• 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 Violation Reports (New forum)

Deceived3596 said:
Hall monitor behavior.

Nothing i said in that thread was even warn worthy, much less report worthy.
Click to expand...
Indeed, I have brought to attention that you repeatedly talked to me in a way against what the rules page says. In a thread about rule violations. That's not hall monitor behavior, it's using a thread for what it was made for.
 
ImmortalDread said:
So in all seriousness, you got offended by @Deceived3596 despite him clarifying it was nothing personal to you? We would have banned 90% of members, including staff members, based on this.
Click to expand...
If someone shoots another person but then said the killing is not intentional, it doesn't make the shot any less valid. With that being said, I'm not asking for a ban or anything lasting, by any means. I'm bringing to attention that "this was disrespectful." which is against the expected behavior within the rules. Simple as that.
 
Magicomethkuon said:
If someone shoots another person but then said the killing is not intentional, it doesn't make the shot any less valid. With that being said, I'm not asking for a ban or anything lasting, by any means. I'm bringing to attention that "this was disrespectful." which is against the expected behavior within the rules. Simple as that.
Click to expand...
How did we jump from banter to shooting someone?
 
Magicomethkuon said:
If someone shoots another person but then said the killing is not intentional, it doesn't make the shot any less valid. With that being said, I'm not asking for a ban or anything lasting, by any means. I'm bringing to attention that "this was disrespectful." which is against the expected behavior within the rules. Simple as that.
Click to expand...
Comparing this to a serious crime, which is not an acceptable behavior in all levels and morals, is not only bad, but horrendous. However, the comments from Deceived is nowhere warning worthy. In fact, he already clarified to you in the screenshots you used for your report that he is direct to you in terms of he is not going to lower his language for you to understand him.

Saying that someone is “fundamentally wrong” is not necessarily an insult or disrespectful in and of itself. However, it is important to consider the context in which the statement was made and the way it was delivered. If the statement was made in a respectful and constructive manner, with the intention of engaging in respectful discourse and trying to understand each other's perspectives, it may not be considered disrespectful. On the other hand, if the statement was made in a dismissive or condescending manner, or if it was intended to belittle or demean the other person, it could be considered disrespectful. It is essential to communicate in a way that is respectful and considerate of others, even when expressing disagreement or criticism.

Sure, in general, it is more productive and respectful to communicate in a way that is respectful and considerate of others, even when expressing disagreement or criticism in general, it is indispensable to try to foster a positive and respectful environment within any community, and to take steps to address behavior that is not in line with that goal.

Also, he did not call you “******* stupid”, he is actually giving you an instance of the definition of “Being direct” which you manifestly neglected to realise it.
 
ImmortalDread said:
Comparing this to a serious crime, which is not an acceptable behavior in all levels and morals, is not only bad, but horrendous. However, the comments from Deceived is nowhere warning worthy. In fact, he already clarified to you in the screenshots you used for your report that he is direct to you in terms of he is not going to lower his language for you to understand him.

Saying that someone is “fundamentally wrong” is not necessarily an insult or disrespectful in and of itself. However, it is important to consider the context in which the statement was made and the way it was delivered. If the statement was made in a respectful and constructive manner, with the intention of engaging in respectful discourse and trying to understand each other's perspectives, it may not be considered disrespectful. On the other hand, if the statement was made in a dismissive or condescending manner, or if it was intended to belittle or demean the other person, it could be considered disrespectful. It is essential to communicate in a way that is respectful and considerate of others, even when expressing disagreement or criticism.

Sure, in general, it is more productive and respectful to communicate in a way that is respectful and considerate of others, even when expressing disagreement or criticism in general, it is indispensable to try to foster a positive and respectful environment within any community, and to take steps to address behavior that is not in line with that goal.

Also, he did not call you "******* stupid", he is actually giving you an instance of the definition of "Being direct" which you obviously failed to understand it.
Click to expand...
The rest of the post aside, I'm not comparing it to the crime. I'm making a metaphor. Stop putting words in my mouth and trying to twist my statement into something I never remotely said, please.
And no, I didn't fail to understand anything. But, as I see you taking the time to try and put things in better terms, I'll take the explanation as an apology in good spirits.
 
Alright first of all, stop ******* spamming the RVR with useless garbage @Deceived3596, and @Magicomethkuon stop responding to obvious jokes that have no place in a report.

Second of all, while Deceived is a crass individual, he hardly says anything worth going to this thread for. Impoliteness that does not border on harassment or genuine hate speech by itself is not report worthy, in any capacity. No action needs to be taken, in my opinion.
 
azontr said:
Deceived talks this way with everyone he debates or engages with, it's not malicious on his part, it's just how he talks. He doesn't mean anything against you.
Click to expand...
I don't have anything against Deceived either, simply felt this kind of approach to things wasn't exactly the best that could be taken. But one way or another, thank you for the time, a lot. I'll keep it in mind for the future and generally ignore it if it's seen as not much of a problem around here!
 
Crabwhale said:
Alright first of all, stop ******* spamming the RVR with useless garbage @Deceived3596, and @Magicomethkuon stop responding to obvious jokes that have no place in a report.

Second of all, while Deceived is a crass individual, he hardly says anything worth going to this thread for. Impoliteness that does not border on harassment or genuine hate speech by itself is not report worthy, in any capacity. No action needs to be taken, in my opinion.
Click to expand...
Yes, sorry for my answers that were off-topic. My case was pretty much clarified by the time of this reply, be as it may. Thanks for the attention!
 
Well, people are not supposed to be rude, but we cannot go around banning everybody who are ever behaving in such a manner.

