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.
Now, look, I recognize that there is a level of ambiguity about what the rules are or how or when to apply edits, but if a decision is made contrary to what was done that isn't because anyone did anything wrong. Not myself, not Fuji, not Glassman. All of us acted in good faith with regard to what seemed appropriate under the circumstances, with regard to the rules. From my perspective, this appears to be a minor ability revision that had two staff agrees and neutral votes outside of that, for a verse that is rather small. That's my sincere opinion.
If anything, a sterner look should be directed at individuals such as Tatsumi and Eldemade who, IMO, made this debacle far more aggressive and hostile than it needed to be and have continued to perpetuate bickering here that wasn't necessary or productive in any way. If they wanted to make their case that the edits weren't made on a sound basis, they could have done so without the vitriol.
You didn't really leave us with much of a choice when especially in my case, my points were being ignored. If I am found guilty of anything on my part here then go ahead and hand down a deserving punishment. Let justice be done, that is what I've been pushing for from the very beginning.
That isn't true. Glassman agreed the same way that I did, and he also specifically came here and clarified that he felt Fuji's edit was justified. The justification in the profile was based on the exact same reasoning that Glassman and I rejected.
In that case I sincerely and deeply apologize for the trouble I caused with that however, that addressed only one issue.
You and glass agreed strictly on the basis of a time stop not anything else.
Let me ask you this; If I created a CRT to add abilities to a character and I get it accepted, then I go ahead and add abilities that weren't even in the CRT to begin with. What would be your opinion on that matter?
You and glass agreed resistance based on Time Stop shouldn't be a thing fair and good but, fujiwara has used that agreement to remove even what wasn't based on a time stop in the first place and therein lies the problem
I am deleting further non-staff comments about the MG drama. Both parties have made their arguments in triplicate. For my part, I am satisfied that the input from Crabwhale, DDM, Glassman, and myself is sufficient to conclude that Fuji acted on a sound basis. If we want to seek further input, that's fine, but there's no need to keep spinning our wheels about the same arguments.
I think this is the right decision. I don't believe we will get anywhere by continuing to clog up the RVR with arguing about who agreed with what or which revisions were approved. We can just tackle the issue by itself in a staff discussion and come to a more convincing consensus one way or the other. I do not believe anyone acted in bad faith.
With that settled, who should we seek for further input on the matter of a potential topic ban / strict warning for MichaelJZero's comments?
Would any of you mind taking a look at my report and help us decide what the best course of action is? We are considering a short topic ban or perhaps just a strict warning at the moment and would just like to get a bit more input before deciding.
I would like to report @StrymULTRA for toxic behavior and overall rudeness towards any disagreeing party, in this case, specifically myself. It's a consistent behavior.
Third, here Strym accuses me of having a spite against the verse because I disagree with this rating! Trying to paint any point I make in a bad light as if they were all made in bad faith
He implied I had a bias before too! Here as well! In the latter, I was just citing the wiki standards on the matter
Even when other point out whataboutism, he responds harshly! I would also like to point out that no one there was heated or using any rude tone against him too! It was just simple and reasonable debating, yet he responds like that
This makes debating with him really uncomfortable and stressful as it seems like he is constantly being aggressive
If anyone could advise him to chill out like I have, twice
I'd appreciate it
But again, y'all yelling "OUTLIER!!!!" when in other verses we jump to even ******* MFTL out of MHS (which is a bigger gap) but now Undertale is a problem.
Given that we just warned him fairly strictly on like, Friday, I think a ban is in order personally. He doesn't seem to be capable of regulation his emotions well enough to stop himself from acting like this in threads. I'm not sure how long though. Maybe 2-3 months. Alternatively maybe an Undertale topic ban? Even if we set aside the cussing, he does have a very aggressive style of discussion which is not appropriate and I sympathize with Topaz feeling uncomfortable and stress out trying to handle this aggro stance for the crime of disagreeing with Strym on something.
I dunno man, I'm just sick of this kind of stonewalling.
Then if you want to ban me now, then I don't really care, because I'm now tired of dealing with this kind of arguments when I don't receive support either.
I just felt the OP being malicious at them constantly switching arguments, thus I felt it's spiteful.
Vulkin's lightning doesn't have the minimum ap to qualify as MHS+
The gap between the fastest speed feat and this one is notable
This is all in the OP
I never ran from these notions
It's natural that new circumstances appeared,
Strym made a new calculation, that I disagreed with for reasons different than the ones in the OP
Of course the arguments are going to be different!
This is spiteful? No
I promise it isn't
I refuted the 8-C calculations which disqualified MHS+
And immediately you looked for a way to make a new 8-C calculation
Could I say you have a bias as well? This wouldn't be respectful, would it?
How would you react to this? Calling you a "fanboy" over this?
You wouldn't like it, I'm pretty sure!
The 8-C calc was made in line with another one for the verse using the exact same basis, ie the sum of multiple objects moving at the same time for the mass and using that for KE, I've simply noticed the inconsistency and I solved it.
Then after the CGMs agreed with the new calc, you pulled the outlier card right because the argument for the lightning not being MHS+ got shot down.
I find it also dishonest saying that x5000 gap in speed between low and mid/high tiers is an outlier when the wiki does even bigger gaps for a big majority.
Would any of you mind taking a look at my report and help us decide what the best course of action is? We are considering a short topic ban or perhaps just a strict warning at the moment and would just like to get a bit more input before deciding.
Strym is a well-established member who has generally been well-behaved as far as I recall. I do not think that he should be banned. A warning might be warranted though.
Strym is a well-established member who has generally been well-behaved as far as I recall. I do not think that he should be banned. A warning might be warranted though.
My problem is that we just warned him about this exact pattern of bad conduct 5 days ago. And he's immediately back to cussing at people and generally being rude in a discussion just because he got frustrated. He has a long history of this. We could do a shorter ban, but I feel like there's no choice but to elevate given the immediate proximity to the last warning.
At least I want more staff input in that CRT. I think that the cause of this thing was due to me talking with the OP on Discord and we've reached an agreement, only for them later changing their mind at the last minute from pulling the outlier excuse.
Edit: And yeah, it's getting seriously circular, so at least I want CGMs to settle the matter.
Strym is a well-established member who has generally been well-behaved as far as I recall. I do not think that he should be banned. A warning might be warranted though.
Given how both events are ocurring back to back
I'd imagine there's something recently bothering or triggering Strym's emotions, which might be personal
I can only speak for my own experience with him
Both instances the same accusations were thrown around for both targets
Anyone else might testify their experiences with Strym
I think that the cause of this thing was due to me talking with the OP on Discord and we've reached an agreement, only for them later changing their mind at the last minute from pulling the outlier excuse.
I can't abide this. The cause of this thing was you choosing to cuss at someone and be rude and exasperated in a discussion instead of debating it politely. Do not shift the blame of your own decisions from you to someone else.
At least I want more staff input in that CRT. I think that the cause of this thing was due to me talking with the OP on Discord and we've reached an agreement, only for them later changing their mind at the last minute from pulling the outlier excuse.
Edit: And yeah, it's getting seriously circular, so at least I want CGMs to settle the matter.
Strym is a well-established member who has generally been well-behaved as far as I recall. I do not think that he should be banned. A warning might be warranted though.
IMO, Styrm is a user who shares a lot in common with users such as DaReaperMan or Chariot. He is definitely someone who is very contributive and often quite helpful more often than not; though he does have a tendency to get impatient. Plus he is someone who is very knowledgeable on Undertale iirc and I personally agree with a lot of his takes for that verse. Perhaps a warning is fine and if he keeps up, some light action can be taken. But I personally don't think he should be topic banned atm.
On an unrelated note, I would like to report @MichaelJZero for making a number of rude/inflammatory remarks in his various posts, and overtly refusing to stop after being warned twice by me, in this thread and this thread. Most of them aren't particularly bad, but every time he posts he usually includes something of this nature and it's not an appropriate way to debate. Though a couple of them are more serious.
Some excerpts of the remarks:
I realize this is a bit repetitive, but the picture I'm painting is that every single post he makes is peppered with weird remarks like this. After my second warning, this was his response:
In addition, he also refuses to properly engage anyone in a discussion, he will respond to any objections to his claims or interpretations of evidence by repeating himself or mocking them.
This is particularly problematic given that more than a few of his claims are genuinely objectively false? And not in a "my interpretation is better than yours" kind of way. Particularly, he has repeatedly referenced a guru named Maharishi Mahesh Yogi in reference to DC comics by claiming Grant Morrison (author) based some of his cosmology on the guy. Then he went on to show Grant Morrison referencing Buddhism and said Maharishi was a Buddhist Guru.
Problem is, Maharishi wasn't a Buddhist, he was a Hindu, those are two different things with some common ground, like Judaism and Islam. The reason this is significant is because 1) This is not a matter of opinion, it's a very easily verifiable fact about a rather famous guru, and 2) He doggedly refuses to acknowledge any of the information that proves this and instead has chosen to mock me for pointing it out. See below:
I recognize this is a bit of an odd side tangent, but I think it's kind of important that throughout the course of a multi-day discussion, pointing out the easily verifiable objective fact that Maharishi Mahesh Yogi was a Hindu guru, not Buddhist, was met with mockery and dogged insistence to the contrary?
Like. Follow me here. Maharishi isn't even a name, his given name is Mahesh Prasad Varma. Maharishi is a title in Hinduism. If you go to his wikipedia page, it says Religion: Hinduism. It says he was a disciple of Swami Brahmananda Saraswati, with his own wiki page identifying him as Hindu. Swami is also a title in Hinduism.
