• 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)

KingTempest said:
We banning people for sweaty armpit usernames?
Click to expand...
I may not like how oversensitive Fandom's TOS can be, but rules are still rules. If Fandom doesn't like the username, it needs to be changed. And if changed on Fandom account, this forum account needs to change to match the Fandom account.
 
CloverDragon03 said:
Shouldn’t be this much of a hassle tbh, they just need to change the username instead of being this stubborn about it. Let’s not act like this isn’t clearly rooted in a fetish
Click to expand...
it stays or Change it to Damagesweatyarmpits. also, this is kinda funny.. my gamertag is way worse than this and i never had problems with it lmaoo..
3d0b5288d0d295530f171f5a218921b4.jpg
 
Mirkosweatyarmpits said:
it stays or Change it to Damagesweatyarmpits. also, this is kinda funny.. my gamertag is way worse than this and i never had problems with it lmaoo..
3d0b5288d0d295530f171f5a218921b4.jpg
Click to expand...
This is worse at this point. Would have been more lenient with you if you acknowledged that or at least take it up to Fandom policy instead of us. If you're going to troll this deliberately, we're going to have to permaban you. This is your final warning.
 
reporting @CHIDOSKI for this kind of behaviour. Asked him to apologise yet he continue to mock us and call all of our scans fake and wank from what we have used as evidence in vsbw. He continue to claim that all of our scans we used were fake without any evidence

He had also edited some of his reply

Check here for more info
all-fiction-battles.fandom.com

Debunking H1B tensura and characters that scale to it. | Fandom

I'm gonna make this a couple part series because…
all-fiction-battles.fandom.com
 
Last edited:
Duedate8898 said:
Uh, we don't have jurisdiction over All-Fiction battles, I don't think
Click to expand...
well i thought we were allowed to report someone offsite and this person has brought vsbw in to this. Also this person claimed that he was CHIDOSKI. I also remember this CHIDOSKI person has been rude to us in this forum before
 
Mizuki67 said:
well i thought we were allowed to report someone offsite and this person has brought vsbw in to this
Click to expand...
You actually are allowed to report people for off-site behavior, but only for stuff that’s extremely inappropriate (i.e., pedophilia, extreme racism, etc). Although even that appears to be case-by-case. This doesn’t meet that benchmark.
 
This Urshani seems like a troll. He is permabanned and global blocked across Fandom, but his forum account doesn't appear banned. Furthermore he made this thread that appears to be prone to red flags and this one less than a day after. Showing signs of spam. He apparently requested to be permabanned. He also appears to be an alt of a permabanned user via his own self admission no less. He also apparently has a history of being obnoxious to SMT fans especially.

Sounds like a type of user we'd rather not have around.
 
DarkDragonMedeus said:
This Urshani seems like a troll.
Click to expand...
I'm serious. Sorry.
DarkDragonMedeus said:
He is permabanned and global blocked across Fandom, but his forum account doesn't appear banned. Furthermore he made this thread that appears to be prone to red flags and this one less than a day after.
Click to expand...
I don't see how they're red flags. I was just asking questions. Getting to know what the userbase believes.
DarkDragonMedeus said:
Showing signs of spam.
Click to expand...
I don't know what this forum's definition of spam is. I'm sure a day between two threads isn't spam? If it is, I didn't know, and I apologize.
DarkDragonMedeus said:
He apparently requested to be permabanned.
Click to expand...
That was a while ago. I changed my mind. I also deleted my old fandom account.
DarkDragonMedeus said:
He also appears to be an alt of a permabanned user via his own self admission no less.
Click to expand...
Read above.
DarkDragonMedeus said:
He also apparently has a history of being obnoxious to SMT fans especially.
Click to expand...
If I was, then I apologize.
DarkDragonMedeus said:
Sounds like a type of user we'd rather not have around.
Click to expand...
 
Urshani said:
I don't see how they're red flags. I was just asking questions. Getting to know what the userbase believes.
Click to expand...
I mean, your threads were about who believes in the current tiering system and what would debunk it. That already gives red flags. Not only that, but in your first thread, you said you were trying to understand your opponents. So like… clearly this is building to an attempt to dismantle our tiering system
 
CloverDragon03 said:
I mean, your threads were about who believes in the current tiering system and what would debunk it. That already gives red flags. Not only that, but in your first thread, you said you were trying to understand your opponents. So like… clearly this is building to an attempt to dismantle our tiering system
Click to expand...
In all honesty: do you think that's a bad thing?

