• 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)

Yes, and being very vulgar towards to our most knowledgeable and reasonable staff member is especially unacceptable. I wouldn't be opposed to a warning ban in order to keep similar behaviour heavily discouraged.
 
Covering all the business.

Rapratarma's bad profiles: I don't think three incidents of creating bad profiles should warrant anything too harsh. I'd be fine with letting this slide with a warning or a short ban. Since no-one else did so, I deleted the pages that were created.

I'd also note that as an offshoot of this, Ninga Games69 replaced the content of one of those pages with "Go **** yourself" as their first edit on the wiki. I've left a warning, but a ban may be in order.

Marshadow's insult: Week-long ban seems fine. I 100% agree with Crabwhale.

Tarang's comment: Frankly, it seems like there's a ludicrous amount of non-staff members commenting, such that I doubt all of them got permission, and I'd rather not have just one of them be targeted. I'll go ask all relevant people.

EDIT: So far, 4 out of the 5 people asked, including Tarang, have either demonstrated permission, or acknowledged a lack thereof and asked for their posts to be deleted. I don't think any other staff will need to help out here.
 
Last edited:
Marshadow29 said:
How did no one notice their username is obviously meant to be the N word
Click to expand...
I took the kinder reading, of their username meaning to be "Ninja". They don't seem like an aimless racist troll, they've made legitimate contributions to ther wikis.

My best guess is that one of their friends (maybe Rapratarma themselves) told them about the page, then they vandalised it, not knowing/caring about our rules on that sorta thing.
 
Mr._Bambu said:
I would disagree with this stance in, I think, every scenario aside from one in which that was the very last infraction. Warnings are there to improve behavior without action being taken, it does seem as though you've remained on this streak of poor behavior.

With that said, simple rudeness is a minor infraction altogether. I don't think your behavior has improved, so let me offer my perspective: I think any warning given now should serve as the last one before a banning should take place.


To an extent I disagree. I think it is acceptable to take people at their word to a point, although that point probably ends when bans are being called for.
Click to expand...
So. That was the last warning before action needed to take place, correct?

Reporting @Tdjwo for his insanely rude comments in this thread.

Notably:
  • Mocking @Deagonx contributions here (At the time I took it as merely a joke, but notable regardless)
  • Being confrontational unnecessarily here once again directed at @Deagonx
  • This incredibly rude comment. While I may understand the frustration when something seems simple and straightforward to you and others don't get it or are not understanding you, there are way better ways to explain them. After these three incidents, I noticed a pattern, so I warned @Tdjwo here to tone it down, as at that point he's being a nuisance and heating the thread unnecessarily.

So with all these, normally I would just leave it at a warning and that's it, but @Tdjwo decided to double down after my warning here continuing his rude streak against everyone that don't agree with his conclusion.

Tdjwo accepted his last warning in this very thread:
Tdjwo said:
Alright. I accept the last warning then. I apologize for any issue I might have caused intentionally or not.
Click to expand...

I'm incredibly patient and tolerant. I can joke around with anyone and go to all kinds of levels, from the stupid to straight up being a punk and trollish. However, when you have someone constantly bringing heat, constantly becoming confrontational to the point that they needed to go on a tantrum, yet still remain rude after being warned and unable to accept others perspective, even when it has barely been a month since their last incident, I draw the line.

Their last warning expired. I advocate for a ban now.
 
Alright, looking at the posts linked.
  1. Doesn't really seem report-worthy.
  2. Doesn't really seem report-worthy.
  3. Doesn't really seem report-worthy.
  4. Doesn't really seem report-worthy.
The first one is an absurdly light jab at Deagon (lol he makes threads go long) clearly presented as a joke. If Deagon was actually upset by that, I could see an argument for a short ban, otherwise no.

The other three are very light levels at exasperation that are focused on the arguments someone's making, not so much their intelligence.

If responding to someone ignoring your points with "it seems like you're ignoring my points" is considered a ban-worthy insult, then we'd have nothing in our lexical arsenal to respond to that legitimate situation.

