• 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.

Discussion Rules lil Revision

Status
Not open for further replies.
Lloydblitzed

Lloydblitzed

2,916
1,565
Permission granted by @Antvasima

This is very simple. So I think a little precision should be added to the discussion rules concerning the number of staff approval required to make a CRT pass. I've seen many people think they need 3 staff approval to make CRT pass when the rule only applies to popular verses

In cases where the series verse has a significant following or a large amount of material has been published based on its content, it may be necessary to seek approval from a minimum of three staff members to ensure that all relevant parties are aware of and agree with the proposed revisions.
Click to expand...

As minor/less popular verses only 2
In order to ensure that all revisions are thoroughly reviewed and approved, it is necessary for a minimum of two staff members to sign off on any proposed changes. The concluding evaluations must be handled by Thread Moderators, Administrators, and Bureaucrats, who should make an effort to base their evaluations on valid arguments, not personal opinions.
Click to expand...

So I think some precision should be added to the 3 staff rule, by giving examples of popular verses who would need their CRTs to get 3 staff approval at minimum. Like this

In cases where the series verse has a significant following or a large amount of material has been published based on its content, it may be necessary to seek approval from a minimum of three staff members to ensure that all relevant parties are aware of and agree with the proposed revisions.
(Example: Marvel Cinematic Universe, Ben 10, Sonic (Main Continuity), Kirby, Mario Bros)
Click to expand...

Agree: @DarkDragonMedeus @Planck69 (Agree with 2 minimum examples), @Mr. Bambu
Disagree:
Neutral/L idea: @DontTalkDT, @IdiosyncraticLawyer
 
Last edited:
I'm neutral I guess.

I can't imagine the examples help, as, if any part of this is ambiguous, it's what the lower boundary of significant following/lots of materials is. All the mentioned examples are so big that they don't really aid in clarifying that.
 
DontTalkDT said:
I'm neutral I guess.

I can't imagine the examples help, as, if any part of this is ambiguous, it's what the lower boundary of significant following/lots of materials is. All the mentioned examples are so big that they don't really aid in clarifying that.
Click to expand...
Do you think we should add "smaller" big verse example then? And would a verse like Ben 10 count?
 
Can somebody summarise then suggested changes here compared to our current rules please? 🙏
 
Antvasima said:
Can somebody summarise then suggested changes here compared to our current rules please? 🙏
Click to expand...
Basically to give an example of verses that would require 3 staff approval to get their CRT accepted. Vzearr is suggesting we name every verses that would fit this rule, and KingTempest is questionning why those popular verse requires 3 staff approval when they can barely get 1
 
Lloydblitzed said:
Basically to give an example of verses that would require 3 staff approval to get their CRT accepted. Vzearr is suggesting we name every verses that would fit this rule, and KingTempest is questionning why those popular verse requires 3 staff approval when they can barely get 1
Click to expand...
@Antvasima
 
Thank you. 🙏

I personally do not think that seems necessary.
 
Lloydblitzed said:
Basically to give an example of verses that would require 3 staff approval to get their CRT accepted. Vzearr is suggesting we name every verses that would fit this rule, and KingTempest is questionning why those popular verse requires 3 staff approval when they can barely get 1
Click to expand...
Antvasima said:
Thank you. 🙏

I personally do not think that seems necessary.
Click to expand...
I also agree that it's unnecessary. @DarkDragonMedeus @Mr. Bambu @Celestial_Pegasus @Andytrenom @Wokistan @Ultima_Reality @Elizhaa @Qawsedf234 @ByAsura @Sir_Ovens @Damage3245 @Starter_Pack @Abstractions @LordGriffin1000 @Colonel_Krukov @SamanPatou @GyroNutz @Firestorm808 @Everything12 @Maverick_Zero_X @Crabwhale @Just_a_Random_Butler @Agnaa @DarkGrath @Dereck03 @Planck69 What do you think about this?
 
