• 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

Mr. Bambu said:
Honestly, does he recognize that he isn't permanently banned? Does he recognize that it is impossible to have a sane, rational conversation when he is threatening his life, as if it were a bargaining chip for re-entry, if we do not comply? That sucks, man. The short ban he received was already pretty light, and this makes it seem like he wants just... no ban, in spite of recognizing that he has done consistent wrong up to this point, intentionally. Which I just can't approve of.
Click to expand...
The issue seems to be out of our hands, as an official Fandom staff member deleted Fukzy's apology message, in which he used the r-word to describe his behaviour, along with the threatened self-harm message, and then banned him across Fandom as a whole. 🙏
 
Harry has renamed his original account, and is trying to explain himself further. 🙏

For how long should it be blocked? It is currently only blocked for one month.

vsbattles.fandom.com

Polastournecis

vsbattles.fandom.com vsbattles.fandom.com
 
I think it does not fall to us to be Harry's nurturers and guardians of his well-being. We're just people, with variable levels of success in judging others and maintaining what we have. We are not psychiatrists or civil workers or anything of the sort. So the fact that Harry has discusses self-harm consistently whenever someone takes action against him breaking the rules sours all of these apologies for me.

All of this could have been avoided, Harry had a rare instance of forewarning, an ability to explain his actions or undo them before it was reported- this, too, makes me less sympathetic with his plight.

It is understood that sympathy is still wanted, however, by some. I would acquiesce to six months. I think this is too light by a great deal, but if we seek the minimum reaction to multiple knowledgeable infractions followed by sockpuppeting (and greatly disturbing behavior aside), then I will accept that this is the barest of minimums.
 
Okay. That seems fine to me then, but he strongly needs to behave well and stick to our rules after his ban time runs out. 🙏
 
@Fallen_Angelicx removed a part of Shinpei's weakness section without a CRT when it was brought up in a VSThread.

vsbattles.fandom.com

Shinpei Ajiro

Shinpei Ajiro (網あ代じろ 慎しん平ぺい, Ajiro Shinpei?) is a 17-year-old boy who returned to his hometown of Hitogashima for the first time in two years to attend the funeral of his childhood friend, Ushio Kofune. Since he lost his parents at an early age and grew up in the Kofune family, he has been close...
vsbattles.fandom.com vsbattles.fandom.com
 
Comiphorous said:
@Fallen_Angelicx removed a part of Shinpei's weakness section without a CRT when it was brought up in a VSThread.

vsbattles.fandom.com

Shinpei Ajiro

Shinpei Ajiro (網あ代じろ 慎しん平ぺい, Ajiro Shinpei?) is a 17-year-old boy who returned to his hometown of Hitogashima for the first time in two years to attend the funeral of his childhood friend, Ushio Kofune. Since he lost his parents at an early age and grew up in the Kofune family, he has been close...
vsbattles.fandom.com vsbattles.fandom.com
Click to expand...
I'd like a mod to get my side of the story if that's ok. This isn't entirely true.
 
DaReaperMan said:
You can either make a CRT on removing the weakness or just accept it's there, you have 2.2K posts how do not know this?
Click to expand...
1. What i removed wasn't necessarily a weakness. What i removed was "Same As Before" on another key which implied both characters have the same weaknesses but that isn't the case because they're two different individuals in the same body (Please check the profile for confirmation, it has clear stuff that indicate this)
2. Your rules state that minor stuff dont need need a crt and misinformation which was on the profile seems like more than minor edit to me.
3. I've made edits to the profile such as pronunciations and sentences & even profile additions to a key but your admin Ant says even that was fine aslong it isn't anything greater and what i did was remove misinformation from a profile I revamped 3 times.
4. Because I've done nothing controversial up to this point for it to be called out so i would know in the future.
 
Fallen_Angelicx said:
1. What i removed wasn't necessarily a weakness. What i removed was "Same As Before" on another key which implied both characters have the same weaknesses but that isn't the case because they're two different individuals in the same body (Please check the profile for confirmation, it has clear stuff that indicate this)
2. Your rules state that minor stuff dont need need a crt and misinformation which was on the profile seems like more than minor information to me.
3. I've made edits to the profile such as pronunciations and sentences & even profile additions to a key but your admin Ant says even that was fine aslong it isn't anything greater and what i did was remove misinformation from a profile I revamped 3 times.
4. Because I've done nothing controversial up to this point for it to be called out so i would know in the future.
Click to expand...
Minor means grammar, it means fixing ***** spelling, it means fixing ***** coding, it does not mean adding or removing quite literally anything from any profile. If you want to change a weakness you make a CRT. Ant is in the wrong here and he should damn well know it since our rules go above his word.

