- 177,687
- 90,730
- Thread starter
- #31,561
I suppose, but I have managed to go past most of it quite well through spiritual exercises.
-
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
- 11,205
- 1,729
I'm saying it's made you numb to it.
- 177,687
- 90,730
- Thread starter
- #31,563
Well, I have turned better at dealing with it at least. I still do not like it, but I try to not lash out and punish people who harshly disagree with me due to that I don't want to potentially help to create a fearful environment and think that others have the right to strongly disagree with me, especially as I am so opinionated regarding moral issues.
- 11,205
- 1,729
Fair enough.
- 7,833
- 11,793
I'm also very numb to it in general, and I admit that may make me uniquely biased towards a results-oriented perspective (merely stopping the behavior) as opposed to a more esoteric sense of justice ('punishing' the behavior).
I view punishment as a means to the end of peace, and thus if I think there's an alternative solution which is more peaceful I tend to advocate for it first.
That Vzearr is generally upsetting people is true and needs to stop, I just hold out hope that there's a very civil way to address that.
But if those civil methods do not work, or my peers largely advocate for punishment, I would not die on that hill.
- 177,687
- 90,730
- Thread starter
- #31,567
A Fandom staff member answered that they seem to be the same person. Is it fine if we permanently ban both of them or should we be more lenient?
Btw: We need to deal with this as well.Thank you for your feedback.
What do the rest of you think?
- 12,490
- 16,861
Non staff members: If you aren't related to the case or have anything useful to contribute, please don't comment.
- 6,419
- 6,002
I say perma ban the alt account and extend the ban on the original, possibly to infinite. I supported the IP check so we could have a more complete case and picture. Now we have that completed picture, and it shows that this person made an alt account to get around a ban.Btw: We need to deal with this as well.
- 6,419
- 6,002
It seems to me both Bambu and Vzearr are agitating this fight. As has been pointed out, Bambu's comment was rude and insulting as well, even if Vzearr escalated from there. It does seem as if everyone needs to calm down a bit.Yes. I agree with Finepoint, but really hope that @Vzearr will make a continuous effort to stop shooting himself in the feet.
Mr. Bambu
Suffer-Not-Injustice Bambu
VS Battles
Joke Battles
Bureaucrat
Administrator
Calculation Group
- 25,072
- 29,769
No, I didn't. I made a factual statement that literally applies to everyone on this forum. My part in the discussion, up to that point, was pointing out how we lack the resources and the expertise as a wiki to reliably handle things with absolute, 100% accuracy. Vzearr called this "incredulity", because someone else phrased it in a way that might be called that, and so I said that he lacked the ability to make the call here. And that's true. That's true of literally everyone. I did not say "Vzearr, I think you are stupid". I did not insult him. You are putting words into my mouth, words that I don't think are supported by the sum of what I said. He is incapable in the same way that he lacks the abilities necessary to refine plutonium into a nuclear bomb or to build a Dyson sphere around the sun. These are not insults.
Vzearr did insult me. He came to my wall to insult me on the basis of me pursuing my staff duties after I had previously asked him to not engage with me in this way because it did not seem productive.
FinePoint is right that, in a setting where tone can be interpreted outside of the user's control, it may have been seen as such by Vzearr; it is true that Vzearr's issues with me and mine with him may have corrupted this perspective, such that he instantly jumped to the offense when he perceived X or Y supposed slight. But it is not true that I insulted him and I will not have it said that it is. I deliberately made the comments quite clinical in an effort to not cause an incident- if I wanted to insult someone, I would have made it unambiguous.
- 4,239
- 4,085
No, don't try and lie here man, you claimed that the results aren't close to what reality entails, and that's what I called incredulity, because, It simply is. You claim that because my results are too high too seem plausible then they must be wrong, and by definition, that's incredulity.
That’s exactly what happened here, you didn’t demonstrate that my math was wrong or that my premises were invalid. You dismissed the conclusion because you found it unrealistic. Logic and math don’t care if something feels improbable, only whether of if it’s consistent and supported by evidence.
So unless you can point to a mathematical flaw, appealing to “unrealistic results” isn’t a rebuttal, It’s an example of the fallacy you’re denying to have done.
How I perceived it, that was extremely condescending and rude, as it entailed that I don't understand anything well enough for my argument to be valid.