In cases where the series verse has a significant following or a large amount of material has been published based on its content, it may be necessary to seek approval from a minimum of three staff members to ensure that all relevant parties are aware of and agree with the proposed revisions.
(Example: Marvel Cinematic Universe, Ben 10, Sonic (Main Continuity), Kirby, Mario Bros)
Click to expand...
For this section, Dragon Ball, Marvel Comics, and DC Comics should probably be the top 3 that come to mind. With HST verses and One Punch Man being next on the list. But otherwise, the proposals seem fine.
 
KingTempest said:
We can barely get 1 staff member for popular verses why the hell would we push it to 3?
Click to expand...
Necessity. A checks and balance system is absolutely fundamentally necessary. No major verse should have revisions passed on the whims of a single staff member. This is the status quo and how it should be.

I do not agree that listing out every single verse that requires this is a good idea, although noting that a verse is under such restrictions may be beneficial. Creating an exhaustive list and saying "and no more" seems to me likely to leave holes.
 
Yeah, I think 2 still being good for obscure verses; or 1 should only be good if there is like one staff approval followed by long periods of radio silence due to pure obscurity or lack of interest (To be fair, the only time that may happen is if it happens to be a verse reeking of cringe but still allowed via guidelines).
 
Mr. Bambu said:
I do not agree that listing out every single verse that requires this is a good idea, although noting that a verse is under such restrictions may be beneficial. Creating an exhaustive list and saying "and no more" seems to me likely to leave holes.
Click to expand...
Would you (and any staff in here) agree with listing 5-8 examples or less at most ?
 
2 minimum is fine. As for examples, we could probably list a few and make it clear that what counts as popular and controversial may be subject to further discretion from staff, but I don't feel too strongly about it.
 
Lloydblitzed said:
Would you (and any staff in here) agree with listing 5-8 examples or less at most ?
Click to expand...
Naruto, One Piece, Bleach, Dragon Ball, Marvel Comics, DC Comics, God of War, Devil May Cry. I think all of these are reasonably verses that should receive more attention as a requirement. Others occur, but as you've said "at most", I will acquiesce.
 
Mr. Bambu said:
Naruto, One Piece, Bleach, Dragon Ball, Marvel Comics, DC Comics, God of War, Devil May Cry. I think all of these are reasonably verses that should receive more attention as a requirement. Others occur, but as you've said "at most", I will acquiesce.
Click to expand...
I agree with that tbh, tho I would also include Honkai Star Trail like DDM mentionned
 
Lloydblitzed said:
I agree with that tbh, tho I would also include Honkai Star Trail like DDM mentionned
Click to expand...
Honkai is a franchise with little recognition and significance compared to such metaseries like DC, Marvel, DB, etc. So adding it to the rooster wouldn’t be necessary, considering the verse does not have much staff interest.
 
I don't think we need to get engaged in the hyper-specifics. I was asked to name examples were we to go through with spelling out specifics, and I did so. I imagine the process could be handled on an individual verse-by-verse basis when we get to the point of this being an actual rule.
 
Mr. Bambu said:
I don't think we need to get engaged in the hyper-specifics. I was asked to name examples were we to go through with spelling out specifics, and I did so. I imagine the process could be handled on an individual verse-by-verse basis when we get to the point of this being an actual rule.
Click to expand...
Can we apply this since we got 3 agreements on around the same thing?
 
Interjecting to ask Staff to consider the following, after which I won't reply further; is it okay to include verses that are undergoing inevitable (and much needed) revisions for the 3-staff rule? Star Wars and Sailor Moon come to mind; and to a lesser extent Touhou Project due to how outdated it currently is. Though, I feel that the former two mentioned verses deserve more attention.
 
So, to sum up, these are the changes according to what was discussed:

Original Rule:
In cases where the series verse has a significant following or a large amount of material has been published based on its content, it may be necessary to seek approval from a minimum of three staff members to ensure that all relevant parties are aware of and agree with the proposed revisions.
Click to expand...

