• 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)

The votes being admin or not admin doesn't change the fact they're still votes that evaluate the thread. Admins don't have more points in a voting criteria for CRTs, they have more rights to evaluate other topics like Site wide revisions and other things but their votes count as much as a thread moderator in a normal CRT.

Also I did comment, I specified that concept hax is fine to add, but the info hax isn't, and if you're talking about the following posts, that was only about concept hax and nothing to do with info hax with spaceman's concerns on what type of concept star seeds would classify as. So no your thread wasn't "in limbo" as you had enough support to add the changes for concept hax.

You didn't get the previous staff to evaluate in your thread such as Planck, Lephyr or Maverick, and with a vote difference not that major, at the very best, the ability would've only been a possibly "info manipulation", not a full on addition to the verse.
 
We count all evaluating staff votes for CRTs, not only admins.

Going back through the thread, Reiner04, LordGriffin1000, and DarkDragonMedeus agreed, while Theglassman12 and ActuallySpaceMan42 disagreed.

This is not enough of a consensus to apply abilities whole.

Still, our rules aren't clear about this, and the closest thing to a protest of this was quite vague and didn't stand strong. It could've just been read as a correction of Unanimous' factual error.

I don't think this deserves any kind of greater punishment. Just an instruction that an ability should not be fully added if the staff votes on it are 3-2, and a reversal of the ability addition.

The thread's still open so discussion of it should continue there. Either get more votes to create a notable difference, or simply add it as possibly.
 
I know I'm not really involved in this report, but I decided to re-read the discussion rules on the VSbattles wiki page and it is true that there is not a single statement in the Content Revision Approval section that states anything about how a mix of disagreements and agreements is handled. I know that typically, most users and staff understand that it's usually the difference between votes, but in the rules, it only states that:

2 staff are required for standard threads, 1 for minor ones, a minimum for 3 for big verses, more scrutiny and at least 1 admin for T2+, T1+ needs even more members (unspecified) and that if there is a disagreement between staff members, more staff members should be pinged for a fair decision. In addition, it does state that while all staff have equal rights, admins are considered more valuable (idk how this works).

Finally, there is actually nothing that directly states a 3-2 thread CANNOT be applied. It's just something that most people accept, but I tried to search around the handling disagreements section for this and I could not find it. Perhaps I'm stupid and I'm missing something, in which case you can just delete this comment, but it is true that if you were to solely read the discussion rules for creating a CRT, there isn't something that specifically states that a thread cannot be applied with a differences of 3-2 or equivalent, it's just subtly implied, which imo isn't good enough

vsbattles.fandom.com

Discussion Rules

VS Battles Wiki is a site where the members attempt to index the statistics of characters across different fictional franchises. These efforts lead to much discussion about certain feats, statements and calculations regarding their validity, reliability, etc. However, certain topics keep popping...
vsbattles.fandom.com vsbattles.fandom.com

it's making me wonder if it's something that should be made more clear.
(This comment is only addressing the 3-2 thing, not anything else in the report)
 
Theglassman12 said:
Also I did comment, I specified that concept hax is fine to add, but the info hax isn't, and if you're talking about the following posts, that was only about concept hax and nothing to do with info hax with spaceman's concerns on what type of concept star seeds would classify as. So no your thread wasn't "in limbo" as you had enough support to add the changes for concept hax.
Click to expand...
This is not accurate.

1. You didn't say to hold off. You said this:

"The conceptual stuff is fine to add, the information stuff is not conclusive given my disagreement."

Even if you wanted to interpret this as "don't add information hax"

2. When you commented this, it was 3 vs 1. So by Derek's interpretation, it was perfectly fine to add Information and you had no right to tell me hold off on adding information. So yes, you were keeping the thread in limbo. And mind you, I did listen and kept the thread open for days.
 
Agnaa said:
We count all evaluating staff votes for CRTs, not only admins.

Going back through the thread, Reiner04, LordGriffin1000, and DarkDragonMedeus agreed, while Theglassman12 and ActuallySpaceMan42 disagreed.

This is not enough of a consensus to apply abilities whole.

Still, our rules aren't clear about this, and the closest thing to a protest of this was quite vague and didn't stand strong. It could've just been read as a correction of Unanimous' factual error.

I don't think this deserves any kind of greater punishment. Just an instruction that an ability should not be fully added if the staff votes on it are 3-2, and a reversal of the ability addition.

The thread's still open so discussion of it should continue there. Either get more votes to create a notable difference, or simply add it as possibly.
Click to expand...
Okay. This is fair. I will get more votes.
 
And literally the post right after that is SpaceMan commenting and saying he doesn't see info type 2. Are we just going to ignore another staff member's input on this thread or what?
 
DragonZeroNova said:
This comment is only addressing the 3-2 thing and it's making me wonder if it's something that should be made more clear.
Click to expand...
It can't be. There are too many situations for us to enumerate the rules for all of them. We cannot list every possible combination of staff votes, including things like people "leaning" towards one side or the other, or situations with multiple possible votes, and determining the fallthrough for them.

We typically rely on higher authorities (experienced admins & bureaus) to determine this sort of thing.

I wrote some draft language for this a few weeks back, but we forgot to add it to the Discussion Rules:
If staff don't unanimously agree on a thread's validity, all parties involved should work in good faith towards a respectable conclusion, based on a variety of factors such as the vote difference, age of the thread, and likelihood of other staff coming along to evaluate it, coming to a compromise or seeking more input if necessary.
Click to expand...
 
I'm not talking about time frame, I'm talking about the following post, stop twisting my words into saying this was me claiming it was the next minute when it was about who commented on the thread after my post.
 
It can't be. There are too many situations for us to enumerate the rules for all of them. We cannot list every possible combination of staff votes, including things like people "leaning" towards one side or the other, or situations with multiple possible votes, and determining the fallthrough for them.
Click to expand...
I'm gonna be frank, I think you're overblowing how many situations would need to be sorted out for threads like this. We can discuss what is needed for certain voting would be considered decisive or not, especially when it comes to controversial abilities or stats being added or not.

I've already tagged the staff members in the thread so we can move on from this.
 
Agnaa said:
It can't be. There are too many situations for us to enumerate the rules for all of them. We cannot list every possible combination of staff votes, including things like people "leaning" towards one side or the other, or situations with multiple possible votes, and determining the fallthrough for them.

We typically rely on higher authorities (experienced admins & bureaus) to determine this sort of thing.

I wrote some draft language for this a few weeks back, but we forgot to add it to the Discussion Rules:
Click to expand...
That would help make things more clear, as the current iteration does not even mention voting difference at all. I think that should probably be added lol. Thanks for addressing my concern.
 
I’m not entirely sure if this is the right place to report it, but I’d like to report that this thread was closed fraudulently, without even providing a valid reasoning.

Supposedly the versus is a stomp, but in the thread itself there was literally an ongoing debate about why it isn’t — so I don’t understand the abrupt decision to close it out of nowhere without even an explanation, just because a single user asked for it.

vsbattles.com

Akuto Sai Vs. Lucifer Morningstar (DKD vs DC Comics)

A battle between two demon kings who, unsatisfied with what fate had in store for them, chose to go beyond: One by destroying the gods' system, the other by escaping his father's grand plan. Who’s the true strongest Demon? - - - Akuto Sai (The Afterlife) vs Lucifer Morningstar - - - Both...
vsbattles.com vsbattles.com
 
ExcelsisBerny said:
I’m not entirely sure if this is the right place to report it, but I’d like to report that this thread was closed fraudulently, without even providing a valid reasoning.

Supposedly the versus is a stomp, but in the thread itself there was literally an ongoing debate about why it isn’t — so I don’t understand the abrupt decision to close it out of nowhere without even an explanation, just because a single user asked for it.

vsbattles.com

Akuto Sai Vs. Lucifer Morningstar (DKD vs DC Comics)

A battle between two demon kings who, unsatisfied with what fate had in store for them, chose to go beyond: One by destroying the gods' system, the other by escaping his father's grand plan. Who’s the true strongest Demon? - - - Akuto Sai (The Afterlife) vs Lucifer Morningstar - - - Both...
vsbattles.com vsbattles.com
Click to expand...

Destroy the DKD society….. Bern!!!!!!

But yes, I feel like the closure was too hasty.
 
ExcelsisBerny said:
I’m not entirely sure if this is the right place to report it, but I’d like to report that this thread was closed fraudulently, without even providing a valid reasoning.

Supposedly the versus is a stomp, but in the thread itself there was literally an ongoing debate about why it isn’t — so I don’t understand the abrupt decision to close it out of nowhere without even an explanation, just because a single user asked for it.

vsbattles.com

Akuto Sai Vs. Lucifer Morningstar (DKD vs DC Comics)

A battle between two demon kings who, unsatisfied with what fate had in store for them, chose to go beyond: One by destroying the gods' system, the other by escaping his father's grand plan. Who’s the true strongest Demon? - - - Akuto Sai (The Afterlife) vs Lucifer Morningstar - - - Both...
vsbattles.com vsbattles.com
Click to expand...
It wasn't a debate, I already said that it's a stomp due to Akuto being a High 1-A+ with Lucifer being unable to do anything. So, I asked for it to be closed in the All Purpose Request Thread. Hope this clears it up.
 
StorytellingDemonKing said:
He didn't. Akuto being a smurf is on the profile, and I explained why his stance doesn't work as well.
Click to expand...

This was her counter:

The only High 1-A+ attribute listed on his profile is his immortality. He’s definitely not winning the fight just with that — and Lucifer has ways to put him down. This isn’t a stomp.
Click to expand...

You didn’t provide a response to that
 
ExcelsisBerny said:
You literally just answered an irrelevant stuff that I addressed what.
Click to expand...
No, I answered, why his Immortality and smurf hax make it impossible for Lucifer to do anything. It's that simple.
Wankbreaker said:
This was her counter:



You didn’t provide a response to that
Click to expand...
Yeah, the thread was closed at that message. And again, his reliant Immortality also lists direct intervention from TLOI, a High 1-A+ character.
 
After discussion among Administrators, and re-evaluation of the evidence, we've decided to reduce @Chaotic_Existentialist and @Theoretical_Toxic19's bans from permanent, to two years from the day their initial ban was imposed (so, ending on 23rd July 2026). On top of that, we've reduced their ban reasons to just:
Toxicity and harassment, both on and off-site.
Click to expand...
Their actions off-site were found to be less extreme and pertinent than initially thought, and certain claims were found to be unsupported.
 
ExcelsisBerny said:
I’m not entirely sure if this is the right place to report it, but I’d like to report that this thread was closed fraudulently, without even providing a valid reasoning.

Supposedly the versus is a stomp, but in the thread itself there was literally an ongoing debate about why it isn’t — so I don’t understand the abrupt decision to close it out of nowhere without even an explanation, just because a single user asked for it.

vsbattles.com

Akuto Sai Vs. Lucifer Morningstar (DKD vs DC Comics)

A battle between two demon kings who, unsatisfied with what fate had in store for them, chose to go beyond: One by destroying the gods' system, the other by escaping his father's grand plan. Who’s the true strongest Demon? - - - Akuto Sai (The Afterlife) vs Lucifer Morningstar - - - Both...
vsbattles.com vsbattles.com
Click to expand...
To avoid letting this get buried...
  • The mod in question here is @Reiner04
  • You can't report staff members here, such a report would need to be taken up with HR privately (I can help you with that if you want)
  • ...but, in my opinion, this is an insanely minor thing to report on. Reiner probably should've talked about it but also like. Sometimes decisions just need making and sometimes people make the wrong one. I'm not even going to say whether it was or was not the wrong one here, but this is far from "fraudulent".
If you want to take this up formally with HR, you're free to, I'm not one of 'em so my opinion is just my own.
 
Mr. Bambu said:
To avoid letting this get buried...
  • The mod in question here is @Reiner04
  • You can't report staff members here, such a report would need to be taken up with HR privately (I can help you with that if you want)
  • ...but, in my opinion, this is an insanely minor thing to report on. Reiner probably should've talked about it but also like. Sometimes decisions just need making and sometimes people make the wrong one. I'm not even going to say whether it was or was not the wrong one here, but this is far from "fraudulent".
If you want to take this up formally with HR, you're free to, I'm not one of 'em so my opinion is just my own.
Click to expand...
I'd like to mention, though, that I did post it on All Purpose Request Thread, and so I wouldn't like if the of the blame went to him, since he was just doing what I requested.🙏
 
Mr. Bambu said:
  • ...but, in my opinion, this is an insanely minor thing to report on. Reiner probably should've talked about it but also like. Sometimes decisions just need making and sometimes people make the wrong one. I'm not even going to say whether it was or was not the wrong one here, but this is far from "fraudulent".
Click to expand...

I’m not interested in getting the mod who closed the thread in trouble, nor in reporting anyone specifically.

I just want the thread to be reopened if possible, since it was closed right in the middle of an ongoing debate.
 
In the future, you'd probably want to handle that via the All-Purpose Requests Thread; this one is, I'm afraid, strictly for getting people into trouble for their troublesome ways.

I'll open the thread for now.
 
Now I don't know if this has been here before (if it has, I apologize) but I'd like to report the user @Adam1396 for constant and blatant toxicity towards literally anyone who either disagrees with them or doesn't think that Bleach solos fiction such as here:

vsbattles.com

BAN-KAI! Bleach General Discussion

Just to play Devil's Advocate; is there anything that indicates that souls are normally invisible to people in Naruto? I don't think assuming default invisibility for souls or spiritual things makes sense for fictional settings where it should really be a case-by-case sort of thing. I don’t...
vsbattles.com vsbattles.com

Now this is just one instance of it, you can find countless others including in the Vegeta vs Ichibei matchup (and if requested I will be happy to provide more) but it's one of the most severe ones, outright implying that the user @Ghostimuscrime is [the R word] which is extremely ableist not to mention toxic.
 
Report against @MeiouHades for their toxic behavior towards other people and unwanted comments, he's been a very bad person with other people lately, even trying to insult him several times against nova

It's like talking to a wall
Click to expand...

And if it weren't for the sake of the rules, it would be very toxic.

You don't realize how lucky you are that the Wiki rules prevent people from being downright toxic.
Click to expand...

Also speaking various evil words about a person

I hope this finally breaks his pointless and unearned confidence.
Click to expand...

And the insults continue below

See this? This is what irks me. Such confidence only looks good on someone who knows their shit. With you, it makes you look like a more fraudulent version of Mr Satan
Click to expand...
 
Yeah, I don't even need to defend myself much here. The user has not only been going on a continuous spree of spamming threads, they've also been told by everyone (not just me) to stop doing this and to inform themselves of how the site works first.

Despite all that, they remain entirely unreceptive to anyone telling them to stop or to at least reconsider before posting threads out of nowhere, instead redirecting and deflecting any and all criticism with nonsensical, non-sequitur comments that come off as incredibly boastful, dismissive and outright arrogant at times. So yeah, not just me but most supporters are annoyed with their unwillingness to learn and listen. For instance, they didn't know that you don't need to redo a match to remove another when profiles get updates, they didn't know how lifting strength works, they didn't know what discussion rules are and so much more. Now this isn't much of an issue since most new users don't know it, but unlike them, most would either learn on their own, listen when others tell them something or would simply ask others, all of which they've not only not done but outright dismissed.

So yes, those were my remarks regarding this situation. Admittedly, I have been more vocal than other users who are annoyed by them, and I'll admit that some of my comments can be a bit mean especially toward a new user. However, it must be acknowledged that this comes AFTER everything above, after I and everyone have tried to be polite and understanding with them and after our attempt to guide them, but I only have finite patience and even then I don't think any of those comments are report worthy despite being tongue in cheek for sure. There have been other new users besides them and you'll notice that no one (including I) has had a problem with them. As such, those remarks shouldn't be taken as me harboring some hostility toward them but simply the result of what happens when someone constantly dismisses your attempt to genuinely correct them or guide them in the most dismissive, almost mockingly disrespectful manner.

That's all I'll say really, the rest is up to the staff (oh and also please do look at my report earlier, that is much more severe than this "report")

(Also, look at this lol. Is it really so unreasonable and report worthy that most users would be annoyed by such a person?)
 
Last edited:
 
Let me see if I have this right.

MeiouHades said:
Now I don't know if this has been here before (if it has, I apologize) but I'd like to report the user @Adam1396 for constant and blatant toxicity towards literally anyone who either disagrees with them or doesn't think that Bleach solos fiction such as here:

vsbattles.com

BAN-KAI! Bleach General Discussion

Just to play Devil's Advocate; is there anything that indicates that souls are normally invisible to people in Naruto? I don't think assuming default invisibility for souls or spiritual things makes sense for fictional settings where it should really be a case-by-case sort of thing. I don’t...
vsbattles.com vsbattles.com

Now this is just one instance of it, you can find countless others including in the Vegeta vs Ichibei matchup (and if requested I will be happy to provide more) but it's one of the most severe ones, outright implying that the user @Ghostimuscrime is [the R word] which is extremely ableist not to mention toxic.
Click to expand...
This report believes Adam1396 is over-toxic, with weird comments like this and outright unacceptable comments like this.

LuffyRuffy46307 said:
Report against @MeiouHades for their toxic behavior towards other people and unwanted comments, he's been a very bad person with other people lately, even trying to insult him several times against nova



And if it weren't for the sake of the rules, it would be very toxic.



Also speaking various evil words about a person



And the insults continue below
Click to expand...
...Then we have you, reporting Meiou, for toxicity of his own. The quoted comments aren't as bad, but using your restraint from heavier insults as an insult itself does suck. Admittedly, frustration in some of those scenarios seems reasonable, and may paint a picture of a wider pattern of issues, of which Meiou is a smaller part. Poor behavior bouncing off of what I read as deliberate goading for a reaction is mitigated in terms of how severe we ought to react. The report also exaggerates a bit, calling Meiou's words "evil", which is weird.

MeiouHades said:
Yeah, I don't even need to defend myself much here. The user has not only been going on a continuous spree of spamming threads, they've also been told by everyone (not just me) to stop doing this and to inform themselves of how the site works first.

Despite all that, they remain entirely unreceptive to anyone telling them to stop or to at least reconsider before posting threads out of nowhere, instead redirecting and deflecting any and all criticism with nonsensical, non-sequitur comments that come off as incredibly boastful, dismissive and outright arrogant at times. So yeah, not just me but most supporters are annoyed with their unwillingness to learn and listen. For instance, they didn't know that you don't need to redo a match to remove another when profiles get updates, they didn't know how lifting strength works, they didn't know what discussion rules are and so much more. Now this isn't much of an issue since most new users don't know it, but unlike them, most would either learn on their own, listen when others tell them something or would simply ask others, all of which they've not only not done but outright dismissed.

So yes, those were my remarks regarding this situation. Admittedly, I have been more vocal than other users who are annoyed by them, and I'll admit that some of my comments can be a bit mean especially toward a new user. However, it must be acknowledged that this comes AFTER everything above, after I and everyone have tried to be polite and understanding with them and after our attempt to guide them, but I only have finite patience and even then I don't think any of those comments are report worthy despite being tongue in cheek for sure. There have been other new users besides them and you'll notice that no one (including I) has had a problem with them.

That's all I'll say really, the rest is up to the staff (oh and also please do look at my report earlier, that is much more severe than this "report")

(Also, look at this lol. Is it really so unreasonable and report worthy that most users would be annoyed by such a person?)
Click to expand...
...and this seems to more or less complete painting that picture.

My conclusions, for now, is that @Adam1396 deserves a very strict warning, if not a very brief ban; use of words like that on-site have been met with harsher reprisals before. Bypassing the slur filter enough to make it clear what the word was does not help. It's inexcusable shit.

I believe @MeiouHades should not receive a formal warning to the tracker, but an informal advisory to not add any insults when someone is stirring the pot. It serves no good. I would not like to see this becoming a trend.
 
Mr. Bambu said:
My conclusions, for now, is that @Adam1396 deserves a very strict warning, if not a very brief ban; use of words like that on-site have been met with harsher reprisals before. Bypassing the slur filter enough to make it clear what the word was does not help. It's inexcusable shit.
Click to expand...
Thank you for this.
Mr. Bambu said:
I believe @MeiouHades should not receive a formal warning to the tracker, but an informal advisory to not add any insults when someone is stirring the pot. It serves no good. I would not like to see this becoming a trend.
Click to expand...
I understand, and after the mess that is the Asta vs Goku thread right now I've learned that the best thing I can do for myself is simply refuse to engage with the user anymore.
 
Also I'd like to report this weird comment (which isn't so much weird as it is outright hostile IMO). I have no idea how these go unreported.

vsbattles.com

Hazbin Hotel Discussion Thread

hey guys where do u all personally scale the verse? Hazbin Hotel Verse Level
vsbattles.com vsbattles.com

Now the reason this is important is because the user @Alexander has been overtly hostile to Dragon Ball and its fans many times across multiple threads (and for that reason he was also thread banned from the Daima thread a while ago, but that doesn't seem to have changed him). If needed I can provide more instances as well.
 
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