• 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 (New forum)

I suppose that a 1 month ban is going to be applied.

What should we state in the official ban reason text?
 
Armorchompy said:
I think it's very telling that you constantly make them in serious debates

So it's fine to do it?

People were disregarding your arguments because you were basing a verse-wide cosmology revision off of one instance, that they deemed not to be enough.

Also, you have not addressed the part where you constantly make up stuff in debates and other forms of trolling.
Click to expand...
I mean if you want to report me for not sending evidence or "making up stuff" which a lot of people do, then at least report them too
 
XXKINGXX69 said:
I mean if you want to report me for not sending evidence or "making up stuff" which a lot of people do, then at least report them too
Click to expand...
Literally nobody says "there is a Low 2-C feat" and then "haha just kidding lol" mate
Antvasima said:
Do you have any suggestions, @Armorchompy ?
Click to expand...
Something like "Rude and unprofessional behavior during debates" I think summarizes things
 
Okay. I will apply the 1 month block then.
 
Newendigo said:
Because of the recent tier changes of Erza and Luffy, their respective matches had to be removed.

A little research can solve anything.
Click to expand...
That being said, @CiscoTheSoto, you still should have provided an explanation within the edit summary. Please make sure you keep this in mind down the line so confusion like this doesn't occur again, okay?
 
Starter_Pack said:
That being said, @CiscoTheSoto, you still should have provided an explanation within the edit summary. Please make sure you keep this in mind down the line so confusion like this doesn't occur again, okay?
Click to expand...
Sorry, my bad. I just saw the opportunity to remove outdated matches since Iron Man's page was unlocked, but I'll be sure to add explanations next time.
 
Given that you reported yourself and do not seem like the type who would seriously mean something like that, and are evidently lashing out due to depression based on your tone, I think that deleting the comment and giving you a warning to make a serious effort to keep yourself under control in the future should probably be enough. You have not been a misbehaving member in the past as far as I recall.
 
Antvasima said:
Given that you reported yourself and do not seem like the type who would seriously mean something like that, and are evidently lashing out due to depression based on your tone, I think that deleting the comment and giving you a warning to make a serious effort to keep yourself under control in the future should probably be enough.
Click to expand...
Fine, I’ll do my best to try not to lash out like that again. It’s hard considering how busy I am getting recently. But what about the comment tberg made to me? He deserves some warning like that…
 
Coolboy6 said:
Fine, I’ll do my best to try not to lash out like that again. It’s hard considering how busy I am getting recently. But what about the comment tberg made to me? He deserves some warning like that…
Click to expand...
Tllmbrg said:
You could at least spell my name right y'know?
Anyways I apologize for being rude to you
Click to expand...
Thank you. This matter seems to have been solved then.

Also, I asked our calc group members if we can decrease the time between bumps in the calculation requests thread from 50 to 30 days instead, and so far they seem to be fine with it.
 
Can some other staff member give him a warning instruction please?
 
Well, when I checked it didn't seem like they have been an extreme offender recently. It has only happened a few times.
 
Yes. Would you be willing to tell them to cut it out with some basic instructions?
 
Also, due to repeated derailing, we have rules against regular members commenting here unless they have something genuinely important to say.
 
Idk if that's the right place but Eficiente closed this thread

The thread wasn't answered properly and the arguments and counters presented by the OP were never properly debunked or replied to.
Just because some people are working on a future CRT that changes standards for some tiers does not give one the right to just close a thread that wasn't replied to properly.
The thread never broke any rules and wasn't chaotic which contradicts one of the reasons for the closure of the thread.
The OP is very hard working and was persistent with the attemps to argue for the upgrade.
I believe that at the very least Eficiente should have given us some kind of notice before straight up closing the thread in one message. There was no need to close the thread either since it wasn't super active and it caused no conflict. I believe closing it that way is rather unprofessional and should either be re-opened or given a proper reason to close it down, one written in an understandable manner.
 
Arceus0x said:
Idk if that's the right place but Eficiente closed this thread

The thread wasn't answered properly and the arguments and counters presented by the OP were never properly debunked or replied to.
Just because some people are working on a future CRT that changes standards for some tiers does not give one the right to just close a thread that wasn't replied to properly.
The thread never broke any rules and wasn't chaotic which contradicts one of the reasons for the closure of the thread.
The OP is very hard working and was persistent with the attemps to argue for the upgrade.
I believe that at the very least Eficiente should have given us some kind of notice before straight up closing the thread in one message. There was no need to close the thread either since it wasn't super active and it caused no conflict. I believe closing it that way is rather unprofessional and should either be re-opened or given a proper reason to close it down, one written in an understandable manner.
Click to expand...
@Eficiente

What do you think about this? Would you be willing to provide a more thorough explanation in the thread?
 
Nothing bad is really going on in this thread, but considering the comments made by the users and the subject of the CRT, I feel like a staff member should watch out for anything going on in it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Antvasima
  • Sticky
Wiki Vandalism Reports
10 11 12
Replies
464
Views
31K
Antvasima
Antvasima
Mr. Bambu
Slight Adjustment to Rules Regarding Original Works
Replies
37
Views
3K
Antvasima
Antvasima
  • Locked
Regarding the Rule Violations Report Thread
2
Replies
71
Views
6K
LephyrTheRevanchist
LephyrTheRevanchist
H3110l12345I20
IRL Paper has a profile.
Replies
28
Views
1K
JustANormalLemon
JustANormalLemon
DarkGrath
  • Locked
Proposal for Off-Site Rules Revision
2 3
Replies
93
Views
9K
Antvasima
Antvasima
Back
Top