New Rule:
In cases where the series verse has a significant following or a large amount of material has been published based on its content, it may be necessary to seek approval from a minimum of three staff members to ensure that all relevant parties are aware of and agree with the proposed revisions.
(Example: Naruto, Marvel Comics, DC Comics, Dragon Ball, Devil May Cry, God of War, One Piece, Bleach)
Click to expand...
 
Lloydblitzed said:
welp we got a 1-4 situation so I think its safe to apply
Click to expand...
I only have evaluation rights in the Joke Battles Wikia subforum, not the main one. I'm simply expressing that I have no desire to side with anyone and won't bring new arguments.
 
Quibster said:
Interjecting to ask Staff to consider the following, after which I won't reply further; is it okay to include verses that are undergoing inevitable (and much needed) revisions for the 3-staff rule? Star Wars and Sailor Moon come to mind; and to a lesser extent Touhou Project due to how outdated it currently is. Though, I feel that the former two mentioned verses deserve more attention.
Click to expand...
Whether a verse is broadly popular is not really the concern. Minecraft is the most popular video game of all time but it probably doesn't need three staff votes for a CRT. Our concern is in popularity (or more accurately, activity) within the battleboarding sphere of culture. If there is more inclination towards scaling something like Tensura than there is recognition of it abroad, we should focus on the fact that it is very notable within our sphere of work.

I don't know if Star Wars and Sailor Moon would really need three staff members. I'm on the fence regarding Touhou, given recent events, but I'd be inclined to say I think just two is fine. I say this acknowledging your actual point is more broad- these examples, if they are your concern, should probably not concern you.

Onto the broader point of whether verses with an ongoing effort to "fix" them should be included, my answer would be yes, I don't think that should exclude them if they otherwise fit our reckoning of a verse that should have a third set of eyes on them at a minimum.
 
Mr. Bambu said:
Whether a verse is broadly popular is not really the concern. Minecraft is the most popular video game of all time but it probably doesn't need three staff votes for a CRT. Our concern is in popularity (or more accurately, activity) within the battleboarding sphere of culture. If there is more inclination towards scaling something like Tensura than there is recognition of it abroad, we should focus on the fact that it is very notable within our sphere of work.
Click to expand...
Ye, I think the rule should be based on the popularity of the verse from within the site
Mr. Bambu said:
I don't know if Star Wars and Sailor Moon would really need three staff members. I'm on the fence regarding Touhou, given recent events, but I'd be inclined to say I think just two is fine. I say this acknowledging your actual point is more broad- these examples, if they are your concern, should probably not concern you.
Click to expand...
SW def doesn't get enough attention for allat
 
Yes, that is fine. Thank you for helping out. 🙏❤️
 
Antvasima said:
Yes, that is fine. Thank you for helping out. 🙏❤️
Click to expand...
Done. Close this thread.
vsbattles.fandom.com

Discussion Rules

VS Battles Wiki is a site where the members attempt to index the statistics of characters across different fictional franchises. These efforts lead to much discussion about certain feats, statements and calculations regarding their validity, reliability, etc. However, certain topics keep popping...
vsbattles.fandom.com vsbattles.fandom.com
 
Okay. I will do so. Thank you to everybody who helped out here. 🙏🙂❤️
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

IdiosyncraticLawyer
  • Locked
Clarifying the number of staff necessary to approve Tier 1 and 0 revisions
2
Replies
67
Views
5K
Antvasima
Antvasima
ImmortalDread
  • Locked
Most Important Discussion Rule Section - Staff Thread Creation Guidelines
2
Replies
63
Views
7K
Antvasima
Antvasima
KingTempest
  • Locked
Obvious Revisions Revision (Staff Only)
2 3
Replies
104
Views
9K
Antvasima
Antvasima
Clarification Of Sentence Phrasings And Addition Of Expected Punishments For Each Type Of Rule Breach For All Rules Pages
Replies
15
Views
577
Mahek_The_Assassin_Silent_Killer
ImmortalDread
  • Locked
Staff Discussion rules
2 3
Replies
109
Views
7K
Antvasima
Antvasima
Back
Top