• 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)

Mr._Bambu said:
If what Fujiwara is saying is true (I'd like other Anus Voidgold fans to confirm or deny whether the WN and LN use the same scans or not, that is the crux of the issue), then Fujiwara has a legitimate complaint. The problem is that this complaint is steeped in verse specific knowledge- are both characters dependent on these scans, were the matters tackled in the mentioned CRT meant for both versions of the character, etc.

If the answer is yes to these questions, then Fujiwara is 100% correct for making a report.


Schizo shit, I'll close it. @eliaspower1234 Do this sorta thing in Fun and Games.
Click to expand...
Yes, you can see here that the scans his current profile use are from 2021 and have several thousand views. Note that this isn't the case for everything; Just the scans for "sources", which is the crux of the debate over concept manipulation. Both scans also use the light novel as a source, so I'm not sure why Dread was talking about the web novel.

Also, I should note that the LN has no new context that'd support type 1. It is literally using less information than the WN, and none of the information it does use is new.
 
Last edited:
Mad_Dog_of_Fujiwara said:
To add onto this somewhat, @EldemadeDityjon has admitted to ignoring staff votes as a basis for these upgrades simply because he thinks he "debunked" @Theglassman12 (here and here). So MG supporters are, again, simply adding whatever they want to profiles with 0 regard for staff input.
Click to expand...
Stop trying to twist my words. Here a staff did agreed with CM type 1 source with proper explanation.

 
Mad_Dog_of_Fujiwara said:
That's not my point. You said no staff disagreed, when Glass did in fact disagree. Your only justification is that he "disagreed without a reason".
Click to expand...
The fact you lied about topic being rejected is crazy. Thread was closed because we said we are going to redo the LN Profiles.
Also @DontTalkDT and Darth explanation disapproves Glassman. And Glass didn't bothered to reply later onwards when he was refuted with. Unless you take Glass Opinion > @DontTalkDT and Darth valid explanation.

As DT is one who normally maintains Conceptual Manipulation pages. I will take his Opinion and Darth who actually gave a valid reasoning > Others who hasn't even bothered to explain themselves.
 
EldemadeDityjon said:
The fact you lied about topic being rejected is crazy. Thread was closed because we said we are going to redo the LN Profiles. Also @DontTalkDT and Darth explanation disapproves Glassman. And Glass didn't bothered to reply later onwards when he was refuted with. Unless you take Glass Opinion > @DontTalkDT and Darth valid explanation.

As DT is one who normally maintains Conceptual Manipulation pages. I will take his Opinion and Darth who actually gave a valid reasoning > Others who hasn't even bothered to explain themselves.

Click to expand...
I didn't say it was rejected. I said 1. that it wasn't accepted (which is true), and 2. that you lied about the votes (which is also true).

So to be clear, this post is an admission that you deliberately ignored staff input just so you could apply upgrades? And for further context, DT never even posted in any of the Maou Gakuin threads being discussed here.
 
Mad_Dog_of_Fujiwara said:
Essentially, they are ignoring staff consensus and making upgrades that have previously been rejected. It should also be noted that Anos' profile was uploaded without a CRT, so this upgrade was done without any sort of analysis or approval from staff.

TL;DR: Tatsumi admits to ignoring accepted upgrades and inserting what they think is true with 0 staff oversight. Probably needs a strong warning or short term ban.
Click to expand...
Mad_Dog_of_Fujiwara said:
I didn't say it was rejected. I said 1. that it wasn't accepted (which is true), and 2. that you lied about the votes (which is also true).
Click to expand...
???
Mad_Dog_of_Fujiwara said:
So to be clear, this post is an admission that you deliberately ignored staff input just so you could apply upgrades? And for further context, DT never even posted in any of the Maou Gakuin threads being discussed here.
Click to expand...
If you actually read what i wrote you would have already understood. I said DT who oversees Conceptual Manipulation pages his opinion > others and you did said MGK supporters using Rejected Thread which is lie.
 
