• 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.

My "The Average Human" profile discussion thread

H3110l12345I20

H3110l12345I20

He/Him
4,484
2,365
^^^ I have this huge outdated profile of the average joe. And I'll set up a general discussion thread here.

I'll be usually contributing to the profile during Saturdays, at least 1 hr a week

Top Question
Namely the fact that the rules make the argument that it's inappropriate for underaged people to debate killing IRL people. Should this be a good argument against the profile existing?

Though ironically enough, there were arguments in the real world human profiles thread against this that Bambu didn't address. And he thought that there were no counterarguments against him.

Secondary top question
How good of a feat is it to withstand punching into a window like that (biomechanics, hardnes of the window, etc)

Orìginal video is here
  • Increase Profile Readability
    • Link Dump all feats I've found and organize them
  • Update Each Section to have accurate info
    • Give the profile's modern human section w/ tech or prep abilities and equipment

  • First things first, should we give the average guy abilities for their optional equipment? What about for with preparation?
  • Why shouldn't the profile be published? (answer)
 
Last edited:
H3110l12345I20 said:
^^^ I have this huge outdated profile of the average joe. And I'll set up a general discussion thread here.
Click to expand...
Even if it's outdated, it still looks good. I also find it funny how you put a citation for how names vary depending on the individual. Like, yeah buddy, I would know, because I'm a human, so I don't need to verify whether or not it's true! 😆
First things first, should we give the average guy abilities for their optional equipment? What about for with preparation?
Click to expand...
As long as what the optional equipment and preparation can do qualify as abilities, I don't see why not.
 
James_Plays_4_Games said:
Even if it's outdated, it still looks good. I also find it funny how you put a citation for how names vary depending on the individual. Like, yeah buddy, I would know, because I'm a human, so I don't need to verify whether or not it's true! 😆
Click to expand...
Back then, I didn't know that common sense stuff didn't need to be cited. And about citation overkill. Truth be told, as a person that wants to treat the profile like any profile on site, should the "don't delete info already on profile for space" be necessary here? Like is it ok already if there's a citation for a common sense thing?

In regards to my opinion of the profile. It has a lot of missing feats and parts should be shortened/modified heavily for readability. I mistaken durability for survival, etc.

In my experience, if you ask me how good of a combatant a regular person is...
  • Under adrenaline, we can get very strong and quick. And we're very capable of fending for ourselves physically; we're capable overpowering 10-B predators and savage dogs, and we can potentially one-shot a person slightly stronger than us.
  • The problem is, we're not very skilled fighters, much like the case for Gale Weathers. We also rely on no-selling rather than material withstanding forces for our durability.
James_Plays_4_Games said:
As long as what the optional equipment and preparation can do qualify as abilities, I don't see why not.
Click to expand...
That's the problem. With preparation, we can do all sorts of stuff that would count as an infohazard. Like there might be a drawn line where it would get unethical to for example... state that we're capable of "X illegal thing" that anyone has access to.
 
And truth be told, my 100 K+ byte profile here is actually a sandbox where much of my editing exp comes from. And as you can tell from the composite human and tree profile, my experience has built up successfully since then.
 
H3110l12345I20 said:
Back then, I didn't know that common sense stuff didn't need to be cited. And about citation overkill. Truth be told, as a person that wants to treat the profile like any profile on site, should the "don't delete info already on profile for space" be necessary here? Like is it ok already if there's a citation for a common sense thing?
Click to expand...
I don't have a problem with everything having citations. I just thought it was funny, which is a good thing, and a profile having information is a good thing.
In regards to my opinion of the profile. It has a lot of missing feats and parts should be shortened/modified heavily for readability. I mistaken durability for survival, etc.

In my experience, if you ask me how good of a combatant a regular person is...
  • Under adrenaline, we can get very strong and quick. And we're very capable of fending for ourselves physically; we're capable overpowering 10-B predators and savage dogs, and we can potentially one-shot a person slightly stronger than us.
  • The problem is, we're not very skilled fighters, much like the case for Gale Weathers. We also rely on no-selling rather than material withstanding forces for our durability.
Click to expand...
H3110l12345I20 said:
And truth be told, my 100 K+ byte profile here is actually a sandbox where much of my editing exp comes from. And as you can tell from the composite human and tree profile, my experience has built up successfully since then.
Click to expand...
Yes, I have seen your more recent feats of profile creation. 👍
That's the problem. With preparation, we can do all sorts of stuff that would count as an infohazard. Like there might be a drawn line where it would get unethical to for example... state that we're capable of "X illegal thing" that anyone has access to.
Click to expand...
Going along with how this is an average human, I recommend researching about average human willingness to act and something like what the average is for criminal activity versus refusal to do criminal activity.
 
James_Plays_4_Games said:
Going along with how this is an average human, I recommend researching about average human willingness to act and something like what the average is for criminal activity versus refusal to do criminal activity.
Click to expand...
Good for research, but... the reason why there's not avg human profile is that this is a fictional indexing website.
  • We only do IRL profiles as a reference point. And not only we virtually survived without an avg human profile for 14 years. Staff find it unethical and not appropriate to have a matchbanned profile that's basically info on people still breathing. That's why I'm hesitant on including criminal info stuffs.
  • Not to mention the amount of stuff the average person could do with prep is endless. Where's the line drawn with the average guy with prep and composite human?

I've debated a lot regarding the existence on having such a profile official with Deleted Username. And despite it not being likely to be official on site, Deleted Username could get very far in the debate if it were to happen on a staff thread. Not sure what's your view on the profile here.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
H3110l12345I20 said:
Good for research, but... the reason why there's not avg human profile is that this is a fictional indexing website.
  • We only do IRL profiles as a reference point. And not only we virtually survived without an avg human profile for 14 years. Staff find it unethical and not appropriate to have a matchbanned profile that's basically info on people still breathing. That's why I'm hesitant on including criminal info stuffs.
  • Not to mention the amount of stuff the average person could do with prep is endless. Where's the line drawn with the average guy with prep and composite human?