You said that I “lacked the ability to make the call here” and that statement was directed specifically at ME in response to my argument, not a general reflection about everyone. It was your rebuttal attempt aimed at discrediting my position by implying that I wasn’t competent enough to judge it. That makes it personal, regardless of your 'later' attempts to generalize it. Saying “that’s true of literally everyone” after the fact doesn’t change the initial intent. If you truly meant it in a universal sense, you would have said something like “none of us have the means to make that determination” at the time. But you didn’t, you singled me out, and only later tried to frame it as a neutral observation. That’s not clarification, that’s after the hand justification to try and save your ass. Your nuclear bomb analogy only gives reinforcement as to your condescending tone. Comparing somebody's reasoning ability to their potential inability to to build a Dyson sphere around the sun isn’t a “neutral” stance .” It’s a mocked exaggeration meant to violate another person’s intellect. This kind of analogy doesn’t strengthen an argument bambu, it ridicules me instead of addressing my point. Intent doesn’t override what actually impacted me either. Finally, your own logic contradicts itself lol. You argued that no one can truly make these calls, yet you treat your interpretation as the factual one and position yourself as the authority to declare others “incapable.” You can’t hold both positions at once. Either we all lack the ability to make the call, including YOU, or you’ve created a convenient exception for yourself.
What I said was an exaggeration based on how I felt at the moment, my emotions do get the best out of me, and for that I'm sorry, I do hold accountability for that. However you also need to accept accountability here.
Mr. Bambu
Suffer-Not-Injustice Bambu
VS Battles
Joke Battles
Bureaucrat
Administrator
Calculation Group
- 25,072
- 29,769
I didn't give myself authority to make the call. Again, words are being added that I didn't say- even went precisely against. I said we, we, cannot claim accuracy when taking on small slivers of reality to determine our results. That's inclusive of me. You took that as an insult but it was not one.
I'm heading out for the night and won't be able to maintain a back and forth, if one develops. But if you look at what I said, this is true.
I'm heading out for the night and won't be able to maintain a back and forth, if one develops. But if you look at what I said, this is true.
- 177,687
- 90,730
- Thread starter
- #31,574
Bambu is a very honest, ethical, rational, and reliable person. I do not think that he intended to insult you personally, but rather just to make a statement about the veracity of the topic itself.
Also, I do not wish to cause offence, but as I stated above, you really need to make a serious continuous effort to stop shooting yourself in the feet by overreacting in a very rude manner towards others, especially high-ranking staff members. I know that it is difficult for you given your mental problems, but our community won't accept that I make exceptions for you due to your past and ongoing helpfulness and good intentions in the long run.
Also, I do not wish to cause offence, but as I stated above, you really need to make a serious continuous effort to stop shooting yourself in the feet by overreacting in a very rude manner towards others, especially high-ranking staff members. I know that it is difficult for you given your mental problems, but our community won't accept that I make exceptions for you due to your past and ongoing helpfulness and good intentions in the long run.
Last edited:
- 177,687
- 90,730
- Thread starter
- #31,575
Anyway, Vzearr has apologised here.
Mr. Bambu
Suffer-Not-Injustice Bambu
VS Battles
Joke Battles
Bureaucrat
Administrator
Calculation Group
- 25,072
- 29,769
To seek a resolution to this...
That I reported it does not inherently mean I seek an outright punishment. While I think calling this "walking on eggshells" extreme, I also don't want us to ban users for swearing and insulting one another- I will remind the class of my own ban in 2016 for that. We are not so fragile these days, but nevertheless, the rules were objectively broken. I would like a warning added to the tracker so there is a formal record of behavior persists. This would satisfy my feelings on the subject.
- 177,687
- 90,730
- Thread starter
- #31,577
A mild or possibly regular warning added to the tracker ("Was rather rude" or somesuch as clarification text perhaps?) seems fine to me.
Also, what I meant is just that we have to find a balance to maintain some sort of order without going overboard with heavy punishments for small infractions, and have to maintain pretty thick skins to accomplish that, as otherwise our members will either feel afraid to open their mouths and offer criticism, be kicked out as soon as they are in any bad mood and fail to control it, no matter how helpful they have been otherwise, or on the other end our members should not consider this site to be so toxic, bigoted, and/or hostile that they do not feel safe or consider it enjoyable to be here either.
I don't have a mathematical formula for a perfect balance in that regard of course, but nevertheless think that it is important to keep in mind.
