- 3,927
- 5,687
Nah nah nah everyone lets chill lol
-
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.
Baki Back to 7-C
- Thread starter Shmeatywerbenmanjenson
- Start date
-
- Tags
- grappler baki
- Status
- 3,927
- 5,687
To answer that being stronger than the military doesn’t make you 7-B.
- 3,927
- 5,687
You have to be stated to be equal to nukes or stronger to have that 7-B rating
- 16,998
- 12,134
Because you need to prove it???? Literally what kind of counter is this supposed to be? You
The Military doesn't use nukes, so again wrong. Next.
Again, the military isn't in charge of utilizing nuclear warheads. If you think this I'd seriously suggest doing further research because this is only something a 12th grader would think.
Jojo part 2 is 8-C+ via various feats on that level so once again, wrong. It's a common practice, it isn't written anywhere in particular.
Nope.
Then don't use stupid arguments.
- 8,795
- 4,099
......
- 3,927
- 5,687
Nah don’t get me wrong. I have the scans to prove he is. But being compared to the military isn’t enough to be 7-B on vs wiki
- 8,795
- 4,099
Yeah i worded it wrong
- 4,716
- 4,209
- Thread starter
- #88
That's what I'm arguing for, Yujiro should scale to characters at that time so his prof would look something like this. 9-A likely higher, possibly far higher( stopped an earthquake with a punch) for his early Baki appearances. Current Yujiro there's definitely an argument to be made.
- 4,716
- 4,209
- Thread starter
- #89
Yeah technically 8-A is enough to be stronger than an entire army(Since nothing non-nuclear is higher) so it doesn't conflict with tier 8 Baki.
Last edited:
- 4,716
- 4,209
- Thread starter
- #90
Bump
- 4,716
- 4,209
- Thread starter
- #91
Bump
- 802
- 167
Who is not an official Baki source.
This doesn't mean the anime is more canon the the source material, you also have to quantify and qualify Itagaki's involvement in making the anime show becuase as far as I can tell you are mentioning vague stuff that is inconsequential to the power scaling. What does Yujiro's character depth mean in this context ? Nothing.
Yeah you do, you are the one who made the claim first that Yujiro was holding back vs Doppo and wasn't during the earthquake feat, that's not how the dynamics of a negative vs positive claim work, that has nothing to do with this point. Since you are not bothering to show evidence I can simply dismiss your argument altogether via hitchen's razor. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hitchens's_razor
I never claimed Yujiro was holding back or going all out, I never took a stance in the first place I just asked you to prove the point you made.
No, Yujiro's earthquake feat is x2.6 baseline of town level, done by a certifiably weaker Yujiro than the one we see in the maximum tournament fighting Doppo. There's no reason to downscale the cast to anything less than 7-C/town level, that's just headcanon. I read your argument, very carefully, it's simply wrong man.
Why should I prove the stance YOU have taken? lol.
Sorry but is there actually a reason you have that would legitimize you disregarding the scan Notorious posted ? becauase it's not an author statement, it's Yujiro's character bio from the manga lol.
You just can't dismiss a scan with no evidence to contradict it just because "lul death of the author", it's simply not how this works.
@LordGinSama
- 16,998
- 12,134
Wasn't misusing the term, once again you don't know what the term even means to begin without using Google kiddo.
I'll reply to the above soon.
- 8,795
- 4,099
lel
Man i directly give you the description of what death of the author is, and is totally different from what you were saying
PD: Oh also i alredy know what death of the author is anyway
- 16,998
- 12,134
No you literally misunderstood the very definition of the word. You copied and pasted shit that you found right from the front page of Google which is a terrible source.
And you very clearly didn't considering you thought it meant that it meant the actual death of a author. Man you must be an English major.
- 8,795
- 4,099
Again why would i believe you from a source...
Also i heard the exact same definitions 2 times so it cant be a mere concidience
PD: Also insulting my english isnt going to scare me away
- 8,795
- 4,099
From tropedia:
Death of the Author is a concept from the field of literary criticism which holds that an author's intentions and biographical facts (the author's politics, religion, etc) should hold no weight when coming to an interpretation of his or her writing; that is, that a writer's interpretation of his own work is no more
Wikipedia:
In his essay, Barthes argues against the method of reading and criticism that relies on aspects of an author's identity to distill meaning from the author's work. In this type of criticism against which he argues, the experiences and biases of the author serve as a definitive "explanation" of the text.
Literally all of this
And again you have to explain why every single one of those descriptions isnt reliable
Death of the Author is a concept from the field of literary criticism which holds that an author's intentions and biographical facts (the author's politics, religion, etc) should hold no weight when coming to an interpretation of his or her writing; that is, that a writer's interpretation of his own work is no more
Wikipedia:
In his essay, Barthes argues against the method of reading and criticism that relies on aspects of an author's identity to distill meaning from the author's work. In this type of criticism against which he argues, the experiences and biases of the author serve as a definitive "explanation" of the text.
Literally all of this
And again you have to explain why every single one of those descriptions isnt reliable
- 16,998
- 12,134
Because a random source that isn't even legitimate in the first place isn't an authentic argument to make. First of all, that's argument from disbelief which isn't valid, secondly Google has very different definitions of words from let's say authentic sources such as Merium and other printed sources.
PS: I quite frankly don't care. It wasn't an insult either as opposed to a general observation.
Extra PS: The fact that you need to Google shit with little to zero blatant proof you wouldn't fair well in any college kiddo.
- 8,795
- 4,099
Oh yeah and 3 Sources are not reliable because reasons, but your world is apperently true... for no reason
I LITERALLY GIVED YOU THE DEFINITION IN WIKIPEDIA
Man i give you proves you say "nah they arent true" i give you more proves and you still say no. This is just moving the goal. I could bring a ******* omnicient being to give you the definition and you still wouldnt accept it
Also what??? you say that i dont know the definition.... even if i gived you?
- 16,998
- 12,134
Yeah ignored, obviously an argument given by someone who's either illiterate or has never taken a Singulair college course in their life.
Anyway if you continue to drop the same old argument without actually understanding it to begin with then I'm gonna ignore you.
FYI good luck giving a Wikipedia link to a professor as an actual argument.
Anyway if you continue to drop the same old argument without actually understanding it to begin with then I'm gonna ignore you.
FYI good luck giving a Wikipedia link to a professor as an actual argument.
- 8,795
- 4,099
1. Calling me a guy who hasnt go to school because my bad english
2. Ignores all my argument saying "they arent beliable truth" without any backup on why those arent truth
3. Oh yeah you are a profesor so much that LITERALLY EVERYONE IN THE INTERNET DISAGREE WITH YOU, even if you were a professor you would still be wrong, because what you saying isnt true and doesnt matter if you are a professor that doesnt make it true that is like saying "a biologist says that a ant is 10x more intelligent than a human so is must be true"
I preffer houndres of sources versus a guy who claims to be proffesor without any proves
- 3,927
- 5,687
Honestly I feel that this should be made into a new thread. The problems here aren’t with just scaling. It’s multiple other things that are outdated or not remember correctly for Baki.
- 16,998
- 12,134
Reading compression of a fourth grader huh? The fact that you think I said I was a professor is blatant evidence of you literally not having the basic understanding of English to even be replying to arguments in the first place.
2: A random ass link from Google is not a forum of proper citation. Wiki isn't an EDU or a .GOV link for next.
Try again.
- 8,795
- 4,099
???? You need information to prove that those arent reliable AND again you havent gived any backup on why your definition of death of the author is true.
Also the definition that i use, is universally used like this
1.https://interestingliterature.com/2021/10/barthes-death-of-the-author-summary-analysis/ (Basically ignore the author background to focus only in the work)
And Uberto mentions it "A narrator should not supply interpretations of his work; otherwise he would not have written a novel, which is a machine for generating interpretations."
Literally the ENTIRE "BOOK" IS IN INTERNET JUST GOOGLE IT, now what you gonna say that the existence of the book is fake or what?
Last edited:
- 8,795
- 4,099
Also you think i am so dumb that i am going to ignore you saying one thing and then saying that you didnt??? Insult my grammar all you want is obvious, because you are only prolongin these because unlike you i am actually backing my sources. Oh also your defintion of death of the author doesnt have anything with death so....
- 42,598
- 36,888
Just commenting on this, by professor, he means a teacher at a college. If you try to give them anything with a Wikipedia link as a source, they will not grade you well since Wikipedia can be edited by basically everyone, this is common knowledge. You either get a .gov or EDU as a source generally, or quotes from knowledgeable sources. So, unless you do the research to find at least several of those backing up the Wikipedia claim, you will not get far.
- 42,598
- 36,888
And to back up Wikipedia generally not being the best source, one upon a time there was an entire war involving Canada and such published onto it and it was believed, well it was more of a faker then Gilgamesh thinks Shirou Emiya is.
- 8,795
- 4,099
.... you know he said that he wasnt a teacher literally after he said that he was
And this isnt school, the term is universally accepted as is used as a way to determinate on how to value a work, also just... ju... write Death of the author PDF to see that i am not lying, because that is what literally everyones reminds of roland barthes
Also i still dont know if he is a teacher, specially when he said that he wasnt a teacher 3 responds later
Also there is this by a author so...
Oh also he still needs to give sources for his version of death of the author, i dont give a shit if he is a teacher because he still need to give source
- 8,795
- 4,099
A. Universally accepted
B. Used commonly to determinate the value of a work
C. The entire work is in google
D. An entire wikipedia page
E. The version that i give is talked in the daily michingan
Him being a teacher doesnt mean that he is rigth intristically, specially when people far more specialized than him has used the version that i am saying is the correct, because if we just assume that he is saying the truth, that his version of death of the author is the correct without giving any sources and dissmissing everything then that is just a big authority fallacy. If he is saying the truth then give his sources to back it up because even if am wrong two wrongs doesnt make a rigth..
Last edited:
- 42,598
- 36,888
I'm not here to actually argue with you, I'm here to correct mistakes about sources and such.
This meant that if you tried to give a college professor a Wikipedia link it'd be automatically denied. Because as constantly said in this thread, Wikipedia is a terrible source as I've given an example of. Gin did not say he was a professor, this is obvious in his post is worded, he said "a professor" this means any professor at a college, not that he himself is a professor. So are wrong. I have no intention of debating here regardless.
This meant that if you tried to give a college professor a Wikipedia link it'd be automatically denied. Because as constantly said in this thread, Wikipedia is a terrible source as I've given an example of. Gin did not say he was a professor, this is obvious in his post is worded, he said "a professor" this means any professor at a college, not that he himself is a professor. So are wrong. I have no intention of debating here regardless.
- 8,795
- 4,099
Oh that makes sense i guess... But that still doesnt change my point that is accepted to the point where several writters have made columns about it, also i still havent found a version that coincides with his version kek
- Status