I've debated a lot regarding the existence on having such a profile official with Deleted Username. And despite it not being likely to be official on site, Deleted Username could get very far in the debate if it were to happen on a staff thread. Not sure what's your view on the profile here.
Click to expand...
I didn't know about what you wrote in the first point, but at the same time, I assumed you were going to post this on the Joke Battles Wiki anyway. I understand. If you aim for the average human profile to be on the VS Battles Wiki, then I guess you should exclude preparation abilities unless the VS Battles Wiki's stance changes.

As for where to draw the line with preparation: I suppose you should keep it general. As an example of what to avoid, countless average humans had the potential to have theoretically became a government leader, but I think they would've no longer counted as average humans if they did, since being a government leader is too specific and grand.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
James_Plays_4_Games said:
I didn't know about what you wrote in the first point, but at the same time, I assumed you were going to post this on the Joke Battles Wiki anyway. I understand. If you aim for the average human profile to be on the VS Battles Wiki, then I guess you should exclude preparation abilities unless the VS Battles Wiki's stance changes.

As for where to draw the line with preparation: I suppose you should keep it general. As an example of what to avoid, countless average humans had the potential to have theoretically became a government leader, but I think they would've no longer counted as average humans if they did, since being a government leader is too specific and grand.
Click to expand...
Posting it on joke battles is a good idea either, considering they don't want VSBW rejects as their rules state. It would survive for a bit due to the staff shortage, but having the profile there isn't a long term solution.

Thanks for the advice on the "with preparation" part.
 
H3110l12345I20 said:
Posting it on joke battles is a good idea either, considering they don't want VSBW rejects as their rules state. It would survive for a bit due to the staff shortage, but having the profile there isn't a long term solution.
Click to expand...
Rather than merely being for what the VS Battles Wiki doesn't allow, I was thinking of it as being in the same way of those composite real life entity profiles, but unlike Composite Human, an average human profile would be a lot more grounded, restricting itself to what is common rather than allowing peak human capabilities. Composite Human was originally associated with the VS Battles Wiki long ago, as you know, and yet the Joke Battles Wiki allows that profile and similar ones.
Thanks for the advice on the "with preparation" part.
Click to expand...
I'm glad to help. 👍
 
James_Plays_4_Games said:
Rather than merely being for what the VS Battles Wiki doesn't allow, I was thinking of it as being in the same way of those composite real life entity profiles, but unlike Composite Human, an average human profile would be a lot more grounded, restricting itself to what is common rather than allowing peak human capabilities. Composite Human was originally associated with the VS Battles Wiki long ago, as you know, and yet the Joke Battles Wiki allows that profile and similar ones.
Click to expand...
That's because they're composites; profiles without a Canon. And some of them can be subjectively jokes. Look at composite tree for example.

The average human in a sense, does have a canon via our IRL timeline. It would be booted out of JBW with time
 
It's about time I decided to copy-paste some of my notes from my doc.
{{!}}-{{!}}With preparation and technology=
{{#tag:tabber|
{{!}}-{{!}}
Abilities=<div class="scrollable" style="overflow:auto; max-height:510px; width:{{{width|100%}}}; -moz-border-radius-topleft:0.5em; border:1px solid #AAAAAA; padding-left:0.5em; background:transparent;">
*'''[[Superhuman Physical Characteristics]]''' (Technology can exceed any person in real life by strength, speed or durability)

*‘’’Potentially [[Peak Human Physical Characteristics|Peak Human Physical Condition]]'''

*'''[[Acid Manipulation]]''' and '''[[Fragrance Manipulation]]''' (Via scent-based sprays, stink bombs and acidic cleaners)

*'''[[Adhesive Manipulation]]''' (By a first-aid kit’s duct tape)

*'''[[Damage Reduction]]''' (By blast-resistant suits and bullet body armor reducing the potential damage of piercing objects)

*'''[[Durability Negation]]'''

*'''[[Explosion Manipulation]]''' (By legal and illegal IEDs, and explosives)

*'''[[Fire Manipulation]]''', (By flame-based tools and incendiaries)

*'''[[Martial Arts]]'''

*'''[[Fire Manipulation|Fire]] [[Power Nullification|Negation]]''' (By fire extinguishers)

*'''[[Healing]]''' ('''[[Regeneration|Mid-Low]]''' via a first-aid kits’s equipment disinfectants, tourniquets, and bandages. Also has medications)

*'''[[Light Manipulation]]''' (Can use the torch button on their phone, flashlights, turn on decorations and the lights of their car, and should have either popular electronic devices to light up their surroundings)

*'''Limited [[Animal Manipulation]]''' (Can train their pets to obey commands with [ operant conditioning])

*'''[[Smoke Manipulation]]''' and '''[[Status Effect Inducement]]''' (By tear gas, medication errors from first-aid kits)

*'''[[Statistics Amplification]]''' (Via glasses and stimulants)

*'''[[Water Manipulation|Water]] [[Absorption]]''' (By various cleaning supplies, paper towels and [ towels])

*'''[[Weapon Mastery]]'''

*Potentially more abilities (Can gain any skill set/ability available to them in the real world)</div>
{{!}}-{{!}}Resistances=<div class="scrollable" style="overflow:auto; max-height:510px; width:{{{width|100%}}}; -moz-border-radius-topleft:0.5em; border:1px solid #AAAAAA; padding-left:0.5em; background:transparent;">
'''[[Resistance]]''' to:

*'''[[Explosion Manipulation]]''', '''[[Fire Manipulation]]''' and '''[[Temperature Manipulation|Extreme Heat]]''' (Via blast-resistant suits)

*'''[[Technology Manipulation|Technological Damage]] [[Power Nullification|and Disablement]]''' and '''[[Electricity Manipulation|Electro]][[Magnetism Manipulation|magnetic]] [[Radiation Manipulation|Radiation]]''' (Items like microwaves and cars can function like faraday cages) and potentially more resistances (Can get more resistances with enough time)

*'''[[Pain Manipulation|Pain]]''' (Via a first-aid kit’s pain relievers)</div>}}}}<br><br> |

Also, for shortening the main stat sections. Which should we do?

