Rule Violation Reports (New forum)

[Astral_Trinity439]

I agree 100% with you

And we have nothing showing that @AlexSamDen was using the material to create a CRT with illegal-by-our-standards WoG

So why are we cogitating his ban? I am reading this from the original @Gamin_Yoon23 report and this is definetely not clear

To be fair, @AlexSamDen has a habit (on the verge of being a role) of proof reading and rewording everything. That includes our CRTs and sandboxes and profiles as well. Thus at some point he started asking everyone to send whatever tensura related stuff they're doing so he can proofread and reword them if needed

 

[Nonynho]

The point is not if Alex could do something, because we're not vigilantes or villains who combat illegalities before they happen (hell, anyone with good prompt engineering skills or decent photoshop skills can manipulate images to make it seem like WoG, so everyone has the potential to make CRTs with illegal, irregular materials, and we obviously won't ban everyone), and the rule is saying that the problem resides in actually doing the CRT or being seen harassing the author, and none of those can be proven by @Gamin_Yoon23 or anyone here, as it is not what happened

If i send someone a print of a fake Akira Toriyama interview, i can't be banned by a False-CRT-Prevention-Rule because "i could use it to make a CRT with rule-prohibited material", this is not what our rule is saying.

And i'm not saying that mods should allow something dangerous to happen before acting, because the most dangerous thing that Alex could do is publish the CRT and then make it plausible to report... which obviously poses no serious threat to our site or any user

 

[LephyrTheRevanchist]

The point is not if Alex could do something, because we're not vigilantes or villains who combat illegalities before they happen (hell, anyone with good prompt engineering skills or decent photoshop skills can manipulate images to make it seem like WoG, so everyone has the potential to make CRTs with illegal, irregular materials, and we obviously won't ban everyone), and the rule is saying that the problem resides in actually doing the CRT or being seen harassing the author, and none of those can be proven by @Gamin_Yoon23 or anyone here, as it is not what happened

If i send someone a print of a fake Akira Toriyama interview, i can't be banned by a False-CRT-Prevention-Rule because "i could use it to make a CRT with rule-prohibited material", this is not what our rule is saying.

And i'm not saying that mods should allow something dangerous to happen before acting, because the most dangerous thing that Alex could do is publish the CRT and then make it plausible to report... which obviously poses no serious threat to our site or any user

I will leave this comment up out of respect, but a small reminder that, if you aren't staff and don't have anything new to add to the conversation, you should not be commenting here. That being said, I still appreciate your thoughts.

Now is up to the rest if staff if they want to change their thoughts.

 

[FinePoint]

I'm not particularly interfering in the conversation, however, a certain issue with the very core of the report was brought up 3 times already, but ignored for some reason

This is the original time it was brought up

That the negative consequences of a rule violation are effectively neutralized could be a mitigating factor, but it does not equal innocence.

We ought to discourage actions that are likely to lead to outcomes we don't want, not just ones that definitely do.

A rhetorical example:
Stealing something is still a crime even if the owner ends up not caring, and conspiring to steal something is still a crime even if you fail to. Knowing that the owner doesn't care about that item it doesn't make it not a crime either.

As a practical outcome person, I tend to value intent, and the intent here was seemingly to conspire to break the rules, which paints the picture of an individual who is willing to use subterfuge for malicious intent. In contrast, I tend to be extra understanding against people who simply 'have a moment' or 'make a mistake' even if the outcome is pretty bad. The reason is that the former is a lot more likely to re-offend than the latter.

All that is to say I'm not moved by the argument that the statements would never be usable and this was known. If they truly believed that made it no longer a violation they would've not talked about it so conspiratorially.

 

[Gamin_Yoon23]

The point is not if Alex could do something, because we're not vigilantes or villains who combat illegalities before they happen (hell, anyone with good prompt engineering skills or decent photoshop skills can manipulate images to make it seem like WoG, so everyone has the potential to make CRTs with illegal, irregular materials, and we obviously won't ban everyone), and the rule is saying that the problem resides in actually doing the CRT or being seen harassing the author, and none of those can be proven by @Gamin_Yoon23 or anyone here, as it is not what happened

If i send someone a print of a fake Akira Toriyama interview, i can't be banned by a False-CRT-Prevention-Rule because "i could use it to make a CRT with rule-prohibited material", this is not what our rule is saying.