Last edited:
EldemadeDityjon said:
???
Click to expand...
That was in reference to both my downgrade thread, and the first part of the type 1 upgrades.

EldemadeDityjon said:
If you actually read what i wrote you would have already understood. I said DT who oversees Conceptual Manipulation pages his opinion > others and you did said MGK supporters using Rejected Thread which is lie.
Click to expand...
Which is irrelevant, because DT never actually gave input on those threads. You can't use his opinion as a crutch here.
 
Mad_Dog_of_Fujiwara said:
That was in reference to both my downgrade thread, and the first part of the type 1 upgrades.
Click to expand...
You literally said you never claimed it as Rejected*.
Mad_Dog_of_Fujiwara said:
Which is irrelevant, because DT never actually gave input on those threads. You can't use his opinion as a crutch here.
Click to expand...
My sole Reasoning was it was never rejected instead closed which is far from your bias claims of it being rejected. Never accepted* it doesn't mean it was rejected either. Also Darth did give a explanation and evaluated properly when Glass was ducking whole time without a reasoning. Also it's irrelevant to your thread why are trying to use that as an argument?
Tatsumi504 said:
In the first place, confirmation was received from @DontTalkDT that the premise of the CRT is wrong- wasn't addressed directly but indirectly.

The premise of the CRT was that the concept governs only one thing and as such is a personal concept. DT confirmed that a concept governing only one thing doesn't make it a personal concept which voids the entire CRT and as I mentioned above, the CRT has nothing do with the current profile. The WN profiles were scrapped and it's strictly LN profiles now.
Click to expand...
Also this DT himself saying individual concepts are qualified for CM type 1 that which was used for current profile justification.

I will say this again DT who oversees Conceptual manipulation pages his opinion > others in this pages where How Ultima opinion stands above others in tiering system pages. You can't just rule out DT opinion as nothing just because you don't want to accept it.
 
I'm not gonna bother arguing this. Here's a recap for those who don't want to deal with Elde's bullshit.

-Despite what Elde claims, DT has never given evaluation to any Maou Gakuin concept upgrade thread.
-Said upgrades were explicitly rejected twice before, and a third thread was tied in terms of votes.
-In spite of that, MG supporters have re-upgraded sources back to type 1 with no permission. This is because they believe the opinions of those who disagreed are simply not valid, which you can see @EldemadeDityjon defend above despite that very obviously being a rules violation.
 
Mr._Bambu said:
If what Fujiwara is saying is true (I'd like other Anus Voidgold fans to confirm or deny whether the WN and LN use the same scans or not, that is the crux of the issue), then Fujiwara has a legitimate complaint. The problem is that this complaint is steeped in verse specific knowledge- are both characters dependent on these scans, were the matters tackled in the mentioned CRT meant for both versions of the character, etc.

If the answer is yes to these questions, then Fujiwara is 100% correct for making a report.


Schizo shit, I'll close it. @eliaspower1234 Do this sorta thing in Fun and Games.
Click to expand...
Just wanted to share my thoughts from here because reason for that and this are different. Also something that is not even valid can it still be used?
Post in thread 'Anos is Back, and so are Maou Gakuin Downgrades' https://vsbattles.com/threads/anos-is-back-and-so-are-maou-gakuin-downgrades.152797/post-5690057
 
Last edited:
I basically agree with what Bambu and First Witch are saying, remaking a page that had only just been deleted isn't much different than editing a page while making a lot of changes. Which typically requires a content revision to do. It's not the same as just introducing a new character and making a profile from scratch. Making giant edits to a profile requires a content revision regardless of Tier; it's not Tier 1 pages exclusively.
 