This? (simplified; put the rest of the feats in a "feat" section of the profile):

Varies (Depends on the size, strength and weight of the person) from '''Human level''' to '''Human level+''' (Can fight evenly with and overpower people and a [[Gray Wolf|wide]] [[American Pit Bull|variety]] of predators and other [[White-tailed Deer|animals]] on their level), Varies from '''Human level+''' to '''Athlete level''' via Hysterical strength (Hysterical strength puts a human's strength from 67% to 100%, making them 1.538 times stronger than normal and stronger than chimpanzees)

->

Varies (Depends on the size, strength and weight of the person) from '''Human level''' to '''Human level+''' (Can fight evenly with and overpower people and a wide variety of predators and other animals on their level), Varies from '''Human level+''' to '''Athlete level''' via Hysterical strength (Hysterical strength puts a human's strength from 67% to 100%, making them 1.538 times stronger than normal and stronger than chimpanzees)


or this? (feat list goes in the AP section): Varies (Depends on the size, strength and weight of the person) from '''Human level''' to '''Human level+''' (Can fight evenly with and overpower people, and a [[Gray Wolf|wide]] [[American Pit Bull|variety]] of predators and other [[White-tailed Deer|animals]] on their level. Snapped the neck of a deer, can overpower and fight evenly with wolves and weakened leopards on their level. Older people and even regular people are capable of overpowering large, and even savage [[American Pit Bull|dogs]] given the chance. Can fend off cephalopod attacks of a weight range similar to themselves. etc), Varies from '''Human level+''' to '''Athlete level''' via Hysterical strength (Hysterical strength puts a human's strength from 67% to 100%, making them 1.538 times stronger than normal and stronger than chimpanzees)

Obviously, I'll provide scans. But should we simplify the AP sections and put a lot of the feats in a feat section for easier reading, or do we lump the strength feats in their respective stat sections?
 
H3110l12345I20 said:
It's about time I decided to copy-paste some of my notes from my doc.
{{!}}-{{!}}With preparation and technology=
{{#tag:tabber|
{{!}}-{{!}}
Abilities=<div class="scrollable" style="overflow:auto; max-height:510px; width:{{{width|100%}}}; -moz-border-radius-topleft:0.5em; border:1px solid #AAAAAA; padding-left:0.5em; background:transparent;">
*'''[[Superhuman Physical Characteristics]]''' (Technology can exceed any person in real life by strength, speed or durability)

*‘’’Potentially [[Peak Human Physical Characteristics|Peak Human Physical Condition]]'''

*'''[[Acid Manipulation]]''' and '''[[Fragrance Manipulation]]''' (Via scent-based sprays, stink bombs and acidic cleaners)

*'''[[Adhesive Manipulation]]''' (By a first-aid kit’s duct tape)

*'''[[Damage Reduction]]''' (By blast-resistant suits and bullet body armor reducing the potential damage of piercing objects)

*'''[[Durability Negation]]'''

*'''[[Explosion Manipulation]]''' (By legal and illegal IEDs, and explosives)

*'''[[Fire Manipulation]]''', (By flame-based tools and incendiaries)

*'''[[Martial Arts]]'''

*'''[[Fire Manipulation|Fire]] [[Power Nullification|Negation]]''' (By fire extinguishers)

*'''[[Healing]]''' ('''[[Regeneration|Mid-Low]]''' via a first-aid kits’s equipment disinfectants, tourniquets, and bandages. Also has medications)

*'''[[Light Manipulation]]''' (Can use the torch button on their phone, flashlights, turn on decorations and the lights of their car, and should have either popular electronic devices to light up their surroundings)

*'''Limited [[Animal Manipulation]]''' (Can train their pets to obey commands with [ operant conditioning])

*'''[[Smoke Manipulation]]''' and '''[[Status Effect Inducement]]''' (By tear gas, medication errors from first-aid kits)

*'''[[Statistics Amplification]]''' (Via glasses and stimulants)

*'''[[Water Manipulation|Water]] [[Absorption]]''' (By various cleaning supplies, paper towels and [ towels])

*'''[[Weapon Mastery]]'''

*Potentially more abilities (Can gain any skill set/ability available to them in the real world)</div>
{{!}}-{{!}}Resistances=<div class="scrollable" style="overflow:auto; max-height:510px; width:{{{width|100%}}}; -moz-border-radius-topleft:0.5em; border:1px solid #AAAAAA; padding-left:0.5em; background:transparent;">
'''[[Resistance]]''' to:

*'''[[Explosion Manipulation]]''', '''[[Fire Manipulation]]''' and '''[[Temperature Manipulation|Extreme Heat]]''' (Via blast-resistant suits)

*'''[[Technology Manipulation|Technological Damage]] [[Power Nullification|and Disablement]]''' and '''[[Electricity Manipulation|Electro]][[Magnetism Manipulation|magnetic]] [[Radiation Manipulation|Radiation]]''' (Items like microwaves and cars can function like faraday cages) and potentially more resistances (Can get more resistances with enough time)

*'''[[Pain Manipulation|Pain]]''' (Via a first-aid kit’s pain relievers)</div>}}}}<br><br> |
Click to expand...
Great job preparing that. 👍
Also, for shortening the main stat sections. Which should we do?

