• 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)

From their response to my instruction, it seems like they made an error in their edit. Just keep an eye on them for now.

Also, can you teach me how to revert edits? So, I can be helpful in the future

  1. Go into the page's history.
  2. Click the edit you want to revert to.
  3. Click the edit button.
  4. Save the edit as-is.
There are some other ways of reverting; if it was just one edit, you can click the "undo" button. If it was just one person editing, and you have staff permissions, you can click the "rollback" button, which will undo all edits until the last one by a different user.
 
Agnaa said:
From their response to my instruction, it seems like they made an error in their edit. Just keep an eye on them for now.

Also, can you teach me how to revert edits? So, I can be helpful in the future

  1. Go into the page's history.
  2. Click the edit you want to revert to.
  3. Click the edit button.
  4. Save the edit as-is.
There are some other ways of reverting; if it was just one edit, you can click the "undo" button. If it was just one person editing, and you have staff permissions, you can click the "rollback" button, which will undo all edits until the last one by a different user.
Click to expand...
Thanks and I hope I can help with those issues in the future.
 
Antvasima said:
I would greatly appreciate if somebody who knows Confluctor well tries to convince him to come back to this community, as he has usually been an excellent and extremely helpful staff member as far as I am concerned. 🙏
Click to expand...
With all due respect Ant, that type of (understandably) visceral anger takes time to recover from and regardless of overturning the ban it's clear Confluctor needs time away from the VSBW (Again a "fun hobby" shouldn't be emotionally draining yet time and again it does).

The best thing to do is to forget about that whole debacle and move on. If Confluctor decides to come back just welcome him back with open arms, that's all.

Speaking as someone whose had generally nothing but positive experiences talking to Confluctor in the past.
 
Last edited:
The_Axiom_of_Virgo said:
With all due disrespect Ant, that type of (understandably) visceral anger takes time to recover from and regardless of overturning the ban it's clear Confluctor needs time away from the VSBW (Again a "fun hobby" shouldn't be emotionally draining yet time and again it does).

The best thing to do is to forget about that whole debacle and move on. If Confluctor decides to come back just welcome him back with open arms, that's all.

Speaking as someone whose had generally nothing but positive experiences talking to Confluctor in the past.
Click to expand...
Disrespect? I think you are trying to say, “With all due respect, Ant”.
 
The_Axiom_of_Virgo said:
With all due respect Ant, that type of (understandably) visceral anger takes time to recover from and regardless of overturning the ban it's clear Confluctor needs time away from the VSBW (Again a "fun hobby" shouldn't be emotionally draining yet time and again it does).

The best thing to do is to forget about that whole debacle and move on. If Confluctor decides to come back just welcome him back with open arms, that's all.

Speaking as someone whose had generally nothing but positive experiences talking to Confluctor in the past.
Click to expand...
Okay then. I just don't want him to think that he has been banned. He is very welcome back here whenever he wants.
 
I am reporting @Sniper670 for his behavior in this thread.

During the last page, Sniper has repeatedly lied about votes and has attempted to invalidate @DontTalkDT's vote because he won't respond to his points, even though the thread is over. By continuing to repeat the same arguments even though the thread is done, he is also stonewalling.

For context, even in his own vote tally, you can see that 4 staff do not disagree, but 2. The other 2 are neutral, and 3 are in agreement. This on it's own is misleading because @Moritzva and @The_real_cal_howard don't agree that Arceus's Plates are good enough evidence that Arceus can use every single Pokemon power.

Overall, he just needs a light warning for this behavior. Nothing here is ban worthy whatsoever, just bad faith.
 
InfiniteDay said:
I am reporting @Sniper670 for his behavior in this thread.

During the last page, Sniper has repeatedly lied about votes and has attempted to invalidate @DontTalkDT's vote because he won't respond to his points, even though the thread is over. By continuing to repeat the same arguments even though the thread is done, he is also stonewalling.
Click to expand...
1. I didn't lie. There are 4 votes in disagreement. 2 are neutral. 1 leans on disagreeing, the other wants Arceus to get all powers

Repeating an argument you failed to refute by repetetive talks about votes that isn't in your favor
InfiniteDay said:
For context, even in his own vote tally, you can see that 4 staff do not disagree, but 2. The other 2 are neutral, and 3 are in agreement. This on it's own is misleading because @Moritzva and @The_real_cal_howard don't agree that Arceus's Plates are good enough evidence that Arceus can use every single Pokemon power.
Click to expand...
1. Explained above
2. There was a recent trailer that literally confirms some things.