It also says: Some religious studies scholars have further said that Maharishi Mahesh Yogi is one of a number of Indian gurus who brought neo-Hindu adaptations of Vedantic Hinduism to the west. Author Meera Nanda calls neo-Hinduism "the brand of Hinduism that is taught by Maharishi Mahesh Yogi, Deepak Chopra, and their clones"
The sole piece of evidence he attempted to present that Maharishi was a Buddhist was a link to a course in the Maharishi University (founded by the guru) that teaches the basics of Buddhism, but if you actually look at the page, it's taught by a professor who teaches courses on all the main religions at that university:
Evan Finkelstein, PhD, Associate Professor of Maharishi Vedic Science. Professor Finkelstein earned a B.A. from Carnegie-Mellon University; an M.S.W. from Yeshiva University; and an M.S.C.I. and Ph.D. from Maharishi International University. Included in courses taught by Professor Finkelstein are themes such as universal principles of life expressed by Maharishi Vedic Science and the religions of Judaism, Christianity, Islam, Buddhism, Taoism, and Confucianism
Notably, this guy is a professor of "Maharishi Vedic Science." Vedic means Vedas, like Bible/Biblical. The Vedas is an authoritative religious text in Hinduism, but it isn't recognized by Buddhism or other sramana traditions. See:
Other śramaṇa traditions, such as Charvaka, Ajivika, Buddhism, and Jainism, which did not regard the Vedas as authorities, are referred to as "heterodox" or "non-orthodox" (nāstika) schools.
I tucked most of that away into a spoiler, as it's a lot of text and most of it I guess doesn't really matter? I just wanted to illustrate that the guy has been doggedly unreasonable about even easily verified piece of information and has just met it with mockery. I warned him multiple times to stop adding in mocking statements in every comment he makes and he directly told me he didn't care and got even more aggressive, not sure what else I can do there so I'm bringing it here to RVR.
And oh yeah, I recall commenting on this, and also agree that a topic ban is in order but not sure about the time frame but I also share Antvasima's sentiments on this.
Strym is a disruptive member with increasing irregularities in his behavior. I would say the baseline of a VSBW member is someone who may turn to rudeness if so prompted, but Strym has in recent days been going well beyond this to defend Undertale from perceived threats (that is, Topaz, above).
If Strym cannot behave even after already receiving a warning, I have misgivings about letting him off with another- after this, action ought to be taken.
For the record I would agree with a shorter topic ban being given out now- maybe a month.
You don't really have to do that. I'll just unfollow that MHS/8-C downgrade as it seems like it'll be accepted anyway and while I disagree with that logic, I understand that I have my limits and not everyone buys the same stuff and way to think.
I know this is the second time in a row but I went overboard, but if the CGMs agree with Topaz anyway, I just have to deal with it.
One month is possibly the smallest topic ban I've ever seen. If we take action, I think that's a perfectly acceptable duration.
You don't really have to do that. I'll just unfollow that MHS/8-C downgrade as it seems like it'll be accepted anyway and while I disagree with that logic, I understand that I have my limits and not everyone buys the same stuff and way to think.
I know this is the second time in a row but I went overboard, but if the CGMs agree with Topaz anyway, I just have to deal with it.
Y'know, you argued in your own defense in a similar vein the last report against you. Rather than saying we don't need to take action against you, how about shaping up? You've gone well into outright inflammatory twice in the past week- do better and this isn't a discussion we'd need to have.
My vote is for a month long topic ban on Undertale for Strym. I feel the topic has reached a lot of discussion, should probably just get staff opinions.
Oh. My. God. How is telling someone to think rude in anyway? Did you consider your teachers rude If they told you to think about something? Have you never had these directed at you before; "use your medula" "are you incapable of thinking for yourself", "make better use of your brain"? What word would you prefer I use? Ponder? Theorise?
This is the way I talk. All the jargon I end up typing here doesn't even amount to 1% of the vocabulary I use on a daily basis.
Shall I switch to the broken English I actually use in close circles and show you what true rudeness looks?
I second the above report. I warned him after the third comment and throughout the course of the discussion he just keeps making comments like that.
I understand there is little appetite for dealing with even more MGK drama, but this genuinely is an issue and I'm not sure how to deal with it if my warnings are blatantly ignored as below:
I will not make fun of anyone who possesses some form of disability but I can only consider people who think of usage of the word "Ignorance" and being told "to think" as being mentally weak/vulnerable. There are places in the world where much more serious stuff is happening and this level of conversation is what bothers you? No thank you. I might just leave while leaving a comment that is clearly rude so that the accusation can be justified in your part.
Why are you acting innocent?
You called him a "low budget Sherlock Holmes" For which strangely enough, you have never been warned for that by @Deagonx . @Deagonx Only warning MG supporters shows favoritism to people that want to debate against MG.
At least in my eyes.
P.s idk how to insert links here but it's Reply #195 on same thread Pain linked.
I took a screenshot as well.
