LGBT additions to the Vsbattles wiki

[Duedate8898]

Snip

I disagree that we have no reason to be discussing LGBT topics on the wiki. Seeing as ones identity is a part of their character, and we are an indexing wiki, it makes sense that we could have mention of it on the profiles. Not to mention, but as members of our community are inadvertently a part of the LGBT group, it also shows our own recognition of these same members in an official capacity. Saying that its too much trouble to simply have a category for such characters, sends out the message that it's too much trouble for us to recognize LGBT in general in any official capacity.

And that's a really ****** up message to give.

I don't disagree it won't be a headache to deal with at times, but everything here is a headache to deal with at times, and if you don't want to participate you don't have to. We have a whole thing where most of our staff doesn't participate in the VsDebates part of our community, when that's a whole part of the brand of the wiki and where its not unoften for staff members to be called to a thread and say they don't want to deal with it.

So I'm still failing to see any good reason to not let this be a category, because not wanting to deal with the trouble and worries of inaccuracies is just an intrinsic part of all changes, big and small here.

 

[Moritzva]

I disagree that we have no reason to be discussing LGBT topics on the wiki. Seeing as ones identity is a part of their character, and we are an indexing wiki, it makes sense that we could have mention of it on the profiles. Not to mention, but as members of our community are inadvertently a part of the LGBT group, it also shows our own recognition of these same members in an official capacity. Saying that its too much trouble to simply have a category for such characters, sends out the message that it's too much trouble for us to recognize LGBT in general in any official capacity.

And that's a really ****** up message to give.

I don't disagree it won't be a headache to deal with at times, but everything here is a headache to deal with at times, and if you don't want to participate you don't have to. We have a whole thing where most of our staff doesn't participate in the VsDebates part of our community, when that's a whole part of the brand of the wiki and where its not unoften for staff members to be called to a thread and say they don't want to deal with it.

So I'm still failing to see any good reason to not let this be a category, because not wanting to deal with the trouble and worries of inaccuracies is just an intrinsic part of all changes, big and small here.

I am a part of the LGBT group. It's still a really bad idea. It is a very large headache on a level that we do not want to deal with, and there is absolutely nothing ****** up about not including a category. We don't have a category for 'straight' characters. We don't need one. I don't want one.

You talk about the LGBT community and messages towards it as if you speak for the entire community. You don't. A lot of LGBT members in this community approved of my post. Please, don't say my proposal gives a "****** up message", it's rude and exists only as an overall non-argument assumption.

As someone who has had to deal with the multitude of LGBT discussions that have popped up this month, it is easily more of a headache than literally anything else I have had to deal with on this site for over a year. Emotions run high, people get angry, and the matter is an overall minefield. All for discussions over identity that are far, far too serious to be discussed on a battleboarding site for fictional characters.

I'll make this very clear. The fact that you immediately took "Maybe we shouldn't include this category, as it would lead to a lot of arguments that this wiki isn't build to handle." as "So you don't want to include LGBT in any official capacity? That's ****** up." despite repeated changes and threads, recognizing characters as their proper gender on their profiles, and so on, proves exactly why I am hesitant about this. If we can't even debate about adding the category itself in good faith, how can we expect to argue about the actual contents of the category in a productive manner?

 

[Pikaman]

I just think the above regulations on what we approve are very, VERY objective and leave no room for the debate that would spark the toxicity you’re (understandably) so afraid of

Like, give me an example of where there could be a toxic mess of a debate on a ruling on if a certain character should be in the category, and I will answer where they fall on the very clear and objective guidelines on what we call “official confirmation” in as few characters as I can, to try and show how it’s a much simpler process than it sounds on paper

 

[ShivaShakti]

And that's a really ****** up message to give.

LGBT characters don't require a category to be included. There isn't any issue with acknowledging their identity without placing them all into a single classification.

