• 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)

I'm fine with what Griffin's said as it was their first time doing that and seems to be unintentional.
Okay. I will unblock @Doomrider7 then.

Thank you for your input.

Also, Doomrider7, please be much more careful in the future when you post links in our wiki or forum (or otherwise).
 
Okay. I would appreciate input from other staff members as well then. 🙏
Their apology seems genuine enough, and if there is the possibility of a false positive (mentioned by Dereck) then I think it would be fine to roll back the punishment and just remember this for the future.

Can somebody help me evaluate this case as well please? I think that I may have applied a far too harsh block time.

Have you contacted him at all? It seems like at least some of his edits were indeed not allowed but usually we'd only go for an immediate ban if they were obviously troll-like in nature. If you hadn't contacted him and this was his first offense, I'd agree that we should tone it down to a stiff warning and proceed from there.

Yeah, this guy was objectively the aggressor in practically all of these scenarios (and more that were in that thread but unlinked). A stern warning could do for now, but if it is ignored/disobeyed, I think a ban would be in order, since usually this sort of thing is mitigated by everyone instigating the conflict- not so, here.

Deleted member 16409: You really, really need to tone back the aggression and insults. We expect a level of maturity on this forum from our users, at least enough to engage civilly in discussions. If you can't, then you leave us little choice in the matter and you will be banned. So, please, behave.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Deleted member 16409: You really, really need to tone back the aggression and insults. We expect a level of maturity on this forum from our users, at least enough to engage civilly in discussions. If you can't, then you leave us little choice in the matter and you will be banned. So, please, behave.
alr
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Their apology seems genuine enough, and if there is the possibility of a false positive (mentioned by Dereck) then I think it would be fine to roll back the punishment and just remember this for the future.
Yes. They have also thanked us afterwards for giving them a chance via an email message.
Have you contacted him at all? It seems like at least some of his edits were indeed not allowed but usually we'd only go for an immediate ban if they were obviously troll-like in nature. If you hadn't contacted him and this was his first offense, I'd agree that we should tone it down to a stiff warning and proceed from there.
I did try to contact them, yes, and they did not respond until afterwards.


I have unblocked them and given them a warning message instead now.
Yeah, this guy was objectively the aggressor in practically all of these scenarios (and more that were in that thread but unlinked). A stern warning could do for now, but if it is ignored/disobeyed, I think a ban would be in order, since usually this sort of thing is mitigated by everyone instigating the conflict- not so, here.

Deleted member 16409: You really, really need to tone back the aggression and insults. We expect a level of maturity on this forum from our users, at least enough to engage civilly in discussions. If you can't, then you leave us little choice in the matter and you will be banned. So, please, behave.
Agreed. Thank you for helping out. 🙏❤️
 
Last edited:
So i found that Blazeking17 has vandalized Sulphur (Phantom_Brave)'s page. Not only does Sulpur only shows up in a non canon plotline in the postgame was applied with no CRT.
I reverted the changes:


@Blazeking17

What do you have to say for yourself?
 
This user has created this profile that pretty much breaks all rules. Judging by his message wall, he was given warnings last month.
Sir Ovens deleted the page; and based on his history. It seems a temporary block is in order. Though Fandom seems to be having a lot of loading issues on my end. So I cannot check let alone apply the block. And for how long? 3 months sound good?
 
I have been talking with him, and he doesn't seem to mean any harm. It is just very hard to get through to him and make him understand.
 
I don't want to be too harsh, but could any of you look at what's going on here?
 
I don't want to be too harsh, but could any of you look at what's going on here?
It's fine now, @LordGriffin1000 handled it.
 
You should preferably link the profile that's been vandalized rather than the verse when making reports, especially when there are multiple pages for the character in question. Nevertheless, I figured out which you were talking about, I'll drop a warning to the user in question, thank you for the diligence.
 
You should preferably link the profile that's been vandalized rather than the verse when making reports, especially when there are multiple pages for the character in question. Nevertheless, I figured out which you were talking about, I'll drop a warning to the user in question, thank you for the diligence.
My mistake, I thought I did link the profile instead.
 
Reporting @Random-Helper323 for his attitude in this vs thread.

Not only is he clearly hostile, he's inspiring hate against the opposing members with baseless accusations then later cries wolf about about it. The lies he's spewing has grown to the extent of accusing the opposing faction of telling him to go **** himself and saying he should go and die.

A quick read through the thread of just over 150 messages reveals no such comments along with the accusations against a group of people who aren't even there considering I'm the only opposing supporter who was there from the beginning till now.
 
Last edited:
That's poor behavior, and I've seen Random acting hostile in the past as well so this seems like an expected escalation. He should receive a warning for this IMO.

Edit: He edited out what he said after seeing the report. I don't think that really helps matters.
 
The "go and die" thing is a cultural metaphorical comment used in Chinese culture in lieu of the Western swear words and equivalent, and used far more often than it should be, in all honesty. However, it's obviously taken literally outside of Chinese culture. With that in mind, I have edited it, since it is clearly not taken the same way outside of Chinese culture where it's used much more generally. I did not edit it to hide it. All the same, I agree I've been too reactive here, as I'm having a bad time in real life at this exact moment. Still, it wasn't reasonable, I apologize to Tatsumi, and I will stop.
 
Last edited:
That's poor behavior, and I've seen Random acting hostile in the past as well so this seems like an expected escalation. He should receive a warning for this IMO.

Edit: He edited out what he said after seeing the report. I don't think that really helps matters.
I second this statement.
 
I agree with the warning, even though the user has specified that it may be a metaphorical comment not everyone is familiar with it and it may instigate problems, the apology seems genuine but it does not detract from the fact that the warning should be given because it appears to have previous similar behavior.
 
I agree with the warning, even though the user has specified that it may be a metaphorical comment not everyone is familiar with it and it may instigate problems, the apology seems genuine but it does not detract from the fact that the warning should be given because it appears to have previous similar behavior.
I agree that I need to calm down, and I'm working on it. I do apologise to Tatsumi for the misplaced hostility and to the staff for wasting their time.

Update: I will drop the issue this came from, and this serves to tell me that I need to make some major adjustments IRL, so I will work to become calmer like I was before all the real-life stress came in. Apologies once again to all concerned. I was wrong to direct my stresses at anyone here.
 
Last edited:

I'm unsure if it was an approved CRT since there are corresponding profiles that are Low 7-C but I'm reporting just in case since there was nothing linked.
 

I'm unsure if it was an approved CRT since there are corresponding profiles that are Low 7-C but I'm reporting just in case since there was nothing linked.
Leave JJK profiles as it is for now. I'm gonna change the ratings in future revisions. Currently 4 threads are already active and We are struck in the middle of discussion regarding current calculations. So it will take some time.

Currently we don't have Low 7C ratings for anyone except God tiers. Those 7-A & Low 7-C ratings for fodder characters should be removed and replaced with new Calculations. But as I said currently too many threads are active so can't really do much about that.
 

Obvious vandalism.

They also have other vandalising edits on their contributions page.
 
Back
Top