Add a Dimensionality section to profiles.

[Shmeatywerbenmanjenson]

The second part of my message is. The first part definitely isn't. If anything I can argue this addition is outright counterproductive, since people will be reading a page and saying "yep both 16-D time to make VS thread" without getting into any of the finer nuance of the page itself.

Like, I need you to understand this WILL happen if this passes. It's not a matter of if, but of when and how many times. So in conclusion, aside from the useless extra work, I'm now further against this revision as it will lead to a lot of wasted time on that front as well.

If people are dumb enough to do that then they'd also be dumb enough to just see that their in the same tier and make a match with them

With this we at least get the clarity that AP wise the characters are in the same ballpark as opposed to being multiple infinities above the other resulting in an instant stomp

It's infinitely better for people to make matches where one hax stomps but dimensionality wise they are in the same tier as opposed to them being in two completely different dimensionalities resulting in an insta stomp

In one they at least have the chance to argue one or the other

 

[PrinceofPein]

HDE without any specified dimensions is 4th dimensional

There, just did all the Tier 2 pages

Did you read what you typed before sending it?

 

[Shmeatywerbenmanjenson]

Did you read what you typed before sending it?

Yes, explain the problem please

 

[ActuallySpaceMan42]

The second part of my message is. The first part definitely isn't. If anything I can argue this addition is outright counterproductive, since people will be reading a page and saying "yep both 16-D time to make VS thread" without getting into any of the finer nuance of the page itself.

As it currently stands, people see one character that is 1-B and another character that is 1-B, and do that anyway. The same goes for Low 1-C, and 1-C, and all the other tiers.

I swear it's 2023, and the best method we have for identifying smurfs or exact dimensionality on this site is hoping that a supporter is still active and that they can pitch in on 4 separate versus battle threads all happening at the same time.

 

[ImmortalDread]

Did you read what you typed before sending it?

He did not.

 

[ActuallySpaceMan42]

And we all know for a fact this is true. How many versus battles have to be closed because of mismatches, or paused cause a supporter never comes around? This has been happening for years, and it;'s going to be happening in 2024, 2025, and so on and so forth. It's annoying and we all know it happens.

 

[ImmortalDread]

The second part of my message is. The first part definitely isn't. If anything I can argue this addition is outright counterproductive, since people will be reading a page and saying "yep both 16-D time to make VS thread" without getting into any of the finer nuance of the page itself.

Like, I need you to understand this WILL happen if this passes. It's not a matter of if, but of when and how many times. So in conclusion, aside from the useless extra work, I'm now further against this revision as it will lead to a lot of wasted time on that front as well.

Honey.. this is already happening and the point of this thread is to prevent it-

 

[Crabwhale]

As it currently stands, people see one character that is 1-B and another character that is 1-B, and do that anyway. The same goes for Low 1-C, and 1-C, and all the other tiers.

So we're swapping one problem for a slightly lesser problem. That still leaves a problem.

I swear it's 2023, and the best method we have for identifying smurfs or exact dimensionality on this site is hoping that a supporter is still active and that they can pitch in on 4 separate versus battle threads all happening at the same time.

Or you could read the profile. This addition will do either little or nothing in easing erroneous matches, and is far, faaaaar from worth considering the still significant workload.

 

[ActuallySpaceMan42]

So we're swapping one problem for a slightly lesser problem. That still leaves a problem.

The whole point of the wiki is to make profiles as comprehensible as possible.

Or you could read the profile. This addition will do either little or nothing in easing erroneous matches, and is far, faaaaar from worth considering the still significant workload.

This has nothing to do with reading. Cosmology Explanations do not tell you what the dimensionality of a character is, nor does the profile. Tiers are generalizations, 1-C is a generalization, Low 1-C is a generalization, 1-B is a generalization, 1-A is a generalization, and when the creates of the verse don't bother to be specific we run into issues.

Instead of telling people to go read, and try to understand the minds of people they don't know, and guess what dimensionality or smurf level a character is at, how about we just make it so, this stuff is specifically stated?

