• 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.

Rule Violation Reports - 27

Status
Not open for further replies.
I haven't interacted with this dude Xcano, but I don't see a warning on his message wall, so this is kinda outta nowhere. I have faith that Assalt isn't lying but it does come off as kinda witchunt-y on first glance.

Regardless, I feel a Month Block is the worst he should get, but keep in mind I haven't interacted with him. Take this with a grain of salt, but know where I stand.
 
Nobody is reporting him out of "Actual constructed arguments". The report is threefold:

1. Consistent trolling for months in literally every single post.

2. Being responsible for the biggest shitstorm thread in the history of the wiki.

3. Having an admitted vendetta against the Wiki on other sites.

His smug response above just adds further evidence to what Assaltwaffle stated above.
 
Guys, let's please not derail the thread, we really don't want a repeat of the LordAizenSama incident. I agree 100% with AssaltWaffle of course, but this is a Bureaucrat decision to discuss privately. Anyway, I should probably hakai the posts that were derailing.
 
Fair enough, but I was talking the Non-staff members who's posts I already removed, some of them at least.
 
I am fine with if you wish to block him. He was a constructive and hardworking staff member once upon a time, but he seems to have nurtured massive grudges due to that the site was not run exactly the way that he wanted, and has continuously attacked the wiki for a long time now.
 
However, another alternative would be if he agrees to simply stop attacking us, both here and on Reddit, and tries to become a productive member again.
 
I sincerily do not know how you can believe that the only reason you were ever rejected was because "People didn't want to downgrade their favorite characters" or "Too much work".

Sure, some do say this at times, but do you simply cannot conceive of people simply having different opinons and seeing you as incorrect? Moreover, do you honestly believe your interpretation is the only absolutely correct one in existence? As if debating about who would win in a fight is a mathematical science? Even in the manner of calculations people disagreed on the basis of your argument, rather than just dismiss it.
 
> Sure, some do say this at times, but do you simply cannot conceive of people simply having different opinons and seeing you as incorrect

No, I say that it was rejected due to downgrades and work because that is what I was told.

I was told, to my face, by multiple bureaucrats, that I was right, but we couldn't do it because it'd be too much effort.
 
@LordXcano

I am very aware of the limitations of the wiki, but we simply do not have the resources to make lots of major revisions, or to have 4+ highly competent calc group members evaluate and thoroughly discuss every single calculation.

I have been working around 10 hours a day for almost the last 4 years to ensure that the wiki is a good as possible, but despite being a perfectionist I still have to accept that it cannot be made perfect. Every improvement is a gradual work in progress that takes a long time to achieve, and the rest of the staff simply do not have the time available to ensure that everything is completely reliable and flawless. They have their own real lives to deal with.

Rather than blaming the staff for that this every page is not a thoroughly verified scientific thesis, it is better to appreciate them for that the wiki is not far far worse than it is, and that it is slowly improving month-by-month.
 
Dude, no need to combine Bold and Italic here.

I reccal no such event. Literally every time you try bring these things multiple people disagree with the very premise of your posts.
 
I think Xcano has a point. I always feel that this wiki rejects revisions just because they're massive.

However, that does not justify causing discord within the wiki and hating on us on reddit.
 
Spinosaurus75DinosaurFan said:
I think Xcano has a point. I always feel that this wiki rejects revisions just because they're massive.
Click to expand...
This argument seems completely counter-intuitive considering we tend to have a Wiki-wide revision every 2 - 3 months or so. In fact Assaltwaffle is planning one exactly as we speak.
 
@Ant

If he is actually right, which I'd need sources for, ignoring it isn't the way to go.

Even if a lot of calcs are wrong, the best way to go about it would be to get things right and then go back through calcs over time to re-evaluate them.

If he is right and we've chosen to ignore and berate him I have a problem with that.
 
I think the main problem here is that he's being toxic on the wiki and causing discord on not just the wiki, but on other websites too (reddit).

Regardless of if he's right or not, this isn't the way to go about doing anything.
 
I agree, all 18 of Cano's edits in 2018 prior this thread over the course of the last 5 months have indeed stirred controversy within the wiki, and should cease.
 