You might think it's obviously misinformation, but others might think it's legit, you never know, and that's why you do CRTs.

This is kind of like if I just randomly released Death's rework onto his profile with no CRT, I think everything there is blatant, but I have no idea if others will see it that way
 
Shiroiyo said:
Sorry to bump this case again, but this hasn't been resolved for over a month now
Click to expand...
It hasn't been over a month, rather a couple of weeks- still, I'll apply it.
 
DaReaperMan said:
You might think it's obviously misinformation, but others might think it's legit, you never know, and that's why you do CRTs.
Click to expand...
No one in the thread i was in knew about this weakness fact I was only asked about it so there was no debate regarding it. But it doesn't matter now and besides you're right regardless, as long as the misconception is cleared im content 🙏🏽
 
Fallen_Angelicx said:
No one in the thread i was in knew about this weakness fact I was only asked about it so there was no debate regarding it. But it doesn't matter now and besides you're right regardless, as long as the misconception is cleared im content 🙏🏽
Click to expand...
Still, it should be added back, Simple CRTs with no contention thankfully only need a single mod and 24 hours(I think)
 
Fallen_Angelicx said:
1. What i removed wasn't necessarily a weakness. What i removed was "Same As Before" on another key which implied both characters have the same weaknesses but that isn't the case because they're two different individuals in the same body (Please check the profile for confirmation, it has clear stuff that indicate this)
2. Your rules state that minor stuff dont need need a crt and misinformation which was on the profile seems like more than minor edit to me.
3. I've made edits to the profile such as pronunciations and sentences & even profile additions to a key but your admin Ant says even that was fine aslong it isn't anything greater and what i did was remove misinformation from a profile I revamped 3 times.
4. Because I've done nothing controversial up to this point for it to be called out so i would know in the future.
Click to expand...
You would require a CRT, even for a minor issue like this. The rules refer to things like grammatical fixes and so on, whereas a minor CRT would include misunderstandings such as this.

Ant's post was "this long after the fact"; even self-evident changes to statistics require a CRT to adjust them, in that instance Ant was being lenient because it was long after a fairly minor edit.

I am giving you a formal warning: do not change profile statistics or abilities (in this case, weaknesses) without a CRT, even if it is well-intentioned and likely accurate.
 
I'd like to report what's likely a minor incident about the DBS Manga Grand Priest.

There is this downgrade thread which intenteded to initially downgrade his full Low 1-C to a possibly. Almost everyone in the thread, including @CloverDragon03, agreed to completely remove Low 1-C instead, with OP later on conceding on it, and recently confirming that they preferred now a complete removal.

Why am I mentioning this? According to the history, @Jaakor48 has added the Low 1-C out of nowhere, under the pretense of simply fixing the Striking Strength and Durability and other minor changes.

I have no idea if it's genuine vandalism or just a misunderstanding, but still worth of telling so here methinks.
 
Last edited:
Mr. Bambu said:
I think it does not fall to us to be Harry's nurturers and guardians of his well-being. We're just people, with variable levels of success in judging others and maintaining what we have. We are not psychiatrists or civil workers or anything of the sort. So the fact that Harry has discusses self-harm consistently whenever someone takes action against him breaking the rules sours all of these apologies for me.

All of this could have been avoided, Harry had a rare instance of forewarning, an ability to explain his actions or undo them before it was reported- this, too, makes me less sympathetic with his plight.

It is understood that sympathy is still wanted, however, by some. I would acquiesce to six months. I think this is too light by a great deal, but if we seek the minimum reaction to multiple knowledgeable infractions followed by sockpuppeting (and greatly disturbing behavior aside), then I will accept that this is the barest of minimums.
Click to expand...
Antvasima said:
Okay. That seems fine to me then, but he strongly needs to behave well and stick to our rules after his ban time runs out. 🙏
Click to expand...
Is it fine if we apply this?
 
StrymULTRA said:
I'd like to report what's likely a minor incident about the DBS Manga Grand Priest.

There is this downgrade thread which intenteded to initially downgrade his full Low 1-C to a possibly. Almost everyone in the thread, including @CloverDragon03, agreed to completely remove Low 1-C instead, with OP later on conceding on it, and recently confirming that they preffered now a complete removal.

Why am I mentioning this? According to the history, @Jaakor48 has added the Low 1-C out of nowhere, under the pretense of simply fixing the Striking Strength and Durability and other minor changes.

I have no idea if it's genuine vandalism or just a misunderstanding, but still worth of telling so here methinks.
Click to expand...
@Jaakor48

Please explain yourself. 🙏
 
Antvasima said:
@Jaakor48

Please explain yourself. 🙏
Click to expand...
In that thread, the OP never changed his proposal in hr opening post, this is it
For this reason, I believe the Grand Priest's rating should be changed to "At least 2-C, possibly Low 1-C" as opposed to a straight Low 1-C. I'm looking forward to see if anyone wants to argue otherwise.
Click to expand...
That's the proposal in the OP, 2c possibly low 1c

Now this is the so-called post he claimed decided to change the proposal
For once everyone agrees with me. While we're at it, if everyone agrees to remove the Low 1-C scaling completely, I feel like this is the main thing that differentiates it from the Grand Priest's anime profile, so if we remove it, we should also merge the profiles into a composite like the wiki did with the rest of the Angels.
Click to expand...
He never changed his initial proposal in the OP, it was a conditional statement relying on staff agreeing to completely nuke low1c,, none of the staff who voted even tagged this message, they simply agreed with he OP. Somehow he decided that they saw the OP, and then read down to post #26, interpreted that as him somehow changing the entire OP, agreed with that one, and the typed "sounds good to me". Do I need to pay his ridiculous of take that is?. Fact is, the OP proposal is 2c, possibly low 1c

As for this?
and recently confirming that they preferred now a complete removal.
Click to expand...
Yea, what he "preferred" was not what his OP proposed and it certainly wasn't what those voting mods read in the OP, this is irrelevant

The we have this utter lie
Why am I mentioning this? According to the history, @Jaakor48 has added the Low 1-C out of nowhere, under the pretense of simply fixing the Striking Strength and Durability and other minor changes.
Click to expand...
Literally, my first edit is right ABOVE his own, showing that I corrected the 2c to 2c, possibly low 1c and linking the thread, with the Striking and durability a minor fix because I forgot to edit those the first time

I messaged @ByAsura to help me briefly open them when I did that

The time stamps of my edit are literally there, but he apparently only saw the last one and didn't notice there were others below? This coming after hastily downgrading a profile outside why the OP proposed?

Paraphrasing what someone said
I have no idea if it's genuine rve worthy report or just a misunderstanding, but still worth of telling so here methinks
Click to expand...



Read the OP of that post yourself and you'll see what was proposed
 
The staff members didn't specify whether they were referring exclusively to the OP or not. And correct me if I'm wrong, but we usually seem to go by the consensus rather than the OP proposal alone in these exact scenarios.

So, I think it should be reverted, but I don't think any action should be taken against Jaakor.

Also, sorry for not looking into this further originally. I was doing other stuff.
 
ByAsura said:
The staff members didn't specify whether they were referring exclusively to the OP or not. And correct me if I'm wrong, but we usually seem to go by the consensus rather than the OP proposal alone in these exact scenarios.

So, I think it should be reverted, but I don't think any action should be taken against Jaakor.

Also, sorry for not looking into this further originally. I was doing other stuff.
Click to expand...
As I explained, the OP himself never changed, he only said while we were on the thread, of anyone actually agreed to completely remove it, they would need to change other profiles,

No staff said anything about removing the low 1c completely

Maybe it's just to tag those 3 staff to see whether they agreed with the OP or his post #26? Even when he don't actually
..change the proposal
 
ByAsura said:
You don't actually need to change the OP for that to happen.
Click to expand...
I know, but he didn't...change his proposal to downgrading straight to 2C

I mean, OP makes a proposal, doesn't change it, staff comes and agrees without tagging anyone or anything and we assume it was a random message, not the OP that he agrees with?

Is it possible to tag
@DarkDragonMedeus
@Theglassman12
@Just_a_Random_Butler

To see if they agreed with complete or possibly low 1c?

Ottavio_Merluzzo said:
Y'all could just ask the OP to clarify their stance, instead, considering it's their thread. Just saying...
Click to expand...
That wouldn't solve anything, he could just say what he thinks now after already getting the votes, the issue is if the mods voted based on the OP or if they took another post down as complete removal and agreed with that, so it's best to ask them
 
Last edited:
Jaakor48 said:
That wouldn't solve anything, he could just say what he thinks now after already getting the votes, the issue is if the mods voted based on the OP or if they took another post doe as complete removal and agreed with that, so it's best to ask them
Click to expand...
Ah, alright then, my bad.
 
I didn't really have much opinions on whether or not we kept Low 1-C as a possibly or not. I did comment thinkin the OP was fine, and while a few staff members did prefer to nuke it outright. I was fine either way. The main concern was that making Grand Priest Low 1-C outright seemed iffy to me.
 
Jaakor48 said:
He never changed his initial proposal in the OP, it was a conditional statement relying on staff agreeing to completely nuke low1c,, none of the staff who voted even tagged this message, they simply agreed with he OP. Somehow he decided that they saw the OP, and then read down to post #26, interpreted that as him somehow changing the entire OP, agreed with that one, and the typed "sounds good to me". Do I need to pay his ridiculous of take that is?. Fact is, the OP proposal is 2c, possibly low 1c
Click to expand...
Yeah but the users almost all voted for straight up 2-C, so I assumed it was alright to completely remove it, especially given that OP later on told me in DMs that they changed their mind to a whole removal.
Ottavio_Merluzzo said:
Y'all could just ask the OP to clarify their stance, instead, considering it's their thread. Just saying...
Click to expand...
Yeah, I did later on before making the report here.
 
Thank you for helping out, ByAsura and Medeus. 🙏❤️
 
I just didn't want the page to display the tier 1 statistic as it was displayed previously (before the revision was applied), so I was fine with them either appending a "possibly" to the statistic or removing it altogether.
 
Mr. Bambu said:
I think it does not fall to us to be Harry's nurturers and guardians of his well-being. We're just people, with variable levels of success in judging others and maintaining what we have. We are not psychiatrists or civil workers or anything of the sort. So the fact that Harry has discusses self-harm consistently whenever someone takes action against him breaking the rules sours all of these apologies for me.

All of this could have been avoided, Harry had a rare instance of forewarning, an ability to explain his actions or undo them before it was reported- this, too, makes me less sympathetic with his plight.

It is understood that sympathy is still wanted, however, by some. I would acquiesce to six months. I think this is too light by a great deal, but if we seek the minimum reaction to multiple knowledgeable infractions followed by sockpuppeting (and greatly disturbing behavior aside), then I will accept that this is the barest of minimums.
Click to expand...
Antvasima said:
Okay. That seems fine to me then, but he strongly needs to behave well and stick to our rules after his ban time runs out. 🙏
Click to expand...
I would appreciate some staff help regarding Harrythefoxlobster/@Polastournecis, so we can finish that issue. 🙏
 
Not this nonsense again,

Antvasima said:
.
Click to expand...

Ignoring his burning desire to downgrade the character for some reason

Facts if this case are:

OP never changed their stance in the thread, a half assed conversation after the thread was done means nothing

@DarkDragonMedeus clearly said his agreement was with the OP, meaning his vote was based on the proposal in the OP and @Just_a_Random_Butler clearly said he had no issues with either meaning it's a 1 and a half vote either side at best

The proposal of OP of the damn thread clearly stated 2c, possibly low 1c.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Antvasima
  • Sticky
Extremely important announcements for our community
Replies
27
Views
2K
Antvasima
Antvasima
Catzlaflame
  • Locked
Regarding the Rule Violations Report Thread
2
Replies
71
Views
7K
LephyrTheRevanchist
LephyrTheRevanchist
DarkGrath
Proposal for Site/Forum Image Standards Revision
3 4 5
Replies
175
Views
7K
CloverDragon03
CloverDragon03
Mr. Bambu
  • Locked
Slight Adjustment to Rules Regarding Original Works
2 3
Replies
80
Views
8K
Antvasima
Antvasima
Agnaa
  • Locked
Proposal for Off-Site Links Revision
Replies
11
Views
3K
Antvasima
Antvasima
Back
Top