Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Oh okay .ThanksThe Veldora editors were already dealt with.
I don't think this actually qualifies; even under their argument, Goku wouldn't be "made to give up", he would be "made to spare him", which doesn't really seem like it qualifies. There's a difference between conceding, and being convinced to not kill. And I fundamentally feel like this sort of rule should only apply for this sort of thing being done to a supernatural extent, not just ordinary social influencing.In character, but will attempt to win the battle. Characters will not give up of their own accord. That means a character that is uninterested or sees no chance of winning won't simply leave and characters wouldn't simply become friends with each other. This doesn't prevent a character being made to give up, because the other character manipulates them via things like, for example, mind control, fear inducement, psychological tricks or superhuman charisma.
It's not within arguable range whatsoever, the feat used as reference for how Saul 'could win' was when dealing with someone who didn't particularly intend to kill him to begin with. On top of that, the circumstances were wildly different and were dealing with someone Saul could at least intuitively attempt to debate with. There is no argument meant to be had, it's ******* ridiculous to put Saul against Goku and literally anyone can see this. The very fundamental rules structure of the site does not leave there to be an argument to be had on this matter. If people who didn't want to fight could, in nearly any circumstance, simply ask the opponent nicely and get an incon, the entire battle system would be a travesty.BigSmoke quoted a rule that may allow this sort of win
I don't think this actually qualifies; even under their argument, Goku wouldn't be "made to give up", he would be "made to spare him", which doesn't really seem like it qualifies. There's a difference between conceding, and being convinced to not kill.
Still, this does lie within an arguable range, and people in the thread did agree, so I don't think you should have closed the threads or reported him for making another one. It's something you should have argued, either there or in a general CRT for these sorts of resolutions to a fight.
bruh it was a crazed meth addictIt's not within arguable range whatsoever, the feat used as reference for how Saul 'could win' was when dealing with someone who didn't particularly intend to kill him to begin with. On top of that, the circumstances were wildly different and were dealing with someone Saul could at least intuitively attempt to debate with.
except saul has done so several times with way worse people than goku, it's perfectly in character for him if you just watch his showThere is no argument meant to be had, it's ******* ridiculous to put Saul against Goku and literally anyone can see this. The very fundamental rules structure of the site does not leave there to be an argument to be had on this matter. If people who didn't want to fight could, in nearly any circumstance, simply ask the opponent nicely and get an incon, the entire battle system would be a travesty.
seems pretty fair considering that saul has talked people who are a: more intelligent than goku and b: literally insane down from killing him or othersAgnaa, you are one that highly values consistent rulings. To accept this as a reasonable debate would be incredibly inconsistent with several years of VSBW history, standards, and common sense. And, as we can see, plenty of others agree in this matter. Putting Saul Goodman against Goku is not a reasonable or fair debate, and for him to simply make another thread after I closed the first one is just proving my point.
i think i’ve made one other stomp match for it, unintentionally.I am absolutely not in the mood to see Breaking Bad wanked to 9-C and then thrown into ridiculous, impossibly unfair and illogical matches in a way that has happened all too often by BigSmoke's whim specifically.
???Remember, I am not asking to punish him in any general manner. I am just asking that BigSmoke in particular is removed from the Breaking Bad sphere due to his general tendencies involving it and his history.
I get the impression you aren't too aware of Better Call Saul from the phrasing of your posts.snip
watched the series, have been obsessed with it for months. shut up.I get the impression you aren't too aware of Better Call Saul from the phrasing of your posts.
he doesnt need mind control, the dude convinced a meth addled drug lord not to kill him. probably wouldn't be too hard to convince gokuThe rules do not leave enough wiggle room for that, and 'social influencing' is not grounds for mind control.
you could've argued that in the actual thread. thanks for closing it and just reporting me instead.I'll keep this concise: Agnaa, if you want to fix the standards, fix them. Your arguments are pedantic and are missing the point being presented. The "rules we leave open", as you put them, aren't open - basic common sense says otherwise. Our rules says staff can close stomp threads, and there is no world in which you are arguing for Saul Goodman fighting Goku isn't a stomp. The most basic, obvious bits of common sense says so. I do not need to argue this, it is a given, and if you are under the impression that Saul Goodman has magical social influencing that would lead one to believe the thread isn't a stomp... You're very wrong. He's just a good lawyer.
with cool cat, i didn't even read half of the source material, which was the main problem aside from derek savage's copyright chicanery. neither of these apply to breaking bad. sorry to let you down.Not to mention, we set a standard with our previous debates over BigSmoke and Cool Cat that his behavior then (which is quite similar to now) isn't okay. Our rules don't allow this, Agnaa, years of precedent says so. If your only point of contention is "well, technically, the rules allow it", you're simply wrong.
nah. agnaa disapproved the calc after i used it in the crt. sorry again.BigSmoke is a massive repeat offender who has broken the rules multiple times (no, he does not 'weasel through holes', he has been reported and punished for this sort of behavior before), has passed egregiously flawed, disapproved calcs in actual CRTs (which you, yourself, argued against - despite this, he still put it on his most recent Breaking Bad CRT), and I can't overstate this enough, unironically put a regular, perfectly human lawyer with no supernatural powers against Goku from Dragon Ball, twice.