I brought it up and @InfiniteDay has not given me a reply till now. All he talks about is "its over", when it's not even close to it

DT argument doesn't fly. I made mention, Ant called him. I see no reason his argument holds value when
A. His argument falls on Arceus not habing the know how. Which won't work here as the concept of knowledge is literally just an aspect of Arceus

It will be extremely dishonest if we went like
"Okay DT never returned, so let's ignore your post and go with what DT says"
InfiniteDay said:
Overall, he just needs a light warning for this behavior. Nothing here is ban worthy whatsoever, just bad faith.
Click to expand...
Overall. All you've been doing for several hours now, is addressing anything but the main argument

Your recent comments literally confirms you didn't read it at all
 
Sniper670 said:
1. I didn't lie. There are 4 votes in disagreement. 2 are neutral. 1 leans on disagreeing, the other wants Arceus to get all powers
Click to expand...
Alright, let's count up the votes from your most recent tally.

"Agrees: 9 Regular + 3 Staff (@Iamunanimousinthat, @Hasty12345, @Rikimarox2, @InfiniteDay, @Paul_Frank, @Comicgyal, @DontTalkDT, @JoshSSJGod, @TheGreatMaster12, @Antvasima, @Paul_Frank, @Maverick_Zero_X

Disagrees: 15 Regular + 2 staff (@Yemma670, @Arceus0x, @Chariot190, @Thelastmlg, @The_Pink_God, @JustANormalPerson01, @hajime, @Robot972, @Moritzva, @ZetaMarishi, @Milly_Rocking_Bandit, @Pikaman, @GodlyCharmander, @Luckyfun , @Faron25 @The_real_cal_howard, @Agnaa(some things need to change, but I'm waiting for the specifics)

Inconclusive/No Opinion: 3 regular + 1 Staff @Everything12(Agrees with True Form Arceus having everything), @Purgy (fine with Possibly), @Zencha9 (Agreed with True Form Having it), @Vietthai96, @Dereck03 (leaning towards disagreeing with op)"

As you can see, 2 staff are listed as disagree and 2 are listed as Inconclusive.

You're combining the disagree and inconclusive staff votes, which in it of itself is blatant, but your also acting as if the neutral votes are still their, which is even worse. Neutral means that while they mean lean one way or another, they are not convinced on either side, and as such do not count as a vote for either side. Counting them for your side is bad practise at best and malicious at worst.
Sniper670 said:
Repeating an argument you failed to refute by repetetive talks about votes that isn't in your favor

1. Explained above
2. There was a recent trailer that literally confirms some things.

I brought it up and @InfiniteDay has not given me a reply till now. All he talks about is "its over", when it's not even close to it

Your recent comments literally confirms you didn't read it at all
Click to expand...
First off, this is ad-hominem. Second of all, it is not relevant to the report and I do not know why you decided to include this information when this is RVR, not the Arceus CRT.
Sniper670 said:
DT argument doesn't fly. I made mention, Ant called him. I see no reason his argument holds value when
A. His argument falls on Arceus not habing the know how. Which won't work here as the concept of knowledge is literally just an aspect of Arceus

It will be extremely dishonest if we went like
"Okay DT never returned, so let's ignore your post and go with what DT says"
Click to expand...
First off: You cannot just invalidate votes because he feel like his argument isn't strong.

Second Off: DT doesn't need to respond to your points for his argument and votes to count and influence people's decisions.
 
You didn't get it?
4 in total against op

Amongst the 4, 2 are neutral. Amongst the 2, 1. Leans towards disagreeing, the other wants Arceus True Form to get everything

DT made an argument several pages ago, which was refuted. But upon several calls he never made it back
 
Sniper670 said:
You didn't get it?
4 in total against op

Amongst the 4, 2 are neutral. Amongst the 2, 1. Leans towards disagreeing, the other wants Arceus True Form to get everything

DT made an argument several pages ago, which was refuted. But upon several calls he never made it back
Click to expand...
You don't seem to understand that neutral votes cannot be changed into other votes without the people who cast them saying otherwise. It doesn't matter if they may lean towards one side, they still are Inconclusive votes.

Also, Arceus's True Form getting the powers is not what the CRT is about, and as such is irrelevant information.
 
InfiniteDay said:
He's using the neutral votes as if they were disagree votes, and then adding back in the neutral votes.
Click to expand...

InfiniteDay said:
You don't seem to understand that neutral votes cannot be changed into other votes without the people who cast them saying otherwise. It doesn't matter if they may lean towards one side, they still are Inconclusive votes.
Click to expand...
@Everything12 wants Arceus to get everything
InfiniteDay said:
Also, Arceus's True Form getting the powers is not what the CRT is about, and as such is irrelevant information.
Click to expand...
The CRT is for arceus to lose everything

All 4, are not agreeing with that idea. It's that simple
 
Look. Are you going to actually address the argument, or you're just going to beat around the bush?

