• 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)

Fallen_Angelicx said:
It says that as a way to say they're fighting in the same body. Shinpei has his weakness and Ryuunosuke has his. It's split into keys and they're different people but they're under the same body. It was removed recently anyway upon me speaking with mods about it. It isn't supposed to incline with them both having the same weakness
Click to expand...
"Same as before" objectively does imply having the same weaknesses. If there are certain weaknesses that aren't the same from one key to another, that should be noted. As it stands, it's clear where the confusion on this point in particular came from
 
CloverDragon03 said:
"Same as before" objectively does imply having the same weaknesses. If there are certain weaknesses that aren't the same from one key to another, that should be noted. As it stands, it's clear where the confusion on this point in particular came from
Click to expand...
This point makes sense and I understand their perspective now, despite it being misinformation. It didn't change anything in the course of the discussion however, since it's been argued that Ryuunosuke could just knock Sans out;
And even tho my point here is valid, if u wanna bring up the "its profile thoo" bs then it still doesn't stop ryuunosuke from knocking sans unconscious which he'd easily be able to do.
Click to expand...
Why won't he kill him? What's stopping him from knocking him out too? All this happens before Sans even thinks of speaking because ryuunosuks is pulling his amplification even if it harms him
Click to expand...
These points ofc were ignored by Shion and the others. I'm getting the match removed from the profiles in Versus Match Removal Thread as it's filled with a lot of misconceptions and is just a stomp. @Catbowtie goes indepth on that in his post in the San's vs Ryuunosuke thread.
 
This is a lot of text to look at, but I would have to strongly suggest avoid multi-posting on the RVR and to give staff time to evaluate. But since Glassman and Spaceman were in the content revision, they could comment on what their stance was one what they accepted.
 
Last edited:
DarkDragonMedeus said:
This is a log of text to look at, but I would have to strongly suggest avoid multi-posting on the RVR and to give staff time to evaluate. But since Glassman and Spaceman were in the content revision, they could comment on what their stance was one what they accepted.
Click to expand...
I briefly just added the thread since I got the proper votes needed for one specific Hax. But I could ask Glassman for his input again to completely shut down that argument once and for all. Sorry for the Multi Posting tho, I'll do otherwise in the future.
 
DarkDragonMedeus said:
Off topic to above, but this user was reportedly a sock of Mad Dog of Fujiwura; all the more reason to keep her permabanned. And be on the lookout she may attempt more socks in the future.
Click to expand...
What do you mean, it's a sock? I've been in contact with Fuji on discord, and she is equally confused as to why some random account decided to dm her and ask to continue revisions.

Did you even do an IP check? You guys kind of just banned a random user who was just curious about revisions.

What other proof is there besides this person commenting on Fuji's page, I'd like to see it before make such bold claims.
 
Looking deeper into this, the only interaction the Liviticus account has had with the site was changing the description of their page, followed by a comment on Fuji's page, one which she even expresses confusion over.

If your reasoning for assuming it's a sock is their wish to continue, GoW/Touhou revisions, then guess what, other people have already asked such questions, both on and off site.
Once again, I hope you have more concrete reasoning because now you've falsely accused Fuji and banned an innocent and seemingly curious new member.
 
CurrySenpai said:
What do you mean, it's a sock? I've been in contact with Fuji on discord, and she is equally confused as to why some random account decided to dm her and ask to continue revisions.

Did you even do an IP check? You guys kind of just banned a random user who was just curious about revisions.

What other proof is there besides this person commenting on Fuji's page, I'd like to see it before make such bold claims.
Click to expand...
Hmmm, I will assume someone decided to report that account in private as noted in DDM’s wording on the matter.

DarkDragonMedeus said:
reportedly
Click to expand...

That part should been addressed as he was probably informed by someone else regarding that account.

Regardless, I do think it was premature to ban a new user permanently, but outside of that, it is odd a new user does seem to have some knowledge of the Wiki and Forum, but likely out of observations.


Anyway, that is all I have to say regarding this part.
 
HammerStrikes219 said:
Hmmm, I will assume someone decided to report that account in private as noted in DDM’s wording on the matter.



