The necessity of Neutral/Opponents on a Verse page?

[Jinx666]

Hello,
Its possible I've just missed something, and I know this has been around on the Wiki for a long time, but this in in regards to having a section on every Verse page for Neutral/Opponents?

Not that i've had any personal issues with it in the past, but it seems rather counter-productive and doesn't seem to serve any purpose other than letting people know widely that you do not care for the series (Power-scaling wise or story wise?), or you flat out oppose it for some reason?

Were there debating competitions or something that require alligning or opposing a certain verse? I definitely understand the Supporters section since that is how you are able to list members who are willing to help and know their stuff for clarity of information, but what does knowing someone is against the verse exactly do thats positive?

If anything, it can possibly be a reason for people to list your opinions off as spite (as in people may suspect a bias since you list yourself as against a verse in general), or promote more general negativity within the debating community by creating some sort of competitive target against specific verses. The debating community can get very negative over something as silly as powerscaling/matchups, as we've all seen and probably experienced at least once in our life, and this sorta seems to make it view more as a competition?

The vast majority of Verse pages dont even seem to have any Opponents/Neutral included, since i can assume its not really a necessary label to most, that if anything, is going to get in the way of people thinking a viewpoint is fair.

If this was all to be changed, im aware of the work required having to clear and edit through the hundreds of Verse pages but is there any reason to keep this section of Verse pages? Perhaps theres something im missing but if anyone wants to discuss it then by all means

 

[Nullflowerblush]

know their stuff for clarity of information

That would be the Knowledgeable Members List. Any Joe Schmo could support or oppose a verse.

 

[Jinx666]

True, but people less knowledgable about the wiki and pages like that probably find an easier time with a Supporters section on a Verse page. I can imagine its also easier to navigate from the Verse page to find supports, than a page like KML so i personally am fine with keeping a Supporter section. It just seems like having a Neutral and Opponent part, when this site doesnt really seem to host any wide-scale debating tournaments or stuff that require alligning yourself to a verse, isnt really necessary

 

[Antvasima]

Sometimes it is useful in order to find members who know a decent amount about a verse but are not more likely to be biased in favour of it, in order to try to balance out the different types of evaluations that a revision thread might get.

 

[Jinx666]

Sometimes it is useful in order to find members who know a decent amount about a verse but are not more likely to be biased in favour of it, in order to try to balance out the different types of evaluations that a revision thread might get.

Calling them Opponents or Neutral does not really get this across well, and sounds more as if they are opposing the Verse, I can also see a few exceptions like on the Naruto Verse page, where people seem to be opposing one part of the Verse media (Boruto Series in particular), where it would look like it is less based on finding non-biased members. There is no need for both a Neutral AND Opponent category if this was also the case. It could also lean the other way as if they were bias against the verse.

If this is the reason then it perhaps would be better to just call it a 'Knowledgable Members' Section instead? It would save the long list page required to already outline Knowledgable Members and remove all notion of both Supporters + Opponents looking as if it were to be bias to either side. If someone is looking to find knowledgeable members of a series, would it not be easier for them to look for the Verse page over trying to navigate/realise that list (if they were not as well acquainted with the wiki)?

 

[Jinx666]

bump

 

[ImmortalDread]

You did not really explain why “opponents” are biased to the side of the verse.

 

[Jinx666]

You did not really explain why “opponents” are biased to the side of the verse.

I didn't say they were, only that it could definitely be perceived that way given labelling yourself as an 'opponent' of a specific verse may lead one to thinking you are trying to make matches for the verse to lose, or just try to go against them in fights for the sake of being an 'opponent', which wouldn't be a valid reason for voting agaisnt a character. If anything, an 'opponent' would be biased against a verse, and a 'supporter' would be biased for it

This sort of supporters/opponents thing is present in debating communities outside of Vs battle wiki, but is made more for competitive debating tournaments than this wiki, which is mainly wanting to be a large database of character profiles the general/casual public can refer to in terms of a character's power. As such, It doesnt really seem to me like the concept of labelling yourself an opponent, or neutral (Which can definitely be portrayed as whether you like the series rather than having extensive knowledge over it) is sort of coutner productive.

