-
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
- 31,385
- 34,178
I'll go with 6 months as well.
- 4,603
- 6,516
Permaban is an option. Would you prefer to be listed under permaban, or 6 months?
- 22,343
- 18,529
I think I'll stick with at least 6 months, if not more, based on precedent.
I've seen people receive 3-6 month bans for pretty childish insults, but DarthSpiderr was banned for a full year because he said something pretty offensive against recognising preferred pronouns and then proceeded to triple down. So ~>6 months seems right (though I think it should be perma).
I've seen people receive 3-6 month bans for pretty childish insults, but DarthSpiderr was banned for a full year because he said something pretty offensive against recognising preferred pronouns and then proceeded to triple down. So ~>6 months seems right (though I think it should be perma).
Last edited:
- 31,256
- 27,479
I'll go with 6 months as well.
- 15,830
- 12,124
I'm going with 1-3 (I'd say 3 specifically).
- 15,413
- 15,767
I’m still in favor of a permanent ban.
- 13,138
- 20,847
6 months works for me
- 20,064
- 10,851
Agnaa
VS Battles
Super Moderator
Administrator
Calculation Group
Translation Helper
Human Resources
Gold Supporter
- 15,489
- 13,705
Actually, it's probably best to remove my vote.
Since I didn't support, it's hard for me to internalize, our new standards for off-site conduct, which are highly relevant to this case.
Plus, I promised Ant I'd participate in the RVR while he's on vacation on the condition that I give more deference to other staff members in terms of deciding punishment durations, since I typically suggest shorter ones than others.
Since I didn't support, it's hard for me to internalize, our new standards for off-site conduct, which are highly relevant to this case.
Plus, I promised Ant I'd participate in the RVR while he's on vacation on the condition that I give more deference to other staff members in terms of deciding punishment durations, since I typically suggest shorter ones than others.
Since my earlier attempt of just using the correct name was apparently too subtle, that user's gone by the name "Angie" and she/her pronouns for a while now.
- 15,830
- 12,124
Well, removing Agnaa's vote it's 2 (1-3 months), 5 (6 months), 1 (Permanent Ban)
I guess 6 months it is then?
- 13,138
- 20,847
Yeah so realistically it’s more like 2-4-1. That being said, this is still probably enough to apply a 6 month ban
- 167,692
- 76,282
- Thread starter
- #25,576
I agree with Bambu here. We cannot be too draconian against thought-crimes, if a member has not actually targetted other members based on their prejudices.
For example, if somebody would say that they categorically dislike autistic people, such as myself, I would also not remotely advocate for a permanent ban unless they had stated that they want them all dead and burning in hell or somesuch .
Also, there are cultural differences around this world, and it will take very much time and effort to gradually improve tolerance between different cultures, ethnicities, genders, sexualities, and so onwards. Excluding anybody who privately disapproves of some other group identification from any international community, such as our own, is not going to help with decreasing any of the prejudice and tribalism that plague this world. It is going to increase feelings of anger and hostility, turn prejudice into outright bigotry, and make things worse.
For example, according to the following extensive opinion poll survey from 2013 by PEW Research, most Muslims in this world disapprove of LGBTQIA+ people, due to their conservative cultural upbringing, and yet almost all Muslims that I have encountered both IRL and online have been very good and moral people. Should we still ban them all based on their assumed private thoughts, even though the Muslims who come to this community are likely considerably more openminded and interested in other cultures than average? Of course not! That would be to engage in prejudice and bigotry much more than fighting against it.
https://www.pewresearch.org/religio...s-muslims-religion-politics-society-overview/
To make things better in this world different communities need to gradually get to know each other and see that ordinary people all over this world are generally not dangerous. It is the psychopathic or sociopathic politicians and oligarchs in political charge of this world that are the big problem, and they divide regular people with hate-propaganda as a divide and conquer distraction in order to stay in power.
So to summarise, a 3 months warning ban to force Shmooply to shape up seems like an acceptable compromise solution.
Last edited:
- 11,390
- 13,140
I'll preface this by saying that I was actually made aware of Shmooply's transphobic comments a very, veeeeery long while back, by a user whom I shall not name.
I didn't think much of it at the time since I barely knew who Shmooply was and how or whether they were active on site. Looking back with the veil of time and bad memory lifted however, even then it was a pretty egregious set of messages, though unfortunately said messages are lost.
Regardless, Shmoop's messages off-site provide context for what he said on-site. And to me at least said context looks damn bad.
I'm not interested in having a genuine transphobe in here. Permaban, simple as.
I didn't think much of it at the time since I barely knew who Shmooply was and how or whether they were active on site. Looking back with the veil of time and bad memory lifted however, even then it was a pretty egregious set of messages, though unfortunately said messages are lost.