 

[Shmeatywerbenmanjenson]

So we're swapping one problem for a slightly lesser problem. That still leaves a problem.

I'd argue its a quite noticeably less of a problem considering you can at least argue something if there the same tier

Or you could read the profile. This addition will do either little or nothing in easing erroneous matches, and is far, faaaaar from worth considering the still significant workload.

This whole "Just read the profile lol" has been the cause of so many mismatches that it's hilarious that people still say this

Not all profiles have explanation pages

Not all profiles are clear on what dimensionality they scale to

Not all users of this site have a firm grasp on tier 1 in order to figure it out for themselves

 

[PrinceofPein]

People are supposed to read a profile before making a match, so now if your argument is that someone is breaking the rules so let us print the instructions and increase it by a font to help them so they do not break the rules, that is kind of weird.

Also if I profile does not have explanation, that is another violation of the rules, so it is not a wiki policy problem but rather the people making the pages and the ones not reading the pages before creating a versus thread.

 

[Crabwhale]

Honey.. this is already happening and the point of this thread is to prevent it-

Call me honey one more time and I will stuff you in the freezer with all my other corpse compost.

And we all know for a fact this is true. How many versus battles have to be closed because of mismatches, or paused cause a supporter never comes around? This has been happening for years, and it;'s going to be happening in 2024, 2025, and so on and so forth. It's annoying and we all know it happens.

So you're admitting that this suggestion is simply a band aid for a problem that will not fix itself unless users properly educate themselves, which is an imperative they themselves must undertake and that we can legislate for (unless you want to make some rule about mandatory quizzing of character knowledge before every VS thread, and I think you can see how well that would turn out).

Personally, speaking as one of the mods that actually gets closing requests, I'd rather go through a relatively straightforward VS match and see if it's lopsided (which is usually pretty easily indicated by people commenting on it, if it can't be ascertained in 5 seconds by looking yourself) than go through a few hundred pages to determine what each one's dimensionality is. Not to even mention the fact that this ENTIRE THING is using outdated terminology (in case you haven't noticed we don't equate bigger dimension number to higher tier anymore), and would probably only lead to more confusion.

This whole "Just read the profile lol" has been the cause of so many mismatches that it's hilarious that people still say this

Not all profiles have explanation pages

Not all profiles are clear on what dimensionality they scale to

Not all users of this site have a firm grasp on tier 1 in order to figure it out for themselves

The whole point of the wiki is to make profiles as comprehensible as possible.

This has nothing to do with reading. Cosmology Explanations do not tell you what the dimensionality of a character is, nor does the profile. Tiers are generalizations, 1-C is a generalization, Low 1-C is a generalization, 1-B is a generalization, 1-A is a generalization, and when the creates of the verse don't bother to be specific we run into issues.

Then fix the profiles. Add to the P&A, the AP section, the Note section, and expand the cosmology blogs. If at any point during my argument I came across as advocating for profiles that do not have the required explanation on them, then please point me to it, because I was saying the exact opposite. The effort should be made to add more info on the profiles, absolutely.

 

[ImmortalDread]

His gf is probably watching the thread

 

[ActuallySpaceMan42]

So you're admitting that this suggestion is simply a band aid for a problem that will not fix itself unless users properly educate themselves, which is an imperative they themselves must undertake and that we can legislate for (unless you want to make some rule about mandatory quizzing of character knowledge before every VS thread, and I think you can see how well that would turn out).

We shouldn't have to rely on a singular person to get information that should be directly on the profiles themself. Just like how we shouldn't need Ultima or DT for every High 1-A and Tier 0 CRT. Why the hell should guest user have to educate themselves on guesswork when the whole point of profiles is for the information to be readily available and comprehensible?

Personally, speaking as one of the mods that actually gets closing requests, I'd rather go through a relatively straightforward VS match and see if it's lopsided (which is usually pretty easily indicated by people commenting on it, if it can't be ascertained in 5 seconds by looking yourself) than go through a few hundred pages to determine what each one's dimensionality is. Not to even mention the fact that this ENTIRE THING is using outdated terminology (in case you haven't noticed we don't equate bigger dimension number to higher tier anymore), and would probably only lead to more confusion.

