-
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
- 22,572
- 13,875
thank you ant
- 4,176
- 1,405
Post in thread 'Calc Stacking in Tokyo Revengers'
https://vsbattles.com/threads/calc-stacking-in-tokyo-revengers.154723/post-5853564
Vapour is still commenting on this thread despite the fact the mods and admins agreed he need a topic ban.
https://vsbattles.com/threads/calc-stacking-in-tokyo-revengers.154723/post-5853564
Vapour is still commenting on this thread despite the fact the mods and admins agreed he need a topic ban.
- 800
- 146
My bad
- 4,176
- 1,405
Tbf, no staff bother to inform you have a topic ban for TR threads have been applied as I don’t see one on your message wall although they are usually busy on their part so.
In any case, it is still mentioned on last page technically.
- 800
- 146
Sorry, I’ll just stop talking in threads from now on
- 165,890
- 73,617
- Thread starter
- #20,450
I blocked them for 3 months, as they seemed more clueless than malicious, but I may have been too lenient.
- 668
- 409
@Marshadow29 has been posting in the Nasuverse General Discussion Thread. For context see above where he received a topic ban that would last until 8/3/2023.
I could go on, but there are over a dozen more of these.
Mr. Bambu
Suffer-Not-Injustice Bambu
VS Battles
Joke Battles
Super Moderator
Administrator
Calculation Group
Silver Supporter
- 21,807
- 19,761
While I did technically state "all types", these posts seem harmless, and standard discussion threads are generally allowed provided that said posts aren't rule breakages themselves.
- 4,789
- 4,359
Frankly, I am quite tired of this. I don't know if this is RVR worthy but I am reporting @speedster352 for always jumping the gun and trying to evalute a calc he did not make.
If it was only one time i won't be making this but this is about the 3rd time he's done this and I and other people have warned/ shared our discontent with this.
The first time I have seen him do this was with Kachon and he was upset with it even to even the point he didn't want to help with the verse anymore
The second time was with my calc, going ahead to make a calc evaluation thread and I, the creator did not want it to be evaluated
The third time he makes another calc thread with a bunch of @Aether2734 's calc and Aether has warned him about this type of stuff before.
Should an offical warning be enacted because he doesn't seem to take other warnings to heart?
If it was only one time i won't be making this but this is about the 3rd time he's done this and I and other people have warned/ shared our discontent with this.
The first time I have seen him do this was with Kachon and he was upset with it even to even the point he didn't want to help with the verse anymore
The second time was with my calc, going ahead to make a calc evaluation thread and I, the creator did not want it to be evaluated
The third time he makes another calc thread with a bunch of @Aether2734 's calc and Aether has warned him about this type of stuff before.
Should an offical warning be enacted because he doesn't seem to take other warnings to heart?
- 21,252
- 30,330
It’s not a rule break, it’s just extremely annoying
- 12,806
- 3,928
I agree. Unfortunally, he went and made this thread, which is an extremely thinly veiled atempt at evading a thread ban as far as I see. I mean, he even stopped trying to hide it at some point, and this one is obviously an atempt at getting ratings up.
Dunno if I would suggest any severe punishment or anything, but at least a warning should be had.
- 15,111
- 12,954
Why does that matter?
I don't think this should be something we ever punish people for. It seems ludicrous to require the creator's permission for a calc to get evaluated. Calcs influence verses in ways that all supporters of the verse would be invested in.
Why do you and Kachon actively not want calcs evaluated? The only reason given in one of those posts (if Speedster asks it'll get rejected) makes zero sense.
I find that mindset so incomprehensible, that I don't think there should be any punishment for going against it.
- 4,789
- 4,359
I'm not pushing for any punishment at all. At max a warning to require permission to evaluate something he did not make or partake in.
Requiring the permission of the creator is about respect nothing more. You don't know the plans the creator has in plan for the calc, whether or not he's still working on it or even doesn't want it to be evaluated anymore.
Going ahead without at least letting the creator what your intentions are is imo not respectful as it's not your work nor you actually put effort into it. I'm not saying the intent of the person is bad, but you should at least respect the creator enough to ask for permission.
