-
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
- 6,610
- 6,457
@Azertyhuuh you should remove Reiner from the vote list. I asked him off site.
No more clogging this thread anymore.
- 3,157
- 3,933
Might be off-topic, but since we are discussing about votes generally, I think actually HR or Admins need to clarify if retired staff vote counts, cuz i see ongoing threads have Reiner vote too, so idk if we count retired staff or not
vsbattles.com
vsbattles.com
I don't mind if we count retired staff vote, but it just needs some clarification to not confuse users in future.
Ben 10: “OK, so you’re saying the sword needs someone worthy.” - Ascalon re-interpretation
How powerful is Ascalon? When wielded by Sir George in the past, he had a brutal battle against the Dagon that ended with him cutting out the creature’s heart and sealing him away, as he was unable to properly kill him. According to Azmuth, Dagon underestimated George in their first fight, and...
Honkai Impact 3rd - Infinite Speed Arguments (v2)
This CRT will go over several infinite speed arguments for Hi3, all that's required is for one to pass. I'll list these in order from weakest to strongest. Arguments will be separated by horizontal lines. Firstly, the Theatre is accepted as infinite. Under this CRT it's accepted the Herrscher...
I don't mind if we count retired staff vote, but it just needs some clarification to not confuse users in future.
- 1,303
- 594
Well, I understand your point, but I am not acting this way because I want to. I end up being attacked by a group of people at once with incorrect arguments, and they flood the thread. How would you react if you were the only one debating while more than 10 people opposed you at the same time, supporting each other to defend mistakes and inaccurate information? They even support each other over objectively false claims.
Astral came and reopened topics that had already been discussed in a previous thread and were already accepted. That discussion itself reached 16 pages, yet he was not even aware of it. He came into my thread and started debating points that had already been accepted, which turned the thread into chaos. The problem is that the members supporting him are backing him up normally without even checking the prior discussion.
When I came into his thread before and mentioned something that had already been accepted, he himself told me not to discuss already accepted matters and said that I was derailing the thread.
@FinePoint You personally may remember that in a Tensura discussion, you warned someone against reopening already accepted topics because it was disrupting and derailing the discussion, and you told them to make separate threads for things that had already been accepted.
Now imagine being alone against more than 10 opposing people who support each other, spread inaccurate information, and attack points that were already accepted, while not even knowing what was accepted, what exists already, or the reasons behind those conclusions. I explained it to him, another staff member explained it to him, and another supporter explained it to him as well, yet after all of that, he still said that “incorrect things can be debated here normally,” meaning he still wanted to reopen already accepted topics and flood the thread, even though the original accepted discussion already lasted 16 pages.
I am not saying my behavior is perfect, but when you are put in situations like this, things become extremely difficult if you do not defend yourself strongly enough.
- 34,694
- 42,081
Normally we don't need to remove votes from retired staff if the vote happened before their retirement. But given Twilight OP's DMs with Reiner, Reiner has requested to have vote removed and we should honor that.
- 1,303
- 594
I deleted it.@Azertyhuuh you should remove Reiner from the vote list. I asked him off site.
No more clogging this thread anymore.
- 7,828
- 11,777
I would present my argument as clearly as possible, including why I think the opposition is categorically incorrect, then trust that the staff would see past the noise and land on a position that was at least logical.
If I thought everyone else was acting in bad faith or spamming, I would report them.
If I determined that even the staff present were being completely irrational, then I would appeal to different staff.
If I determined that there was not a single staff member capable of seeing reason and in a position to help, then frankly I would just stop using the website.
I can tell you that at the very least I wouldn't start insulting everyone. It would not benefit my position in any way, it would only give them reason to dismiss me and make it about that.
- 1,303
- 594
I am here to report @Ruler_Star_Kuma because he is trying to create problems in the thread I just opened, and it does not seem like he entered the discussion in good faith, but rather out of hostility alone.
I specifically requested in the thread that people stay on topic and avoid discussing matters that were already approved previously in the thread. He did not like that and started arguing that I have no right to say this.
