- 224
- 81
I have no objection to your comments on the situation this is exactly what I was hoping for. I’ve already stated that I will not repeat my mistakes in any way and that it was a one-time occurrence. Still, I leave it to your discretion.
-
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
GarrixianXD
University Enthusiast
Any/AllVS Battles
Joke Battles
Administrator
Content Moderator
Thread Moderator
Translation Helper
- 4,901
- 11,281
@Shiedaisthepeak Would you like to make a report on Floxiaaa? The fact that you excused them for intentionally character-assassinating you with the motive to get you banned, is worthy of concern.
Edit: nvm, seems like you already have done it.
Anyways, if what Shieda said is true about being close with Floxiaaa when he made that comment, I personally would just prefer a harsh warning instead because of its obscene nature. Though, I do not have any contentions against the 2-week ban proposal.
Edit: nvm, seems like you already have done it.
Anyways, if what Shieda said is true about being close with Floxiaaa when he made that comment, I personally would just prefer a harsh warning instead because of its obscene nature. Though, I do not have any contentions against the 2-week ban proposal.
- 224
- 81
If you’d like, I can bring all my friends who witnessed this here (my own friend group). At one point, I even had a couple profile picture with them.
GarrixianXD
University Enthusiast
Any/AllVS Battles
Joke Battles
Administrator
Content Moderator
Thread Moderator
Translation Helper
- 4,901
- 11,281
I'd be personally fine with that. However, I doubt that it'll get your warning rescinded even if you do get vouched.
- 224
- 81
Alright, I’ll tag them here. I hope I only receive a strict warning because I’ve already initiated a very important cosmology revision.
@Protector_Hunk @Gorkyss @TyraexgSama @InfNoyan
GarrixianXD
University Enthusiast
Any/AllVS Battles
Joke Battles
Administrator
Content Moderator
Thread Moderator
Translation Helper
- 4,901
- 11,281
- 54
- 14
They used to be close friends at the time this joke was made, and Floxia wasn’t offended by it back then. That’s my perspective on the matter.
- 31,633
- 34,647
I agree with Bambu's suggestion
Recon1511
He/Him- 7,460
- 6,573
https://vsbattles.com/threads/strongest-one-punch-man-discussion-thread.107591/post-6862237
Reporting this guy for whatever this was lol
Reporting this guy for whatever this was lol
- 22,452
- 18,669
He has a sordid history of this kind of stuff (albeit usually when provoked to some degree), so maybe a month or few month ban would work, especially given more recent behaviour.
Last edited:
PrinceofPein
Username Only- 9,100
- 6,037
I honestly wanted to let this go since I do not take offence with things like this, which is why I am just making this report now.
I wish to report @Tyranno223
He has a way of positing his opinion as some sort of facts and dislikes it when people disagrees with him.
Here in his single reply to me, he adds statements that undermine the other person's intelligence
I wish to report @Tyranno223
He has a way of positing his opinion as some sort of facts and dislikes it when people disagrees with him.
Here in his single reply to me, he adds statements that undermine the other person's intelligence
To which I called him out on his attitude
Which he gave a half assed apology, admitted he is being condenscending and doubled down on his said attitude to other people's argument
Certainly it is not a serious rule violation but insulting and doubling down is certain an offence regardless
- 3,551
- 3,402
Context is important.
You, on three seperate occasions, demonstrated a refusal to read the materials of the thread and the included blog.
I asked twice before displaying any genuine frustration. The chief tone I am displaying is frustration, albeit I admit that my initial response to your third post was overly condescending, and I still am sorry about that.
Your most recent post contained material that was already addressed in thread and in blog for a third time without any addressing of the already present rebuttal.
Edit:
Tolkien Tier High 1-A+ and 0 Proposal
Many thanks to Ultima for helping me with this project! This is a cosmology expansion for Tolkien's Legendarium that proposes Eru as tier 0 and the Ainur in their "Prior to entering Eä" key as High 1-A+...
My initial post directing him to read the blog after a outright erroneous post.
Tolkien Tier High 1-A+ and 0 Proposal
Many thanks to Ultima for helping me with this project! This is a cosmology expansion for Tolkien's Legendarium that proposes Eru as tier 0 and the Ainur in their "Prior to entering Eä" key as High 1-A+...