 

[Moritzva]

I just think the above regulations on what we approve are very, VERY objective and leave no room for the debate that would spark the toxicity you’re (understandably) so afraid of

Like, give me an example of where there could be a toxic mess of a debate on a ruling on if a certain character should be in the category, and I will answer where they fall on the very clear and objective guidelines on what we call “official confirmation” in as few characters as I can, to try and show how it’s a much simpler process than it sounds on paper

Even if the standards were truly objective, which seems more than a little difficult and opinionated, do they not open the door for people to argue for why the standards should be changed in the future?

 

[MonkeyOfLife]

I just think the above regulations on what we approve are very, VERY objective and leave no room for the debate that would spark the toxicity you’re (understandably) so afraid of

Like, give me an example of where there could be a toxic mess of a debate on a ruling on if a certain character should be in the category, and I will answer where they fall on the very clear and objective guidelines on what we call “official confirmation” in as few characters as I can, to try and show how it’s a much simpler process than it sounds on paper

Yamato is one... For example I would say

 

[Pikaman]

Yamato is one... For example I would say

Idk a whole bunch about One Piece but reading the wiki seems they were born female but identify as male, so yes they would qualify

 

[Moritzva]

Yamato is one... For example I would say

Oh dear god, I'm not touching that one with a ten foot pole. I do not know enough about One Piece to say, and what I do know seems like it would attract a ban from Fandom if I were to even try.

For those unaware, Yamato's status as transgender is... hotly debated, to say the least, but Fandom is pretty strictly on the side of identifying them as male so we'll stick with that.

Edit: Initially said female by mistake. Fandom identifies Yamato as male.

 

[MonkeyOfLife]

but Fandom is pretty strictly on the side of identifying them as female so we'll stick with that.

You mean male? Right? Or?

 

[Moritzva]

Yes, male. ****. My bad. Again, don't know shit about One Piece, I forgot.

 

[Pikaman]

For those unaware, Yamato's status as transgender is... hotly debated, to say the least, but Fandom is pretty strictly on the side of identifying them as male so we'll stick with that.

Yeah, if the debate is very heated I get that but Fandom lists them as Male, WE list them as Male, so we already index him as transgender, and thus adding him to the category is just a confirmation of a stance we already have. The same goes for the fact Bridget is already in the category, that seems controversial on paper but she’s already acknowledged as trans by this wiki, adding her to the category is just applying the stance we already have to a new section where it is relevant.

 

[Moritzva]

Yeah, if the debate is very heated I get that but Fandom lists them as Male, WE list them as Male, so we already index him as transgender, and thus adding him to the category is just a confirmation of a stance we already have. The same goes for the fact Bridget is already in the category, that seems controversial on paper but she’s already acknowledged as trans by this wiki, adding her to the category is just applying the stance we already have to a new section where it is relevant.

Bridget is not the same case as Yamato, is all I'll say.

I really don't want to start a Yamato discussion here, because... oh dear, it's an entirely different beast. Yet another reason why I'd prefer to keep things as they are rather than stir the pot with further discussions about this.

 

[MonkeyOfLife]

This is a question, but aren't there gay people or trans who don't support LGBT? Or does that not make sense?

 

[Pikaman]

Bridget is not the same case as Yamato, is all I'll say.

I really don't want to start a Yamato discussion here, because... oh dear, it's an entirely different beast. Yet another reason why I'd prefer to keep things as they are rather than stir the pot with further discussions about this.

We don’t need a discussion though, we acknowledge Yamato as trans, so just add them to the category?

 

[Pikaman]

This is a question, but aren't there gay people or trans who don't support LGBT? Or does that not make sense?

I’m… not quite sure what you’re getting at here exactly

 

[Moritzva]

This is a question, but aren't there gay people or trans who don't support LGBT? Or does that not make sense?

Okay, this is already starting to snowball into something more complicated and off-topic.

