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.
This is the list:
vandalism,
trolling,
bad editing,
unapproved edits,
spamming,
bad faith edits,
repeatedly adding pages that violate copyright
@GarrixianXD @IdiosyncraticLawyer any ideas for the list?
I did not see the warnings, apologies. Ya, it seems reasonable. Although, the original block from @Antvasima (2-3 months) was more preferable and less extreme.
I don't know, I know it is all preference and such, but the thread would be more than vandalism. I believe trolling, bad editing, unapproved edits, spamming, bad faith edits, repeatedly adding pages that violate copyright, are also included, and they are not of necessity “vandalism” under...
I believe he is thread-banned. You got the option to view this. I don't mind either one of them, but you are required to temporarily unban him from the thread.
The second edit appears harmless as it is grammatically correct; however, the subsequent edits suggest a lack of understanding, with an attempt to bolding the tiers instead of providing templates. Therefore, I believe a warning should be issued in this case.
We need a Turkish translator to confirm this, @Georredannea15 would you help us to translate the text, and tell us who is advocating for extreme tyranny and bigotry?
https://vsbattles.com/threads/rule-violation-reports-new-forum.107529/post-6223604
Since they are already “divorced” (this is important, as if they were in the process of getting divorced, it would lead to a different outcome), I would imagine that the narrator's actions would bring nothing new to the table, given that they are single afterward. If the conceptual manipulation...
Ya, I agree with the suggestion. Since those all reports can be categorized as one (vandalism), I don't mind having a specific management request thread for it. The quantity of those reports can arguably be equivalent to on-site ones, so I see some significance for this.
I can't speak of which ideology he is trying to spread, since it is not mainly my focus here. The post itself is not welcome here, since we forbid any political controversial arguments in general, since it simply brings drama and brings a good precedence and fairness to all types of communities...
Since it is not supported by our community rules, the post should be deleted and the user should be given a warning. Unless you perceive some serious threats from the post that warrants further extreme punishment, you can offer an alternative punishment.
I think he does not know how online...
Is it really that controversial that requires a permission?
I mean we all agreed it's optional and the idea is not bad, and it's permitted. So adding a text that explains how it works should not require evaluation.
To give a translation to people who are lazy:
The post is very unnecessary. It does not belong to our community.
Seems only a warning and deletion warrants here.
Hearing/sees everything is significantly different from "knowing everything." You need to comprehend the feelings of people to truly be omniscient as well; otherwise, you are not truly all-knowing. Therefore, this evidence is weak and based on speculation, and I disagree.
This pertains more to...
Eh what, ya obviously since I made the guidelines, it's been a thing. Any minor/self-evident thread can be passed through one moderator with evaluation rights. Minor thread is if it is not about:
acausality (except type 1),
concept manipulation,
abstract existence,
plot manipulation...
One staff member is enough to pass a self-evident/minor thread according to guidelines, @KLOL506.
(Minor/self-evident has their own definitions in the guidelines as well)