My response to him when he admitted to only reading the summary when I bolded an insistence that people read the blog. I also later highlight that even the summary made it clear his initial post was erroneous, demonstrating he didn't even properly read that
Tolkien Tier High 1-A+ and 0 Proposal
While Tolkien's faith influenced his writing, the tier justification stands on its own based on the source material's explicit descriptions. high 1-A+ placement for the Ainur is also well-supported by their described abilities and relationship to sub-creation, while still maintaining a clear...
A post during the point when my frustration boiled over too much. I compared two extracts, one from his last rebuttal to the thread and one from my blog.
His rebuttal was already addressed in the blog, showing that despite claiming to read it, he either did a poor job or did not read it properly.
Last edited:
PrinceofPein
Username Only- 9,100
- 6,037
You are literally doing the same thing, anything in your blog is an opinion and I do not agree with it and I am allowed to provide my own opinion.
I can also start making the same statements you are making.
"You lack reading comprehension cause you have not read my arguments and I have already addressed your rebuttal in your blog in my argument"
"You have not read my arguments and you cannot understand them"
"I will like you to read my argument"
As you can see you claiming all these cause I do not agree with you is dogmatic. Also based on your reply to my argument, I can either agree that you do not agree with my opinion or I can keep saying you did not read my argument, cause it sure feels like you did not, sending wall of texts that did not really address my arguments.
If everyone argues with snide remarks like you do, then this place will turn into a toxic hole.
Again for future reference, if someone does not agree with you = They did not agree with you
And not they lack reading comprehension, cause I can also make the same claim seeing as you just like sending wall of texts without providing any real argument.
Edit: No need to clog this thread up, just wait for the mods
Last edited:
- 3,551
- 3,402
I am sorry for getting this badly condescending, I am, but I do not appreciate you not acknowledging that your arguments are already addressed or irrelevant. You have repeatedly just ignored the material of the thread!
My language was toxic, and I think it was wrong, but genuinely, you were not contributing to the thread! You were ignoring the material and arguments of it!
Pein, seriously, I asked you to read the blog, and you did not. How is that not frustrating? To use your example, if we just ignored the posts of the thread to push our arguments, it would devolve into meaningless nothing!
Edit: Regardless, it's best to just wait for staff evaluation.
PrinceofPein
Username Only- 9,100
- 6,037
Like I said, me providing my argument and not agreeing with your conclusion is not me ignoring the material of the thread.
Because I do not agree with you, I should acknowledge that my arguments are irrelevant?
Are you even hearing yourself at all?
You were wrong, not think, you were wrong.
You saying someone lacks reading comprehension is an irony.
Please read what I am saying.
I did not agree with your blog =/= I did not read it.
The blog is your opinion and not facts, leave it at that, people can disagree with you, you need to accept that fact now.
once again, like I said let the mods decide.
- 3,551
- 3,402
Last comment on the matter since I agree staff should evaluate. You
A. Did not make this at all clear. I cannot read your mind. You made no reference to the already present rebuttals to the material you posted. It wasn't even new, I'd already made them months ago.
B. You already displayed a poor willingless to read the thread in your first two posts. The summary both containted an insistence to read the blog and a present rebuttal to the point you presented.
C. Your presented material was already rebutted. This is a seriously damning point, why post already rebutted stuff if you had read it? If you had addressed the rebuttal, there would be no confusion. Either you didn't read it properly or you ignored it. That is not contribution, that is obstruction.
- 168,514
- 77,229
- Thread starter
- #28,700
He was just ranting and saying f-ing a lot, so that likely only warrants a warning to stop in itself.
This, however, is severe enough to warrant a ban.
- 3,551
- 3,402
Thank you for the support Ant!Tyranno223 is generally a constructive member of this community, and I do not think that he went far enough in his harsh language to warrant a punishment here.
Just as a counterpoint if I may ask, at what point can someone post here for obstruction?
While I do not think Pein has done enough to deserve a warning or anything really, I am of the opinion he has just been largely obstructive to the thread he and I quarrelled in.
I just want to ask in case it feels like its come to a point where I need to post here.
PrinceofPein
Username Only- 9,100
- 6,037
So anyone can keep throwing around "you lack reading comprehension"Tyranno223 is generally a constructive member of this community, and I do not think that he went far enough in his harsh language to warrant a punishment here.