Regardless, Shmoop's messages off-site provide context for what he said on-site. And to me at least said context looks damn bad.
I'm not interested in having a genuine transphobe in here. Permaban, simple as.
- 15,351
- 22,177
I’m in this camp as well.
To be blunt I’m not a fan of being overly bureaucratic about cases like this because at the end of the day I think we’d all agree our community would be better off without bigots.
- 13,138
- 20,847
Okay, now the vote's a lot more split (3-4-3)
In this case, we should call more staff to evaluate this case
In this case, we should call more staff to evaluate this case
- 11,908
- 11,526
Reporting @TheGunsFinalWrath for this comments here. For context, this thread deals with Buddhism and its application on Jujutsu Kaisen, in which we rejected. In the most recent replies, you can see TheGunsFinalWrath replying to the thread, and one of his comments was:
Udl's reply to him:
In which pissed @Udlmaster off, and he's completely right. No one in this wiki has the right to just come and say "well you're not from X religion" just because you disagreed with the guy.
Udl's reply to him:
I think a warning would be enough, the guy is very argumentative and overly confrontive. This is one of the examples.
- 1,607
- 1,118
Huh? So are yall just gonna straight up ignore this? or did yall happen to not fully read what Udl has been saying in literally 99% of his comments in the thread.
if not, i can give you a quick list that you can find in the thread.
"This was deceptive framing of the Buddha's word to sully the waters and I take particular offense that you're using it against myself, a Buddhist."
"If I show you the cross, and say "This is the Symbol of the Christ" I am not then saying Christ is a wooden cross, you buttered crumpet."
"You linked said blog in the Original Post. Don't make it out now that I rooted through your garbage and dug up dirt on you."
"Damn, did I LITERALLY say that? Hmm, let's see what said, shall we? Hmmm, here I'm not saying they don't intertwine as concepts, I'm saying they shouldn't be grouped together as if they are the same concept. Strange how I never said anything to the effect of what you're saying I LITERALLY said. How strange, that."
"Likewise, you never actually addressed the fact you were splicing, just that I was wrong to call you out for slimy behaviour, which is just tone policing, and I don't care for it."
"In fact, I know how, you did a bit of deceptive splicing there, using parts of Wikipedia's article on the Dharmachakra and then switch to the Dharma page without disclosing that fact to make it seem like one continuous narrative."
["It's something which should not happen. It goes against the laws of God."
"Nuuu, she doesn't actually mean what she's saying, she means this other thing that doesn't contradict my views."]
"Thank you for that. Since my interests in this thread lies entirely on the Buddhist aspects of it, I wouldn't have been able to notice this bit of slippery deception."
"This is just waffling and pre-empting."
"Incredible, so you failed to understand I was talking about and then went to wikipedia, CTRL+F "causal" and then copy and pasted that at me to then declare me totally debunked and pwnd without reading what I said."
"You've just regurgitated wikipedia at me for a page and then claimed I have no idea what I'm talking about. Meanwhile, I've presented many sources for my claims, while for you, you've misunderstood both what I'm talking about and what certain concepts are and then flagrantly conflate them and expect to come out with the correct conclusion."
This is justifiable right? Seems like it, given how many staff agreed with Udl, meaning they've read his comments, and ignored the insults, rudely sarcastic comments, negative remarks etc. but when I express my doubt about Udl being a Buddhist given how they've conducted themselves in this thread so far, it's a no no. Also, there was that one comment Deagon deleted for it being "warning worthy" and "insulting" in the thread. Could somebody look through history or whatever in that thread and add that in here alongside the quotes that ive copied. or at least say what Udl said.
so can you explain how any of this is justifiable but what I said is not? I want to see the reasoning for it.
- 11,908
- 11,526
The only real offense here is calling him a buttered crumped, and come on now. The rest is Udl being at most sarcastic and this doesn’t directly goes against our rules, it’s just not recommended to debate like that and usually we just ask you to be polite.
The comment Deagon deleted was some chinese thing that seemed rude and given how no one gave a singular **** we just moved on.
The comment Deagon deleted was some chinese thing that seemed rude and given how no one gave a singular **** we just moved on.
GarrixianXD
University Enthusiast
Any/AllVS Battles
Joke Battles
Administrator
Content Moderator
Translation Helper
- 4,410
- 10,716
Who posted that?
- 11,260
- 19,744
The deleted comment was something to the effect that Dr. White's arguments to Udl's pov were bad or stupid whichever is more similar depending on the translation.
GarrixianXD
University Enthusiast
Any/AllVS Battles
Joke Battles
Administrator
Content Moderator
Translation Helper
- 4,410
- 10,716
Send it on discord or some shit
- 13,138
- 20,847
Udl's literally already been warned for the thing that was worth warning them for. Deagon already took care of that, so digging this up again is pretty redundant. And real talk, I don't think any of that is any worse than trying to discredit the idea that Udl practices Buddhism over something like this.
