• 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.

Wiki Vandalism Reports

Re5yh said:
Absolute 1-A vandalism. Page should be locked to prevent unauthorized edits:
Click to expand...
Masked gave them a warning.
Edit: Since it seems to be a misunderstanding regarding R>F, Masked doesn't believe further action is required for now, but Masked will wait for other staff.

There have been several Tier 1 profiles opened recently that haven't been re-locked, so Masked may need to ask about that.
They will lock it for now, though.
 
MaskedDragon908 said:
Masked gave them a warning.
Edit: Since it seems to be a misunderstanding regarding R>F, Masked doesn't believe further action is required for now, but Masked will wait for other staff.

There have been several Tier 1 profiles opened recently that haven't been re-locked, so Masked may need to ask about that.
They will lock it for now, though.
Click to expand...
That is sufficient, yes, as that member seems clueless rather than malicious. Thank you. 🙏
 
 
Antvasima said:
@Azertyhuuh seems to have changed the statistics of several Instant Death pages based on false claims of this being accepted in a crt. I think that an addition to our official warning tracker seems reasonable. 🙏

Click to expand...
I only applied the revisions; it was never my intention to make any false claims. The cosmology had already been upgraded, and I requested that the profiles be unlocked so I could apply the new tiers. After that, they told me the characters don't actually scale to those tiers, as you can see for yourself. All I did was apply the revisions.
 
Antvasima said:
@Azertyhuuh seems to have changed the statistics of several Instant Death pages based on false claims of this being accepted in a crt. I think that an addition to our official warning tracker seems reasonable. 🙏

Click to expand...
Before accusing me like this, you should review the profile justifications. All I did was apply the tiers that had already been accepted.

The profile justification literally states, "Can destroy any world in the Ultimate Ensemble." It also states that The Great Sage is stronger than him.

Those justifications support a 1-C rating. All I did was apply the 1-C tier, remove the outdated novel justifications that had already been agreed to be removed, and restore the Higher Universes references to the justifications as they were before.

This staff member is saying that these characters do not qualify for that tier, yet the justifications on their profiles themselves support 1-C.

So is this mistake really mine, or does it belong to the person who originally wrote those justifications? Those justifications were already there long before I even joined the community.

I'll give you an example:

Let's say a CRT upgrades the Spirit World from 2-B to 1-B.

A character previously had this justification:
2-B: "Can destroy the entire Spirit World."

After the Spirit World is upgraded to 1-B, the profile would naturally become:

1-B: "Can destroy the entire Spirit World."

The character automatically becomes 1-B because the justification states that they can destroy the entire Spirit World. If the Spirit World's tier is raised, the character's tier rises with it as long as the justification remains the same.

That's exactly what happened here. The justifications existed long before I joined, and they support a 1-C rating. If the staff member believes that tier is incorrect, then the justifications should be reviewed and corrected. I should not be accused of making incorrect edits when I simply applied what the existing justifications supported.



Look at what the justification itself says:


  • (The sword is an 'exception'[2] capable of using its ability in any given world within[3] the Ultimate Ensemble World regardless of what laws they follow.[3][1][2] Able to easily cut through Alexia and her barrier[2] which is someone as powerful as UEG)
While the justification states that this sword can destroy any world in the Ultimate Ensemble, regardless of what that world is. It is, of course, one of the exceptions and can function in any world, applying its ability, which is cutting and destroying worlds.

So who is wrong here now?
 
Last edited:
Antvasima said:
@Azertyhuuh seems to have changed the statistics of several Instant Death pages based on false claims of this being accepted in a crt. I think that an addition to our official warning tracker seems reasonable. 🙏

Click to expand...
Masked would normally advocate for leniency, but in this case, a warning may be reasonable, yes.

When Azertyhuuh first edited the pages, it was a simple mistake.
However, removing Environmental Destruction from this page is undoing an accepted CRT.

