Rule Violation Reports (New forum)

[thetechmaster36]

The video that I linked does use canon information from the games themselves to figure out the characters' ages

Hagane, as someone who has watched and played the HDN games, gauging the characters' canonical ages are very difficult save for some characters like Rei Ryghts and Uzume. The others are almost entirely in the dark aside from the information given to us about things such as timeskips. Canon information or not, it's still an assumption by a fan-theory.

I just feels like a total pain to create a whole thread for it to see if members agree with it though

I get that Age isn't the most important thing on a profile, but you still have to make a thread (either CRT or QnA) for it.

Regardless, you've received the warning message, I don't want to drag this on so I'm leaving it here.

 

[Antvasima]

I think a good practice to consider is the gaps between how helpful/contributive they been compared to how problematic their behavior gets when they slip and how frequent each side is.

Thank you. That is my view as well. We cannot go around banning all generally helpful and well-behaved members because they are not perfect and get annoyed and frustrated/have a bad day sometimes. It would be long-term devastating for our available "work force" (in lack of a better term to use), but there is obviously an upper limit to how lenient we can get regarding offences in this regard, as we have demonstrated repeatedly in recent years.

 

[Antvasima]

Please do not add Fan Theory details into profile pages. It is unconfirmed or denied if they are reliable. But for now, we only use canon information.

Thank You

Agreed. Thank you for helping out.

 

[DarkDragonMedeus]

I should have clarified this as mentioned on my wall, if Hagane wishes to make a Content Revision addressing the issue, he may do so. But the actual warning actually has more to do with the fact that adding the information without discussing it in a content revision. But either way, that would be reserved for a content revision.

 

[Coolboy6]

@speedster352 clearly isn’t listening to his matchban since He tried to submit his characters into my tournament after he DM’d me as an attempt to submit his characters when he thought no one would notice. And when I told him that he can’t submit his characters because of his matchban when he first DM’d me, he did it again in the actual tournament thread showing that he’s unwilling to learn from his mistakes and deserves a longer matchban time.

 

[speedster352]

@speedster352 clearly isn’t listening to his matchban since He tried to submit his characters into my tournament after he DM’d me as an attempt to submit his characters when he thought no one would notice. And when I told him that he can’t submit his characters because of his matchban when he first DM’d me, he did it again in the actual tournament thread showing that he’s unwilling to learn from his mistakes and deserves a longer matchban time.

Seriously What did I do wrong? I just want to submit two characters and see the tournament I wasn't debating at all in versus threads. The thread was in fun and games so why report me? Like seriously this speedster thing is going too far.

 

[Coolboy6]

Seriously What did I do wrong? I just want to submit two characters and see the tournament I wasn't debating at all in versus threads. The thread was in fun and games so why report me? Like seriously this speedster thing is going too far.

You’re literally trying to participate in vs matches when you have literally been banned from doing so.

 

[speedster352]

You’re literally trying to participate in vs matches when you have literally been banned from doing so.

I was participating in a fun and games thread.

 

[Coolboy6]

I was participating in a fun and games thread.

You don’t know how tournaments here work, don’t you? The matches in the tournament are gonna be made into vs matches. Simple as ******* that. Don’t make me derail this any further

 

[speedster352]

You don’t know how tournaments here work, don’t you? The matches in the tournament are gonna be made into vs matches. Simple as ******* that. Don’t make me derail this any further

Yes, but I didn't participate in it. I was planning on submitting the characters and contacting the verse supporters. I just tried to submit 2 characters on a fun and games match and if you said you won't add them why report me then? Is that a little bit overboard? Yeah, I am not going back and forth with you but you need to calm down.

 

[Confluctor]

Honestly? I agree with Speedster, there is no need for this to be reported, he wasn't technically participating in versus thread. And nothing says he can't submit a character - but ofc, not debate them. A lot of people submit characters for tournaments and have others argue for the character.

Should Speedster get involved in the actual tourney or try to use a proxy, then yeah, that can be reported. But for now, it seems like a non-issue.


