-
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 - 48
- Thread starter Antvasima
- Start date
- Status
- 12,522
- 3,489
Then you should be linking to those posts instead of that one.
- 32,327
- 20,215
I have reported him for his behavior privately but nothing happened either. I've been insulted personally by him multiple times already.
- 10,748
- 6,476
Some links would be good.
Wokistan
Bioluminescent African American Working At The CIA
VS Battles
Administrator
Calculation Group
Human Resources
- 16,887
- 7,342
HST threads in general just don't go very well so I wouldn't doubt it tbh.
Left a comment on the blog myself. More people causing issues there than just the one, so it's addressed generally.
Left a comment on the blog myself. More people causing issues there than just the one, so it's addressed generally.
- 165,237
- 72,275
- Thread starter
- #248
I remember that USklaverei said that Matthew should be lynched or somesuch, which is enough for a ban in combination with his general hostility. The problem is that it was in a private conversation off-wiki, and not directly told to Matthew himself, so I was uncertain to what degree we could hold him responsible for it, and wanted the HR group to handle the evaluation, but nothing seems to have happened yet.
- 12,522
- 3,489
Oh boy, imagine wanting someone dead over a different opinion regarding VS debating. Yes, he has serious issues if he really did say that.
- 813
- 137
This.ShadowWarrior1999 said:
Honestly, I feel like that if its something akin to any kind of threat against another person here on the site, much less a death threat, where it was said shouldnt be a factor in this particular given case given the nature.
- 59
- 19
You can't lol. It happened off-wikiAntvasima said:
- 8,136
- 2,156
@Antvasima
Eh are you suppose to even release something like that to the public? this is like witch hunt material.
How'd you even get someones private conversation?
Eh are you suppose to even release something like that to the public? this is like witch hunt material.
How'd you even get someones private conversation?
- 12,522
- 3,489
I'll say if that's how he reacts to people disagreeing with him, then I think he really should not be here, even if he said it off-site. It sets a bad precedent for more toxic behavior in the future as it clearly shows he isn't capable of maintaining a healthy discussion, as people are bound to have differing views from each other on something.
- 32,327
- 20,215
I thought the whole point was to have higher transparency between what happens in the wiki? The August Debacle got as bad as it did specifically because of behind the scenes feuding and in-fighting.
- 813
- 137
Fair enough. But I do want to say one thing about this from an in-general perspective, not just for this specific case. And then i'll leave this be.
If any member of this wiki makes a threat against another member, even if off-site, it should not be just hand waived like the former is immune from any kind of consequence. While it would be said off-site, its coming from someone who is a member of the same wiki platform that the perso they are threatening are members of. And of course they would never say anything like that on-site because then they'd absolutely be punished for it, so going off-site to say such a thing to abuse as some kind of loop-hole around the site's standards shouldnt be tolerated.
Just because the intentions were said in a different place doesn't suddenly negate the feelings that the member of the site actually has for another member. And if they really have those kind of feelings, then they shouldnt be allowed here.
If any member of this wiki makes a threat against another member, even if off-site, it should not be just hand waived like the former is immune from any kind of consequence. While it would be said off-site, its coming from someone who is a member of the same wiki platform that the perso they are threatening are members of. And of course they would never say anything like that on-site because then they'd absolutely be punished for it, so going off-site to say such a thing to abuse as some kind of loop-hole around the site's standards shouldnt be tolerated.
Just because the intentions were said in a different place doesn't suddenly negate the feelings that the member of the site actually has for another member. And if they really have those kind of feelings, then they shouldnt be allowed here.
- 14,915
- 12,434
@Xerkser500 As a counterargument, I'm not familiar with this specific situation, but in most cases when it's said off-site it's not directly to the person being threatened, so they'd only find out about it if someone they sent it to passed the message on. Opening people up to punishment like this can allow for blackmail or enacting revenge by threatening to send screenshots of the message to staff.
Also, if it's off-site it's much harder for staff to verify if the messages are actually real, so doctored screenshots could become an issue, especially in relation to controversial members.