And i'm not saying that mods should allow something dangerous to happen before acting, because the most dangerous thing that Alex could do is publish the CRT and then make it plausible to report... which obviously poses no serious threat to our site or any user

I’ve never seen myself as a vigilante but I do understand where you’re coming from with that point of yours. Combating illegalities isn’t a necessity nor is it something that has to be done but I think if anyone were to argue it’s redundant I would disagree. Even in several of my comments prior I had admitted that I didn’t really have a set decision for what punishment I wanted Alex to face. I even made it painfully obvious that I think a strict warning for Alex by my standards would’ve been okay, but he would have to firm a distasteful image that came to be by no one else but himself.

I should also note that while this analogy does have similarities to what’s being expressed, there’s still some context which can’t coexist. I would have to do some digging but if my memory serves me right, it wouldn’t be the first time supporter(s) have used manipulative tactics. (Tensura MTL which can be found in RVR which utilises manipulation). So in good faith I can’t necessarily agree with you, at least not fully. So in all honesty I think Bambu’s proposal of harsher consequences fits fine. Had this been a first? I think it would’ve been too far fetched. Not here it isn’t.

It’s also worse when we’ve seen over dramatic behaviour within the line of Tensura supporters which is yet again in a way manipulative. Mr Bambu had even bluntly called it out since he was able to read it nigh instantly, knowing it’s a ploy to retaliate. As was the doxing allegations which was just, absurd to say the least. Manipulation comes in many forms and if we carefully analyse we can see this follows one aspect and that it isn’t uncommon.

 

[AlexSamDen]

A rhetorical example:
Stealing something is still a crime even if the owner ends up not caring, and conspiring to steal something is still a crime even if you fail to. Knowing that the owner doesn't care about that item it doesn't make it not a crime either.

I believe the rhetoric example is a bit wrong, since nothing was stolen in the first place, nor intended to

The more fitting example, in my opinion, would be:

I am believed to be making a bomb (a loaded question that might go off in the future), I'm detained for this and my house is searched. The bomb is found (even though I didn't ask any questions myself). However, it turns out to be a fake bomb, a juke, it simply cannot go off ever

The reason for me being detained - possibility of using the bomb
Discovered - I cannot use the bomb
The very reason for detaining is eliminated

All that is to say I'm not moved by the argument that the statements would never be usable and this was known. If they truly believed that made it no longer a violation they would've not talked about it so conspiratorially.

Excuse me, but what exact screenshot makes you believe the "conspiratory" part?
Discussing questions in a group between friends? Some of the discussion there are already post-factum, just people saying they already asked btw
Zane's remark that is obviously a joke by the use of emojis?
I think I and Astral explained the nature of my statement several times already
@Random-Helper323 also remarked that the "leading" part of the questions is extremely minor and leaves a lot of possible answers

So can I see which exact screenshot bothers you?

 

[Astral_Trinity439]

As a practical outcome person, I tend to value intent, and the intent here was seemingly to conspire to break the rules, which paints the picture of an individual who is willing to use subterfuge for malicious intent. In contrast, I tend to be extra understanding against people who simply 'have a moment' or 'make a mistake' even if the outcome is pretty bad. The reason is that the former is a lot more likely to re-offend than the latter.

Would this be of any use to evaluate his intentions? Becuase I believe a single message by itself can be interpreted in many ways, but context can make it less and less assumtions and more actuality.

As seen in the screenshots, Alex has a habit of simply correcting whatever we plan to make, be it CRTs, Profiles, Sandboxes about other things, etc. it's gotten to the point that his role among the group is almost always to correct others among us for grammar mistakes, forgetting things, weak arguments, etc. etc. And this has been going for a long while regularly (all those screenshots are from 2026 alone, and Alex has been doing this since 2025)

I can also show you more screenshots of Alex's past behavior regarding "rewording things", on discord if you're willing.

 

[Mr. Bambu]

Would this be of any use to evaluate his intentions? Becuase I believe a single message by itself can be interpreted in many ways, but context can make it less and less assumtions and more actuality.

As seen in the screenshots, Alex has a habit of simply correcting whatever we plan to make, be it CRTs, Profiles, Sandboxes about other things, etc. it's gotten to the point that his role among the group is almost always to correct others among us for grammar mistakes, forgetting things, weak arguments, etc. etc. And this has been going for a long while regularly (all those screenshots are from 2026 alone, and Alex has been doing this since 2025)

I can also show you more screenshots of Alex's past behavior regarding "rewording things", on discord if you're willing.

