Please report any rule violations in this thread. Notifying us of such incidents is highly appreciated.
Additionally, kindly report any sockpuppets that you come across.
Only report violations regarding thewikirules. False reports due to personal vendettas are unacceptable.
Also, this thread should be for reporting actual rule-breaking, not every single little disagreement.
In cases of extreme vandalism or trolling, you can report the accounts at the VSTF wiki.
If blocked members create sockpuppet accounts to circumvent their block repetitively, or several are created at almost the same time, you may contact the Fandom Staff, to politely request permanent range IP blocks.
You can also find specific users with the Search Function by typing with the format: "User:Username"
Remember to inform members via their message walls if that you have reported them here, in case they have performed severe enough rule-violations to risk being blocked. However, this should only be used in uncertain cases, not if they have done something instantly ban worthy, or if their offenses are minor.
It is against the Fandom rules to upload any offensive images to the wiki, so in order to show screencapture evidence of extremely bad behaviour, you must use external sites, such as Gyazo or Imgur, in order to not get globally banned yourself by the higher-ups:
Do not derail the Rule Violation Threads with irrelevant nonsense or internal disputes. It is solely for making serious, warranted reports of violations of the Site, Discussion, and Editing Rules, and not for discussion or side comments. Such posts should preferably be removed by the staff, and if a member continues to derail after being repeatedly told to stop, this will result in a temporary ban.
Given the extreme levels of systematic harrassment towards this community, kindly remember to not share/post any evidence of malware or child abuse publicly in order to prevent unwillful distribution. Submit any evidence of child abuse and severe systematic threats to the police.
If something goes outside the jurisdiction of the VS Battles wiki bureaucrats, or even the global Fandom staff, you need to report it personally to the authorities.
Also, absolutely do not click on any random links from suspicious users. You could potentially access content that contains dangerous malware or illegal types of pornography, alternately tracks your IP address and location. If you are uncertain, please use this page to verify that the links are not dangerous.
However, do not feed the trolls by discussing their behaviour here, as they get excited and motivated by any form of attention. Strictly report them to the staff, who then block them and mass-delete their contributions.
If there are genuine serious problems with the behaviour of certain staff members, do not cause drama by extensively arguing about it here, but rather contact the Human Resources Group.
It’s not that the ban was wrong, like I said I do agree that it was ultimately the correct move, but there was no discourse or consideration, if anyone just clicked on this thread with little context chances are they’d think the basis of his ban is superficial.
>Expletive in name. That barely qualifies as an expletive when just about everyone on this site has said expletives objectively worse, whether in jest or not
>His links, while spammy technically don’t break any major rules. They were all educational history videos. While it is possible to postulate a more sinister motive, it would still just be making assumptions based on little evidence
>Suspicious profile. How do you determine a suspicious profile? He’s new, his page in empty and as far as I can tell even his profile pic is purely random.
Well, he hasn’t really done much wrong, as of yet. In all fairness, ‘trolling’, while having heavy implications can vary from spamming gore to being mildly annoying- he seems to be leaning to the ‘mildly annoying’ side.
I request that we can talk to him for a moment, first. He seems like a younger user, after all, not one with cruel and malicious intent.
It wouldn't have mattered. His very first contribution was a link to the thread where FANDOM chastised us about Ever's demotion and then the troll group of the time came in and caused it to descend into chaos. And he did so right after something related that I said.
He was there to start trouble. Under the above context, I'd even wager he was one of them.
Would an IP block of the person behind The Best Hacker and AogiriKira2 accounts be reasonable under the circumstances? It's quite clear that this has been going on for some time, with the same person repeatedly making sockpuppet accounts specifically to harass AogiriKira.
Actions on FANDOM websites are subject to the laws of California according to ToU, so the laws of wherever they live don't matter in a case like this.
If a user does something on a FANDOM wiki that can get them arrested in California, they can be prosecuted by the company regardless of the laws of where they live. And any defenses involving "lack of personal jurisdiction" (as in, "you can't prosecute me because I live in a different state/country and you have no way of getting me to appear before your court of law" type defenses) are waived the moment that user moves forward with making a FANDOM account.
TL;DR: Convince the people at FANDOM to take legal action, and you might get some semblance of a result. Maybe.
Contacting the police is literally the first thing you should do in that case, even if you think it's not going to help. They know your IP and location so at least you should be under protection for this time.
you look above Ant comment saying If blocked members create sockpuppet accounts to circumvent their block repetitively, or several are created at almost the same time, you may contact the Fandom Staff, to politely request permanent range IP blocks.