Discussing matters that were already approved inside a thread dedicated to another argument derails the discussion and makes the thread extremely chaotic. At this rate, the thread could easily extend to 30 pages or more. Each thread is meant to focus on a specific argument, which is why I open separate threads for separate arguments, so that it becomes easier to discuss future points based on previously accepted conclusions. Discussing everything at once is impossible. It is exhausting both for the staff and for me, and no staff member would realistically want to read a massive disorganized thread like that.
Every thread has its own arguments. Some already reach 4 or 5 pages because of a single argument, sometimes even more. There are threads that reach 16 pages. That is exactly why I requested that previously accepted matters not be reopened. Reopening already accepted issues inside another thread, even if somewhat related, floods the discussion with unrelated debates. That would effectively reopen every previous thread I worked on inside one thread, turning it into a chaotic mess extending to 20 pages or more.
I intentionally open multiple threads and discuss arguments one by one in order to support future arguments with points that were already discussed previously. However, coming into a thread and attacking arguments that were already accepted in other discussions, derailing the thread and turning it into chaos, is unacceptable.
When I personally tried to discuss an already accepted argument in a Tensura thread before, I was collectively criticized and told that the matter had already been accepted and could not be debated again within that thread, and that I should open a separate thread for it instead. Even the staff themselves ask for this approach.
This is the thread.
I specifically requested in the thread that people stay on topic and avoid discussing matters that were already approved previously in the thread. He did not like that and started arguing that I have no right to say this.
Discussing matters that were already approved inside a thread dedicated to another argument derails the discussion and makes the thread extremely chaotic. At this rate, the thread could easily extend to 30 pages or more. Each thread is meant to focus on a specific argument, which is why I open separate threads for separate arguments, so that it becomes easier to discuss future points based on previously accepted conclusions. Discussing everything at once is impossible. It is exhausting both for the staff and for me, and no staff member would realistically want to read a massive disorganized thread like that.
Every thread has its own arguments. Some already reach 4 or 5 pages because of a single argument, sometimes even more. There are threads that reach 16 pages. That is exactly why I requested that previously accepted matters not be reopened. Reopening already accepted issues inside another thread, even if somewhat related, floods the discussion with unrelated debates. That would effectively reopen every previous thread I worked on inside one thread, turning it into a chaotic mess extending to 20 pages or more.
I intentionally open multiple threads and discuss arguments one by one in order to support future arguments with points that were already discussed previously. However, coming into a thread and attacking arguments that were already accepted in other discussions, derailing the thread and turning it into chaos, is unacceptable.
When I personally tried to discuss an already accepted argument in a Tensura thread before, I was collectively criticized and told that the matter had already been accepted and could not be debated again within that thread, and that I should open a separate thread for it instead. Even the staff themselves ask for this approach.
This is the thread.
- 212
- 587
Sorry but this is wholly disingenuous.
Kuma said I quote
That's all he said, he did not insult or mock, all he said was that taking the permission for talking about a context that corresponds to another is not of good faith. Which you answered passive aggressive as always.
Mods are not 24/7 free either to waste their time on these reports. Finepoint told you to report people who are derailing the thread yes but he did not mean you should report anyone left and right because they disagree with the scale, you cannot limited the discussion when it literally is interconnected with another "already accepted" content.
- 1,303
- 594
It seems this topic will get out of control because the upgrade combines very large amounts of abilities, so this thread will become controversial and may reach 15 pages. Therefore, I am asking one of the staff members here to move this topic to the staff section, as this is the only thread I requested to be moved since it is large and requires serious discussion.
- 3,157
- 3,933
Not reporting or whatever but I think you should explain OP something like that
is already red flag. There is no rule violation for it yet it showing complete combative mood of OP. I am actually surprised why only @Ruler_Star_Kuma gets warning when starting premise from OP actually something surprising.
- 7,828
- 11,777
Is it a red flag? Is it completely combative? They're just asking people to stay on-topic, and saying they'll report people that don't, which is genuinely what we suggest they do if it'll otherwise just cause a fight.
Azer has been rude in the past, but it feels like since they got in trouble the first time people have been really reaching over some incredibly minor stuff.
Are they speaking in the most polite manner possible? No, but we only ask that people are civil, not that they constantly walk on eggshells.
