• 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 - 65

Status
Not open for further replies.
I agree with Julian. Also, the VSTF already cleaned up the mess.
 
Was told to make a "decent, concise, and coherent case" for unbanning ShadowWarrior1999 here so don't tell me to make a thread for it. I'm going in circles.

As a brief summary of what was decided for off-site stuff from this thread:

Sera EX said:
Off-site behavior is completely irrelevant except in cases of:
Click to expand...
If you were to look at the reasonings of his ban due to off-site Discord drama, you'll see that Shadow has violated... None of these, actually.

  • This is the only one you could make a case for, but there was nothing that he said that caused any form of destabilization. The most it did was, what, hurt the feelings of others due to childish insults? Nothing thay warrants a ban.
  • No threats of any form from anybody on site. No doxxing, hacking, threats of physical harm, etc. Nothing much else to say on this front.
  • I hope that this would be an obvious no, but I'll reiterate that Shadow has done nothing that's regarded as criminal activity.
While the thread is still in-progress, everybody agrees that Sera's sugfestions is what generally should be held as what could lead to bans. There will obviously be things that aren't listed, but Shadow hasn't done anything else that would warrant a ban.
 
I told you not to bring it up, as the Human Resources Group has discussed the issue very extensively with Mr. Bambu and DarkDragonMedeus before they reached a decision. To keep digging up the issue over and over and over is only wasting all of our time and most likely won't lead anywhere.
 
No offense, Ant, but the judgement of your staff isn't always reliable. If you fail to realize that things can change, and that cases such as these aren't always concrete, then there's not much I can say.

Several staff agree with me in case you've failed to notice, with Bambu himself saying he was neutral on the topic of Shadow. So don't act as if this is something unchangeable, Ant, when the "standards" for this weren't even made until Shadow was brought up. And that comment you made about it being repeatedly brought up? Yeah, that was a lie. I have people telling me left and right to do different things, and I'm not gonna be at your beck and call in this.
 
I almost never lie. I vaguely recall that this has been brought up repeatedly before. Regardless, alright then, if other staff members wish to discuss this issue, feel free.
 
@Ant maybe we should create a separate thread for this in general discussion and highlight it again once we have decided on our new off-site standards.
 
Antvasima said:
It should be a staff only thread in that case to avoid lots of drama.

Maybe Shake could be allowed to comment as well.
Click to expand...
Emessary from Hell should comment as well, since he made the case against the ban in the first place
 
As the person who has been dealing with him today, I gotta say he's just trying to get attention looking at what actions he commits.

Granted, he's being disrespectful at the people in the wiki when clashing the scaling is incorrect and that the site isn't good or this. Meanwhile he directly rejects making CRTs to discuss what he thinks is accurate.

So while overall harmless, he's not productive. Seems to be a child trying to figure in internet.
 
I think a warning is appropriate, but not in good enough condition to be giving out warnings ATM. Basically tell him that while he is entitled to his opinion, he should be mindful about what he says regarding the wiki and the statistics. And that Vs Threads should be going by the profile rather than constantly derail. And he should be moving it to content revisions if he has a problem with the stats.
 
I'm not sure what's the basis for the warning so with a little help I can give him a proper warning.
 
The Calaca said:
I'm not sure what's the basis for the warning so with a little help I can give him a proper warning.
Click to expand...
Sure, I think it can be on this Site Rule:

You can leave comments in the forums if you want to argue about a character's power or point out things that seem wrong, but don't be rude, obnoxious, unreasonable, or overly argumentative. Also, try to keep the forum threads on point, and to not veer off-topic.
 
Mado once again has done that thing where s/he tries to tell people how to do their jobs with that whole sanctimonious thing s/he does here. I gave a response so no need for action, but mentioning it here as s/he was reported for this or something similar before.
 
That's one of the things I want to adress in the discussion I want to do, mostly because some rules are misplaced.
 
I deleted the message. It was links to debating him in Discord.

Anyway, he seems very clueless and rather obnoxious. Perhaps you should tell him to wait with his interactions here until he gets more accustomed to how this place works? You can link him to our rules pages as well.
 
I have already done so in his message wall. But I agree with waiting until he finally learns how to work here
 
Okay. Feel free to give him instructions then.
 
I think this user might be suspicious. He's got a swear word in his username; albeit censored, but that's still a typical troll name.

Also randomly wrote this rude comment on this blog. Not sure if that's enough for a ban, but seems very suspicious. The comment is very tame, but just his name combined with that attitude is still fishy.
 
I do not think that it is a troll. He has a previous seemingly harmless edit history. We should probably unblock him and ask him to change his username instead.
 
I agree with Ant, looking at his editing history, he looks like someone normal, just didn't agree much with the blog and got a weird nickname.
 
Should I unblock him then?
 
I think so, it does not seem any danger to wiki, except the strange nickname and have been a little aggressive in the comment.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Antvasima
  • Sticky
Wiki Vandalism Reports
32 33 34
Replies
1K
Views
99K
Elizhaa
Elizhaa
Lloydblitzed
  • Locked
Discussion Rules lil Revision
Replies
39
Views
2K
Antvasima
Antvasima
A minor addition about discussion rules
Replies
4
Views
778
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