- 15,591
- 22,891
So should every single person that complains about certain groups of wankers or downplayers receive punishment as well? If so we’ve got hundreds of members to reprimand.
-
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)
- Thread starter Antvasima
- Start date
- 32,835
- 38,111
Hundreds? Try thousands.
- 7,477
- 2,889
My argument to this is in the same comment you quoted, not sure if I have to repeat myself but since this is you last post I guess is not that needed.
I disagree with not being report worthy.
But for the rest of the part, I also advocated for better moderation in that thread to avoid whatever conflict.
Or hell, at minimun least have one staff go there and tell people to dial down a bit the aggression, expecting to work (Maybe).
- 11,807
- 7,371
Can you not get involved in reports that don't concern you unless you're bringing up some banger context nobody else considered? It's a rule now on the wiki, follow it.
- 11,807
- 7,371
@DarkDragonMedeus @KingTempest @LordTracer Also try to address the situation next time instead of kudosing someone's post who isn't meant to input, no matter how much you agree, this only leads to spiraling into past chaos, fellas.
- 21,489
- 30,820
That's fair, my apologies
- 31,633
- 34,648
@The_Impress I do get involved to address the situation when available and needed. I was in the middle of multitasking with RL stuff during the report plus I thought Maverick seemed to be handling it just fine and he is staff who is allowed to give input. Not only that, it's difficult to give lengthy responses using an old dusty laptop that only works when it feels like it.
As for the other topic at hand, while Tmaakkonen does need to calm down, he was more so venting about personal frustrations with various fans in the YouTube comments, he was not verbally attacking other platforms or entire fanbases and what not. This still isn't the platform to rant about publicly as saying things inherently negative about other communities should either be in less public conversations such as PMs. And there are plenty of users staff or not (Though mostly former staff who come to mind) who have been far more bashful and not all of them were punished for it. At worst, he needs a reminder and no penalties.
And Maverick was more or less giving constructive criticism towards some people in the OPM fanbase, not the entirety of it. Attacking by definition more so means very rough harshness. Having negative feedback in itself isn't insulting and light criticism towards how offsite debating is handled is fine, just shouldn't be something done overboard nor happen all the time.
Also, the rule is more so against derailing the rule violations report with off topic problems and side conversations. Like staff discussion threads, posts from regular users that are contributing to the main topic whether to bring more evidence or to correct misunderstandings spoken by other users; that is still contributing. I do not see how ShadowWarrior or Viethai did anything wrong and simply just briefly got involved to clear up misunderstandings. I'm aware of regular users mass posting like that as of late, but that's not what was going on hear.
I have left them a message with instructions.
As for the other topic at hand, while Tmaakkonen does need to calm down, he was more so venting about personal frustrations with various fans in the YouTube comments, he was not verbally attacking other platforms or entire fanbases and what not. This still isn't the platform to rant about publicly as saying things inherently negative about other communities should either be in less public conversations such as PMs. And there are plenty of users staff or not (Though mostly former staff who come to mind) who have been far more bashful and not all of them were punished for it. At worst, he needs a reminder and no penalties.
And Maverick was more or less giving constructive criticism towards some people in the OPM fanbase, not the entirety of it. Attacking by definition more so means very rough harshness. Having negative feedback in itself isn't insulting and light criticism towards how offsite debating is handled is fine, just shouldn't be something done overboard nor happen all the time.
Also, the rule is more so against derailing the rule violations report with off topic problems and side conversations. Like staff discussion threads, posts from regular users that are contributing to the main topic whether to bring more evidence or to correct misunderstandings spoken by other users; that is still contributing. I do not see how ShadowWarrior or Viethai did anything wrong and simply just briefly got involved to clear up misunderstandings. I'm aware of regular users mass posting like that as of late, but that's not what was going on hear.
- 11,807
- 7,371
DDM issue as of late is 90 people chiming in to "correct misunderstandings", and then those involved in the report then feel the need to get involved in arguments with the ones chiming and worsening thread atmosphere, so the best solution is, to let the limited users of staff discuss on thread so as to not pile onto the RVR. If the rule is EXACTLY the way you say it is, which it is not, then it's the most inefffective and redundant rule in existence, regular users aren't compelled to pass on their judgement towards other regular users within the forum, this just isn't how any healthy work environment functions.