To very briefly and quickly answer MonkeyOfLife's question, a gay or trans person will always be LGBT (as, by definition, they are), but they don't necessarily have to participate in the community itself actively.

Getting back on topic, I don't appreciate having my proposal and intent implied to be bigoted, and that sort of behavior is exactly why we should not continue with a category on this. It's not necessary, and a plethora of users (including several LGBT users) agree with me on this matter.

 

[Duedate8898]

I am a part of the LGBT group. It's still a really bad idea. It is a very large headache on a level that we do not want to deal with, and there is absolutely nothing ****** up about not including a category. We don't have a category for 'straight' characters. We don't need one. I don't want one.

Cool, as another member of the group, I want the category to exist. Hence why I'm arguing for it.

You talk about the LGBT community and messages towards it as if you speak for the entire community. You don't. A lot of LGBT members in this community approved of my post. Please, don't say my proposal gives a "****** up message", it's rude and exists only as an overall non-argument assumption.

As someone who has had to deal with the multitude of LGBT discussions that have popped up this month, it is easily more of a headache than literally anything else I have had to deal with on this site for over a year. Emotions run high, people get angry, and the matter is an overall minefield. All for discussions over identity that are far, far too serious to be discussed on a battleboarding site for fictional characters.

Just as I don't speak for the community in full, neither do you. And with that said, i think it only furthers the idea that the category itself being added as too troublesome is screwed. Because you're not rejecting the category because its unneeded, cause if that was the case a lot of other unneeded categories would be up on the chopping block, you and other members are rejecting the category because of controversy. And to me, that's a weak reason to reject it. And what I say only exist as a non-argument if isn't addressing the fact that that's very much the message. And I don't see how its rude to say the message I'm getting from you feels ****** up, because that's how it feels. Especially with you being from the community.

I'll make this very clear. The fact that you immediately took "Maybe we shouldn't include this category, as it would lead to a lot of arguments that this wiki isn't build to handle." as "So you don't want to include LGBT in any official capacity? That's ****** up." despite repeated changes and threads, recognizing characters as their proper gender on their profiles, and so on, proves exactly why I am hesitant about this. If we can't even debate about adding the category itself in good faith, how can we expect to argue about the actual contents of the category in a productive manner?

And you don't make the argument productive, by immediately getting defensive and by reducing what I say done to a non-argument. Because you're not assuming good faith either, you let your emotions run high and immediately assumed the worst of it.

 

[MonkeyOfLife]

I’m… not quite sure what you’re getting at here exactly

Similar to other movements where there are people that are included but who don't support it like for example blm or alm and stuff like that

I'm not very knowledgeable in this topic tho, just naming things I have seen

 

[Moritzva]

Cool, as another member of the group, I want the category to exist. Hence why I'm arguing for it.

Just as I don't speak for the community in full, neither do you. And with that said, i think it only furthers the idea that the category itself being added as too troublesome is screwed. Because you're not rejecting the category because its unneeded, cause if that was the case a lot of other unneeded categories would be up on the chopping block, you and other members are rejecting the category because of controversy. And to me, that's a weak reason to reject it. And what I say only exist as a non-argument if isn't addressing the fact that that's very much the message. And I don't see how its rude to say the message I'm getting from you feels ****** up, because that's how it feels. Especially with you being from the community.

And you don't make the argument productive, by immediately getting defensive and by reducing what I say done to a non-argument. Because you're not assuming good faith either, you let your emotions run high and immediately assumed the worst of it.

Duedate, I have thoroughly explained my reasonings as someone who has been thoroughly involved in these conflicts and will be thoroughly involved in the future. I did say it was unneeded, and there was even support in this thread for deleting other unneeded categories - they are to be taken care of separately. Not only is it unneeded, but it is also controversial. None of these are weak reasons. If you disagree, that is fine.