On top of this, if the issue isn't spreading on-site, then the member being threatened isn't actually suffering any harm. And if no-one's getting hurt, it's not really a problem.
Also, if it's off-site it's much harder for staff to verify if the messages are actually real, so doctored screenshots could become an issue, especially in relation to controversial members.
On top of this, if the issue isn't spreading on-site, then the member being threatened isn't actually suffering any harm. And if no-one's getting hurt, it's not really a problem.
- 305
- 63
Stop being snowflakes is my suggestion. Offsite you have no power over what can or cannot be said.
- 59
- 19
I mean, regardless, staff needs to focus on what happens on-site only. Can't go around banning people because they happen to say something offensive on another site. Honestly, a lot of you need thicker skin.
- 813
- 137
Except this is not simply about "needing thicker skin" which at this point is now being used as a copout. This is about geniunely being upset over how another member legitmately feels about you or another member and they get off scot free just because it wasnt said on-site, which is like that for obvious reason to avoid a punishment.
If someone were to, right now, make some rant on [insert here site] about me, saying disgusting slander to de-humanize me or my family (whatever it is), all because of a fricking fictional debate, your seriously going to say I should just ignore it like it never happened in the first place? Sorry, but I vehemently disagree with that line of reasoning. This isn't simply just throwing minor petty insults. This would be someone legimitately expressing how they feel about you as a human being just because they didnt get their way in a thread. There is a clear difference and one shouldnt just be hand waived like the other.
If someone were to, right now, make some rant on [insert here site] about me, saying disgusting slander to de-humanize me or my family (whatever it is), all because of a fricking fictional debate, your seriously going to say I should just ignore it like it never happened in the first place? Sorry, but I vehemently disagree with that line of reasoning. This isn't simply just throwing minor petty insults. This would be someone legimitately expressing how they feel about you as a human being just because they didnt get their way in a thread. There is a clear difference and one shouldnt just be hand waived like the other.
- 813
- 137
Doesnt mean you can't punish the person who said it in the first place, which was my point.GilgaArcuied said:
You cant stop them from what they say, but you can sure as hell punish them if they're a member of the same site that the person they are referring to is apart of.
- 59
- 19
Yeah. I will tell you to ignore it and go on with your day
https://twitter.com/tylerthecreator/status/285670822264307712?lang=e
https://twitter.com/tylerthecreator/status/285670822264307712?lang=e
- 813
- 137
Right. My bad, just wanted to get that off my chest. I'll stop now.Antvasima said:
If anyone wants to talk about it more, they can come to my wall.
- 10,748
- 6,476
Strict Warning or ban. Linking to the sentence is practically the same as posting it. Still, banning for even a humorous usage of the n word is a Fandom thing so I'm not sure if we also have to be this strict (I partially want to say no just because of some past stuff that has happened here)
- 59
- 19
Is this a joke or are you being serious? ant, i'm telling someone to not be offended on what they read on the internet. The link is harmless and the context of the n-word is too.
- 59
- 19
This tells me either you're not from the U.S or you simply don't go out a lot/socialize with other people irl. Delete the link and move on
- 1,246
- 365
I'm going to agree with MiamiVice43 here; I don't believe we should say "yeah guys let's just ban him because he posted this link with a singular word in it that'd stir a tad amount of controversy". If it's an issue, just politely advise him to steer away from posting links such as that and you're set.
- 165,237
- 72,275
- Thread starter
- #273
I have personally tried to have a thick skin over all the ridiculous amounts of harrassment that I have had to endure, but not everybody can be the same way. We live in a world where it is commonplace that cyber-bullying drive children to suicide or severe mental illness, and your solution to turn off the computer would mean that any harrassed members should leave the wiki. It is not acceptable.
Anyway, if you are going to stay in this wiki, do not link to such posts again.
Anyway, if you are going to stay in this wiki, do not link to such posts again.