Please when it comes to rule violation let's be objective.
If everyone argues the way he does this will not be a conducive place to make a hobby
Edit: the first two post is me saying I have not read the blog but his summary and my next post is me providing my argument and I have not said any other argument in the thread since then.
The first 2 post are like 2 lines each without any argument, so I will like to see why he is being defensive when people disagree with him.
Anyone who disagrees is being obstructive is a funny stance to take in a battle boarding site.
- 3,551
- 3,402
Pein, the first two lines were you coming in and saying the thread is invalid for erroneous reasons and then admitting you didn't read the blog before then making it clear you poorly read the OP.
You are being obtuse. I have been disagreed with and have changed my opinion on various things on this wiki. I removed tier 5 from LotR after arguing for it, argued against anything higher than tier 2 until convinced otherwise, and argued against LotR being above Low 1-C until standard changes made it suggestible. Heck, one of the staffs I ping most is Bambu who I appreciate for being critical of my revisions.
Pein, there is serious issues with how you entered that thread and serious issues with the posts you made. Stop pretending as if there is nothing legitimate about my outrage. By your points, we need not even properly read a thread before contributing to it.
Edit: oops in the third paragraph.
Last edited:
- 2,267
- 2,098
Yeah, this warrants a flat out ban for 3-6 months imo.
- 2,267
- 2,098
Eh, someone telling him to be more kind would at most be warranted here. I don't think a warning is needed here.
Edit: Apologies for not putting my two replies into one post.
PrinceofPein
Username Only- 9,100
- 6,037
Exchanging words with you is pointless, I will come again, me not agreeing with you is not the same as I did not read your blog, after I read the blog, I provided arguments which you did not read, which is why I was also not interested in the whole arguments again.
You have absolutely no reason to say someone lacks reading comprehension, if you feel frustrated by someone, bring it to the RvR for the mods to decide if I was being obtuse or not
You have absolutely no reason to say someone lacks reading comprehension, if you feel frustrated by someone, bring it to the RvR for the mods to decide if I was being obtuse or not
- 3,551
- 3,402
Very well.
I suppose I'll make a report that Pein came into the thread in question and first made post that was entirely unconstructive, the contents already being addressed in the OP and blog.
Tolkien Tier High 1-A+ and 0 Proposal
Many thanks to Ultima for helping me with this project! This is a cosmology expansion for Tolkien's Legendarium that proposes Eru as tier 0 and the Ainur in their "Prior to entering Eä" key as High 1-A+...
When confronted, they did not claim any error in their activity and instead simply claimed that they did no wrong as they were repeating the summary. This is in spite the summary containing a rebuttal of their first post.
Tolkien Tier High 1-A+ and 0 Proposal
Many thanks to Ultima for helping me with this project! This is a cosmology expansion for Tolkien's Legendarium that proposes Eru as tier 0 and the Ainur in their "Prior to entering Eä" key as High 1-A+...
After that point, they then delayed the the thread by stating they were preparing a rebuttal after reading the blog. I was already displeased with them at this point, but said I was fine waiting.
Tolkien Tier High 1-A+ and 0 Proposal
While Tolkien's faith influenced his writing, the tier justification stands on its own based on the source material's explicit descriptions. high 1-A+ placement for the Ainur is also well-supported by their described abilities and relationship to sub-creation, while still maintaining a clear...
Tolkien Tier High 1-A+ and 0 Proposal
While Tolkien's faith influenced his writing, the tier justification stands on its own based on the source material's explicit descriptions. high 1-A+ placement for the Ainur is also well-supported by their described abilities and relationship to sub-creation, while still maintaining a clear...
They then made a post that was entirely already answered in the blog or already accepted on previous threads. Pein makes the claim he was just stating his opinion. That is no issue in and of itself, but he did so while ignoring everything despite claiming to read the material. That is not constrictive, it is obstructive, especially considering this was a delaying matter.
Overall, I am of the opinion Pein is being overly obstructive in this thread.
I do not want to issue a warning or anything, but I want to make a note of their behaviour and activities in case this is repeated or has already been repeated.
Edit: I now see that they already have one warning for disruptive behavior. Perhaps another would not be amiss.