@Azertyhuuh That said, you don't need to keep reminding people. As for your request, I think we should wait a bit and see if anything happens.
- 5,132
- 4,192
I think we are forgetting this part....
So yes, it's combat since he goes into it believing he is correct, and any other arguments are "irrelevant".
- 7,828
- 11,777
Everyone goes into a debate believing they're correct. Refusing to listen to or discrediting the other side is different, and something they were already warned for in a separate incident.
I don't see this as a continuation of that.
- 1,363
- 1,094
Excuse me for stepping in, but that part right there is pretty much the point. That very part being more, than consistent.
And to the point where not even adding disagreements until told relentlessly? Sometimes not even with that? Not to mention laughing and the whole entitlement issue. He's not a newcomer and I don't get why exactly such things are being taken so minor.
- 1,303
- 594
“I’ve just been extremely busy these days, which is why I still haven’t written down the disagreements yet. I already mentioned this yesterday in a reply to Astral, and I haven’t even read the other comments so far.”
Mr. Bambu
Suffer-Not-Injustice Bambu
VS Battles
Joke Battles
Bureaucrat
Administrator
Calculation Group
- 25,067
- 29,751
Someone pointed this out to me (@Dark_Soul20189), after I asked them not to get directly involved.
This seems just patently untrue. You have made multiple lengthy replies in the interim time. It takes, what, 30 seconds to click edit, then remove a username, add another? One of these lengthy replies was to the disagreement vote you were meant to add, even. The defense is just so impossible so as to not even be considered. At this point I can only see it as being vote manipulation, in that even if you are not lying about votes, you are unreasonably delaying changing them to properly reflect the state of the thread.
- 1,303
- 594
I don’t know whether you will believe what I’m saying, but I personally didn’t see any of those comments, as I told you. I came in, saw Astral’s comment only, and immediately left. I replied as quickly as possible even though I was busy, and I still haven’t fully finished responding to his comment. I told him I’m busy and that I will complete the reply later. That is the truth. I am not lying, and I didn’t see those comments as I mentioned. Now I will go back and review the previous comments and add the votes.
You can review this comment here. Personally, I said that I am busy and that I haven’t even finished my reply. I only quickly saw Astral’s comment and wanted to respond to part of it, and I didn’t even see the other comments. I am also very busy, so I don’t see all the comments.
Mr. Bambu
Suffer-Not-Injustice Bambu
VS Battles
Joke Battles
Bureaucrat
Administrator
Calculation Group
- 25,067
- 29,751
You are absolutely correct. I do not believe this. You responded to the staff member voting. You had time to add their vote.
- 1,303
- 594
A staff member came and I added him to the vote list, but then members told me he is not actually staff even though he has a staff badge. At that moment I didn’t understand anything, even though some people tried to explain that they are from another community. But I am already inside VSBW—how can it be “another community” when I am in VSBW? Also, I replied to that other staff member and I was waiting for his final response, but it seems he posted it on page 3, and I didn’t even see page 3 at all. I only saw Astral’s comment, and I didn’t even finish replying to it. Now I added him to the vote list and removed the first “staff member” after users told me he is actually from another community.
I don’t even understand English at all. Whenever I receive any reply, I have to translate it first, then write my response in my own language, then translate it into English, and then verify it using other translators because this AI sometimes changes the meaning and uses words that don’t match what I intended. That creates more problems. Writing a reply to someone is not simple either: I translate the person’s message, then write my reply in my language, translate it into English, and on top of that I have to check whether specific terms are translated correctly. Then I have to identify small English parts in the text where I need to insert blue links. And my internet is extremely bad—sometimes translating a single text takes more than 3 minutes, and even then when I try to send it, it gives a network error. Even reading comments or moving between pages is difficult, and don’t even ask about opening evidence inside links.
I’m saying all of this so you understand that it is not something that takes 30 seconds as you think. On top of everything, I am busy all day and can barely even follow replies. And if I had said I would not add him or refused, then that would truly be vote manipulation. But accusing me just because I was late in adding it is a direct accusation without any evidence.
