- 21,143
- 30,099
Ban em
-
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)
- Thread starter Antvasima
- Start date
- 251
- 77
"Jesus ******* Christ what the hell am I looking at"
No, I will be making a report on this since you are literally nitpicking my words to make what I do worse
My statement:
"CAN YOU READ MY ARGUMENTS INSTEAD OF YAPPING ABOUT SOMETHING ELSE"
You twisting my words to make it seem worse:
"CAN YOU READ
- 9,742
- 12,610
The meaning behind what you're saying hasn't changed
- 4,484
- 5,786
Looking into this situation from the outside, I would support a short-term forum ban here.
At the present, MysticCarnage's behaviour is evidently unacceptable. They are not only causing problems and needless stresses for other users, but they are extremely insistent on this behaviour in spite of having it pointed out to them. This behaviour is also clearly not going to be mitigated by simply giving them a warning - if it was, the discussion on the RVRT so far would have already surely been enough. They are causing trouble, and they'll continue to cause trouble unless we distance them from the forum for a time.
At the same time, I'm not forced to believe from what I've seen so far that they are incapable of changing. While I certainly don't consider such circumstantial mitigating factors to have serious leeway when discussing punishments, I will note that this hostile behaviour has clearly been caused in part by a negative feedback loop - MysticCarnage sincerely believes that they are being targeted and harassed here, and while I can't say I agree, the fact that they clearly believe this combined with the continued interactions with the members they believe are targeting them is almost certainly making their behaviour worse than it would be otherwise.
I don't believe his behaviour on this RVRT thread so far is deterministic for his behaviour in the future, even if there is more than enough of a case for taking action. I believe, once the dust has settled, that they should be capable of interacting productively with the community again. I would suggest a forum ban of no more than a few months, perhaps around the range of 3-6. Hopefully that will be enough for the current conflicts, both interpersonal and intrapersonal, to settle.
At the present, MysticCarnage's behaviour is evidently unacceptable. They are not only causing problems and needless stresses for other users, but they are extremely insistent on this behaviour in spite of having it pointed out to them. This behaviour is also clearly not going to be mitigated by simply giving them a warning - if it was, the discussion on the RVRT so far would have already surely been enough. They are causing trouble, and they'll continue to cause trouble unless we distance them from the forum for a time.
At the same time, I'm not forced to believe from what I've seen so far that they are incapable of changing. While I certainly don't consider such circumstantial mitigating factors to have serious leeway when discussing punishments, I will note that this hostile behaviour has clearly been caused in part by a negative feedback loop - MysticCarnage sincerely believes that they are being targeted and harassed here, and while I can't say I agree, the fact that they clearly believe this combined with the continued interactions with the members they believe are targeting them is almost certainly making their behaviour worse than it would be otherwise.
I don't believe his behaviour on this RVRT thread so far is deterministic for his behaviour in the future, even if there is more than enough of a case for taking action. I believe, once the dust has settled, that they should be capable of interacting productively with the community again. I would suggest a forum ban of no more than a few months, perhaps around the range of 3-6. Hopefully that will be enough for the current conflicts, both interpersonal and intrapersonal, to settle.
- 22,043
- 18,127
Personally, I don't think a ban of any length is in order for the stuff they said in the threads. I and even many previously banned users get away with similar stuff on the regular.
That's not to say it isn't kind of childish, but I think all that's needed is a warning (like most users, staff included, get when they say stuff like this).
That's not to say it isn't kind of childish, but I think all that's needed is a warning (like most users, staff included, get when they say stuff like this).
- 7,297
- 13,250
I agree with this.
- 251
- 77
Yes it has
"can you read my arguments" refers to me asking for him to read my arguments instead of talking about other things
"can you read" would refer to me insulting his reading capabilities
I don't intend for it Im just debating it XD, I wouldn't call it trouble, it is pretty normal to debate on why you shouldn't get banned
6 months is crazy, this aint the court of law my guy jesus, I aint do anything you can name
NAME AND GIVE ME EXAMPLES OF RULES I VIOLATED
Thank you
- 7,297
- 13,250
All of the good will and leeway I had developed as a result of DarkGrath's very thoughtful and well-reasoned advocacy has swiftly evaporated.
- 21,143
- 30,099
Cause the calc was shitty and he was angrily questioning why it's so shitty
Can you cut that shit out?
