Anti Roshi Lowballing Rule - Rule addition to the DB Verse Page

[ByAsura]

Same argumentation? How many threads on this topic have the same arguments?

I was including several threads from further into the past that I participated in. It's all precisely the same shit as back then, like 'the King Piccolo statements are too vague', 'small nukes', 'Roshi transformed', 'jet fuel can't melt steel beams'.

Anyway, while I agree with the discussion rule, I don't really care enough to argue about this.

 

[Alexander]

i...don't know i have seen more reasons for bigger upgrades or downgrades than this.

 

[KingTempest]

I disagree for Damage's reasons

 

[noninho]

@Damage3245 even if you say that now you know about my acceptance of a change of this rules' wording, you still disagree?
@Damage3245 @KingTempest any change of how we write the rule changes ur opinions or you definitely disagree?

 

[Damage3245]

@Damage3245 even if you say that now you know about my acceptance of a change of this rules' wording, you still disagree?

It depends on what your intent is with the thread. If you want the rule to cover anyone else who scales to Roshi too, then the current proposal isn't enough.

But I disagree with the addition of a rule with or without that change; I just brought it up so that the proposal would be clearer in what is covered.

 

[noninho]

It depends on what your intent is with the thread. If you want the rule to cover anyone else who scales to Roshi too, then the current proposal isn't enough.

But I disagree with the addition of a rule with or without that change; I just brought it up so that the proposal would be clearer in what is covered.

How would you change what I proposed on the "quote" in the OP? Give me an example

 

[Hasty12345]

I agree with the implementation of a discussion rule.

 

[TheTenno07]

I agree that the discussion rule should be implemented.

 

[Vietthai96]

Ngl, i honestly don't care with rule or shit, but definitely from the statistics, Roshi Moon feat is an annual, yearly topic at this point which i can sure as hell that there gonna be another one in 2025, and let not pretend that before the Roshi Moon feat was accepted due to Seth wrecking havoc, there is annual Roshi topics before that try to upgrade Roshi to 5-C, there are also some minor Q&A threads about this shit too iirc. Let end this Moon topic here

 

[noninho]

It also gets worse cuz it's always the same arguments and I am tremendously sure everyone involved is tired of this topic
Many things would lead to problems absurdly small if compared to this one and are covered by a rule, let us all get one to be protected from a repetition of this.

 

[DarkDragonMedeus]

How many times has this topic actually been brought up in recent history? I think it's important to be clear whether or not this is an issue that actually warrants a rule, or if it is just a discussed topic that you're tired of hearing about.

For now I disagree with a rule being added until some evidence can be supplied.



This is also not the case; the OP is being misleading. Cisco's thread was not about removing Master Roshi's 5-C rating.

I don't think the proposed rule is exclusively talking about attempts to downgrade Roshi, but it applies to attempting to argue against those who upscale from him. Which obviously, even if one wanted to argue some aspects about Roshi; such as debate about possible glass canon status during 21st budokai. King Piccolo and everyone who upscales easily upscales easily has all physical stats upscale from Roshi.

We also need to consider that Roshi did the 5-C feat back when even he himself was significantly weaker back then. Meaning he would be significantly above baseline with Max Power Kamehameha; and despite those notes, Roshi still had 0 doubts that both Tien and Goku are even stronger than himself. And Roshi was especially scared about preparement for Tri Beam. Which when he said "Surpasses the Kamehameha," he may not have been specific. But the fact that Tri Beam is more officially dangerous combined with the fact that Tien is physically stronger than Roshi via Roshi's own admittance implies being strongest than the strongest Kamehameha he himself can pull off is a bare minimum.

I can agree with some proper wording, but I still effectively agree with there being a rule to avoid downgrading characters who are obviously stronger than Roshi. Especially Kami, Piccolo Jr, and Teen Goku via Kami's own alleged consistent feat.

 

[noninho]

I was including several threads from further into the past that I participated in. It's all precisely the same shit as back then, like 'the King Piccolo statements are too vague', 'small nukes', 'Roshi transformed', 'jet fuel can't melt steel beams'.