I'm typically concerned about insults when they focus on someone as a person, rather than on their arguments. This kinda gets close, but doesn't seem to cross the line of being worthy of a punishment. And so, I advocate for none.
 
Last edited:
Agnaa said:
Alright, looking at the posts linked.
  1. Doesn't really seem report-worthy.
  2. Doesn't really seem report-worthy.
  3. Doesn't really seem report-worthy.
  4. Doesn't really seem report-worthy.
The first one is an absurdly light jab at Deagon (lol he makes threads go long) clearly presented as a joke.

The other three are very light levels at exasperation that are focused on the arguments someone's making, not so much they're intelligence.

If responding to someone ignoring your points with "it seems like you're ignoring my points" is considered a ban-worthy insult, then we'd have nothing in our lexical arsenal to respond to that legitimate situation.

I'm typically concerned about insults when they focus on someone as a person, rather than on their arguments. This kinda gets close, but doesn't seem to cross the line of being worthy of a punishment. And so, I advocate for none.
Click to expand...
He was reported previously for making rude remarks like these ones and given a last chance. He has made the same kinds of remarks. I personally hate teetering on the line of "well, is not that bad". If someone is being problematic consistently, I will call them out.
 
LephyrTheRevanchist said:
He was reported previously for making rude remarks like these ones and given a last chance. He has made the same kinds of remarks. I personally hate teetering on the line of "well, is not that bad". If someone is being problematic consistently, I will call them out.
Click to expand...
The remarks aren't the same kind. Which is why I supported the earlier warnings, but not this turning into a ban.

"This thread is ass", "Your opinion is irrelevant", "Your headass".

Those are all far less based on the merits of the argument than this case is.
 
DarkDragonMedeus said:
I'm fine with the one week ban.6
Click to expand...
0
LephyrTheRevanchist said:
So. That was the last warning before action needed to take place, correct?

Reporting @Tdjwo for his insanely rude comments in this thread.

Notably:
  • Mocking @Deagonx contributions here (At the time I took it as merely a joke, but notable regardless)
Click to expand...
This is a joke so I'm not even going to bother addressing it. It's no brainer that Deagonx loves making easy stuffs complicated. If you think its an insult, well...that's...
LephyrTheRevanchist said:
  • Being confrontational unnecessarily here once again directed at @Deagonx
  • This incredibly rude comment. While I may understand the frustration when something seems simple and straightforward to you and others don't get it or are not understanding you, there are way better ways to explain them. After these three incidents, I noticed a pattern, so I warned @Tdjwo here to tone it down, as at that point he's being a nuisance and heating the thread unnecessarily.
Click to expand...
Tell me what I did wrong here? Complaining on how the same staff members treat Nasuverse threads by either stonewalling the hell out of it or not elaborating their reasonings? So am I supposed to just look at them saying "I agree with insert admin" without any elaboration or am I supposed to just agree with them for missing out blatant contexts I keep explaining on multiple occasions?
LephyrTheRevanchist said:
So with all these, normally I would just leave it at a warning and that's it, but @Tdjwo decided to double down after my warning here continuing his rude streak against everyone that don't agree with his conclusion.
Click to expand...
How is that rude? I made a short post explaining in details regarding the crt that even a kid would understand.
LephyrTheRevanchist said:
Tdjwo accepted his last warning in this very thread:
Click to expand...
Yeah but I did absolutely nothing wrong here. I didn't insult anyone did I? I only complained about the way they treat the crt which isn't against the rules, is it?
LephyrTheRevanchist said:
I'm incredibly patient and tolerant. I can joke around with anyone and go to all kinds of levels, from the stupid to straight up being a punk and trollish. However, when you have someone constantly bringing heat, constantly becoming confrontational to the point that they needed to go on a tantrum, yet still remain rude after being warned and unable to accept others perspective, even when it has barely been a month since their last incident, I draw the line.

Their last warning expired. I advocate for a ban now.
Click to expand...
Still did nothing wrong.
 
Agnaa said:
The remarks aren't the same kind. Which is why I supported the earlier warnings, but not this turning into a ban.

