• 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)

Maverick_Zero_X said:
A warning works, the comments are rude and unnecessary but don’t seem super severe.
Click to expand...
I agree they aren't super severe, however (and this isn't unique to StrymULTRA) there are some users who do that pretty much all the time, and it can get tiring to deal with it constantly knowing that it never fully crosses a line and thus you can't really get it dealt with easily.

Not saying in this case more than a warning is necessary, per se, but I've had a similar experience with Strym where he's just always a jerk and he's been reported here for it before.
 
I've stepped into the thread and dropped a general wording.

If this is a matter of Strym's behavior over an extended period of time, it may be that we ought to put together a more specific report on his history- at which point I feel real, applicable warnings would be called for.
 
Mr._Bambu said:
I've stepped into the thread and dropped a general wording.

If this is a matter of Strym's behavior over an extended period of time, it may be that we ought to put together a more specific report on his history- at which point I feel real, applicable warnings would be called for.
Click to expand...
Well, he has some really bad behavior towards people, in the concept Zamasu thread he insulted me all the time too
 
I mean, I can get if it gets a bit heated, and I am aware that it's not the first time when it happens, but it does in general when people are passionate about something.

I always had this hot-heated personality in general, and sometimes it slips out of control, that much I admit. If this is an actual problem that is truly report-worthy, then I'll try to behave, if it causes issues with this community.
 
In my experience, it isn't that things "get heated" and then you get mean. You get mean towards people who disagree with you. Just for disagreeing with you in a way you find unacceptable. You're the antagonizer that makes a thread heated.

Even when not being mean you're often just sort of mocking the opposing side adding the skull emojis or lols and lmaos.

Sure, that's not ban worthy, but I sympathize with the folk dealing with it regularly
 
Not everybody takes insults/threats on the internet well. You don't know what little thing might make a person snap. Yes i know exactly how it feels to argue with someone over and over, how you might wanna call them this, and that etc. If i was in Dread's shoes i probably wouldn't respond like how she did being told all that. So kudos to dread. If i get mad arguing with same person over and over i just stop tbh. "its the internet." or "they are just words" are very bad ways of looking about things, imo. Words hurt some people more than sticks and stones. I'm one of them due to a history of mental abuse. It only takes one person being toxic/rude to cause an argument/fight. Too many people think a disagreement is a reason to insult somebody which is why i left reddit.
 
To be fair, although Dread has been very helpful regarding wiki content moderation issues and sometimes evaluations of ongoing rule-violation reports, she has also butted into threads and tried to mini-moderate them quite a lot, including staff only threads, in one of which she seemed to try to overrule myself. Several members, including staff, have approached me about that they find this tendency very frustrating to deal with.

Of course, being rude to her is still not acceptable, but it might be something to keep in serious consideration for her.
 
I believe the thread in question isn't related to mini-modding. Instead, it seems to be a tactic used by opponents to intentionally leave vague points, making it difficult for me to understand the context, especially since I'm not familiar with the verse beyond its metafictional setting and visual perspective.

However, I received a direct message from a good friend who provided a summary and explanation of everything, and they also share the same opinion that the opponents in the thread did a poor job explaining their interpretations.

Furthermore, I have refrained from engaging in mini-modding, and as a result, I reported the person in question for this behavior.
 
Antvasima said:
To be fair, although Dread has been very helpful regarding wiki content moderation issues and sometimes evaluations of ongoing rule-violation reports, she has also butted into threads and tried to mini-moderate them quite a lot, including staff only threads, in one of which she seemed to try to overrule myself. Several members, including staff, have approached me about that they find this tendency very frustrating to deal with.

Of course, being rude to her is still not acceptable, but it might be something to keep in serious consideration for her.
Click to expand...
Honestly I am glad you can see this from my perspective a bit. It gets very irritating when you're discussing an argument without problems with others, then someone who knows nothing comes in and talks in a pretendious tone, basically sending said discussion to hell and back.

I am aware I shouldn't have talked like that, but it gets seriously infuriating after a while, and my patience has limits.
 
I don't understand it. You can't use the patience limits argument for each member in the community where they lose control and start insulting others without any warning or temporary mute. This is not how it works.

I have already admitted above, both privately with you and in the discussion itself, that I don't know the lore of the verse. It doesn't excuse the fact that not only "members with verse knowledge" are allowed to evaluate. So yes, I may question each claim and its backstory.

Furthermore, the OP himself asked me on the wall to evaluate his thread and provide my input.

Why was @Adem_Warlock69 able to argue peacefully and explain thoroughly?

Not to mention, you were being passively aggressive with me at the beginning of the thread.
And when I questioned its relevance to a certain feat, someone already clarified that it was a mistake (after you had already derailed the conversation with unnecessary passive aggression). So yes, it's not about patience limits, you were being unreasonable with me from the start.

I am aware that the RvR discussion has ended (but the official warning has not been given on his wall yet), but I dislike it when people point out some details and make it seem like I am the one at fault the whole time.
 
Last edited:
Yes, I think that our members should try to be more patient with and tolerant towards Dread. She doesn't mean any harm and is just trying to help out. Instead of insulting her, please just try to instruct her what she is doing wrong, if she actually is doing something wrong, so she can try to understand and improve.
 
ImmortalDread said:
I have already admitted above, both privately with you and in the discussion itself, that I don't know the lore of the verse. It doesn't excuse the fact that not only "members with verse knowledge" are allowed to evaluate.
Click to expand...
If you don't know anything about the verse then take a step back and leave them be. This is the minimoding/stonewalling that people are talking about. No one wants to see you harassed, but this isn't cool either.
 
How did you end up in this conclusion? According to this logic, everyone should not give their disagreement to verse unless you need some verse knowledge, but when it comes to agreement, you can agree without having some sort of background knowledge.

So me disagreeing or questioning the claim's validity is stonewalling or mini-modding? How I was mini-modding in the thread? I literally reported the person here to avoid "mini-modding".

This is some type of accusation right now.
 
JohnConquest1 said:
If you don't know anything about the verse then take a step back and leave them be
Click to expand...
I don't agree with this approach. The pertinent evidence should be available in the OP and explained in such a way that even a total outsider would understand that the reasoning is solid.

Allowing small groups of dedicated fans to dictate profiles without any outside input or scrutiny is what leads to unreliable profiles.
 
Last edited:
Antvasima said:
I agree with Deagonx. We cannot only have fans that quite often want as high upgrades as possible to determine statistics on their own.
Click to expand...
Sorry if this is disturbing or not but as someone who made the thread I feel like this situation is a part some of my fault due to me not writing to point and I should have been more on the thread but I thought the thread died weeks ago so when I found out I felt bad about how my thread caused some problems to a member who is very well liked here by people and mods. My sorrys go to dread. And I deeply sorry that this happened.
 
Guys, can we just end this here? Now you might think that I just want to end this because is inconvenient or whatever, but the CRT was already accepted and applied from a while.

This is legit beating up a dead horse and keeping to discuss this brings literally nothing and no one likes it. I already said that I was wrong to act like this, and I don't see why keeping to discuss this, when the thread that caused this problem got already applied and closed.
 
StrymULTRA said:
And here we go again. Man you sure are overfixated huh?
Click to expand...
Didn't we just talk about this? How do you manage to do this in the very RVR thread where your habit of antagonizing people was brought to public attention?

Get control of your emotions. Your personal frustration is not a justification for being an asshole to people.
 
IdiosyncraticLawyer said:
Nostredam has been insulting the wiki's credibility and the userbase for perceived "arrogance" because they're upset about us not catering to their bickering and derailing and has essentially rage-quit the site.
Click to expand...
I think it should also be worth noting how he tends to pretty frequently carry a holier-than-thou attitude when debating subjects, accusing people of bias when it's irrelevant to the discussion and claiming some opposing arguments to be "objectively incorrect" when it's provably not the case (not even getting into how power scaling is mostly subjective to begin with)
 
Regarding @Lindsay2023: I'd say just perma-ban, to be honest? Low edit count, barely coherent, directly attacking Ant for a wiki wide revision, it reeks of bad faith.