I don't feel it does. I do believe that Alex's activity also included fixing grammar, but that's not really what he was talking about in the screenshot. He's talking about altering a question so it can ask a powerscaling question without coming off as powerscaling. That is an extremely troubling offer to make, given our rules on the subject.

 

[SomebodyData]

I don't like this comment

Bast profile from marvel

Here what I done so far: https://vsbattles.fandom.com/wiki/User:Re5yh/Bast_(Marvel_Comics) And yeah, she has more than 20 appearances in marvel

vsbattles.com

It's a reference to the hit game "Marvel Rivals" btw, it was just a comment in jest since it's a very meme'd on quote

Also, staff can see your deleted comments, fyi

 

[Mr. Bambu]

Hello all. I'm here to issue a formal warning, after some brief discussion, to @EmbalmerMaster9000 and @ROZAN-U for posts on Antvasima's depicting politically controversial imagery:

• For ROZAN-U's part, he posted an edited version of Antvasima's profile picture to depict it with blonde hair and blue eyes, renaming it in such a way to reference Nazism.
• For EmbalmerMaster9000's part, he continued the joke by depicting FinePoint's avatar as a Zionist. I would also consider his actions to fall into the category of "spamming", as he posted several times in sequence on Ant's wall during this exchange.

A warning is being issued because I believe these were meant to be edgy but ultimately harmless jokes. Nevertheless, making them onsite, and directing them at specific individuals, falls against our rules of harassment and and political/religious speech. If you must engage in such humor, do so offsite. Inappropriate shit onsite will be litigated as genuine rule violations. Avoid the headaches for both of us.

 

[XxZetsuxX]

I would like to report this individual;

https://vsbattles.fandom.com/wiki/User:Buzzflightyear (i am not finding this user in here with @Skushy or @Buzzflightyear), so i assume this user does not have an account in this part of the wiki

Reasoning;

He keeps spreading misinformation regarding the verse "Classroom of the elite" with his head canons while ignoring feats and narrative as whole, i have reverted 3 times his edits filled with his own interpretation and head canons

Ranging from altering the profiles to fit his interpretations without contacting the supporters of the verse when it's made clear he has little to no knowledge of the verse and changing the whole scaling of the verse page, again with no consultation with it's supporters or a CRT

 

[Vzearr]

I would like to report this individual;

https://vsbattles.fandom.com/wiki/User:Buzzflightyear (i am not finding this user in here with @Skushy or @Buzzflightyear), so i assume this user does not have an account in this part of the wiki

Reasoning;

He keeps spreading misinformation regarding the verse "Classroom of the elite" with his head canons while ignoring feats and narrative as whole, i have reverted 3 times his edits filled with his own interpretation and head canons

Ranging from altering the profiles to fit his interpretations without contacting the supporters of the verse when it's made clear he has little to no knowledge of the verse and changing the whole scaling of the verse page, again with no consultation with it's supporters or a CRT

Yeah, that's Cloud Yagami. I realised it from the patterns he leaves behind, I can make an in depth report later, just know, that I know, that's cloud. Don't ask how I noticed so quickly.

 

[Antvasima]

Hello all. I'm here to issue a formal warning, after some brief discussion, to @EmbalmerMaster9000 and @ROZAN-U for posts on Antvasima's depicting politically controversial imagery:

• For ROZAN-U's part, he posted an edited version of Antvasima's profile picture to depict it with blonde hair and blue eyes, renaming it in such a way to reference Nazism.
• For EmbalmerMaster9000's part, he continued the joke by depicting FinePoint's avatar as a Zionist. I would also consider his actions to fall into the category of "spamming", as he posted several times in sequence on Ant's wall during this exchange.

A warning is being issued because I believe these were meant to be edgy but ultimately harmless jokes. Nevertheless, making them onsite, and directing them at specific individuals, falls against our rules of harassment and and political/religious speech. If you must engage in such humor, do so offsite. Inappropriate shit onsite will be litigated as genuine rule violations. Avoid the headaches for both of us.

For the record, given that both Nazism and Zionism have genocidal supremacist histories, these are not remotely the types of jokes that I find appropriate or acceptable.

 

[XxZetsuxX]

For the record, given that both Nazism and Zionism have genocidal supremacist histories, these are not remotely the types of jokes that I find appropriate or acceptable.

The user i mentioned has made the edits again, with him saying you approved of his edits, can you confirm his claim please?

