• 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 - 58

Status
Not open for further replies.
DarkDragonMedeus said:
Anyway, I'd appreciate if you guys stopped bombarding this thread.
Click to expand...
We don't like the amount of posts we've taken up either, but the fact is that this level of punishment is uncalled for, which as you can see many people have already noted.
 
Crimson, nothing I said was as bad as the behavior he showed. He quite into came into the thread with hostility. Also you yourself made several strawman fallaices at me in the thread and acted more condescending than i have. Again, don't shift the blame onto others.
 
Literally your first comment to him was as follows

"Funnily enough if i recall you were one who stone walled and didn't even debate much. It was pretty handily debunked."

The discussion opened on bad terms.
 
The Prince of Counters said:
Crimson, nothing I said was as bad as the behavior he showed. He quite into came into the thread with hostility. Also you yourself made several strawman fallaices at me in the thread and acted more condescending than i have. Again, don't shift the blame onto others.
Click to expand...
I find it quite interesting personally you blame him for shifting the blame by saying that he was doing exactly the same thing kek. Irony much.
 
The Prince of Counters said:
Honestly, it just seems like his friends are getting upset over him getting banned at this point. Mob mentality isn't good for anyone.
Click to expand...
Oh, Hl3 isn't the friend of many people kek. It's just most people can spot a unfair ban. Anyway, Appeal to Motive isn't the best in this situation when actual arguments are being presented.
 
Unfair ban? Trust me, this isn't an unfair ban, there have been plenty of actual users getting banned unfairly. Anyway, yall should quit spamming here and derailing and let the staff handle it.
 
Anyway, as it stands, based on the precedent set by this ban, I'd estimate about half the wiki, including PoC himself, could arguably be banned using this logic, which opens up a large can of worms on our standards anyway. It would be best just to give everyone involved a warning whether or not you think it was rude or insulting.
 
The Prince of Counters said:
Unfair ban? Trust me, this isn't an unfair ban, there have been plenty of actual users getting banned unfairly. Anyway, yall should quit spamming here and derailing and let the staff handle it.
Click to expand...
You mean like the staff who have commented so far supporting what we've said?
 
The Prince of Counters said:
Mob mentality isn't good for anyone.
Click to expand...
Mob Mentality is the idea of a large group of people overriding logic in favor of one belief everyone is already spouting. We're simply giving our own opinions and perspectives, using our own reasoning, and there happens to be a large group of people. This isn't a mob.
 
DDM this is a massive reach for banning someone. Did you even bother reading the thread where PoC was provoking HI3 to insult him? Like Yobo said, at least half the people in the wiki would be banned with that logic, so this ban is unjustified and at best should've just given him a warning.
 
I did read the thread, and didn't care about the outcome. However, while Prince of the Counters may have been rather blunt, but he didn't sound malicious or explosive. HI3 on the other hand was very explosive and especially him insulting Matthew Schroeder behind his back. And he's had numerous instances of behaving like this. Okay, it's less about the number of warnings you have gotten, and more about the number of times you legitimately acted out. Which he's been known for using excessive profanity and has deliberately insulted people who disagree with him. He was also clearly the instigator. Especially after he recieved his final warning 5 days ago.

I don't mind unblocking him, you guys really need to stop cluttering up the thread instead of taking it up to message walls.
 
Well, there are numerous things that I could point out there, but the most glaring issue is that walls are simply not where this discussion is meant to be. Taking all the people in a argument into a wall does not work for any thread, and that includes rule violation. If we have that much of a issue with discussion of a ban, it may be time for a separate thread just for that.
 
@DDM >> Cluttering up the thread instead of taking it to message walls

Uhh, excuse me, but this is a Rule Violation report thread. You've banned someone for illogical reasons, this is like the number 1 spot to discuss this stuff. Also in this very thread.

Remember to inform members via their message walls if that you have reported them here, in case they have performed severe enough rule-violations to risk being blocked. However, this should only be used in uncertain cases, not if they have done something instantly ban worthy, or if their offenses are minor.

You did not even follow this part of the rules. Nothing that HI3 did is remotely immediately ban worthy.
 
Theglassman12 said:
DDM this is a massive reach for banning someone. Did you even bother reading the thread where PoC was provoking HI3 to insult him? Like Yobo said, at least half the people in the wiki would be banned with that logic, so this ban is unjustified and at best should've just given him a warning.
Click to expand...


This part is a load of shit, nothing i said at the start would be able to provoke him. He started angry, and i said he was stone-walling. Thanks but don't try to make it seem like I'm the one who made him angry whenever he came into the thread angry.
 
I suppose saying someone is stone walling is a valid reason for his next reply? He definitely made a mountain out of a mile hill considering I didn't even insult him. Not sure how you can find someone saying you're a stonewall is offensive.
 