If this is truly to separate people that could be bias (supporters) to people that will be critical of the series (opponents), then the whole section should probably just be revised as a 'Knowledgeable Members Section'. From what i can tell, placing yourself in an opponents category if you dont want to appear as bias doesnt exactly remove the chance of it being bias in the first place either, so frankly it would be better to just revamp the section to note people who say they know what they're talking about and have knowledge of the verse to refer to, than putting bias-coded labels such as Opponent and Supporter on them

 

[LordTracer]

Yeah, the Neutral and Opponents lists have always seemed useless to me. I don’t see what the point of them is.

 

[Dereck03]

I also think they are totally useless, I had thought of making a thread about it but I forgot about it a long time ago, practically all those who are in those sections (especially the opponents) are because they do not like "X" verse and it is not because they have knowledge of it, if they are called they never answer and make clear their position as opponents, so what is the point of having such a section?

I also plan to make a thread that allows supporters to remove members who are listed as supporters of "X" verse but never participate in the verse as such in any way even when pinged, it makes no sense for those to be listed as supporters either, but that will be for another time.

 

[TheKingStrategist13]

I think some part of this makes sense to me- it can be easy to write off the argument of someone who is a "Opponent" to a verse as being biased against it, though I don't see this as the biggest concern.

 

[Maskofthedragon]

Neutral/Opponents is a hold over copied from other sites and has no purpose to the current state of this site

 

[ImmortalDread]

I didn't say they were, only that it could definitely be perceived that way given labelling yourself as an 'opponent' of a specific verse may lead one to thinking you are trying to make matches for the verse to lose, or just try to go against them in fights for the sake of being an 'opponent', which wouldn't be a valid reason for voting agaisnt a character. If anything, an 'opponent' would be biased against a verse, and a 'supporter' would be biased for it

Based on which evidence?

 

[Jinx666]

Based on which evidence?

The general definition of opponent?
If you're putting a label on yourself that you are an 'opponent' of the verse, then that can lead to the easy assumption that you're trying to actively 'oppose it', which would create a bias argument about what you're talking about being able to chalk down to 'they are just opposing the verse because they are supposed to'. Obviously this wont be the case a fair amount of the time, and people who are opponents of the series (hatewatching/reading?) are likely not going to be as invested as supporters, but its an easy assumption to make.

I dont have a asecific example out of the many, many threads and discussions from this wiki over the years, nor would i want to call out any specific user in general that they've been 'bias' because theyre a 'supporter' or 'opponent', its just a logical conclusion to make with the term 'opponent'.

Again, im not saying you ARE bias if youre an opponent, only that its very easily perceived as such, as is an overall counterproductive label to keep around anymore. The section should just be limited to people who have credible knowledge of the verse's power, rather than whether they like or dislike the verse

 

[ImmortalDread]

What is the basis for assuming that the opponent is biased? Can you apply the same label to the supporter? There is no evidence presented to support this assumption.

Additionally, it is unclear where the speculation that the opponent lacks knowledge about the verse originated from.

Why assume that the opponent is the one who will present a biased argument? Is it not possible for the supporter to be biased in their desire for a strong verse instead of seeking accuracy and consistency?

Your definition of "opponent" seems to be subjective and not necessarily true.

There is no example or evidence to support your premise, just an unproven assumption.

 

[Jinx666]

What is the basis for assuming that the opponent is biased? Can you apply the same label to the supporter? There is no evidence presented to support this assumption.