Last edited:
- 168,514
- 77,229
- Thread starter
- #28,709
Maybe a 3 months ban then as a compromise solution?
- 3,551
- 3,402
Sure, no problem with that. Like I wrote, I was mostly posting that to make a note of what I believed to be disruptive behavior. I'll stop posting here now unless asked to again.I do not think that Pein deserves a warning for disagreeing with you and possibly misunderstanding.
- 1,938
- 3,455
I support a 3 month ban for Dbz. Their manner of speech is so unnecessarily rude, and even if he was “provoked” the retaliation is far worse than what people said to them.
Regarding Pein and Tyrano — i will reiterate what I have said in the past: People are allowed to feel however they want about a thread unless it is objectively out of spite.
Tyrano is saying that Pein is repeating arguments already countered in the blog… but Pein is saying he’s providing a different perspective. You are both entitled to those opinions.
Tyrano if you genuinely believe Pein is just repeating arguments (not saying he is, I haven’t read the blog obviously) what you need to do is: (1) Reply to arguments for as long as you are willing to do so (2) Put Pein down as disagreeing (3) move on. We have staff for this very reason, it’s them who are going to pass or not pass a thread, so you have literally no reason to start being rude. Again, I don’t know if your claims that his posts lack substance are true, but that doesn’t mean you should insult him. Let staff decide who is right.
To add on to that, I don’t think he was being obstructive. Obstructive goes back to what I said earlier about objectively spite responses (and some other circumstances)… but Pein is stating his stance, and defending it from what I can see — no violations there.
TLDR: no action against either user.
Regarding Pein and Tyrano — i will reiterate what I have said in the past: People are allowed to feel however they want about a thread unless it is objectively out of spite.
Tyrano is saying that Pein is repeating arguments already countered in the blog… but Pein is saying he’s providing a different perspective. You are both entitled to those opinions.
Tyrano if you genuinely believe Pein is just repeating arguments (not saying he is, I haven’t read the blog obviously) what you need to do is: (1) Reply to arguments for as long as you are willing to do so (2) Put Pein down as disagreeing (3) move on. We have staff for this very reason, it’s them who are going to pass or not pass a thread, so you have literally no reason to start being rude. Again, I don’t know if your claims that his posts lack substance are true, but that doesn’t mean you should insult him. Let staff decide who is right.
To add on to that, I don’t think he was being obstructive. Obstructive goes back to what I said earlier about objectively spite responses (and some other circumstances)… but Pein is stating his stance, and defending it from what I can see — no violations there.
TLDR: no action against either user.
- 3,551
- 3,402
For the record, I was responding cordially for a good while. It wasn't until it was, at least from my perspective, a third time that Pein didn't read the material that I got upset. I also did put them down in the disagree section and I didn't state that disagreement was in and of itself a bad thing. I have apologised for the extent to which I got condescending in language and for getting insulting, but I do believe my frustrations are at least justified. At the very least, they admitted not to reading the blog before their initial post in their second post, and made it rather evident that they didn't read the summary properly for the reasons I listed. The third post can be contested, but I'm planning to drop the matter after today.
Sorry for any disruptions caused by all this.
- 10,541
- 12,352
3 months is fine with me, given the multiple crash outsMaybe a 3 months ban then as a compromise solution?
Regarding Pein and Tyranno, I'm in th same boat as Catzlaflame
Also a reminder that the 2 weeks ban for @Shiedaisthepeak hasn't been applied.
- 15,591
- 22,891
3 months for Dbz is fine with me, especially considering this is far from an outlier for him.
CodeCCLL
He/Him- 2,424
- 1,258
Is posting such images a violation of the rules? If so, and no one has reported Robo for this before, I'm reporting Robo for this.
- 8,443
- 8,897
I deleted the message and the quoted messages. I'll just wait for the others opinion on this matter.
- 1,938
- 3,455
Although not explicitly pornographic (which is what the rules technically prohibit):
@Robo432343 Please don't post weird stuff on the forum. There are minors on here, and people who don't care to see shit like that (understandably so).
I think the implications are clear enough here.
@Robo432343 Please don't post weird stuff on the forum. There are minors on here, and people who don't care to see shit like that (understandably so).
Similar threads
- Sticky
- Featured
- Locked