Anyway, while I agree with the discussion rule, I don't really care enough to argue about this.

ByAsura, would you mind @ others to see this? Like a bureaucrat to discuss the wording or anyone who would be able to give an input

 

[Vietthai96]

I don't think the proposed rule is exclusively talking about attempts to downgrade Roshi, but it applies to attempting to argue against those who upscale from him. Which obviously, even if one wanted to argue some aspects about Roshi; such as debate about possible glass canon status during 21st budokai. King Piccolo and everyone who upscales easily upscales easily has all physical stats upscale from Roshi.

We also need to consider that Roshi did the 5-C feat back when even he himself was significantly weaker back then. Meaning he would be significantly above baseline with Max Power Kamehameha; and despite those notes, Roshi still had 0 doubts that both Tien and Goku are even stronger than himself. And Roshi was especially scared about preparement for Tri Beam. Which when he said "Surpasses the Kamehameha," he may not have been specific. But the fact that Tri Beam is more officially dangerous combined with the fact that Tien is physically stronger than Roshi via Roshi's own admittance implies being strongest than the strongest Kamehameha he himself can pull off is a bare minimum.

I can agree with some proper wording, but I still effectively agree with there being a rule to avoid downgrading characters who are obviously stronger than Roshi. Especially Kami, Piccolo Jr, and Teen Goku via Kami's own alleged consistent feat.

I think the rule is talking about Roshi Moon feat in general and what related to it, downgrade, upgrade, removal, scaling thing like that

 

[MasqueTLDF]

So, the current staff votes are 5 (DDM, Asura, Nierre, Garrixian, Lephyr) - 2 (Damage, Tempest) in favor of the Rule being added?
Keeping this here and updated for the people that start on the second page.

 

[DarkDragonMedeus]

Not sure if a vote gap being higher by one point is enough tbh.

 

[Damage3245]

If this was a frequent issue with threads that constantly had to be debunked and closed, I'd get it, but we've had... what, one attempt this year, just last month, to downgrade some characters who scale from Roshi?

And if that thread was unanimously rejected, then it's clearly not that controversial of a topic either and any similar attempts without new evidence would get similarly rejected quite quickly. I just don't see the need for the rule.

 

[noninho]

Not sure if a vote gap being higher by one point is enough tbh.

Please call more staff members to give their inputs, then

If this was a frequent issue with threads that constantly had to be debunked and closed, I'd get it, but we've had... what, one attempt this year, just last month, to downgrade some characters who scale from Roshi?

And if that thread was unanimously rejected, then it's clearly not that controversial of a topic either and any similar attempts without new evidence would get similarly rejected quite quickly. I just don't see the need for the rule.

The fact that it's not frequent (as in like once every few months) doesn't nullify the fact that it happens since 2016 with the same arguments and frustrates every member involved due to the repetition of the same arguments.
Ask everybody, or check what happened last month on that 6-page long discussion.

 

[Raiden38]

Disagree

 

[noninho]

Disagree

Because...?

 

[RoninSlayer200]

Agree, this is a frequently rejected topic so I don't see any reason to not put a discussion rule

 

[Damage3245]

The fact that it's not frequent (as in like once every few months) doesn't nullify the fact that it happens since 2016 with the same arguments and frustrates every member involved due to the repetition of the same arguments.
Ask everybody, or check what happened last month on that 6-page long discussion.

Again, what "same arguments"? How many threads like that one have there actually been? I don't think you properly cited examples to back your claims.

 

[Vietthai96]

i don't think the argument is the only problem, the other problem is how yearly that topic become, it is always revolving around Roshi Moon feat, either the feat directly, or the scaling around it.

 

[Damage3245]

i don't think the argument is the only problem, the other problem is how yearly that topic become, it is always revolving around Roshi Moon feat, either the feat directly, or the scaling around it.

I haven't seen any major attempts to actually downgrade the Moon feat itself. There's only been two attempts to downgrade the other 5-C characters, one by me which actually was accepted at the time, and one last month which was rejected.