For example, Deceived is sarcastically quoting a brief explanation regarding the reasons for my distaste for Bleach in his signature, and I do not particularly care, and stand by my quoted assessment.

That said, if new members instantly begin to start trouble by being very disrespectful, I think that usually warrants warning explanations at least, so they can learn, adapt, and shape up their behaviour.
 
KingTempest said:
This user/these group of users have been tacking the same calculation over and over and over and over a ******* gain and its irritating.


It keeps tackling how "KT's calc is wrong since he didn't take a deep breath before he did it, my calculation has (insert new useless barely changing effect)" and nothing is new except the value is raised.

All he's doing is changing tiny steps over and over and exaggerating a distance so the feat reaches FTL+, which is why every thread has FTL+ at the end of it, and even trying to use a bigass size again in another blog just to raise the value, again.
270º when a weapon barely moves 45º. Deadass?

The points have been reused, reduced, and recycled over and over and over again.

I don't request a thread ban, but I request this user should just leave this calculation alone, and all other users should give this topic a grace period.

We can't change several dozens of profiles every 5 minutes all because someone wants them FTL+.
Click to expand...
I think there should be a way to block those kind of threads from being made for some time period
Like if it has the keywords " One Piece " "Speed/FTL" "Whitebeard" it's blocked from being entered.
 
TheMonkeMan said:
I think there should be a way to block those kind of threads from being made for some time period
Like if it has the keywords " One Piece " "Speed/FTL" "Whitebeard" it's blocked from being entered.
Click to expand...
That really wouldn't solve anything. They'd just be able to make a thread without those keywords.

A rule would be better than that.
 
XXKINGXX69 said:
I reported him before but crabwhale is ok with hositility
Click to expand...
First: you linked a comment quoting the person in question instead of the comment the person actually made. This made me read the comment posted underneath the quote, as opposed to the quote itself. I don't think it's exactly a leap of logic to expect me to do that.

Second: the quote provided above the comment you pointed me to, is somewhat hostile. It does not however need action taken against, in my opinion. However, it appears that since then, the user in question has escalated their wild behavior. So I am choosing to intervene now.

The warning has been posted on their wall. They are also a new user, so keep an eye on them.

If a different staff member wishes to discuss a stricter warning or punishment, I'm open to it, but so far I don't think anything more than this is necessary.
 
Crabwhale said:
First: you linked a comment quoting the person in question instead of the comment the person actually made. This made me read the comment posted underneath the quote, as opposed to the quote itself. I don't think it's exactly a leap of logic to expect me to do that.

Second: the quote provided above the comment you pointed me to, is somewhat hostile. It does not however need action taken against, in my opinion. However, it appears that since then, the user in question has escalated their wild behavior. So I am choosing to intervene now.

The warning has been posted on their wall. They are also a new user, so keep an eye on them.

If a different staff member wishes to discuss a stricter warning or punishment, I'm open to it, but so far I don't think anything more than this is necessary.
Click to expand...
Sure
 
I think a warning is a bit lenient, as he has 17 messages on the forum and here are 17 things he has said in those messages
1. You lack intelligence
2. A clown can formulate thoughts
3. You are a clown
4. Do you people read?
5. Do you know whats dumber
6. Thas ******* silly
7. Learn better english
8. Nasutards have the bad habits of been unable to read
9. Are you mental?
10. Damn.... you are really stupid
11. You dumbfuck
12. Are you this ******* stupid
13. Something you stupid ***** lack
14. Are you too stupid to take a hint
15. Better than being mentally deficient
16. Thats beyond pathetic
17. Now shut the **** up
e.t.c.
 
Pain_to12 said:
I think a warning is a bit lenient, as he has 17 messages on the forum and here are 17 things he has said in those messages
1. You lack intelligence
2. A clown can formulate thoughts
3. You are a clown
4. Do you people read?
5. Do you know whats dumber
6. Thas ******* silly
7. Learn better english
8. Nasutards have the bad habits of been unable to read
9. Are you mental?
10. Damn.... you are really stupid
11. You dumbfuck
12. Are you this ******* stupid
13. Something you stupid ***** lack
14. Are you too stupid to take a hint
15. Better than being mentally deficient
16. Thats beyond pathetic
17. Now shut the **** up
e.t.c.
Click to expand...
I think that a 6 months ban seems warranted in that case.
 
Okay, maybe a month or two is enough then. I do not like members who only seem to have joined to immediately cause problems though.
 
I, personally, agree with some in-between of Ant and DDM's suggestions. Just because our current site culture allows a certain degree of hostility and nastiness doesn't mean that's a good thing, and it is productive for all manners of debate to remain civil where possible.
 
Moritzva said:
I, personally, agree with some in-between of Ant and DDM's suggestions. Just because our current site culture allows a certain degree of hostility and nastiness doesn't mean that's a good thing, and it is productive for all manners of debate to remain civil where possible.
Click to expand...
If we are going for somewhere in between, perhaps 3 months?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Antvasima
  • Sticky
Wiki Vandalism Reports
14 15 16
Replies
638
Views
43K
TWILIGHT-OP
TWILIGHT-OP
Mr. Bambu
Slight Adjustment to Rules Regarding Original Works
2
Replies
51
Views
5K
Antvasima
Antvasima
  • Locked
Regarding the Rule Violations Report Thread
2
Replies
71
Views
6K
LephyrTheRevanchist
LephyrTheRevanchist
H3110l12345I20
IRL Paper has a profile.
Replies
28
Views
2K
JustANormalLemon
JustANormalLemon
DarkGrath
  • Locked
Proposal for Off-Site Rules Revision
2 3
Replies
93
Views
10K
Antvasima
Antvasima
Back
Top