Rule Violation Reports (New forum)

[Duedate8898]

I gotta agree with Garri on this. While Arcker was by far a more toxic element throughout the entire argument, that does not excuse Deagonx's behavior throughout. Especially as a thread mod, letting that grow as it did as a participant in the discussion shows a failing on both parties.

A warning should've been given a while into that argument, so let's just give it now and have it as a notch for a later. Anything more than that isn't fitting in my eyes

 

[LordTracer]

I gotta agree with Garry on this. While Arcker was by far a more toxic elment throughout the entire argument, that does not excuse Deagonix's behavior throughout. Especially as a thread mod, letting that grow as it did as a participant in the discussion shows a failing on both parties.

A warning should've been given a while into that argument, so let's just give it now and have as a notch for a later. Anything more than that isn't fitting in my eyes

My thoughts are pretty much the same.

 

[Dereck03]

Yeah, i'm in the same boat as Duedate.

 

[Catzlaflame]

I share the same sentiments as Duedate as well.

 

[Deagonx]

That's good with me. I'll add it to the other warnings on the tracker for future references.

 

[Damage3245]

Okay. Let's consider the matter settled.

 

[Mr. Bambu]

This thread is not staff only. However, input is only necessary from people directly related to the report, and staff. We don't need a million voices leaning in to remind us that they, too, feel they have been wronged by Deagon pursuing his duties.

From the given statements quoted by either side, Arcker is the aggressor here, a fact I feel is too frequently true: Deagon has a bad reputation, and thus many users seem to feel it is acceptable to dogpile him and cite upvotes as a meter of correctness. The idea is absurd and yet was quoted in this very thread, in this very incident. The problems with this are only exacerbated by the fact that Arcker has, indeed, been banned on the grounds of hostility relatively recently, something we are very slow to pursue.

I do not want to ban Arcker for this shit. I'd like everyone to walk away peacefully and have an understanding of each other, because for *****' sake people need to stop starting screaming matches over such inane topics. A warning is acceptable, and I want this known for the people referring to it: Deagon is following the letter of the rule in 95% of the instances where he deletes a message. Our rules, as they are written, have almost entirely supported his actions. Most of us operate from the spirit of the rule, the intention, wherein unobtrusive messages do not always need deleted, and so we allow it, even though our policies would technically forbid it. Deagon is not deleting messages "because he feels like it", and this feels like a deliberate misinterpretation of the reality of the situation.

Settle down and play nice, please. I'm sick of returning to this topic.

 

[Antvasima]

Thank you to everybody who helped us to reach a solution to this situation.

I also think that a warning is all that is necessary for Arcker here, and that quite a lot of members seem to dislike Deagonx due to that he has been a bit overzealous with deleting even useful comments, closing threads, and preventing other members from responding. As Bambu said, he is not breaking our rules, but most of our staff members try to act based on the spirit/intentions of our rules, rather than continuously going as far in their enforcement as is technically permitted, so that is definitely something for Deagonx to try to take into careful serious consideration before engaging in such behaviour in the future.

 

[Dereck03]

Well, Garrixian's suggestion which seems to be the one that the staffs finally agreed on was to give a warning to both Arcker and Deagon, the warning was already given to Arcker when it was added to the warning tracker, but according to Deagon his "warning" should be discussed with HR.

 

[Antvasima]

Okay. Understood.

 

[Deagonx]

As Bambu said, he is not breaking our rules, but most of our staff members try to act based on the spirit/intentions of our rules, rather than continuously going as far in their enforcement as is technically permitted, so that is definitely something for Deagonx to try to take into careful serious consideration before engaging in such behaviour in the future.

The whole thing with comment deletion is a bit off-topic to the primary incident, but I'll speak on it briefly here because it has come up a lot, and I've mostly avoided saying much on it because it is not the focal point of the discussions where it has been brought up, such as this one.

As Bambu said, my intention is to follow the letter of the rule when I delete comments, it isn't personal. Just as I deleted Gin's comment providing his proposal, I deleted an earlier comment which chastised Arcker's actions even though (obviously) I agreed with it. When it comes to RVRT the flow chart for what comments are allowed is fairly simple, so a lot of comments end up getting deleted. When I became a mod, unhelpful RVR comments was somewhat of a focus for me, because I'd seen a lot of RVR debacles get entirely out of hand largely due to unhelpful interjections from people who had no business being here other than the fact that they wanted to participate in the ongoing drama, which just made already messy situations even messier. This is an issue because the RVR is often the primary avenue to get staff assistance in dealing with a user who is being persistently rude to them, such as the situation above.