In any case, Speedster; Coolboy doesn't want your characters there, so just drop it and forget about it.

 

[speedster352]

Honestly? I agree with Speedster, there is no need for this to be reported, he wasn't technically participating in versus thread. And nothing says he can't submit a character - but ofc, not debate them. A lot of people submit characters for tournaments and have others argue for the character.

Should Speedster get involved in the actual tourney or try to use a proxy, then yeah, that can be reported. But for now, it seems like a non-issue.


In any case, Speedster; Coolboy doesn't want your characters there, so just drop it and forget about it.

Thank you. I will. Have a nice day

 

[Coolboy6]

Honestly? I agree with Speedster, there is no need for this to be reported, he wasn't technically participating in versus thread. And nothing says he can't submit a character - but ofc, not debate them. A lot of people submit characters for tournaments and have others argue for the character.

He was gonna try and participate in a vs thread and clearly he DM’d me his submissions since he knew he was doing something wrong. Heck, even people in the tournament thread didn’t think want his characters in. And don’t act like I’m dumb for constantly being bothered by someone who is unwilling to learn

 

[speedster352]

He was gonna try and participate in a vs thread and clearly he DM’d me his submissions since he knew he was doing something wrong. Heck, even people in the tournament thread didn’t think want his characters in. And don’t act like I’m dumb for constantly being bothered by someone who is unwilling to learn

To be fair you just left the chat after saying I was thread banned. I wasn't trying to participate I just wanted to submit 2 characters in a fun and games thread.

 

[Coolboy6]

To be fair you just left the chat after saying I was thread banned. I wasn't trying to participate I just wanted to submit 2 characters in a fun and games thread.

I left the chat because I didn’t want to deal with your bullshit. And you decided to comment on the actual thread since you kept ******* pushing adding in the characters.

 

[Coolboy6]

A lot of people submit characters for tournaments and have others argue for the character.

Also, i guess this makes sense. Fine, I embarrassingly concede.

 

[speedster352]

I left the chat because I didn’t want to deal with your bullshit. And you decided to comment on the actual thread since you kept ******* pushing adding in the characters.

Like I said please calm down. Yes, but what am I supposed to learn like you were saying? So what's your problem here?

 

[Coolboy6]

Like I said please calm down. Yes, but what am I supposed to learn like you were saying? So what's your problem here?

What to learn here is not to keep bothering me whenever I tell you “no”. Simple as that

 

[speedster352]

What to learn here is not to keep bothering me whenever I tell you “no”. Simple as that

I understand that but you didn't say no you just left after you said I was thread banned. Anyway no more derailing.

 

[Antvasima]

Honestly? I agree with Speedster, there is no need for this to be reported, he wasn't technically participating in versus thread. And nothing says he can't submit a character - but ofc, not debate them. A lot of people submit characters for tournaments and have others argue for the character.

Should Speedster get involved in the actual tourney or try to use a proxy, then yeah, that can be reported. But for now, it seems like a non-issue.

In any case, Speedster; Coolboy doesn't want your characters there, so just drop it and forget about it.

I personally agree with this. Thank you for helping out.

 

[Confluctor]

@MisterMiyagi posted proper **** in this thread; https://vsbattles.com/threads/magi-massive-revision.135054

The post (link) is now deleted by Glassman, but either way, something needs to be done about it. As for staff, you can check for yourself - but be prepared for some ugly stuff.

 

[XXKINGXX69]

He's a pan alt

 

[The_Impress]

He's a pan alt

Proof?

Also ye ban the guy

 

[Emirp sumitpo]

How long of a ban would suffice? Doesn't posting straight up pornography warrant a permaban?

 

[Damage3245]

This warrants a perma ban.

EDIT: I've applied it now.

