- 15,851
- 11,021
Hi I am sorry that i am intruding here since I am not staff, but it is very much possible to open VSBW on both phone and pc and have vpn on both active and then post. It's that easy.
-
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
- 165,692
- 73,428
- Thread starter
- #22,042
Yes, that is true. I just think that he would have to be ridiculously attentive to not ever reveal an IP address from a different country than the standard one for each of these accounts.
- 12,088
- 19,097
On the contrary, I think you're starting to go a bit too far with this - again, to the point where I fear it'll turn into a sort of witch hunt that I feel is unhealthy for the site. It's not that I disagree on Shadow being a sock, I think that part is pretty likely, but I think the accusations against Passerby are largely unfounded.
Or perhaps I'm a sock as well for defending Passerby, I guess
- 18,393
- 14,310
Wait, looking from it, it is also the same verse that Cloud also supports (the original one).
This is not a coincidence at all.
- 7,598
- 14,125
Please don't strawman my position and pretend I am making accusations out of thin air. The guy was inactive for a year until the day after Vapour's ban, and then arrives in this thread to defend a user you literally agree is a sock of Vapour. Vapour's other alt, MysticCarnage, has a lot of overlap with Passersby as well. All of these users have several verses in common, but your position is they just coincidentally either made their account or ended length inactivity in conjunction with Vapours bans?
- 243
- 86
Ant reached out to me to help with the language of the verse. Again I believe it is all a coincidence.
- 165,692
- 73,428
- Thread starter
- #22,047
@TheDivineHost wants to appeal his ban. Does anybody here remember much about the issue?
https://community.fandom.com/wiki/M...124&useskin=fandomdesktop#4400000000013343414
https://community.fandom.com/wiki/M...124&useskin=fandomdesktop#4400000000013343414
- 12,088
- 19,097
My issue is that you can find this stuff in pretty much anything if you look hard enough. In Passerby's case, I find it more likely to be coincidental given that they were actually around beforehand rather than the account being created after Vapour's ban
Maybe it was wrong of me to go the strawman route, that's completely fair, but I really don't think your accusations of Passerby don't hold much weight
Last edited:
- 9,352
- 9,834
I think people would be more comfortable if you asked Fandom about them as well, instead of just "including him suddenly" because he's defending someone.
That would also make it more open and shut for me too.
For right now, can I agree Shadow is a sock, but Passerby needs more conclusive stuff. If we based our evaluations on personal analysis and "bs detectors", we would very likely ban half the forums for suspecting them of malice and ill intent.
- 1,272
- 882
i made a demon slayer thread to upgrade the verse after seeing that the previous kaikagu calc was rejected, vapourr from what i've seen posted one to downgrade it
i've alse been arguing against downgrading the verse in another thread and had been interested in the DS characaters from a writing/ literature standpoint and even posted a character analysis on uppermoon 1 kokushibo ,@ImmortalDread and @CloverDragon03 can vouch for that, if the "they have interests in the same verses" is all you have to offer i would like you to drop this accusation
because i've seen/interacted with him in his baki thread revision CRT and tought he was a cool and chill dude and also saw him in Agnaa's crft about yoriichi and zenitsu and i saw him apologize for his incompetence over not knowing/not doing research so i tought he lacked self confidence, either way, that's not evidence
i have mostly only been involved in demon slayer and in a way where i wanted to upgrade it, vapourr wanted to downgrade it
i have also never been involved in a TR threads nor even cared about the verse
at this point you're really just obssessed
- 165,692
- 73,428
- Thread starter
- #22,051
Regardin Passersby, his IP addresses from before his 1-year break from this forum were also all located in the same country as after his break, and before his break he obviously didn't know that Vapourrrrr would get banned.
- 4,526
- 6,073
We need to slow very far down and take things one step at a time here. The report was directed to ShadowSythez, and I will reiterate that I don't believe there is any room for reasonable doubt in that case. We should focus on that, and then work on the Passersby case.
- 9,352
- 9,834
Agreed.
- 165,692
- 73,428
- Thread starter
- #22,054
Yes, the ShadowSythez case seems to have some reliable evidence (although I think that we should try to think up if there is any good way for him to prove that he is not the same person), but not the Passersby case.
- 18,393
- 14,310
I will summarize (for all) to make evaluation easier, and I will also include my parts there, since I am involved in this, and I requested the investigation to @Deagonx (since I trust him in this regard)
- When I requested Deagonx to check IP overlap, it is because the moment Vappour was ranting about an aspect of calculation guidelines (1/500), I saw Shadow to be exactly online and ranted in that calculation thread made by DT.