That they are an 'opponent'/'supporter', which Ant above has stated that people can make the pre-made assumtpion that they are bias because of this in the fatc of 'Supporter', but the exact same can be said for Opponent, but instead they can be biased for the sense that they need to 'oppose' the verse

Additionally, it is unclear where the speculation that the opponent lacks knowledge about the verse originated from.

Its more the fact 'opponent' suggests that they are actively against the verse, rather than them not being knowledgeable about it, but people treat it as if its a reaosn to put down that you simply dont like the verse

Why assume that the opponent is the one who will present a biased argument? Is it not possible for the supporter to be biased in their desire for a strong verse instead of seeking accuracy and consistency?

I've already literally said that Supporters can be seen as biased too. A lot of this reply i have already took note on, and given my stance about. Supporters can most definitely be bias, but at least the term Supporter makes it come across as they are knowledgable of the verse, rather than opponents suggesting they are merely against the verse. The basis for an opponent being knowledgable about the verse is that they read/watch the media just to 'oppose' it, and the section as a whole is widely treated as a personal preference to the verse rather than it being about their actual power

Your definition of "opponent" seems to be subjective and not necessarily true.

From Google:
'someone who competes with or opposes another in a contest, game, or argument.'
This site is a casual site, while the community within vs battles wiki may realise this, a lot of people outside of this use this wiki as a resource for basic powerscaling, and as such it is fair to assume when they read 'opponents', that they associate it to people trying to oppose the verse and its characters with debating

Being an opponent isnt necessarily a bad thing, but it is treated way too much on whether you like the verse or not, rather than what Ant claims it is about in finding critical knowledgable members of the verse. A Supporter cna be critical or bias, just as an opponent can, and its for that reason why I would mainly rework it into a Knowledgable Members Section instead of putting labels like 'Opponent' and 'Supporter'

There is no example or evidence to support your premise, just an unproven assumption.

This isn't necessarily something that needs a ton of reference threads, but more based on logic. And again, im not going to look through threads and start blaming people for being 'bias' because they are a Supporter or Opponent of the verse, since thats just looking for arguments, but i do believe there have been countless times there have been accusations of people trying to downplay/'wank' a verse on this wiki. There are things i can bring up from my experience, but those are behind me and i don't wish to start those up again.

Despite this, my premise is asking whether or not having 'Neutrals' and 'Opponents', or even 'Supporters' is a necessary label, for all the reasons i've said above, compared to just reworking it into a Knowledgeable Members List that doesnt look to separate 'Opponents' and 'Supporters' into 'People who will be bias for the verse' and 'People who will be bias against the verse', or Neutral as in 'People who don't care for the verse'? I'm not trying to sit here and claim this section of the pages have caused heaps of trouble that I haven't been present for, but from again, all the things ive talked about above, I think this sort of terminology and section of the Verse pages should be revamped to not suggest anything that could make people think others are bias.

It would also be a reason to change that long list of 'Knowledgable Members List' page, which in my opinion, isn't well formatted or organised, and is just a long page that casual viewers of the wiki are not going to know/navigate through compared to seeing a 'Knowledgable Members' section on the respective Verse pages. This thread isnt about getting rid of that page, but it can open the opportunity of formatting a way members can see who is 'Knowledgable' without putting potentially bias-viewed labels like 'Opponent' (and Supporter i guess).

While you may not personally take this section this way, the casual viewer and the basic definition of 'Opponent' would very likely get this sense if they were to be shown it. Again, opponents/supporters is a common thing in debating tournaments within the community and also gets across the idea that this wiki does that sort of thing competitively (since its on official pages) rather than just seeing it as a useful resource

 

[Jinx666]

@ImmortalDread
Could I ask why you think labelling the 'Neutral' and 'Opponents' of a Verse is something that should be kept though? As opposed to changing the section entirely to something like 'Knowledgable Members'? Are there any positives to this I am missing?

 

[ImmortalDread]

It is advisable to maintain an open mind towards people who hold differing opinions regarding the verse as it does not necessarily indicate a predisposition towards presenting biased arguments or opposing every upgrade thread without reason.