He's not right in the situation because he's a red name
He's right because you're blatantly wrong
Somehow you're attempting to say that you're innocent here and your rebuttals are of a 2 year old
@staff can yall stop going back and forth with em please?
A ban of a severe length is in order for how negative he turns any and every tokyo revengers thread and how condescending he loves to be whenever he starts getting on his high horse against anybody who disagrees with him
- 9,742
- 12,610
Again, if it was truly your intention to ask "could you please focus on my arguments", then you need to phrase it that way. The way you have it phrased absolutely implies you're insulting his reading capabilities
We have been doing so for a good while now
- 251
- 77
No my guy, I phrased it perfectly, you mysteriously ended my sentence at the part where it seems like an insult, I hope you get a punishment because what your doing ain't okay, If I phrased it like this, actually nvm, I see no way how you could see me referring to that as him not being able to read
No you haven't, I never insulted anyone, other then you which is only worth a warning
Pretty sure I've seen a couple people disagree, let me rest my case instead of jumping to the worst conclusion
- 22,043
- 18,127
Ziller and Coomandar were slinging worse insults in the past and only received bans of a month or less. So I disagree with any kind of lengthy ban.
- 9,742
- 12,610
I never mysteriously ended your sentence. In my listing of your insults, I put your full post there
I'd like to stop this back and forth now please
Six months is good
- 251
- 77
If I get banned, I'll just ask someone else to report you its fine, I will start making the report now though
- 251
- 77
Also like 3 people disagreeing, let more people see it jesus
Mr. Bambu
Suffer-Not-Injustice Bambu
VS Battles
Joke Battles
Super Moderator
Administrator
Calculation Group
Silver Supporter
- 21,606
- 19,136
My suggestion is bearing in mind the unnecessary clogging up of this thread, too.
- 4,484
- 5,786
I would frankly prefer the 3 month threshold, but I'll stand by the range of 3-6 being reasonable. 6 months is erring on being harsh for this kind of behaviour, as memory serves, and I don't believe we'll address the behaviour of someone who thinks "staff members are targeting me" by being needlessly harsh.
- 22,043
- 18,127
I wouldn't say it's unnecesary if they genuinely think they're being misinterpreted.
But, if they're getting banned anyway, I say anything more than 2 or 3 months is unreasonable.
- 251
- 77
Jesus, Yall are the opposite of suitable people to have positions of power
Your all soft, YOU CANT EVEN NAME ME A RULE I VIOLATED, MAYBE FOCUS ON THAT MY GUY
Your all soft, YOU CANT EVEN NAME ME A RULE I VIOLATED, MAYBE FOCUS ON THAT MY GUY
- 165,229
- 72,262
- Thread starter
- #21,265
An at least 4 months forum ban combined with a permanent Tokyo Revengers topic ban seems fine to me, given that this member seems to be a completely unreasonable and exhausting extreme ongoing time-sink for our staff to deal with.
- 10,688
- 9,842
Brother at this point just shut up. Really. Shut up. You're making comment after commenting and getting things worse. The reason a ban is being discussed is because you didn't shut up before. I'm surprised none of the staff members have shut you down yet.
Before this wave of comments you were about to get a simple topic-ban and still be able to comment on different stuff on the forum, now you're getting a 2 or more months ban.
Mr. Bambu
Suffer-Not-Injustice Bambu
VS Battles
Joke Battles
Super Moderator
Administrator
Calculation Group
Silver Supporter
- 21,606
- 19,136
I'm inclined to disagree, though the word "harsh" seems appropriate. Grath mentioned being uncertain whether a harsher sentence is good for someone who feels staff is targeting them: personally, I feel that we should err on the side of harshness to avoid looking as though individuals can glean a lighter punishment by simply screaming about how terrible the staff are.
At this point I would also agree with an actual outright ban over a topic ban. I'd be game with Ant's suggestion.
- 7,297
- 13,250
Votes:
Six Months: Deagonx, Mr._Bambu, KingTempest, Lonkitt, Antvasima
Three Months: DarkGrath, ByAsura
Along with permanent TR topic ban. I'm not trying to steamroll anyone's opinion, but I think the vote is clear enough to act upon the ban. He's clearly committed to acting like a belligerent child.