- It turned out fandom also suspects of this and does not mind if any punishments are given.
- All interests are perfectly identical including
- Calculation guidelines
- TR Verse
- Valorant (they play and have similar ranking too)
- And many others
- Language – I am not physiologist, but I have talked with both of them, their comprehension is near accurate equivalent
- Mindset – they literally argue the same, and act the same in every aspect.
- TR Calculations – they both actively engage regarding calculations in TR, exact behavior.
- Behavior– they both thinks that everyone is wrong regarding calculation guidelines even DT and simply refuse to see other interpretation.
- Shadow showcases even at his first days to be perfectly aligned of how our calculation works
- Vapour was banned on August 2nd, and ShadowSythez made his account on August 3rd.
If not, he is the most fakest person I ever concur in my life, and I am too stupid to appreciate his niceness in my DMs and forgive him twice for being caught lying.
- 12,088
- 19,097
I believe all this evidence is pretty damning, and that Shadow is most likely an alt of Vapour. However, I'd at least like for Shadow to be able to defend himself
- 4,526
- 6,073
It's a matter I've been thinking of through the thread, but the problem is that I don't believe such a method can exist in these circumstances.
To provide evidence that one is not the other would require some form of identifying information - this information would have to come from both of them, and would have to be comparable in a way that we could see one does not match with the other. Without such a method, any information gathered about either one of them would be irrelevant. What would it matter if we, say, knew Shadow had a particular Deviantart account if we didn't know whether or not Vapour had an account?
We have IP checks for this reason, as this fulfills the method, but that's about it. And as we all know, it's not definitive. As far as I can tell, no other identifying information is gathered from users. No matter what Shadow presents as evidence, it can't prove anything without some equivalent information from Vapour. The most we can do is identifying behavioural patterns, and that's exactly what has gotten Shadow reported here in the first place - the fact that he behaves consistently like Vapour.
- 18,393
- 14,310
I have made my points. I would never reach out to @Deagonx until I caught them both at the same time, ranting over the same aspect of calculation, along with their impressive debating skills and poor language proficiency that they both possess.
At this moment, I became disgusted by his fakeness and blatant insincerity in my DMs. He was well aware of how nice I had been towards him and how reasonable I had been with him.
I told him 5 times in DMs, "Don't create ALT accounts." I had warned him and made my stance very clear. Despite that, he still lied. He did apologize later, and I forgave him. However, now I have caught them behaving in exactly the same manner.
He is fake person. I won't trust any evidence he shares to prove himself unless he can objectively differentiate himself from Vappour or Cloud.
Last edited:
- 7,598
- 14,125
Aside from the timeline, we can also observe the extreme overlap in interest.
These are cases in which ShadowSythez posted in verses that Vapour and Mystic were regularly posting in.
First post says he agrees, with the same thread both Vapour and Mystic agreed with
Same day posts about Valorant, which Mystic posted about
Then about Demon Slayer which both Vapour and Mystic posted about
Then Tokyo Revengers which we already know both Vapour and Mystic posted about
Then Attack on Titan which both Vapour and Mystic posted about
Then Baki which both Vapour and Mystic posted about
Then Classroom of the Elite which both Vapour and Mystic posted about (even contesting the exact same feat!)
Then PTJ/Lookism which both Vapourrrrr and Mystic posted about
Then Naruto which bout Vapour and Mystic posted about
But hey, perhaps this is all a coincidence and I'm just witch hunting this dude who made his account the day after Vapour's perma ban and posted about the same 10 verses.
Oh, and I forgot Spy Family, which is the same as above.
- 12,088
- 19,097
In the same vein that you (fairly might I add) asked me to not strawman you, I'd like to ask you to not make a snide comment like this, as I feel it's pretty unproductive to the discussion at hand
As for Shadow, at the moment, I'm in support of a permaban
- 7,598
- 14,125
We should also not overlook Cloud's latest sock that someone posted above:
vsbattles.fandom.com
The linked discord is "cloudsupreme" and Clouds other alt, Akasakelucilfer, has a linked Discord named "Gojosrevenge" so this is certainly another alt.
Gojosrevenge
vsbattles.fandom.com
The linked discord is "cloudsupreme" and Clouds other alt, Akasakelucilfer, has a linked Discord named "Gojosrevenge" so this is certainly another alt.
- 12,088
- 19,097
Seems pretty straightforward so I'm inclined to agree with thisWe should also not overlook Cloud's latest sock that someone posted above:
Gojosrevenge
The linked discord is "cloudsupreme" and Clouds other alt, Akasakelucilfer, has a linked Discord named "Gojosrevenge" so this is certainly another alt.
