- 969
- 738
Cokesakto translated the entire novel, but has been called out for heavily editing Nasu’s prose, and adding entire paragraphs which did not exist in the original text.
-
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
KingNanaya
He/Him- 3,017
- 4,201
the point of my comment was to show that @Tdjwo wasn't saying that he translated something wrong, but that he used a translation that was wrong. That was all.
Agnaa
VS Battles
Super Moderator
Administrator
Calculation Group
Translation Helper
Human Resources
Gold Supporter
- 15,536
- 13,770
Since the substance of the matter is important, I've had a look at the raws, and posed a question to Wankbreaker about them in the relevant CRT.
Agnaa
VS Battles
Super Moderator
Administrator
Calculation Group
Translation Helper
Human Resources
Gold Supporter
- 15,536
- 13,770
Firestorm, can you (or anyone else) provide the source for this claim? Having a quick scroll through both of these threads I can't find it, but I admittedly haven't checked everywhere.
Since, if true, there would be no real possibility for wrongdoing.
KingNanaya
He/Him- 3,017
- 4,201
This part, I believe
- 7,521
- 7,713
- 969
- 738
The screenshot of one of my mutual friends asking the proofreader about the vetting process was posted earlier in this thread,btw.
Agnaa
VS Battles
Super Moderator
Administrator
Calculation Group
Translation Helper
Human Resources
Gold Supporter
- 15,536
- 13,770
In that case, I think this is plainly viewable as an oversight unrelated to Translation Helper duties.
Translation Helpers aren't obligated to personally check every scan they post from a series they could translate; they're only obligated to personally check when they claim to have done so, even if implicitly by response to a translation request without qualifying with something like "I found this translation someone else did online".
So yeah, just posting a scan from a different decently-reputable translator should not be taken as a stamp of approval, and so, this translation falling short in that regard isn't a mark against Wankbreaker. It's just a reason to be diligent about this sort of thing in general.
Hell, even some very reputable stuff often ends up with tiny mistakes that have big effects on battleboarding efforts. Care with this sort of thing is good, but not something we'd rigidly mandate with demotions over stuff like this.
Translation Helpers aren't obligated to personally check every scan they post from a series they could translate; they're only obligated to personally check when they claim to have done so, even if implicitly by response to a translation request without qualifying with something like "I found this translation someone else did online".
So yeah, just posting a scan from a different decently-reputable translator should not be taken as a stamp of approval, and so, this translation falling short in that regard isn't a mark against Wankbreaker. It's just a reason to be diligent about this sort of thing in general.
Hell, even some very reputable stuff often ends up with tiny mistakes that have big effects on battleboarding efforts. Care with this sort of thing is good, but not something we'd rigidly mandate with demotions over stuff like this.
- 72
- 38
I know uninvolved people aren't supposed to make a comment here, but I don't think it's very fair to say "Wankbreaker stated it wasn't their translation already" when he made this comment AFTER tdjwo had made his comment about the translation. This would imply that Wankbreaker had stated that it was not his translation, then tdjwo made his claims when in reality, tdjwo made his claims first, then Wankbreaker stated it was not his translation in the first place, which wasn't information that existed when tdjwo did his report.
I'm not saying that Wankbreaker has done anything rvr worthy, but it's somewhat unfair to tdjwo since it's likely he didn't know this was not Wankbreaker's translation when making the claims he did and had Wankbreaker stated in his original comment that this was not his translation, this whole debacle may have been avoided.
I'm not saying that Wankbreaker has done anything rvr worthy, but it's somewhat unfair to tdjwo since it's likely he didn't know this was not Wankbreaker's translation when making the claims he did and had Wankbreaker stated in his original comment that this was not his translation, this whole debacle may have been avoided.
Agnaa
VS Battles
Super Moderator
Administrator
Calculation Group
Translation Helper
Human Resources
Gold Supporter
- 15,536
- 13,770
True, but I'd more put that on Tdjwo jumping the gun. We shouldn't expect Translation Helpers to label every single scan they could've translated but didn't.
For what it's worth, I don't think Tdjwo should receive any sort of punishment for his actions here, from what I've seen.
- 969
- 738
He was told about this a couple of days ago in my discord server,just an FYI
- 7,521
- 7,713
Again, use of an inaccurate translation can happen time to time. That's not an issue.
The issue I see is the unfounded accusation of bias as a translator.
- 13,153
- 20,876
I just know that there's been beef between these two for a while, as Tdjwo believes Wankbreaker to be heavily downplaying Nasuverse while Wankbreaker believes the opposite of Tdjwo. Problem, though, is that this is seeping into unfounded accusations that seem to be made out of a belief that these translations are being made to further push this "downplaying agenda." I'm not gonna act like I think things are all fine and dandy on the other side (like, I think coming in naming yourself "Wankbreaker" is just an unnecessary display of arrogance imo) but that's not really relevant to this case
If there's hard evidence of Wankbreaker manipulating translations, that's one thing. But if not, I'd say that's a rule violation on Tdjwo's part. It's attempted defamation, within the scope of the wiki, pretty much
If there's hard evidence of Wankbreaker manipulating translations, that's one thing. But if not, I'd say that's a rule violation on Tdjwo's part. It's attempted defamation, within the scope of the wiki, pretty much
Mr. Bambu
Suffer-Not-Injustice Bambu
VS Battles
Joke Battles
Super Moderator
Administrator
Calculation Group
Silver Supporter
- 22,775
- 22,295
The question, then, becomes to what extent we wish to dissuade people from reporting staff members, if it can be interpreted as an attack. Obviously such things can be weaponized, and in the case of random beef between these two it lends itself to that interpretation, but consider the opposite end: if it was found that Wank had done the things he is accused of, then we would consider it a boon on Tdjwo's part. From where I sit, it seems possible, if not plausible, that Tdjwo is overzealous in his squabbling with Wank, and in that state of mind can legitimately see what to all of us appears as an honest error as an attempt at manipulation.
Now, this still remains an unfavorable state of affairs- we don't want users who don't like particular staff members constantly looking for anything that might be interpreted as foul play and using it to cause trouble, knowingly or otherwise. We don't want to encourage random witch hunts.
I say all of this to explain my thoughts. My opinion on whether to consider this a rule violation: I dislike the idea for this first infraction, acknowledging that WB did nothing wrong (I dislike typing his full name and yet shortening it isn't actually very good either). If it is widely agreed that it is a rule violation in that he was overeager to find fault in WB that he overstepped and made a mountain out of a mole hill, I think at best it would be a formal warning.
- 13,153
- 20,876
Well, my recommendation is that rather than bringing it up in a public thread (which is what led to him being reported), I'd have encouraged Tdjwo to report WB to HR if he felt so strongly about this. That way, it could be handled in a more controlled manner as opposed to exploding as it has now.
As for the status of it being a rule violation, I think it's pretty clear that it is, but the point of contention is more what to do in response to it - due to the factors at play, as you've mentioned. I'd be okay with a formal warning
As for the status of it being a rule violation, I think it's pretty clear that it is, but the point of contention is more what to do in response to it - due to the factors at play, as you've mentioned. I'd be okay with a formal warning
- 15,145
- 6,922
Going back to Robo though? 3 staff agreed with a Thread Creation ban, but that wasn't applied yet
- 12,297
- 5,562
this is not true
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16
i have been making matches that are not stomps and have improved
you are the one who should be reported for lying about me because you keep saying shit like i have been making bad fights over and over when this is not true at all
Last edited:
- 15,145
- 6,922
- 12,297
- 5,562
no im convincing you
because you are the one reporting me for making bad matches even though this has been something i have been working on and trying to improve on
reporting me for the one thing that i have been trying to improve on is straight up cruel
Last edited:
- 12,297
- 5,562
i literally replied to chariot about this
wdym "i can't do anything?"
what you can do is admit that you were wrong about this
see now you're just going to stay quiet and not reply to this message
Last edited:
Baken384
He/Him- 3,610
- 3,754
Dude, quit being so obnoxious and acting like a victim that you don't know you were making "Spite" Matches. In the thread, you made the most obvious Spite Match with Diavolo vs Hit
Once it gained interactions due to how dumb it is, you proceed to change it with another spite match, you changed the match how many times already
"Calm down im cooking something special." Yeah bro, you know you were posting rat matches from the start
- 12,297
- 5,562
yeah i realized how bad the match was and tried changing the matches in hopes that they were NOT stomps
but they still ended up being stomps as chariot explained in the thread
you calling me obnoxious even though you're the one trying to report me for something that i have been trying to improve on
i am not trying to make stomp matches on purpose wtf dude???
Baken384
He/Him- 3,610
- 3,754
Your action with Hit vs Diavolo says otherwise Mr “everyone calm down im cooking something special then proceeds to make spite matches after farming interaction”
- 12,297
- 5,562
what???
I mean yeah i said that because i thought the hit vs diavolo match was a good match but i realized how stupid it was because of your messages in the thread.
And then i tried making more Jojo matches but Chariot explains how they are stomps every single time but i didn't know they were stomps so i stopped making jojo matches
before this happened, i have been making matches that were not stomps at all and they were actually good match-ups.
- 15,145
- 6,922
Ah yes, somehow, Diavolo, a Tier 8 character who doesn't have any durability negation hax, is a good fight for Hit, who is several infinities above him in both AP and Dura.
How dumb do you think we are?
- 12,297
- 5,562
i thought making the match was okay because it is thematic and thought diavolo had time erasure abilities and hax as a wincon, i have been been seeing so much media and debates around the fight so i thought why not give it a try
i literally changed the fight because people were talking about how much of a stomp it is
- 15,145
- 6,922
Literally seeing the profile tells you that's not that great of an ability against characters absurdly stronger than him.
Again, do you think we're this dumb, or are you completely incapable of comprehending what's a stomp?
Last edited:
- 167,703
- 76,302
- Thread starter
- #28,468
Just a note that I agree with Agnaa about that Wankbreaker should not be punished, and with bambu about that a standard warning should be sufficient for Tdjwo. Thank you for helping out. 
- 1,333
- 461
Sorry I have to jump in...even if you think that, if you see the profiles you would see differently. Or you could look around and ask people who scale JoJo to get an insight of Diavolo just in case.
But still Hit outscales Diavolo in every way and I am surprised you thought this was a good match?
At least when I started making MUs I learned from stop making stomp matches.
- 12,297
- 5,562
- 15,145
- 6,922
"Low Hax" how is Time Erase a hax
- 12,297
- 5,562
Ant please i have to say something or else everyone is going to think i make stomp matches on purpose even though that is not trueRegarding the possible thread ban issue, please stop spamming posts here, so our staff members can get sufficient time to evaluate.
i dont want anyone thinking this
- 12,297
- 5,562
I meant high hax vs high ap"Low Hax" how is Time Erase a hax
my bad
- 15,145
- 6,922
Nobody is saying you do on purpose.
Just that you're incapable of avoid doing stomps (even if not intentionally), so that you should be temporarily banned in order for you to think more about it and actually learn.
- 12,297
- 5,562
look
i have improved in not making matches that are stomps and have made so many matches in a row which were not stomps
it was just yesterday that the 'make matches that are not stomps' streak ended
yesterday was just a bad day of me making bad matches
Agnaa
VS Battles
Super Moderator
Administrator
Calculation Group
Translation Helper
Human Resources
Gold Supporter
- 15,536
- 13,770
@Mahek_The_Assassin_Silent_Killer That question is better suited for a Q&A thread, due to there not really being an active rule violation that ought be stopped.
Mahek_The_Assassin_Silent_Killer
Any/All- 475
- 257
Oh OK thanks for the info
- 4,603
- 6,520
I've been asked to comment here regarding the issue with Robo432343.
Looking at Robo's history broadly, as well as the previous time Robo was reported for similar issues, I would prefer to opt for a strict warning before a thread ban or similar restriction on creating versus threads.
As far as I can tell, the last time this issue was brought up on the RVRT, it was ultimately dropped by the original reporter after a short digression and did not result in any action. Robo does have two warnings on the Warning Tracker - one for making a CRT with a misleading title, and one for making a derailing post on the RVRT - the former being about 1 year ago and the latter about 5 months ago. Neither of these are particularly severe offenses, both were quite some time ago, and importantly, neither are particularly relevant to the issue at hand. So, if my research is correct, I believe Robo has never been warned about this issue or anything closely related.
It is true that these stomp threads appear to reoccur, but looking at Robo's history, including several of the threads they linked themselves, I don't really think this is intentional or malicious. For the notable number of poorly considered matches they have posted, there's also more than enough perfectly ordinary or thoroughly debated matches as well. Perhaps I'm misguided by a perspective from the outside looking in, but it just looks to me like Robo just posts a lot of matches in general and often doesn't properly research the characters in advance to determine if it's an appropriate matchup.
This has gone on for some time, and as of the recent report, it has clearly reached the point of being bothersome to some users. But for someone who is doing - in the grand scheme of things - a not particularly severe offense, one for which improvements could easily be made, there is limited evidence regarding malicious intent, and for which they have never been warned for before, I think enacting a punishment in this case would be both heavy-handed and not really conducive to Robo improving in this area in the future. I would opt for an instructional warning, with guidelines on interpreting character profiles and identifying fair matchups, rather than a punishment at this stage. If issues were to continue past this point, I would reconsider my stance.
Looking at Robo's history broadly, as well as the previous time Robo was reported for similar issues, I would prefer to opt for a strict warning before a thread ban or similar restriction on creating versus threads.
As far as I can tell, the last time this issue was brought up on the RVRT, it was ultimately dropped by the original reporter after a short digression and did not result in any action. Robo does have two warnings on the Warning Tracker - one for making a CRT with a misleading title, and one for making a derailing post on the RVRT - the former being about 1 year ago and the latter about 5 months ago. Neither of these are particularly severe offenses, both were quite some time ago, and importantly, neither are particularly relevant to the issue at hand. So, if my research is correct, I believe Robo has never been warned about this issue or anything closely related.
It is true that these stomp threads appear to reoccur, but looking at Robo's history, including several of the threads they linked themselves, I don't really think this is intentional or malicious. For the notable number of poorly considered matches they have posted, there's also more than enough perfectly ordinary or thoroughly debated matches as well. Perhaps I'm misguided by a perspective from the outside looking in, but it just looks to me like Robo just posts a lot of matches in general and often doesn't properly research the characters in advance to determine if it's an appropriate matchup.
This has gone on for some time, and as of the recent report, it has clearly reached the point of being bothersome to some users. But for someone who is doing - in the grand scheme of things - a not particularly severe offense, one for which improvements could easily be made, there is limited evidence regarding malicious intent, and for which they have never been warned for before, I think enacting a punishment in this case would be both heavy-handed and not really conducive to Robo improving in this area in the future. I would opt for an instructional warning, with guidelines on interpreting character profiles and identifying fair matchups, rather than a punishment at this stage. If issues were to continue past this point, I would reconsider my stance.
Similar threads