- 1,607
- 1,118
??? Go over ever single one of them and explain how all of them are ok but only buttered crumpet. No way you're saying this shi is fine but what I said isnt. Yall blew it out of proportion already so why not this?
also post the Chinese thing. Better to know what is actually said.
- 1,607
- 1,118
Deagon only warned for that comment. Nobody ever pointed out to Udl to stop being rude and aggressive af. That's what my point is.
- 13,138
- 20,847
If Udl was never warned for that, that's the verdict. If you want to push against that, be my guest, but not as a means of drawing attention away from your own misconduct. And again, I feel what you did was worse by comparison.
- 11,260
- 19,744
To begin with, the only thing that warranted a warning was Udl's comment and it was already handled. And also as M3X pointed out, the most that can be seen is a sarcastic tone and it can be understood from Udl's POV that someone misuses their religion and on top of that dares to pretend to understand it and contradict it.
So in perspective you are the only one who came up with a more direct offense in this case.
Udlmaster
They/Them- 6,909
- 2,114
Yes, because all of my comments have been on the quality of the arguments, not speculating on the religious beliefs of someone you know nothing about.
It's baffling too, because what you're doing is tone policing, you're not mad at me for pointing out the deceptive behaviour, you're mad that I didn't coddle the person butchering my religion in front of me.
Because what's the point of doing otherwise? People don't always have to voice their agreement, their silence is agreement.
All this is doing is distracting from the issue, it's literally "What aboutism". The report isn't about "the chinese thing" it's about your speculating on my private life.
- 1,607
- 1,118
Never did draw away attention. If u wanna give me a warning for something like this, (even if I disagree and feel it is blown out of proportion) then cool. Just don't ignore the big red flag next to me. which given how M3X thinks only buttered crumpet is the only real insult UNTIL i pointed it out, is kinda concerning. how did most of the staff read through Udl's comment but never go "huh this sounds like a insult? I should point it out". And it wasn't just one or two, given how many seemed to base off their disagreements from the thread based on what Udl has said, and some has liked what he has commented, it's safe to assume most staff read through it and saw it. that's what I find outrageous a lot with this when he has been doing ok, no callouts except for only one thing, but when I say this the alarms sound.
- 13,138
- 20,847
The problem is that you're conflating Udl's comments (which in particular, according to them, seem to come from a place of frustration at someone misusing their religion) to yourself claiming that Udl perhaps doesn't actually practice Buddhism.
The alarms only sounded for your case because yours was the only one of the two where the alarms needed to be sounded, so to speak.
The alarms only sounded for your case because yours was the only one of the two where the alarms needed to be sounded, so to speak.
- 1,607
- 1,118
For one thing only, whilst ignoring buttered crumpet which M3X acknowledged only now.
And why is rudely sarcastic tone suddenly out of the rules now, especially with how mocking he was? Do yall staff sometimes not tell members to cool it down or warn em to stop with the tone they use?
You've also been adding in unnecessary remarks to somebody who hasn't ever done that to you. One is civil, the other isn't.
Tryna call it tone policing isn't excusing how you've behaved against your opponent in a debate when your opponent hasn't done the same thing to you to deserve it at all, nor been rude. You've been constantly rude almost every single comment. And mad? No, I'm baffled with how you get away scot free for all the shi you've said when the other hasn't behaved in any manner like yours. And again what butchering? ya two have different interpretations. I don't see it in the way you do. And neither has Dr white made any offensive remarks about your religion whatsoever except for having different interpretation on some stuff. You're again blowing it out of proportion.
Why not? Do we suddenly discard the qualities of a civil manner of discussion and logical debating and start being rude to the other who isn't?
A whataboutism can be true too. I don't disagree with the warning. Go ahead. Just don't try to ignore the other elephant in the room whilst at it. Which ive pointed out. And you don't disagree with it, either, given how you think it is right. So thanks for agreeing to being overly condescending and rude.
- 1,607
- 1,118
No? I'm pointing out that if this is wrong, then look at the other direction to who has also been wrong with how they've conducted themselves in a debate, to somebody who hasn't been acting rude to them the entire time, unlike themselves. Also what. The frustration comes from a different interpretation OF how they themselves perceive the religion, and they find offense in somebody thinking differently. Do we now suddenly allow this to give a pass to people to continue being rude as much as they want now? Or do we equally place the rules. I'd understand the frustration if dr white did actually insult or use any offensive or mocking remarks, but he didn't, at all. He literally just disagreed with how Udl interprets certain things in Buddhism.
ye and that doesn't make sense when the other person has used two insults already. one acknowledged which is fair. the other hasn't been pointed out. and then there are various other comments that, although less rude, is still rude.