That is the textbook definition of a failed working model. You do more work now so that you don't have to do more work in the future, pretty simple stuff. At the end of the day, mismatches are happening, because the profiles are inadequate at directly provide the needed information. And they will continue to be inadequate unless actually guidelines are set to fix it.

Then fix the profiles. Add to the P&A, the AP section, the Note section, and expand the cosmology blogs. If at any point during my argument I came across as advocating for profiles that do not have the required explanation on them, then please point me to it, because I was saying the exact opposite. The effort should be made to add more info on the profiles, absolutely.

Half the verses with these issues are locked, with no supporters, and no one to explain the cosmology blogs. Your talking about a hypothetical wonderland, when the fact of the matter is, this has been an issue for years, and nothing has changed. People have had this conversation with staff before, and nothing has changed.

The wiki will continue to get bigger, the profiles more numerous, the issues with vague tiering more annoying, and it will only continue to increase the overall workload of staff.

 

[Shmeatywerbenmanjenson]

So you're admitting that this suggestion is simply a band aid for a problem that will not fix itself unless users properly educate themselves, which is an imperative they themselves must undertake and that we can legislate for (unless you want to make some rule about mandatory quizzing of character knowledge before every VS thread, and I think you can see how well that would turn out).

Personally, speaking as one of the mods that actually gets closing requests, I'd rather go through a relatively straightforward VS match and see if it's lopsided (which is usually pretty easily indicated by people commenting on it, if it can't be ascertained in 5 seconds by looking yourself) than go through a few hundred pages to determine what each one's dimensionality is. Not to even mention the fact that this ENTIRE THING is using outdated terminology (in case you haven't noticed we don't equate bigger dimension number to higher tier anymore), and would probably only lead to more confusion.

There's always gonna be stupid people in this world but this change makes it so at least these people who only half read the profiles at least make matches with the same dimensionality is an improvement

Literally nothing will fix the problem completely but we can make it to where it happens less

I'd also like to say that if the vs thread is a mismatch then a mod going to the profile themselves and taking a quick look at the dimensionality they scale to is easier then going through the verses explanation page and finding what a certain characters scales too

Then fix the profiles. Add to the P&A, the AP section, the Note section, and expand the cosmology blogs. If at any point during my argument I came across as advocating for profiles that do not have the required explanation on them, then please point me to it, because I was saying the exact opposite. The effort should be made to add more info on the profiles, absolutely.

This would literally require more work than the solution we're trying to propose

Going case by case on every profile making sure there all up to date and have proper explanations for their tier is way more work then simply adding what dimension they scale to on the P&A tab

 

[ActuallySpaceMan42]

I'm not asking for you guys to part the red sea. I just want to look at a profile and know that they are in the same ball park as another profile, without having to wait 3 days for a supporter to show up, or read through a five-page cosmology blog.

Figuring out how their P&As interact and clash is the fun part, what I just mentioned above is just tedious.

 

[Deagonx]

We have spent far too high of a word count on this suggestion which was dead in the water IMO. We have enough staff disagrees to close it. Should we do so @Crabwhale ?

 

[ActuallySpaceMan42]

We have spent far too high of a word count on this suggestion which was dead in the water IMO. We have enough staff disagrees to close it. Should we do so @Crabwhale ?

Which staff disagreed? Psychomaster agreed Rendy agreed, Mr. Bambu disagreed, Qawsed agreed, you seemed back and forth, DT never said he agreed or disagreed, just that it could be fit in the current format. And of course, crabwhale disagreed as well.

 

[Deagonx]

Which staff disagreed? Psychomaster agreed Rendy agreed, Mr. Bambu disagreed, Qawsed agreed, you seemed back and forth, DT never said he agreed or disagreed, just that it could be fit in the current format. And of course, crabwhale disagreed as well.

Me and DT both disagreed

 

[ActuallySpaceMan42]

Me and DT both disagreed

So 3 Agree, 4 Disagree, still room for conversation.