However, it is objectively true that simply calling my proposal "****** up" is a non-argument. That's just an accusation, and it isn't productive for you to double-down on this matter. You're also further accusing me of being defensive and letting emotions run high after being the one to accuse me. Please, stop doing this. It's completely unnecessary and exactly why people do not wish to have this category.

I will repeat - if we can't even have a civil discussion over the existence of the category, how can we have civil discussions over the contents of the category?

 

[Pikaman]

Getting back on topic, I don't appreciate having my proposal and intent implied to be bigoted

I have never made this implication. At all. You could be talking about something/someone else though so sorry ‘bout the misunderstanding if that’s the case lol

and that sort of behavior is exactly why we should not continue with a category on this.

Again, the beginning stages of this will inherently be the bumpiest. Once we get our standards down, as we very almost have, there is 0 room for debate or discussion

It's not necessary

It’s not necessary, neither are a whole bunch of other categories, neither is the addition of certain characters, neither is this wiki in the grand scheme of things. That doesn’t mean it can’t be something for people to appreciate

and a plethora of users (including several LGBT users) agree with me on this matter.

Duedate is LGBTQIA+

Cool, as another member of the group, I want the category to exist. Hence why I'm arguing for it.

I am too, don’t act like our argument isn’t taking into consideration the opinion of the community it affects.

Also, we’re talking of all the potential trouble here, if you want to avoid that just… do so?

There’s been numerous members including staff who have voiced their support for this category, and you’re not magically inclined to moderate it, there’s other people willing to moderate this category, why should we restrict them from doing so because you personally feel you have greater priorities?

 

[CosmicWreck]

Astolfo still need to be answered tho

Bisexual. I added a supporting evidence link in the OP if you are curious.

I will repeat - if we can't even have a civil discussion over the existence of the category, how can we have civil discussions over the contents of the category?

Do you want to @ the supporters on the list I recorded in the OP to reconsider given recent threads? I don't think I can record the voting consensus based on the number of likes a post gains and the majority of users who've voted on this thread have pushed for (or at least tolerated) this category.

 

[Duedate8898]

Duedate, I have thoroughly explained my reasonings as someone who has been thoroughly involved in these conflicts and will be thoroughly involved in the future. I did say it was unneeded, and there was even support in this thread for deleting other unneeded categories - they are to be taken care of separately. Not only is it unneeded, but it is also controversial. None of these are weak reasons. If you disagree, that is fine.

However, it is objectively true that simply calling my proposal "****** up" is a non-argument. That's just an accusation, and it isn't productive for you to double-down on this matter. You're also further accusing me of being defensive and letting emotions run high after being the one to accuse me. Please, stop doing this. It's completely unnecessary and exactly why people do not wish to have this category.

I will repeat - if we can't even have a civil discussion over the existence of the category, how can we have civil discussions over the contents of the category?

I'm not simply calling your proposal ****** up though, I've given reasons as to why I see it that way. And while you might not see them as weak reasons, I do.

And I'm being civil, I'm not attacking your character or anything. What I've been tackling is your argument, because I believe your argument to be a poor one and that it sends a poor message. But I'll drop calling it ****** up, since I see that it's become a problem.

Simply put, I think your argument is not a good one and that it sets a bad precedent.

 

[Pikaman]

I will repeat - if we can't even have a civil discussion over the existence of the category, how can we have civil discussions over the contents of the category?

Because having a discussion about the existence of the category will be more controversial than on its contents, the former is a subjective discussion, the other is an objective ruling. You said you wouldn’t touch discussions on Yamato

with a ten foot pole.

And yet it was a very simple decision to make, because it was based on objective facts. Categorising stuff is very simple, y/n for if it belongs in a certain category. Here the question is “Is this character officially gay, bi, trans, or otherwise LGBTQIA+?” If so, add them to the category.