Similarly, in many CRTs that involve controversial verses (or are made by controversial users) it's common to see just as many off-topic/low-effort jokes as actual responses to the discussion. In a recent Boros CRT I literally deleted half of the existing comments, because at the time of me reading the thread half of the comments were just people shitposting. This is also an issue, because the longer a CRT goes on and the more cluttered it gets, the harder it becomes to persuade staff to come and evaluate it and help it reach a satisfactory conclusion, which can be really frustrating for a well-meaning OP who is just trying to get well-reasoned changes made.

These are both issues I felt frustrated with when I was a user, so they are issues I've tried to help with as a member of staff. That isn't to say I've never had errors in judgment, I'm a human being and relative to a lot of the staff I am fairly new to this. However, it isn't something I do out of personal whimsy, it is always out of a sincere belief that a comment has broken a rule.

I have taken the feedback on it seriously and have applied more discretion, which may not be obvious because the absence of action rarely looks like action, but it is something I genuinely have taken into consideration, and I've regularly pursued input from admins in situations where the line is unclear, and I intend to make an effort to be more communicative as Agnaa has suggested about why comments are being deleted.

 

[Antvasima]

Well, deleting derailing shitposting and maintaining some reasonable degree of polite and orderly conduct is perfectly fine, whereas you have to be careful to not delete constructive comments that happen to disagree with you or apply instant permanent thread bans for generally well-behaved members who have committed a minor offence, so attempting to gauge where to draw a reasonable line to not become too draconian should be a good continuous focus of effort.

 

[Antvasima]

So would the rest of you here be fine with if we ignore this latest event, and return to the punishment for the original offenses, which was 1 month if I recall correctly?

@Dereck03

So should we apply a 1 month ban to @Mizuki67 and @Jozaysmith? or let them go with a warning this time?

 

[Dereck03]

I would not oppose.

 

[Antvasima]

Which solution?

 

[Dereck03]

If this was dismissed, then let their ban be 1 month, but if not then let them stick to 1 year or whatever since other staffs agreed to 1 year and myself alone can't overrule their consensus.

 

[GarrixianXD]

I didn't report anyone or come to wiki and say i want to report anyone again stop carrying offsite claims to wiki honestly this is becoming a pain in the ass
I only said in Discord That "Now that i get to see all the nonsense they have been saying i get to report them" Have i reported you?
Did i come to wiki to report you?
No, please let's drop the matter If you want me report the case on the other server members then please specify I can report all of them here
which is seriously prolonging this issue and i seriously don't want that if you do then its your choice.

They already stated themselves they won’t report Dereck. And Dereck said it themselves if he’s getting reported, we agreed to let him know what he’s being accused of before making such punishments. This can be dropped, however, @Antvasima three staff members already advocated for the ban of Jozaysmith and Mizuki prior to this incident; that should be taken into consideration.

 

[Jozaysmith?]

They already stated themselves they won’t report Dereck. And Dereck said it themselves if he’s getting reported, we agreed to let him know what he’s being accused of before making such punishments. This can be dropped, however, @Antvasima three staff members already advocated for the ban of Jozaysmith and Mizuki prior to this incident; that should be taken into consideration.

I thought the one year ban thing was because of what we called dereck off site (which it was)
However no staff that declared one month or one year ban prior to this case have given their thoughts on the cleared and misunderstood issue
Well the sock puppet thing was cleared off as a warning and was added to our warning tracker well we didn't have any case prior to this sockpuppet thingy so its our first time getting warned

 

[GarrixianXD]

I thought the one year ban thing was because of what we called dereck off site (which it was)
However no staff that declared one month or one year ban prior to this case have given their thoughts on the cleared and misunderstood issue

@Deagonx @Maverick_Zero_X @Qawsedf234 All were supportive of an one year ban after things were cleared up about all the accounts sharing.

 

[Jozaysmith?]