I have no interest at all at revising the early DB characters again; I just don't think the rule has been shown to be necessary.

 

[GarrixianXD]

Not sure if a vote gap being higher by one point is enough tbh.

The vote gap is actually 2, @MasqueTLDF forgot to list my vote.

 

[DarkDragonMedeus]

Please call more staff members to give their inputs, then

I'll call a new staff who became and Admin @LephyrTheRevanchist

And yeah, since Garrixian is a Thread Mod now, their vote counts now. But I still prefer vote gap being 3 points.

 

[MasqueTLDF]

The vote gap is actually 2, @MasqueTLDF forgot to list my vote.

Sorry, I didn't notice you in the first page.

 

[Ped2018]

@Nierre is also an staff member now and he also voted

 

[noninho]

The vote gap is actually 2, @MasqueTLDF forgot to list my vote.

You are there, tho

 

[MasqueTLDF]

@Nierre is also an staff member now

Yes i included them in my initial summary of the votes.

 

[noninho]

Oh yeah, that's right

@Nierre is also an staff member now and he also voted

 

[XXBenShapiroXx]

i don't think the argument is the only problem, the other problem is how yearly that topic become, it is always revolving around Roshi Moon feat, either the feat directly, or the scaling around it.

It's arguments are becoming the same again, but then they come up with something more obscure to avoid 'repeating arguement'. After years and years of clawing to get the outlier argument dismissed outright, making it impossible for the 5C scaling to be removed completely, there have been clear attempts to try and reverse that scaling as much as possible given it's impossible to deny the scaling as a whole.

So it's gone from muh outlier to arguing semantics about Kamehameha's multiplier and Roshi's max power form to imply they are buffs/amps/multipliers capable of taking a building level character to a moon level characters. And now that those have been debunked, we have devolved further into that semantical rabbit hole with arguments about the Kamehameha is actually too slow so that's why it wouldn't work against King Piccolo so that means no one else scales to 5C until Piccolo Jr destroys the moon himself.

There is a clear traceable evolution of the arguements becoming either more desperate or obscure with the intent of getting rid of the scaling or trying to peel it back as much as possible. The site accepted moon level roshi and the outlier arguements got thrown out the window, so now people are trying to semi-downgrade it in any way they can throughout new headcanons.

So after how hotly contested getting the scaling accepted to begin with, then the attempt at downgrading as much as possible, then getting that downgrade reversed, and now this most recent attempt, seems like most of the discussion has been hammered out and we will have to deal with stupider and stupider arguements every so often and since they are grasping at different straws every time, they aren't 'repeating arguements' therefore we have to put up with them.

 

[Ednaxel2]

I think Ben put it best

 

[XXBenShapiroXx]

All those threads of trying to get Roshi to 5C speak for themselves in terms of how contested and chippy they were. People really didn't want 5C Roshi, and I suspect for a variety of reasons they still don't and will take any chance they can get to try and repeal it as much as they can. Which means sillier and sillier arguements are going to be humored and they become six page headaches for everyone to deal with.

Moon level Roshi was the most widespread controversy this site has probably ever seen, it's silly to think that doesn't linger or that all the mods or users who were against moon level roshi have gone away.

I wouldn't bring bias against the verse into this despite clear behavior from people alluding to it, but given we can accuse people of blowing things out of proportion, I think this point is fair game. I find presuming intent, no matter how long that specific pattern of behavior has been clear, icky, so I normally wouldn't bring it up.

But it's rather naive to think that's long in the past and has no bearing on the discussions we today.

 

[Damage3245]

So it's gone from muh outlier to arguing semantics about Kamehameha's multiplier and Roshi's max power form to imply they are buffs/amps/multipliers capable of taking a building level character to a moon level characters. And now that those have been debunked

That is what we actually currently accept on Roshi's profile, so that hasn't actually been debunked.


So the issue has seemingly now changed from "People keep using the same arguments over and over" to "People keep making new arguments to try and alter the scaling, but we don't want the ratings of the characters to change." This isn't an attempt at accusing bias at anyone else either; if you think the current ratings and justifications for the profiles are ideal then that's fair enough and I'm not interested in changing them either - but the reasoning behind the existence of the rule seems to have changed.

