Rule Violation Reports (New forum)

[Antvasima]

Yeah, that's worthy of at least a retort. Their last warning on the Tracker itself was from November 2024, so while it's possible they've had intermittent warnings, they were never logged: for now, I'd prefer to just extend a warning to not devolve into old habits.

Thank you for helping out.

 

[Kenshiaaar]

@Kenshiaax

If you get a new wiki account, and then tell us about it here, I will update your forum account username to the same one that you use there instead.

I created a new account Username : Kenshiaaar

 

[FinePoint]

Yeah, that's worthy of at least a retort. Their last warning on the Tracker itself was from November 2024, so while it's possible they've had intermittent warnings, they were never logged: for now, I'd prefer to just extend a warning to not devolve into old habits.

I concur.

 

[Kenshiaaar]

I created a new account Username : Kenshiaaar

I wait

 

[Antvasima]

I created a new account Username : Kenshiaaar

I wait

Please link to your wiki account here.

 

[FinePoint]

In my opinion, I think the reduction to the original 3 month time is fine. My impression is that he wants to help and that foolishly led him astray of our rules, but we don't need to bar him from helping for so long as a result. I approve of the appeal.

@Antvasima
So Bambu and I are fine with the appeal, what about you?

It doesn't seem like other people want to get involved.

 

[Antvasima]

I do not know. Can somebody explain what reasons they were banned for exactly, and what their current arguments for getting their ban time reduced are, please?

 

[Thermor]

I do not know. Can somebody explain what reasons they were banned for exactly, and what their current arguments for getting their ban time reduced are, please?

If my information is correct, Astral is banned for intentionaly falsely leading translations which has been colectively agreed by most staff members.

This report is regarding @Astral_Trinity439, who is already banned for violating a kind of translation ban due to being an unreliable translator and using MTL.

Considering the right place for following quote, I will post this message here:


Also the fact that he invalidated the reliable fan translation just so he could use his own MTL based translations for the upgrades:


Which seems to be supported by other actions of his that has been pointed out here by @CodeCCLL
Post in thread 'tensura translation issue' https://vsbattles.com/threads/tensura-translation-issue.178477/post-7044995

I view this situation not as a mere mistranslation issue that his translations had (for which he is banned), but rather as dishonest manipulation of the translations to fit a particular agenda. So I think we need to look at this situation seriously and further action needs to be taken.

 

[Thermor]

I am digging into this issue, it seems to be different from this thread where the same thing is being questioned but that one referring to the WN and this one to the LN, it seems that both tiers 1 may be based simply on mistranslations/manipulations of MTL edited scans (more so in the case of the Web Novel) and adding Reiner's main report, I can't say what would be the right thing to do yet until I finish my research.

Also here.

 

[PHANtomFELdway]

I do not know. Can somebody explain what reasons they were banned for exactly, and what their current arguments for getting their ban time reduced are, please?

The first 3 months was cause he used mtl after being warned not to.


And the second one. He was accused of falsely leading translations. (Like actually changing words that weren’t there to use them for upgrades)


His counter is that he didn’t do anything like that. He was using mtl and mtl translates it like that so he just used that one.meaning he didn’t intentionally mislead upgrades at all.

 

[Dark_Soul20189]

I do not know. Can somebody explain what reasons they were banned for exactly, and what their current arguments for getting their ban time reduced are, please?

I was hoping to leave this to a staff, but since the comment above me is extremely misleading this is kinda forced.

Astral was banned first due to using mtl (3 months), and then another 3 months due to the claim that he intentionally added/changed the text that would suit his agenda when he translated stuff using mtl to get the preferred result.

Astral is appealing the additional 3 months

In Astral's appeal, he managed to "prove" (using it like this to make it obvious I am not showing if I agree or not) that he didn't alter the text, but it was an actual alternative from his source. This was accepted by Bambu and Finepoint

(Conclusion, the 2 staff that has judged his appeal think it should be reverted from 6 months to 3 months)

I can't find the original 3 months from Agnaa's report...

Edit - Trying to make the grammar better as well as improve the summary.

 

[Mr. Bambu]

Don't clog the board, please.

The first 3 months was cause he used mtl after being warned not to.


And the second one. He was accused of falsely leading translations. (Like actually changing words that weren’t there to use them for upgrades)


His counter is that he didn’t do anything like that. He was using mtl and mtl translates it like that so he just used that one.meaning he didn’t intentionally mislead upgrades at all.

