• 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)

Antvasima said:
Just a note that he would like to apologise again:

vsbattles.fandom.com

CelestialVortex01

vsbattles.fandom.com vsbattles.fandom.com
Click to expand...
The default position, in my view, is to accept apologies, but depending on the deed, not necessarily forget the action taken. Legitimately those comments were entirely disgusting, and Damage would have been well within his rights to push for harsher punishment. That sort of stuff is extremely serious and it is devastating to consider just how many people would casually threaten such an insane extreme over such a petty ******* hobby.

Now. With that said, it does not fall to me to accept apologies. Really, as this isn't about a current rule violation, the only person apologies should be sent to is Damage, from that guy directly.

Sdjlakjh said:
I never try to use author statements that were asked by me again?
Click to expand...
On this, and the preceding messages: authorial statements are often usable, presuming that the source has a consistent record of offering legitimate lore information (meaning personal accounts are often discredited). I'm not sure about the context at work here, so I will ask @StrymULTRA to detail what exactly is going on. I will further clarify that I am only asking the pinged user, and I ask that the pinged user post their message ignoring other messages that may be posted in the interim by unauthorized posters. I just want the facts as you know them.
 
Mr. Bambu said:
On this, and the preceding messages: authorial statements are often usable, presuming that the source has a consistent record of offering legitimate lore information (meaning personal accounts are often discredited). I'm not sure about the context at work here, so I will ask @StrymULTRA to detail what exactly is going on. I will further clarify that I am only asking the pinged user, and I ask that the pinged user post their message ignoring other messages that may be posted in the interim by unauthorized posters. I just want the facts as you know them.
Click to expand...
Basically the dude is literally saying that he prefers to just ask the author rather than compiling evidence from the series because according to him "it's easier and he wouldn't have to compile a blog", which literally makes 0 sense and makes these abilities even more filmshy.

Yes, it's said in the downgrade made from @Shmooply about removing the resistances obtained through only author statements, and his only defense to maintain that "evidence" in the profile was only this.
 
Alright. And now, on the other side: @Sdjlakjh, in your own words (and in one post), please elaborate on why you feel you did nothing wrong- whether this is an error or misunderstanding, and that you're not using author-asked questions, or if there's some context that might make it not a direct violation of the rules.

As it stands, I will reiterate that using questions asked of the author does indeed fall against our policies, and those questions are unusable, whether you personally find them to be leading or not.
 
Mr. Bambu said:
Alright. And now, on the other side: @Sdjlakjh, in your own words (and in one post), please elaborate on why you feel you did nothing wrong- whether this is an error or misunderstanding, and that you're not using author-asked questions, or if there's some context that might make it not a direct violation of the rules.

As it stands, I will reiterate that using questions asked of the author does indeed fall against our policies, and those questions are unusable, whether you personally find them to be leading or not.
Click to expand...
Ok so what happens is this:

-He was trying to remove abilities because it's a leading question
-I then mentioned no need as I could make a blog why they have such resistances
-He then ask, why bother use a leading question instead of a blog?
-I said it's because I didnt know it wasn't allowed beforehand and just directly ask the author so I can get better confirmation

Now he's reporting me thinking that I am still using the leading author statements (when I stopped after you talked to me)
 
Sdjlakjh said:
Ok so what happens is this:

-He was trying to remove abilities because it's a leading question
-I then mentioned no need as I could make a blog why they have such resistances
-He then ask, why bother use a leading question instead of a blog?
-I said it's because I didnt know it wasn't allowed beforehand and just directly ask the author so I can get better confirmation

Now he's reporting me thinking that I am still using the leading author statements (when I stopped after you talked to me)
Click to expand...
Okay. Then it seems to me the way to do this is to remove the abilities given until your evidence is compiled and prepared to present. You can't use whatever evidence was based on authorial questions.
 
Mr. Bambu said:
Okay. Then it seems to me the way to do this is to remove the abilities given until your evidence is compiled and prepared to present. You can't use whatever evidence was based on authorial questions.
Click to expand...
I already have mention you in my newest CRT tackling the abilities problem btw
 
@Sdjlakjh Has been banned for 6 months, and permanently topic-banned from Lego Monke Kid, after a discussion among some high-level staff due to claiming to have been paid for getting wins for characters in that verse and for offering to pay staff members to evaluate threads.

The latter hasn't been thoroughly discussed, since it was found after we'd already reached a ban decision on the former, but it's my personal opinion that if it were just the latter, the user would only have received a warning since the bribe was a first offence that didn't ask for a particular result and wasn't acted upon.

A rule about not offering or accepting bribes will be added Soon™, but until then I, personally, consider it a violation of our rule requiring users to be reasonable and not show severe irrational bias.
 
Last edited:
Agnaa said:
@Sdjlakjh Has been banned for 6 months, and permanently topic-banned from Lego Monke Kid, after a discussion among some high-level staff due to claiming to have been paid for getting wins for characters in that verse and for offering to pay staff members to evaluate threads.

The latter hasn't been thoroughly discussed, since it was found after we'd already reached a ban decision on the former, but it's my personal opinion that if it were just the latter, the user would only have received a warning since the bribe didn't ask for a particular result and wasn't acted upon.

A rule about not offering or accepting bribes will be added Soon™, but until then I, personally, consider it a violation of our rule requiring users to be reasonable and not show severe irrational bias.
Click to expand...
somehow got roped into a discussion about this off siteand apparently, any type of bribe was punishable,based on past cases.

Anyway, I think it was extremely stupid to not only do this,but to PUBLICLY announce your actions as well, lol.
 
Agnaa said:
@Sdjlakjh Has been banned for 6 months, and permanently topic-banned from Lego Monke Kid, after a discussion among some high-level staff due to claiming to have been paid for getting wins for characters in that verse and for offering to pay staff members to evaluate threads.
Click to expand...
I don't want to aggravate the situation too much, but I'd like to clarify something. I personally know Sdjlak and ik that he lying, since he actually pays a youtuber for matchups based on LMK (nothing to do with VSBW). I also want to point out any LBD matchups I created are in no relations to money or anything whatsoever
 
Lloydblitzed said:
I don't want to aggravate the situation too much, but I'd like to clarify something. I personally know Sdjlak and ik that he lying, since he actually pays a youtuber for matchups based on LMK (nothing to do with VSBW).
Click to expand...
That's not particularly compelling evidence against receiving bribes imo. It's not exactly unheard of for people to pay both ways for favours on either side.
 
Agnaa said:
That's not particularly compelling evidence against receiving bribes imo. It's not exactly unheard of for people to pay both ways for favours on either side.
Click to expand...
This might sound a bit dumb but in short: He joked/lied about paying people to influence LBD's matchups, which bought himself a ban.

I can go get more evidences that he was simply paying Conquestor from him if needed
 
Lloydblitzed said:
This might sound a bit dumb but in short: He joked/lied about paying people to influence LBD's matchups, which bought himself a ban.

I can go get more evidences that he was simply paying Conquestor from him if needed
Click to expand...
If you have evidence that indicates he was almost certainly not getting paid, please provide it.
 
Lloydblitzed said:
Here's proof that he was paying Conq the whole time. And he usually asked me/argued with me if LBD could win against characters or not on Discord before making MUs or nah, so he wasn't getting paid for those
Click to expand...
This is the silliest shit I've ever seen on this wiki. I do not say this lightly.

It goes without saying, but: don't lie about sending/receiving bribes, aside from just being very weird it is a legitimate offense and you shouldn't be partaking in it. Lying to say that you have will be treated as honest. I'll communicate with the others to see if we will reevaluate this mess.
 
Mr. Bambu said:
This is the silliest shit I've ever seen on this wiki. I do not say this lightly.

It goes without saying, but: don't lie about sending/receiving bribes, aside from just being very weird it is a legitimate offense and you shouldn't be partaking in it. Lying to say that you have will be treated as honest. I'll communicate with the others to see if we will reevaluate this mess.
Click to expand...
I completly understand you. Will you guys give an update on your decision to me later?
 
Someone get TotalMasterInfinity please. He’s again acting like a complete jerk and it’s annoying. I’m on phone again but he’s been treating “Burning Full Finger” badly in the DxD threads and CRT and when I told him to stop he starts to act immature

vsbattles.com

DxD Rule addition: Class Scaling

This CRT is to get a general rule added to the verse page that should be followed when scaling the series, and or get this added to the discussion rules page for DxD. 1. In comparison to Boosts, the class system has been very inconsistent throughout the series despite having equal importance...
vsbattles.com vsbattles.com

vsbattles.com

High School DxD Universe Discussion Thread

but I have already found the solution to all this, it is called training. I already say that but look like no one see that
vsbattles.com vsbattles.com

If y’all go to where Burning Full Finger is debating, you’ll see TotalMasterInfinity’s comment. This guy is still acting the way he is even when Mr. Bambu gave him a warning
 
I posted a warning message to them. 🙏

vsbattles.com

DxD Rule addition: Class Scaling

This CRT is to get a general rule added to the verse page that should be followed when scaling the series, and or get this added to the discussion rules page for DxD. 1. In comparison to Boosts, the class system has been very inconsistent throughout the series despite having equal importance...
vsbattles.com vsbattles.com
 
I would like to give a warning out to @Puppet43 for behavior here. Aside from my summary post in that thread, I will offer an explanation of events:
The fact of the matter is that I gave this thread every ounce of courtesy and then this user, knowing what the results of the thread were and what was posted there, first attempted to get another user in trouble for simply applying said results, and then attempted to slander me in the same breath by lying about what had happened. I consider this more than just the common fare of rudeness, and may even be considered instigation of drama on a small scale, and would thus like to hand out a formal warning to avoid such behavior in the future- I do not seek any action beyond that.

As this report includes an offense towards me, I do not make the decision myself, as I might for other petty situations. I defer to you guys.
 
I am fine with Bambu's conclusions here. 🙏
 
 
I am not sure. A permanent ban from the thread in question and a temporary general ban of two weeks or more might make him and others take this issue more seriously. 🙏
 
So should we give him a temporary forum ban as well, and, if so, for how long? 🙏
 
ByAsura said:
Apparently, he's been banned for 6 months from other threads, and nothing has changed. So, you're right; a year to permanent might work better.
Click to expand...
That was for uneccesary threads i made for revisions, i admit i did bad on that, and it was when i was still starting here (in 2022)
 
Let's stick to the topic here please. I am going to bed now. 🙏
 
Even without the cursing and use of a different language to obfuscate it, it is an unnecessary display of pettiness and derailment. I would agree with a brief general forum ban (1 month sounds fine) and a permanent thread ban seems fine. If it becomes a continuing issue, a topic ban would be preferable.
 
Mr. Bambu said:
Even without the cursing and use of a different language to obfuscate it, it is an unnecessary display of pettiness and derailment. I would agree with a brief general forum ban (1 month sounds fine) and a permanent thread ban seems fine. If it becomes a continuing issue, a topic ban would be preferable.
Click to expand...
Sounds good to me.
 
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
17
Views
3K
Antvasima
Antvasima
FlipLaScript
Loosening Up Tier 1 Rules
2
Replies
44
Views
3K
Kanogami
Kanogami
Back
Top