Rule Violation Reports (New forum)

[Arceus0x]

I would like to report @Vesxpura for being antagonistic against me.

It started here with a small debate where the person in question acted confrontational about my concerns. One can explain their points without acting that way, although that isn't the issue as I wouldn't report people over that besides the fact that the thread itself is...weird? Like there's people poking fun at each other left and right there, constant derailing and whatnot. I assume these are friends goofing off but if it isn't then staff should look into this.

Regardless, my concern here is about the fact that Vesx then proceeded to go to my profile and comment the following. Telling me to not participate in 1-A CRTs because apparently I lack knowledge (all I did was disagree with a CRT that hasn't even been accepted or evaluated yet). I believe that telling people to stop participating in CRTs is very much antagonistic and should be warned against, even if not officially. If I was in the wrong about my arguments then they should've been adressed normally, not like this.

 

[Random-Helper323]

I would like to report @Vesxpura for being antagonistic against me.

It started here with a small debate where the person in question acted confrontational about my concerns. One can explain their points without acting that way, although that isn't the issue as I wouldn't report people over that besides the fact that the thread itself is...weird? Like there's people poking fun at each other left and right there, constant derailing and whatnot. I assume these are friends goofing off but if it isn't then staff should look into this.

Regardless, my concern here is about the fact that Vesx then proceeded to go to my profile and comment the following. Telling me to not participate in 1-A CRTs because apparently I lack knowledge (all I did was disagree with a CRT that hasn't even been accepted or evaluated yet). I believe that telling people to stop participating in CRTs is very much antagonistic and should be warned against, even if not officially. If I was in the wrong about my arguments then they should've been adressed normally, not like this.

They definitely are being rude in the thread, and going to your wall to insult you is definitely bad.

I called for calm in the main thread and told them not to go to your wall and be rude.

 

[Vesxpura]

They definitely are being rude in the thread, and going to your wall to insult you is definitely bad.

I called for calm in the main thread and told them not to go to your wall and be rude.

how do you suggest we could "talk" this out? im open to alternatives.

 

[Vesxpura]

also i feel like i should also be apologized to too as i was called a derogatory term which kind of hurt my feelings.

 

[Arceus0x]

also i feel like i should also be apologized to too as i was called a derogatory term which kind of hurt my feelings.

I said you acted like a jackass, not that you are one. If that hurt you then I apologize, but that doesn't excuse what you did.

 

[Vesxpura]

I said you acted like a jackass, not that you are one. If that hurt you then I apologize, but that doesn't excuse what you did.

yeah that is a derogatory term. i accept ur apology

 

[FinePoint]

yeah that is a derogatory term. i accept ur apology

Well now if you apologize back then this can be considered 'talked out' I think.

Edit: I did not notice they already did in the thread, so I'd consider this resolved.

 

[Arceus0x]

Well now if you apologize back then this can be considered 'talked out' I think.

He did in the thread, let's just forget this.

 

[FinePoint]

He did in the thread, let's just forget this.

Alright, all is probably good then.
Thank you both for being reasonable.

 

[Azertyhuuh]

I removed some of the abilities from my thread and decided to leave them for a separate thread. TWILIGHT-OP opposed Acausality Type 5 and BDE Type 1 Erasure, but those points have now been removed from the thread. Because of that, his opposition no longer addresses the current version of the thread.

Can I remove his opposition now, since the points he objected to are no longer part of the thread?

 

[Dark_Soul20189]

I removed some of the abilities from my thread and decided to leave them for a separate thread. TWILIGHT-OP opposed Acausality Type 5 and BDE Type 1 Erasure, but those points have now been removed from the thread. Because of that, his opposition no longer addresses the current version of the thread.

Can I remove his opposition now, since the points he objected to are no longer part of the thread?

No since he still disagrees with BDE 1, something that is still in the CRT

Also, this is RvT; it's not supposed to be used in this thread. Go to the all-purpose thread, QnA or ask a staff member on their wall.

 

[Azertyhuuh]

No since he still disagrees with BDE 1, something that is still in the CRT

Also, this is RvT; it's not supposed to be used in this thread. Go to the all-purpose thread, QnA or ask a staff member on their wall.