 

[Antvasima]

I would like to report this individual;

https://vsbattles.fandom.com/wiki/User:Buzzflightyear (i am not finding this user in here with @Skushy or @Buzzflightyear), so i assume this user does not have an account in this part of the wiki

Reasoning;

He keeps spreading misinformation regarding the verse "Classroom of the elite" with his head canons while ignoring feats and narrative as whole, i have reverted 3 times his edits filled with his own interpretation and head canons

Ranging from altering the profiles to fit his interpretations without contacting the supporters of the verse when it's made clear he has little to no knowledge of the verse and changing the whole scaling of the verse page, again with no consultation with it's supporters or a CRT

Buzz is talking with me here:

https://vsbattles.fandom.com/wiki/Message_Wall:Antvasima?threadId=4400000000003884062

 

[ROZAN-U]

For ROZAN-U's part, he posted an edited version of Antvasima's profile picture to depict it with blonde hair and blue eyes, renaming it in such a way to reference Nazism.

I didn't know it had anything to do Nazism. I just know the meme for some conspiracy and alien things.

Regardless , I apologize for that joke.

 

[Antvasima]

The user i mentioned has made the edits again, with him saying you approved of his edits, can you confirm his claim please?

No that is a misunderstanding, as you can see in the link I posted above.

 

[Antvasima]

I didn't know it had anything to do Nazism. I just know the meme for some conspiracy and alien things.

Regardless , I apologize for that joke.

Okay. Apology accepted then.

 

[XxZetsuxX]

No that is a misunderstanding, as you can see in the link I posted above.

I will revert the edit then, if not approved i can undo it again

Edit: Twilight already did that for me and locked Koji's profile, it was getting annoying having to undo that over and over, you have my thanks twilight

 

[XxZetsuxX]

I have left my comment there Ant, please check it when your available

 

[TWILIGHT-OP]

I will revert the edit then, if not approved i can undo it again

After reviewing the edit, it appears he only added new header images and some additional feats to already accepted ratings. I’m not sure if those are accurate, someone should verify them from the verse.

Also, i have locked the page temporarily and reverted the edit till we sort this out.

 

[XxZetsuxX]

After reviewing the edit, it appears he only added new header images

This would be irrelevant and should not be used imo

and some additional feats to already accepted ratings.

Last time i checked, he added old stuff that i removed because i opted to just add Koji's best feats because otherwise it would just add fluff needlessly

I’m not sure if those are accurate, someone should verify them from the verse.

it's mostly unnecesary fluff, along with some stuff being disproven by statements and narrative

In his edit, he mentioned that Shiba was a equal to him with seconds later Koji stating he could one shot him if he wanted to

 

[Just a Random Butler]

It's hard to talk when the other user in question is not here.

@Antvasima, does Buzz have no forum account?

 

[TWILIGHT-OP]

It's hard to talk when the other user in question is not here.

@Antvasima, does Buzz have no forum account?

He made one, requires approval, he said

https://vsbattles.fandom.com/wiki/Message_Wall:Antvasima?threadId=4400000000003884062#4400000000014929187

 

[FinePoint]

Reporting this user @Blayion for spamming Genshin Impact's Content Revision threads without any scans at all.

How strong do you think surtalogi would be in HSR low-high Pathsrider or low-high emanator

For reference: My personal Scaling of Surtalogi Tier: Bare minimum 5-B. Far higher currently. His hax are likely on a higher tier. Surtalogi, as of the start of the game, should be massively stronger than before, since all of his feats are from hundreds of years ago, due to his growing...

vsbattles.com

How do you think a fight between the Pyro Dragon and Aquila, and the Hydro Dragon and the Ocean Titan, would go? For everyone is in their prime

How do you think a fight between the Pyro Dragon and Aquila, and the Hydro Dragon and the Ocean Titan, would go? For reference, everyone is in their prime state. So for the dragons it’s their version pre celestia For reference Dragons Hydro Dragon: The previous Hydro Archon, Egeria, once...

vsbattles.com

My personaScaling of Surtalogi

My Updated Scaling of Surtalogi Tier: Bare minimum 5-B. Far higher currently. His hax are likely on a higher tier. Surtalogi, as of the start of the game, should be massively stronger than before, since all of his feats are from hundreds of years ago, due to his growing Abyssal power and...

vsbattles.com

@Blayion

You seem new, so I'm assuming you just don't know, but please don't spam threads and make sure any threads you do make are supported not just with evidence but linked evidence so we can actually review it and make sure it's legit.