Azertyhuuh was also dismissive of Oblivion of the Endless' opinion.
vsbattles.com

All-purpose request thread (New forum)

I don't understand what's going on here. I requested that the revisions be applied, and I made every necessary change. Today, I found that all of the revisions had been reverted to their previous state. This is the second time this has happened to me. All the work I put in last night applying...
vsbattles.com vsbattles.com

Azertyhuuh said:
Before accusing me like this, you should review the profile justifications. All I did was apply the tiers that had already been accepted.
Click to expand...
Masked understands your confusion, but
Changing a character from High 3-A to 1-C is a large jump that requires a revision thread.
It is one of the reasons why we have scaling threads to establish the complicated nature of a verse's scaling chain.

Masked would have preferred to simply discuss this with you, but your dismissive attitude towards them has made it difficult.
If you are more patient, it will be easier to resolve these disputes.
 
Azertyhuuh said:
Before accusing me like this, you should review the profile justifications. All I did was apply the tiers that had already been accepted.

The profile justification literally states, "Can destroy any world in the Ultimate Ensemble." It also states that The Great Sage is stronger than him.

Those justifications support a 1-C rating. All I did was apply the 1-C tier, remove the outdated novel justifications that had already been agreed to be removed, and restore the Higher Universes references to the justifications as they were before.

This staff member is saying that these characters do not qualify for that tier, yet the justifications on their profiles themselves support 1-C.

So is this mistake really mine, or does it belong to the person who originally wrote those justifications? Those justifications were already there long before I even joined the community.

I'll give you an example:

Let's say a CRT upgrades the Spirit World from 2-B to 1-B.

A character previously had this justification:
2-B: "Can destroy the entire Spirit World."

After the Spirit World is upgraded to 1-B, the profile would naturally become:

1-B: "Can destroy the entire Spirit World."

The character automatically becomes 1-B because the justification states that they can destroy the entire Spirit World. If the Spirit World's tier is raised, the character's tier rises with it as long as the justification remains the same.

That's exactly what happened here. The justifications existed long before I joined, and they support a 1-C rating. If the staff member believes that tier is incorrect, then the justifications should be reviewed and corrected. I should not be accused of making incorrect edits when I simply applied what the existing justifications supported.



Look at what the justification itself says:


  • (The sword is an 'exception'[2] capable of using its ability in any given world within[3] the Ultimate Ensemble World regardless of what laws they follow.[3][1][2] Able to easily cut through Alexia and her barrier[2] which is someone as powerful as UEG)
While the justification states that this sword can destroy any world in the Ultimate Ensemble, regardless of what that world is. It is, of course, one of the exceptions and can function in any world, applying its ability, which is cutting and destroying worlds.

So who is wrong here now?
Click to expand...
Kyuuzaburou cannot destroy the entire structure of higher universes, he has only shown to destroy a given/chosen world (singular). No matter what world his sword is used in, the feat is never gonna be 1-C since it's not destroying the entire collection of higher universes. It's like picking a specific number from an infinite set, the number picked wont be infinite.

Even the justification you quoted doesn't support what you are saying. All that description is saying is that the sword's power to cut stuff will work in any world the user is in, not that it can destroy all worlds. So it doesn't work either way.
 
I would recommend a thread ban from Instant Death Topics or a small ban. Not my place to do so but yes azerty has broken rules many times before in vsbw
 
Azertyhuuh is being dismissive of Oblivion of the Endless, telling Masked what to do with the pages and snapping at Ant. I understand frustration, but this attitude is not good and does the exact opposite of helping to get the point across.
 
Oblivion_Of_The_Endless said:
Kyuuzaburou cannot destroy the entire structure of higher universes, he has only shown to destroy a given/chosen world (singular). No matter what world his sword is used in, the feat is never gonna be 1-C since it's not destroying the entire collection of higher universes. It's like picking a specific number from an infinite set, the number picked wont be infinite.

Even the justification you quoted doesn't support what you are saying. All that description is saying is that the sword's power to cut stuff will work in any world the user is in, not that it can destroy all worlds. So it doesn't work either way.
Click to expand...
Well, yes, he cannot destroy many worlds at once.
However, he can destroy any world within the Ultimate Ensemble, and this is what makes the exceptions and the nature of this sword special. The property of this sword is that it can cut or destroy anything; it can cut or destroy any world regardless of that world's laws.

It is true that the sword cannot destroy an infinite number of universes, but in the structure of higher universes, each higher universe contains an infinite number of universes, and this continues endlessly.