This? (simplified; put the rest of the feats in a "feat" section of the profile):

Varies (Depends on the size, strength and weight of the person) from '''Human level''' to '''Human level+''' (Can fight evenly with and overpower people and a [[Gray Wolf|wide]] [[American Pit Bull|variety]] of predators and other [[White-tailed Deer|animals]] on their level), Varies from '''Human level+''' to '''Athlete level''' via Hysterical strength (Hysterical strength puts a human's strength from 67% to 100%, making them 1.538 times stronger than normal and stronger than chimpanzees)

->

Varies (Depends on the size, strength and weight of the person) from '''Human level''' to '''Human level+''' (Can fight evenly with and overpower people and a wide variety of predators and other animals on their level), Varies from '''Human level+''' to '''Athlete level''' via Hysterical strength (Hysterical strength puts a human's strength from 67% to 100%, making them 1.538 times stronger than normal and stronger than chimpanzees)


or this? (feat list goes in the AP section): Varies (Depends on the size, strength and weight of the person) from '''Human level''' to '''Human level+''' (Can fight evenly with and overpower people, and a [[Gray Wolf|wide]] [[American Pit Bull|variety]] of predators and other [[White-tailed Deer|animals]] on their level. Snapped the neck of a deer, can overpower and fight evenly with wolves and weakened leopards on their level. Older people and even regular people are capable of overpowering large, and even savage [[American Pit Bull|dogs]] given the chance. Can fend off cephalopod attacks of a weight range similar to themselves. etc), Varies from '''Human level+''' to '''Athlete level''' via Hysterical strength (Hysterical strength puts a human's strength from 67% to 100%, making them 1.538 times stronger than normal and stronger than chimpanzees)

Obviously, I'll provide scans. But should we simplify the AP sections and put a lot of the feats in a feat section for easier reading, or do we lump the strength feats in their respective stat sections?
Click to expand...
I suppose listing the feats in a Feats section would be better, if that's easier to read. The two options you proposed don't seem a lot different than each other in the way they're written here though.
 
Can this profile not be published to the wiki? I know Composite Human got shut down, but I was told that was mainly due to rules against compositing.

I assume we could get into some trouble with users using Average Human as specific IRL individuals, but surely that could be fixed with a rule specific to this profile.
 
ShockingPsychic said:
Can this profile not be published to the wiki? I know Composite Human got shut down, but I was told that was mainly due to rules against compositing.

I assume we could get into some trouble with users using Average Human as specific IRL individuals, but surely that could be fixed with a rule specific to this profile.
Click to expand...
Deleted Username and I have discussed this, and the debate.

Overall. The debate could've continued, but 90% of it has been debated. And I'm surprised that Aurora could get very far into a moral and practical debate on this.

Long story short (read the bolded parts for a short rundown). Put yourself in the position in staff. You don't want the wiki to get sued and taken down by real people, not to mention that this is a fictional indexing wiki that allows IRL animal profiles as a reference point.

At the end of the debate. These points are the likely points staff will fall upon.
  • We already have a thread onto why we shouldn't have IRL human profiles, and even though you could argue the judgment of Mr. Bambu was somewhat skewed due to BigSmoke's behavior on-site. We still have other reasons why such a profile is disallowed.
  • While we do have stuff on-site that arguably could be used to kill people that are still breathing, they're more appropriate to have on-site since they're not only not people that could sue us. Even then, it's inappropriate for people on site (especially underaged users) to debate the killing of IRL people. And we're not debating the killing of IRL people.
    • I personally find the last point weird. You could literally do 10-B street fight matches no problem on-site(there's some against Ned Leeds and Sayori), not to mention they're like real people.
      • If the brutality and ethics of debating IRL people is a problem (even with not-so or low controversial people), then wouldn't the excuse that they're fictional characters downplay the brutality of these said matches? They're just as brutal and terrifying as IRL street fights.
  • If the minor details on IRL avg people are that special, then why not put it in a reference blog? They unlike IRL animals are still real people and the profile is (close to) real people
    • And Aurora countered the point here by suggesting we do the same to all IRL animal profiles.
    • But the staff will still hold the point that this profile is still close to IRL people.
    • This technically means that staff morally uphold people more than animals. Morality is subjective, though Aurora thinks that doesn't mean all animals have equal life as us.
  • We (us users) are the human species.
    • A person can read what it would take to kill a person by knowing what stuff a regular human can't withstand, their weaknesses and limitations, etc. That same person could use the information to kill someone and the survivors of that person could sue the wiki.
      • The profile has indirect information on how 2 kill a person. Though Aurora says plenty of wikis have stuff that would kill a human and they're fine (Coco has poison, our wiki has plenty of IRL weapons, etc)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
H3110l12345I20 said:
Spoiler: Illegal abilities sources
Click to expand...
Added this section of the profile.

Judging by the sources here, these new equipment and abilities can be added (source I'm currently on to research:
) vvv

Equipment​

Has but aren't limited to Household items​

(most are optional equipment, so only note those that most people don't have immediate access to, or are directly and practically combat applicable. The only exception would be standard equipment due to it's far smaller list to index)

A-M (optional)​

  • Dust Mask
  • Firearms
    • Handgun
  • Fire Extinguisher
  • First Aid Kit
  • Infant Products.
  • Manual Can-opener
  • Melee

N-Z (optional)​

Standard (most are from here)​

  • Keychain
  • Cellphone
  • Wallet
 
Last edited:
H3110l12345I20 said:
Should the avg human have electricity bestowal via batteries or similarly mundane and small abilities? I think they're above average in ability since they're optional equipment (not everyone has them), and you could give an ability like bodily weaponry to a user that has a bite that can't pierce flesh. But I'm unsure since common sense says they're way too mundane 😵.
Click to expand...
^^^
 
Last edited:
H3110l12345I20 said:
Should the avg human have electricity bestowal via batteries or similarly mundane and small abilities? I think they're above average in ability since they're optional equipment (not everyone has them), and you could give an ability like bodily weaponry to a user that has a bite that can't pierce flesh. But I'm unsure since common sense says they're way too mundane 😵.
Click to expand...
I understand what you mean, but electricity bestowal via batteries wouldn't coincide with how having a flashlight doesn't count as having light manipulation without further benefits. You're better off not adding it.
 