In addition, threads about fights should go in Versus Threads and threads which attempt to change the tier should go in Content Revision.

 

[Blayion]

@Blayion

You seem new, so I'm assuming you just don't know, but please don't spam threads and make sure any threads you do make are supported not just with evidence but linked evidence so we can actually review it and make sure it's legit.

In addition, threads about fights should go in Versus Threads and threads which attempt to change the tier should go in Content Revision.

Is it possible to delete old posts? I just started making posts today, so I’m not really familiar with how everything works. For my first few posts, I thought you just typed “new post” and created one. It wasn’t until I tested it that I realized which ones I shouldn’t have created.

 

[FinePoint]

Is it possible to delete old posts? I just started making posts today, so I’m not really familiar with how everything works. For my first few posts, I thought you just typed “new post” and created one. It wasn’t until I tested it that I realized which ones I shouldn’t have created.

Yes, you can delete your own comments and I believe you can ask a moderator to delete entire threads if you want.

I already moved your previous posts to the right areas, though.

That said, you actually don't need evidence for a Versus Thread, since you're meant to just use the profile and revise the profile through Content Revision if you disagree with what's currently listed.

 

[Kellex]

Is it possible to delete old posts? I just started making posts today, so I’m not really familiar with how everything works. For my first few posts, I thought you just typed “new post” and created one. It wasn’t until I tested it that I realized which ones I shouldn’t have created.

I'd recommend reading some VSbattles rules first to get a better understanding of making threads and replies.

Versus Thread Rules

The VS Battles Wiki is mainly a site that attempts to index the statistics of characters across many different fictional franchises. However, as the site name implies, we also allow our members to pit fictional characters against each other in hypothetical matchups for entertainment purposes...

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

 

[Antvasima]

It's hard to talk when the other user in question is not here.

@Antvasima, does Buzz have no forum account?

They asked me for help to get one accepted.

 

[Antvasima]

They asked me for help to get one accepted.

@Buzzflightyear 's account has been accepted now.

 

[Antvasima]

They created a content revision thread here.

Ayanokouji Full Strength Contextualized

I finally fixed the full scaling chain and the statement below will be used as the benchmark statement for my entire premise that the verse is mainly separated by experience, and that Ayanokouji is not physically superior to every single character, he is only more skilled, smarter with better...

vsbattles.com

 

[Mr. Bambu]

Updating the thread to inform you all that I have adjusted TempestDragon's ban to 1 year. I would also like to inform you all that he reached out to me, and said that the reason for his outburst was that he was also in the Discord server where all of this happened, and that he felt his privacy was infringed upon. I obviously think this is a silly claim and one that holds absolutely no water, but at the same time, it does help explain why it is he became so angry: he does have some personal tie to this case.

With that said, unless there is something else to add, I would consider that matter resolved. I would also consider the report against Yoon resolved, as everyone seems to be in agreement that it was insubstantial (or, at least, nobody voiced disagreement with that yet). As for the core problem here, the Tensura WoG issue.

Votes on that subject have varied. These are against a rule violation:

• @Planck69 argued against it being a rule violation and affirmed he felt it was alright, even if it looked bad
• @Vietthai96 argued against planning CRTs being a rule violation, though I am not sure if he had time to read the actual accusation
• @DarkDragonMedeus was explicitly neutral, but leaned in favor of leniency

These are in favor:

• @Reiner04 argued early on that it was strictly against the letter of the rule, not accounting for how bad it looked with additional details
• @LephyrTheRevanchist initially suggested only a WoG ban on Tensura, but later shifted to neutrality on a ban (and possible support on warnings, I would like elaboration on this)
• I argued in favor of these being rule violations, including a short ban for AlexSamDen
• @FinePoint argued that these actions fall against the letter of the rule, as it exists now, and later clarified support for Alex's ban and warnings
• @Antvasima agreed with my arguments
• @Random-Helper323 has said most of the posts are fine in his opinion, even if they fall against the letter of the rules, but one in particular seems, in his judgement, to be a leading question deserving of a warning.

This amounts to a vote in favor of 4/5-2-1 (acknowledging that DDM's neutral vote was more in favor of leniency than punishment), with an admin and a mod against and two bureaucrats and two mods (and possibly an admin, I'm inferring from Lephyr's post here). With DDM's preference acknowledged, I would like more staff input.