 

[ActuallySpaceMan42]

This has been brought up CRT's multiple times, and it's going to keep getting brought up. Might as well work through it till the end.

 

[BasedNecoScaler69]

People are supposed to read a profile before making a match, so now if your argument is that someone is breaking the rules so let us print the instructions and increase it by a font to help them so they do not break the rules, that is kind of weird.

Also if I profile does not have explanation, that is another violation of the rules, so it is not a wiki policy problem but rather the people making the pages and the ones not reading the pages before creating a versus thread.

hundreds of rule violations? You're under estimating just how many pages lack the statements you think are already there.

 

[Deagonx]

So 3 Agree, 4 Disagree, still room for conversation.

No. One of them is only staff at Joke Battles. But either way, content moderators don't have voting rights.

As for Qawsedf, what he said is along the same lines as what DT and I said:

Yeah, maybe a tiering level under the AP section that would be like "Low 1-C (Sixth Dimensional) | 1-A (Aleph 4)" or something to that effect.

So I wouldn't count him as an agree either

 

[ActuallySpaceMan42]

So I wouldn't count him as an agree either.

So do you have issues with what he and Qawsed suggested or no? I thought everyone shifted to that idea when it was suggested.

 

[Deagonx]

Yes, including it in the AP justification or in the HDE text is fine. I just don't want it to be a separate stat

 

[Shmeatywerbenmanjenson]

Maybe we should open a new thread with these propositions instead

We kinda already moved past the point of this thread towards a better option

 

[Lewis]

Maybe we should open a new thread with these propositions instead

We kinda already moved past the point of this thread towards a better option

Agree

 

[Lewis]

Can anyone open a new thread?

Why not simply something like this instead? It is much more easily applied and works just as well.

Attack Potency: Complex Multiverse level (Created a 9-Dimensional structure.)

Powers and Abilities: Higher-Dimensional Existence (9-Dimensional. Explanation text and references.)

using this format.

 

[BasedNecoScaler69]

Can anyone open a new thread?

using this format.

Qawsed's format seems better to use

 

[Lewis]

Qawsed's format seems better to use

We can vote for designs
But must create a new thread first.

 

[Crabwhale]

So you're admitting that this suggestion is simply a band aid for a problem that will not fix itself unless users properly educate themselves, which is an imperative they themselves must undertake and that we can legislate for (unless you want to make some rule about mandatory quizzing of character knowledge before every VS thread, and I think you can see how well that would turn out).

I'd like to clarify that there is a typo here. I meant to say CAN'T legislate for. In case the argument didn't make sense, that's what it was meant to read as.

This would literally require more work than the solution we're trying to propose

The problem is, that ain't a solution. That's a band aid. At most you avoid a few mismatches. It does not get rid of the problem. Which is why I would rather focus the effort on slowly (even if that slowly is VERY slowly) fixing the profiles rather than adding a perfunctory classification to each profile.

We shouldn't have to rely on a singular person to get information that should be directly on the profiles themself. Just like how we shouldn't need Ultima or DT for every High 1-A and Tier 0 CRT. Why the hell should guest user have to educate themselves on guesswork when the whole point of profiles is for the information to be readily available and comprehensible?

Not much to say here. I agree.

That is the textbook definition of a failed working model. You do more work now so that you don't have to do more work in the future, pretty simple stuff. At the end of the day, mismatches are happening, because the profiles are inadequate at directly provide the needed information. And they will continue to be inadequate unless actually guidelines are set to fix it.

Which this does not do. At all.

Half the verses with these issues are locked, with no supporters, and no one to explain the cosmology blogs. Your talking about a hypothetical wonderland, when the fact of the matter is, this has been an issue for years, and nothing has changed. People have had this conversation with staff before, and nothing has changed.

Still don't see how a dimensionality rating actually FIXES any of this, or even begins to. What seems to be the matter here is a fundamental rework

The wiki will continue to get bigger, the profiles more numerous, the issues with vague tiering more annoying, and it will only continue to increase the overall workload of staff.