This is broadly correct. The ban was extended following discussion regarding the potentially leading nature of some of the mistranslations. Astral posits that it wasn't his fault and MTL just does translate those things that way, which (from my objectively ignorant perspective) seems fair to me.

 

[Antvasima]

@Kenshiaax

If you get a new wiki account, and then tell us about it here, I will update your forum account username to the same one that you use there instead.

@Kenshiaaar

I have handled it now.

 

[Antvasima]

Don't clog the board, please.


This is broadly correct. The ban was extended following discussion regarding the potentially leading nature of some of the mistranslations. Astral posits that it wasn't his fault and MTL just does translate those things that way, which (from my objectively ignorant perspective) seems fair to me.

Okay. I am fine with your conclusions here then.

 

[FinePoint]

Okay. I am fine with your conclusions here then.

So do you think the three of us in agreement is enough to go ahead and reduce it?

No other staff have responded since the appeal over a week (9 days) ago.

 

[Antvasima]

I do not know. Were specific other staff members involved in banning process for this case, and if so, which ones?

@Agnaa

What do you think?

 

[Thermor]

I do not know. Were specific other staff members involved in banning process for this case, and if so, which ones?

@Agnaa

What do you think?

Wouldn't it be wise if we also tag the two staff members that extend Astral's ban for 3 months? Reiner and Dereck could provide vital points that change the current grounds.

 

[FinePoint]

Wouldn't it be wise if we also tag the two staff members that extend Astral's ban for 3 months? Reiner and Dereck could provide vital points that change the current grounds.

@Reiner04 @Dereck03

 

[Antvasima]

Wouldn't it be wise if we also tag the two staff members that extend Astral's ban for 3 months? Reiner and Dereck could provide vital points that change the current grounds.

Yes. That was my intended point.

 

[Reiner04]

@Reiner04 @Dereck03

My opinion on the matter remains the same as it was before. I don’t think the continuous manipulation of original translations by using alternative suggestions to achieve a higher end interpretation can be dismissed as a mere "translation error".

While one could argue that he added 'to' by altering the MTL cause of confusion, as brought up by our reliable translator on my wall (but its given he forcefully added it), I doubt that’s the case, given the context where Qawsedf was specifically asking for a scan proving the entire timeline was destroyed. It's not something that happened just this once either. He changed 'vast empty nothingness' (as translated by the MTL) to 'vast blank canvas,' which are entirely different things and imply a much highest interpretation of the scan, he didn't even changed it when Code brought this issue up. He also replaced 'brimming/filled with power' with 'embraced with power,' making it seem as if the power contains void, whereas our TL helpers clearly stated that nowhere in the raw does it imply that 'embraced' or 'containing' could be used. So there was no chance of mistake here too. I, personally, do not see these continous attempts to divert translations to meet specific goal as mere issue of mistranslation but I will be fine if other staffs decided to give him second chance.

 

[Antvasima]

I've repeated at this point that I don't want to step in on translation matters because, despite arguments to the contrary, I feel that they are steeped in the context of TL-work and as such I find myself insufficient to evaluate them. Nevertheless, if nobody else will, I shall.

In my opinion, I think the reduction to the original 3 month time is fine. My impression is that he wants to help and that foolishly led him astray of our rules, but we don't need to bar him from helping for so long as a result. I approve of the appeal.

This is broadly correct. The ban was extended following discussion regarding the potentially leading nature of some of the mistranslations. Astral posits that it wasn't his fault and MTL just does translate those things that way, which (from my objectively ignorant perspective) seems fair to me.

Since they seemingly disproved the primary evidence against them (that no MTL actually uses "to") I would support that.

One could argue they were still cherry-picking, but at that point we're just speculating intention. I prefer to assume good faith by default.

My opinion on the matter remains the same as it was before. I don’t think the continuous manipulation of original translations by using alternative suggestions to achieve a higher end interpretation can be dismissed as a mere "translation error".

We still need to solve this issue.

@Agnaa

I think that you mentioned that you are also against reducing the ban length.

 

[Agnaa]

I am not familiar with the circumstances around the extension, so I have no view on whether that extension remains or gets reduced.

 

[Antvasima]

Okay. Thank you for your reply. I likely misunderstood your previous comment then.

 

[FinePoint]

We still need to solve this issue.

So far, it's me, you, and Bambu in agreement with reducing the ban duration.

Reiner is currently the only opposition, but they also said: "I will be fine if other staffs decided to give him second chance."

Regardless, I will try to convince them.

My opinion on the matter remains the same as it was before. I don’t think the continuous manipulation of original translations by using alternative suggestions to achieve a higher end interpretation can be dismissed as a mere "translation error".

It is my understanding there is no actual proof of intentional manipulation. The primary thing brought up prior was that no popular machine translators used the specific words provided, which would imply their arbitrary insertion.

However, Astral proved that these words are accepted as alternative translations on those machine translators, which means it's not impossible they simply thought those alternatives were more fitting for whatever reason.

Intention is very hard to prove, and perhaps this is just because I grew up in the United States, but I believe that the default assumption should be innocence unless there's actual evidence to the contrary. That they frequently gave bad translations via MTL there is undeniable evidence for, and a 3 month ban was already agreed on for this. The extension was explicitly under the suspicion it was done intentionally, which I think there is no such evidence for.

Still, I'm not blind to the fact that personal judgement is sometimes needed when a line is repeatedly walked on, and that sometimes an intuition can be acted on. From that perspective, I have my own personal experiences with Astral's character to weigh in too, if we insist on trying to guess their intentions.

For the last two weeks or so, Astral has been talking to me over Discord (presumably because they're banned on the forum), and in short, asking me a lot of questions about various parts of the tiering system, providing examples, if something qualifies for a certain rating or ability, etc.

They've regularly provided me with additional context when asked, been very polite if my impression was different from theirs, and overall very willing to change their mind if those initial impressions were wrong.

Overall, my impression is that they're passionate about power-scaling as a hobby, and do strive for accuracy over just forcing their own initial interpretation- why else would they be repeatedly asking for clarification from someone they feel is a reliable source?

That said, their initial impressions have historically been a lot higher than mine- which I think is a hint towards what may have led them to think those alternative translations were more appropriate. It occurs to me that never using an alternative suggestion for translations would probably lead to obvious inaccuracies and determination it was indeed MTL.

If I had to guess, they were using the alternative suggestions they thought fit with their idea of accuracy, in an attempt to convey they had more mastery over the language than they actually did, and perhaps to throw off suspicion of straight-up MTL. I do not think it was an attempt to pass any revisions they didn't genuinely think were accurate and/or grief the wiki.

In summary, we can't really prove either way what their intentions were, which to me alone is reason not to punish them for them- but if we were guessing, they have not given me the impression of being someone to try and dishonestly manipulate statistics like that.

 

[Antvasima]

Okay. I suppose that seems reasonable to me as well then. I was neutral previously to reading your reasoning, but I suppose that it likely seems fine.

 

[poyraz]

Okay. I suppose that seems reasonable to me as well then. I was neutral previously to reading your reasoning, but I suppose that it likely seems fine.

dude a guy named Kenshia recently opened a new account just so you know

 

[Antvasima]

If he needs help signing up to our forum, please tell him to create a Fandom account and contact me via my VS Battles Wiki message wall.

 

[DragoZeroNova]

A member by the name of Telomara has edited this page without permission, they go to state that it was accepted in a thread however the thread has not been concluded and does not have the necessary amount of staff votes and is still ongoing.

https://vsbattles.com/threads/wiki-vandalism-reports.163273/ I believe this should go here

 

[SailorRanger64]

Hello, I'm fairly new here but I wanted to report something. This thread was previously used by fans of the series, including myself, but has since been taken over and hijacked by those that oppose the series, completely derailing it. Is this serious enough to report? I think it violates the Site Rules of Staying on Topic.

 

[Mr. Bambu]

Hello, I'm fairly new here but I wanted to report something. This thread was previously used by fans of the series, including myself, but has since been taken over and hijacked by those that oppose the series, completely derailing it. Is this serious enough to report? I think it violates the Site Rules of Staying on Topic.

Looking through it, it is most certainly on topic but is a mite more mean spirited than I would like. Much of the last few pages of the thread is dedicated to ******** on one particular user associated with the verse. I'll post about that and tell them to knock it off.

 

[SailorRanger64]

Didn't think I'd make another report this soon but I figured I'd show this since it was aimed at me. Apologies if this isn't considered serious and takes up space.