Matthew seems to have made an effort to behave better and help out more in this website lately, and has not done anything with the intention to hurt it elsewhere as far as I am aware. Let's try to leave him alone please.
Unlike what cop shows & the internet lead you to believe, tracking one's exact location through their IP address is impossible, unless you live in a city-block sized town with less than 100 people. Odds are that the troll who set up that bait will only be informed of your country or state via general database searching, at most your city - and that's if they get lucky. Anything further than that is literally impossible to find via your IP.
I’m gonna put the hammer on the nail here. Boomer has talked about the same things the last socks talks about. And as a matter of fact, she is on my server, and she even admitted that she was gonna use socks lol.
I was going to wait, but yes; she is definitely Mikoto/Hans/Ted Ed after looking at that. Furthermore, Ted Ed also debated and said the exact same things on my wall on other wikis is another indicator. Mikoto is surprisingly not as malicious sounding as she used to be, but a sock is still a sock. So she should still be banned. I will do so.
DarkDragonMedeus wrote: I was going to wait, but yes; she is definitely Mikoto/Hans/Ted Ed after looking at that. Furthermore, Ted Ed also debated and said the exact same things on my wall on other wikis is another indicator. Mikoto is surprisingly not as malicious sounding as she used to be, but a sock is still a sock. So she should still be banned. I will do so.
Perhaps because it's not "Mikoto" to begin with? Seriously, the only reason this whole issue has started is out of sheer paranoia in Matt's part just saying that the user behind it is the "so-called" Mikoto without absolutely anything to prove it beyond having similar tastes, this sort of stuff has happened before and isn't solid criteria and we know it, as I could have the exact same taste as Ever, yet I'm not actually him, for example.
While using a sock is bad, if the ban behind it has no real reason beyond the above, then she can just be asked to stick to one account and move on as if nothing happened.
@Bobsican, MYHero literally posted a scan confirming that they are socks and that Hans/Mikoto is literally boasting that they will always be making socks. It's not "having the same opinions", it's that on top of the same tactics, the same "Constantly creates socks", same behavior, same habits of having personal vendettas, and many other things. Plus, someone a while back also had a scan confirming Hans is Mikoto. That Lilith account on Discord was also a name Matt recognized as Mikoto. Boomer, Hans, and Ted Ed all did the same thing Marco Shark, Asuka, RapidMotorcycle, and Megaboy Prime did. Act like she's multiple people at once, when they're all the same people. All of whom were also confirmed to be Mikoto socks.
well 1. no that's not it, I said i had stopped but spine kept going in witth the gaia derails that i in truth started, i said i'd be willing to derail it further getting it closed to prove my point if it continued, and as such it worked out, I some of my comments and spine deleted his "so thread won't become toxic"
2. there's no threats, i'm just saying that i'll cut ties, read and observe and i also said if i actually cared i'd see shadow, corgi and bacchus gone in a week because that's how badly they do their dues. I don't do it but said i'd consider it if I did get in trouble for the wrong things
as a example of disrespect here we have shadow trying to tell me what to do and getting roasted alive, he accuses me of being the aggressor because i said i would continue the gaia derail if it keeps getting mentioned
Wokistan wrote: Should prob be temporarily removed, given the wall thing and nebulous threats. That thread was going mostly fine before he started up by the looks of it so idk where that all came from
there are no threats, it's wording taken out of context and I've stated I would continue the gaia talk if it keeps getting mentioned which Darksspine kept doing. I been stopped in all actuality besides responding, I believe ShakeResounding should testify since he described what I was doing in the thread in itself. there's no death threats or anything of the sort.
Wokistan wrote: "i said i'd be willing to derail it further getting it closed to prove my point if it continued,"
This is a problem
"i also said if i actually cared i'd see shadow, corgi and bacchus gone in a week "
This is an implied threat. They don't have to be death threats and that pretty clearly isn't one, but it's still not a thing you can do.
With that link you posted, you seem to have instigated the problem on someone elses message wall, so that doesn't really help you out.
not too there.
I could see if that quote gave any wrong ordeals
it's not an implied threat, it's more of stating what can be done if a mind is put to it, likewise it's saying i have no interest it's like saying "I can run the marathon and outrun you if I really cared"
I can see that, Actually I happened to stumble across the post, i kind of went in knowing the history, I told them that behavior like that is why mods are dipping on sonic.
The Wright Way wrote: I proppse a temporary ban. Breaker clearly thinks he's above the rules. I say we show him otherwise.
you guys could, but i'd say this is missing context and is telling one region of the story being told. I read the rules, saying that you know something won't happen because you the content that cites it isn't placing oneself above anything.
either way i'm chill and feel no pressure what happens just happens but I will remember it, which is my case and all I was trying to say.
When you point it out whilst berating others and getting into arguments that doesn't exactly give a good impression. It's like saying "I can talk shit to your face all I want mate, the rules aren't gonna save you."
Derailing a thread to get it closed just to prove a point or because of personal feelings is definitely unacceptable behavior. Although, it isn't ban worthy, a warning to not repeat this behavior in the future will suffice for now.
AKM sama wrote:
Derailing a thread to get it closed just to prove a point or because of personal feelings is definitely unacceptable behavior. Although, it isn't ban worthy, a warning to not repeat this behavior in the future will suffice for now.
You're literally doing exactly what he wants. He thinks he'll het aeay with it because all he'll het is a warning. He even said as much. We're just encouraging him to do it again with this response.
I don’t want to continue a discussion over this longer than necessary, but frankly, I agree. He himself admitted that he knew his behaviour would “just warrant a warning” and that he didn’t care enough about that to stop or think twice about what he was doing. He’s quite directly admitted that he doesn’t care about being warned for his behaviour, which generally means that further action should be taken.
If his behavior only warrants a warning, it only warrants a warning. If they do it again, then we ban them. We don’t ban people for things they maybe, might do in the future. Psychopass has enough to say about that.
All of the new comments above except for Moritzva are capping, I ruined no thread and was far from doing it, the suupposed quote is being taken out of context tbh, I specifically said it to darksspine so he would quit briinging an irrelevant topic up since he was instigating the deraill I told him I would join in basically even if the thread got closed which he was aiding in, I didn't ruin anything and darksspine deleted his irrelevant comments with "i don't want this thread to become toxic" so it all worked out, telling these guys that it's not likely I would get more than warning is like telling the cops they can't just invade my house without a warrant in hand, that's harmless, there's no above anything, are you mad that i came to a quick conclusion based on the rules I read? they're not doing what I want, it's literally in the books that whatever wrong i did here (i i did) warrants a warning and not a straightt up ban considering that i've never had a warning in my entire time being here. me being warned is telling me to do my best to not do it again aand if it comes close to reportit before it becomes bad or? accept the ban, and i'm doing one and two. that's it, period. a warning is enough, do you really think i'm gonna execute something like this again? did I say that? why are you guys trying si hard? I believe it is because you know it's likely i won't do it again because i'm not that easy peasy like ZaStando, they're trying to boot me only because 1. Belief in 1-A Sonic and 2. because I exposed them for cyberbullying and messing with the staff. if you come anywhere close to my agitation meter i'm reporting it before things get bad. I learn from my mistakes. Shadow And The Rest is overhyping what would be a simple warning, there's no threats or any death threats, link the entire threads as the source from the screenshots. as i've said people like corgi got like 7+ warnings andain't out of here for much worse, currently the worst behaving person on the wikia yet i'm not allowed a warning for a tiny flame being hyped up to a forest fire? Nah B.
you have my word i ain't going on and on about this and won't do it again.
The Wright Way wrote: Only it doesn't only warrant a warning. We don't de things like that. We decided things in a case by case basis and the basis here clearly suggests a ban is needed.
a ban isn't needed, there are other terms and a warning more perfectly fits this description more than a ban, it's not what "I" want, it's what the rules goes to show, these "this guy thinks he's above everything" is a lie and a jack up. they do say knowledge is dangerouus (in this case i know the rules) but at most I estimate a warning if it's seen as wrong, of course i can't get a warning but watch shadow and the others do and make something much worse with all their warnings way more over seven and get away with it. I advised Maverick to talk it over and there's nothing wrong that, and when he said no, I said if it happens i'm cutting ties, that's no threat whatsoever. i'm not attacking him or anybody, just letting them know the potential result of reporting me, why would I be a ally to people who are trying to drive me out over something that clearly won't drive me out based on the rules? of course lay down the neutrality I did have with them.
i'm pretty sure AKM and Antvasima already agreed on a warning. that's it.
Well, this is, as far as I remember, his first offense. A first offense for a generally behaved member has to be pretty bad in order to be considered ban-worthy. So I honestly think a warning is better. Keep an eye on him sure, and if he does so again then unfortunately we'd have to ban him then, but this is about the only time I'm hearing of Breaker doing anything bad.
@Wright That's not it. He did threaten to derail a thread just because of a tiny dispute with another member but when I looked into the thread, both had deleted their respective comments and the matter was back on track.
Although that is quite clearly unacceptable behavior even if he says someone else instigated it. But is it insta-ban worthy? No. There are people among us who have done worse multiple times and got warnings multiple times too. His offence isn't like a troll or vandal who is an immediate threat to the wiki and needs to be insta banned. As far as I'm aware, he's been here for a year and that's his first offence.