Mr. Bambu
Suffer-Not-Injustice Bambu
VS Battles
Joke Battles
Bureaucrat
Administrator
Calculation Group
- 25,067
- 29,751
I'm referring to Twilight-OP. Phoenks is a staff member on FC/OC, our sister wiki, and has the badge appropriate to that role.
I don't see any plausible situation in which you are actively replying to a thread and managing staff votes, but fail to add the vote that was told, explicitly, in Twilight's first post, upon being prompted. There was no hesitation apparent to add Phoenks, who agreed, but you did not add Twilight's vote, who said "I disagree with X and Y" in summary. The only reasonable interpretation I can come to is that this is intentional. That is my say on the subject.
- 7,828
- 11,777
Why not just let someone else count the votes then?
That should serve you well if you're busy, and nobody can accuse you of manipulating them.
- 1,303
- 594
I will do this myself because I do not trust any member here to be given permission to handle it.
At the very least, it should work like this: for example, if a staff member votes and I do not respond to the thread at all from that point onward, it means I am absent. But if they vote and I continue the discussion, and I do not add it as if they never voted, then anyone can remind me in a comment. In that case, if I come back, continue the discussion, and I still fail to add it even after being reminded, then I can be warned about this issue.
GodlyCharmander
He/Him- 6,850
- 6,225
This user insulted me in a Vs Match, allegedly over me presenting my arguments in an "aggressive" way.
Here is the entire context of the interaction:
So, I'd like an opinion of the staff in this matter, is the way I've presented my arguments justification for being insulted? If so, please do inform me how I can do better. If not, please inform the user that the insult is unnecessary.
EDIT: Disclaimer, this is not about whether or not the grace arguments are correct, so you do not need to clarify the rules about that.
Here is the entire context of the interaction:
- My reply to @Kachon123 where I disagreed that Grace was an end-all be-all to the debate.
- User asks me to calm down and explains grace, interpreting my bolded letters as... aggressiveness?
- I again, disagree that votes that do not acknowledge new arguments are more important than new arguments.
- User tells me to make a new thread.
- I go over the examples of matches that did go over grace but could be turned around
- User says I'm being aggressive, and insults me.
- My rebuttal to that.
So, I'd like an opinion of the staff in this matter, is the way I've presented my arguments justification for being insulted? If so, please do inform me how I can do better. If not, please inform the user that the insult is unnecessary.
EDIT: Disclaimer, this is not about whether or not the grace arguments are correct, so you do not need to clarify the rules about that.
azontr
Any/All- 42,033
- 51,134
I called you a pedant. You called me a robot, insinuated I lacked the ability to comprehend certain rules (quite literally an insult to my intelligence), and have succeeded in being condescending in basically every post you have made in that thread with the only reason being that Broly losing to Tatsumaki infuriates you.
If being called pedantic invites this much of a visceral response in you, then perhaps versus debating isn't one of your talents.
If being called pedantic invites this much of a visceral response in you, then perhaps versus debating isn't one of your talents.
GodlyCharmander
He/Him- 6,850
- 6,225
This is an stretch and a half. "You don't understand what the rules is trying to entail because you're interpreting it too literally" is somehow a much worse offense to you than calling me a pedant, which holds virtually the same meaning. You're trying to paint my reaction as something ten times bigger than it actually is, how is replying to an argument with bolded letters condescending?
Luckily I trust the staff here to be reasonable, because I don't have to tolerate being called a ******** over an absolute nothing burger.
azontr
Any/All- 42,033
- 51,134
You haven't just been "replying to arguments with bold letters." Examine what you are actually saying in the thread; just because you don't think that calling arguments jokes, calling people liars, rejecting the idea that a proper debate happened because you disagree with the verdict of said debate, and responding with blatantly condescending language isn't aggressive, doesn't make it not aggressive.
You do not need to communicate your arguments in bold or caps lock. Nobody is forcing you to make this decision. You are deciding to project yourself in a manner that appears aggressive, and when someone points it out, you try to portray it as some kind of writing style crap when no, it's you getting mad for no reason. Be absolutely, completely for real.
You do not need to communicate your arguments in bold or caps lock. Nobody is forcing you to make this decision. You are deciding to project yourself in a manner that appears aggressive, and when someone points it out, you try to portray it as some kind of writing style crap when no, it's you getting mad for no reason. Be absolutely, completely for real.