I'll be blunt, the issue as of late isn't what you purport it to be, not in the slightest, it's the unwarranted """help""" and trying to act pseudo-staff and attempting to slide judgement onto other users' own aggravated matters.
Just let people do the thing they were hired to do.
Last edited:
- 11,807
- 7,371
This isn't meant to be an attack towards you specific or anything, for clarification, just that too many staff members are letting this stuff slide when it is very well under their duties not to, and that only worsens thread environment to allow further violations.
- 168,514
- 77,230
- Thread starter
- #12,612
- 168,514
- 77,230
- Thread starter
- #12,613
I largely agree with this assessment.
Also, the the main problem is that our moderators cannot even keep up with all of the mountains of constant work with handling all of the necessary content revision threads in this forum. Constantly moderating every single entertainment discussion thread on top of that is not within our available capabilities, or our intended primary focus.
However, giving official staff instructions to attempt to tone down the toxicity in discussions after they have been reported is obviously perfectly fine and appreciated.
- 168,514
- 77,230
- Thread starter
- #12,614
Since Newendigo is an experienced member who seems interested in moderation duties and the good behaviour of this community, I will note him down as a potential thread moderator candidate for the future. All competent help is obviously appreciated.
- 11,381
- 19,967
GodlyCharmander
He/Him- 5,744
- 4,998
This user just called me a bitch out of nowhere. (And over FNAF even-)
- 11,559
- 10,996
Come on, everyone has done worse than this. It's not that offensive
- 168,514
- 77,230
- Thread starter
- #12,619
Well, I would personally prefer if we only give a warning instruction for something like this, as I do not want us to turn too oversensitive and draconian, but I think that Fandom considers this as a rather bad word, so we may have to apply a brief symbolic ban time. I am not sure though.
Also, would it be better if I add the word in question to our automatic censor filter?
Also, would it be better if I add the word in question to our automatic censor filter?
- 12,673
- 9,625
Why? I honestly don't think this is that big of an issue.
- 7,905
- 1,413
Yeah think a polite request to tell em to chill can be sufficient, manners cost nothing at the end of the day after all.
- 168,514
- 77,230
- Thread starter
- #12,622
Okay. I will do so.
Please make a continuous effort to maintain a polite tone in this wiki and to avoid using potentially offensive terms.
@ZillertheBucko
Please make a continuous effort to maintain a polite tone in this wiki and to avoid using potentially offensive terms.
- 13,903
- 5,405
Alright, sure thing
GodlyCharmander
He/Him- 5,744
- 4,998
Just one thing. If you're not the one being either attacked, insulted, or harrassed, you should not have the right to say if something is offensive or not, as that's not up to you to decide. (Obvious jokes, or petulant stuff such as being offended by everyday words are obvious expections, of course. Not the case here, I'm afraid).
I am perfectly okay with the warning.
EDIT: Also, insulting people over arguments about fictional robots should not be okay, ever. The fact one of you even tried to shrug it off is disgraceful
I am perfectly okay with the warning.
EDIT: Also, insulting people over arguments about fictional robots should not be okay, ever. The fact one of you even tried to shrug it off is disgraceful
- 13,903
- 5,405
I could say a lot about how you were in the thread too right now, but this is so minor I don’t really feel like it
- 12,673
- 9,625
Okay, let's just drop this now shall we
GodlyCharmander
He/Him- 5,744
- 4,998
Aight bro, I'm done with this site.
- 168,514
- 77,230
- Thread starter
- #12,628
Look, I used to have genuine trolls that constantly terrorised me for 3 years in a row, by bombarding me with real life gore and gorn images, death threats, rape threats, and genocidal bigotry towards autistic people in general, just because they did not like our character statistics. Oh, and they also uploaded over 500 disgusting **** videos with my username in them all over the Internet, so that is the main thing that people still find if they google my username.
That was obviously legitimately completely over the line, but it is still nothing compared to the extreme levels of political oppression that some of our members that I know, and likely many others here, have to endure every day of their lives, including legitimate threats to the lives (or even worse) of them and their families if they ever say anything that is perceived as contrary to the wills of the ruling classes of their countries.