He only disagreed with BDE Type 1 as it relates to the Mysterious Space, and you can verify that by reviewing his replies. As for the BDE Type 1 regarding the True Form, he never gave his opinion on it at all; he only rejected the BDE Type 1 for the Mysterious Space.

The BDE Type 1 for the True Form is unrelated to the Mysterious Space. You can check his comment on that yourself.

Also, please don't involve yourself in matters that don't concern you.

 

[LittleGuy99]

@GodlyCharmander is behaving aggressively in this thread (Context: Discussing the size of a sun and a character's stats, general scaling)
Examples:
Message 1
Message 2
He was already acting condescending before:
Message 1 (He gets angry easily when discussing)
Message 2 (mild)
Message 3 (A llitle passive-aggressive here)
Message 4 "But you'd caught me dead before I attempted to fix that again. Let people laugh at FTL Kris, I'll join them."
Message 5 "It's quite funny you think you could argue with me."
Message 6 (mild)
Message 7 "Your entire premise and argument is false analogies, false equivalences and fallacies to beginning to end, because you genuinely can't debate like a normal person, and needs to extrapolate every piece of pushback you receive." lol

In short: He is being disrespectful, condescending, and obnoxious, which goes against the site rules. And he said several times that he didn't want to interact with the verse anymore, but he still continues. I think something similar should be done like in this case where this person was being rude in the Dragon Ball thread and was banned from the topic. I'm not just saying this because of what I'm showing here, but because Charmander has displayed this behavior several times on this wiki, and Charmander was just warned about this behavior, not even 2 weeks prior.

 

[FinePoint]

I removed some of the abilities from my thread and decided to leave them for a separate thread. TWILIGHT-OP opposed Acausality Type 5 and BDE Type 1 Erasure, but those points have now been removed from the thread. Because of that, his opposition no longer addresses the current version of the thread.

Can I remove his opposition now, since the points he objected to are no longer part of the thread?

Why don't you just ask @TWILIGHT-OP directly if they still oppose the thread?

@GodlyCharmander is behaving aggressively in this thread (Context: Discussing the size of a sun and a character's stats, general scaling)
Examples:

Unfortunately I don't want to evaluate this report since I'm avoiding spoilers for Chapter 5 of Deltarune as I have not finished it yet.

Therefore, I would really greatly appreciate it if someone else could handle this.

 

[GodlyCharmander]

Message 6 (mild)

Message 2 (mild)

You literally included a joke about the general ratings ignoring the anti-feats from Chapter 4 and me saying the game literally shows you what I was arguing as examples of me being "aggressive", it's obvious that you're not doing this out of the goodness of your heart, or a fair justification, this is petty, and blatantly so.

Message 4 "But you'd caught me dead before I attempted to fix that again. Let people laugh at FTL Kris, I'll join them."

Who am I being disrespectful towards? Myself? Because I refuse to do the same CRT that got rejected? And because I find FTL Kris a funny rating?

Message 1
Message 2

Two nothing burgers. What's aggressive about me thinking they're interpreting things for the sake of rating

Neither of these messages communicate that belief aggressively.

Message 1 (He gets angry easily when discussing)

That's the only message that holds any water. And I'm not disrespectful, I'm frustrated because I've been explaining the same thing over and over and my point was being misrepresented, I didn't disrespect him, I didn't attack him personally, I even stepped away after that message to cool off, and we began talking normally right after.

Message 3 (A llitle passive-aggressive here)

Nothing burger, I cite the times where anti-feats were met with whataboutism, this isn't about anyone in particular, who am I being aggressive towards?

Message 5 "It's quite funny you think you could argue with me."

Because the topic at hand was blatant and there was overwhelming evidence against you believing the sun is real. So much so that the consensus currently is that it isn't real, and painfully small. I even list the evidence that I think is objective. "It's quite funny you think you could argue with me" because there is no evidence to support your point.

Message 7 "Your entire premise and argument is false analogies, false equivalences and fallacies to beginning to end, because you genuinely can't debate like a normal person, and needs to extrapolate every piece of pushback you receive." lol

This is me attacking an argument and citing the fallacies of that argument. Give me a break, this is genuinely the most blatant attempt at keeping me from UT/DR because I don't just accept any high values that come up. Omega was making false analogies towards my argument, and exaggerating my points to comical degrees, mocking them, which is fine, but all I did was pointing out that extrapolation.