 

[Moritzva]

I have never made this implication. At all. You could be talking about something/someone else though so sorry ‘bout the misunderstanding if that’s the case lol



Again, the beginning stages of this will inherently be the bumpiest. Once we get our standards down, as we very almost have, there is 0 room for debate or discussion



It’s not necessary, neither are a whole bunch of other categories, neither is the addition of certain characters, neither is this wiki in the grand scheme of things. That doesn’t mean it can’t be something for people to appreciate



Duedate is LGBTQIA+


I am too, don’t act like our argument isn’t taking into consideration the opinion of the community it affects.

Also, we’re talking of all the potential trouble here, if you want to avoid that just… do so?

There’s been numerous members including staff who have voiced their support for this category, and you’re not magically inclined to moderate it, there’s other people willing to moderate this category, why should we restrict them from doing so because you personally feel you have greater priorities?

I did not say you made this implication. Duedate did.

I do not agree that things will get any better, nor do I want to run into those initial bumps.

Saying "the wiki isn't necessary" really isn't at all related to the topic at hand.

I know.

Simply staying that we can attempt to moderate it is a poor argument given that we have attempted to moderate discussions in the past, and it went extremely badly. Amelia's recent thread featuring many overly harmful and harsh claims wasn't properly moderated in the slightest by the users there at the time, and staff members have participated in the shit-flinging of past incidents.

Saying "staff will moderate them just fine" simply isn't true, as it hasn't worked in the past.

I am not going to continue to reiterate myself. I do believe I have received a significant amount of support, enough to pause any further progress with this category until it is resolved.

 

[Moritzva]

Because having a discussion about the existence of the category will be more controversial than on its contents, the former is a subjective discussion, the other is an objective ruling. You said you wouldn’t touch discussions on Yamato

And yet it was a very simple decision to make, because it was based on objective facts. Categorising stuff is very simple, y/n for if it belongs in a certain category. Here the question is “Is this character officially gay, bi, trans, or otherwise LGBTQIA+?” If so, add them to the category.

Yamato, as said, is an entirely different topic. Stop bringing up Yamato. Yamato's transgenderism is not an objective fact. Yamato's official gender is not a fully agreed upon subject, we just list them as male because Fandom has made up their mind and we don't want to get banned.

Now, I've made my points. If people disagree, that's fine, but as someone who has seen these debates and has an obligation to moderate them, this is an incredibly poor decision and I dearly hope we do not move forward with this category.

 

[Moritzva]

In fact, for brevity, can we have a simple tally of votes over who agrees the category should be allowed and who shouldn't? Leave a post, or if you don't want to do that, leave a like on this post specifically if you would prefer for the category to not be allowed. Naturally, leave a post if you want the category to be allowed.

 

[Dereck03]

leave a like on this post specifically if you would prefer for the category to not be allowed

The best way to gain likes eh.

Anyway, i'd agree with Moritzva here.

 

[Pikaman]

I did not say you made this implication. Duedate did.

My bad then

I do not agree that things will get any better

Agree to disagree

nor do I want to run into those initial bumps

This discussion right now is quite literally the initial bumps. We have a definitive description that is objective in nature, we have a category created, this discussion in whether to now delete the category is quite literally the last hurdle in the creation of this category, at which point the initial heat passes, after that it’s just… there. If people want to add stuff to the category they will, if somebody moderating the category notices something sketch they can ask the user who added the character for reasoning, deem if it’s sufficient, and go on with their day after taking appropriate action

Saying "the wiki isn't necessary" really isn't at all related to the topic at hand.

Strawman, my point is that things don’t have to be “necessary” to be good or useful, you just took a few words out of context here

 

[Pikaman]

In fact, for brevity, can we have a simple tally of votes over who agrees the category should be allowed and who shouldn't? Leave a post, or if you don't want to do that, leave a like on this post specifically if you would prefer for the category to not be allowed. Naturally, leave a post if you want the category to be allowed.

