• 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.

The Vs. Battles Wiki Problem

Status
Not open for further replies.
But in that you are assuming it being high somehow makes it more appealing/accurate, which is not what I am claiming nor should that be the case if they are both equally likely in a vacuum.

I don't think I'm claiming that? I'm just claiming that that's how things practically trend. High values being accepted paves the way for higher values being accepted, while low values being accepted doesn't pave the way for those values being disregarded in favor of even lower values. That is my entire point.
 
Yeah, but why are things moving upward an inherently bad thing? If they just... happen to move upwards then so be it. As long things are still equally accurate in all those cases, then go for it. But other wise it shouldnt be changed
 
I just want to say.. members being recommended as staff, and then being approved... The recommended picks to be appointed as staff.. should be very carefully evalutated.. I noticed some strange occurences recently.. that could likely lead to bigger civil disputes between staff members on certain threads... im being vague on purpose.. So im sorry if im not being well understood.. I just see it being a point of high voltiability (Explosiveness) in the near future if not done carefully enough.. or some how a better system for picking who can be recommended as a staff pick should be thought of..

cutting some of the crypticness.. i'll say it like this.. Do you think its possible for this system to be abused? (@in regards to staff members recommending a member to be staff just so they can have 1 more additonal staff vote in a thread that is a split 50/50 on staff votes? thats what im worried about...)

Off-website-personal messaging conspiracies.. maybe even groups.. for example... discord?
 
I think we all have dragged the topic I bit too far right now. This is Sera's thread about his opinion of the wiki overall.

I'm done at least.
 
Again, moving upwards isn't inherently a bad thing.

But if there are two possible approaches we can take to evaluate something, and on the surface with one choice they both seem to produce identical results, but if iterated dozens of times one spirals out into infinity, while one remains controlled and doesn't change, the one with the positive feedback loop on itself seems to be more unreliable, since it takes its own results and increasingly exacerbates itself, while we'd be expecting behaviour that slowly narrows in on the correct answer.

Does that make any sense?
 
I feel like there's some misinterpretation on the whole high-end/low-end thing.

Neither is inherently more reliable. Going for a low-end when the high-end is more reliable is downplay, and going for the high-end when the low-end is more reliable is wank.

However, it should be noted that a large majority of the time, the low-end calcs are more reliable for a wide multitude of reasons. Not inherently, just generally.
 
I'll be honest to say that the comments are qaaay to many to read right now, but from what I get from OP alone...

  • Verses with no proof should go, yes. That's what the audit was made for, which is being carried by two people from what I'm seeing. I might try to join in once I'm free from the hell known as school.
  • Higher tiered verses got more attention overall due to several facts. They just got revised, which means that everyone already there needed to be revised at well. New ones are a lot harder to prove then simply making a 9-B profile for obvious reason. People generally like "muh infinity better than yours" (and as an Ergenverse supporter, that's my bread n butter). Not sure you can reasonably change that.
  • For staff, people tend to dislike them due to them having authority even when not really all that justified (I could go in a random verses' crt and my word would be worth a lot), and due to some staff members abusing their power and/or debating in a frustrating manner. I'll give an exemple cuz I can name myself without much drama. I misunderstood how 5D requirement worked, and was going against LOL revisions a lot. If weekly and/or Ultima weren't stuff then it probably would have stopped there, despite me being wrong.
Reprimend staff for being too bullheaded, and the staff in question should attempt to try and right whatever wrong happened. If it's too stressful, then take a break as a staff member for a few month. I'm certain that has been done before, or could be done if not.

  • Whole no feats thing is kind of... eh. I don't know what feat you expect a tier 0 do. Because any "feat" from tier 1s would first need statements that makes the feat impressive. Stuff with absolutely no proof should be revised or deleted, but statements can be used without someone doing a feat directly on that level. Context, as always.

My bad if this stuff is outdated with the current discussion.
 
Sera EX said:
I never expected a Tier 0 to have feats. I do expect a 2-B to have feats or powerscaling though.
Click to expand...
I don't see the requirement to actually destroy 1000+ universes for 2-B.

If the driving point of the plot is to stop the bad guy from destroying the thousand universes, then them not actually doing it is not quite enough to ignore it.

Words can be more than enough for any tier, as long as the source is reliable and clear enough.
 
If the multiverse is structured to have more than 1001 universes, and the character can "Destroy all existence" including all timelines, then that's enough for 2-B.
 
@Risci

You're arguing for "feats via stakes" (which I'm perfectly fine with) when I am arguing against, for example, 2-B based on vague statements.

"He's going to destroy all the universes" vs. "He exists outside the boundaries of all the universes".
 
in regards to staff members recommending a member to be staff just so they can have 1 more additonal staff vote in a thread that is a split 50/50 on staff votes? thats what im worried about...