- 7,598
- 14,125
He's probably raging because another one of his alts is going to get banned.
- 9,352
- 9,834
Completely unnecessary, specially since Clover apologized to you. Avoid these in the future. Thanks.
Ban away.We should also not overlook Cloud's latest sock that someone posted above:
Gojosrevenge
The linked discord is "cloudsupreme" and Clouds other alt, Akasakelucilfer, has a linked Discord named "Gojosrevenge" so this is certainly another alt.
- 7,598
- 14,125
Later today when I have the opportunity I will compile the full list of known and suspects socks orbiting the TR community among others and have Fandom look into it and see if we can nail down any others. Eventually Vapour got sloppy enough with the MysticCarnage account that it was caught by the forum, but we missed it the first time. Perhaps with a broader net we will be able to determine if theres any overlap we missed or if any of these accounts appear to be using VPNs (which is not -- in and of itself -- inappropriate, but is evidential in conjunction with behavioral evidence).
- 243
- 86
Hey. Sorry I was gone I had to go to eat.
I do not know how this person speaks normally but if they speak like this I can confidentally say I do not speak like them. I do not know how they argue can you link where we have argued in similar ways ? I do not actively participate in tokyo revengers calculations, I only joined a thread on it because the title was "verse upgrade" which piqued my interest.
"Behavior". This one really hurts me because I feel as if I have proven I'm reasonable in multiple instances, I do not understand what I said to be considered as someone who thinks everyone is wrong. Really hurts me to know that you think im a narcissist.
This person does not seem to speak like me in any regard. They use the c word a lot which I haven't heard been used in years and I myself have never said it. Their language also seems to be lacking, they seem to miss out on a lot of punctuation and seem to word things differently (incorrectly that is).
Please stop calling me an alt account. I'm my own person and do not want to be considered the same as someone who talks to people like that.
- 14,933
- 21,034
I've banned them.
- 18,393
- 14,310
Glad the issue is solved, moving on.
@DarkDragonMedeus is the one who banned them with the reason of:
- 165,692
- 73,428
- Thread starter
- #22,073
- 15,052
- 12,818
Since people were asking, I think that getting both users in the same voice chat at the same time is a pretty decent way to indicate against someone being a sock.
While they could get a friend to hop on, one could ask questions that they'd each obviously know to test whether they're someone clueless just being fed lines.
I don't see any suspicious activity from TheDivineHost's account, nor any warnings to not create sockpuppets or anything like that, so I can't tell whether they should've been banned or not.
While they could get a friend to hop on, one could ask questions that they'd each obviously know to test whether they're someone clueless just being fed lines.
I don't see any suspicious activity from TheDivineHost's account, nor any warnings to not create sockpuppets or anything like that, so I can't tell whether they should've been banned or not.
- 15,052
- 12,818
Since people got distracted by other things, I'd like to remind y'all about this:
For reference, here's the original report, and the warning tracker chronicling all warnings is linked in my post above.
Tllm agreed with a ban on editing pages until further notice, is anyone else okay with that? If so, I can go write up an instruction about it.
For reference, here's the original report, and the warning tracker chronicling all warnings is linked in my post above.
- 12,088
- 19,097
This user has made changes to this profile without a CRT
I've reverted the edits already. The user in question has also been warned before about making changes without a CRT, and has done this despite said warning
I've reverted the edits already. The user in question has also been warned before about making changes without a CRT, and has done this despite said warning
- 10,993
- 9,767
From what it looks like these edits weren't really "changes" per say. At least, nothing that would require a CRT. He just specified what key of Shulk he scaled to and fixed the wording of the explanations.
Doesn't really seem block worthy imo.
Also doesn't seem malicious since he did leave a note explaining his reasoning for it. Which seemed fair, at least.
- 15,052
- 12,818
You're right.
Clover, don't revert or report stuff like that in the future.
I'll make sure to actually look at such edits, even if reported by staff members, before warning/blocking in the future.
I've unblocked the user and let 'em know that everything's fine.
Clover, don't revert or report stuff like that in the future.
I'll make sure to actually look at such edits, even if reported by staff members, before warning/blocking in the future.
I've unblocked the user and let 'em know that everything's fine.
- 30,415
- 32,254
I don't particularly remember the user, I know it says I banned them and that they were banned for abusing multiple accounts. But I do not remember what those accounts were but I probably noticed from the approval queue. Was there anywhere on a previous RVR where I mentioned him or explained why he got banned?
Similar threads