I have a history with severe mental illness and suicidal depression, due to being completely overmedicated by bad medicines ordinated by incompetent professionals for several years, and have consistently tried to help all members with similar problems who have approached me in private or that have seemed to be in tormented states of mind, so I am definitely not trying to be unsympathetic to people who are in mental pain. However, we cannot ban and utterly condemn people over simply being somewhat rude, or act as if they committed unforgivable crimes that caused immense amounts of emotional harm.
At the end of the day we all need to at least try to grow some measure of thicker skin over the years or we won't remotely be able to survive and endure, much less thrive, in a world as harsh, corrupt, deceitful, and ruthless as this one very often is if we look at from a wider perspective.
My apologies if I went too far in my response, and I hope that you will reconsider and not leave this community, as I think that you have been a well-behaved member. I am usually trying to keep any toxic bickering to a minimum when I encounter it. I am mainly just saying that we need some sense of scale and proportion as well, and that we should try to not be too oversensitive and unforgiving.
Last edited:
- 168,514
- 77,230
- Thread starter
- #12,629
Thank you for being reasonable.
- 11,807
- 7,371
Right, okay. This kinda shit is EXACTLY why I keep on saying, let only staff respond to the reports, Jesus Christ, and this is getting demonstrated for the 90th time in these few months
@LIFE_OF_KING Consider this a warning, we have an EXPLICIT RULE STATING, don't input on RVR when the report has NOTHING to do with you and you have nothing substantial to add. You've done this a couple of times even in the past, but those times you weren't warned yet.
@Stillwinston Your input isn't particularly bad but please keep in mind the very same rule, and not input on the threads. Even if you don't intend it it only serves to spiral the RVR into the same BS as before, uniformity in rules is important.
@Zencha9 Mate you just straight up attacked him for no reason whatsoever. Like, on an RVR. If you repeat it again I'll honestly just begin asking for a threadban. Don't even need to elaborate shit here.
Like overreaction aside, it isn't that GodlyCharmander's entirely wrong, randoms walking in on threads and trying to pass off judgement by their unwarranted personal opinion on a WIKI MANAGEMENT thread is exceptionally unprofessional, and honestly it only serves to annoy the users involved.
I know the optics of this has always looked like some elitist bias, it's not, genuinely, this has repeatedly been demonstrated on RVR time and time again, nobody wants their PEERS to act like wiki police and dog on them publicly, they BARELY stand it when someone MEANT to police calls them out.
Just, for the 17th time I'm saying it, don't barge in on RVR. You only piss people off who are already immensely pissed off.
@LIFE_OF_KING Consider this a warning, we have an EXPLICIT RULE STATING, don't input on RVR when the report has NOTHING to do with you and you have nothing substantial to add. You've done this a couple of times even in the past, but those times you weren't warned yet.
@Stillwinston Your input isn't particularly bad but please keep in mind the very same rule, and not input on the threads. Even if you don't intend it it only serves to spiral the RVR into the same BS as before, uniformity in rules is important.
@Zencha9 Mate you just straight up attacked him for no reason whatsoever. Like, on an RVR. If you repeat it again I'll honestly just begin asking for a threadban. Don't even need to elaborate shit here.
Like overreaction aside, it isn't that GodlyCharmander's entirely wrong, randoms walking in on threads and trying to pass off judgement by their unwarranted personal opinion on a WIKI MANAGEMENT thread is exceptionally unprofessional, and honestly it only serves to annoy the users involved.
I know the optics of this has always looked like some elitist bias, it's not, genuinely, this has repeatedly been demonstrated on RVR time and time again, nobody wants their PEERS to act like wiki police and dog on them publicly, they BARELY stand it when someone MEANT to police calls them out.
Just, for the 17th time I'm saying it, don't barge in on RVR. You only piss people off who are already immensely pissed off.
Last edited:
- 11,559
- 10,996
No, I did that a few times. And those times, I simply commented a single one and then stopped, even if the person replied to me
Sure, what I did may be wrong, but that part of your comment bothered me. The way you said it really sounded like something I do VERY often. I think the last time I commented here was almost a month ago
GodlyCharmander
He/Him- 5,744
- 4,998
This is honestly one of the saddest statements I have ever heard, and I am genuinely sorry that you went through all of this. That said, I do believe this response was quite uncalled for, as I never took this to such a level that the situation you've gone through is comparable in any way, no.
