Why? The word countless doesn't have a minimum, neither does it have a set definition. Its too subjective. If I punch someone a countless number of times does that mean I punched them 1001 times at least?
We already take into account the context of the verse itself. The verses that are 2-B for countless are those that show proof that said "countless" does in fact refer to an amount so high, one cannot count it nor assign it a set value. So by definition, they would be above a set number like 1001.
It's when Sagan standard apply, countless simply stands for something that cannot be counted or too many to count and even "very much", "plenty" all stands just to describe the former relation, the burden of proof will be on one that making a claim of it being limited to under 1000 rather than one who is simply standing over what has been stated.
I was simply proving countless is above 500.
The same argument that can be used for infinite.
Not really. There's tons of quibbling over whether something's a sufficiently supported infinity standard or not, you can't just throw the word around regardless of context and get jumped up to there.
So you'd concede that the word Countless means ten thousand just as much as it means impossible to count? I've certainly demonstrated that the dictionary says this, after all.
I can when comes to number of universes coming from reliable sources?
No, it means:
www.merriam-webster.com
If it's supposedly so commonly used to mean this, then why would changing a default away from that be so bad? Surely all the verses you'd advocate for using that meaning of countless would have ample support to be able to be argued to use that on their own?
I'd agree that 2-C and 2-B being cut off at 1001 is pretty weird, but that's the kind of change that would take ages to do rip
That's not needed then, no one cares if a character who cannot perceive infinite or has no knowledge over the cosmology or the thing he is talking. Either infinite or countless.
I know a staff member or two planning a CRT to merge 2-C and 2-B into one single being. Not sure when it'll arrive but it is in the works.
Huh? And what is the reason for that?
You’re cherry picking the definition of myriad. The second defitnion is “a great number”, which is actually more synonymous with countless’ definition than 10,000.Definition of COUNTLESS
too numerous to be counted : myriad, many… See the full definition
countless
adjective
count·less ˈkau̇nt-ləs
: too numerous to be counted : MYRIAD, MANY
myriad
1 of 2
noun
myr·i·ad ˈmir-ē-əd
1
: ten thousand
2
: a greatnumber
a myriad of ideas
I dunno man, looks like the dictionary says it also means 10,000.
The cut-off is arbitrary as ****.
The difference here is that I can absolutely prove that countless is not usually used to mean what you use it to mean here. It would be quite bizarre if we just assumed the esoteric academia definitions of words in every case by the default as opposed to how the word is actually used by people, and there's also plenty of characters who don't really have any way to be sure about the academia meaning anyways. It makes more sense to just default to how real people use the word, and then leave the academic option open if it can be sufficiently supported.