We'd obviously give a warning and opportunity to shape up his behavior and if he thinks he can get away with such behavior again in the future, he can try. Although I think he already said he won't do it again.
Earthyboy got banned for being a sock of Semajar The Debunker who got banned for making and incessantly arguing in bad faith, within this thread. Many more people took issue with his behaviour there than the few users he mentioned in that community thread.
I will verify that Earthyboy did apologize for his actions in a group chat I’m in and I have noticed an improvement in his behavior. He hasn’t been overly zealous about pushing exaggerated upgrades and he has been more civil in his interactions with others.
He did make a sock account to evade a ban which is definitely an issue since typically that’d result in people being perma banned. So whether or not Earthyboy would be allowed to come back is something I’d rather abstain from, but if it does get decided that he can come back, I won’t object to him being here as long as he continues to show that he’s changed for the better.
I think he should stay banned, problems with "behavior" is 98% the reasons of warnings and bans, the "change in behavior" could be a ploy and he is one of my buddies, he's been given chances and has made socks for the exact purpose of offense and avoiding bans. I don't see why he should come back when others in similar or exact same circumstances wouldn't able to. in my thoughts it's just unethical. wasn't this requested before? and it wasn't just earthyboy that was requested before, the reason being "they were given chances already" (not even being warned before bans and number of bans were 2)
if it wasn't accepted then, it should not be accepted now. there's spacebattles, facebook, discord and even other wiki's.
but if we're talking about it, admittingly Earthyboy And ZaStando has become more stable and courteous when interacting with others, they plan whether certain threads should be made or not with ShakeResounding (who i'm also scheming with) and if it does we ponder which order should it be placed. overall they're not as ignorant and displaced as they once were, even if they disagree with the statistics, they're willing to work it out and play the cards right. but if they weren't accepted back then, then i don't see why now.
I mean, Earthyboy has said quite a lot of things both on and offsite. Such as saying "The staff here don't have a single brain cell." And making socks to get around bans is definitely off limits. And while there are definitely people much worse than either of them, there is the fact that they both been banned from multiple wikis due to their behavior is something to consider. No one should be banned for their beliefs; though, them being pushy about their beliefs is a different story.
I recall this BlitzSevenTeen was rumored to be a sock, but I think I recall it being mentioned that he doesn't appear to be the same guy. I'm fine with him being unblocked, but Zastando and EarthyBoy have both said some things that overall it may not be entirely safe to unblock them.
yeah pretty much.
@Shadow Please do not start, Earthyboy is also my friend but I admit both should stay unblocked or have some deep talk. i'm neutral here and not entirely against either. I would like them to be unblocked but looking at the status qup it's unlikely, the only difference between earthboy and zastando is one is more assertive, but one is more aggressive, earthyboy moreso then zastando, in wiki's earthyboy has point blank called the staff alot of dolphin talk, when zastando was involved it was "mmm kay" and didn't push the same mood, rather he stated the staff's arguments are flawed, not attacking the person, ZaStando can push anything he wants, whether he plays the right cards is the question, and the recent tier 5 stuff was with earthyboy's and zastando's cooperation. you haven't talked to zastando in months, stop personalizing and attacking, considering you mock others inappropriately more brutally with a opposition to you like zastando and medeus (via discord and wall thread's i've seen") you need to chill and back up because you're being unreasonable. asserting earthynoy should stay yet beating down zastando is showing a deeper scope going on.
@Medeus I can say, ZaStando wasn't banned from multiple wiki's, he's been in only 3, Omniversal Battlefield happened because SuperBearNeo has a strong hate towards him (when I asked why, he made poor excuses) and then blocked me too for questioning his motif, and then there's character stats profiles which basically got set ablaze because of stuff on discord, i don't know the entire story on csap but that's it, the true story. and that was a year and a half ago, he has had no problems with any other wiki. what has zastando specifically said? I'm fine with both staying blocked, i'm neutral here
Can we stop pointing fingers at each other for something so trivial? Just state your points and leave, don't drag other users' credibilities into this and definitely don't derail the thread with this BS drama
A notable porno avatar should generally be avoided; even censored porn could still be seen as something Fandom would raise eyebrows against. That being said, cropping it to the point where there's no nudity seems to be okay; avatars that are literally just a face can't really be bad in terms of "Adult content".
However, looking at his avatar now, I think he's okay.
Do we even have the source to know if it's a porno at all? A lot of male art exposes the bare chest: hell, even Oko, the Magic: The Gathering planeswalker plaguing every format in the game, isn't wearing a shirt at all.