GodlyCharmander
He/Him- 6,850
- 6,225
We're not going to sit here and pretend that bolding letters and using bigger fonts, not caps lock, is aggressive. Using the highlight function to highlight an argument is not aggressive. You're creating massive hysteria over me presenting the flaws of my opponents argument using the word "magically" frozen, or me commenting on how most of these votes appear to be based on the "funny".
You will also not be talking about attitude after overblowing this and insulting me over it. Let the staff decide the outcome, because this is ridiculous.
Mr. Bambu
Suffer-Not-Injustice Bambu
VS Battles
Joke Battles
Bureaucrat
Administrator
Calculation Group
- 25,067
- 29,751
Being absolutely fair, you did not call him a pedant (that is, this is not the full extent of what you did). You called him a "d*ckhead", specifically avoiding the profanity filter to do so. I think your posts up to that point were rational and straightforward, and GodlyCharmander's were at least very stonewall-y if not outright instigatory, but you did take to insulting him outright eventually. To clarify, I am generally in favor of calling a boot a boot, I've been known to refer to someone as an asshole if I think they're being an asshole, but I think your term there was a bit uncalled for/extreme for the situation and, again, profanity filter.
You, on the other hand. I don't think I can possibly evaluate this while ignoring the subject of the conversation. I won't clarify the rules, if that is your want, but I will say that these posts highlight increasing aggressiveness because of a disagreement over the rules. Truthfully, I think the best outcome would have been that you really listened to this post here and stepped away, striving to remake the match and seek a fairer outcome down the line when the opportunity arose. I think that bit of advice was well-intentioned and generally a good idea.
The fact is that both of you dissolved into insulting each other. I think GodlyCharmander's posts were more at fault in starting this, I think making a scene about disagreeing with the rules of the site rather than abiding by them can only really be called "aggressive", but it ended with both sides trying to draw blood. I also feel it is an extremely petty affair for either side.
I am in favor of a warning to you, GodlyCharmander, only because I think you do not appreciate the thinness of your ice. You were unbanned conditionally, that you would actively strive to behave well. This does not mean tolerating abuse, but it does mean knowing when to make a stand. This is not one of those times. This is obviously not one of those times, even. If a debate is over by the written rules of the site, I do not think it is behavior that aligns with what we expect from you to go on a warpath and declare it, personally, invalid. You have had several reports lately, and while most have been petty, it is a trend of behavior that I do not wish to see from someone only recently granted leniency for poor behavior before. You are back on claims of having matured and grown up. Please demonstrate that to me.
azontr
Any/All- 42,033
- 51,134
This is true, I did call him that. Which, in hindsight, perhaps might not have been the best way to handle the situation. But when you are trying to get someone to calm down and just move on with the situation and they are continuously coming at you with aggression, then it becomes hard to keep ones composure.
Though I will also admit that I did lose said composure rather quickly. I'll submit myself to a warning if that's necessary.
- 7,828
- 11,777
I don't think that's necessary.
Your peers seem to agree that Charmander was being aggressive and unreasonable, and I'm inclined to agree as well.
In that light, I see what you said less as an insult with malice and more a statement of their perceived behavior being mean said without tact.
...That came out WAY more formally than I intended, but I suppose all I'm saying simply is that there's a consensus they were being a jerk, and so you said they were being a jerk. We would prefer if you didn't use crass insulting words in doing so, but I can't really blame you too much for getting frustrated and calling a spade a spade.
Overall I agree with Bambu's assessment, except that I'd like to remain neutral on punishing Charmander.
- 7,828
- 11,777
Of most relevance to me is that they said the people in the thread were the reason VSBW is seen as a joke.What did Charmander do eactly, in summary? I don't want to punish him unnecessarily.
They also called azontr a robot.
Otherwise they were debating normally, with bit of an aggressive tone maybe.
I don't personally think it's enough to warrant a formal warning, but I may not be putting enough weight on their history, which I don't fully remember.