"This thread is ass", "Your opinion is irrelevant", "Your headass".

Those are all far less based on the merits of the argument than this case is.
Click to expand...
It's the consistent pattern of behavior that's the problem. For example, the "incredibly light jab" at Deagonx. By itself? Sure, one can just take it jokingly (which I did) and just move on. But the moment Deagonx gave his contribution, he went on an unnecessarily heated tantrum. Which again, understandable, he felt he wasn't being understood. But to then keep adding fuel? Nah.
 
LephyrTheRevanchist said:
But the moment Deagonx gave his contribution,
Click to expand...
He gave absolutely no contribution. What was the contribution again? Oh, "I agree with this person" As a staff member, you have to give your own reasonings as to why you agree with someone especially if that someone just got debunked. I'm not about to tell you the exact same thing I told the previous person if you are just going to say you agree with the other person without any elaboration.
LephyrTheRevanchist said:
he went on an unnecessarily heated tantrum. Which again, understandable, he felt he wasn't being understood. But to then keep adding fuel? Nah.
Click to expand...
What fuel did I add again?
 
LephyrTheRevanchist said:
It's the consistent pattern of behavior that's the problem. For example, the "incredibly light jab" at Deagonx. By itself? Sure, one can just take it jokingly (which I did) and just move on. But the moment Deagonx gave his contribution, he went on an unnecessarily heated tantrum. Which again, understandable, he felt he wasn't being understood. But to then keep adding fuel? Nah.
Click to expand...
And I'm not seeing what you're seeing. Rather, I'm seeing an improvement in behaviour, to the point where it shouldn't be punished.

I am not arguing that these offences are so few and far between that it doesn't create a bad pattern. I'm saying that the behaviour is just fine.
Tdjwo said:
He gave absolutely no contribution. What was the contribution again? Oh, "I agree with this person" As a staff member, you have to give your own reasonings as to why you agree with someone especially if that someone just got debunked.
Click to expand...
You don't.
Tdjwo said:
I'm not about to tell you the exact same thing I told the previous person if you are just going to say you agree with the other person without any elaboration.
Click to expand...
If you don't want to do that, then you can just not respond.

If you want to follow up on this, please do it outside of this thread, since it's not quite relevant to your report.
 
Agnaa said:
I'm saying that the behaviour is just fine.
Click to expand...
I just don't see how this approach is tenable. We can't just give a blanket pass on any rudeness/hostility that doesn't rise to the level of cussing someone out.

I understand a hesitation to delve into full blown tone policing, but atmosphere and attitude can make a big difference in how threads go and this kind of mild to moderate toxicity on a constant basis can create a big headache for everyone.

The way that we keep people from going at eachothers throats is the assurance that they can use the RVR to get bad behavior rectified. Saying "well, it's okay for users to be kind of a dick all the time" just encourages more of the same, and sets the stage for much harsher conflict and much larger headaches for us down the road.

For Tdjwo's part, he is just kind of always rude, always doggedly convinced that everyone who disagrees simply isn't reading his responses or is biased or ignorant or etc and feels more than comfortable throwing around such accusations in threads.

I think it'd be a failure on our part to say that those comments, no matter how frequent, are not rule violations of any kind despite contributing to a hostile and toxic atmosphere and essentially giving him free license to be openly pigheaded in every CRT he involves himself in.

I understand you have a lighter approach to punishment but saying this simply isn't a problem of any kind is a problem. We expect users to be polite and contribute positively to discussions, not start pissing contests at every opportunity
 
While he isn't quite resorting to name calling, the one joke would be light if it's on its own. But it is possible for an excessive number of minor offenses to stack together to become a major offense. And while I do agree that that this comment is more or less attacking the argument rather than the person and thus not quite an Ad Hominin, the way he did it was quite blunt as taking apart and argument piece by piece is different than blowing up an argument. Also there were some bold allegations in that comment which may come off as a strawman.

But anyway, I agree more with Lephyr and Deagon here.
 
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
531
TheGreatJedi13
TheGreatJedi13
Back
Top