 

[Armorchompy]

I would like to report @XXKINGXX69 for the following reasons:

• Commonly insults people as he's losing a debate, sometimes even claiming that his opponent knows nothing about the verse in question or that literally everyone in a debate but him is unreliable (because they disagreed with him), this after explicitly targeting certain users in the same thread. Most extreme example of this is literally reporting someone for disagreeing with his CRTafter losing a debate.
  • Sir Ovens has warned him about this behavior, so it cannot be assumed he's unaware that he's being annoying/unpleasant in the newer examples.
  • Speaking of being warned, replying to criticism with "your mom" jokes is something he was also warned about, yet keeps doing.
• Speaking of insults, here's a good one, once again, prompted by KING losing a debate.
• Claims a character has a Low 2-C feat, then goes back on it, claiming it to be a joke, then makes a similar claim again but then goes back on it again, claiming he just heard of it, which is the most blatant trolling I've ever seen.
  • Afterwards, threatens to make a 3-A profile for the verse anyway despite having lost the debate.
  • Note that he has claimed characters are certain tiers then gone back on it claiming it to be a joke on other occasions too. Here's another example.
• Upon one of his threads being rejected and locked, he immediately makes it again without even acknowledging the reasons it was rejected.
• Makes incredibly extraordinary claims in a thread and constantly refuses to bring up additional proof or scans when requested to by like, five people, most of them staff.
• In fact, he makes a lot of threads without bringing up any scans. Or evidence at all, really.
• Crashes a random, peaceful conversation about Sentry comics by saying, completely unprompted, that "Sentry's ass and Batman is better".
• Stonewalls debates pretty often.
• Insults Confluctor and Marvel fans, which I think was meant to be a joke but really falls flat all things considered, this being another example of making pseudo-jokey insults after losing a debate. Here's a similar one.
  • Generally has an issue with making very unfunny jokes during debates. Obviously some levity during Vs Debates and even CRTs is perfectly fine but again, this constantly puts an halt to discussions without any benefit and is often a little unpleasant or insulting, to the point that he's been warned for it.
• He also has a fixation with asking for scans about the most random stuff, including things that literally cannot have scans, even just personal opinions or interpretations of statements. I think this is his idea of a joke, at least sometimes, but again, it's very annoying, pointless trolling and just halts a debate to a screeching halt. Sometimes, the scans have even been posted already.
  • As a reminder, here's another example of him making weird claims without providing a hint of evidence, and here's another of him making a claim and then admitting he doesn't actually know the character in question.

I would like to report KING again due to his toxic behavior in threads.

• Insults another user's abilities
• Insults another user, period
• Once again mocks other knowledgeable users' knowledge of the verse mid-debate (I say once again, because this is exactly one of the things he was originally banned for)
• Also mocks people's arguments
• Is told by many knowledgeable users that his CRT needs to wait for a bigger one they're planning, doesn't listen to that and tries to push his forward anyway
• Straight-up acknowledges to using muddy tactics to make his CRTs have a higher chance of passing
• Repeatedlt takes his opponents' replies as concessions, despite them clearly not being that
• Refuses to have his calculation evaluated by Calc Group Members, claiming he's done so himself already and that they are inferior to him.
• Stonewalling isn't really a punishable offense, but KING stonewalling a debate with zero support and without any real arguments for almost three pages does speak to his usual conduct in threads, I've seen and heard many users very frustrated with his behavior and honestly I have to agree with them, most of the time he is fairly demeaning or dismissive.

 

[Emirp sumitpo]

I would like to report KING again due to his toxic behavior in threads.

• Insults another user's abilities
• Insults another user, period
• Once again mocks other knowledgeable users' knowledge of the verse mid-debate (I say once again, because this is exactly one of the things he was originally banned for)
• Also mocks people's arguments
• Is told by many knowledgeable users that his CRT needs to wait for a bigger one they're planning, doesn't listen to that and tries to push his forward anyway
• Straight-up acknowledges to using muddy tactics to make his CRTs have a higher chance of passing
• Repeatedlt takes his opponents' replies as concessions, despite them clearly not being that
• Refuses to have his calculation evaluated by Calc Group Members, claiming he's done so himself already and that they are inferior to him.
• Stonewalling isn't really a punishable offense, but KING stonewalling a debate with zero support and without any real arguments for almost three pages does speak to his usual conduct in threads, I've seen and heard many users very frustrated with his behavior and honestly I have to agree with them, most of the time he is fairly demeaning or dismissive.