 

[SomebodyData]

@GodlyCharmander is behaving aggressively in this thread (Context: Discussing the size of a sun and a character's stats, general scaling)
Examples:
Message 1
Message 2
He was already acting condescending before:
Message 1 (He gets angry easily when discussing)
Message 2 (mild)
Message 3 (A llitle passive-aggressive here)
Message 4 "But you'd caught me dead before I attempted to fix that again. Let people laugh at FTL Kris, I'll join them."
Message 5 "It's quite funny you think you could argue with me."
Message 6 (mild)
Message 7 "Your entire premise and argument is false analogies, false equivalences and fallacies to beginning to end, because you genuinely can't debate like a normal person, and needs to extrapolate every piece of pushback you receive." lol

In short: He is being disrespectful, condescending, and obnoxious, which goes against the site rules. And he said several times that he didn't want to interact with the verse anymore, but he still continues. I think something similar should be done like in this case where this person was being rude in the Dragon Ball thread and was banned from the topic. I'm not just saying this because of what I'm showing here, but because Charmander has displayed this behavior several times on this wiki, and Charmander was just warned about this behavior, not even 2 weeks prior.

Given that he's already expressed a desire to not be involved in Deltarune on the wiki, and to avoid banning him outright, I think it might be a good idea if he was banned from the Deltarune topic like the Dragon Ball example.

 

[GodlyCharmander]

Given that he's already expressed a desire to not be involved in Deltarune on the wiki

I retract that desire, it was made out of frustration, and using that against me is unfair

to avoid banning him outright

There's literally nothing there that's ban worthy.

I think it might be a good idea if he was banned from the Deltarune topic

If you do that, ban me outright, because there is nothing else I'm interested in this wiki.

 

[Azertyhuuh]

Why don't you just ask @TWILIGHT-OP directly if they still oppose the thread?

The CRT contained two separate arguments regarding BDE Type 1.

The first argument was that the True Form (the End) possesses BDE Type 1.

The second argument was that the Mysterious Space possesses BDE Type 1.

He only opposed the BDE Type 1 for the Mysterious Space, arguing that it relied on fourth-wall breaking material and that the Mysterious Space was only mentioned in the Q&A section rather than in the main work, so it should not be treated as canon. That is the entirety of his argument regarding the Mysterious Space, and that is exactly what he discussed in all of his comments here, here, and here.

The quote posted by Dark_Soul20189 is referring to the BDE Type 1 for the Mysterious Space, which is what he was discussing in those comments. He never addressed the True Form at all. Furthermore, quoting a single sentence from his comment without including the argument he was responding to makes it impossible to tell which BDE Type 1 he was disagreeing with, and only serves to confuse the staff. Normally, no one quotes a single sentence from someone's comment while omitting the context of what they were actually discussing.

Also, please note that I am only pointing this out because I did not list him as an opponent of the BDE Type 1 for the True Form. I am clarifying this now so that no one comes here later and accuses me of manipulating the votes again.

The Mysterious Space has nothing to do with the True Form, and that is the end of my point. TWILIGHT-OP never discussed the True Form; he only discussed the Mysterious Space.

 

[LittleGuy99]

There's literally nothing there that's ban worthy.

It's not just because of this, it's because of your general behavior

 

[GodlyCharmander]

It's not just because of this, it's because of your general behavior

It's genuinely insufferable and insane, how other users like Strym get to make these same type of comments about other people's arguments, with the same level of "passive-aggressiveness", with continuous examples, but they get brushed off because it's attacking the argument, but when it's me, the collective group of Deltarune Supporters that "just so happens to like high ratings", it suddenly becomes something ban worthy, something to get me away from the verse, because the simple act of showing frustration is seen like the devil's spawn.

It's just so obvious how targeted this is, and how many staff are friends with that group. If nothing there is ban worthy and you think my general behavior, of which you showed little to no evidence of, then why make it about that?