Regarding @Nostredam: He seems like an asshole, has he done anything to skew us from assuming he came here solely to start trouble? Would he like to speak in his defense? I'm expecting something to the tune of "this site is stupid and not up to my standards so go ahead and ban me" but I'm willing to be pleasantly surprised.
 
Mr._Bambu said:
Regarding @Nostredam: He seems like an asshole, has he done anything to skew us from assuming he came here solely to start trouble? Would he like to speak in his defense? I'm expecting something to the tune of "this site is stupid and not up to my standards so go ahead and ban me" but I'm willing to be pleasantly surprised.
Click to expand...
They've said they're not going to be replying here anymore.
 
Mr._Bambu said:
Regarding @Nostredam: He seems like an asshole, has he done anything to skew us from assuming he came here solely to start trouble? Would he like to speak in his defense? I'm expecting something to the tune of "this site is stupid and not up to my standards so go ahead and ban me" but I'm willing to be pleasantly surprised.
Click to expand...
Supposedly he came to the site to politely debate things, though I wonder if that's just a part of the holier-than-thou attitude he semes to carry or if it's genuine, given his past behavior.
 
I got ninja'd I suppose.

Yeah, I've been trying my utmost best to reason with the guy but he just kept bringing up one bad argument after another and took every profanity-laden comment I had made as an insult towards him, even though none of it was targeted towards him, but rather the logic of his arguments, nor was it made to aggravate the dude at all. And then he brought up a post of mine eons ago from a DMC thread where the other dude was derailing tons with the DMC thread. Granted I had lost my cool a bit back then but like, that was what, quite a long while ago? I haven't been remotely as heated as of late and I have even calmly told the dude that I am no longer interested in going back-and-forth with him and I agreed to disagree, yet he does this while my power goes out.
 
CloverDragon03 said:
Supposedly he came to the site to politely debate things, though I wonder if that's just a part of the holier-than-thou attitude he semes to carry or if it's genuine, given his past behavior.
Click to expand...
Yeah that doesn't seem genuine given how quickly it seems they've devolved.
 
Mr._Bambu said:
Yeah that doesn't seem genuine given how quickly it seems they've devolved.
Click to expand...
I've been in the DBS thread and the moment all the supporters started making actual retorts to OP, he started devolving and ended up name-calling in one instance as far as my memory serves.

I honestly do not see any good reason to keep an individual like this on our wiki, but if you think a ban is too harsh, I won't object.
 
While I heavily disagreed with his arguments against the thread, it was mostly harmless until people actually started replying in that God of War thread, whereupon it devolved quite rapidly into that rather pretentious message and rage-quit.

Something similar happened on the Dragon Ball Super thread as well and I think their Cthulhu Mythos thread too. They seem to be quick to anger and take arguments against them and some of their (quite frankly misinformed) takes as personal slander and react far too caustically to that.

I'd be OK with a ban if it was on the table but I'll see what you all think.
 
A permaban for Lindsay for the propoganda she had against Antvasima is 100% justified yes.

As for Nostredam, downplaying Dragon Ball and other verses is one thing that could be forgiven if done only briefly until proven wrong, but constantly recycled a bunch of repeated arguments is indeed obnoxious. And then he makes comments like this on the God of War thread where he straight up insults the entire wiki and poisons the well against KLOL. He might have time to post here, but I don't have high hopes for him and more or less the conditional branch suggested by Mr Bambu sounds reasonable.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Antvasima
  • Sticky
Wiki Vandalism Reports
32 33 34
Replies
1K
Views
99K
Elizhaa
Elizhaa
Lloydblitzed
  • Locked
Discussion Rules lil Revision
Replies
39
Views
2K
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
540
TheGreatJedi13
TheGreatJedi13
Back
Top