• 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)

CodeCCLL said:
Sorry for commenting here but as someone who understands the language (turkish) of the vandalizing user, I would like to say a few things.

-Vandalizing user states that if Yhwach's changes to him profile are reverted, he will vandalize again. (repeatedly)

-Judging by speech, he's (definitely he) probably quite young or totally troll.

-He is quoting a channel that produces content that normalizes sexuality on youtube and that has great toxicity.

In conclusion, I don't think such a person would really benefit the wiki. I think, like Dread said, either keep an eye on him or ban him.
Click to expand...
I permabanned him
 
Regarding Pein, I do not think that he seems to have done any actual rule-breaking behaviour here, and that Fujiwara saying "I don't give a s___" and calling him a "m_____-f_____", and then omitting that in a report against him is considerably worse than anything that he did.
 
Antvasima said:
Regarding Pein, I do not think that he seems to have done any actual rule-breaking behaviour here, and that calling him a m-f is considerably worse than anything that he did.
Click to expand...
Heavily disagree, especially seeing as Fuji's more aggressive responses were in response to Pein outright provoking her, including mocking her and insulting her intelligence. I'd say Pein's done more in the rule-breaking department than Fuji here.
 
"Of course, understanding issues and getting defensive when they are called out on their BS, classic battleboarding moments. You should probably stop giving opinions on what you cannot understand."
"Oh you did not understand a single thing"
"The ones actually knowledgeable on Tier 2 understood me well enough" (implying Fuji isn't knowledgeable on this just because she didn't fully get what they were trying to communicate)

How does this not come off as condescending? Pein frankly has had a bit of a history, from my experience, of being condescending toward people that don't agree with them (claiming they just "didn't read their posts properly" and the like), trying to act as though they weren't acting in such a way, and then getting away with it.
 
CloverDragon03 said:
"Of course, understanding issues and getting defensive when they are called out on their BS, classic battleboarding moments. You should probably stop giving opinions on what you cannot understand."
"Oh you did not understand a single thing"
"The ones actually knowledgeable on Tier 2 understood me well enough" (implying Fuji isn't knowledgeable on this just because she didn't fully get what they were trying to communicate)

How does this not come off as condescending? Pein frankly has had a bit of a history, from my experience, of being condescending toward people that don't agree with them (claiming they just "didn't read their posts properly" and the like), trying to act as though they weren't acting in such a way, and then getting away with it.
Click to expand...
Noted, but being annoyed and somewhat condescedning is not sufficient to get him banned, a moderate instruction warning at most, and Fujiwara still blatantly behaved considerably worse here.
 
I will say that Pein has done this sort of thing before, where they'll go out of their way to mock my intelligence (such as calling me a child and saying they'd just ignore any evidence I posted because they believed I was a wanker). I can find the specific report when I find the time.
 
Mad_Dog_of_Fujiwara said:
I will say that Pein has done this sort of thing before, where they'll go out of their way to mock my intelligence (such as calling me a child and saying they'd just ignore any evidence I posted because they believed I was a wanker). I can find the specific report when I find the time.
Click to expand...
I will like you to find this specific report. Since I cannot remember ever doing such a thing
 
I don't approve of Fuji's reactions in that situation, but it is decidedly unfair to say that her aggressive reactions to repeated, persistent provocations were more severe than the provocations themselves. Pein was acting out of line, and going very far out of their way to bother and harass Fuji for no discernable benefit - none of this report would have occurred in the first place if it wasn't for Pein's misconduct.

On the basis of this incident alone, I would think that a warning is suitable and that it should be left there. However, I would like if Fuji can provide evidence regarding her claims of Pein's past conduct for further context before a decisive judgement is passed.

Mad_Dog_of_Fujiwara said:
I will say that Pein has done this sort of thing before, where they'll go out of their way to mock my intelligence (such as calling me a child and saying they'd just ignore any evidence I posted because they believed I was a wanker). I can find the specific report when I find the time.
Click to expand...
 
I do not think that trying to reason with Fujiwara via private messages remotely counts as genuine harrassment. It was probably tone deaf/ill-considered, sure, but Pein is not an ill-intended member, just blunt by nature.
 
Antvasima said:
I do not think that trying to reason with Fujiwara via private messages remotely counts as genuine harrassment. It was probably tone deaf/ill-considered, sure, but Pein is not an ill-intended member, just blunt by nature.
Click to expand...
I find this extremely disingenuous, since me telling Pein that I don't give a shit about them coming into my DMs to bother me about me agreeing with them is also me being blunt by nature. Feels odd to let one example slide and not another, especially when I was never picking a fight with Pein to begin with and just responded when she started hounding me over this for no reason.

Anyways, here is the report I was referring to.
 
I did not say that you should be punished. I just said that it would be a massive double-standard to punish Pein when you behaved worse and also apparently misrepresented the situation in order to get them banned.
 
Antvasima said:
I did not say that you should be punished. I just said that it would be a massive double-standard to punish Pein when you behaved worse and also apparently misrepresented the situation in order to get them banned.
Click to expand...
Are you really just taking Pein's word for it and that's it? Especially when it comes to the "misrepresented the situation in order to get them banned" part? Like, that's an obvious way in which someone who has done something wrong would try to defend their wrongdoing.
 
No, I checked through the screencaptures that Pein provided, and if I recall correctly, Fujiwara initially presented the situation as if she had done nothing wrong here, which was not the case.
 