What's so bad about asking questions like that? even if they'll lead into me pointing out flaws in the tiering system.
 
Urshani said:
In all honesty: do you think that's a bad thing?

What's so bad about asking questions like that? even if they'll lead into me pointing out flaws in the tiering system.
Click to expand...
Because at the end of the day it's going to lead to absolutely nothing, given your last previous threads before this. No battleboarding system is perfect and there will never be unity between the other battleboarding sites due to its ever-changing and highly-subjective nature, not to mention that regardless of whatever flaws it might have, you'd still need to consider bringing up viable remedies to them that wouldn't disrupt wiki activity or get into meaningless contradictions that would takes months or years to debate, time people could spend elsewhere.
 
Urshani said:
In all honesty: do you think that's a bad thing?

What's so bad about asking questions like that? even if they'll lead into me pointing out flaws in the tiering system.
Click to expand...
Trying to dismantle systems for the sake of dismantling them, yes.

Our system is tested and checked and changed on a regular basis. It is the primary pasttime of many users, one feels. However, when someone comes in and appears to be doing it for the sake of 'tearing it all down', with no real approach of their own, it reeks of bad intentions.

You see, we get many of those types here- people who think they're enlightened beyond the years of refinement the Tiering System has been given, and who think they're just what the wiki needs to finally be right. It is almost always the case that these turn out to be malicious actors with an inflated sense of ego and superiority, who don't really want what is best for the wiki, but rather for it to conform to their views. In your case, you appear to be outsourcing this to others, just out of a desire to **** with the system.

I think it's reasonable to note this as a red flag, yes.
 
KLOL506 said:
Because at the end of the day it's going to lead to absolutely nothing, given your last previous threads before this. No battleboarding system is perfect and there will never be unity between the other battleboarding sites due to its ever-changing and highly-subjective nature, not to mention that regardless of whatever flaws it might have, you'd still need to consider bringing up viable remedies to them that wouldn't disrupt wiki activity or get into meaningless contradictions that would takes months or years to debate, time people could spend elsewhere.
Click to expand...
Because you kept closing down my threads and refusing to engage with them. Also, I have better arguments than I did the last time, and a coherent alternative.
Mr._Bambu said:
Trying to dismantle systems for the sake of dismantling them, yes.

Our system is tested and checked and changed on a regular basis. It is the primary pasttime of many users, one feels. However, when someone comes in and appears to be doing it for the sake of 'tearing it all down', with no real approach of their own, it reeks of bad intentions.
Click to expand...
True. But then again, I have an approach of my own. That's what makes it different.
Mr._Bambu said:
You see, we get many of those types here- people who think they're enlightened beyond the years of refinement the Tiering System has been given, and who think they're just what the wiki needs to finally be right. It is almost always the case that these turn out to be malicious actors with an inflated sense of ego and superiority, who don't really want what is best for the wiki, but rather for it to conform to their views. In your case, you appear to be outsourcing this to others, just out of a desire to **** with the system.

I think it's reasonable to note this as a red flag, yes.
Click to expand...
All of my views on what the tiering system is are mine. They might be influenced by others, but they're still mine.

To put it simply, I can prove that the tiering system is incorrect right here and now. If you want to accurately analyze fiction, then you should care about that. If you don't care about accuracy, cool, but that stands in defiance to the culture of this site (such as CRTs) as I understand it.
 
I'm willing to believe all of that, I don't really know you. I was replying to your implications of "is this really a bad thing"- yes, I think it is, and it's reasonable for people to infer from those archetypes a red flag or two. And I think the way you put your positions doesn't help- you speak as though you feel this place is biased or uncaring for accuracy at all, which is an ignorant, abrasive take at best.
 
Mr._Bambu said:
I'm willing to believe all of that, I don't really know you. I was replying to your implications of "is this really a bad thing"- yes, I think it is, and it's reasonable for people to infer from those archetypes a red flag or two.
Click to expand...
I apologize for seeming rude. I dislike it when people read bad intentions into me when there are none, but that's my own fault for acting my way.
Mr._Bambu said:
And I think the way you put your positions doesn't help- you speak as though you feel this place is biased or uncaring for accuracy at all, which is an ignorant, abrasive take at best.
Click to expand...
I respect this site's effort at trying to accurately model the capabilities of fictional characters. I just think you're doing it the wrong way.
 