Completely and entirely disagree with this. Old profiles may be doing their own thing, but we're a lot less tolerant with them nowadays. New profiles are held to better standards. References as well as scans are mandatory nowadays. And Tier 2 and above pages are held in even more scrutiny. If anything, as the number of old pages get fixed or purged and new ones are made more accessible, I'd wager the workload decreases, not increases.

 

[ActuallySpaceMan42]

I'd like to clarify that there is a typo here. I meant to say CAN'T legislate for. In case the argument didn't make sense, that's what it was meant to read as.

I changed my opinion based on what was discussed above. The plan is to make a new CRT based on Qawsdef.

 

[Shmeatywerbenmanjenson]

I'd like to clarify that there is a typo here. I meant to say CAN'T legislate for. In case the argument didn't make sense, that's what it was meant to read as.

The problem is, that ain't a solution. That's a band aid. At most you avoid a few mismatches. It does not get rid of the problem. Which is why I would rather focus the effort on slowly (even if that slowly is VERY slowly) fixing the profiles rather than adding a perfunctory classification to each profile.

And that still doesn't fix the problem

Nothing fixes stupid people

Fixing the profiles is not a solution either

Which this does not do. At all.

Explain how this does not make it easier to find out exactly what dimension a character scales to?

You can't just say "This doesn't work" and then provide no elaboration on exactly why it wouldn't work

Still don't see how a dimensionality rating actually FIXES any of this, or even begins to. What seems to be the matter here is a fundamental rework

Like you said it's a band aid, but it's a much needed band aid for the profiles who don't have supporters or have been abandoned for a long amount of time

It provides the same benefits as re-working every single profile with 90% less hassle


I'm pretty sure we're making a new thread

Hell, I'll make it if need be
But for now take your complaints and wait until the new thread is up

ActuallySpaceMan42 you seem pretty knowledgeable on the matter and can explain things concisely, would you mind helping me out?

 

[ActuallySpaceMan42]

ActuallySpaceMan42 you seem pretty knowledgeable on the matter and can explain things concisely, would you mind helping me out?

What do you need help with?

 

[Shmeatywerbenmanjenson]

What do you need help with?

I suck at explaining things well and I want a second opinion on my proposed solution so tier 2 profiles don't get caught up it this

 

[ActuallySpaceMan42]

From my understanding, the whole point of the thread was to minimize confusion. If you viewed one new profile that was Low 1-C, and another new profile that was also Low 1-C, you would be able to tell with a glance which is 5D and which is 6D and if they are matchable.

Since this information is never displayed on Cosmology Blogs, Profile Notes, etc, it should simply be made as an addition to statistics profiled as Qawsed stated.

Yeah, maybe a tiering level under the AP section that would be like "Low 1-C (Sixth Dimensional) | 1-A (Aleph 4)" or something to that effect.

Of course, his recommendation extends past basic dimensions and also refers to stuff that is 1-A, High 1-A, etc. I think this is just something useful that should be listed on every profile. And it looks like the OP agrees with that sentiment.

No need for a massive rewrite of profiles, just additions to new profiles and the slow addition to outdated profiles as they get changed overtime. It will help avoid mismatches and whatnot, and although it won't solve all problems, it will solve a few.

 

[Shmeatywerbenmanjenson]

I was under the impression that you were agreeing to putting it in the P&A section under HDE or BDE

However seeing this I agree even more as tiers and AP are the first thing people look at on a profile

 

[Crabwhale]

And that still doesn't fix the problem

Nothing fixes stupid people

Fixing the profiles is not a solution either

Then what the **** are we meant to do lol

 

[Shmeatywerbenmanjenson]

Then what the **** are we meant to do lol

Like you said put a band aid over it so it at least doesn't happen as much

Fleshing out every single Tier 1 Profile is way more work than what were proposing which does literally the exact same thing but with far less effort

Also now that I understand that we would be putting this on the tiers themselves, people who just see the Tiers match and make a match would be eliminated now

So the amount of dumb stomps is even further reduced

 

[Antvasima]

I agree with Crabwhale here.

Should we add a note to our Higher-Dimensional Existence page, regarding that dimensionality should preferably be mentioned in a parenthesis when possible, and then close this thread?