Godsatoshi23 said:
But what if something that had accepted in the content revision is not valid?
Click to expand...
Then a staff can reopen the thread where it was accepted to re-discuss it (or you can go to a staff wall to bring up the problem and see if it merits re-discussion). If neither of those happen for whatever reason, you would need to wait a few months before bringing it up again.
When creating content revisions, it is essential to ensure that the topic has not been addressed previously. Rejected content revisions cannot be resubmitted within a short period of time (typically defined as within 3 to 4 months), except in cases where a staff member has a good reason to do so (e.g. important unconsidered information, violation of site standards or flaws in a calculation). This only applies to threads that have received extensive debate or have been rejected due to a clear conflict with the wiki's rules or standards. If a thread passes or is rejected without significant opposition, then opposition should not be restricted from making a point.
Click to expand...
Here

For future questions regarding that, you ask them here or on a Q&A thread.
 
EldemadeDityjon said:
Also @DontTalkDT and Darth explanation disapproves Glassman. And Glass didn't bothered to reply later onwards when he was refuted with. Unless you take Glass Opinion > @DontTalkDT and Darth valid explanation.

As DT is one who normally maintains Conceptual Manipulation pages. I will take his Opinion and Darth who actually gave a valid reasoning > Others who hasn't even bothered to explain themselves.
Click to expand...
I want to chime in on this part. This is not okay, at all. If Glassman disagreed, you do not have the right to dismiss that fact simply because he didn't continue arguing or because another staff member agreed. You should not be slyly discounting staff votes on a basis like that.
 
Blackcurrant91 said:
They went to DT's wall to ask a question about how personal concepts work, he said they can be type 1 so they reverted the previous CM downgrade without making a further CRT. They discussed it extensively on discord too and as a group decided source qualified for type 1 so there was no need for a CRT for some reason. Regardless of if the standards had changed or not a new CRT should have been created. The explanation used to justify type 1 is exactly the same as it was on his old profile even if the scans might be different.
Click to expand...
I don't need to make a CRT to change something that doesn't even apply to the current profile.

You all do know what your insinuating right? If the fact that "x" has been proven before and should not be used, do we have the right to readd any ability to the profile that has already been accepted without a CRT?

In any case, a CRT that the basis have been proven wrong, was steeped in dishonesty with one staff- @Maverick_Zero_X being part of the peanut gallery (Agree FRA) and never showing up again, @Theglassman12 seeing scans that say "x" is a spade and retaliating with "x" isn't a spade, @Planck69 admitting he isn't sure and his opinion being dependent on the actual interpretation of the CM description which DT doesn't feel the need to change not to mention that the CRT has 0 hold on the new profile which is entirely officially translated content.

Not to mention @Mad_Dog_of_Fujiwara is guilty of also dismissing what has been said by staff (DT) in that case.

Basically the crux of the downgrade
"X" only governs an individual (something specific) and thus is a personal concept (Type 3)
@DontTalkDT opinion when asked about the topic in a vaccum
In the usual sense, a concept of x is expected to govern all x in the world.
A concept of fire governs all fire in the world at once.
A concept of water governs all water in the world at once.
And a concept of Naruto Uzumaki would govern all Naruto Uzumaki in the world at once, even if there is at the moment only one. If there were more, it would govern all.

In contrast, a personal concept doesn't govern all of something, but just one thing in particular.
If you point a weapon that destroys personal concepts at fire and destroy the fire concept with it, only that one fire will be erased. All other fire in existence is fine.

DontTalkDT once again;
A type 1 / 2 concept can only have a single object participate in it, but it would still be the universal concept. (As in, if a duplicate of the object were to be created, it would then participate in that same concept.)
Added context from @Deceived3596
Personal concepts are concepts which, by definition, only govern specific aspects about your personal existence, it doesn’t reference “scope” to mean a singular person, it’s referencing “scope” in the sphere of influence it defines, for an example; the personal conceptualization of emotions would be a considered as a Type 3 Concept since it only defines the emotions of someone, it wouldn’t define that person’s existence, ability of thought etc, nor define the personal emotions of everyone else. It’s by its sheer existence unable to be anything above Type 3 since it doesn’t define anything else within that “sphere of influence” of emotions.
 