If this sword targets a higher universe that contains infinite universes, then the higher universe itself will be destroyed, along with all the universes contained within it, because the sword destroyed a single universe that contains many universes inside it. The destruction of those universes would simply be a consequence of destroying that one universe.

When we look at it this way, the sword is capable of destroying any possible world. It does not matter if that world contains universes or has higher dimensions; regardless of the laws of that world, as long as it is a world, this sword will destroy it, even if it contains an infinite number of universes, because the sword would simply cut through the higher world and destroy it, which would result in the destruction of everything inside it.

The entire structure of higher universes is 1-C, isn't it? All this sword needs to do is destroy the highest possible higher universe within the higher universes. If it targets the highest possible universe within the structure that contains the entirety of this hierarchy, then it will completely destroy the entire structure because it destroyed the highest possible universe containing this collection.

I agree with you that this sword cannot destroy more than one world at a time, but as you know, this sword can destroy any world regardless of its level. At the very least, it destroys one world, and the things contained within that world are irrelevant because they will be destroyed as a consequence of destroying the larger universe that contains them when it is targeted by this sword, since it will be cut and destroyed.

All it has to do is target the highest possible higher universe within the structure of universes in order to destroy the entire structure.

Are you convinced by the current character rankings?

Are you convinced by the H-3A classification? There is not even any universe at this level in the first place; the lowest classified universe is Low 2-C.

The same applies to the 2-B classification of the Higher Gods. You realize that UEG and Toichiro destroyed countless numbers of higher universes, and this would have continued endlessly. A single higher universe is a Low 1-C structure.

You know that UEG stated that she is capable of destroying everything, don't you? And this was confirmed by the text multiple times.
 
Random-Helper323 said:
Azertyhuuh is being dismissive of Oblivion of the Endless, telling Masked what to do with the pages and snapping at Ant. I understand frustration, but this attitude is not good and does the exact opposite of helping to get the point across.
Click to expand...
I am not angry about the issue of the revisions themselves, but rather about being accused now of applying false revisions, as if I appear to be a deceitful person in the community. I only applied the revisions and I never had any bad intentions at all. I applied the revisions based on my understanding, and anyone could simply tell me that they were incorrect and they would be reverted. But it should not reach the point where I am accused of being a deceiver or a liar, right?
 
Azertyhuuh said:
I am not angry about the issue of the revisions themselves, but rather about being accused now of applying false revisions, as if I appear to be a deceitful person in the community. I only applied the revisions and I never had any bad intentions at all. I applied the revisions based on my understanding, and anyone could simply tell me that they were incorrect and they would be reverted. But it should not reach the point where I am accused of being a deceiver or a liar, right?
Click to expand...
We do generally try to assume good faith, especially if something lines up with an existing justification.

Typically a leap as large as that, especially involving Tier 1, needs to be evaluated closely though.
 
Random-Helper323 said:
We do generally try to assume good faith, especially if something lines up with an existing justification.

Typically a leap as large as that, especially involving Tier 1, needs to be evaluated closely though.
Click to expand...
I only applied the edits based on my understanding of the justifications, and I did not expect that Oblivion_Of_The_Endless would suddenly oppose it like this. In the end, my understanding of the justifications and his understanding are not the same, and this alone does not prove that I am wrong in my understanding of the justifications. My statements could be correct, or they could be wrong, and Oblivion_Of_The_Endless's statements could also be wrong.

Currently, I have no problem at all. The edits I made have been reverted, and I have absolutely no issue with that. After I was asked yesterday to open a dedicated thread to discuss this matter, I did so and opened it last night. I made a mistake, the edits were reverted, and I opened a thread to discuss the issue.

I had completely forgotten about the matter until I saw Antvasima say that I applied false edits and that I should be given a warning. All that happened is that I misunderstood the justifications, and this can happen to anyone here in the community. For example, if a cosmology upgrade is approved and edits are applied to characters based on previous justifications, someone might also make a mistake. I opened a thread to discuss this matter last night, and currently I am not objecting to anything. I have accepted the reversion of the edits and was only clarifying my understanding, not trying to argue further with the staff.

You can check here in the thread I opened last night to see that I do accept the staff's opinion.
 