However, there is currently insufficient evidence to support this claim.

The purpose of this section is not to enumerate knowledgeable members of the verse but rather to identify individuals who possess a favorable, neutral, or unfavorable view of it.

For users who are recognized as knowledgeable members, a separate page has been designated for them.

 

[Nierre]

We already have a Knowledgeable Members List (I don't even use this but IK the importance of it), so the opponents/neutral thing is nigh useless.

Do people actually use it anyway? As in, do people actually use it for it's intended purpose? I feel like people would, if anything, use it to call supporters because the title "opponents" doesn't really connotate anything positive to the layman who happens to look at it - as opposed to KML, where it's a general section.

 

[Planck69]

Yeah, it's quite pointless to have. The Knowledgeable Members List serves that purpose well enough and most of the time, these Opponents don't even involve themselves with the verse in question, so even that idealized image of non-biased members that invest in the series doesn't hold water.

Best to just remove it.

 

[Damage3245]

Maybe the "Opponent" branding could be repurposed?

It could be used to list people who don't want to bothered with the verse; as in don't ask them to comment on threads for it if their name is listed under that heading.



But I'm also fine with the labels being removed entirely as otherwise they don't serve any meaningful purpose.

 

[Jinx666]

It is advisable to maintain an open mind towards individuals who hold differing opinions regarding the verse as it does not necessarily indicate a predisposition towards presenting biased arguments or opposing every upgrade thread without reason.

Well yes, but the terminology of it all is still getting that sense across. Why are they 'opponents' of the verse if they dont mean to oppose it in some way?

However, there is currently insufficient evidence to support this claim.

This isnt like some versus thread that needs a scan or feats to back up a power or smthn, its just a common question on whether the section of neutral/opponents is necessary, because people will prejudge what the meaning of 'Neutral' and 'Opponent' means, with regards to Supporter, that its more of a bias thing (e.g. whether you like the verse or not). Thats just simply the definition of the words, Its not logically possible for me to provide evidence of someone being 'bias' because of this, and even if i could i do not want to target anyone specific and call them bias.

The purpose of this section is not to enumerate knowledgeable members of the verse but rather to identify individuals who possess a favorable, neutral, or unfavorable view of it.

This is not what Ant claims, but i dont see why it needs to be identified whether you're a neutral or opponent of the verse, that just leads into questions of spite/bias, and serves no information or invitiation to engage about the verse with. It sounds more like a popularity thing someone can list on their own profile if they want, but isn't useful information to the general viewer. Its not necessary to put down on the verse profile yourself that you have an 'unfavorable' view of it.

For users who are recognized as knowledgeable members, a separate page has been designated for them.

Which makes this notion unnecessary of putting Opponents/Neutral on the Verse page.

 

[Jinx666]

Personally I think the best solution for this is to-

Rework the Entire section of Opponents/Neutrals/Supporters of a Verse page into 'Knowledgeable Members', where people can put down that they are 'knowledgable' of the verse and eliminate any prejudged bias of the 'Opponent' or 'Supporter' label
Provide a note or other external link that links to the Knowledgeable Members List

or

Just get rid of the Knowledegable Members List and put each section of it on their own respective verse. The list is fine but it doesn't look the best, and without Ctrl F, its a pain to scroll through. Its just a long list of verse names and profiles under it, where i dont think the casual viewer would even know of its existence to check, and instead rely on the verse page listings. Its a decent amount of work but this wiki has been able to do mass overhauls before

 

[LordTracer]

I feel like combining both of those ideas would be best. Change the entire “Opponents/Neutrals/Supporters” section to “Knowledgeable Members” and move the sections from the Knowledgeable Members List to their respective verse pages.

 

[Damage3245]

I feel like combining both of those ideas would be best. Change the entire “Opponents/Neutrals/Supporters” section to “Knowledgeable Members” and move the sections from the Knowledgeable Members List to their respective verse pages.