Deleted last comment and made this one to clear things out
I remember explaining the situation but they didn't reply
So i think bumping this case is a good idea, the old proposals was because i and @Mizuki67 was suspected to be the same user which we cleared out with @GarrixianXD on Discord that even @AKM sama and @Antvasima agreed and Confirmed not to be sock
We agreed that we should ban my previous account named @Starfeldway which was taken later it was also suspected that we did the same thing again which we repeatedly prove we didn't, and the whole sockpuppet thing on fandom is a one time thing moving on, the punishable offenses we carried out were offsite which we agree to move away from after we apologize and decide to move past from i personally asked @Antvasima on DM that he should help me settle things in other words i wanted to apologize given the way i acted i honestly felt it might be a waste of time but seeing the way @GarrixianXD is i decided to do so even if am not forgiven i can clear the bad name and behavior of all the thing i said and did offsite, Reason is because We felt our thread was being jumped on which was a false accusation which @Mr._Bambu warned me on not to place false accusation on users of this forum
Lastly, Which might be a useless remark I Have no alter motions towards people on this wiki not any mods not any members most things are emotional outburst of a teenage boy just raging online so i apologize for that also on behalf of @Mizuki67 who called dereck the P word, although very uncalled for it was just a teenage offsite outburst we do not and will not mean any harm to any staff here and would not do anything to get any staff punished or so by saying things they didn't do, Honestly doubt we can anways, Yeah we cant even if we tried but the point is we won't try So we plead with the staffs here to forgive our past offenses

 

[KLOL506]

Can there be multiple degrees of Type 5 Acausality?

Can there be multiple degrees of Type 5 Acausality in the same verse? As in, say something transcends the causal system of a universe and exists on a higher plane. So it operates on that higher plane's causal system, yet it still transcends the one below them. Would this be Type 5, or still...

vsbattles.com

Can there be multiple degrees of Type 5 Acausality?

Can there be multiple degrees of Type 5 Acausality in the same verse? As in, say something transcends the causal system of a universe and exists on a higher plane. So it operates on that higher plane's causal system, yet it still transcends the one below them. Would this be Type 5, or still...

vsbattles.com

Can there be multiple degrees of Type 5 Acausality?

Can there be multiple degrees of Type 5 Acausality in the same verse? As in, say something transcends the causal system of a universe and exists on a higher plane. So it operates on that higher plane's causal system, yet it still transcends the one below them. Would this be Type 5, or still...

vsbattles.com

Yeah uh I don't think that's appropriate at all here.

 

[TaiwaneseScaler]

Can there be multiple degrees of Type 5 Acausality?

Can there be multiple degrees of Type 5 Acausality in the same verse? As in, say something transcends the causal system of a universe and exists on a higher plane. So it operates on that higher plane's causal system, yet it still transcends the one below them. Would this be Type 5, or still...

vsbattles.com

Can there be multiple degrees of Type 5 Acausality?

Can there be multiple degrees of Type 5 Acausality in the same verse? As in, say something transcends the causal system of a universe and exists on a higher plane. So it operates on that higher plane's causal system, yet it still transcends the one below them. Would this be Type 5, or still...

vsbattles.com

Can there be multiple degrees of Type 5 Acausality?

Can there be multiple degrees of Type 5 Acausality in the same verse? As in, say something transcends the causal system of a universe and exists on a higher plane. So it operates on that higher plane's causal system, yet it still transcends the one below them. Would this be Type 5, or still...

vsbattles.com

Yeah uh I don't think that's appropriate at all here.

Bro It doesnt violate any rules (Yes I read them) plus I seen worse jokes on this site that didnt get reported

 

[Damage3245]

Yeah uh I don't think that's appropriate at all here.

Very inappropriate, yeah. At the very least they should be deleted and the user given a warning.

 

[Damage3245]

Bro It doesnt violate any rules (Yes I read them) plus I seen worse jokes on this site that didnt get reported

One of our rule sections under Site Rules is "Be Appropriate":

• Being sexually flirtatious will not be tolerated. Playing mature games, flirting, or using sexual connotations is discouraged, and in extreme cases, will result in a severe penalty.

 

[KLOL506]

Bro It doesnt violate any rules (Yes I read them) plus I seen worse jokes on this site that didnt get reported

DON'T EVEN START.

 

[TaiwaneseScaler]

Can there be multiple degrees of Type 5 Acausality?