Considering he's consistently pulled off these stunts repeatedly, and hasn't changed since the last time he was reported for his behavious. I say he warrants a ban. I suggest 1 to 3 months.

 

[Armorchompy]

He was already banned for one month previously, alongside the many warnings

 

[Emirp sumitpo]

Ban for 6 months sounds good

I agree with this.

 

[LordTracer]

Straight-up acknowledges to using muddy tactics to make his CRTs have a higher chance of passing

I would’ve said a three month ban would be fine, but this makes me more inclined to agree with six months.

 

[Maverick_Zero_X]

A temp ban for 6 months or a year should work since his behavior hasn't changed since his last block.

 

[Milly_Rocking_Bandit]

I am in full, and 100% agreement, with a 6 months ban.

 

[Armorchompy]

@XXKINGXX69

 

[XXKINGXX69]

I would like to report KING again due to his toxic behavior in threads.

• Insults another user's abilities
• Insults another user, period
• Once again mocks other knowledgeable users' knowledge of the verse mid-debate (I say once again, because this is exactly one of the things he was originally banned for)
• Also mocks people's arguments
• Is told by many knowledgeable users that his CRT needs to wait for a bigger one they're planning, doesn't listen to that and tries to push his forward anyway
• Straight-up acknowledges to using muddy tactics to make his CRTs have a higher chance of passing
• Repeatedlt takes his opponents' replies as concessions, despite them clearly not being that
• Refuses to have his calculation evaluated by Calc Group Members, claiming he's done so himself already and that they are inferior to him.
• Stonewalling isn't really a punishable offense, but KING stonewalling a debate with zero support and without any real arguments for almost three pages does speak to his usual conduct in threads, I've seen and heard many users very frustrated with his behavior and honestly I have to agree with them, most of the time he is fairly demeaning or dismissive.

Ok the first one was my bad

The second one was obviously a joke if you read it

The third one was just me wanting dareaperman to not derail the thread with proposals not even part of the thread

Also mocks people's argument

This is just me not wanting to read, not mocking

Is told by many knowledgeable users that his CRT needs to wait for a bigger one they're planning, doesn't listen to that and tries to push his forward anyway

This is not true, no one was actually planning anything yet, it was just people thinking a CRT will be made in the future. I tried to push it forward for many reasons including the fact that said CRT would be too messy and a big mess if everything huge was in just 1. This isn't rulebreaking

Straight-up acknowledges to using muddy tactics to make his CRTs have a higher chance of passing

This was obviously not serious

Repeatedlt takes his opponents' replies as concessions, despite them clearly not being that

I said those were concessions because they didn't even acknowledge what I said, nothings wrong with that

Refuses to have his calculation evaluated by Calc Group Members, claiming he's done so himself already and that they are inferior to him.

Dude this is obviously not serious

The last one in the makkari thread isn't stonewalling, Qawsedf was going in circles saying "no feats to back it up" and I said "doesn't need feats to back it up but needs evidence of the statement being contradicted

is fairly demeaning or dismissive.

Again have no idea why you're taking this seriously its just a joke at how ridiculous he was

 

[XXKINGXX69]

overall most of that except the first one isn't rule breaking, disagreeing with almost everyone here in a lot of debates isn't against the rules

 

[Armorchompy]

The second one was obviously a joke if you read it

You can't just use "this is a joke" as a defense bro, it can apply to literally any situations

The third one was just me wanting dareaperman to not derail the thread with proposals not even part of the thread

Doesn't matter, you were literally warned not to do this in the past

This is just me not wanting to read, not mocking

You can't just

This is not true, no one was actually planning anything yet, it was just people thinking a CRT will be made in the future. I tried to push it forward for many reasons including the fact that said CRT would be too messy and a big mess if everything huge was in just 1. This isn't rulebreaking

They literally told you the opposite and that you shouldn't do this, literally what reason would you have to.

