Proposal for Rule Modification Regarding Controversial Haxes in Profile Creation

[TWILIGHT-OP]

I have observed a recurring issue within our community involving the creation of profiles featuring controversial haxes. To address this concern and ensure a more rigorous and standardized approach, I propose a modification to the existing rules governing profile creation.

Presently, the guidelines stipulate that a content revision thread (CRT) is mandatory only for Tier 1 profiles. However, I have identified instances, exemplified by recent profiles, where controversial haxes have been introduced without undergoing the CRT process.

The proposed modification advocates extending the CRT requirement to any profile introducing controversial haxes, not solely limited to Tier 1 profiles. This adjustment aims to maintain consistency and transparency in the evaluation of such abilities, ensuring they undergo scrutiny before being incorporated into the main profiles.

Minor revisions, typically involving simple abilities, are exempt from CRT unless they pertain to certain categories such as acausality (except type 1), concept manipulation, abstract existence, plot manipulation, information manipulation, causality manipulation, nonexistent physiology, or law manipulation. I suggest applying this exemption criterion to controversial haxes, particularly when incorporated into new profiles.

In essence, if a creator intends to incorporate controversial haxes into a new profile, they should be required to initiate a CRT for those abilities. This additional step will serve as a safeguard against potential misuse and uphold the integrity of our content creation process.

By implementing this rule modification, we can foster a more robust and accountable environment, reducing the likelihood of contentious abilities being introduced without due diligence. I believe this adjustment aligns with our shared commitment to maintaining the quality and credibility of the VS Battles Wiki.

Thank you for considering this proposal. I look forward to any feedback or discussions regarding this matter

 

[BestMGQScalerEver]

Sounds like more effort than it's worth tbh (also quite a few of "controversial" abilities are quite common in fiction). Well which you know will create a huge influx of CRTs which will overwhelm evaluating staff. Tier 1 isn't exactly rare but it's also not that common which is why them requiring CRTs work.

 

[TWILIGHT-OP]

Let wait for mods to come here.( if possible I want this to become a staff thread )

 

[ZillertheBucko]

No.

 

[Phoenks]

Nice ChatGPT 3.5 OP, anyway...

Yeah this definitely sounds like way too much effort for too little. If someone wrongly places an ability in a profile, just make a CRT about it.

 

[TWILIGHT-OP]

Nice ChatGPT 3.5 OP, anyway...

No, higher version
using the technology right way.

Yeah this definitely sounds like way too much effort for too little. If someone wrongly places an ability in a profile, just make a CRT about it.

Well yeah that will work too but that's only for tier 1 there.

 

[Jozaysmith?]

I have observed a recurring issue within our community involving the creation of profiles featuring controversial haxes. To address this concern and ensure a more rigorous and standardized approach, I propose a modification to the existing rules governing profile creation.

Presently, the guidelines stipulate that a content revision thread (CRT) is mandatory only for Tier 1 profiles. However, I have identified instances, exemplified by recent profiles, where controversial haxes have been introduced without undergoing the CRT process.

The proposed modification advocates extending the CRT requirement to any profile introducing controversial haxes, not solely limited to Tier 1 profiles. This adjustment aims to maintain consistency and transparency in the evaluation of such abilities, ensuring they undergo scrutiny before being incorporated into the main profiles.

Minor revisions, typically involving simple abilities, are exempt from CRT unless they pertain to certain categories such as acausality (except type 1), concept manipulation, abstract existence, plot manipulation, information manipulation, causality manipulation, nonexistent physiology, or law manipulation. I suggest applying this exemption criterion to controversial haxes, particularly when incorporated into new profiles.

In essence, if a creator intends to incorporate controversial haxes into a new profile, they should be required to initiate a CRT for those abilities. This additional step will serve as a safeguard against potential misuse and uphold the integrity of our content creation process.

By implementing this rule modification, we can foster a more robust and accountable environment, reducing the likelihood of contentious abilities being introduced without due diligence. I believe this adjustment aligns with our shared commitment to maintaining the quality and credibility of the VS Battles Wiki.

Thank you for considering this proposal. I look forward to any feedback or discussions regarding this matter

In the cases a CRT have already been held about it then its useless to open another CRT, something Like a general ability for the character, Admins also go through profiles with the wrong abilities heck even content mods do, and you get asked in your profile wall to justify that said ability
I see no reason for a modification
If admins or content mods dont go through people profiles to check or confirm a correct stability or such then the rule would make sense but you're now adding extra stress on the staffs by this, everyone who wants to now create a profile with said abilities you mentioned need to make a CRT, have two voting right staffs and content mods view it for clarification and checking the ability while allowing other administrators again to go through the stress to checking it out when its then a profile
Content mods get notification of a new profile being added so they don't even need to search or stress to look for new profiles

 

[Jozaysmith?]

No, higher version
using the technology right way.

Well yeah that will work too but that's only for tier 1 there.

Also he was talking about a downgrade
Which also isnt needed

 

[CrimsonStarFallen]

Sounds unnecessary.

Tier 1 profiles are not allowed to be made without a CRT because of how unintuitive the concepts at play are. Slowing down the process of making profiles even more by adding rules this rule for "controversial" abilities (a completely arbitrary label as is) when they are far easier to understand would just bring pain to the evaluating staff, who would have to evaluate an influx of threads about this, and the users creating profiles, who would obviously prefer to not make such threads (specially in cases where the abilities are insanely obvious, it would just be fustrating).

If you disagree with an ability in a profile, make a CRT arguing for the removal of the ability. This goes for any ability, including "uncontroversial" (seriously, what does controversial abilities even mean) abilities.

 

[KLOL506]

This entire thread is completely redundant.

We do not allow ability additions willy-nilly without a CRT, however controversial or simple they may be, it's in our rule guidelines I am sure. Whoever told you that you could do this without prior approval, told you wrong.

 

[Planck69]

Redundant and more trouble than it's worth. Never mind how an ability being controversial is subjective, this doesn't really matter when an incorrect ability or abilities on a profile can just be removed

Hard disagree.

 

[TWILIGHT-OP]

Redundant and more trouble than it's worth. Never mind how an ability being controversial is subjective, this doesn't really matter when an incorrect ability or abilities on a profile can just be removed

Hard disagree.

Well i saw some of the profile, which have those so i I talked to catzlaflame about it , catzlaflame was kinda half agree on this a week ago, but if you guys think my proposal is troublesome or not worth , you may close it.

 

[Wokistan]

This entire thread is completely redundant.

We do not allow ability additions willy-nilly without a CRT, however controversial or simple they may be, it's in our rule guidelines I am sure. Whoever told you that you could do this without prior approval, told you wrong.

What OP seems to be talking about is just making a profile from scratch, starting with a bunch of high end stuff on there. I'd rather not add random steps into the mix like that and it seems this proposal is generally unpopular, so I'll close it.