Can there be multiple degrees of Type 5 Acausality in the same verse? As in, say something transcends the causal system of a universe and exists on a higher plane. So it operates on that higher plane's causal system, yet it still transcends the one below them. Would this be Type 5, or still...

vsbattles.com

Can there be multiple degrees of Type 5 Acausality?

Can there be multiple degrees of Type 5 Acausality in the same verse? As in, say something transcends the causal system of a universe and exists on a higher plane. So it operates on that higher plane's causal system, yet it still transcends the one below them. Would this be Type 5, or still...

vsbattles.com

Can there be multiple degrees of Type 5 Acausality?

Can there be multiple degrees of Type 5 Acausality in the same verse? As in, say something transcends the causal system of a universe and exists on a higher plane. So it operates on that higher plane's causal system, yet it still transcends the one below them. Would this be Type 5, or still...

vsbattles.com

Yeah uh I don't think that's appropriate at all here.

Types of Jokes that Violate rules are Doxxing, Threatening, and etc that are like borderline weird bro.

 

[Dereck03]

Can there be multiple degrees of Type 5 Acausality?

Can there be multiple degrees of Type 5 Acausality in the same verse? As in, say something transcends the causal system of a universe and exists on a higher plane. So it operates on that higher plane's causal system, yet it still transcends the one below them. Would this be Type 5, or still...

vsbattles.com

Can there be multiple degrees of Type 5 Acausality?

Can there be multiple degrees of Type 5 Acausality in the same verse? As in, say something transcends the causal system of a universe and exists on a higher plane. So it operates on that higher plane's causal system, yet it still transcends the one below them. Would this be Type 5, or still...

vsbattles.com

Can there be multiple degrees of Type 5 Acausality?

Can there be multiple degrees of Type 5 Acausality in the same verse? As in, say something transcends the causal system of a universe and exists on a higher plane. So it operates on that higher plane's causal system, yet it still transcends the one below them. Would this be Type 5, or still...

vsbattles.com

Yeah uh I don't think that's appropriate at all here.

Ok, ngnl, it gave got me a little creeped out and cringe to see those messages, I deleted them because they are troll asf.

 

[Damage3245]

@TaiwaneseScaler Take the warning, or take a ban, it's as simple as that.

And stop posting here if you've got nothing relevant to say.

 

[Damage3245]

TaiwaneseScaler keeps posting in this thread despite warnings and having his posts deleted, so I've banned him on the forum for a day out of necessity to stop the spam.

We'll see if he can behave after 24 hours.

 

[Kachon123]

Not sure if posts like this are allowed.

 

[LephyrTheRevanchist]

Not sure if posts like this are allowed.

They are not:

Derogatory comments on religious or political matters (both highly sensitive issues) will not be tolerated, as it almost always leads to massive hate-commenting and negativity. Doing so will result in a deletion of the post, and possibly a ban, depending on the severity.

The issue isn't serious enough to warrant even a warning, but good thing the comment was deleted.

 

[Maverick_Zero_X]

One of our rule sections under Site Rules is "Be Appropriate":

• Being sexually flirtatious will not be tolerated. Playing mature games, flirting, or using sexual connotations is discouraged, and in extreme cases, will result in a severe penalty.

Apparently that Q&A thread isn’t the only time they posted a sexually flirtatious message out of nowhere:

The Boys small upgrade

This calc was accepted bringing Ryan's speed from Unknown to Superhuman and his striking strength from Unknown to Wall level+

vsbattles.com

So a stern warning sounds appropriate.

 

[KLOL506]

TaiwaneseScaler keeps posting in this thread despite warnings and having his posts deleted, so I've banned him on the forum for a day out of necessity to stop the spam.

We'll see if he can behave after 24 hours.

I don't think he will, look at what he said here.

 

[GarrixianXD]

A final warning sounds good. If they still misbehave after that, it’s a boot for them.

 

[Lonkitt]

A final warning sounds good. If they still misbehave after that, it’s a boot for them.

Admittedly, I think just giving them the boot is fair enough right now. All of their comments before the warning and responses to the warning don’t suggest this user’s going to take the policies seriously

 

[TWILIGHT-OP]

A final warning sounds good. If they still misbehave after that, it’s a boot for them.

