In short, there's only two options in play right now, and until someone supports the other option I think I'll keep the two around.

Also, am I right to assume that I should put you in for disagreement on the outright ban?

 

[Agnaa]

Also, am I right to assume that I should put you in for disagreement on the outright ban?

Yes, I want a participation restriction, not a ban.

 

[Arceus0x]

Yes, I want a participation restriction, not a ban.

I added you. I gotta ask though, if you do win over the vote, would you agree with the conditions I proposed?

 

[Agnaa]

I added you. I gotta ask though, if you do win over the vote, would you agree with the conditions I proposed?

1 year 1k messages > 2 year 5k messages >>> freeze > ban