- 34,694
- 42,081
I do agree the most with what Bambu and FinePoint have said, but it shouldn't be ignored of a common pattern that has been going on as of late. There has been a lot of growing concern that of there being patterns/groups of mostly community members with even a few staff members joining in. I cannot officially confirm or deny if the so called conspiracy theories are true, but there is definitely some kind of noticeable pattern that should be worth looking into. But the there are suspicions going on that their is some kind of Dragon Ball spite campaign going on. Putting a 5-C character against a 2-C character should be seen as a stomp in hindsight, but the former being a "Advanced Telekinesis specialist with crazy LS" and the latter being a "2-C character with shit tier LS." One hand, it may look fine to even the odds, but it's been informingly agreed that simply having dominant LS has a one limit that it's not assumed they can kill the stronger character or bypass durability via sheer LS. Which the voters of the former either seems to have forgotten that or are hiding a blind eye to focus on the spite. But I suppose the former is the safer interpretation. Likewise, I have seen people "Celebrate" when Dragon Ball LS strength downgrades were being inserted.
While I agree that none of this excuses GodlyCharmander's behaivor, I am going to overall remain neutral. But before anyone does it, I do not think it should be ignored on the opposite end of the spectrum. Lots of users openly are in the mentality that they never agreed with Charmander's ban being lifted, which it is fine if they have such an opinion. But there are users who openly acknowledge that GodlyCharmander and possibly other "Dragon Ball fans" are on thin ice. But it's for those reasons some people secretly hope some of them react horribly to certain arguments or take actions hard in hopes that those reactions would lead to their ban. Again, I'm not saying that there is hard evidence of the rage baiting conspiracies, but there is definitely a common pattern and potential signs of it, to the point where we shouldn't just be giving harsh one-sided punishments to GodlyCharmander or any other Dragon Ball supporters just from what was going on. And we at the very least need to consider the possibility of what goes on behind closed doors.
While I agree that none of this excuses GodlyCharmander's behaivor, I am going to overall remain neutral. But before anyone does it, I do not think it should be ignored on the opposite end of the spectrum. Lots of users openly are in the mentality that they never agreed with Charmander's ban being lifted, which it is fine if they have such an opinion. But there are users who openly acknowledge that GodlyCharmander and possibly other "Dragon Ball fans" are on thin ice. But it's for those reasons some people secretly hope some of them react horribly to certain arguments or take actions hard in hopes that those reactions would lead to their ban. Again, I'm not saying that there is hard evidence of the rage baiting conspiracies, but there is definitely a common pattern and potential signs of it, to the point where we shouldn't just be giving harsh one-sided punishments to GodlyCharmander or any other Dragon Ball supporters just from what was going on. And we at the very least need to consider the possibility of what goes on behind closed doors.
azontr
Any/All- 42,033
- 51,134
Just going to say that I know and talk to @BoastJr and I don't think he made that match out of any desire to spite Dragon Ball or anything. I can't speak on how others behaved but the "LS meta" thing is kind of a meme in our community, and I think he was just making the match as kind of a joke in that vein rather than a deliberate attempt to create discord or anything.
BoastJr
He/Him- 2,879
- 4,204
Allow me to clarify that I hold no ill Will towards Dragonball at all and most of my time here was to support the franchise.
The Thread was created with the purpose of exploring an underused mechanic in Versus Debates and while we do joke about Lifting Strength in the server I am in, there are people who genuinely believes it is underused or glossed over without much attention.
I have asked if people wanted to change the conditions of the battle which somewhat buffed broly because a user has informed me it was a stomp which is what I partially expected for either sides (hence why I have asked early on)
I cannot speak for everyone in that thread however I do not believe anyone would be petty enough to falsely vote over a exaggerated wincondition to humiliate Dragon Ball. There are those who were genuinely debating it at the start and it was only possible in an extremely unrealistic conditions (speed equal and an underused stat). These is what enabled many other matchups to be possible.
Many people think this matchup is a stomp in favor of Broly or isn't convinced by the wincon and while that is perfectly fine... it was rather uncalled for claiming the matchup was intentionally spiting a verse the other users may not like.
I believe its fair to assume people argue in good faith first and foremost until proven wrong. I do not understand why we need to question this without any proof or what not to stir unnecessary drama.
Last edited:
