• 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.

Wiki Vandalism Reports

So, from reviewing the situation:

Two of them aren't fussed either way (both confirm they even saw the altered proposal).

And another says we should nuke it outright.

This just confirms to me that we should go with the consensus.

And no, it still doesn't matter that the OP didn't change.
 
Last edited:
So, from reviewing the situation:

Two of them aren't fussed either way (both confirm they even saw the altered proposal).

And another says we should nuke it outright.

This just confirms to me that we should go with the consensus.

And no, it still doesn't matter that the OP didn't change.
So just to be clear

The OP proposal is complete irrelevant in a thread, if the mods, despite not specifying, decide they are "ok" with either way even after the thread has been concluded and this the OP becomes irrelevant, yes?

Cuz DDM literally said his vote was because he agreed with the OP, but because he's also okay with complete removal, the vote itself means nothing?
 
This is what happened.
  • The original poster changed their stance based on the same logic as the OP.
  • This occurred 1/3rd of the way through the thread.
  • 3 particular staff (all of whom verifiably read the altered proposal) didn't say what exactly they agreed to.
  • They clarified here (2 were 50/50, the other wanted it gone), after which I took action.
What you're saying is out-of-context, and no votes are being invalidated. In fact, you're kind of asking us to invalidate other votes based on 1 shaky vote.

If you disagree with the new ratings, make another CRT at this point.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top