 

[Hasty12345]

Didn't think I'd make another report this soon but I figured I'd show this since it was aimed at me. Apologies if this isn't considered serious and takes up space.

Yeah and I stand by it. You cannot possibly think presenting two translations of the same panel as evidence for star seeds embodying or being the source of two ideas that have entirely distinct connotations on the site is acceptable because you can "debate bro" your way out of it with frivolous semantics. People will read that OP and think star seeds do more than what the scan is claiming. Glassman pointing this out to you.

You're reporting me for making an entirely substantiated observation of your character that you yourself pictured with your actions.

 

[Mr. Bambu]

Yeah and I stand by it. You cannot possibly think presenting two translations of the same panel as evidence for star seeds embodying or being the source of two ideas that have entirely distinct connotations on the site is acceptable because you can "debate bro" your way out of it with frivolous semantics. People will read that OP and think star seeds do more than what the scan is claiming. Glassman pointing this out to you.

You're reporting me for making an entirely substantiated observation of your character that you yourself pictured with your actions.

I wouldn't sign off on a warning, but you're able to say "I think you're obviously wrong" without calling someone stupid. Site rules are in favor of politeness, do try to abide by them in the future.

 

[Hasty12345]

I wouldn't sign off on a warning, but you're able to say "I think you're obviously wrong" without calling someone stupid. Site rules are in favor of politeness, do try to abide by them in the future.

I don't believe I called him stupid, I was in disbelief of his willingness to support someone blatantly misrepresenting evidence and couldn't believe he's doing this without being aware of the dishonesty he's supporting. Nonetheless, I will endeavor to be polite in the future.

 

[Mr. Bambu]

I don't believe I called him stupid, I was in disbelief of his willingness to support someone blatantly misrepresenting evidence and couldn't believe he's doing this without being aware of the dishonesty he's supporting. Nonetheless, I will endeavor to be polite in the future.

I was of the impression you were against semantic defenses. You called him stupid, don't do that. If you want to call out shady practices, that's still fine, and indeed even actively good.

 

[Hasty12345]

I was of the impression you were against semantic defenses. You called him stupid, don't do that. If you want to call out shady practices, that's still fine, and indeed even actively good.

Yeah you're right, there's no functional difference in what I said and actually calling him stupid, it's obvious now you're spelling it out, wasn't so obvious in my head since it's not what I mean. That's on me.

 

[KLOL506]

Blatant case of leading questions being asked and people being encouraged to ask leading questions. Read from down.

The speaker in this case also has a notorious record of making highly-inaccurate and unreliable calcs. Do what you will.

EDIT: One of the members is also doubling down on their stance to use leading questions despite knowing that this will lead to a ban.

 

[FinePoint]

Blatant case of leading questions being asked and people being encouraged to ask leading questions. Read from down.

The speaker in this case also has a notorious record of making highly-inaccurate and unreliable calcs. Do what you will.

EDIT: One of the members is also doubling down on their stance to use leading questions despite knowing that this will lead to a ban.

I'd support a very strict warning for @TugiaTheNarrator since there is nothing on the tracker and they may not have known.
They also took responsibility and asked to be punished instead of DeadlyMonarch for encouraging it, and then cited a Q&A stream leading me to believe they simply didn't understand the difference between that and what was suggested, as well as their nobility indicating they probably were well-intentioned.

For @DeadlyMonarchChewstheDirt I'd support a short ban (1-3 months) for blatantly knowing it's against the rules and continuing anyway.

Edit: @DeadlyMonarchChewstheDirt did back down recently, so maybe just a warning for them is also appropriate.

 

[DeadlyMonarchChewstheDirt]

I'd support a very strict warning for @TugiaTheNarrator since there is nothing on the tracker and they may not have known.
They also took responsibility and asked to be punished instead of DeadlyMonarch for encouraging it, and then cited a Q&A stream leading me to believe they simply didn't understand the difference between that and what was suggested, as well as their nobility indicating they probably were well-intentioned.

For @DeadlyMonarchChewstheDirt I'd support a short ban (1-3 months) for blatantly knowing it's against the rules and continuing anyway.

Edit: @DeadlyMonarchChewstheDirt did back down recently, so maybe just a warning for them is also appropriate.

I will accept whatever you all decide

 

[TugiaTheNarrator]

The speaker in this case also has a notorious record of making highly-inaccurate and unreliable calcs. Do what you will.

Is making inaccurate calcs is against the rules?