- 3,759
- 1,615
But it's enough Atleast as nothing disproves it.Some of those you listed aren't criteria.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
But it's enough Atleast as nothing disproves it.Some of those you listed aren't criteria.
Yes that is how it works.His beam is called beam of light... This means it consists of light. Thus meeting that requirement. Is this not how “of” is used?
The page needs not editing, you know by definition "of light" means comprised of light or in layman's terms, made of light. That is what the CRT established. The CRT is also concluded lol.Edit: Checked the light speed page, the accepted CRT you said as not been added, work on that first
Stop with the false equivalencies. Is "headbutt of justice" not a hyperbole?''the villain shall die by the hero gun'', does it makes the gun be hyperbole?
It appears there is not enough agreement for this to be accepted. I can close the thread if you want.Can we conclude this
Not gonna lie man, I feel like the oppositions point on Mask has been debunked. We have a character who is serious and straightforward state exactly how many joules of electricity her arrows contain, and then we have a character who’s far more flair like, like a wrestler would be, (he’s literally modeled after a wrestler) add some flair to what he’s saying.Can we conclude this
Hey, if he said “beam of justice” you’d have a case, but he said lightStop with the false equivalencies. Is "headbutt of justice" not a hyperbole?
But the case here is Beam of LightStop with the false equivalencies. Is "headbutt of justice" not a hyperbole?
I’m just waiting for him to respond to what I said.But the case here is Beam of Light
And yet you brought up a gun example. Hence, false equivalency.But the case here is Beam of Light
I have already responded to everything in my comments.I’m just waiting for him to respond to what I said.
False equivalence would be the headbutt of justice case, because his headbutt is not made of ""justice""?And yet you brought up a gun example. Hence, false equivalency.
Soo you’re not gonna respond to what I said about Kubo having Candice state exactly how many joules her arrows contain given her personality and Mask’s more flair like way of saying his attack given his personality? Mask isn’t an idiot, he literally pierced his eardrums to cancel out Rose’s bankai. But it’s nice to know you’d rather dodge it than answer itAnd yet you brought up a gun example. Hence, false equivalency.
I have already responded to everything in my comments.
The standards are being misinterpreted or misunderstood. "Light beam" already needs to fulfill the fourth requirement. "Beam of light" thing should be stated in a matter of fact way so that we know it's reliable. The statement here looks very flowery. The other requirements don't matter on their own as they are fulfilled by any generic energy beam. There is nothing else to say. If you don't want to get this thread concluded, then sure, let's keep doing this same song and dance.
Well he’s modeled after a wrestler It’s what they do. Doesn’t mean they don’t know saying a kick of justice means they’re gonna punch the opponenti suggest people read the full fight once Masks reveals his schrift, his enitre motif becomes the hero monologue stuff not just that instance and his pretty descriptive with his moves star kick(knee really) star headbutt etc
It doesn’t even matter if he’s flair. The fact that he was able to assess Rose’s bankai fast enough to destroy his eardrums to nullify the effects of it shows he’s not an idiot who says “the beam of light of justices fire doesn’t mean I fired a beam of ligh!”. Given his persona of a wrestler who likes to call out his attacks and is able to react like the Rose situation like he did showsI mean, I understand 100% what AKM is trying to say, Mask usually is really flair, however, in that sentence, the only thing that looks like a flair is "Hero" and "Villain"
Yeah thats a good pointIt doesn’t even matter if he’s flair. The fact that he was able to assess Rose’s bankai fast enough to destroy his eardrums to nullify the effects of it shows he’s not an idiot who says “the beam of light of justices fire doesn’t mean I fired a beam of ligh!”. Given his persona of a wrestler who likes to call out his attacks and is able to react like the Rose situation like he did shows
He’s gonna come up with something else trust meYeah thats a good point
Uh, we dont need to talk about these things, AKM is a very good person and he is just trying to do his best here to make accurate ratings, its understandable if he see problems with Mask statement, same applies to Damage, we dont really need to be toxic with them, they are just doing their jobsHe’s gonna come up with something else trust me
You're right but this is the first time I'm disagreeing with him. I thought he would even have accepted it since to be honest.Uh, we dont need to talk about these things, AKM is a very good person and he is just trying to do his best here to make accurate ratings, its understandable if he see problems with Mask statement, same applies to Damage, we dont really need to be toxic with them, they are just doing their jobs
Can u say what his argument is to dismiss this feat?AKM seems to make sense to me. I suppose that we should probably close this thread then.
AKM is pointing out that you need more than something being called a "beam of light" or a "laser" a single time to satisfy the 4th requirement. Having that statement / name for it is the starting point; it's after that where you need to begin fulfilling the requirements such as having another source that it is made out of light or photons.Can u say what his argument is to dismiss this feat?
Besides mask referring to himself as a hero and his enemy as a villain
Then he needs to make a thread to make it so, cus as of the thread posted here multiple times "beam of light" satisfies the 4th requirement, unless he wants to dismiss an accepted thread just cus he canAKM is pointing out that you need more than something being called a "beam of light" or a "laser" a single time to satisfy the 4th requirement. Having that statement / name for it is the starting point; it's after that where you need to begin fulfilling the requirements such as having another source that it is made out of light or photons.
At least that's my understanding of AKM's post here.
@Antvasima; I agree that the thread should be closed.
agreedYeah, no.
If we just had a thread that says that one of the requirements is valid, then we should allow that requirement to work.
The thread that Arc made says that "Beam of light" = "Beam comprised of light", which was accepted by several staff members (including those disagreeing here) including me who previously disagreed to that and was the originator of the justification being removed.
It's a wiki standard that this is allowed. We can't just say "no" to that. Either the standard should be reverted, or the requirement should be accepted.
As far as I can tell AKM isn't disputing that. You're attacking a strawman argument instead of focusing on what AKM is actually saying.As of now the argument to even close the thread is hollow cus the other thread was made which accepts "beam of light" as enough for the 4th requirement
A thread which was made AND accepted by staff
He is calling for the closure of the thread cus "beam of light is not enough for the 4th requirement"As far as I can tell AKM isn't disputing that. You're attacking a strawman argument instead of focusing on what AKM is actually saying.
Which is a weak argument that just comes of him calling himself hero and his mortal enemy a villain...The argument against it is Mask not being a reliable source to beam of light statement
So there has been a new thread that modified the standards that DontTalk defined as safety precautions, and it wasn't located in the staff forum, so I and other prominent staff members did not notice it, and weren't summoned either? That in itself should disqualify its validity.He is calling for the closure of the thread cus "beam of light is not enough for the 4th requirement"
This, is false as of the new thread which was accepted