I'm going to conclude this report, rather than let it drag on. More votes are in favor of action as I outlined it before, with some variability in terms of who agrees to what specific action. In the interest of concluding this, I'm going to begin Alex's ban now, rather than waste a week more letting it hang over his head. I will also add the less controversial warnings for the users outlined in Reiner's post here.

 

[Mr. Bambu]

I have added the relevant warnings to the thread (@Astral_Trinity439, @Curcuma_x_curcuma, @Ultimuru, @Ferno1234): they should avoid asking any form of powerscaling-adjacent questions to authors in the future. Most things done behind closed doors have a tendency to surface in the public eye eventually. I have also put through @AlexSamDen's ban for one month. I consider the matter resolved. Thanks all.

 

[Astral_Trinity439]

I'm going to conclude this report, rather than let it drag on. More votes are in favor of action as I outlined it before, with some variability in terms of who agrees to what specific action. In the interest of concluding this, I'm going to begin Alex's ban now, rather than waste a week more letting it hang over his head. I will also add the less controversial warnings for the users outlined in Reiner's post here.

I was wondering if I can actually point it out after it's already concluded, so I held back, but now I got a heads up saying yeah sooo

Isn't this actually 4:5:0 to 4:4:1? In terms of Ban : against ban : neutral

Support ban:

• Bambu
• FinePoint
• Reiner
• Antvasima

Against Ban (or rule violation at all, and consequently ban)

• Plank69
• DarkDragonMedus (While they maintained neutrality, they explicitly said they don't think it's deserving of a ban)
• Random-Helper323 (Explicitly said they are in favor of leniency and that a warning should be enough)
• Lephyr (Explicitly said they dislike the idea of banning from intention)
• Vietthai

Neutral:

• Lephyr (While they did say they dislike the idea, they also said they don't oppose it entirely on the ground of "yet", so perhaps neutrality since it's both yes and no in a single message)

Even if we, per say, set Lephyr as fully neutral, it would still be a 4:4:1
We can call Vietthai again to clarify their stance further, but even so it would be 4:3:2 unti they clarify their stance.

So is such a vote enough to conclude this report? This is just a guess based on what's usually the staff vote ratio in staff CRTs and

Note: this voting is based only on "is a ban needed", not "is it a rule violation at all". I don't mind the warnings, but the ban only based on these votes. Also, if I got someone's vote misunderstood, I don't mind being corrected. I've attached the posts I'm referring to.

I hope this post didn't clog the thread.

 

[Reiner04]

• Lephyr (Explicitly said they dislike the idea of banning from intention)
• Vietthai

Lephyr is neutral on Ban and 100% fine with the warning. Vietthai never commented about WOG stuff. He only clarified that CRT creation is only a rule violation if done with personal bias and malicious intent against verse rather than content accuracy, solely.

 

[LephyrTheRevanchist]

Lephyr is neutral on Ban and 100% fine with the warning.

Imagine

 

[Vzearr]

Can someone close this? It's just purposefully trying to rile people up. From the start.

Voting Yu for Azontr reasons (when he gets here)

Yes, you can count my vote once Azontr gets here

Your inability to read the profile is not my problem.

Yu frb

Maybe because Mikey could have just dodged all of his attacks. I don't care if you're pissed off for being a liar because you are a liar who is lying.

If it upset you, then tell the truth.

Vzearr is about to active his own "Dark Impulse"

No one committed a rule violation, and I wasn't behaving at my best, but this isn't gonna lead anywhere nice.

 

[azontr]

The match does not need to be closed because of a few distasteful jokes. A debate happened and votes came in as with any normal match. I am not riling you up, i am calling you out for purposely not being truthful and intentionally misleading people, which is much more so a rule violation.

 

[Vzearr]

The match does not need to be closed because of a few distasteful jokes. A debate happened and votes came in as with any normal match. I am not riling you up, i am calling you out for purposely not being truthful and intentionally misleading people, which is much more so a rule violation.

No, you did not “call out” a lie. You argued my interpretation was wrong. Those are different things. A lie requires proof of intent, and you never proved my intent once. You just kept repeating “liar” while relying on speculation. Also, “votes came in” is not some magic shield against thread misconduct. Once a thread devolves into ad hominem, mockery, and character attacks, nihilistic insults, the quality of the match is obviously affected and not taken seriously.

 

[azontr]

There is no speculation. You removed several scans between two scenes to push a narrative which supported your argument. Regardless of what you claim your intent to be, you are manipulating evidence, and that is called lying, which makes you a liar.