I think @Damage3245 already gave him 1day ban.

 

[Robo432343]

I noticed that taiwanesescaler keeps derailing and tries to be funny in like 90% of threads that are meant to be serious

Expanding Arceus Transduality Justification

Transduality (Nature 2, Aspect 2; They are the "God who transcends everything", that is both a part of everything and outside everything, beyond both time and space and the Distortion world having percieved them into creation. The Distortion World being nothingness that is a reverse of the...

vsbattles.com

randomly said "Yep. This is Boundless for sure. mhm" in a transduality CRT

Saitama VS Goku • (1-1-0)

Did anyone else vote? I mean, sure, but Saitama's growth is exponential lol. By the time he reaches a SSJ transformation it's pretty much over for Goku I would say. Vote for Goku

vsbattles.com

"Huesito whimpering audio boutta go crazy."
like wtf??

Granblue Fantasy small Cosmology tweak (new story)

Yea this is Boundless close the thread make the changes promote the OP to staff. Actually give em the entire vsbw site

vsbattles.com

"Yea this is Boundless close the thread make the changes promote the OP to staff. Actually give em the entire vsbw site"

Gotta go fast!

There’s NOTHING that implies that he became ftl in the last chapter. The most acceptable ideia is that he already was at his last appearence. There’s no visible buff, no statement… There is nothing that directly implies he was FTL when he had his skirmish with Tatsumaki either.

vsbattles.com

"Thats gotta be an Immeasurable speed feat with Type 5 Acausalty with Soul Manipulation, Biological Manipulation, Telepathy, Cosmic Awareness and Precognition and Fate Manipulation, Immortality (Types 1 and 4") in a speed crt


he already got in trouble for leaking an ip address and he does unnecessary stuff like this
there is more

 

[TWILIGHT-OP]

I noticed that taiwanesescaler keeps derailing and tries to be funny in like 90% of threads that are meant to be serious

Expanding Arceus Transduality Justification

Transduality (Nature 2, Aspect 2; They are the "God who transcends everything", that is both a part of everything and outside everything, beyond both time and space and the Distortion world having percieved them into creation. The Distortion World being nothingness that is a reverse of the...

vsbattles.com

randomly said "Yep. This is Boundless for sure. mhm" in a transduality CRT

Saitama VS Goku • (1-1-0)

Did anyone else vote? I mean, sure, but Saitama's growth is exponential lol. By the time he reaches a SSJ transformation it's pretty much over for Goku I would say. Vote for Goku

vsbattles.com

"Huesito whimpering audio boutta go crazy."
like wtf??

Granblue Fantasy small Cosmology tweak (new story)

Yea this is Boundless close the thread make the changes promote the OP to staff. Actually give em the entire vsbw site

vsbattles.com

"Yea this is Boundless close the thread make the changes promote the OP to staff. Actually give em the entire vsbw site"

there is more

Yeah true, going through his recent msgs there a lot of msgs like these

For black winter

I see that black winter does not have a profile and I scaled it accordingly in cosmology and as a result I made this profile. I want vsbw to use this profile for black winter https://vsbattles.fandom.com/wiki/User:Roirr/Sandbox?useskin=fandomdesktop#Powers_and_Stats Agree:LordTracer, Elizio33...

vsbattles.com

 

[TheGreatJedi13]

Yeah true, going through his recent msgs there a lot of msgs like these

For black winter

I see that black winter does not have a profile and I scaled it accordingly in cosmology and as a result I made this profile. I want vsbw to use this profile for black winter https://vsbattles.fandom.com/wiki/User:Roirr/Sandbox?useskin=fandomdesktop#Powers_and_Stats Agree:LordTracer, Elizio33...

vsbattles.com

To add more to it
He recently did this

alien x upgrade

But there is no creator It doesn't change anything. The fact that the waves are 5D doesn't mean that what it creates should be 5D.

vsbattles.com

He used the reply function to change the content of the message he is replying from further insinuating and disrupting conversation. And the way the message was changed is teetering on the level of S harassment

 

[DarkGrath]

I definitely think TaiwaneseScaler's conduct warrants a ban, and more than a day at that. But the intention of the ban was to see if they'll get the message and shape up in the light of the report and the actions taken against them, which I believe is worth waiting for. If they do not, I'd support an at least 6 month ban.