Deagonx said:
I want to chime in on this part. This is not okay, at all. If Glassman disagreed, you do not have the right to dismiss that fact simply because he didn't continue arguing or because another staff member agreed. You should not be slyly discounting staff votes on a basis like that.
Click to expand...
Understood. I will watch out things like that doesn't happen again.

But my intention was showing the thread was not rejected. Web novel profiles are already deleted. Fuji was the one who brought up old threads so I replied to her. We are doing the profiles based on LN. So it should be noted some contents are different. So I hope no one brings up old CRTs to justify their Downgrade thread.

Anyway I will stop dragging the conversation for threads and profiles which aren't important to current profiles especially DT and others has different POV. So Current profile rating and abilities should be discussed as new thing not based on Old CRTs. That's all I have to say.
 
Two things:

-As has been admitted by @Tatsumi504, DT has only ever been asked about this topic in a vacuum. His input should not be given more weight, because he has not taken into account the actual evidence MG fans are using for type 1.
-The LN and WN versions of Anos being different is irrelevant here, because they use the EXACT SAME scans to prove sources are concepts. No new evidence from the LN has been brought up, only previously rejected evidence.

Anyways, the staff opinion seems to agree that what Elde and Tatsumi did was wrong, so what should be done about that?
 
Mad_Dog_of_Fujiwara said:
-The LN and WN versions of Anos being different is irrelevant here, because they use the EXACT SAME scans to prove sources are concepts. No new evidence from the LN has been brought up, only previously rejected evidence.

Anyways, the staff opinion seems to agree that what Elde and Tatsumi did was wrong, so what should be done about that?
Click to expand...
If that is the case, I agree that making that change in spite of it being specifically discussed and rejected in the previous profile with regard to the same scans is underhanded, but despite how heated this has gotten I am not sure this action rises to the level of direct action beyond a warning, as there seemed to be some initial uncertainty even among staff about whether or not this was a problem. That's my opinion at least.
 
Deagonx said:
If that is the case, I agree that making that change in spite of it being specifically discussed and rejected in the previous profile with regard to the same scans is underhanded, but despite how heated this has gotten I am not sure this action rises to the level of direct action beyond a warning, as there seemed to be some initial uncertainty even among staff about whether or not this was a problem. That's my opinion at least.
Click to expand...
Well, I do recall Elde and Tatsumi being reported before for aggressive behavior in threads, so I'm not sure if that changes anything. Would it be a good idea to ask other staff for input on this?
 
Mageman460 said:
I can give a proper response to this later, but as for Dread. The scans Dread was asking about weren't relevant to the topic in the CRT. Hence why we asked her to bring it up elsewhere to prevent further derailment.

I was really just asking for staff instruction/intervention as Dread was already ignoring, mocking, and belittling our attempts at informing her that she was derailing.

As for Marshadow, I honestly didn't really even want to report him. It was less really being the same argument, though the 8D one is just a copy paste of the 9D one, and more just the general spamming of threads. It has been about two weeks since the first Root thread Marshadow made. I'm honestly just asking staff to ask him to chill out with the threads as he does not really listen to me.

Sorry about saying warning, I'm new to posting to RVR, if that's too much. Just something like Ant suggested about an instruction.
Click to expand...
Late ass response but, most people who disagreed with the 9d resigned the fact that the moon cell was inferior to the earth, just not enough to make a dimensional difference. So that was the next logical conclusion
 
Can you guys please discuss your CRT somewhere else, preferably NOT on the RVT?

I don't care who's right or wrong in regards to the statistics. A report was filed, you had a good ass while to speak on it, now (and I repeat) let the staff decide. This isn't a window to continue the debate.
 