That part should been addressed as he was probably informed by someone else regarding that account.

Regardless, I do think it was premature to ban a new user permanently, but outside of that, it is odd a new user does seem to have some knowledge of the Wiki and Forum, but likely out of observations.


Anyway, that is all I have to say regarding this part.
Click to expand...
I won't disagree that it is really REALLY sus for this account to comment on Fuji's page first thing, but I think it's important to understand VSBW's reach within the at wide powerscaling community. Many people have talked about the GoW revisions and even planned Touhou ones, and I'm sure talks have reached far outside our bubble (hell I've seen Touhou youtubers who don't even powerscale make videos on it and mention Fuji because of her involvement).

I think it's more likely that this new member was genuinely just a new scaler who knew that Fuji was continuously involved and knowledgeable in both verses and went to her account in hopes to get answers and whatnot.

The tinfoil hat answer is that someone's trying to frame her, but I think it's important to consider this aspect of things before we jump immediately to it being a sock puppet, as banning an innocent new user for interacting with a banned member doesn't sit right with me.
 
CurrySenpai said:
What do you mean, it's a sock? I've been in contact with Fuji on discord, and she is equally confused as to why some random account decided to dm her and ask to continue revisions.

Did you even do an IP check? You guys kind of just banned a random user who was just curious about revisions.

What other proof is there besides this person commenting on Fuji's page, I'd like to see it before make such bold claims.
Click to expand...
Our forum directly registered the @Liviticus account as being a sockpuppet of Fujiwara. 🙏
 
 
Antvasima said:
XenForo's automatically registers if somebody is a sockpuppet account in multiple ways. 🙏
Click to expand...
Well, I believe I've given enough evidence to at least suggest that this isn't a sock. Fuji maintains her innocence in having no clue who this is, but she's stated that even when she was not banned, she used a VPN (something I know that some sock detectors on other forum sites and places can give false positives on).

I'd appreciate it if this could be further looked into, for both users sakes, as this all seems speculative at best.
 
CurrySenpai said:
stated that even when she was not banned, she used a VPN (
Click to expand...
If Fuji is using a VPN is probably what cause the issue as chances are, they could been using the same IP addresses by coincidence or something.

That is what would cause the problem.

Hell, I used a VPN in my native country, but only used to avoid those pesky intrusive ads banners and so on for specific websites I used.

Can Fuji vouch on the whole VPN thing? Just show a screenshot of the VPN Fuji used and that will do.
 
CurrySenpai said:
Well, I believe I've given enough evidence to at least suggest that this isn't a sock. Fuji maintains her innocence in having no clue who this is, but she's stated that even when she was not banned, she used a VPN (something I know that some sock detectors on other forum sites and places can give false positives on).

I'd appreciate it if this could be further looked into, for both users sakes, as this all seems speculative at best.
Click to expand...
No, it isn't speculative. The new account apparently interacted with Fujiwara's account, and our forum strongly registered it as being a sockpuppet. It is an extremely clear case, so please stop interfering here. 🙏
 
Pepsimanslover_69 said:
The fact that the first thing the user did was message Fuji already makes it very suspicious, especially given the subject, if they are using the same VPN, then that kinda is just fumbling the bag.
Click to expand...
A fair point, but I have considered the other possibility that the new User does have a native IP address as they might not necessarily used a VPN as it does depend on the country they live in and all that.

Anyway, time to avoid cluttering up this thread further and let other staff members weigh in with their own thoughts on this matter
 
I mentioned this off-site, but I'll briefly mention it here since it's still on the topic and I know it confused a few people.

Mad Dog of Fujiwara was able to post on her message wall due to the block parameters I set up when I put it down. Specifically, I never ticked the side option that blocks someone from posting on their own message wall.

This was intentional - outside of situations where you'd expect someone to continue using their message wall for rule violations (for example, a troll who might post troll images on their message wall), there's not really any reason to block it. It simply offers a convenient means for someone to make a ban appeal without needing to make a new FANDOM account or needing to rely on off-site correspondence, and it still prevents them from interacting with anything on the wiki.