This was obviously not serious

See above.

I said those were concessions because they didn't even acknowledge what I said, nothings wrong with that

There is a lot wrong with that bro, not replying to something isn't a concession.

Dude this is obviously not serious

See above.

The last one in the makkari thread isn't stonewalling, Qawsedf was going in circles saying "no feats to back it up" and I said "doesn't need feats to back it up but needs evidence of the statement being contradicted

"I'm not making circular arguments, you're making circular arguments"

Again have no idea why you're taking this seriously its just a joke at how ridiculous he was

Dude have you considered that maybe you should be a bit more serious and a bit less an asshole? Clearly, even if these all were jokes, and I don't think they all are, they're still pretty offensive or demeaning, "lol it was a joke" doesn't change that.

 

[LordTracer]

This is not true, no one was actually planning anything yet, it was just people thinking a CRT will be made in the future.

This is objectively false, the Star Wars revisions have been in the works since at least 2020, maybe even earlier.

 

[XXKINGXX69]

This is objectively false, the Star Wars revisions have been in the works since at least 2020, maybe even earlier.

I mean if thats true, I wasn't aware people actually started working on it and thought people were just thinking of it, which is why emirp (i think it was him) didn't answer when I asked him who was working on it

You can't just use "this is a joke" as a defense bro, it can apply to literally any situations

Doesn't matter, you were literally warned not to do this in the past

You can't just

They literally told you the opposite and that you shouldn't do this, literally what reason would you have to.

See above.

There is a lot wrong with that bro, not replying to something isn't a concession.

See above.

"I'm not making circular arguments, you're making circular arguments"

Dude have you considered that maybe you should be a bit more serious and a bit less an asshole? Clearly, if these were to be jokes, and I don't think they all are, they're still pretty offensive or demeaning, "lol it was a joke" doesn't change that.

I was never warned to not ask people who were derailing threads to not comment

They literally told you the opposite and that you shouldn't do this, literally what reason would you have to.

Do you think its like, against the rules to not agree with other people's decisions?

There is a lot wrong with that bro, not replying to something isn't a concession.

Even if that were true, whats wrong with that?

"I'm not making circular arguments, you're making circular arguments"

You should read the whole thread, the whole thing was just a statements> feats debate and me saying statements don't need to be backed up. If anything, Qawsedf was the one stonewalling

Dude have you considered that maybe you should be a bit more serious and a bit less an asshole? Clearly, if these were to be jokes, and I don't think they all are, they're still pretty offensive or demeaning, "lol it was a joke" doesn't change that.

Why do you think obvious jokes are offensive

 

[Armorchompy]

I was never warned to not ask people who were derailing threads to not comment

It should be pretty obvious you shouldn't be rude to people. Not to mention you seem to have a pretty selfish definition of "derailing"

Do you think its like, against the rules to not agree with other people's decisions?

No, I think it's pretty sus when half the supporter base agrees with the thread but tells you that it's better to wait for a site-wide and go "nuh-uh, I wanna do it now"

Even if that were true, whats wrong with that?

It's just a cheap and scummy debating tactic to try and get one over your opponent.

You should read the whole thread, the whole thing was just a statements> feats debate and me saying statements don't need to be backed up. If anything, Qawsedf was the one stonewalling

This is secondary anyway, I have read the whole thread and I definitely think you were the one stonewalling, but again it's just evidence of your conduit

Why do you think obvious jokes are offensive

The question is why do you think something being covered in a thin layer of irony prevents it from being offensive?

 

[XXKINGXX69]

@XXKINGXX69 you confuse "questioning your evidence" with "derailing". Also you explicitly said "Don't comment if you dont scale pokemon", which is what you were reported for.

Ok show me which one you're talking about so I know