Azertyhuuh said:
I only applied the edits based on my understanding of the justifications, and I did not expect that Oblivion_Of_The_Endless would suddenly oppose it like this. In the end, my understanding of the justifications and his understanding are not the same, and this alone does not prove that I am wrong in my understanding of the justifications. My statements could be correct, or they could be wrong, and Oblivion_Of_The_Endless's statements could also be wrong.

Currently, I have no problem at all. The edits I made have been reverted, and I have absolutely no issue with that. After I was asked yesterday to open a dedicated thread to discuss this matter, I did so and opened it last night. I made a mistake, the edits were reverted, and I opened a thread to discuss the issue.

I had completely forgotten about the matter until I saw Antvasima say that I applied false edits and that I should be given a warning. All that happened is that I misunderstood the justifications, and this can happen to anyone here in the community. For example, if a cosmology upgrade is approved and edits are applied to characters based on previous justifications, someone might also make a mistake. I opened a thread to discuss this matter last night, and currently I am not objecting to anything. I have accepted the reversion of the edits and was only clarifying my understanding, not trying to argue further with the staff.

You can check here in the thread I opened last night to see that I do accept the staff's opinion.
Click to expand...
The issue is that this is not the first time and have been repeatedly told and warned about this, and the first action you did was try to deny it and blame others, the moment that didn't work you are throwing excuses around and trying to be a victim...
 
Dark_Soul20189 said:
The issue is that this is not the first time and have been repeatedly told and warned about this, and the first action you did was try to deny it and blame others, the moment that didn't work you are throwing excuses around and trying to be a victim...
Click to expand...
At the beginning, I defended myself and my understanding of the justifications. After I was asked to discuss this matter in a thread, I opened one for that, and that’s all. It is a mistake that can happen to anyone in this community. There are many members who unintentionally make mistakes when applying edits, they get corrected, and the errors are reverted. If there is a disagreement, a thread can be opened to discuss the issues, just as I did when I was asked to.

I made a mistake in applying the edits to some profiles, and this issue has been resolved. This is a problem that can happen to anyone here.

I ask you not to interfere in matters that do not concern you. This is not the first time you have tried to pour oil and gasoline on the fire to stir up more problems when you see me in these difficult situations, in order to make me look bad, deceptive, or manipulative.
 
Random-Helper323 said:
We do generally try to assume good faith, especially if something lines up with an existing justification.

Typically a leap as large as that, especially involving Tier 1, needs to be evaluated closely though.
Click to expand...
Yes, it is very possible that Azertyhuuh simply made a mistake, but it is very important to be extremely careful and absolutely certain when applying revisions. 🙏
 
Apotheosis69 said:


Multiple edits, please wait to Lock page. As I'm fixing some stuff
Click to expand...
A lot of other tier 1 tensura pages are also unlocked, and I think that all tensura pages should be locked even if its not tier 1, because its a very popular verse and one of the main verses used on powerscaling communities so a lot of people try to vandalize it
 
Apotheosis69 said:

Multiple edits, please wait to Lock page. As I'm fixing some stuff
Click to expand...
Masked has warned this user just yesterday, so it appears further action may be required.
This newer edit is also 1-A Vandalism, so it may require a ban.

Especially this Tier High 1-A and Tier 0 Vandalism, which was tacked on as an afterthought.

Bernkastelll said:
A lot of other tier 1 tensura pages are also unlocked, and I think that all tensura pages should be locked even if its not tier 1, because its a very popular verse and one of the main verses used on powerscaling communities so a lot of people try to vandalize it
Click to expand...
If the supporters approve of this, it could be done.
In the meantime, Masked will see how many Tier 1 Tensura profiles need to be locked.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Agnaa
Fanart Rule Revamp
Replies
7
Views
3K
Antvasima
Antvasima
Lycoris4812
Low Effort/Barely Finished Profiles
Replies
25
Views
2K
Lycoris4812
Lycoris4812
FinePoint
  • Locked
Discussion Rule Word Salad
Replies
22
Views
2K
Antvasima
Antvasima
Antvasima
I will be mostly absent for a while
2
Replies
46
Views
5K
Antvasima
Antvasima
FinePoint
  • Locked
Clarifying Death Threat Rules
2
Replies
64
Views
7K
Antvasima
Antvasima

Latest posts

Back
Top