Also, what I meant is just that we have to find a balance to maintain some sort of order without going overboard with heavy punishments for small infractions, and have to maintain pretty thick skins to accomplish that, as otherwise our members will either feel afraid to open their mouths and offer criticism, be kicked out as soon as they are in any bad mood and fail to control it, no matter how helpful they have been otherwise, or on the other end our members should not consider this site to be so toxic, bigoted, and/or hostile that they do not feel safe or consider it enjoyable to be here either.
I don't have a mathematical formula for a perfect balance in that regard of course, but nevertheless think that it is important to keep in mind.
- 7,833
- 11,793
I think that is a reasonable outcome.
It seems like we've been lumping everything like this under "Disruptive Behavior" on the tracker.A mild or possibly regular warning added to the tracker ("Was rather rude" or somesuch as clarification text perhaps?) seems fine to me.
- 177,687
- 90,730
- Thread starter
- #31,579
Okay. I suppose that seems fine then.
- 2,243
- 865
- 2,182
- 3,383
That should be here.
- 177,687
- 90,730
- Thread starter
- #31,582
I blocked them.
- 177,687
- 90,730
- Thread starter
- #31,583
Btw: We need to deal with this as well.
Okay. I will handle it then.
Edit: I permanently blocked both of the sockpuppet accounts.
Last edited:
- 40,911
- 16,350
I might overthinking it but....
@Telomera have a vendetta with Nasuverse, starting from here and goes on to the latest page on Nasuverse discussion thread: https://vsbattles.com/threads/nasuverse-discussion-board-new-forum.107783/post-7358162
One thing that raised a concern is that he said that Wankbreaker succeeded on bringing out some of the rebuttal points, that people on that thread already disapprove it
On top of that, he said that he will carry Deagonx torch to downgrade the verse, which is sound really spiteful
Again, overthinking, but I fear that we get a Wankbreaker supporter which need to be look at
@Telomera have a vendetta with Nasuverse, starting from here and goes on to the latest page on Nasuverse discussion thread: https://vsbattles.com/threads/nasuverse-discussion-board-new-forum.107783/post-7358162
One thing that raised a concern is that he said that Wankbreaker succeeded on bringing out some of the rebuttal points, that people on that thread already disapprove it
On top of that, he said that he will carry Deagonx torch to downgrade the verse, which is sound really spiteful
Again, overthinking, but I fear that we get a Wankbreaker supporter which need to be look at
- 15,320
- 22,651
I'm really close to my sleeping hours here. Even if he is indeed spiteful (which is mostly your guesswork), or he wants to continue Deagonx or Wankbreaker's work, if he could bring our good evidence and arguments, then they would still be evaluated nonetheless. Let's not bring every single person to RVR thread simply because they are against certain ratings of the verse.
Wankbreaker was banned because he is a sockpuppet and using fake translation, not because he has opinion that against the verse's rating
- 1,716
- 927
Heyo, I have a question about the nasuverse tier 1 rules. The verse was reverted to how it was before the revisions, so does that rule still applies?
- 1,249
- 1,165
This is not the thread to ask about such things. If you're not sure where to ask, https://vsbattles.com/threads/all-purpose-request-thread-new-forum.107534/ is a good start.
Edit: Or just use the Nasuverse general thread and wait for a reply, you've used that thread before.
- 1,716
- 927
Asked twice but didnt get an answer, so mb. I will as on the place you suggested. thx
SomebodyData
Waiting for Walpurgisnacht Rising and Metroid 6...
VS Battles
Administrator
Human Resources
- 14,751
- 4,119
Hello,
I would like to report a series of edits made by AThe1412 that include content additions, removals, and tier/stat changes without proper CRT approval or justification. Below is a summary of the relevant edits with links for reference:
Removed stuff from the profiles: 1, 2, 3
Added stuff to the profiles: 1, 2, 3
Downgrades: 1, 2, 3
Removing matches he dislikes without permission: 1, 2
Tbh, usually I would just say let him know the rules and give a little slap on the wrist; but apparently he's been warned eight times since 2024, including a ban by Agnaa, so I'll the staff handle that.
I would like to report a series of edits made by AThe1412 that include content additions, removals, and tier/stat changes without proper CRT approval or justification. Below is a summary of the relevant edits with links for reference:
Removed stuff from the profiles: 1, 2, 3
Added stuff to the profiles: 1, 2, 3
Downgrades: 1, 2, 3
Removing matches he dislikes without permission: 1, 2
Tbh, usually I would just say let him know the rules and give a little slap on the wrist; but apparently he's been warned eight times since 2024, including a ban by Agnaa, so I'll the staff handle that.