James_Plays_4_Games said:
I understand what you mean, but electricity bestowal via batteries wouldn't coincide with how having a flashlight doesn't count as having light manipulation without further benefits. You're better off not adding it.
Click to expand...
Much of Catzlaflame's arguments rely on the fact that flashlights are too mundane enough to be notable and a weapon.

Fundementally, a power/ability should be on the profile if it's above average than a human.
  • If your senses or abilities are like, 1% better than average people (like having better hand-to-hand fighting ability than most) or if you're an animal that has piercing damage that can't pierce flesh (as stated by Crabwhale), that would overall count strangely.
    • So where do we draw the line in optional equipment if we can have stat amp via drugs in optional equipment? Anyone can technically take stimulants to amplify themselves physically as much as they can put in fresh new batteries in flashlights.
  • The primary reason why flashlights aren't allowed on profiles is because virtually, everyone has a flashlight via their phones. If it's a flashlight that's better than most flashlights like CH's flashlight, it would count.
 
H3110l12345I20 said:
Much of Catzlaflame's arguments rely on the fact that flashlights are too mundane enough to be notable and a weapon.

Fundementally, a power/ability should be on the profile if it's above average than a human.
  • If your senses or abilities are like, 1% better than average people (like having better hand-to-hand fighting ability than most) or if you're an animal that has piercing damage that can't pierce flesh (as stated by Crabwhale), that would overall count strangely.
    • So where do we draw the line in optional equipment if we can have stat amp via drugs in optional equipment? Anyone can technically take stimulants to amplify themselves physically as much as they can put in fresh new batteries in flashlights.
  • The primary reason why flashlights aren't allowed on profiles is because virtually, everyone has a flashlight via their phones. If it's a flashlight that's better than most flashlights like CH's flashlight, it would count.
Click to expand...
Aside from the established rule of thumb where an ability should be notable and not mundane, rather than a technicality, I don't know precisely where to draw the line. However, my laptop's mouse has a battery in it that I have to replace multiple times a year for it to work, yet I've never thought of it as me bestowing electricity in the mouse until now. Perhaps batteries bestowing electricity is so minor and limited that it's not worth mentioning, hence why a lot of profiles of fictional characters don't mention it. Maybe what qualifies as an ability is also judged based on how familiar we are with the function, rather than only how mundane it is. That's just me brainstorming though. I recommend that you ask someone else what they think of my answer.

Keep in mind that a lot of the time, "none notable" can be seen in the Standard Equipment section of character profiles, which doesn't mean those characters have no standard equipment, it just means the creators of the profiles didn't want to list the characters' clothes and various random little items that wouldn't realistically make much of a difference in a battle. We can furthermore deduce that, when a super scientist such as Dr. Eggman from the Sonic the Hedgehog series, Dr. Wily from the Mega Man series, Dr. Doofenshmirtz from Phineas and Ferb or Golf Ball from Battle for Dream Island don't have batteries listed in the equipment sections of their profiles, it's not because they don't have access to batteries, it's because the creators of the profiles didn't believe batteries were notable enough to list.
 
James_Plays_4_Games said:
Aside from the established rule of thumb where an ability should be notable and not mundane, rather than a technicality, I don't know precisely where to draw the line. However, my laptop's mouse has a battery in it that I have to replace multiple times a year for it to work, yet I've never thought of it as me bestowing electricity in the mouse until now. Perhaps batteries bestowing electricity is so minor and limited that it's not worth mentioning, hence why a lot of profiles of fictional characters don't mention it. Maybe what qualifies as an ability is also judged based on how familiar we are with the function, rather than only how mundane it is. That's just me brainstorming though. I recommend that you ask someone else what they think of my answer.

Keep in mind that a lot of the time, "none notable" can be seen in the Standard Equipment section of character profiles, which doesn't mean those characters have no standard equipment, it just means the creators of the profiles didn't want to list the characters' clothes and various random little items that wouldn't realistically make much of a difference in a battle. We can furthermore deduce that, when a super scientist such as Dr. Eggman from the Sonic the Hedgehog series, Dr. Wily from the Mega Man series, Dr. Doofenshmirtz from Phineas and Ferb or Golf Ball from Battle for Dream Island don't have batteries listed in the equipment sections of their profiles, it's not because they don't have access to batteries, it's because the creators of the profiles didn't believe batteries were notable enough to list.
Click to expand...
K. thanks for the input. I'll think ahead and try to draw the line myself. At this point, I'll withhold having batteries in optional equipment for now.

Wait, so what happens if a cyber/machine superpower requires "X" battery replacements to work? Should we ditch the batteries or keep them? Because both our mundane and some cyber superpowers require batteries to work. So do we ditch the batteries with even notable superpowers because of some notable superpowers? A cyber-based superpower like hacking or cyborgization wouldn't work without electricity.
 
H3110l12345I20 said:
Wait, so what happens if a cyber/machine superpower requires "X" battery replacements to work? Should we ditch the batteries or keep them? Because both our mundane and some cyber superpowers require batteries to work. So do we ditch the batteries with even notable superpowers because of some notable superpowers? A cyber-based superpower like hacking or cyborgization wouldn't work without electricity.
Click to expand...
I know that Remote from Battle for Dream Island has batteries listed in the Standard Equipment section of her profile, which is because she can't function without them, so in cases where batteries are too important to ignore about a character, they seem to get listed.