This is a solution that I think works best for VSBW in its current state.

The Opponents/Neutrals/Supporters section is outdated and unnecessary.

 

[Nierre]

I echo Damage and Tracer's thoughts

 

[KLOL506]

This is a solution that I think works best for VSBW in its current state.

The Opponents/Neutrals/Supporters section is outdated and unnecessary.

I agree with this sentiment. The Supporters/Opponents/Neutral section does nothing but just garner hatred amongst the community for absolutely no reason at this point. Whether you love the verse, hate the verse or are indifferent on it is irrelevant if you know little to nothing about how the verse works.

 

[Jinx666]

^^^ Definitely for all this

 

[Bobsican]

I recall I tackled this topic as my first CRT since this XenForo forum was made, anyways...

The consensus over there was that basically only users that are willing to actually contribute on the respective verse should list themselves over there, and this much is outlined in the Standard Format for Verse Pages:

• A section where members who are familiar with a series, or franchise, can add their names under different sections, depending on their opinions about it. Only the members who help out with content revision threads in our external forum should write themselves down under these sections.

However, in practice this is clearly not enforced at all, and users just freely list themselves on if they like, dislike or aren't interested on the verse (regardless of proper awareness on the topic and act of helping out on CRTs), and so the practical intended purpose of it is largely rendered irrelevant by the Knowledgeable Members List, so yeah, I'd be fine with such section being downright removed from all verse pages.

 

[ImmortalDread]

This is a solution that I think works best for VSBW in its current state.

The Opponents/Neutrals/Supporters section is outdated and unnecessary.

This is a bit of generalization, what is exactly being outdated?

 

[ImmortalDread]

Well yes, but the terminology of it all is still getting that sense across. Why are they 'opponents' of the verse if they dont mean to oppose it in some way?

This isnt like some versus thread that needs a scan or feats to back up a power or smthn, its just a common question on whether the section of neutral/opponents is necessary, because people will prejudge what the meaning of 'Neutral' and 'Opponent' means, with regards to Supporter, that its more of a bias thing (e.g. whether you like the verse or not). Thats just simply the definition of the words, Its not logically possible for me to provide evidence of someone being 'bias' because of this, and even if i could i do not want to target anyone specific and call them bias.

This is not what Ant claims, but i dont see why it needs to be identified whether you're a neutral or opponent of the verse, that just leads into questions of spite/bias, and serves no information or invitiation to engage about the verse with. It sounds more like a popularity thing someone can list on their own profile if they want, but isn't useful information to the general viewer. Its not necessary to put down on the verse profile yourself that you have an 'unfavorable' view of it.

Which makes this notion unnecessary of putting Opponents/Neutral on the Verse page.

You have repeated the same points numerous times, yet you have not provided an explanation for why a supporter could not be biased.

 

[Jinx666]

You have repeated the same points numerous times, yet you have not provided an explanation for why a supporter could not be biased.

I've felt the need to repeat as such because you are saying that I have not made such points, so I am willing to repeat them again for you

I've also never stated that a Supporter couldn't be bias, ever since Ant's post I have been advocating to changing all 3 labels into just 'Knowledgeable Members', but with excluding it from this threads original title, 'Supporters' can be another way of saying 'Knowledgable Members', or at least to me seemed like decent terminology for someone that 'supports' the series, and ergo knows enough about it. But it's not something i'm clinging onto and haven't been for a while now.

Its been days now, and I've stated multiple times that I much prefer the naming of 'Knowledgable Members' than Supporters, as Supporters can be viewed as 'bias' in the same light as 'Opponents', so it is therefore better to just change it to something different entirely. Hope this clears it up.

 

[ImmortalDread]

Your argument relies on a certain premise, which is why it cannot be valid as long as that premise remains. Whether you choose to remove that section or not is up to you. However, I find this type of argument to be unfair.