- 11,260
- 19,744
First of all, to me "buttered crumpet" doesn't sound like an insult to me, even if I google it the only thing that comes up is this, English is not my main language so I don't know what slang tends to be insulting and I was on vacation for more than a month and I happened to log on to the wiki that day to see what was new and I came back yesterday so I'm not up to date with anything.
And there is no sarcastic rude tone as such but a sarcastic one, I can understand that no one has said anything because they might have understood Udl's frustration that someone would missued their religion.
Literally in MY POV I don't see anything to reproach Uld for other than the unnecessary comment that made Deagon already handled it, just a friendly reminder not to argue in a sarcastic way again, although it's hard to avoid if someone messes with something important to you as for Udl is their religion.
- 2,338
- 1,833
I didn't really want to get involved with this but there's been a bunch of nonsense posts in here from people not being objective in the slightest.
First off, let's drop this narrative of "Uld being offended" about his religion being used. Religion is used in several versus throughout this site, and plenty enough evidence and corroboration from major translators and dwellers from the native country of Japan have corroborated the deep connection of the religion to the manga, including the author themselves. Even if you disagree with my conclusions, to state that "using the religion" to correlate with manga as offensive is downright gaslighting as the author is the one who chose to use said concepts and themes in their work. You would also be tactitly calling buddhist who downright agree with Buddhism being heavily involved with the manga wrong, and I don't really think that's a position mods should be taking officially as some have done in this thread already (double standards go crazy).
Furthermore, Uld and other mods such as Pheonks, downright poisoned the well throughout the whole thread and this activity was never once addressed despite its inappropriateness, especially coming from administration. People keep trying to downplay the Udl deleted comment but let's look at Deagon's response
First off, let's drop this narrative of "Uld being offended" about his religion being used. Religion is used in several versus throughout this site, and plenty enough evidence and corroboration from major translators and dwellers from the native country of Japan have corroborated the deep connection of the religion to the manga, including the author themselves. Even if you disagree with my conclusions, to state that "using the religion" to correlate with manga as offensive is downright gaslighting as the author is the one who chose to use said concepts and themes in their work. You would also be tactitly calling buddhist who downright agree with Buddhism being heavily involved with the manga wrong, and I don't really think that's a position mods should be taking officially as some have done in this thread already (double standards go crazy).
Furthermore, Uld and other mods such as Pheonks, downright poisoned the well throughout the whole thread and this activity was never once addressed despite its inappropriateness, especially coming from administration. People keep trying to downplay the Udl deleted comment but let's look at Deagon's response
That post seems pretty stern and directly opposed to the narrative given earlier, verbatim
Also, shouldn't a reaction from a mod of this level warrant a report in the RVR? Should other mods have not gotten a say? I've seen much less reported to the thread and didn't know single mod quiet actions were a thing.
- 1,607
- 1,118
if you read the quote. Does it not come off as a way to say a insult? "If I show you the cross, and say "This is the Symbol of the Christ" I am not then saying Christ is a wooden cross, you buttered crumpet."
"You linked said blog in the Original Post. Don't make it out now that I rooted through your garbage and dug up dirt on you."
So do we think this is aight to say? "Likewise, you never actually addressed the fact you were splicing, just that I was wrong to call you out for slimy behaviour, which is just tone policing, and I don't care for it"
so two people are debating. a debate like these is where you purely debate in a logical way, bring up evidence for your arguments etc. It's expected that both hold a civil debate without insulting each other or framing somebody's character in a negative way. yet somebody doesn't do that. Do we not think this way of behaving is frowned on? Udl admits to not caring if they said somebody had slimy behavior or not, as well. I think you get my point already.
And yes I get the idea of the frustration here. I just don't see as to why we'd go "well meh its fine" when this isn't normally accepted, no? Like we aren't gonna forego civil manner of discussion and all that stuff, especially for that long, yes?
Yes I get that. but again I don't think the way of behaving is deserved,when again dr white has not went on to mock, be sarcastic or insult Udl's religion in anyway. The only offensive part mentioned that ive seen is Udl being frustrated with Dr white simply having a different interpretation of Buddhism. Which brings me to this point then: Are there not different Buddhist schools or something like that? Do they ALSO not have a different interpretation regarding certain things when comparing the differences? So, I really don't see as to whatever Dr white has done except for have a different interpretation, is somehow frowned on, or offensive.
Last edited:
- 13,138
- 20,847
@Dr._whiteee I understand your viewpoint. Just a couple of things though.
- I don't think simply using the religion is the issue, rather how it's being used (specifically, the belief that it's being misused to get an upgrade out of it). This is not necessarily my stance, I just felt it was worth mentioning that I'm not sure if the simple use of Buddhism is the problem
- Pheonks isn't a staff member on our wiki, but on the FC/OC Battles Wiki
Similar threads
