- 6,247
- 2,669
more like they got their calc and dont want people to disprove it so they made a new rule to prevent people from doing so
-
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.
BAN-KAI! Bleach General Discussion
- Thread starter Zoro21043
- Start date
- 287
- 283
Pretty sure the same thing is going to happen after universal bleach is downgraded lol. Well atleast it was fun while it lasted lmao. It was fun seeing all the new posts on comicvine about it.
- 6,247
- 2,669
Was there not a rule about making CTR on good faith or something? cus i have seen CTR get closed cus it was obvious that the OP hated that verse and his only purpose was to downgrade and lowball it
- 1,527
- 855
There was a rule so that you do not try to upgrade Bleach characters with the ginin mach 500 expression, it still writes on wiki, but we are doing this now, right, administrators change the rules
- 366
- 91
Yeah but we can just point out it makes no sense and they have to argument why it's there.
User fatigue isn't a valid excuse when they aren't forced to participate and they can't restrict other people from having fun in the forums.
Same as how there's no point in waiting for the anime since the feats from the manga aren't affected by it.
- 18,869
- 27,535
I had a thread of mine get closed because they thought it was a joke. Instead of talking with me to figure out if I was trolling (I wasn't) they just said "you're a joke so we closed the thread". The abuse from Staff is so ******* sick it makes me want to never come back here, but everywhere else is like unanimous wank or lowball so I guess I'm stuck putting up with it here.
- 366
- 91
You should point that kind of thing to admins with scans.
- 1,527
- 855
Calc stalking rules also don't make much sense to me, but there is not much I can do. Whenever we try to use a speed success for distance calculation, calc stalking appears.
- 6,247
- 2,669
Another big problems is that most mods are besties and even if u report someone more than likely nothing will happen
- 366
- 91
I think the rules for calc stalking make sense, but they aren't applied with... English isn't my first language but as a lawyer we often interpret laws in a way that fits either the intent of the law or the intent of the people that sanctioned the law in the context of when and why.
If applied to the letter, every single calc would be calcstalking if there's pixel or angle scalling, or if you use real life data, or if you asume a distance or time.
Hiding calculations is the practice of trying to avoid calculating a feat in order to be able to use the result in another calculation. In other words it is the practice of trying to fool people into not noticing that calc stacking is being used.
This usually occurs if a feat is quantified per a rule of thumb instead of precisely calculated. A typical example would be a character dodging a bullet from a short distance being ranked as "Supersonic" and then using that ranking to calculate the speed of another character, whose speed one can compare to the former in some feat.
While it is acceptable to rank a character by such a self-evident feat without a calculation, one should keep in mind that the unwritten calculation is only skipped due to being trivial, but is still the justification for the ranking. Hence calc stacking will still be an issue for such feats.
- 5,227
- 3,365
And it's worse because staff members should be held to a higher standard than a regular members, they're there to enforce rules and follow them explicitly, yet they receive less of a punishment than regular members for breaking said rules.
But yes, expect nothing to come of the report.
But yes, expect nothing to come of the report.
- 366
- 91
Being fair, there's a difference between calling your arguments something and calling you, a joke.
Now, if you had been punished for something similar there's a double standard.
- 601
- 190
About Gremmy's Tier, isn't it even mentioned in CFYOW (by Liltotto i think) that Gremmy's imagination was extremely hintered due to being sealed up so long by Yhwach (or something along those lines) and that's essentially why he lost to Kenpachi?
Also saying "It's just his imagination. Prove it's real" when the character's power is literally turning his imagination into reality is weird to say the least.
Also saying "It's just his imagination. Prove it's real" when the character's power is literally turning his imagination into reality is weird to say the least.
Last edited:
- 18,869
- 27,535
- 8,427
- 3,144
I will admit, hearing all this staff bashing makes my existence in this thread quite awkward, but I was asked to look at this conversation about possibly reporting some form of harassment and I will view this seriously. And frankly, I am not really the person to talk to, if you think that you've been unfairly treated or targeted, there is a thread to report such things.
To look at this personally, I don't know if "insulting viewpoints" is viable enough for a rule violation. I would need to see the comment specifically to see if the person was just saying that what you are saying is dumb, or if there is some actually targeted hatred there.
I know I regularly call posts "nonsensical", "illogical", or "ludicrous" if I think the argument that they are making is as such. Although, I specify the user's arguments are those things, not the user themselves. And I have only been "called out" once for this, by the person who I was debating who I felt was taking everything too personally, but I digress.
I know I have felt and desired to chuck ad hominem after ad hominem to the people I am debating time and time again, especially when an argument has become circular, but I try and refrain from doing that, and I like to think I succeeded.