I feel like this isn't a matter entirely about standards, but more so about how extensively an equipment section is written. Did you notice how Light Yagami from Death Note has a Death Note listed in his Standard Equipment section, but nothing like a pen or pencil? I think that's just an oversight, not that writing equipment is irrelevant to the character. Moments ago, I added writing equipment to the section without a content revision thread, and I bet I won't get in trouble because no one discusses the character as if writing equipment is a rare resource.
 
The_King_of_Prudence said:
Given the other key in your Sandbox has it for starting fires, I think modern-day humans could do some things.
Click to expand...
Just because an entity can prepare "X" thing, that doesn't automatically mean we have the preparation ability. Anyone can prepare, that's the problem.

There are 2 unwritten rules we follow on-site to having abilities, and our preparation doesn't follow them.
  1. It has to be above average regular people in ability/capability. (bonus points if it's a superpower)
  2. It shouldn't be considered mundane to most people.
Now, does that mean prehistoric human shouldn't have stuff like fire creation? No. It's still notable since most people nowadays don't know how to make a fire in a forest. I could say the same thing for the other abilities prehistoric human has.
 
Fair, though we could prepare things they couldn't.
I guess "unfamiliarity with modern technology" would be a weakness for past humans.
We might want to put the bar a little lower, just to give a better idea of what they do (though that is a nice Standard Tactics section).
 
Last edited:
What does everyone think of this change? vvv
vvv
H3110l12345I20 said:
Dealing with the vagueness of optional equipment (I gave it a deep thought during work); the difference between "anyone can insert "X" battery" and "anyone can intake "X" stimulant" is the ease of access of the said ability. Anyone can locate a battery for "X" tech that has "X" superpowers if they search for it in their own homes. But not everyone has easy access to illegal drugs, hacking via computing devices, guns, body armor, etc.

Top suggestion to make adding abilities from optional equipment less vague here: So for optional equipment below the source "are examples of abilities that try to be distinct from regular people for this reason."...
  • *For optional equipment, abilities can be listed from each equipment if the average person doesn't have close/immediate access to each equipment's ability in their daily lives.
Click to expand...
Especally you James? ^^^
James_Plays_4_Games said:
I know that Remote from Battle for Dream Island has batteries listed in the Standard Equipment section of her profile, which is because she can't function without them, so in cases where batteries are too important to ignore about a character, they seem to get listed.

I feel like this isn't a matter entirely about standards, but more so about how extensively an equipment section is written. Did you notice how Light Yagami from Death Note has a Death Note listed in his Standard Equipment section, but nothing like a pen or pencil? I think that's just an oversight, not that writing equipment is irrelevant to the character. Moments ago, I added writing equipment to the section without a content revision thread, and I bet I won't get in trouble because no one discusses the character as if writing equipment is a rare resource.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
James_Plays_4_Games said:
I think you did well. Maybe "their daily lives in modern day" would be better than just "their daily lives," since batteries would be like magic before they existed, but I feel like people would assume that's what you mean either way.
Click to expand...
What do you think of this question James? This is especially relevant to speed too since we usually only have the leg bones of the animal.

vvv
H3110l12345I20 said:
Top Question
If our prehistoric ancestors didn't have the training, food, etc of our modern athletes, what should we do about the fact that they were stated/implied to have stronger muscles?

In archaeology, it's known that higher bone strength is proportional to muscle strength. They shouldn't have stronger bones than modern average athletes, and yet, some scans say they do have stronger bones.

www.discovermagazine.com

How Strong Were Ancient Humans? Modern-Day Athletes Are a Window to the Past

To uncover the habits of ancient humans, scientists are studying modern sports stars.
www.discovermagazine.com www.discovermagazine.com
phys.org

Modern men are wimps, according to new book

(PhysOrg.com) -- A new book claims even modern athletes could not run as fast, jump as high, or have been nearly as strong as our predecessors.
phys.org phys.org
I should remind everyone here that fossilization is a rare event that only occurs under specific circumstances, so unless "X" prehistoric animal is extensively studied or has a lot of (complete) remains, we should be careful about making assumptions about extinct animals.
Click to expand...
 
James_Plays_4_Games said:
Sorry, I'm not sure. I don't know the reliability of the sources, and I'm not familiar with how prehistoric humans were, so I'm not in a position to give a good answer.
Click to expand...
That's ok. I can always discuss my thoughts on this myself.

This actually stem fro Crabwhale's argument from awhile ago that they shouldn't surpass modern athletes on average due to a lack of modern advantages. However, if that were the case, they shouldn't have decently made bones [a sign of high physical activity in their daily lives].

Prehistoric humans were fairly athletic in regular life (if that weren't the case, they wouldn't be compared to some modern athletes in the sources).

I think what the argument was actually saying from the sources here was that prehistoric humans could get decently strong compared to most athletes or get relatively strong in some athletic fields. Which, I believe that the peak human running speed seems like a high-end outlier (albeit what they could potentially achieve in speed) given the limited info here.
  • Do you mind having my position in this paragraph as a final verdict on the official profile regarding prehistoric human?
 
H3110l12345I20 said:
That's ok. I can always discuss my thoughts on this myself.

This actually stem fro Crabwhale's argument from awhile ago that they shouldn't surpass modern athletes on average due to a lack of modern advantages. However, if that were the case, they shouldn't have decently made bones [a sign of high physical activity in their daily lives].

Prehistoric humans were fairly athletic in regular life (if that weren't the case, they wouldn't be compared to some modern athletes in the sources).

I think what the argument was actually saying from the sources here was that prehistoric humans could get decently strong compared to most athletes or get relatively strong in some athletic fields. Which, I believe that the peak human running speed seems like a high-end outlier (albeit what they could potentially achieve in speed) given the limited info here.
  • Do you mind having my position in this paragraph as a final verdict on the official profile regarding prehistoric human?
Click to expand...
I don't mind your position here being the verdict on the profile.
 
H3110l12345I20 said:
^^^ I have this huge outdated profile of the average joe. And I'll set up a general discussion thread here.

Top Question
If our prehistoric ancestors didn't have the training, food, etc of our modern athletes, what should we do about the fact that they were stated/implied to have stronger muscles?

In archaeology, it's known that higher bone strength is proportional to muscle strength. They shouldn't have stronger bones than modern average athletes, and yet, some scans say they do have stronger bones.

www.discovermagazine.com

How Strong Were Ancient Humans? Modern-Day Athletes Are a Window to the Past

To uncover the habits of ancient humans, scientists are studying modern sports stars.
www.discovermagazine.com www.discovermagazine.com

phys.org

Modern men are wimps, according to new book

(PhysOrg.com) -- A new book claims even modern athletes could not run as fast, jump as high, or have been nearly as strong as our predecessors.
phys.org phys.org

I should remind everyone here that fossilization is a rare event that only occurs under specific circumstances, so unless "X" prehistoric animal is extensively studied or has a lot of (complete) remains, we should be careful about making assumptions about extinct animals.

  • Increase Profile Readability
    • Link Dump all feats I've found and organize them
  • Update Each Section to have accurate info
    • Give the profile's modern human section w/ tech or prep abilities and equipment

  • First things first, should we give the average guy abilities for their optional equipment? What about for with preparation?
  • Why shouldn't the profile be published? (answer)
Click to expand...

H3110l12345I20 said:
Deleted Username and I have discussed this, and the debate.

Overall. The debate could've continued, but 90% of it has been debated. And I'm surprised that Aurora could get very far into a moral and practical debate on this.

Long story short (read the bolded parts for a short rundown). Put yourself in the position in staff. You don't want the wiki to get sued and taken down by real people, not to mention that this is a fictional indexing wiki that allows IRL animal profiles as a reference point.

At the end of the debate. These points are the likely points staff will fall upon.
  • We already have a thread onto why we shouldn't have IRL human profiles, and even though you could argue the judgment of Mr. Bambu was somewhat skewed due to BigSmoke's behavior on-site. We still have other reasons why such a profile is disallowed.
  • While we do have stuff on-site that arguably could be used to kill people that are still breathing, they're more appropriate to have on-site since they're not only not people that could sue us. Even then, it's inappropriate for people on site (especially underaged users) to debate the killing of IRL people. And we're not debating the killing of IRL people.
    • I personally find the last point weird. You could literally do 10-B street fight matches no problem on-site(there's some against Ned Leeds and Sayori), not to mention they're like real people.
      • If the brutality and ethics of debating IRL people is a problem (even with not-so or low controversial people), then wouldn't the excuse that they're fictional characters downplay the brutality of these said matches? They're just as brutal and terrifying as IRL street fights.
  • If the minor details on IRL avg people are that special, then why not put it in a reference blog? They unlike IRL animals are still real people and the profile is (close to) real people
    • And Aurora countered the point here by suggesting we do the same to all IRL animal profiles.
    • But the staff will still hold the point that this profile is still close to IRL people.
    • This technically means that staff morally uphold people more than animals. Morality is subjective, though Aurora thinks that doesn't mean all animals have equal life as us.
  • We (us users) are the human species.
    • A person can read what it would take to kill a person by knowing what stuff a regular human can't withstand, their weaknesses and limitations, etc. That same person could use the information to kill someone and the survivors of that person could sue the wiki.
      • The profile has indirect information on how 2 kill a person. Though Aurora says plenty of wikis have stuff that would kill a human and they're fine (Coco has poison, our wiki has plenty of IRL weapons, etc)
Click to expand...
The_King_of_Prudence said:
Fair, though we could prepare things they couldn't.
I guess "unfamiliarity with modern technology" would be a weakness for past humans.
We might want to put the bar a little lower, just to give a better idea of what they do (though that is a nice Standard Tactics section).
Click to expand...
ShockingPsychic said:
Can this profile not be published to the wiki? I know Composite Human got shut down, but I was told that was mainly due to rules against compositing.

I assume we could get into some trouble with users using Average Human as specific IRL individuals, but surely that could be fixed with a rule specific to this profile.
Click to expand...
James_Plays_4_Games said:
I don't mind your position here being the verdict on the profile.
Click to expand...
Before we settle the verdict, just want to quickly state a few points myself.

1: If I'm not wrong, the main rules about having real-life people is having SPECIFIC (mostly famous or otherwise notable, which also extends to stuff like targeting other people by either real or online name) real-life individuals as main subjects/topics of a wiki itself or a wiki/forum article/thread (so not as examples of feats or other less major parts of the discussion), so if we're talking about any general human or the human species as a whole (same as we do with other living beings in real life, thus addressing the point about moral standing of living beings with regard to comparing humans to other living beings), that should not pose an issue.

2: I find the "brutality and ethics" point as well as the "knowledge of how to kill people" point both a bit weird as well, because ironically enough, Wikipedia has detailed articles on how specific people have died as well as what stuff in the universe is deadly to us and how/why they are deadly (such as toxic chemicals and radiation and various types of injury, at times with graphic potential NSFW/NSFL imagery and/or details), and while I can understand that Fandom and forums do not have the same ruleset as Wikipedia and I agree about not discussing specific individuals and not using graphic imagery or details, there have been many brutal fictional and real events of the sort on various platforms of media.
Again, as a compromise, I would think discussing general means as to how any general real-life living being (so again, not specific named/famous/notable individuals) can be harmed and/or die (as well as how and why such means are life-threatening and otherwise harmful) in addition to how they can be helped and/or brought (back) to life or otherwise have their life sustained (as well as how and why such means are life-saving and otherwise helpful) would be overall acceptable to a degree in the name of information dissemination as long as we adhere to the above about not discussing specific individuals and not using graphic potential NSFW/NSFL imagery and/or details.