Of course I am not considering the single insult thrown at me to be remotely on the same level as everything you just said to me, obviously. But knowing how toxicity can affect not only an individual, but the wiki as a whole, I am quite shocked that insulting another member over something trivial is taken as lightly as this. Of course, I am not advocating for any sort of punishment, the warning as fine, it's just how people are implying that I am "oversensitive" because I complained over something I thought was offensive to me.
I am not considering it the end of the world by any means, it's not that. I know there are way worse stuff one can go through. I never even remotely put my complaint on this sort of pedestal. It was just a minor complaint about an insult. I apologize that things escalated to this level, but my intention was never to consider an insult like some sort of unforgivable crime like you are implying.
Is it wrong for me to say, "hey, we shouldn't name-call, or insult each other over fictional characters"? I do not think so. Is it wrong for me to report when someone is insulting me? Well, based on these member's reactions, it does seem like it. Their backlash makes me think I should not report this kind of behavior, and thus, makes it look like the Wiki doesn't care too much about insults in general. This is discouraging, at the very least. Please understand my side, this was portrayed as, and supposed to be a minor thing.
Last edited:
- 11,807
- 7,371
Anyways issue is resolved. Please move on, no further comments required on the above topic from this point.
- 168,514
- 77,230
- Thread starter
- #12,634
GodlyCharmander:
Okay. No problem then, and no harm intended. I had the impression that you took what happened as a much greater problem than what it objectively was, given that you said that you would leave this community.
Okay. No problem then, and no harm intended. I had the impression that you took what happened as a much greater problem than what it objectively was, given that you said that you would leave this community.
- 168,514
- 77,230
- Thread starter
- #12,635
Yes. Agreed.
- 31,633
- 34,648
I was informed that this user posted someone's actual first name. I removed the comment and gave them a strict warning.
I know doxxing is a serious crime that warrants a permanent ban; especially if it's their location, payment info, and other personal information such as their full name without their permission. If it's just a first name, it's not quite as bad but still a very dick move. But I'd like to hear thoughts from other staff members how bad revealing a 1st name is before I do anything beyond what I already done.
I know doxxing is a serious crime that warrants a permanent ban; especially if it's their location, payment info, and other personal information such as their full name without their permission. If it's just a first name, it's not quite as bad but still a very dick move. But I'd like to hear thoughts from other staff members how bad revealing a 1st name is before I do anything beyond what I already done.
- 21,489
- 30,820
If their first name isn't in their account user like the members we have here (I won't give examples for obvious reasons), then that's an issue.
Although in this situation it seems like it was unintentional and it was handled very quickly, it seemed like ridiculous levels of carelessness and genuine ignorance, as it seems as if there was no ill intent.
But a strict warning is valid, and I personally believe that someone should just be addressed by their user on the wiki or a public alias they use.
Me personally, a ban for something caused from pure ignorance is excessive. Then again I'm not the authority on stuff of this nature.
- 21,489
- 30,820
Someone gotta put this in bold in the OP
But they probably knew each other offsite or something. The issue of this report isn't finding out the real name (which is an issue), it's revealing it in public
Last edited:
- 83
- 74
I think I can comment here without getting banned as I’m directly involved. Anyway, I know him offsite and he has actually dropped his name on the Wiki in the past, so I thought it was fine. He’s been pretending [offsite] like he wasn’t Pain_to12 and while I did not necessarily care to investigate the user, and did not care about his reasons for wanting to remain anonymous, him revealing that myself and some other users are friends offsite [without anyone’s permission also, and in the thread he seems to force the accusations on the users that deny it] in order to create a 'friendship' or 'salty' bias to discredit their fair disagreement with him was unnecessary and something of a confirmation that he matches the person I know offsite. Brother went as far as revealing [and seems to force the revelation] a user’s WhatsApp moniker just because of criticism on a CRT. There is absolutely no way he knows that information otherwise.
Additionally, despite all of this, he claims that **** is "another guy," I’m not forcing him to reveal his identity but if he insists that he’s not that person then his comment should be looked into as he dropped the same name as well.
Summary, my Lords: I said the name because he already revealed it, so I thought it was fine.
- 31,633
- 34,648
I think you're good, just don't go revealing other people's names again without permission. And some people may have done so by accident and may have forgotten and/or regretted it.
But the comment removal and warning are good, no further action needed.
But the comment removal and warning are good, no further action needed.
Similar threads
- Sticky
- Featured
- Locked
