- 6,018
- 321
I know, sorry.
-
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 Violations Reports - 54
- Thread starter Antvasima
- Start date
- Status
JohnCenaNation
He/Him- 3,220
- 296
- 15,486
- 22,614
That doesn't seem like derailment at all.
- 5,322
- 433
Its a bit of a derail going into the wikis stance on speed and blitz but overall he's simply adressing someones complaint about speed. Why not simply tell them to take it to their walls? I'd understand if they continued arguing after a request but you haven't even asked them to stop arguing their yet.
I also find it strange your claiming his goal is derailment... Over all he's simply explaining why the wikis rules on speed exist, while slightly agressive theirs nothing warning worthy their from my prespective.
I also find it strange your claiming his goal is derailment... Over all he's simply explaining why the wikis rules on speed exist, while slightly agressive theirs nothing warning worthy their from my prespective.
- 14,464
- 4,493
- 5,336
- 1,216
- 5,322
- 433
Well the alien x guy made the another thread that nearly identically matches the preivous users reasoning/explanation this time covering the atomic x. Though he's using slightly different explanations I beleive it is likely the same person... especially considering how new the account is... Though Id like some more opinions to be sure
- 31,485
- 34,360
I don't remember the guy who tried to wank Alien X as multiversal, but I do remember a lot of socks of people trying to downplay him. This guy appears to be doing the opposite, though unsure and he probably could be a sock.
I have given the other guy a warning also, the one calling people "wankers".
I have given the other guy a warning also, the one calling people "wankers".
- 5,322
- 433
Originally they attempted to upgrade alien x, using suspicously similar logic as the new account, when these upgrades were denied they contiued to mock and downplay alien x as a form of trolling. Atleast thats what I remeber.
- 31,485
- 34,360
In that case, I suppose ColdSnapper is probably another Sock. I have taken care of him.
- 5,336
- 1,216
Thanks for the help.
- 11,135
- 14,120
- 7,413
- 3,302
He accused us of wanking a certain verse in two threads, but otherwise made no personal attacks against anyone and didn't seem too bad.Antvasima said:
I and Medeus both gave him warnings on his message wall.
Perhaps a permanent block and deletion of his contributions via WHAM was too harsh, considering it was his first offence? Another chance?
- 5,322
- 433
I saw the thread early on and he was making a bunch of claims about unfair matches, easy wins and wanking. Saying that I didn't see how it continued as Im not overly invested in dragon ball so I cant say how severe he got. Aplogies for not being of greater assitance.
- 10,758
- 6,491
I really don't trust someone whose first response to a ban is making a sock and going on a rant like this, but maybe if his ban was unfair I can see him being given another chance
I'm neutral
I'm neutral
- 5,336
- 1,216
I'm against a second chance as he might have been a sock in the first place.
- 5,322
- 433
Hmm From what little I saw he wasnt to severe, though I also agree imediatly coming back via sock and going a rant is grounds for distrust.....It also leaves the question why he didn't attempt to contact the staff via community centeral....
In the end Im also nuetral on the issue, if he's allowed back he should be warned he's on semi thin Ice and that he should be more careful with his post especially given how new he is.
In the end Im also nuetral on the issue, if he's allowed back he should be warned he's on semi thin Ice and that he should be more careful with his post especially given how new he is.
Agnaa
VS Battles
Super Moderator
Administrator
Calculation Group
Translation Helper
Human Resources
Gold Supporter
- 15,592
- 13,868
He probably didn't contact staff via community central because he seems new to wikis.The pen or the sword said:
He calls this place a "server" and has tons of other really basic misunderstandings of terminology (he seems to think staff/the site as a whole makes matches instead of just one person). Making a new account's more intuitive to new users.
I also think that the ban + wham was a bit too hasty but ┬»\_(Òâä)_/┬»
- 5,336
- 1,216
If he truly is just new here I would be fine with an unban. If not then he can stay banned.
- 5,322
- 433
Fair point...Hmmm..... I hadn't examined his text closly enough. Im fine with an unban then. Though he should be warned about making socks/multiple accounts and how thats not allowed...
- 5,336
- 1,216
Multiple accounts is fine as long as you have a valid reason which he seemingly does.
- 8,753
- 1,617
Even Schnee had one before, as he pointed out, mainly from forgetting his password.
- 5,322
- 433
Fair I was more thinking of the fact he used it to get around a ban, my mistake.
- 5,336
- 1,216
He seems to know about Wham though.Agnaa said:
- 6,901
- 4,323
I don't see anything especially block worthy, but maybe disallow him from participating in DBZ and OPM threads until he realises how our site treats AP.
- 10,758
- 6,491
I don't know if I have complaints about the initial ban but using WHAM definitely seems unnecessary going by what the situation was described to be
Why use that if he isn't posting highly inapropriate or genuinely harmful content?
Why use that if he isn't posting highly inapropriate or genuinely harmful content?
- 2,153
- 307
This guy here just go in and remove Gilgamesh's once Low 2C, currently 2A key, without making a CRT for it.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