MysticCarnage defended themselves fully in the first few comments, and every comment since this has just been repetitive clutter. We shouldn't let users essentially exhaust the staff into giving them a shorter sentence just so that we can get it over with.
Six Months: Deagonx, Mr._Bambu, KingTempest, Lonkitt, Antvasima
Three Months: DarkGrath, ByAsura
Along with permanent TR topic ban. I'm not trying to steamroll anyone's opinion, but I think the vote is clear enough to act upon the ban. He's clearly committed to acting like a belligerent child.
Strongly agree. I feel as though I have seen more than a few reductions in RVR as a result of people throwing tantrums here in a manner similar to MysticCarnage. ByAsura pointed out shorter bans for worse insults, but by my recollection those users were more or less doing the same thing, flooding the RVR with arduous bickering by replying to every staff who tried to give input with stubborn insistence of their own innocent. Behavior which, IMO, we should clamp down on in the future.
MysticCarnage defended themselves fully in the first few comments, and every comment since this has just been repetitive clutter. We shouldn't let users essentially exhaust the staff into giving them a shorter sentence just so that we can get it over with.
- 7,297
- 13,250
I've also just threadbanned MysticCarnage. He hasn't offered anything of substance for quite a while and we should be able to discuss this without his constant belligerent interjections. If someone strongly disagrees they are free to reverse the threadban, but I feel it's better if we don't.
- 4,484
- 5,786
To briefly appease you:
"You can leave comments in our forums..
but do not become obnoxious, unreasonable, or overly argumentative." - from the site rules. Your behaviour has been obnoxious, unreasonable, and overly argumentative, as any rational individual examining this situation from the outside can attest to. As such, we reserve the right to acknowledge that your behaviour has been of harm to the people and the integrity of the wiki, and so we will take action against it.
Now, I ask that you do not leave another comment on this matter going forward. You are not helping your case. It would be for everyone's benefit, yours included, if you were distanced from the community for a time. If your instinctual response to this is to try and contest further that you somehow do not consider your behaviour to align with the rule above, then I have no more leeway I can give you.
Mr. Bambu
Suffer-Not-Injustice Bambu
VS Battles
Joke Battles
Super Moderator
Administrator
Calculation Group
Silver Supporter
- 21,606
- 19,136
To be absolutely certain, I think 4 months is a good compromise as suggested by Ant. It avoids what I would agree with Grath in calling the lower extreme.
- 7,297
- 13,250
That's fine with me. I counted him as a six month vote but I did not see that he had edited the comment.
- 9,742
- 12,610
I would say both, given his comment on Therefir's calc
- 22,043
- 18,127
I don't necessarily disagree, but that had nothing to do with what I was saying at all.
I didn't say I actually agree with that kind of ban length.
At this point, though, I'm not really fussy on any ban length.
Edit: To clarify, it's because I lost interest. Not because he called those staff soft, as stupid as that was.
Last edited:
Mr. Bambu
Suffer-Not-Injustice Bambu
VS Battles
Joke Battles
Super Moderator
Administrator
Calculation Group
Silver Supporter
- 21,606
- 19,136
Handled.
- 7,297
- 13,250
Sorry, I misunderstood your comment.
I'm glad this is settled. Now we can return to focusing on more important matters, like whether Goku could beat Superman.
Mr. Bambu
Suffer-Not-Injustice Bambu
VS Battles
Joke Battles
Super Moderator
Administrator
Calculation Group
Silver Supporter
- 21,606
- 19,136
Now that we're past that: I've received multiple comments regarding @Hellscream and his behavior in this thread. Primary offenses are general rudeness and refusing to cooperate, which in my opinion is normally a fairly light offense but someone accurately pointed out that he was banned for practically the same stuff less than 6 months ago.
I'm open to discuss what exactly should be done in his case, if anything more than just a warning is even necessary, but as he's very recently just off a ban, I do feel it's worth at least bringing up. @Deagonx and @Damage3245 are both prolific in that particular thread and I think can attest to the general poor behavior.
I'm open to discuss what exactly should be done in his case, if anything more than just a warning is even necessary, but as he's very recently just off a ban, I do feel it's worth at least bringing up. @Deagonx and @Damage3245 are both prolific in that particular thread and I think can attest to the general poor behavior.
Similar threads