 

[Nierre]

That still seems to be missing the point of this thread and derailing a bit. Regardless it's still useless/redundant to have and it's better to have it merged with KML, as many (staff included) have agreed upon.

 

[KLOL506]

This is a bit of generalization, what is exactly being outdated?

The whole notion of Supporters/Opponents/Neutral. We aren't supposed to add in nobodies in there regardless of bias towards or against because ultimately, if they don't know jackshit about the ins and outs of the verse, their opinion is effectively worthless in the long run regardless of whether upgrades or downgrades are being pushed.

 

[LordTracer]

Your argument relies on a certain premise, which is why it cannot be valid as long as that premise remains. Whether you choose to remove that section or not is up to you. However, I find this type of argument to be unfair.

You’re focusing on one specific part of what he said instead of the entire premise of the thread, and it’s getting to the point of derailing. If you don’t have anything to say about the main premise of changing the Supporters/Neutral/Opponents section to a Knowledgeable Members section, then please stop commenting on the thread.

 

[Jinx666]

Your argument relies on a certain premise, which is why it cannot be valid as long as that premise remains. Whether you choose to remove that section or not is up to you. However, I find this type of argument to be unfair.

I do not understand what you mean by this 'certain premise', whether thats the fact i'm saying people can incorrectly judge the terrm 'Opponent' (or Supporter) in the case of its definition itself, people putting themselves on the verse page purely for liking/disliking the series etc.

As a member with 0 power on this wiki, its not my call at all, and this thread was originally asking for its purpose, but it seems widely agreed that it is a redundant section and would be better repurposed, which was apparently the point of this section in the first place.

 

[ImmortalDread]

The fact that someone judges a term incorrectly doesn't mean that the term can be defined by that incorrect judgment. As I mentioned before, I am indifferent about whether the section is removed or not, but this argument lacks evidence and is incorrect.

 

[Jinx666]

The fact that someone judges a term incorrectly doesn't mean that the term can be defined by that incorrect judgment. As I mentioned before, I am indifferent about whether the section is removed or not, but this argument lacks evidence and is incorrect.

It's not, but its much easier for the sake of understanding to everyone, and trying to find people who 'know' about the verse rather than putting a seemingly-bias label on them 'Supporter'/'Opponent' thats being misused. We could reverse the meanings of 'Supporter' and 'Opponent' on this wiki, and then it would just be confusing. It is purely for improving the efficiency and understanding of the wiki, and allowing casual viewers better access to people who know what they are talking about without a risk of bias, or disturbing someone who has only put themselves as an 'opponent' because they dislike the series.

Evidence again, isnt that necessary in the sake of common sense and using better terminology.

Either way thats the last post im making replying to this, as it is starting to derail.

 

[ImmortalDread]

I don't understand why you're calling it a biased label. Either your understanding of what it means to be an opponent is different from mine, or you're attempting to create a new definition altogether.

Furthermore, I'm not sure which confusion you're referring to. The editing rules explicitly state that the label's existence serves for:

• A section where members who are familiar with a series, or franchise, can add their names under different sections, depending on their opinions about it. Only the members who help out with content revision threads in our external forum should write themselves down under these sections.

You mentioned that you would stop using the “biased argument” because it could be applied to either side, but you haven't stopped.
I used the phrase “a certain premise” because you haven't altered your argument.

Everyone has their own perspectives on what qualifies as good, bad, or somewhere in between, and this goes beyond personal preferences.

My opinions on the power levels, abilities, and rankings of characters have no correlation with my personal tastes or enjoyment of a series. I may label myself as a supporter if a series is a personal favorite or if I simply like it and want to see it receive more attention or recognition.

However, there are some series that I am neutral towards but actually like better than ones I consider myself a supporter of. The level of support for a series may also depend on other factors beyond its quality.

It's possible for opposing series and neutral series to be in the same boat, so to speak.