Mad_Dog_of_Fujiwara said:
Well, I do recall Elde and Tatsumi being reported before for aggressive behavior in threads, so I'm not sure if that changes anything. Would it be a good idea to ask other staff for input on this?
Click to expand...
I think so. I'm definitely not the end-all-be-all. From my end it just seems like the kind of situation where the overall frustration from the debate and other issues make the trespass a lot more upsetting than it probably ought to be in a vacuum, which is understandable, but I'm not sure it's worth banning the guy
 
CloverDragon03 said:
I'd say a warning is very much in order here, but given that these two haven't had any prior offenses afaik, a ban ain't needed
Click to expand...
Elde has been warned a few times prior, if that's at all relevant (here, here, and here, for example). Now these are just warnings, but there's definitely an upper limit on how many times someone can be warned before actual action needs to be taken.
 
Mad_Dog_of_Fujiwara said:
Elde has been warned a few times prior, if that's at all relevant (here, here, and here, for example). Now these are just warnings, but there's definitely an upper limit on how many times someone can be warned before actual action needs to be taken.
Click to expand...
Afaik the warnings were for general hostility, compared to this being a different case entirely

Of course, other staff opinions would also be helpful here
 
Mad_Dog_of_Fujiwara said:
I'd like to report @Tatsumi504 for the following reason.

Recently, Anos Voldigoad's page was reuploaded to VSBW, having added type 1 conceptual manipulation to the page as a part of the update. However, his CM was previously accepted as being only type 3 in this thread, so I made a downgrade thread to rectify that. As @Tatsumi504 explains here (image saved here in case they delete), they changed it back to type 1 simply because they believed that the downgrade was wrong, saying that they didn't need to make an upgrade CRT as a result. Essentially, they are ignoring staff consensus and making upgrades that have previously been rejected. It should also be noted that Anos' profile was uploaded without a CRT, so this upgrade was done without any sort of analysis or approval from staff.

TL;DR: Tatsumi admits to ignoring accepted upgrades and inserting what they think is true with 0 staff oversight. Probably needs a strong warning or short term ban.
Click to expand...

Dereck03 said:
.
Click to expand...
As it has been decided that source being CM Type 1 will be removed unless a CRT be made to add it. Can you do it? For venuz it'll stay tho.
 
I have a question. If someone try to downgrade a verse he didn't even read, trying to downgrade the whole verse without even know most of the feat and is using his own translation that we can prove is modifying thing. He get banned?
 
Staff can delete the comment if wanted.
Regidian said:
I have a question. If someone try to downgrade a verse he didn't even read, trying to downgrade the whole verse without even know most of the feat and is using his own translation that we can prove is modifying thing. He get banned?
Click to expand...
For the first part no, however if someone is using bad translations modiying things to support their point that is indeed report worthy.

Edit: Of course, only if is proved that the translation are indeed purposely modified with bad intentions.
 
Reporting @Reiner due to them blatantly ignoring a set standard for the wiki.

Context: For a character from the Maou Gaukin verse, it has been discussed whenever them regenerating from body + soul destruction is Low or Mid Godly.

Issue is that we got an entire discussion even here for Undertale characters having the regeneration under this very basis, and at the end it was decided it would be just Low Godly as you can see in current profiles.

The problem? @Reiner explicitly said that they do not care and that they find the standard of the wiki wrong, willing to forcefully impose their own standard.

This is pretty much ignoring a standard which made discussions before, so I need staff to help about this.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Antvasima
  • Sticky
Wiki Vandalism Reports
32 33 34
Replies
1K
Views
100K
Antvasima
Antvasima
Lloydblitzed
  • Locked
Discussion Rules lil Revision
Replies
39
Views
3K
Antvasima
Antvasima
Antvasima
  • Sticky
Extremely important announcements for our community
Replies
31
Views
5K
Agnaa
Agnaa
  • Locked
Clarification Of Sentence Phrasings And Addition Of Expected Punishments For Each Type Of Rule Breach For All Rules Pages
Replies
21
Views
2K
Mahek_The_Assassin_Silent_Killer
AThe1412
Can you restrict a character's Standard Equipment if it gives them a different tier?
Replies
2
Views
568
TheGreatJedi13
TheGreatJedi13
Back
Top