However, I was alerted off-site in the midst of this situation to the fact that Fujiwara used this to get someone to proxy for her, which is an obvious misuse of this. So I've adjusted the block setting.
 
CurrySenpai said:
Well, I believe I've given enough evidence to at least suggest that this isn't a sock. Fuji maintains her innocence in having no clue who this is, but she's stated that even when she was not banned, she used a VPN (something I know that some sock detectors on other forum sites and places can give false positives on).

I'd appreciate it if this could be further looked into, for both users sakes, as this all seems speculative at best.
Click to expand...
Our system is literally programmed to detect if any pending accounts have the same Email Address and or IP Address as other users on forum; and better yet if they happened to be banned users. In this case, it was confirmed. Also, them interacting with themselves on Message Walls doesn't confirm them being different people; ZaStando has done that plenty of times, as has Sera Ex and VenomElite. In fact, plenty of staff members do something similar offsite and screenshot themselves using multiple Discord accounts and talk to themselves just to prove people can just make use of multiple accounts to pretend to be multiple people.
 
DarkGrath said:
However, I was alerted off-site in the midst of this situation to the fact that Fujiwara used this to get someone to proxy for her, which is an obvious misuse of this. So I've adjusted the block setting.
Click to expand...
Well, personally I do not think it seems harmful if other members are allowed to post Fujiwara's most important remaining God of War revisions, if they improve the reliability of the information in our wiki. 🙏
 
If they're literally parroting Fuji's own words then that's no different than having any banned member try to get around any bans by using someone as a proxy to argue for them, this is the similar thing Weekly did way back during his first ban for some RWBY threads. If they want to make any GoW revisions they can argue their own points instead of just copying everything Fuji does.
 
But Fujiwara seems to have spent a lot of time properly analysing the issue, and the point of our wiki is not to give all characters exaggerated statistics, but to give them accurate statistics. 🙏

The problem was Fujiwara's bad behaviour, not her analysis of this verse.
 
It's one thing to get information for threads and such from her offsite, there's no feasible way to stop that nor should we bother, but it's really another thing to just copy paste her words repeatedly on the site. The revisions in question are largely a breakdown of a large thread she's already posted here 4 months ago as well, so I'm not sure why it's specifically being treated as something that's never been discussed on site.

That is to say, how the remainder is handled is whatever, but it doesn't have to come down to ghost posting for a banned member.
 
I've mentioned before that our rules on proxying are loose and should probably be specified further for cases like these. But that's a topic for another time, not the RVRT. For now, I think it's fine to just say directly copy-pasting from a banned member shouldn't be allowed - since it has the same practical impact as account sharing with that member.
 
Well, I agree about that it seems much better if members who want to post Fujiwara's revisions talk with her offsite to gather information, rather than just directly post her own arguments repeatedly word-by-word. 🙏
 
GarrixianXD said:
Talking about Fujiwara, I think someone should add that cannot edit own talk page for her block.

| VS Battles Wiki | Fandom

vsbattles.fandom.com vsbattles.fandom.com

She can still interact with the wiki despite being blocked if that setting isn’t turned on.
Click to expand...
DarkGrath said:
However, I was alerted off-site in the midst of this situation to the fact that Fujiwara used this to get someone to proxy for her, which is an obvious misuse of this. So I've adjusted the block setting.
Click to expand...
Already done.
 
What do the rest of you think about Shion's report? 🙏
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

FinePoint
  • Locked
Discussion Rule Word Salad
Replies
22
Views
1K
Antvasima
Antvasima
Agnaa
Fanart Rule Revamp
Replies
7
Views
2K
Antvasima
Antvasima
FinePoint
  • Locked
Clarifying Death Threat Rules
2
Replies
64
Views
6K
Antvasima
Antvasima
Kachon123
One Piece: Planet Size Discussion Rule
Replies
14
Views
2K
RaikiKurohane99
RaikiKurohane99
FlipLaScript
Loosening Up Tier 1 Rules
2
Replies
44
Views
2K
Kanogami
Kanogami
Back
Top