- 39,646
- 15,557
Exactly what we want to right nowSeems like a reasonable take on the matter, but I would perhaps think it might be fair to choose a supporter or two to also have permission to comment.
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.
Exactly what we want to right nowSeems like a reasonable take on the matter, but I would perhaps think it might be fair to choose a supporter or two to also have permission to comment.
Yeah hello as the person being reported. This comment is in fact not derailing. As it is in fact what the entire CRT is about. As for the "blatant" ad-hominem attacks, please point them out as that post isn't attacking you.
Requesting staff to delete some of the derailment and blatant ad-hominem attacks
Can you list what posts are considered Ad-Hominem's? I skimmed through the thread and I mostly just saw people disagreeing with each other. As far as I know, I didn't hear anyone insult intelligence or resort to name calling.
Requesting staff to delete some of the derailment and blatant ad-hominem attacks
mainly post 151Can you list what posts are considered Ad-Hominem's? I skimmed through the thread and I mostly just saw people disagreeing with each other. As far as I know, I didn't hear anyone insult intelligence or resort to name calling.
Currently Paul_Frank has permission, and Crimson and Migue have commented to. I am not opposed to an additional one, but I would prefer that decision be made carefully with regard to temperament.Seems like a reasonable take on the matter, but I would perhaps think it might be fair to choose a supporter or two to also have permission to comment.
Which is why you need to unban Regidian, he's the perfect person for the criteria you saidCurrently Paul_Frank has permission, and Crimson and Migue have commented to. I am not opposed to an additional one, but I would prefer that decision be made carefully with regard to temperament.
So based on that premise, that spamming crts isn't allowed, I would like to formally report @Marshadow29 for spamming crts.
- A single verse shouldn't have more than 3 content revisions threads running simultaneously. If 3 are already running, one of them should be concluded before a new one is created.
Tbh I've hardly seen anyone actively try to enforce that CRT limit rule and it's kinda a big thing too when popular verses often get spammed the most with CRTsAs state by the rules:
So based on that premise, that spamming crts isn't allowed, I would like to formally report @Marshadow29 for spamming crts.
Currently there exist 3 different crts for the verse currently open (one of those crts very important to the verse as it affect the cosmology), more if also counted something like this minor clean-up of one profile, so with that in mind the user in question currently have 7 other content revisions threads currently open plus two other crts he made the exact same day (this Sunday, not even with an hour apart between them) that propose two different things. Furthermore, while currently closed (and rejected btw), he also made several more threads in short spans of time, and all of them of quite bad quality (reason to why not only supporters but normal users and staff rejected them, except maybe one or two things between all the threads but tbh I don't even remember a single thing of them that have be accepted), so since March the supporters of the verse (and completely unreleated staff he talk in their walls) had to deal with 14 bad quality crts from the same user (who btw also stonewall the threads itself, including other threads not made by him), as as result the supporters of the verse (myself included and I didn't even personally stepped in most of the threads, unlike more active supporters like @Paul_Frank, @Mageman460, @CrimsonStarFallen, etc) are at this point just tired from having to constantly deal with him, so I (and likely the rest of supporters) would like for a topic ban for at least some months to make him calm down.
I agree with the topic ban. In addition to spamming these threads, my experience has been that Marshadow often engages in an immature way and is difficult to have a reasonable discussion with due to his limitations with English, he doesn't seem to understand what's being asked of him in terms of clearly explaining his reasoning or evidence, so it often devolves to just him repeating himself or responding to debate points with non-sequiturs that seem to stray from the narrative of the discussion. I don't think it will be productive to have him engaging with Nasu CRTs.As state by the rules:
So based on that premise, that spamming crts isn't allowed, I would like to formally report @Marshadow29 for spamming crts.
Currently there exist 3 different crts for the verse currently open (one of those crts very important to the verse as it affect the cosmology), more if also counted something like this minor clean-up of one profile, so with that in mind the user in question currently have 7 other content revisions threads currently open plus two other crts he made the exact same day (this Sunday, not even with an hour apart between them) that propose two different things. Furthermore, while currently closed (and rejected btw), he also made several more threads in short spans of time, and all of them of quite bad quality (reason to why not only supporters but normal users and staff rejected them, except maybe one or two things between all the threads but tbh I don't even remember a single thing of them that have be accepted), so since March the supporters of the verse (and completely unreleated staff he talk in their walls) had to deal with 14 bad quality crts from the same user (who btw also stonewall the threads itself, including other threads not made by him), as as result the supporters of the verse (myself included and I didn't even personally stepped in most of the threads, unlike more active supporters like @Paul_Frank, @Mageman460, @CrimsonStarFallen, etc) are at this point just tired from having to constantly deal with him, so I (and likely the rest of supporters) would like for a topic ban for at least some months to make him calm down.
To that I would also like to add that he don't seem to understand in general how the wiki works, something specially evidenced in his tier 1 threads (more specifically, the 1-A ones since those reached the several pages from his stonewalling and lack of understanding), so besides the topic ban a recommendation to familiarize more with the wiki would also be good.I agree with the topic ban. In addition to spamming these threads, my experience has been that Marshadow often engages in an immature way and is difficult to have a reasonable discussion with due to his limitations with English, he doesn't seem to understand what's being asked of him in terms of clearly explaining his reasoning or evidence, so it often devolves to just him repeating himself or responding to debate points with non-sequiturs that seem to stray from the narrative of the discussion. I don't think it will be productive to have him engaging with Nasu CRTs.