Coming from someone who agreed both that we have too many staff and that the importance of staff in threads is being overemphasized, I don't think this is really possible. It takes time for a reccomendation to drive, and a lot of people complaining about having way too many staff drives are the staff themselves.
 
Sera EX said:
@Risci

You're arguing for "feats via stakes" (which I'm perfectly fine with) when I am arguing against, for example, 2-B based on vague statements.

"He's going to destroy all the universes" vs. "He exists outside the boundaries of all the universes".
Click to expand...
You forgot the most ridiculous justification, "the number copy of the game"
 
Problem like those are normal in a versus community, people are humans, therefore ... the best among the worst, is actually the best we can achieve as a versus community.
 
I clearly never said demote anyone. My advice to staff that have just lost interest or can't perform their duties at least part-time, they should just retire. It's an advice to the staff themselves, not the bureaucracy to demote anyone. Ant and Ryukama have said many times that real life comes first. I especially know that, being a mother. I will not be here forever, that's why I made this thread to give my final thoughts before then.

Same thing with obscure verses. I never said delete a verse just because it's obscure. Don't act like I did. I'm saying that in the future, we should think twice before allowing any more verses with only two or three people knowledgeable on it/are even capable of reviewing the information (either due to regional constraints, a language barrier, etc.) I used Masadaverse as an example saying something like DI should've been allowed but not KKK. That doesn't mean I want KKK deleted, so stop damage controlling and think about why I used it as an example, rather than see it as a direct emote the verse entirely.

I'm only asking for you guys to comprehend what I'm saying, or at least ask for clarifications rather than make reactionary assumptions and arguments.
 
> Verses with no proof should go, yes. That's what the audit was made for, which is being carried by two people from what I'm seeing. I might try to join in once I'm free from the hell known as school.

There are a few verses currently marked in Red which I'd see as being the highest priority to be purged if it came to that, assuming they can't be fixed up to standards.

And I have an incomplete list of profiles which don't have any Verse pages, which will eventually need sorting through.
 
Newendigo said:
Also yeah I'm hellbent up with what Sera brough about creating pages.
If anyone want make a page about verse or character(s) (Popular or unpopular), they should, by all means, be fully willing to consistently work on it, otherwise those should be outright deleted with no futher discussion.

There are many pages with oudated stats due to their contributors just leaving them out of boredom or lazyness (No blaming the ones that are too overworked, but still).
Click to expand...
 
Yes, a certain series get 2-B because the amount of the copy of the game that has been sold IRL.

See, normally I'd be combative at this, but I have to be a better staff member as I stated earlier. So I'll say "I respect your opinion" and move on.
 
I agree. This is especially worst with the gatekeeping effect (which I accidentally cut out of the critique).

>This person is handling this verse

Turns out that same person is trying to do many verses at once. Please, stop gatekeeping.
 
I also want to say a subjective opinion here, but I feel a little more strongly on the matter of obscurity with the inability to access due to language barrier.

This is primarily an English speaking site. Most of our visitors (not our members mind you, as somehow Portuguese is likely our highest) speak English as their first language. While anime is huge, so are subs, so that's not a problem. What is a problem are JP only verses that only a handful of members can read. If said members have an agenda and want it to be a certain tier, they can cherrypick or take out of context and no one would be any wiser. We had a verse that was tier 0 for this exact reason. Now I also said only. As Ex said, Digimon has a lot of stuff that's JP only, but Digimon as a whole isn't JP only. On a related note, I wouldn't expect a Japanese VSBW to have like, Danny Phantom or inFAMOUS on their site, if it wasn't properly translated. Heck, I'm pretty sure ACF didn't have a lot of western series on their site. From what I can tell, creating profiles for series that are both, emphasis on both, incredibly obscure and incredibly foreign with no translation, only serves to benefit one person, and that's the creator of the profile.
 
I can say that I've always tried to read everything and carefully consider problems before clearing any revisions, although that has had the effect of making me less eager to check many CRTs. I'm not sure I agree with you on the importance of statements (I didn't get all that well what you consider fine and not fine tho) but I do think that is how every staff should approach threads

I also admit that I'm not that good of a staff anymore, I have not been motivated to look over pages for a while and recently have reduced activity in general, were it not for HR duties I would probably seriously consider retiring right now. I hope I can improve on things after reading this however
 
@cal

As far as I know that's a matter that can happen in any verse, translated or not. Pretty sure admins don't go read entire works to check if what user X is doing is cherry-picking or not. Which is where the whole "having faith" thing comes in (multilingual members list is also here to help in those cases afaik). So I don't think it's a fitting justification to the obscure verses part.