 

[LittleGuy99]

It's just so obvious how targeted this is, and how many staff are friends with that group. If nothing there is ban worthy and you think my general behavior, of which you showed little to no evidence of, then why make it about that?

What?

 

[SomebodyData]

I retract that desire, it was made out of frustration, and using that against me is unfair

Fair enough.

There's literally nothing there that's ban worthy.

Normally I'd agree with you but you were already only let back on the wiki with the promise of good behavior and have seemingly broken that promise repeatedly. Even just two weeks ago you were reported here iirc

If you do that, ban me outright, because there is nothing else I'm interested in this wiki.

We'll keep that in mind, but are you sure? I've seen you active in other threads and low-key you're one of the last good DB debaters on the wiki; I note this because if you're saying this out of frustration on the RVR thread, you may regret this.

 

[GodlyCharmander]

It's just so obvious how targeted this is, and how many staff are friends with that group. If nothing there is ban worthy and you think my general behavior, of which you showed little to no evidence of, then why make it about that?

It's actually, genuinely so easy to prove a double standard.

When I report someone for calling me a jackass, the reply is "well, you were being kind of a jackass, so this report is petty"

But when someone reports me for saying someone is exaggerating, "oh wow, we might ban him for life".

It's asinine, and if not a single soul here recognizes this, this isn't the place for me. Insane.

 

[Planck69]

I do agree with Data, that it seems to be UT/DR specifically that brings out this sort of frustration and behavior. I can agree with a topic ban there. Though, if they don't wish to engage in the wiki anyways, then I can respect that wish.

 

[SomebodyData]

It's actually, genuinely so easy to prove a double standard.

When I report someone for calling me a jackass, the reply is "well, you were being kind of a jackass, so this report is petty"

But when someone reports me for saying someone is exaggerating, "oh wow, we might ban him for life".

It's asinine, and if not a single soul here recognizes this, this isn't the place for me. Insane.

You're removing a lot of context here. You were already banned and many disagreed with your unbanning. You were only let back on the condition that your behavior changes. The issue is that it appears to have not changed.

 

[GodlyCharmander]

Normally I'd agree with you but you were already only let back on the wiki with the promise of good behavior and have seemingly broken that promise repeatedly. Even just two weeks ago you were reported here iirc

If any kind of assertiveness, regardless of how respectful it is, is considered bad behavior, despite the fact there are others who are more assertive than me, who are more passive-aggressive than me, who are allowed to mock argumentation unlike me, then the concept of good behavior is acting like a super-duper late season spongebob character, and that applies to me exclusively. I'm not going to do that.

We'll keep that in mind, but are you sure? I've seen you active in other threads and low-key you're one of the last good DB debaters on the wiki; I note this because if you're saying this out of frustration on the RVR thread, you may regret this.

If this nothing burger, targeted of a report, gets me banned from my favorite verse, then I want nothing to do with this wiki.

 

[Mr. Bambu]

@GodlyCharmander is behaving aggressively in this thread (Context: Discussing the size of a sun and a character's stats, general scaling)
Examples:
Message 1
Message 2
He was already acting condescending before:
Message 1 (He gets angry easily when discussing)
Message 2 (mild)
Message 3 (A llitle passive-aggressive here)
Message 4 "But you'd caught me dead before I attempted to fix that again. Let people laugh at FTL Kris, I'll join them."
Message 5 "It's quite funny you think you could argue with me."
Message 6 (mild)
Message 7 "Your entire premise and argument is false analogies, false equivalences and fallacies to beginning to end, because you genuinely can't debate like a normal person, and needs to extrapolate every piece of pushback you receive." lol

In short: He is being disrespectful, condescending, and obnoxious, which goes against the site rules. And he said several times that he didn't want to interact with the verse anymore, but he still continues. I think something similar should be done like in this case where this person was being rude in the Dragon Ball thread and was banned from the topic. I'm not just saying this because of what I'm showing here, but because Charmander has displayed this behavior several times on this wiki, and Charmander was just warned about this behavior, not even 2 weeks prior.

