- 13,903
- 5,405
- Thread starter
- #81
Adding the scaling values directly to the notes shouldn’t be against the rules it literally hurts nobody, even the people who think putting it in the AP section would be “too messy”
-
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.
Indexing scaling chains and calc values
- Thread starter ZillertheBucko
- Start date
-
- Tags
- vs battles wiki
- Status
- 11,552
- 10,976
Who? Because I can see a **** ton of people and mods who agrees with such a method
Youre not stupid, you have understand what I meant. Writing a blog is the same shit as writing a page, both use the same model and site configurations.
- 32,835
- 38,108
Me, Damage3245, ElajRuengies and DarkDragonMedeus. Ant even agreed to the suggestion that Elaj proposed: Make an Optional Explanations section in the profiles somewhere, and as the name says, it's optional.
The hell was this for?
- 11,552
- 10,976
Nor you or ElajRuengies are relevant, otherwise me, Ziller and SeijiSeto would as well count
Anyway, LordTracer, Gyronutz, Propellus and Adytrenom agrees with adding values to the justifications
- 32,835
- 38,108
LMAO what? I'm staff, plus, a CGM, and this thing is about listing calc values, my vote absolutely counts here.
As an optional.
Same thing, but said that more effort should be placed on elaborating it in the paragraph.
Same as Tracer.
He's pretty much the only solid "Agree" here.
We're gonna get nowhere with this. We'll have to tag all the Admins and CGMs here to get anything out of it.
- 13,903
- 5,405
- Thread starter
- #86
I don’t see how being a calc member means you get to give yourself voting power in a thread about profile formatting
- 11,552
- 10,976
Yeah, thats the whole premise
- 32,835
- 38,108
Calc members, Thread Mods and Content Mods are considered to be on the same footing in terms of rank and responsibility, only with different focuses.
Plus, in this case of profile formatting, calcs are involved, so naturally, it becomes our part as well as that of an admin and content mods as well.
- 32,835
- 38,108
Like I said, I don't see the point. Elaj's proposal does this way more justice if you're that insistent in not using a Scaling Chain Explanation page.
- 13,903
- 5,405
- Thread starter
- #90
Calcs are technically involved in any crt about scaling, because everyone’s scaling to a calc value, yet that doesn’t mean you get voting rights there
I was under the impression that calc group authority doesn’t extend beyond evaluating if a calc is usable, and discussing things like calculation methods or the baselines of tiers being adjusted and such
yes, this is about where to put calc values, but it has nothing to do with the values themselves.
- 32,835
- 38,108
Nah, our coat buttons tight on a number of other duties as well, like knowing a fair bit amount about site policy and where and when those apply, in calcs or elsewhere, which is why we serve as such a fundamental cornerstone to the site's well-being.
- 32,835
- 38,108
Anyway, derailing aside, tagging CGMs, Content Mods and Admins that haven't evaluated this yet:
@DontTalkDT @Ultima_Reality @Executor_N0 @Spinosaurus75DinosaurFan @Mr._Bambu @Therefir @DMUA @TheRustyOne @DemonGodMitchAubin @Jasonsith @Wokistan @Migue79 @Psychomaster35 @CloverDragon03 @M3X_2.0 @AbaddonTheDisappointment @Dark-Carioca @Dalesean027 @Aguywhodoesthings @Agnaa @DemiiPowa @Celestial_Pegasus @Elizhaa @Qawsedf234 @ByAsura @Starter_Pack @Abstractions @Colonel_Krukov @SamanPatou @Firestorm808 @Everything12 @Maverick_Zero_X @Crabwhale @Just_a_Random_Butler
What do you think? Does OP make a good proposition? Or is Elaj's proposition better?
@DontTalkDT @Ultima_Reality @Executor_N0 @Spinosaurus75DinosaurFan @Mr._Bambu @Therefir @DMUA @TheRustyOne @DemonGodMitchAubin @Jasonsith @Wokistan @Migue79 @Psychomaster35 @CloverDragon03 @M3X_2.0 @AbaddonTheDisappointment @Dark-Carioca @Dalesean027 @Aguywhodoesthings @Agnaa @DemiiPowa @Celestial_Pegasus @Elizhaa @Qawsedf234 @ByAsura @Starter_Pack @Abstractions @Colonel_Krukov @SamanPatou @Firestorm808 @Everything12 @Maverick_Zero_X @Crabwhale @Just_a_Random_Butler
What do you think? Does OP make a good proposition? Or is Elaj's proposition better?
- 11,552
- 10,976
Elaj proposal is way too shitty imo
But I don't see why both methods cannot be accepted as optional
- 32,835
- 38,108
I'll take your word for it and count you as a disagree.
One word: Consistency.
Can't have a single Standard Profile Format if there's multiple to go about. So pick one.
- 13,903
- 5,405
- Thread starter
- #95
I don’t really have that much more to push for in this thread, since it’s just I hate the current formatting vs they hate my preferred formatting
the bare minimum here is that people are allowed to put the values the characters scale to right onto the notes as an optional thing
the bare minimum here is that people are allowed to put the values the characters scale to right onto the notes as an optional thing
- 13,903
- 5,405
- Thread starter
- #97
May the OP speak?
- 11,552
- 10,976
We literally have three methods to write P&A (Normal, topics or in bolding)
Even justifications and scans is something currently optional in our profiles
- 32,835
- 38,108
Probably, but ask just in case.
- 32,835
- 38,108
And a lot of parties already think it excessive.
Nope, not anymore. It is now mandatory to include justifications, scans and references (ALL OF THEM) in ALL YOUR PROFILES.
- 11,972
- 11,581
I agree with this.
- 15,450
- 15,865
That doesn’t mean I don’t solidly agree with the OP’s premise lol. If people want to list the values in the justification, they should be able to. If they don’t want to, then they don’t have to.
- 32,835
- 38,108
Fair enough.
- 21,470
- 30,790
OP not being able to speak on their own thread cause they're a blue name is crazy
I'm fine with this, but don't make it something we need to implement to all the old ones, maybe "it's encouraged to do this for all the new profiles made"
I'm fine with this, but don't make it something we need to implement to all the old ones, maybe "it's encouraged to do this for all the new profiles made"
- 32,835
- 38,108
I agree, but I'm not the one making new rules RN.
- 11,972
- 11,581
Or just optional even for new profiles. Nothing stops our visitors from clicking the calculation and check the values.
- 167,863
- 76,487
Yes, in an ideal world I agree, but our member do not seem to know or understand how to do this, and keep using this format over and over for different verses, so it may be practically unfeasible.
- 167,863
- 76,487
I think that the poster of a staff forum thread can continue to speak there, yes.
Last edited:
- 4,769
- 7,810
I feel like this would be better along with placing any scaling chains in the explanations section as well just so it's all in one place.
Also crazy how the OP still has the 5-C value for OPM. This thread is old lol
- 11,552
- 10,976
- 31,401
- 27,693
I'm not a fan of that AP section to be honest. Putting four bolded AP values in the description of one AP rating is just cluttering it.
IdiosyncraticLawyer
Username OnlyVS Battles
Joke Battles
Administrator
Content Moderator
Translation Helper
- 3,245
- 3,944
Should I add something to the rules to clarify that?
- 13,903
- 5,405
- Thread starter
- #113
It takes up a considerably lower amount of space compared to the AP justification, and for the little space it takes up it is convenient and quite helpful for vs threads
Mr. Bambu
Suffer-Not-Injustice Bambu
VS Battles
Joke Battles
Super Moderator
Administrator
Calculation Group
- 22,786
- 22,313
The OP sounds really annoying in that I agree it would **** up my beautiful pages. I don't think we necessarily need a policy here, though, as I don't see the harm in including the exact values in the AP section if you really want to- I just, don't really want to.
- 10,906
- 12,346
IMO our format is flexible enough to conveniently index things as is. One can include all those infos in the AP and Dura explanations. Or in other explanation sections.
What we need isn't a change in format, but people who are willing to sit down and invest the work needed to improve profiles in aspects as this.
So just do it. Find a profile you think has too hard to find scaling. Make a CRT proposing a rewrite. Get it approved. Edit the profile. See it as a chance to take the initiative to improve things!
(This ad is directed at nobody in particular)
What we need isn't a change in format, but people who are willing to sit down and invest the work needed to improve profiles in aspects as this.
So just do it. Find a profile you think has too hard to find scaling. Make a CRT proposing a rewrite. Get it approved. Edit the profile. See it as a chance to take the initiative to improve things!
(This ad is directed at nobody in particular)
- 167,863
- 76,487
I personally wouldn't mind.
- 167,863
- 76,487
So what do you all think about this?
- 15,450
- 15,865
Uh, ew. As I’ve said before, I think people should be allowed to index the value a character scales to in their justification if they want to, but not like that. It should just be something simple like this:
- Status
