• 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.

A new Versus Threads Rule

We had this problem when McQueen matches started to become a thing, though I don't remember many people participating in the thread.

A forced inconclusive should just be a mismatch imo, and in some cases could be spite.
 
Eh, Ant's uninterested in versus threads, so I wouldn't.
 
This isn't my area, no. I don't even know what you want to do.
 
Basically a new Versus Thread rule to specify the difference of an inconclusive match and an stompy inconclusive match.
 
Well, I don't think that we can let the profile matchup summaries get too complicated.
 
This is unnecessary. The difference between Mcqueen and the linked match is that matches involving Mcqueen could have other outcomes other than inconclusive: "Can character X stop Mcqueen from suiciding?", whereas in that Casper thread Goku was literally unable to even interact with Casper.

The problem here is basically 1. Intend of the Op (Match was intended to be inconclusive from the beginning) and 2. unfairness towards one of its used characters (Goku can literally do nothing against Casper at all). Even if inconclusive, you could chalk this match as spite and that is generally against the rule.

So no, a rule regarding stompy inconclusives is not necessary. They will probably fall into the spite category either way.
 
Okay. Should we close this then?
 
I will let you decide that Ant, maybe wait for Bobsican to bring a new point.
 
First Witch said:
Even if inconclusive, you could chalk this match as spite and that is generally against the rule.

So no, a rule regarding stompy inconclusives is not necessary. They will probably fall into the spite category either way.
Click to expand...
Spite =/= Unfair enought to not be added, unless I´m missing something
 
What happens is that... No one lost, which is a requirement for it to technically fall as spite.
 
I will unsubscribe from this. You can message me when it needs to be closed.
 
This is utterly irelevant. A lose being there or not dosnt make the match not spite. If its done with a desired outcome in mind and only that outcome can be archieved then its spite. The lose paragraph is just the case that happens the most.
 
"A spite thread is a type of Versus Thread in which two or more characters of vastly different Power are put against each other. A Spite Thread is made in order to humiliate one of the characters by making them lose without standing a chance or to enrage the fans of the character. They are different from stomp threads, as the one who created a spite thread did so with bad intentions, while stomp threads are created by accident."

It doesn´t seem to meet either of those requirements to fall as such.

At least a mention about inconclusive matches would be enought.
 
I will not debate sematics with you. People even called out in the original thread that matchups with clear desired outcomes wont be added.

Point is: If you have clear intentions and make the matchup in a way that the intention becomes the only outcome then its spite. It being a lose or not dosnt matter, it being to humiliate a character dosnt matter. You cant write down all reasons of a user, the spite thread page features the most prominent one.
 
So basically matches with totally only a single possible outcome can´t be added, regardless of whether it´s a stomp or not?
 
Matches where the OP made only one single possible outcomne possible by puting 2 characters against each other, fully knowing what both can do to either add a win/lose/incon to a liked/hated profile, to make fun of a character or to make fun of a group.

Dont onmitt the intention part, i didnt repeat that for nothing.
 
I guess that part should be also mentioned in that case?
 
I mean, emphatize that is something that could avoid needless trouble in the future.
 
I think the spite page shoukd be expanded and made to better explain what kind of matchups are and aren't allowed.

Cases of planned incons may need to be included if that's what everyone deems necessary.

Also I think cases of trying to give a win to a character instead of trying to humiliate one should be included in this, since no one seemed to find a problem with what this thread was.
 
If "planned" incons are to be included, I have a strong feeling a good chunk of Thunder McQueen matches will be removed.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Planck69
  • Locked
Touhou Thread Rule Removal
2
Replies
56
Views
5K
Planck69
Planck69
AThe1412
Can you restrict a character's Standard Equipment if it gives them a different tier?
Replies
2
Views
719
TheGreatJedi13
TheGreatJedi13
Lloydblitzed
Ninjago Star Tiering and Possible New Value
6 7 8
Replies
307
Views
11K
REX9097
REX9097
Acertainbcplayer
  • Locked
1-A Toaru possible upgrade discussion thread
Replies
5
Views
1K
Acertainbcplayer
Acertainbcplayer
DaReaperMan
  • Locked
Warhammer Cosmology re-Eval cause Ultima wanted me to make a thread to be sure
2
Replies
57
Views
8K
Ultima_Reality
Ultima_Reality
Back
Top