I do not like that this has gone on this way. I had hoped that these small reminders that you were on thin ice before would make you behave. I do not think this is an entirely one-sided matter, I think it would be fair to say that a measure of frustration is probably justified. But you have made no effort to improve, Charmander. You point to other users, but you have been given the greatest level of leniency. Abusing it because "well they do it" doesn't work, man. I want you to have a second chance but you have spat on that desire repeatedly at this point.

I am in favor of reinstating a ban for GodlyCharmander. Given the petty nature of the offenses, I do feel this should be a short one. I'd argue in favor of two months. Warnings do not work. I think this has been made obvious. We cannot be expected to render the RVRT a weekly get-together to discuss the latest aggression from Charmander.

Contrary to my fellow staff, I do not agree with a topic ban. I think Charmander is aggressive in general, and I think they are (in some cases justifiably) frustrated with Undertale/Deltarune on the wiki. They simply seem to lack the self-control to act fairly when frustrated.

 

[StrymULTRA]

It's genuinely insufferable and insane, how other users like Strym get to make these same type of comments about other people's arguments, with the same level of "passive-aggressiveness", with continuous examples, but they get brushed off because it's attacking the argument, but when it's me, the collective group of Deltarune Supporters that "just so happens to like high ratings", it suddenly becomes something ban worthy, something to get me away from the verse, because the simple act of showing frustration is seen like the devil's spawn.

Alright, given that my name has been put in, I'll just say something.

I have barely interacted with this wiki in the last month due to me being generally extra busy with irl matters like job, family and other friends, and I did not even stepped in the Deltarune thread until today because of me avoiding spoilers, and I do not even think I even did something report worthy, I only gave two light jabs in the DR thread now that were not even meant to be offensive at all and that was it. I literally was not reported ever since late 2024, lmao.

You instead make every single discussion heavy and toxic with the amount of "I am always right and if you're disagreeing with me then you are not able to even talk to me", you really think that making jabs against users that you're not even friendly with is a good look? I admit that I used to have this exact same behavior years ago, to then just dropping it because ultimately it's all just fiction, not that important, and getting needlessly mad at this is useless overall.

If nothing there is ban worthy and you think my general behavior, of which you showed little to no evidence of, then why make it about that?

I am pretty sure that shit like "because you genuinely can't debate like a normal person" indeed does not take place here lol. No matter who you're talking with, play nice or don't play.

 

[SomebodyData]

If any kind of assertiveness, regardless of how respectful it is, is considered bad behavior, despite the fact there are others who are more assertive than me, who are more passive-aggressive than me, who are allowed to mock argumentation unlike me, then the concept of good behavior is acting like a super-duper late season spongebob character, and that applies to me exclusively. I'm not going to do that.

If this nothing burger, targeted of a report, gets me banned from my favorite verse, then I want nothing to do with this wiki.

Do you have examples of people acting this way in the thread to react with passive aggressiveness and mocked your arguments? Because it looks like you were the one who started any issues in the thread, not the other way around.

 

[GodlyCharmander]

You were only let back on the condition that your behavior changes. The issue is that it appears to have not changed.

Data, my previous aggressiveness would have me cussing the 4th generation of someone's family over Dragon Ball. It's not comparable.

I demonstrated mild frustrations over Ad Infintum, and mocked the Wiki's current ratings of Deltarune verse.

You're saying this is comparable to me accusing fellow staff members of being criminals and cussing out their intelligence?

 

[FinePoint]

The CRT contained two separate arguments regarding BDE Type 1.

I'm just saying that you can explain that to TWILIGHT_OP themselves, and ask if they still want to be listed under the disagreements, or if the removals have moved them to agreement with the thread.

That would be better than asking us all here, since we may not even know anything about what's being discussed.

 

[Antvasima]

I do not like that this has gone on this way. I had hoped that these small reminders that you were on thin ice before would make you behave. I do not think this is an entirely one-sided matter, I think it would be fair to say that a measure of frustration is probably justified. But you have made no effort to improve, Charmander. You point to other users, but you have been given the greatest level of leniency. Abusing it because "well they do it" doesn't work, man. I want you to have a second chance but you have spat on that desire repeatedly at this point.