 

[XXBenShapiroXx]

That is what we actually currently accept on Roshi's profile, so that hasn't actually been debunked.


So the issue has seemingly now changed from "People keep using the same arguments over and over" to "People keep making new arguments to try and alter the scaling, but we don't want the ratings of the characters to change."

My point still absolutely stands. This discussion warrants more than 'same arguments'.

This is a cop out.

 

[Raiden38]

Because...?

for the reasons given by Damage

 

[DarkDragonMedeus]

I also still don't think we can reliably assume a multiplier; f.e. downscaling everyone who upscales from base Roshi to High 6-A via downscaling from Moon level stuff. Because while Mount Frypan is not an antifeat for Max Power Roshi, it's arguably still an anti-feat for base Roshi. Since he needed to transform and use it. And if anything, gaps between strongest Ki attacks and physical/melee AP tend to lessen the stronger they grow. Especially since after training, one of his upgrades was being able to maintain the seriousness form for longer periods and/or use his strongest attack more than once without depleting himself. And even with the upgrades he got in 22nd Budokai compared to 21st budokai, there are still painfully obvious statements, comparisons, and fight outcomes to be had.

 

[XXBenShapiroXx]

Didn't expect to come back here to add more, but I did. I'll stop cluttering the thread and let the mods decide if they want to throw their hat in the ring or not. Made my thoughts clear.

Not taking into account the full context of moon level roshi and sticking to 'same arguements' conveniently allows people to take as many shots at the scaling as they want no matter how silly the argument provided they use a 'different arguement'.

 

[noninho]

Just something:
4-2-0 is enough to start grace/decide for the approval?

 

[LephyrTheRevanchist]

Just something:
4-2-0 is enough to start grace/decide for the approval?

No, but with an asterisk. Depends what the staff decide in the thread itself. While the minimum vote required for a revision is three, when staff themselves disagree among each other we have the following guidelines:

If a disagreement arises between staff members during the evaluation of a content revision thread, it is important to seek the input and guidance of additional staff members in order to reach a fair and unbiased decision. This may involve seeking the opinion of higher-ranked staff members, or consulting with staff members who possess specific expertise or knowledge related to the revision in question. The final decision on the approval of a content revision should be based on a thorough and unbiased evaluation of the suggested changes and their impact on a verse.

Ultimately, the final decision regarding the approval of a content revision should be based on a thorough and unbiased evaluation of the suggested changes and their impact on each verse, rather than on the rank or status of the staff members involved.

Although the evaluation of each staff member carries equal weight, the final decision regarding the approval of a content revision may be influenced by other factors such as the expertise and knowledge of the staff members involved, the complexity and controversy of the revision, and the popularity or prominence of the affected series verse. In terms of decision-making authority, bureaucrats are given the highest consideration, followed by administrators, and then thread moderators.

What this means in summary: When we have a vote count among staff members with evaluating rights, the decision whether the vote difference (the "decision making" for the threads conclusion) is enough for application falls to the highest authority of the evaluating staff in the thread. In this case, DDM mentions that a vote difference of 2 is not enough in his opinion, so a thread mod can't demand the thread to be concluded as things currently stand. In the case of whether two or more admins disagree even with the application of a thread, then a bureaucrat may be called to resolve the situation.

-

Giving my thoughts on the matter, I do agree a rule would be more beneficial here, because of the longevity of the topic. This isn't an issue of present times, wherein there are different interpretations to a new feat to a series: This is an issue that has had several years of discussions, from virtually all possible angles. Outlier, scaling, multipliers, charged attacks, consistency. To retreat the same steps is certainly a daunting proposition at this point, particularly when (and this is my personal opinion) this is such a straightforward situation. Roshi performed a moon level feat; we have a narrative of continuous power progression, we have statements of technique superiority, and we have an enemy that for all intents and purposes was completely undefeatable no matter what the heroes did at the time (including this same technique).