Ok that sounds fair

Like Moritzva’s post above if you agree with the deletion of the category, like this one right here if you wish for it to stay

 

[Moritzva]

Strawman, my point is that things don’t have to be “necessary” to be good or useful, you just took a few words out of context here

Nothing about that is a strawman, you compared "LGBT tags are unnecessary" to "The entire wiki is unnecessary", which is a ridiculous claim.

 

[Overlord775]

I feel this is not the best of ideas, as the category would just turn into a targets list for LGBT hate

 

[Maverick_Zero_X]

I agree with Moritzva's recent arguments.

 

[Pikaman]

Nothing about that is a strawman, you compared "LGBT tags are unnecessary" to "The entire wiki is unnecessary", which is a ridiculous claim.

I said that there’s a whole lot of things that are unnecessary, including this wiki in the grand scheme of things, it’s still a good thing the wiki is here. As does it make me happy that the LGBTQIA+ Characters category (currently) exists

 

[Listentomyrhytm]

Disagree on having the categories in. This wiki is not civil enough to have a discussion about Bridget or any similar chars who cause a lot of discussion on gender.

 

[Promestein]

I'm neutral, leaning towards 'no', personally. There's evidently a lot of debate to be had about certain characters and it's best if we avoid going through all that trouble to begin with, as Mori's already said. A lot of characters have very ambiguous situations there as well.

I'm also generally against excessive categories and want a lot of them removed, so this one feels just unnecessary to me, even as a lesbian.

 

[Pikaman]

I feel this is not the best of ideas, as the category would just turn into a targets list for LGBT hate

If people direct homophobia or other bigoted attacks on the category just ban them for vandalism fuelled by hatred or smth, vandalism is an issue across the whole wiki

This wiki is not civil enough to have a discussion about Bridget

We literally already had a discussion about Bridget. That happened very recently.

 

[Listentomyrhytm]

If people direct homophobia or other bigoted attacks on the category just ban them for vandalism fuelled by hatred or smth, vandalism is an issue across the whole wiki

We literally already had a discussion about Bridget. That happened very recently.

Yeah, but we are going to have it again and again, people will constantly take it to CRT, provide scans, argue about it. And not just Bridget, it can happen with other chars. This wiki in the grand scheme is not ready or civilized enough to have those, and I believe it would be constant.

 

[Pikaman]

Yeah, but we are going to have it again and again, people will constantly take it to CRT, provide scans, argue about it.

Genuinely what makes you

A: Think this will happen and not just immediately get shut down if it happens anyways

B: Be aided or caused at all by the creation of this category

 

[Overlord775]

If people direct homophobia or other bigoted attacks on the category just ban them for vandalism fuelled by hatred or smth, vandalism is an issue across the whole wiki

Why just not put there the kindle for the fire? It's exponentially better to prevent the shitstorm from happening then to just try to quell it.

 

[Antvasima]

Well, I obviously want to avoid as much controversy as possible, and if we keep this category, there will likely be lots of agitated arguments in this forum, and a massive amount of hard to verify inaccurate additions to it, but given that many people here and otherwise seem very prone to assume that anybody who has any unconventional views about this issue is an automatic hardcore bigot, I also don't want to have to deal with further attack threads against me, so maybe somebody else, such as Abstractions or Andytrenom, should remove it if that is what we decide?

We might be able to mitigate the upcoming problems by starting a single ongoing discussion thread wherein it is required to get approvals for adding this category to any character pages, and the specific posts in which any additions have been approved need to be linked to in the edit summary boxes for the affected pages in conjunction, and the participants of these threads, particularly the staff members, all need to make a continuous serious effort to handle the issue very responsibly by demanding very convincing officially sanctioned blatant evidence for any characters that might get the category, or be thread-banned from further participation in it if they simply try to add it to some of their favorite characters regardless if it makes good sense or not.

I also think that we should split the category into "Homosexual Characters", "Bisexual Characters", and "Transgendered" characters instead, in order to keep the indexing process far more self-evident and straightforward to handle.