I am in favor of reinstating a ban for GodlyCharmander. Given the petty nature of the offenses, I do feel this should be a short one. I'd argue in favor of two months. Warnings do not work. I think this has been made obvious. We cannot be expected to render the RVRT a weekly get-together to discuss the latest aggression from Charmander.

Contrary to my fellow staff, I do not agree with a topic ban. I think Charmander is aggressive in general, and I think they are (in some cases justifiably) frustrated with Undertale/Deltarune on the wiki. They simply seem to lack the self-control to act fairly when frustrated.

2 months seem too much to me. Maybe a 1 month warning ban would be appropriate?

 

[Eden_Warlock99]

Do you have examples of people acting this way in the thread to react with passive aggressiveness and mocked your arguments? Because it looks like you were the one who started any issues in the thread, not the other way around.

Tbf I kinda did that here and here. The second one is a different UT topic but it seems sorta relevant?

 

[GodlyCharmander]

I am in favor of reinstating a ban for GodlyCharmander. Given the petty nature of the offenses, I do feel this should be a short one

You people's punishment system is absolutely nonsensical.
"Well, these are petty offenses where no one was disrespect and some things were even jokes/taken out of context, let's ban him."

The fact it was targeted? Nothing.
The fact most of it is a nothing burger? Nothing.
The fact that, apparently, the simple act of attacking argumentation and being frustrated is prohibited? Nothing.

Good riddance. Genuinely. I'm trying to at least fix the verses I'm passionate so this place won't be a laughing stock to the collective entirety of the internet when it comes to my verses specifically. Make it permanent, don't allow me back even if I humiliate myself.

2 months seem too much to me. Maybe a 1 month warning ban would be appropriate?

I apologize, Ant. But I can't do this anymore. Walking on eggshells over the pettiest of disagreements would just make debating here miserable. Because I was under the impression that at least showcasing frustration was allowed, but apparently I was mistaken. Of course any disagreements are not target at the fellow staff, or at you, in any way. But it's clear to me that people are willing to turn a situation scale 1 to a situation scale 100.

Please don't ever allow me to comeback again, I will not be setting foot here.

@LittleGuy99 congratulations, go commemorate that you will get higher fake numbers on your verse without any pushback, since that's clearly and evidently your objective here.

 

[Mr. Bambu]

You people's punishment system is absolutely nonsensical.
"Well, these are petty offenses where no one was disrespect and some things were even jokes/taken out of context, let's ban him."

The fact it was targeted? Nothing.
The fact most of it is a nothing burger? Nothing.
The fact that, apparently, the simple act of attacking argumentation and being frustrated is prohibited? Nothing.

Good riddance. Genuinely. I'm trying to at least fix the verses I'm passionate so this place won't be a laughing stock to the collective entirety of the internet when it comes to my verses specifically. Make it permanent, don't allow me back even if I humiliate myself.

Okay.

 

[Antvasima]

I would much prefer if we would have treated Charmander less severely. He has a good point about having to walk on eggshells to the degree that he was not even allowed to express frustration.

He is free to contact me via my Community Central wiki message wall if he changes his mind.

 

[FinePoint]

I would much prefer if we would have treated Charmander less severely. He has a good point about having to walk on eggshells to the degree that he was not even allowed to express frustration.

For what it's worth, I think he was handled pretty professionally and objectively, even by Bambu.
If he had not stormed out, I think it's likely we would've ended up going relatively easy on him despite his record.

 

[Mr. Bambu]

I would much prefer if we would have treated Charmander less severely. He has a good point about having to walk on eggshells to the degree that he was not even allowed to express frustration.

He is free to contact me via my Community Central wiki message wall if he changes his mind.

I can't control how he feels about the situation. He feels that any action taken after his numerous small offenses, after being allowed back under the explicit promise from him that he would behave well, is "insane". I don't think my evaluations of his offenses demand that he walks on eggshells. But he does have to have a basic level of respect for his fellow user that he has adamantly refused to use. For most users, we would warn them for a rather long time before action was taken. Even here, we have warned Charmander many times, despite his "last chance" being the fact that he was allowed back at all. I would have preferred if he didn't crash out, if he took whatever decision with his chin up, taken whatever time to address his anger issues and try to learn how to work well with others. But this did not come to pass, and I will not lose sleep over it.