Your terms are more than acceptable.
In theory, this does look nasty. But we do have Offsite rules, none of the following are quite listed here. He may be a YouTube troll, and it's probably worth flagging YT posts like that. But it doesn't look like the type of thing to get banned from this platform. And Bambu also is making good points.Bro, almost all of the banter in the Pokémon vs Digimon comment section literally comes from you.
There are 118 comments made in the last 2 years by just you alone in that video lol
Besides that, here are some of the worst comments I've managed to find. I'll tell by the start that these ain't doxxing or stuff like that, as these are all made in public, mind you.
And youself have admitted in one of these that you've been spamming its comment section since 2019.
As I mentioned on a different thread, if someone mentioned the OTL translation for the Chloe's Time Stop mechanics, things would turn out differently. I later asked a different question that I do not think was answered yet.
your suggestion to send digimon fans to the camps was a week ago lmao
Can you wait a bit more in the thread? I had exams and a bit of more work to do. Will get back to it asap.
...Is that not the past?
I dunno man, can I murder someone and then dismiss it because "it's in the past"?
False equivalence. I'm not even dismissing it on the basis of it being in the past.
crazy analogy.
I think that is perfectly reasonable.
Four staff members agreed (considering you fully agreed with Bambu here) to give Sean a final warning to improve his behavior and attitude towards other franchises. If he continues after this, he will be permanently banned.Staff members:
So what should we do regarding the current cases here?
Not only shields but also all mana is passive as shown when Gwen used here mana, everytime, it should passive.
They accept as Higher-Dimensional, so it should be at least 4-D
You should transfer this to Magic
The clip shown they in intangible, also when they use their possession ability, they will be in the Intangible form
This is Non-Physical Interaction (Intangibility [Immaterial]) not Phasing
Isn't you need CRT?
Wrong thread?
He is trying to explain what was "wrongfully removed" by Firestorm, due to him going on a cleanup spree after Hellformer and him implimented stuff that was never accepted in the first place should remain on the profiles/pages.
I think you should discuss regarding this with @Firestorm808 on his wall or PM. RVT is regarding reports for rule violation and this sounds like misunderstanding at best.
No, he remove some things get accepted, since when did Hellformer add things that weren't accepted?
A strict warning, but not resulting in that people in our community who dislike Sean can get him permanently banned for almost any small issue afterwards.
@Antvasima @DarkDragonMedeus @Reiner04
Okay. That is good then.@Antvasima @DarkDragonMedeus @Reiner04
The matter will be resolved in another CRT to clarify the previous determinations on the proposed abilities.
Ben 10: Mana Information Page Clean-up
At the moment, the page lists the following abilities: Conceptual Manipulation & Dimensional Manipulation: Type 2 [4-D] - Any sapient species can potentially learn to manipulate mana, an essence for every being in the universe, and it is higher-dimensional flow. It is tied directly to a...vsbattles.com
@Mr. Bambu @AgnaaA strict warning, but not resulting in that people in our community who dislike Sean can get him permanently banned for almost any small issue afterwards.
Stop blaming me when I didn't do any such things, especially in the context which you're referring to i.e. the mana page.
@Planck69 say agree with higher via Dennis' world (meaning he disagree with 1-A)
Also he agreed with The event is an anti-feat for 1-A (Option 1 before to be removed)
So it should be removed 1-A as it didn't get enough votes
How is that I get reported everytime I make a Gravity Falls cosmology CRT because of people not understanding what happened?
Not enough you need 3 agree without any disagree, to add it
...no? From where did you get that lmfao
Plancks saying he agrees with 1-B does not necessarily means he disagrees with 1-A. Just saying. He can just be more confident with 1-B.
In that case its the burden of OP to clarify from the staff before applying the changes and closing the thread.
Says who?
What clarification is needed? He listed them based on what they said. OP clearly listed @Qawsedf234 as disagreeing with 1-A since he specifically stated his disagreement. OP is only obligated to list votes according to what the staff says. I don’t see why he would add Plancks in disagreement with 1-A when he never said he disagreed.
Which is why I said that he should clarify it for once to avoid reports. So that you have verbatim comments to back up your vote for agree/disagree. Just to be on a safer side.