- 10,748
- 6,476
Yeah I'm gonna go back on my previous comment and say a warning should be enough
- 165,237
- 72,275
- Thread starter
- #275
Just a heads-up that Awsometime continues to be generally rude and disrespectful in the following thread:
https://vsbattles.com/vsbattles/2912278
I have given him a warning, and think that we should remove him if he continues. I am concerned that we have turned so lenient that toxic very disrespectful behaviour and paranoid accusations towards the staff are becoming increasingly commonplace and making our work here much more difficult. We can't have an environment where new members who have done nothing to contribute to this community are near instantly making potshots towards the people who keep it running.
Here are his quoted comments, directed at Cal and other members, including me:
"Unless you're gonna accept my debate challenge and stop ducking, quit crying about revisions just because you don't like them."
"So you admit to holding double standards? Alright cool."
"If mods are allowed to be hostile and add nothing valuable to conversations just for the sake of being mods, you can't expect me to not reply accordingly."
"He didn't say a single thing or give a since scan to debunk the evidence I presented, just hid behind his mod status and commited ad baculum."
"Stop ignoring evidence and nitpicking."
"Tell that to the mods that are supposed to be setting an example and living by their own rules."
"Anyway we're getting off track here as funny as it may be."
"Seems like you intentionally took that out of context"
"saying he was defeated is pretty dishonest tbh"
"I'm done with this whole shtick of you hiding behind your position."
https://vsbattles.com/vsbattles/2912278
I have given him a warning, and think that we should remove him if he continues. I am concerned that we have turned so lenient that toxic very disrespectful behaviour and paranoid accusations towards the staff are becoming increasingly commonplace and making our work here much more difficult. We can't have an environment where new members who have done nothing to contribute to this community are near instantly making potshots towards the people who keep it running.
Here are his quoted comments, directed at Cal and other members, including me:
"Unless you're gonna accept my debate challenge and stop ducking, quit crying about revisions just because you don't like them."
"So you admit to holding double standards? Alright cool."
"If mods are allowed to be hostile and add nothing valuable to conversations just for the sake of being mods, you can't expect me to not reply accordingly."
"He didn't say a single thing or give a since scan to debunk the evidence I presented, just hid behind his mod status and commited ad baculum."
"Stop ignoring evidence and nitpicking."
"Tell that to the mods that are supposed to be setting an example and living by their own rules."
"Anyway we're getting off track here as funny as it may be."
"Seems like you intentionally took that out of context"
"saying he was defeated is pretty dishonest tbh"
"I'm done with this whole shtick of you hiding behind your position."
- 10,748
- 6,476
A few of those aren't bad, but that's pure nitpicking on my part
The given quotes are grounds for a strict warning at the very least, I'm not opposed to a ban tho I'm going to avoid suggesting just for not being very familiar with the situation
The given quotes are grounds for a strict warning at the very least, I'm not opposed to a ban tho I'm going to avoid suggesting just for not being very familiar with the situation
- 7,404
- 3,288
I agree with Andytrenom. I don't think Awsometime has done anything ban-worthy. Sure, he comes off as angry and dramatic in most of those posts and confrontational in two, but I don't think he deserves a ban. It's not like he's trolling on the level of you-know-who.
- 165,237
- 72,275
- Thread starter
- #279
@Soldier Blue
Well, the problem is that this is the way that he has constantly behaved during the brief time he has been in this wiki, and he completely ignores warnings and disrespects staff authority to even give them in the first place. It sets a very bad example for the rest of the community that it is okay to behave in this manner and get away with it.
Well, the problem is that this is the way that he has constantly behaved during the brief time he has been in this wiki, and he completely ignores warnings and disrespects staff authority to even give them in the first place. It sets a very bad example for the rest of the community that it is okay to behave in this manner and get away with it.
- 10,748
- 6,476
Okay, skimming through the thread I can actually kinda see why some of Cal's comments would come off the wrong way, for someone who doesn't really know him.
Not saying Cal deliberately added to the problem, but I can only blame the guy so much for taking "can we stop with these threads" and "talking to an admin like that is a quick way to get banned" as a reason for leaving some harsh comments.
Warning is enough I think
Not saying Cal deliberately added to the problem, but I can only blame the guy so much for taking "can we stop with these threads" and "talking to an admin like that is a quick way to get banned" as a reason for leaving some harsh comments.
Warning is enough I think
- Status