I won't blame you. Your recent comment in the plates thread proves you didn't even read
 
Sniper670 said:
Look. Are you going to actually address the argument, or you're just going to beat around the bush?

I won't blame you. Your recent comment in the plates thread proves you didn't even read
Click to expand...
This is not the thread to talk about the Arceus CRT. I'm not beating around the bush, i'm just not going to be debating you on RVR of all places.

Sniper, i'm fine if you don't even get a warning, you just need to realise that inconclusive votes, or even those that are inconclusive but lean to one side, can be changed to another.
 
The_Axiom_of_Virgo said:
@InfiniteDay and @Sniper670 I'm just going to say this to and fro on the RVT doesn't look good for either of you, just stop arguing with each other here and leave it up to the mods before you both end up in hot water.

I'll comment no further on this subject.
Click to expand...
This ^^^


Let the mods discuss and see what's needed.
 
Inconclusive votes are Inconclusive votes regardless of whether or not the voter leans to one side.

That is to say that they can't fully decide on which side they stand on so they remain neutral. In practice this means you do not count Inconclusive votes when deciding the final tally.

Sniper needs to understand the above which he doesn't at the moment. I think letting him off on a warning for now should suffice but no more vote manipulation will be tolerated.
 
To add to the report, my vote was being counted in a way that I never agreed to, in a CRT I never commented in or saw. I was never even notified that my vote was being counted like that.

As Iamunanimousinthat said in the thread, he was willing to concede on the point I brought up, so I'd lean more on the agree side. Even just going by what I said before seeing the thread, I agreed with the vast majority of the OP.
 
Agnaa said:
To add to the report, my vote was being counted in a way that I never agreed to, in a CRT I never commented in or saw. I was never even notified that my vote was being counted like that.

As Iamunanimousinthat said in the thread, he was willing to concede on the point I brought up, so I'd lean more on the agree side. Even just going by what I said before seeing the thread, I agreed with the vast majority of the OP.
Click to expand...
You literally conceded


Honestly, if you're going to ignore all evidence and wank your position as staff, over to you.


I just cannot fathom how the evidence can be so blatant as to say Arceus has the power of ALL THINGS..

Then Admin says he disagrees because "it can also be interpreted as strength"

... What. The. ****.


When I literally proved you WRONG. And now you're here telling me you agree with the op


Incredible. I'm amazed.
 
Honestly, I've been meaning to report Yemma/Sniper670 for uncivil, rude comments for a while, alongside a chronic lack of good faith and reasonable debating (insulting opponents, refusing to provide evidence and stonewalling all the while, etc), but didn't have enough evidence for anything significant.

Overall, Yemma/Sniper670 hasn't been a remotely civil or reasonable individual on Pokemon threads. Make of it as you will.
 
I don't care tbh. And quit blaming me alone, others like Iamunanimousinthat and @InfiniteDay are also uncivil

You know how you feel when the evidence is right in front of someone, but he chooses not to see it?

Ahh, you hit on exactly how I feel rn
 
Sniper: I'm gonna leave most of this for your wall, since most of what I have to say isn't relevant for the report.

But what is relevant is that I didn't concede, and you didn't prove me wrong, so you do not get to unilaterally decide that my vote is agreeing with you.

If anyone cares about the actual arguments/reasons why, they can have a look at the convo on your wall.
 
i am not sure if this is report-worthy or not but @speedster352 commented on my page in regards to a match with zeldris. i asked why they wouldnt just post on the thread and they didnt answer, and i only learned today that they are banned from talking in versus threads, so it seems like they are trying to circumvent a ban by directly posting on pages. it feels strange that that would be allowed as a loophole if they were already banned from doing it in threads

 
speedster352 went through a car accident recently in which he received considerable damage to his body along with a serious concussion that gave him long-term memory loss. I definitely don't think that we should add further to his problems. He should be able to use this place as a refuge from his real world problems.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Antvasima
  • Sticky
Wiki Vandalism Reports
8 9 10
Replies
394
Views
25K
GarrixianXD
GarrixianXD
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
5K
LephyrTheRevanchist
LephyrTheRevanchist
H3110l12345I20
IRL Paper has a profile.
Replies
28
Views
984
JustANormalLemon
JustANormalLemon
DarkGrath
  • Locked
Proposal for Off-Site Rules Revision
2 3
Replies
93
Views
9K
Antvasima
Antvasima
Back
Top