LordXcano said:
> Sure, some do say this at times, but do you simply cannot conceive of people simply having different opinons and seeing you as incorrect

No, I say that it was rejected due to downgrades and work because that is what I was told.

I was told, to my face, by multiple bureaucrats, that I was right, but we couldn't do it because it'd be too much effort.
Click to expand...
From my months in the wiki I haven't seen this unless it's a purely pedantic change (i.e. neither option is more "right" than the other but one makes more sense, so stuff like naming conventions). I've seen people bring it up as a potential issue, but I haven't seen it stop changes.

Pushing for changes like these to actually be made is constructive, but holding a vendetta/trolling as staff are accusing you of doing isn't going to solve anything.
 
Darkanine said:
No one is saying he should be banned for suggesting change. Like Asalt said, if he was right and we were wrong, that is a problem we need to fix. The problem s the smug, condescending attitude he's giving off, with unprofessional rant blogs.
Click to expand...
^^^
 
@Assaltwaffle

Well, I do not remember much of my conversations with LordXcano, as they were so long ago, and I have likely changed my mind a lot since then, but we can not suddenly revise an entire working tiering system, or all of our calculations on his say-so. At best we can handle one major revision during the summer and one during the winter holidays, and we are already booked up, especially with your own project.

DontTalkDT and other calc group members have also gradually built a working system for us, including DT's latest Dimensional Tiering page, so I am extremely unwilling to suddenly start from scratch.
 
Look,if Xcano is able to just make the necessary posts about the calculations and stop the flaming wars between here and reddit (Seriously,we are probably the most hated site that pitches fictional characters fighting for some reason), then I dont see any problem in him staying, but if he just dont stop with the flaming wars, well... Ban him, I guess
 
Darkanine said:
No one is saying he should be banned for suggesting change. Like Asalt said, if he was right and we were wrong, that is a problem we need to fix. The problem is the smug, condescending attitude he's giving off, with unprofessional rant blogs.
Click to expand...
This is Assaltwaffle's point. I feel people made a strawman of this in interpreting that we were simply being against change. When standards and rules and tiers and whatever change on the wiki all the time.
 
I think we should give him one more chance to shape up his behavior, and present his thoughts in professional blogs, not nonsensical rants with the primary purpose of bashing the wiki.
 
Honestly? I disagree. There would be a chance if he had even bothered throughout an entire year that's been since this started.
 
Look, I am by far the hardest working member of this wiki. I am definitely not averse to said hard work. The problem is that I do not think that massive revisions of our system are realistic or constructive to apply based on the opinions of a single member who has stirred up problems in the past.
 
Matthew Schroeder said:
Honestly? I disagree. There would be a chance if he had even bothered throughout an entire year that's been since this started.
Click to expand...
Well... this is my first time even seeing LordXcano to be honest. So I wasn't aware.
 
Also, we can now report the behavior of representatives or ex-representatives (Read: staff, ex-staff), based on behavior outside of the wiki?
 
@Spino

I don't know what revisions he's talking about, but we don't shoot down revision proposals just because "they're a lot of work". We shoot down revision proposals because "they're a lot of work with virtually no benefit".

If XCano would like to present his arguments in a reasonable manner without resorting to insulting others for not following his methods to the letter, sure, we'll hear him out. If he's going to actively rant and rail against us while contributing nothing, he has to leave.
 
Considering that Ant and 6 (At least. I know others who want the Banning too but haven't posted here) Admins think a banning should be done, I think we should go it?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Antvasima
  • Sticky
Wiki Vandalism Reports
8 9 10
Replies
392
Views
25K
Antvasima
Antvasima
Mr. Bambu
Slight Adjustment to Rules Regarding Original Works
Replies
37
Views
3K
Antvasima
Antvasima
Agnaa
  • Locked
Proposal for Off-Site Links Revision
Replies
11
Views
2K
Antvasima
Antvasima
H3110l12345I20
IRL Paper has a profile.
Replies
28
Views
978
JustANormalLemon
JustANormalLemon
DaMonkeMan
  • Locked
Editing some rules for the Wiki
Replies
21
Views
2K
ImmortalDread
ImmortalDread
Back
Top