• 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.
Theglassman12
Reaction score
10,871

Profile posts Latest activity Postings About

  • Why'd you lock the thread? Only 3 staff members rejected it.
    TyphonEX
    TyphonEX
    It says here though that we should get as many staff members as possible for "big or controversial changes" (which I'm under the impression that a Low 1-C GOW downgrade would be) though. Antvasima, Ultima_Reality, and Catzlaflame were all willing to look over the thread and possibly respond and make evaluations on the thread but were never able to do so. Even DarkDragonMedeus never made an actual concrete evaluation.

    Also, since DDM's response wasn't exactly a solid evaluation in the form of a disagree or agree, it doesn't really count as a rejection vote. That makes just 3 staff members who rejected the proposal, which is practically (even if not officially) pretty much the bare minimum for proposals for verses with "significant following" or a large amount of material published. It's not a very good idea to close a thread before half the people likely willing to evaluate actually gave an evaluation. And it's not like opening the thread would do any harm either. There's only two CRTs going on right now and they're both already concluded, they just need to apply the changes already agreed upon.
    Planck69
    Planck69
    This will be my last post on this matter, so sorry if it may not satisfy you but;

    We don't act upon rejected threads the same way we do accepted threads, especially when there's unanimous staff rejection. Which this is, regardless of anything.

    There's no minimum timeframe for closing a thread with multiple rejections and no agreements, in fact Theglassman12 waiting 48 hours from the OP was a courtesy given that he could've just closed the thread the moment Emirp disagreed.

    There's also no major consideration for an uncontroversial full rejection, which this is. 4 staff (and it is 4 staff, DDM agreeing with a post where I vehemently reject everything in the OP is hard to construe as anything else) and numerous regular member disagreements versus the OP + 2 regular members isn't a debatable issue at all. The thread being Low 1-C doesn't really matter much here.

    And finally, being blunt, every single staff member you mentioned can open and post any time they wish, and I won't begrudge them. But we don't keep threads open in perpetuity for that reason, even if this was accepted.
    TyphonEX
    TyphonEX
    DDM also made that "evaluation" before I even got to make a counterargument, which is kind of unfair for an "evaluation." I'll ask him about it.
    If you don't mind me discussing it here, what do you still disagree on in this post? I've shown that parallelism is completely unnecessary headcanon and that they haven't even proven that the RBR or by extension the Yggdrasil would extend in any significant extent along the 5th dimensional axis.
    Hi I made a blog post to hopefully make following a series much easier to follow and clear up misconceptions, any help would be much appreciated
    Half_Shiny
    Half_Shiny
    Hi a bit ago you gave your input on this thread. It has been about two months, is there anything I can do to make this more straightforward to get it to accepted? I am trying to make it so people with no knowledge on the verse can easily understand, since it has caused slow down and delay on other CRTs. Any help would be apricated
    Your opinion

    Could you check this thread? It's fairly simple, I think. Thank you in advance!

    Could you check this downgrade CRT out?

    Can you check it out once you got time?
    Hi. Can you evaluate these CRTs:
    Both need one more staff evaluation.
    Could you look at this profile rework?
    Hello can you answer this question

    Mind checking this staff thread?
    Hello, can you review this CRT, we need one more staff vote

    Can you slide an input here? only need 1 more
    Yo, I need help with this CRT which is dead from over a month, thanks..

    Can u give an input here? (Sorry if it feels like Im spamming you with LMK requests😭)
    Hello. Could give some input here? 🙏
    Thanks!!
    Hello can you unlock this thread for a moment? I would like to add more context and replace some scans that are wrongly linked.
    Mind giving your input here?
    Hi, could you evaluate this if you have some time please ?

    Let's say that a cartoon character is explaining to the viewer how to draw the characters in his cartoon (in the metafictional style).

    He uses a pencil and draws the characters. And instead of the character himself, he basically draws himself from "scratch" without using a pencil (since he also starts without hands/body, and even when the hands are drawn he doesn't use a pencil)

    Would this count as narrative regeneration?

    Could you evaluate this simple crt
    Hi, could you give your opinion on this thread please ?
  • Loading…
  • Loading…
  • Loading…
Back
Top