If a may, personally speaking while I also believe he isn't really malicious and instead is someone without common sense (as that seems the way other users with similar behaviour have be called before in this thread), after all the interactions with him I believe a month would be too short for him to really learn how to act better, after all he didn't learn after two months of bad quality thread spamming, so I believe something like 3 months would be better, if after that he seem to be the same then I will ask for a longer or even permanent topic ban (depending of how bad things are then).I don’t think they’re really being malicious, so the topic ban I’d say should be temporary and not unreasonably long (maybe a month?). And yeah, I’d say a good reminder to properly familiarise themselves with how the wiki works & its rules is a good idea (even though their account says they joined 6 months ago so they’re kind of expected to be better than this).
I will probably go through and close all of them, at the very least the older ones.I don't know if this is the place to ask this, but will those threads Marshadow made be closed? or will they stay open?
It's really not excused (since the rule does not define big servers as exceptions). It's simply not well moderated by thread moderators or administrators.while this could be excused as DB being a big verse
1. I didn't even know that rule existed, as dragon ball ,naruto and other shit have 1002928 crts open. Either apply this fairly across the board or not.As state by the rules:
So based on that premise, that spamming crts isn't allowed, I would like to formally report @Marshadow29 for spamming crts.
Currently there exist 3 different crts for the verse currently open (one of those crts very important to the verse as it affect the cosmology), more if also counted something like this minor clean-up of one profile, so with that in mind the user in question currently have 7 other content revisions threads currently open plus two other crts he made the exact same day (this Sunday, not even with an hour apart between them) that propose two different things. Furthermore, while currently closed (and rejected btw), he also made several more threads in short spans of time, and all of them of quite bad quality (reason to why not only supporters but normal users and staff rejected them, except maybe one or two things between all the threads but tbh I don't even remember a single thing of them that have be accepted), so since March the supporters of the verse (and completely unreleated staff he talk in their walls) had to deal with 14 bad quality crts from the same user (who btw also stonewall the threads itself, including other threads not made by him), as as result the supporters of the verse (myself included and I didn't even personally stepped in most of the threads, unlike more active supporters like @Paul_Frank, @Mageman460, @CrimsonStarFallen, etc) are at this point just tired from having to constantly deal with him, so I (and likely the rest of supporters) would like for a topic ban for at least some months to make him calm down.
1. I didn't even know that rule existed, as dragon ball ,naruto and other shit have 1002928 crts open. Either apply this fairly across the board or not.
2. Explain how they're bad quality besides you disagree.
3. Nobody really cared when I was making upgrade threads, but as soon as I make a downgrade one, there's a problem? If it was such an issue, you would've reported it months ago.
4. You've been making not so subtle jabs on me across several crts and even on Deagon's wall. Whatever issue you had, you could've discussed it on my wall.
I have full reason to question your motivations as it was only after the gilgamesh thread that you decided to fact, with no attempt to discuss anything with me prior
I have deleted it.This user created the entire page involved with tier 0 stuff without any thread, even the format is completely wrong
Rushsound(form 2)
Rushsound is an entity from the backroom Chinese branch that possesses extraordinary abilities that cannot be destroyed or killed. It has the unfortunate ability to be immortal, it has Form 1 and Form 2, and the power of From 2 is far greater than that of Form 1, and the ability from 2 allows it...vsbattles.fandom.com
That rule seems to be applied unevenly at beast, as many verses have more than 3 pages open.In short, the man has spammed extremely low-quality CRTs to such an extent that verse supporters struggle to actually keep up with the volume. He claims he didn't know about our rule limiting the number of CRTs that may be open at the same time, which if true I think warrants a lighter sentence, to be fair. Still, he does act poorly on these CRTs and the sheer number is notable- seven that he has currently running, with two of them being made in the same 24 hour time period.
Personally I'd go with a month long topic ban as a solid reminder not to spam such stuff, and to put more thought into the CRTs being made.
Im not saying i shouldn't be punished for whatever, but at least apply the rule evenly for everyone if you apply itThere is a phrase to be said about that, Marshadow. "Two wrongs don't make a right." Simply put, even if other verses are having an influx of CRTs that, in all honesty shouldn't be happening yes, that does not give you the right to post a million CRTs an hour.
If you have multiple topics that need to be looked over for a single verse, then compile your thoughts into one large, cohesive CRT rather than spreading it out into many multiple ones. That way, people can simply look in the one place for your proposed changes and give their complete thoughts there, rather than searching all over to comment on different things, which appears to be one of the major problems here.
Though, of course, I suppose that whether or not this advice is useful to you at all depends on if this topic ban gets applied.
In short, the man has spammed extremely low-quality CRTs to such an extent that verse supporters struggle to actually keep up with the volume. He claims he didn't know about our rule limiting the number of CRTs that may be open at the same time, which if true I think warrants a lighter sentence, to be fair. Still, he does act poorly on these CRTs and the sheer number is notable- seven that he has currently running, with two of them being made in the same 24 hour time period.
Just a small correction, he have 7 crts open plus the other two made Sunday so in total he currently have 9 open crts, but 14 of those crt happened between March and this Sunday, the months before that were 1-2 other threads but they were normally spaced. That intensity was the reason of propose 3 months instead of just 1.But in your case, you've made fourteen CRTs for the same verse in a span of 5 months. That's really over the top.
We could meet in the middle and do 2 months.Fair enough, 'pologies. I still think a month long topic ban is fine enough but given the consensus seems in favor of three months, I suppose that's best? Is that acceptable?