My take on it is basically what Agnaa said here :

No they don't, they just need to face the same scrutiny as all other verses, and if no-one puts in the time to do that then they don't get a high tier. This is exactly what happened with Ergenverse, it was sitting at Unknown for ages until people came along to verify it. Also, KKK has fan translations, and the parts we use have been verified by many multilingual members. If you're disqualifying material like that then we'd have to kick off dozens of non-English verses for no good reason (since we have the information and have verified that it's reliable).
 
Difference is in translated things can be verified by simply checking the scans. For example, Kep can look at scans for say, Mario, and see if they're legitimate or not, without playing the entire work. He can't however, look at scans for A Wild Last Boss Appeared and see any legitimacy.
 
Yea, sure. And in case on untranslated scans, we have the multilingual members check their veracity. For Last Boss for exemple, we have peopel like Shiroyasha. So I don't really see the problem. As far as I know, that list was made for cases like these. Where verses in foreign languages are introduced.

Unless it's a forgotten language that no one in the wiki can speak or can verify aside from the supporter.....in which case it'll obviously not have its place in the wiki afaik.
 
Sera EX said:
@Risci

You're arguing for "feats via stakes" (which I'm perfectly fine with) when I am arguing against, for example, 2-B based on vague statements.

"He's going to destroy all the universes" vs. "He exists outside the boundaries of all the universes".
Click to expand...
I mean... those are current standards.

Flowery language has been frowned upon since the wiki was made, and haslve become stricter over time.

At most, people need to bring such scans to the light. And if false stuff got accepted, then that's not a wiki problem but a "people wank if given opportunity".
 
Yeah, I agree that kind of flowery language has been more recurrent nowdays, specially within the "abstract" context.
 
Well, I think that Sera largely seems to make sense, but I have a few comments and clarifications:

We do have a wiki audit group for gradually getting rid of unreliable profiles and verses, but it isn't realistic to get rid of all of them at once.

I trust and consider most of our staff members reliable, even if I wish that more of them regularly helped out with content revision threads that they are unfamiliar with, but given that most of them are busy IRL, I am trying to help out with as much of the work as I am able in that regard, but my attention is too split between many tasks at once to usually be able to evaluate the discussions in-depth.

In any case, it is better to have many mostly reliable people helping out here and there than having a few reliable people who have to turn even more overworked than currently, and I did not enlist PrinceOfTheMorning and Sandman31 because they agree with me in Marvel and DC threads, but because they seem genuinely highly knowledgeable and reliable in these areas, and there are lots of these discussions to take care of.

Meaning, I definitely do not want to suddenly fire large portions of the staff, or for them to retire on their own, but more help is always appreciated.

Also, regarding the calculations being accepted, I try to make sure that there should always be at least one calc group member who has evaluated them before being accepted, and more than that along with a CRT if it is a controversial topic. However, given how many calculations that are constantly created, it isn't realistic to have several calc group members evaluating every single one of them.
 
I agree with Antviasma, however. Sera was never suggesting we should fire a single staff member, only that we should take a break on staff recruitment drives at least till several more staff retire.

I'm also aware that even Matt has often debated with Antvasima when it came to Marvel and DC verses; back in 2016, Antvasima used to be heavily reluctant to scale Superman's flight speed to his combat speed even with several characters having several feats ranging that high.

I also have tried helping out a great deal with verses where my knowledge is limited and often looked at context. While I'm not too helpful when it comes to revising 1-A and above verses, I do at least know 10-C to 2-A tier ranges and standards well enough to give reasonable thoughts.

Any yeah, calculations do need input from at least one Calc Group member, and that the logic is just as, if not more important than the math behind it.
 
I just read through much of the rest of the thread and apologise about that I misunderstood some of Sera's intentions above, especially regarding staff demotions.
 
I mean... those are current standards.

Flowery language has been frowned upon since the wiki was made, and haslve become stricter over time.

<Laughs in Rakudai

Flowery Language hasn't become stricter over time, its been much looser with smaller LN verses that don't have many to look at
 
I am also worried about that Sera seems to imply that she will leave soon, as we are quite dependent on her good sense of judgement rearding important wiki policy issues.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

AKM sama
VSBW Lore: Staff Timeline Returns
2
Replies
45
Views
3K
HammerStrikes219
HammerStrikes219
EliminatorVenom
I'm back, with some apologies
Replies
0
Views
242
EliminatorVenom
EliminatorVenom
Antvasima
  • Sticky
Extremely important announcements for our community
Replies
31
Views
5K
Agnaa
Agnaa
AKM sama
Super Moderator Promotions and New Staff Promotions
2
Replies
50
Views
5K
Greenshifter
Greenshifter
Tllmbrg
Alt Battle Wiki
Replies
11
Views
2K
Tllmbrg
Tllmbrg
Back
Top