3: To be honest, I'd rather just keep the Composite Human profile and not use an Average Human profile since "average" is hard to define/measure and often subject to context and expectations which would lead us to a LOT of debating due to the inherent near-limitless potential we have (only limited by our resources and characteristics/traits), whereas peak of abilities is easier to define/measure, and due to our format on profiles, is easier to structure and leaves less room for debate.

4: Additionally, regarding prehistoric and modern humans (using perhaps the period of the starting of civilisations (the general part of human history where civilisations began to arise, as we transitioned from more active hunting and gathering to more sedentary agriculture) as the boundary for prehistoric vs modern), we should always keep in mind that the daily lives of those different types of humans are vastly different due to our different lifestyles and demands for sustainment of such lifestyles, which also correlate with the different features/characteristics/traits that were developed during the evolution of these different types of humans (H3, sorry, but I suggest that you look back to the articles I sent you about the archaic humans since they had details about their anatomy).
For example, we should consider that prehistoric humans would have to hunt large prey animals such as bison and compete with other predators such as the big cats and bears with relatively crude and primitive tools such as wooden fire-hardened and/or stone-tipped spears, clubs and perhaps bows and arrows as well as strategies/tactics like endurance hunting, whereas by the time civilisation arose and modern humans started to flourish, said modern humans would have domesticated animals and plants to either aid them or sustain them, and also developed more efficient and effective tactics and tools for defence and offence which could be used for both hunting and combat (as noted by depictions of gymnasiums and fighting techniques and weapons in ancient civilisations).

Is everyone OK with these points?
 
Mahek_The_Assassin_Silent_Killer said:
Before we settle the verdict, just want to quickly state a few points myself.

1: If I'm not wrong, the main rules about having real-life people is having SPECIFIC (mostly famous or otherwise notable, which also extends to stuff like targeting other people by either real or online name) real-life individuals as main subjects/topics of a wiki itself or a wiki/forum article/thread (so not as examples of feats or other less major parts of the discussion), so if we're talking about any general human or the human species as a whole (same as we do with other living beings in real life, thus addressing the point about moral standing of living beings with regard to comparing humans to other living beings), that should not pose an issue.

2: I find the "brutality and ethics" point as well as the "knowledge of how to kill people" point both a bit weird as well, because ironically enough, Wikipedia has detailed articles on how specific people have died as well as what stuff in the universe is deadly to us and how/why they are deadly (such as toxic chemicals and radiation and various types of injury, at times with graphic potential NSFW/NSFL imagery and/or details), and while I can understand that Fandom and forums do not have the same ruleset as Wikipedia and I agree about not discussing specific individuals and not using graphic imagery or details, there have been many brutal fictional and real events of the sort on various platforms of media.
Again, as a compromise, I would think discussing general means as to how any general real-life living being (so again, not specific named/famous/notable individuals) can be harmed and/or die (as well as how and why such means are life-threatening and otherwise harmful) in addition to how they can be helped and/or brought (back) to life or otherwise have their life sustained (as well as how and why such means are life-saving and otherwise helpful) would be overall acceptable to a degree in the name of information dissemination as long as we adhere to the above about not discussing specific individuals and not using graphic potential NSFW/NSFL imagery and/or details.

3: To be honest, I'd rather just keep the Composite Human profile and not use an Average Human profile since "average" is hard to define/measure and often subject to context and expectations which would lead us to a LOT of debating due to the inherent near-limitless potential we have (only limited by our resources and characteristics/traits), whereas peak of abilities is easier to define/measure, and due to our format on profiles, is easier to structure and leaves less room for debate.

4: Additionally, regarding prehistoric and modern humans (using perhaps the period of the starting of civilisations (the general part of human history where civilisations began to arise, as we transitioned from more active hunting and gathering to more sedentary agriculture) as the boundary for prehistoric vs modern), we should always keep in mind that the daily lives of those different types of humans are vastly different due to our different lifestyles and demands for sustainment of such lifestyles, which also correlate with the different features/characteristics/traits that were developed during the evolution of these different types of humans (H3, sorry, but I suggest that you look back to the articles I sent you about the archaic humans since they had details about their anatomy).
For example, we should consider that prehistoric humans would have to hunt large prey animals such as bison and compete with other predators such as the big cats and bears with relatively crude and primitive tools such as wooden fire-hardened and/or stone-tipped spears, clubs and perhaps bows and arrows as well as strategies/tactics like endurance hunting, whereas by the time civilisation arose and modern humans started to flourish, said modern humans would have domesticated animals and plants to either aid them or sustain them, and also developed more efficient and effective tactics and tools for defence and offence which could be used for both hunting and combat (as noted by depictions of gymnasiums and fighting techniques and weapons in ancient civilisations).

Is everyone OK with these points?
Click to expand...
Dang. Love the essay. Will address and sum up your points in a bit. Though I usually have extended efforts in putting effort into the profile on Saturdays or nearing the end of the week. So a response will come in a couple of days.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Naito-desu
Help an Average 10-B Human solo fiction
19 20 21
Replies
800
Views
26K
Jackpact
CCMBROTTERFN
Create the ultimate Lifeform from a Sea Otter
Replies
27
Views
1K
H3110l12345I20
H3110l12345I20
H3110l12345I20
Composite Human Vs Tournament
5 6 7
Replies
254
Views
20K
H3110l12345I20
H3110l12345I20
H3110l12345I20
A human tries to crack a peanut without closing their eyes (Composite Human (Real World) vs SCP-173)
Replies
14
Views
2K
H3110l12345I20
H3110l12345I20
ThePrimalHunter
2 Busted 9-Cs Fight (Composite Human vs Man In The Suit) (0-0-0)
Replies
7
Views
1K
Rayfire
Rayfire
Back
Top