-
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
- 5,187
- 4,307
Reporting @Hellformer for changing the context of what was accepted. in this CRT.
Here, it was decided that Low godly regeneration, was gonna at most get a "Possibly".
With Elizhaa, and DDM agreeing to that rating, but somehow a solid rating was what was implemented?
Here, it was decided that Low godly regeneration, was gonna at most get a "Possibly".
With Elizhaa, and DDM agreeing to that rating, but somehow a solid rating was what was implemented?
- 12,494
- 16,896
@Firestorm808 @Elizhaa @DarkDragonMedeus the staff that accepted the revision
@Hellformer the user being reported
-
For what is worth, I believe Firestorm later implied he supported a solid rating with this comment. But as it's not explicitly stated, I can see where the report stands.
- 5,187
- 4,307
Regarding that comment, it would still not be enough, since It would be after the other 2 agreed to his previous stand. SO even in the best case scenario he agreed to it, which would be a stretch by itself, it still wouldn't change it would only be 1 staff.
(If you want, I can edit this So I have it in one post and delete this one?)
Hellformer
He/Him- 2,632
- 2,359
Someone else had reported me for this few weeks ago, however firestorm clarified that he was fine with a solid rating.
Hellformer
He/Him- 2,632
- 2,359
Here
@LephyrTheRevanchist @Dark_Soul20189
However you can re-ask him if he's fine with a solid rating. I wouldn't mind.
@LephyrTheRevanchist @Dark_Soul20189
However you can re-ask him if he's fine with a solid rating. I wouldn't mind.
Last edited:
- 5,187
- 4,307
As my point stand, I don't think the others expressed themself to agree, so I would be best if we can wait for direct input from the staff in questioned.
- 12,494
- 16,896
Thank you. I think the report is unfounded then.
Hellformer
He/Him- 2,632
- 2,359
Firestorm had clarified in that thread itself that either GG reformed himself or AX reformed GG. And I replied with which one makes sense and he did not raise any contentions against it. And btw Elizha him/her self agreed with the thread after this specific conversation. So I don't see any point in reporting me.
Last edited:
Hellformer
He/Him- 2,632
- 2,359
Thank you very much
- 9,152
- 10,031
I will be adding my new comment to that thread to dissuade further reports.
- 178,202
- 91,345
- Thread starter
- #28,333
There seems to have been a rule-breaking when applying an unaccepted Ninjago revision while claiming that it was approved.
vsbattles.fandom.com
vsbattles.com
Help would be appreciated.
Antvasima
vsbattles.fandom.com
Ninjago Attack Potency update
DISCLAMER: Althought this CRT seems very big, its actually very simple (plz don't get discouraged😭🙏) Ok so many characters in the Ninjago (all have them) have been really ditched in terms of Attack Potency, Strength and Durability (the WHOLE VERSE IS DEPENDENT ON ONE MORRO FEAT) and there are...
Help would be appreciated.
Last edited:
- 6,699
- 3,576
Since Im the OP starter, I think I can respond to this:There seems to have been a rule-breaking when applying an unaccepted Ninjago revision while claiming that it was approved.
Antvasima
Help would be appreciated.
1. Finepoint never re-open the thread bc of his own arguments, but for Agnaa to add more to it
2. Agnaa never disagreed at all on the 4-C part, she just had no comment on the issue
3. Craw never disagreed on the thread, his opinion on 4-C was just "less iffy"
4. Qawsef was the only one who genually stated to have a disagreement with the thread
5. Dark was referring to the Mergequake feat when stating he was unsure about the disagreement, and ended up accepting it due to UES
6. Idk what's unclear about Finepoint's reply, as he approved Tier 4 scaling
Last edited:
- 12,494
- 16,896
This is what I found after going through the thread. Evaluating staff that commented were @Crabwhale @Qawsedf234 @DarkDragonMedeus @FinePoint @Dereck03 @AgnaaThere seems to have been a rule-breaking when applying an unaccepted Ninjago revision while claiming that it was approved.
Antvasima
Help would be appreciated.
- Crabwhale gave a neutral vote for the 4-C scaling, until a proper UES could be argued. He later didn't fully vote after discussion continued.
- DDM accepted 4-C scaling via UES
- Qawsedf rejected the 4-C scaling
- Dereck also left a neutral comment
- FinePoint supported 4-C scaling
At that point, seems thread got closed but reopened to hash out other arguments.
- After discussion restarted and arguments were being given, Agnaa asked the staff that commented to give their thoughts again
- Qawsedf once more rejected 4-C scaling
- DDM agreed with rejections (seemingly also to the 2-C feats?; notably, Agnaa and Crab also rejected 2-C, with only FinePoint having accepted it before the thread got reopened)
- FinePoint did not comment again
So indeed, both 4-C and 2-C scaling got rejected after getting reopened.
If I got something wrong, staff members are naturally welcomed to correct me.
- 178,202
- 91,345
- Thread starter
- #28,336
@GarrixianXD
Since you have evaluated this issue previously, it might be of interest for you to help out here as well.
Since you have evaluated this issue previously, it might be of interest for you to help out here as well.
- 6,699
- 3,576
DDM didn't disagree, as he seemingly agreed to the 2-C scale via UES and rejected a downgrade thread on the same issue
I also find it suspicious that the message was made by a guy with 0 edits and no posts
- 12,494
- 16,896
Did you meant to link something else?
Regardless, I will wait for DDM to comment and clarify, but he stated he agreed with the counterarguments (which were in favor of rejecting 4-C) and later expressed he was unsure of 2-C.
Edit: Correction, he flat-out rejected 2-C and then was unsure of 4-C. Either way, both upgrades were rejected, since only FinePoint was agreeing.
- 18,202
- 19,678
My view of that thread, as I espoused when I was asked about it, found that Seiji (not evaluating staff) and Fine had reservations about the rating. As Lephyr pointed out, Qawsed disagreed with 4-C, Fine initially agreed with 4-C but seemed to hesitate later, and DDM supported it earlier but made ambiguous statements later.
Looking back, that was enough of a mix that we should've tried to really nail down proper answers from people, and get more input. But I also don't think the 4-C stuff was taking something clearly rejected, and adding it in spite of that, such that it would be a rule violation. The thread was just kind of a clusterfuck.
As I mentioned, I think the best way forward would be to make a new thread bringing up the important counterarguments, to reformat discussion outside of that clusterfuck.
Looking back, that was enough of a mix that we should've tried to really nail down proper answers from people, and get more input. But I also don't think the 4-C stuff was taking something clearly rejected, and adding it in spite of that, such that it would be a rule violation. The thread was just kind of a clusterfuck.
As I mentioned, I think the best way forward would be to make a new thread bringing up the important counterarguments, to reformat discussion outside of that clusterfuck.
I don't. Seems like a lurker, not some sock that's out to get you.
- 12,494
- 16,896
I think for me the comment is glitched? It links to an entirely unrelated post
I'd be fine with this.
- 6,699
- 3,576
I can make a CRT later, since there's more supporting evidences
- 18,202
- 19,678
Yeah, but I knew it was about the user reporting it on message walls. They have 0 edits and 0 posts on the wiki, but a few posts on the forum.
- 22,823
- 23,789
On my end I never accepted the 4-C stuff and still disagree with its usage.
- 34,768
- 42,252
It's been a while since I looked through the thread; so I do not remember every detail I agreed with. But I do remember some back and forth and often times people changing a stance, myself perhaps included.
But based on what I gathered, the main thing I agreed with was the idea that it meets criteria for a UES. But I was unsure on the context of the star creation feat or if it was considered casual. And likewise, I agree that the "Merging universes" was indeed a 2-C feat, but what I do not remember was whether or not to officially deem the feat casual let alone something that low end feats could downscale from and by extension scale to physical stats.
But based on what I gathered, the main thing I agreed with was the idea that it meets criteria for a UES. But I was unsure on the context of the star creation feat or if it was considered casual. And likewise, I agree that the "Merging universes" was indeed a 2-C feat, but what I do not remember was whether or not to officially deem the feat casual let alone something that low end feats could downscale from and by extension scale to physical stats.
- 5,163
- 11,793
I share the same sentiment with Lephyr here.@GarrixianXD
Since you have evaluated this issue previously, it might be of interest for you to help out here as well.
- 178,202
- 91,345
- Thread starter
- #28,346
@ScarletjetThere seems to have been a rule-breaking when applying an unaccepted Ninjago revision while claiming that it was approved.
Antvasima
Help would be appreciated.
- 178,202
- 91,345
- Thread starter
- #28,347
Also, it seems like the unapproved changes need to be reverted. Are you and any other involved Ninjago supporter members willing to help with properly cleaning up your mess, @Lloydblitzed ?
- 6,286
- 4,062
I think it was decided that we need to decide the fate of the verse in a CRT, which was created already.Also, it seems like the unapproved changes need to be reverted. Are you and any other involved Ninjago supporter members willing to help with properly cleaning up your mess, @Lloydblitzed ?
- 178,202
- 91,345
- Thread starter
- #28,349
Well, if the revisions were rejected, they are not allowed to remain unless your new CRT has been decisively accepted by our staff members with evaluation rights, especially if the revisions within it were rejected recently previously.
- 14,997
- 10,626
what the hell
why is this guy unbanned
vsbattles.com
why is this guy unbanned
Vegeta vs Ichibei (15-15-1)
base vegeta casually powers up and blows up Ichibe and the entire bleach cosmology on accident.
- 889
- 229
Chill out, I did not hurt anyone. Js random fictional characterswhat the hell
why is this guy unbanned
Vegeta vs Ichibei (15-15-1)
base vegeta casually powers up and blows up Ichibe and the entire bleach cosmology on accident.
- 178,202
- 91,345
- Thread starter
- #28,352
@Mr. Bambuwhat the hell
why is this guy unbanned
Vegeta vs Ichibei (15-15-1)
base vegeta casually powers up and blows up Ichibe and the entire bleach cosmology on accident.
- 1,728
- 1,633
Reporting @Tdjwo for intentionally trying to discredit me. I wouldn’t have seen this as reportable, if he had accompanied any relevant evidence to back this up, but he has not,leading me to believe this is more intentional.
vsbattles.com
Nasuverse Discussion Board (New Forum)
https://vsbattles.com/threads/ryuunosuke-vs-shiki-tohno-0-0-0.173575/#post-6837001
- 18,202
- 19,678
It's not just random fictional characters, it's inherently based on real-world racism by drawing a throughline from the colour "black" to monkeys.
I'd suggest a ban of at least a few months.
- 14,997
- 10,626
"Oh they're just fictional characters so i can be racist."
- 889
- 229
Oh well gonna go into my slumber again, never intended to actively target anyone
- 19,382
- 12,159
To defend the dude a bit, Saiyans are referred to as "Monkeys" from characters who hate them. I do agreed that the association with the black color is completely uncalled for.
Regardless I'd like to point out that in the thread there's beed a massive chaos, with both sides insulting each other and other disturbing behavior.
Regardless I'd like to point out that in the thread there's beed a massive chaos, with both sides insulting each other and other disturbing behavior.
- 889
- 229
Yeah I was trying to pull the common Dragon Ball meme where Frieza calls the saiyans monkies (and many think he's racist cus of it). Anyway, didn't think the joke would become this serious
- 34,620
- 35,071
That's not what you did.
If you were saying "This character can control all monkeys in the world, so can he control Vegeta because he's a monke-", then that's one thing.
Instead you made a actually racist joke.
- 889
- 229
If you were in the DB comm for a while, you would know what I mean but I'll just concede right now