And to pursue that, you made two threads asking people to complain about it, rather than making a thread about changes you would want to see.

Like I said, I'm willing to believe you have the intentions you say you have- we're starting from neutral, you and I. But it was an entirely fair assessment for others to think otherwise.

Regardless, we'll see what your activities produce and, if necessary, return here at a later date. You're unbanned, we don't need to continue discussion here. Move along, nothing to see here, et cetera et cetera.
 
I will, actually, update this. On his user profile, @Urshani linked to his own wiki, which details his own beliefs about what is and isn't right about powerscaling and how mistaken everyone is about it.

Most of it is benign, albeit probably wrong- I'll save speaking on my opinions of it for later. However, some of it proves relevant to our deliberations on whether or not Urshani's actions can be taken to be hostile or not. Specifically, he has a deleted page titled "VSBW Stupidity" that he deleted today that was almost solely about demeaning users who disagreed with him- today it had been updated to include @DarkDragonMedeus's ban of him, but previously included insults against @Milly_Rocking_Bandit regarding scaling disagreements between the two. The page can be seen in image form in these images. For now, images of the posts that caused this can be found here and here. At time of writing, it was apparently deleted about ten minutes ago- removing evidence of wrongdoing.

The page links to a Spanish blog that rants about VS Battles Wiki. I don't speak Spanish, so the best I can offer is translation by way of my friend Google. You're free to read it here if you're so inclined, but in it he details a manifesto of reasons why he hates VSBW with an apparent passion- he claims it is not a revenge post, but links to it from a page about his feuds with VSBW members, and then he goes on to say that it is made to laugh at people (I feel a particular bout of irony given that I've read his own concepts of a tiering system).

It is clear to me that this is another instance of a user with a bitter passion towards VSBW's destruction, and yet one who uniquely clearly knows so little about VSBW. Among the claims in his own sporadically-paced manifesto, we see many claims about the site and its functions, beliefs, etc, and yet very few actually align with reality. Here are some examples:
  • VSBW does not use references or citations, and most of its evidence is made up (that is, forgery)
  • VSBW as a community engages in revisionist history by pretending our original functions were invented by us, rather than hailing from older concepts from places like the OBD or ACF
  • Antvasima belittles other wikis if they will not partner with VSBW to promote us instead
  • VSBW skews context to favor verses to skew them upwards (or downwards, depending on the author's own belief of how strong the verse is)
This... critique, if it can be called that, is also just riddled with hateful messages aimed at our userbase. Specific users, like @KLOL506, @Qawsedf234, and others- and perhaps most frequently @Antvasima ("The wiki was later owned by one XXKINGXX69, who in 2014 handed over control to Antvasima, in what is possibly one of the worst moves in fandom.com history") and then the groups that work on various verses (God of War, Dragon Ball, Dungeons and Dragons, and so on). This is not the positioning of someone who wants to help the wiki be fixed. This is the position of someone who hates the wiki for disagreeing with them, and has gone to some lengths to conjure a new "tiering system" to try to force it to change- while still demeaning anyone who has ever disagreed with him. The amount of namedrops in this blog are astronomical, as far as I can tell most of it is heranguing people who don't view things as the author does.

Most of the actual criticisms are objectively wrong- we require references on our pages (and work to implement them on older pages, too- major revisions are underway for things like Warhammer and so on that have a lot of content to work through). I've never seen an individual on VSBW say that we didn't come from other older systems- we don't deny our roots, they just don't really come up much now, especially now that we've moved past so many of them. Antvasima made a specific rule about not engaging in foul interchanges with other wikis (while no other wiki affords us the same graces), and VSBW is decision by committee- pages are the way that they are because of majority rule, not a singular motive. There's more, but, I feel I should conclude:

This is not a benevolent user. This is a user who means to harm the wiki out of spite and bile. We have no need for users such as this one. We ought to ban him again, for no good can come from something so rotten-through.

EDIT: I will note that, because the way I worded it can be vague, technically he merely linked to it- he didn't write the blog. I don't think that matters- he linked it as his thoughts regarding VSBW, whether they are his own original thoughts or thoughts given to him by someone else shouldn't impact the fact that he has them.
 