Mad_Dog_of_Fujiwara said:
Anyways, here is the report I was referring to
Click to expand...
Thank you, I genuinely have forgotten this, read through it and I can remember clearly now you saying "I have zero reasoning" and "learn to ******* read" and my reply was you should stop acting like a child when someone disagrees with them.
None of the messages are excusable like it was said in the reports.
CloverDragon03 said:
Are you really just taking Pein's word for it and that's it? Especially when it comes to the "misrepresented the situation in order to get them banned" part? Like, that's an obvious way in which someone who has done something wrong would try to defend their wrongdoing.
Click to expand...
I am not trying to defend my wrongdoings here, she indeed misrepresented the situation when she sent my messages and not her own messages that prompted the replies, she literally acted like she did nothing wrong and it was all me and that I have been warned previously. I was wrong to say "she cannot understand" and that sounds insultive, that much I accept and know, but at the same time you also need to accept that she is wrong for calling a "mf-er". And saying "I don't give a shit" to me sincerely trying to explain something she did wrong to her.
Also this is ignoring that this is not the first time she does these things, and has a lot of warnings and bans already for getting aggressive when people disagrees with her


Anyway now that all contexts have been laid out, I will wait for the mods to decide what to do.
 
As always, I primarily care about personal insults, rather than general hostility.
  • The conversation started off chill on both sides.
  • Fujiwara stepped up the temperature a bit by saying "I don't give a shit".
  • Pein went straight to personal insults with "stop giving opinions on what you cannot understand", as well as general hostility with saying Fujiwara had understanding issues, and was spewing BS.
  • Fujiwara responded with more general hostility, but I would consider the "************" there more of an exclamation rather than a personal insult.
  • Pein responded with another personal insult by saying "the ones actually knowledgeable on tier 2 u understood me well enough".
While I do think that Fujiwara not including this full context was bad, given how I ultimately didn't find those messages reportable, I don't find that lack of context as bad as Pein's personal insults.

Since I think Pein did worse, I think that Pein should get a short ban, while Fujiwara shouldn't get a ban or a warning.
 
Have there been any other reports of either Pein or Fuji in the past? I noticed that the report Fuji linked was from about a year and two months ago, and it was also a report regarding Pein's conduct towards Fuji, which makes me think that the two of them have been in conflict with one another for some time.

Assuming there are no other reports, I stand by what I said previously about a strict warning. I don't get the impression from these reports that Pein is incapable of having civil discussions in their current state - just that they've needlessly overreacted to contextual factors in a couple of instances. As far as I can see, a clear, unambiguous warning about avoiding this conduct in the future with acknowledgement to the punishment they will receive if they persist should be enough to defuse the situation.

That being said, my stance is obviously liable to change if Pein has already been warned in recent times for similar issues, or if this behaviour persists past this point.
 
Agnaa said:
but I would consider the "************" there more of an exclamation rather than a personal insult.
Click to expand...
While I think we both have different opinion on what makes personal insults or insults, i will only address this
"************ I said...." is not an exclamation, it is "name calling"

DarkGrath said:
if Pein has already been warned in recent times for similar issues, or if this behaviour persists past this point.
Click to expand...
On past behaviours though, I can say I have no warning in all my years here.
While Fuji has multiple warnings and ban on being aggressive in threads, although nothing in the last few months.
 
Last edited:
PrinceofPein said:
While I think we both have different opinion on what makes personal insults or insults, i will only address this
"************ I said...." is not an exclamation, it is "name calling"
Click to expand...
Maybe it just a matter of interpretation. I think "Holy shit, I said..." and "Goddamnit, I said..." both fit equally well, implying that it's more of an exclamation.
 
DarkGrath said:
Have there been any other reports of either Pein or Fuji in the past? I noticed that the report Fuji linked was from about a year and two months ago, and it was also a report regarding Pein's conduct towards Fuji, which makes me think that the two of them have been in conflict with one another for some time.
Click to expand...
There are from both sides. I could create a list of each to provide a transparent overview.
 
I would consider myself friendly with both users, I think they're both cool people but they also both run hot so I think it's not super surprising it came to blows. I'm inclined to think Pein shouldn't have instigated in DMs, but I'm not sure either person's behavior deserves more than a warning. I'm biased though, in this case, which is why I have avoided saying much.
 
Milly_Rocking_Bandit said:
I have to ask.

Why does being “a consistently helpful member” seem to be this… pseudo-shield to try and object people from being punished, and why does it matter here? Fujiwara is clearly distressed by what was said, in-great detail, but he’s allowed leniency because… he’s helpful scaling… characters that don’t exist…?
Click to expand...
So, again. This is the same exact people, too.
 
I've participated in pretty much every thread that resulted in Fuji getting reported, so I think I'm allowed to give further context?

All of Fuji's serious warnings and bans came as a result from constant bickering with another member, @Malomtek, who would misread Fuji's arguments, as well as trashtalk Fuji off-site and once even made a comic that was basically a death threat (Goku vaporizing Mokou, who was Fujiwara's current profile picture at the time, with a kamehameha), who was also known as the guy that DOXXED @Deagonx, I think it's pretty understandable why Fuji would have shit-flinging contests with this member. After Malomtek's ban, Fuji has shaped up and hasn't gotten any actual warnings or other punishment from staff since then, at least from what I can remember.
 
CloverDragon03 said:
Being a helpful or productive member is not a shield for toxicity. It’s what we expect
Click to expand...
I will rephrase that and more or less what I repeated; "Have been helpful and productive member" is not a shield. "They still are and working really hard to be" are better shields. And more so shields for some occasional slip ups resulted from overstress; nothing is really a shield for like full blown toxicity. We use present and future as holding more weight over than the past, combined with weighing how helpful/contributive they consistently and relative to how often and/or hard they misbehave.
 
User's history

@Mad_Dog_of_Fujiwara (aka @FujiwaraYesMokou)
@PrinceofPein (aka Pain_to12)
I excluded the wiki warnings since they are not relevant to the current discussion.
 
Last edited:
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
537
TheGreatJedi13
TheGreatJedi13
Back
Top