And in Speeds case, it's not the first or second time he's done this.
Requiring the permission of the creator is about respect nothing more. You don't know the plans the creator has in plan for the calc, whether or not he's still working on it or even doesn't want it to be evaluated anymore.
Going ahead without at least letting the creator what your intentions are is imo not respectful as it's not your work nor you actually put effort into it. I'm not saying the intent of the person is bad, but you should at least respect the creator enough to ask for permission.
And in Speeds case, it's not the first or second time he's done this.
- 5,966
- 2,975
Sorry to intrude, but after check the calculations and discussions I believe the problem was that their calculations had problems, weren't good enough or needed some improving but despite thay speedster spammed the walls of several calc members before they could do something with them.
Edit: Ninjaed.
- 15,111
- 12,954
I just don't think that should be necessary.
Why should we ignore a valid calculation of a feat in a show just because the person who ran the numbers doesn't want it used anymore? That destroys the information integrity of the wiki. In extreme cases of this, we have backed up and reposted people's calcs.
If the calcs still need updating, then it's a bit of a waste of time, but doesn't matter too much. Rejected calcs can still be evaluated again and accepted after they're updated. That happens a lot, actually.
Why should we ignore a valid calculation of a feat in a show just because the person who ran the numbers doesn't want it used anymore? That destroys the information integrity of the wiki. In extreme cases of this, we have backed up and reposted people's calcs.
If the calcs still need updating, then it's a bit of a waste of time, but doesn't matter too much. Rejected calcs can still be evaluated again and accepted after they're updated. That happens a lot, actually.
- 11,023
- 9,833
I don't understand why this is considered thread ban evasion.
It seems like a genuine question to me that he took from a Fate Discussion and put into a Question and Answers thread to get more input from others in the forum.
What exactly is so much different between asking this in a discussion thread and asking it in Questions and Answers?
Mr. Bambu
Suffer-Not-Injustice Bambu
VS Battles
Joke Battles
Super Moderator
Administrator
Calculation Group
Silver Supporter
- 21,807
- 19,761
I would agree that creating a thread to tier the verse while under topic ban is an evasion of said topic ban, even if phrased in a sideways manner.
@Marshadow29 Knock it off. You get this one warning. Carry out your ban.
- 4,789
- 4,359
Again it's really not about valid or invalid number. The main problem is respect and at least asking the calc creator that you want to get their calc evaluated.
Some people won't mind if someone went ahead and got their calc evaluated while some don't. And when someone does this more than one time to people who don't want their calc evaluated, problems would arise(minor or not) with said person and that ain't healthy at all.
Simply ask the creator
This is my last response in this thread, I understand it's an rvr thread so I'm gonna stop here.
Some people won't mind if someone went ahead and got their calc evaluated while some don't. And when someone does this more than one time to people who don't want their calc evaluated, problems would arise(minor or not) with said person and that ain't healthy at all.
Simply ask the creator
This is my last response in this thread, I understand it's an rvr thread so I'm gonna stop here.
Last edited:
- 3,346
- 1,905
It's a thread for pure discussion, about a topic already spoken about in the discussion thread. Another member talking about a 1-b scan for nasu, and linked the luminary's profile. I have no intention of making any crts ( the most that was going to happen would've been another member would use that scan for the upgrade. I was only looking for outside opinion on if the claim had any validity ( for the record, i was not the first to suggest this rating either, if you bothered to scroll through)
- 3,346
- 1,905
11
exactly this. I wasn't the only one discussing the topic , or the first either
- 5,966
- 2,975
In this case it would be thread ban evasion because part of his original bad quality threads that got him banned were related with that sort of argument that pushed so high characters, and he was also one of the individuals stonewalling other bad quality threads (called like that by botj the reliable users that participated in them and staff) from other users with similar views as him that were pushing for the same things as he did in his own threads. So this is indeed a way to evade his thread ban.
But you are the one with a thread ban for threads like this, so if is a genuine doubt that many share then it would had be better to let them make the threads instead of you who have a record with this topics.
Edit: Just in case, I'm posting about this because I'm actually involed in this topic as the one who originally reported Marsh.