I... was talking to Agnaa. The line directly above said it was Agnaa I was responding to. Please, read my posts before commenting before telling me to "shut up".watched the series, have been obsessed with it for months. shut up.
This is the most important part, so I'll just address this. I currently do not believe it is allowed, simply enough. If you plan on making a thread to clarify, feel free to do so, but that still doesn't address using unapproved calcs on CRTs.I disagree with this and will make a thread to change it later today, but it currently has room to be allowed.
you never explained it bro, you just keep saying "it's saul goodman vs goku". if you actually explained to me which rules it broke, maybe i wouldn't have made a second thread.And again, it's Saul Goodman vs. Goku, I do not need to explain why that's not a reasonable matchup and I'm not going to do it again. There is no defense or debate for it being "arguable", it's not.
Getting sour in the RVT isn't helping your case. Step back for a bit and chill out.i agree with a permaban. that son of a bitch has been making saul goodman fight goku. that is extremely unfair to goku and i will not stand for it
there was evidence though. you just refused to see it because the show was too goofy lolOne specific instance regarding Big Smoke, which was recent, was him claiming that Slippin Jimmy was canonical to Better Call Saul, despite not having actual evidence. He then attempted to use feats from the former to upgrade the latter.
yeah sorry, just woke up to this. tired and pissed off rnGetting sour in the RVT isn't helping your case. Step back for a bit and chill out.
I don't think it should take a lot of explaining why putting Saul (who, by SBA, is willing to kill and not interested in giving up just because the battle seems unwinnable - thus ruining the entire thread from the get-go) against Goku is a bad idea.you never explained it bro, you just keep saying "it's saul goodman vs goku". if you actually explained to me which rules it broke, maybe i wouldn't have made a second thread.
oh, wait. it didn't break any rules? no fuckj way thats insane
Just step away from this and chill out firstin-character, but willing to kill. in-character saul freaks the **** out and tries to slimeball his way out of the situation, which would be much more viable in a fight with goku
i'll just leave you with this. you can either leave me be, or strip me of the one serious contribution i'm making here. your choice.go look at the walter white profile. over half of it was made by me. i've checked.
i have made several profiles for the verse, which i had to get accepted by people who you guys assigned to keep me in check.
in total, i've probably added more content to the verse than any other user on this ******* wiki. it is one of the only good contributions i've ever made to this site. after several years of getting punished for making cool cat profiles and upgrading the god damn annoying orange, i finally come back and make contributions to an actual verse, and now i'm not ******* allowed to do that either. if you ban me from this topic, i have nothing to add here. i'll just go back to making shitty joke profiles, like the boss baby or some shit like that. and you're not gonna be able to stop me, because i won't be breaking any rules. i will simply be making fodder for people to use in joke vs threads, rather than doing anything helpful. so thanks for that! really helps keep the quality up here!
I am willing to settle for him simply not making Breaking Bad versus threads anymore. That is remarkably lenient and doesn't even address the problems with his CRTs.BigSmoke does have a history of being quite problematic, and his attitude on the RVR thread doesn't really help is case. I do agree that some of the match ups of a normal human lawyer convincing Goku to back out of the fight even though Goku is literally the type of character where martial arts fights is the only thing in life he pretty much lives for besides food, and that not even a debate. Though making really bad threads isn't something I'd give harsh punishments for.
But I pretty much agree with Moritzva that if this is something he does a lot, some discipline is in order when partaking in Vs Threads.
That was more or less what I meant as well.I am willing to settle for him simply not making Breaking Bad versus threads anymore. That is remarkably lenient and doesn't even address the problems with his CRTs.
I disagree with this and will make a thread to change it later today, but it currently has room to be allowed.
This is the most important part, so I'll just address this. I currently do not believe it is allowed, simply enough. If you plan on making a thread to clarify, feel free to do so, but that still doesn't address using unapproved calcs on CRTs.
And again, it's Saul Goodman vs. Goku, I do not need to explain why that's not a reasonable matchup and I'm not going to do it again. There is no defense or debate for it being "arguable", it's not.
This seems like a good and harmless solution to me as well.I am willing to settle for him simply not making Breaking Bad versus threads anymore. That is remarkably lenient and doesn't even address the problems with his CRTs.
But most likely, the rule allowed him tho. Like the thread was still following the rule. I would rather change the rule instead of it.It is a very small topic ban though.