But enough of me, if you think that a staff member has violated one of the rules, then advise you to take screenshots of them, and point out the double standard in a thread. As that is all I can think you can do.
Whatever the case, if Matthew really did make claims like "The Garagunta is outer space" or "Gremmy's imagination isn't real", then it is very indictive that he clearly has no idea what he is talking about, and honestly, shouldn't have his thoughts viewed seriously until he makes an attempt to actively understand the cosmology of the series he is criticizing without making blank statements that are hollow and vapid.
And whatever this case about 3-A/Low 2-C removal thread, (Which honestly, if they are so sure of this, why didn't they make these arguments on the thread when it was first being introduced?) let us just wait and see for the reasonings. If they are correct, then they are correct, but if they aren't, they aren't. It is as simple as that.
This is all I will say on the matter as of now.
To look at this personally, I don't know if "insulting viewpoints" is viable enough for a rule violation. I would need to see the comment specifically to see if the person was just saying that what you are saying is dumb, or if there is some actually targeted hatred there.
I know I regularly call posts "nonsensical", "illogical", or "ludicrous" if I think the argument that they are making is as such. Although, I specify the user's arguments are those things, not the user themselves. And I have only been "called out" once for this, by the person who I was debating who I felt was taking everything too personally, but I digress.
I know I have felt and desired to chuck ad hominem after ad hominem to the people I am debating time and time again, especially when an argument has become circular, but I try and refrain from doing that, and I like to think I succeeded.
But enough of me, if you think that a staff member has violated one of the rules, then advise you to take screenshots of them, and point out the double standard in a thread. As that is all I can think you can do.
Whatever the case, if Matthew really did make claims like "The Garagunta is outer space" or "Gremmy's imagination isn't real", then it is very indictive that he clearly has no idea what he is talking about, and honestly, shouldn't have his thoughts viewed seriously until he makes an attempt to actively understand the cosmology of the series he is criticizing without making blank statements that are hollow and vapid.
And whatever this case about 3-A/Low 2-C removal thread, (Which honestly, if they are so sure of this, why didn't they make these arguments on the thread when it was first being introduced?) let us just wait and see for the reasonings. If they are correct, then they are correct, but if they aren't, they aren't. It is as simple as that.
This is all I will say on the matter as of now.
Last edited:
- 11,531
- 3,088
I made a recent thread (that was supposedly similar to one created 2 months ago, I was not aware of that) and Damage closed it based on that argument.
I was given the old thread link by Damage. I read everything on that thread and rebutted (post 106 onward) all the false claims for which the thread was closed in a Bleach thread.
He instantly said there was no new evidence and ignore my request to reopen the thread.
P.S.
I will take screen shoots and update this comment.
EDIT: I don't want to post the images on IMGUR for now. So I gave you the links. If the comments are deleted I have the screenshots as back up.
Last edited:
- 8,427
- 3,144
As I said in my initial post, I am not really the one to handle such things, sorry.
- 18,869
- 27,535
They’re arguing that Yhwach can’t destroy the three realms because uh we don’t see it on screen...
The rest of it is about how the SK doesn’t fit the stability rules (which whatever can’t do much about them making a whole rules page to combat the upgrade). However, to argue that Yhwach can’t destroy the three realms is quite odd.
The rest of it is about how the SK doesn’t fit the stability rules (which whatever can’t do much about them making a whole rules page to combat the upgrade). However, to argue that Yhwach can’t destroy the three realms is quite odd.
Ovy7
He/Him- 2,619
- 2,465
I think Apple had called almost everything.
- 18,869
- 27,535
There’s still tier 5 scaling from MoN and tier 4/3 scaling from Gremmy among a shit ton of tier 2 scaling from the realms.
I’ll make like one long mega post on why I think they’re wrong and probably dip. I don’t feel like fighting the majority of the staff in a literal echo chamber. That mega post is essentially gonna detail the 3 metas of Bleach power scaling I find valid and then just saying choose your candy.
I’ll make like one long mega post on why I think they’re wrong and probably dip. I don’t feel like fighting the majority of the staff in a literal echo chamber. That mega post is essentially gonna detail the 3 metas of Bleach power scaling I find valid and then just saying choose your candy.
- 8,159
- 2,185
Interesting. So the plan is downgrade god tiers to 6-A.
- 21,468
- 30,790
They said tell Arc if you have anything to say and he could put it in the thread.
It's staff only because
Which is valid. We don't need another "FRA" chain.
Calm down and stop tryna blame staff for every misdemeanor.
- 5,666
- 4,894
curious what does fra mean