- 177,687
- 90,730
- Thread starter
- #31,593
- 7,763
- 3,984
1. I didn't remove anything or change the AP rating, only added more things to the justification to expand it. I have no excuses for removing Class K other than it being self-evident that pushing and flipping over a warship and the Titanic should be Class M, as is written on our LS page.
2. Just a rewording for the justification. I removed the Limited rating because it was unwarranted. Zricera being unaffected by its own flames (which can hurt the Player) while still taking damage from the Player's fire attacks just means that their attacks have a higher temperature than Zricera's resistance.
3. That ability was actually added without justifications if you couldn't tell, and I provided reasons to remove it, other than it clearly not being accepted.
1. No excuses for this one, other than it being self-evident with scans justifying it.
2. I made those edits when the profile was created just a few days before and could be considered incomplete, and it has stayed untouched since. Most of them were either rewording and expanding on justifications with scans provided or self-evident changes. I forgot to remove the Type 4 in the justification for resurrection but that's about it.
3. Very self-evident addition and slightly different wording that doesn't change anything in the weakness section.
1. The justification for Type 1 was shaky, as the character needs to be at least over a dozen meters tall and a "small" building doesn't guarantee it. The 13-foot height came from a statement made by his creator, which is both a more reliable estimate and fits better with his portrayal in the small building scan, hence Type 0. His range was decreased proportionate to his height.
2. No excuses other than it being self-evident, and the justification clearly not being enough for Superhuman stamina.
3. Same as above.
I'll just go ahead and admit that I do dislike that match, but I have valid reasons to remove it that I didn't bother pointing out in my edit justification.
1. The match was made all the way back in 2019 and used to be on the Indominus Rex's profile before a downgrade in 2020 caused it to be removed. However, it stayed on the Spino's profile for some reason and remained that way till today. It was eventually re-added to the Indo's profile in 2023 despite clearly being outdated.
2. The primary factor for the I-Rex's loss was due to its supposedly lower intelligence. Ignoring the fact that the narrative made it out to be one of the smartest dinosaurs at the time it was created, the profile has gone through numerous changes, including ones to its intelligence section. Just compare it to the Spino's and you'll see an obvious difference.
Last edited:
Arkansalter2
He/Him- 8,282
- 2,678
Reporting a user under the name of @Arsuzz and possibly @NikHelton for lying to staff to get a match removed from their favorite character's profile, Ken Kaneki.
All started around here. Overhaul won fair and square. Smoove right?
Well... apparently it got slammed straight to versus thread removal. The match got removed. Now the match got remade here, skewing the match into Kaneki's favor.
Arsuzz lied to get a match removed, despite said match not even being a stomp
This caught the attention of Therefir, a Content Mod who in fact caught on to this.
Parties involved should be able to provide with more information.
All started around here. Overhaul won fair and square. Smoove right?
Well... apparently it got slammed straight to versus thread removal. The match got removed. Now the match got remade here, skewing the match into Kaneki's favor.
Arsuzz lied to get a match removed, despite said match not even being a stomp
This caught the attention of Therefir, a Content Mod who in fact caught on to this.
Parties involved should be able to provide with more information.
- 177,687
- 90,730
- Thread starter
- #31,597
Which members should we ping here?
- 11,516
- 10,357
As someone who participated in all 3 matches, it’s REALLY strange how I used the same exact arguments to show why the original match wasn’t a stomp yet it still gets labeled as a stomp and said arguments are labeled as THEORETICAL ABILITIES. Yet somehow it’s perfectly fine in the rematch with a dumb prior knowledge.Which members should we ping here?
Arkansalter2
He/Him- 8,282
- 2,678
Arsuzz (random TG supp who made a whole essay about removal), NikHelton (the main Kaneki supp), and Therefir (the content mod who caught on to this) for right now.Which members should we ping here?
Other parties who have other information should end up coming through as well but a ping for them is not required.
- 11,516
- 10,357
Just to elaborate even further, several members have noticed this too yet any arguments against this is always accusing the other party of creating an L train
vsbattles.com
Versus Thread Removal Requests (New forum)
isn't farming characters in vs threads to get a loss on their profile report worthy You might wanna check Voldemort's profile then
Last edited:
