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.
First off, dear god Eficiente, break up your sentences. One of those had eight commas in it. I genuinely can't tell what half of what you said is supposed to mean.
What I did get, however, was that a large number of people are clearly taking your words as offensive and crass. I agree with this...
Honestly, what confuses me about this entire argument is how this statement has seemingly just been… looked over.
If Chara says “Let’s erase this timeline (one) and move onto the next (another)”, that’s just one timeline being destroyed. Just because there are multiple timelines doesn’t mean...
I believe Ant simply means to refresh notifications for admins, as it is very easy for the forums to un-follow you from a thread depending on your exact interactions with it. That's all!
Higher than 10 rather than 20, in an absence of context saying otherwise. One character can overpower two others without literally being twice as strong, after all, so we'd need more evidence to support that idea.
I'm not the most knowledgeable on comic standards or Marvel in particular, but giving 1-A to a character with no personal feats on that level simply due to association with a power close to that level is a bit dubious to accept outright. Methinks that, given the context and idea of her being...
... I don't even know where to start with you.
Alright, I don't think I have the capacity to engage with Sniper anymore without getting legitimately irritated and upset. I would greatly appreciate another staff member stepping in and reaching a conclusion, because I am struggling to remain...
Passive-aggressively demeaning my position and arguments repeatedly while ignoring any attempt I make at pointing you towards legitimate arguments you could use, my counterpoints against your arguments, and similar is literally the exact behavior you're being told to stop.
I already did, I literally gave a very quick explanation just a minute ago. If you think it is too brief and doesn't elaborate enough, check the previous thread. If you aren't going to read the short posts I write, why the hell should I write another, longer one?
To reiterate for all interested parties, the entire point of closing a thread for stonewall is that a party refuses to quit and continues to drag threads through the mud, exhausting all involved participants and relying on attrition more than anything else.
I could give a far more in-depth...
For the record, I would also like Sniper to stop harassing me on my wall over the matter. When I close a thread for stonewalling, that isn't an invitation to move the stone to my wall instead.
Edit: I've been really wanting to accept Sniper/Yemma getting a stern warning, but he is continuing...
What part of "I have life to attend to" did you not understand? If you can't understand how a counterpoint is a counterpoint, I literally cannot hand-hold and walk you to the evident truth.
Leave me alone. I have things to do.
The fact that I literally responded to that exact piece of evidence (and, as I said, disagreeing with me =/= I didn't respond), in however brief of a point, only goes to show that your accusations of me not reading/responding are off-base.
I really don't care enough to debate this right now...
I agree with that. Sniper/Yemma didn't do anything horribly bad, these are all minor offenses that wouldn't be report-worthy on their own. That being said, it is a repeated pattern of behavior and has continued even on the very RVT discussing it. While I would've liked to just leave a warning...
To reiterate, all posts dealing with the Arceus thread will be deleted, as discussing that here will horrifically bloat the entire thread. It isn't even the point of the report.
I am replying to this post before I delete it.
You have been asked multiple times to stop spamming RVT about the Arceus thread.
I think we may need to consider a stronger punishment.
Given Sniper has doubled down on accusing and stonewalling even after the previous report from around a week ago (and has continued to do so on the very report addressing this behavior), I think a slightly more stern response would be warranted. Maybe one month or so.
That being said, thanks...
Yemma, again, stop spamming.
I'll say this one last time. You have a notorious track record for stonewalling, complaining, and accusing literally everyone who disagrees with you of bias and refusing to read your posts. These are the same threads where you have went on-record to refuse to give...
You keep saying "the old thread didn't address the OP", but it did.
Even then, the point of this report is directly addressing your antagonistic behavior. Shut up about Arceus, this isn't a debate about that as you're not being reported for it. Flooding RVT for 10 more pages regarding it is...
Again, just because you disagree doesn't mean we didn't have a ten page thread over it. The entire idea of any opposition being able to cry "Our arguments didn't answer!" is textbook stonewalling, which is against the rules. Making another thread to continue stonewalling is against the rules. I...
Case and point, accusing everyone of being biased and ignoring his arguments when they disagree with him or call out the 10+ page stonewall on the previous thread. This isn't remotely civil debate, and it lacks all context of being proper and good faith.
For further evidence, he accused and...
Disagreeing with my counterarguments doesn't mean I didn't have any.
I will not be responding any further on this matter. If you want to make a new thread, find evidence besides the plates. They have been debated to death, and Cal's argument is literally sitting on a silver platter for you to use.
... Then you are free to throw your own case. I'll be closing this because, again, read the previous thread.
You do not have the right to waste everyone's time for ten pages of reiterated arguments, win based on Cal's arguments, then make a new thread demanding people engage with your...
I would highly advise shifting your argument away from the plates (due to general vagueness and interpretation, such as "all types of powers" having the literal meaning of having power in each type, e.g. Multitype letting Arceus be each type) and towards what Cal said.
I don't remember when...
I would like to bring this issue back up, as it got drowned out and he is continuing his behavior with comments such as this antagonizing people questioning his decision to make a new thread dismissing ten pages of debate as "rushed" and trying to undo it.
And for the record, why are you even arguing this? Last time I checked, the consensus was to give Arceus everything for Cal's reasoning. What is even the purpose of continuing this debate? What do you want to accomplish?
So you mentioned energy.
If you're going to debate with me, at least don't contradict yourself a singular line after rebuking me. If you can't even portray your own OP correctly, how can you claim I didn't read it?
And, no, the previous thread did address it. To very briefly reiterate, energy...
Just because the OP said something doesn't mean it didn't happen. The OP said it a million times on the last thread, making it last 10 pages.
The entire point is that you can't repeatedly ask for the same proof and reiterate arguments as infinitum until your opponent is too tired or isn't aware...
The conclusion of the last thread was that Arceus still had everything, we just changed the reasoning a bit. No?
Like… did I miss anything? Because none of these arguments are new, and I will be closing this thread. The “energy = everything” argument was already brought up, and the...