Mr. Bambu
Suffer-Not-Injustice Bambu
VS Battles
Joke Battles
Super Moderator
Administrator
Calculation Group
Silver Supporter
- 21,807
- 19,761
Just keep your discussions to the general topic threads, Marshadow. You aren't in trouble at present, but your topic ban covers this instance. If it needs discussing, get someone else to handle the discussion. This doesn't bear discussion, we can move on.
- 7,639
- 14,224
@Mr._Bambu what are your thoughts about requiring a Calc creators permission to submit it for an eval?
- 21,252
- 30,330
Because some calcers have things in motion that people who eagerly go to rush evaluations for mess up
Sometimes the calc isn't even done or they wanna add something but then you get overeager people who ask for evaluations, and now the calc is filled with "no, this is wrong, this is bad, this is horrible"
Sometimes after it's evaluated you have people who automatically make threads about it even when verses have people who want to wait and crt it with other calcs that have yet to be evaluated
Sometimes people are still looking at things to be added to the calc
Somebody throwing your calculation around for the world's criticism isn't their job, and it's annoying when you have other plans for said calcs
- 15,111
- 12,954
If a calc was rejected, and then updated, CGMs should look at it and evaluate the new version. Hell, if a calc was accepted, and then updated with more stuff, CGMs should still look at it and evaluate the new version. Your points seem to be under the misconception that CGMs can only evaluate calcs once. Previous rejections that were later overruled as the calc was updated and accepted do not matter in the slightest.
There is a distinct point though; the one about creating CRTs, but on top of that being unrelated to this report, that sorta behaviour's also fine. You can tell them that their revision will be pointless, but if they still wanna do it, that's their prerogative. They're gonna have to do the work of implementing it anyway.
There is a distinct point though; the one about creating CRTs, but on top of that being unrelated to this report, that sorta behaviour's also fine. You can tell them that their revision will be pointless, but if they still wanna do it, that's their prerogative. They're gonna have to do the work of implementing it anyway.
- 12,806
- 3,928
As a reminder, you probably shouldn't be posting calculations in blogs if they aren't done for this exact reaction. Any user can make any number of sandboxes by messing with their profile's URL, if a calc isn't finished it can easilt be put there until ready for evaluation.
- 21,252
- 30,330
I know people who have been here longer than me who just found out what a sandbox is. We don't even have distinct rules on how to make a sandbox. You've never seen a blog with sandbox in the title, people thinking their blogs are sandboxes?
I don't feel comfortable trying to pin this on "you shouldn't blog it if it's ready", instead of "stop treating it like it's yours to distribute"
- 21,252
- 30,330
We live in the era where occasionally it can take months to get a cgm just to click your blog, much less evaluate it, much less evaluate it twice
I've had calcs I made years ago still waiting for evaluation. Much less calcs I'm not ready to get evaluated
It doesn't need to be something against the rules, it needs to be something pointed against
Mr. Bambu
Suffer-Not-Injustice Bambu
VS Battles
Joke Battles
Super Moderator
Administrator
Calculation Group
Silver Supporter
- 21,807
- 19,761
Against, in principle. It can be rude, but I don't think we ought to punish people for pursuing evaluations on calcs.
- 21,252
- 30,330
It doesn't need a punishment. It needs to not be done
- 15,111
- 12,954
We do, from Editing Rules
That text is in Standard Format for Character Profiles, and probably a few other places, too.
I think we do actually consider blogs to be everyone's to be used. Lina Shields deleted most of his ~140 calc blogs 6 years ago, and less than a month later, the blogs were restored by other staff members. I think that decision's good; we shouldn't let people hamper verses from being accurate.
I know that I, at least, am far more willing to evaluate blogs that I've already evaluated. I think many other CGMs are the same.
That makes it against the rules.
If we never punish someone, it's not a real rule.
If it's not against the rules, we shouldn't tell them to not do it.
Last edited:
- 12,191
- 19,271
Nah I'm far more on KingTempest's side with this. The last thing I want is to make a blog because I'm planning some stuff only for someone to just completely jump the gun and screw it all up
Similar threads