Last edited:
I definitely agree with a permaban following all this. It’s clear that this guy is another case of someone who hates VSBW with a passion and wishes to dismantle our tiering system in favor of his own conception of one. Doesn’t at all seem to be out of good faith (and I think it’s compounded by his own claims here of being essentially objectively correct, as he claims we should consider his beliefs if we at all care about accuracy)
 
Mr._Bambu said:
I will, actually, update this. On his user profile, @Urshani linked to his own wiki, which details his own beliefs about what is and isn't right about powerscaling and how mistaken everyone is about it.

Most of it is benign, albeit probably wrong- I'll save speaking on my opinions of it for later. However, some of it proves relevant to our deliberations on whether or not Urshani's actions can be taken to be hostile or not. Specifically, he has a deleted page titled "VSBW Stupidity" that he deleted today that was almost solely about demeaning users who disagreed with him- today it had been updated to include @DarkDragonMedeus's ban of him, but previously included insults against @Milly_Rocking_Bandit regarding scaling disagreements between the two. The page can be seen in image form in these images. For now, images of the posts that caused this can be found here and here. At time of writing, it was apparently deleted about ten minutes ago- removing evidence of wrongdoing.

The page links to a Spanish blog that rants about VS Battles Wiki. I don't speak Spanish, so the best I can offer is translation by way of my friend Google. You're free to read it here if you're so inclined, but in it he details a manifesto of reasons why he hates VSBW with an apparent passion- he claims it is not a revenge post, but links to it from a page about his feuds with VSBW members, and then he goes on to say that it is made to laugh at people (I feel a particular bout of irony given that I've read his own concepts of a tiering system).

It is clear to me that this is another instance of a user with a bitter passion towards VSBW's destruction, and yet one who uniquely clearly knows so little about VSBW. Among the claims in his own sporadically-paced manifesto, we see many claims about the site and its functions, beliefs, etc, and yet very few actually align with reality. Here are some examples:
  • VSBW does not use references or citations, and most of its evidence is made up (that is, forgery)
  • VSBW as a community engages in revisionist history by pretending our original functions were invented by us, rather than hailing from older concepts from places like the OBD or ACF
  • Antvasima belittles other wikis if they will not partner with VSBW to promote us instead
  • VSBW skews context to favor verses to skew them upwards (or downwards, depending on the author's own belief of how strong the verse is)
This... critique, if it can be called that, is also just riddled with hateful messages aimed at our userbase. Specific users, like @KLOL506, @Qawsedf234, and others- and perhaps most frequently @Antvasima ("The wiki was later owned by one XXKINGXX69, who in 2014 handed over control to Antvasima, in what is possibly one of the worst moves in fandom.com history") and then the groups that work on various verses (God of War, Dragon Ball, Dungeons and Dragons, and so on). This is not the positioning of someone who wants to help the wiki be fixed. This is the position of someone who hates the wiki for disagreeing with them, and has gone to some lengths to conjure a new "tiering system" to try to force it to change- while still demeaning anyone who has ever disagreed with him. The amount of namedrops in this blog are astronomical, as far as I can tell most of it is heranguing people who don't view things as the author does.

Most of the actual criticisms are objectively wrong- we require references on our pages (and work to implement them on older pages, too- major revisions are underway for things like Warhammer and so on that have a lot of content to work through). I've never seen an individual on VSBW say that we didn't come from other older systems- we don't deny our roots, they just don't really come up much now, especially now that we've moved past so many of them. Antvasima made a specific rule about not engaging in foul interchanges with other wikis (while no other wiki affords us the same graces), and VSBW is decision by committee- pages are the way that they are because of majority rule, not a singular motive. There's more, but, I feel I should conclude:

This is not a benevolent user. This is a user who means to harm the wiki out of spite and bile. We have no need for users such as this one. We ought to ban him again, for no good can come from something so rotten-through.
Click to expand...
no actual arguments. lol
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Antvasima
  • Sticky
Wiki Vandalism Reports
8 9 10
Replies
367
Views
23K
Polandballczechball
Polandballczechball
Mr. Bambu
Slight Adjustment to Rules Regarding Original Works
Replies
37
Views
2K
Antvasima
Antvasima
  • Locked
Regarding the Rule Violations Report Thread
2
Replies
71
Views
5K
LephyrTheRevanchist
LephyrTheRevanchist
H3110l12345I20
IRL Paper has a profile.
Replies
28
Views
918
JustANormalLemon
JustANormalLemon
DarkGrath
  • Locked
Proposal for Off-Site Rules Revision
2 3
Replies
93
Views
8K
Antvasima
Antvasima
Back
Top