As for hl3 supposedly "insulting Matt", the only comment he had that could be construed as that is the whole "Matt can't take an L", all he did besides that was accuse Matt of being the one stonewalling the 2-A thread, which isn't an insult and anyone seeing the 2-A thread can see that it's true
 
@PoC and jumping the gun by accusing someone of something that didn't really happen to begin with is valid in of itself? In a thread that had nothing to do with the ratings of Nasuverse?
 
Aside from all these arguments, there is something I wish to point out here.

Remember to inform members via their message walls if that you have reported them here, in case they have performed severe enough rule-violations to risk being blocked. However, this should only be used in uncertain cases, not if they have done something instantly ban worthy, or if their offenses are minor.

This part. This was blatantly ignored in this situation. This case was not some troll or vandal with barely any edits being banned, in such a case it should, of course, be fine to ban them instantly. This was an active user with over 20k edits being banned without being given any chance to argue his report at all, despite the rule violation thread directly stating that members should be informed of being reported here, I would hardly consider such a case "instantly ban worthy" like a troll would be.

It would be best if decisions like these weren't made so hastily and the user in question was actually allowed to argue, this applies to both this situation and any similar situations in future.
 
Well, Medeus has unblocked HI3. He made a simple mistake and corrected it, so there is likely no need to spam this thread further with talk about this issue.

I agree that HI3 has behaved in a rather aggressive manner recently though.

Has the IP block been removed as well?
 
Can somebody explain over what issue(s) Matthew was reported to Fandom?
 
^ This is important, in case I need to talk with their staff about the issue.
 
I don't remember him even being reported to Fandom, I think they meant to say Human Resource Group. I don't recall Matt ever doing or saying anything illegal/Fandom report worthy.
 
I was told today that he was reported a while back, but not very recently, and nothing happened as a result.
 
Not to butt in but it seems if you are close or friends with certain moderators on this website you are given more leniency toward punishments and are usually there to back you up when something goes down. What just happened is a prime example of that. And its rapidly becoming more transparent since I joined.

Not to derail or anything but this could be a major issue down the line so staff would probably want to address down the line, so situations don't happen like this again.
 
Most of the people arguing against the ban, especially at the start, were non-staff...

A lot of the time even people without friends in the staff have other users realizing if a warning is unnecessary. And a lot of the time staff get in trouble despite having friends in staff.

I think this sort of thing inevitably happens to a minor extent, but I don't think it happened here, and I think a lot of what you would have seen could be chalked up to other factors (i.e. a user with 0 edits lashing out vs a user with 10,000 edits lashing out, we know that the latter can contribute positively to the community, and they'd have staff members defending that).
 
Maybe you aren't getting my point. If the latter were someone other than PoC, A ban would not have happened and DDM wouldn't have been gung-ho is my point. All I saw were small bullshit reasonings as to why he banned him when the real reason is someone was picking with his friend.

As someone who regularly gets into confronatations with Mods as I do even I know that BARELY warranted a warning.

And might I remind this type of favortism is what fueled that little incident last year but you're right im not gona argue.

Just gonna go back in my shadows and watch the choas ensue.

Till next time
 
I mean, I agree with Judge here, and similarly with the issues that happened last year where it was pointed out that I was being punished but the other engaging with myself wasn't punished, and while I myself got a ban the other person didn't recieve any punishment, and to quote the famous words of Zach:

"Because he's an admin"
 
So your point is that PoC got banned because he said something rude to a staff member, and that staff member's friend banned him? That is more reasonable and more likely, but I don't think there's a lot we (or any community) could expect to do about that besides correct mistakes, and encourage more people to report bad behaviour than just any staff member's friend.

Basically I think it's inevitable that people focus more on issues concerning their friends, but I think all we can do is overturn unfair bans fueled by that, and encourage non-staff to speak out when they're harassed. But it is still hard to untie things from staff's feelings, especially since this sort of thing is heavily based on opinion, with no two cases being exactly identical. I think staff are legitimately trying to do the right thing (even if some are trying harder than others), so the most we can say is "wish you guys were better at this", idk if there's a better way to address the issue.

I don't remember which incident from last year you're talking about? But alrighty.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Antvasima
  • Sticky
Wiki Vandalism Reports
32 33 34
Replies
1K
Views
99K
Homie890
Lloydblitzed
  • Locked
Discussion Rules lil Revision
Replies
39
Views
2K
Antvasima
Antvasima
A minor addition about discussion rules
Replies
4
Views
780
Deleted member 40688
  • Locked
Clarification Of Sentence Phrasings And Addition Of Expected Punishments For Each Type Of Rule Breach For All Rules Pages
Replies
21
Views
2K
Mahek_The_Assassin_Silent_Killer
Mr. Bambu
  • Locked
Slight Adjustment to Rules Regarding Original Works
2 3
Replies
80
Views
9K
Antvasima
Antvasima
Back
Top