Bleach — Small Revision

[BestMGQScalerEver]

About the hope stuff. I'll say it doesn't seem to be conceptual but still is an abstract thing so I wouldn't mind downgrading it to be reliant on an abstract idea instead since hope is still clearly a thing here.

 

[BestMGQScalerEver]

Yeah the fact that it's directly commented on as being turned into ashes tells me it definitely isn't a visual effect. So I would agree.
I don't believe this is a matter of "who knows Aizen's ability better" or trusting one character versus another, I think the two statements aren't at odds. Most authors don't think in the very nuanced way that is done here, so "cease to exist" is a perfectly reasonable description for an ability that turns something into ash.

Note that it's currently listed as a possibly so the ability being on the page is still completely warranted. I would suggest doing this instead.

going from this

Possibly Passive Existence Erasure (Aizen's Reiatsu is so potent that things that get near his body are erased[35])

to this

Passive Deconstruction, possibly Passive Existence Erasure (Aizen's Reiatsu is so potent that things that get near his body are turned to dust. It is implied that Aizen completely erases what gets near his body.)

 

[Damage3245]

@BestMGQScalerEver That seems like a fair suggestion to me.

 

[Arc7Kuroi]

Yeah that’s fair. Best case you got for it being decon and not EE is equal interpretation anyway, and the EE is already a possibly rating so MGQ makes good sense to me.

 

[Arcker123]

Do y'all just evaluate EE only? What about other points such as Conceptual Removal and Empowerment?

Your argument against CM3 is also bad.

CM3 is just concept manipulate that doesn't fit any other type. As long as Gerard manipulates a concept, it's type 3. You didn't actually present an argument against that.

 

[Deagonx]

I'm looking at the scans for the Concept Manipulation and it seems more like a metaphor to me. The sword contains the hope of the people. Is that literal?

 

[Null]

Note that it's currently listed as a possibly so the ability being on the page is still completely warranted. I would suggest doing this instead.

going from this

to this

No, that's unfair to me, that's because many use the EE Argument as an absolute in the case of a fight, the description also has to be changed it shouldn't could be made like a default literal.

 

[Arcker123]

I'm looking at the scans for the Concept Manipulation and it seems more like a metaphor to me. The sword contains the hope of the people. Is that literal?

It'd be your burden to prove it isn't as he does directly state he's manipulating hope itself.

 

[Null]

Your argument against CM3 is also bad.

advisable should need to read all my arguments carefully before judging, and try refute

 

[BestMGQScalerEver]

No, that's unfair to me, that's because many use the EE Argument as an absolute in the case of a fight, the description also has to be changed it shouldn't could be made like a default literal.

People use it because they can until otherwise. Possibly ratings can be restricted in vs matches if you didn't know that.

 

[Arcker123]

Note that it's currently listed as a possibly so the ability being on the page is still completely warranted. I would suggest doing this instead.

going from this

to this

I have no issues with this because "Cease to exist" can mean many things (such as straightforward death).

advisable should need to read all my arguments carefully before judging, and try refute

I read it, then explained why it was a bad argument. This just proves you didn't read the post.

CM3 is simply described as concepts that aren't elaborated on, and since Gerard manipulates a concept and that isn't given further explanation, it's type 3. You never refuted this argument, which was the original reason Gerard got it, and then misconstrued what CM3 was.

 

[Deagonx]

It'd be your burden to prove it isn't as he does directly state he's manipulating hope itself.

I don't agree. This implies that your interpretation of it literally referring to the tangible manipulation of a concept should be accepted as a matter of course, and that any suggestions to the contrary incur a burden of proof. I don't see why this would be the case. This is a normal manner of metaphorical speaking and I see that interpretation as equally plausible.

What evidence is there to eliminate that possible interpretation, thus proving the claim that he is directly manipulating a concept?

 

[Arcker123]

I don't agree. This implies that your interpretation of it literally referring to the tangible manipulation of a concept should be accepted as a matter of course, and that any suggestions to the contrary incur a burden of proof. I don't see why this would be the case. This is a normal manner of metaphorical speaking and I see that interpretation as equally plausible.

What evidence is there to eliminate that possible interpretation, thus proving the claim that he is directly manipulating a concept?

There's simply no intuitive reason to accept yours over the simplest solution which he says on panel. These interpretations aren't equally plausible in then slightest, and you'd have to give justification as to why it is. My interpretation already is accepted and is the status quo, so the onus is on you to debunk it.

Stop dodging your burden of proof.

 

[Deagonx]

There's simply no intuitive reason to accept yours over the simplest solution which he says on panel.

I don't see how him literally referring to a sword containing the concept of hope is more simple than him speaking metaphorically. If anything I'd argue the metaphor interpretation is simpler.

These interpretations aren't equally plausible in then slightest, and you'd have to give justification as to why it is. My interpretation already is accepted and is the status quo, so the onus is on you to debunk it.

Stop dodging your burden of proof.

The fact that an ability is accepted in a profile doesn't affect the burden of proof. I am still not seeing a good reason to accept this statement as literal than metaphorical other than your assertions that it should be literal.

 

[Arcker123]

Completely dishonest and evasive response ^

You were asked to justify why these claims were equal, and predictably you did not. This conversation is 100% just gonna be a waste of time since you keep evading.

I have no burden of proof here, stop asking me for explanations and justify the reasons for the downgrade.

 

[Null]

Lesser Fundamental Concepts: Concepts that don't meet the same standards as Type 1 or Type 2, such as personal concepts that continue to govern the object in question, merely on a more specific scale, or concepts whose nature is not elaborated upon. Case-by-case specifications and explanations are necessary for such concepts and examples, and they are likely not going to meet the same standards for abilities such as High-Godly regeneration that other concepts may. Conceptual manipulation of this type can be resisted by those who resist sufficiently similar abilities, even if the exact mechanics may differ.

@Arcker123 You should to re-read the lesser concept page, even if it's not elaborated on, it should be explained in detail, it must prove that human expectation is a governing concept, and it must also be proven that it is something fundamental in a particular scope

 

[Deagonx]

Completely dishonest and evasive response ^

I ask that you do not cast accusations like this. Consider this a warning to conduct the discussion more civilly.

You were asked to justify why these claims were equal, and predictably you did not.

I should clarify, my position is actually that a metaphorical reading comes through more naturally with the wording in the scans. Though, this is just my opinion/interpretation and that's the impression I get upon reading. I've yet to see a justification for interpreting it literally, especially not anything strong enough to minimize the possibility of it being a metaphor, which is a good reason to remove the ability.

 

[Arcker123]

@Arcker123 You should to re-read the lesser concept page, even if it's not elaborated on, it should be explained in detail, it must prove that human expectation is a governing concept, and it must also be proven that it is something fundamental in a particular scope

The Hoffung has "hope" within the shield, I.E governance of a concept on a specific scale (The shield for instance). This is not difficult.it also says "concept whose nature is not elaborated on" as I claimed.

This is not a debunk at all.

 

[Deagonx]

@Damage3245 do you have any input on the "concept" matter above?

 

[Arcker123]

I ask that you do not cast accusations like this. Consider this a warning to conduct the discussion more civilly.

I'm just calling out bad debate tactics. That's not an insult.

I should clarify, my position is actually that a metaphorical reading comes through more naturally with the wording in the scans. Though, this is just my opinion/interpretation and that's the impression I get upon reading.

So you admit we have no reason to accept this and thus downgrade? Argument over Ig.

Arcker 2
Deagon 0

I've yet to see a justification for interpreting it literally, especially

This is why I called you dishonest. It's not my burden to prove that.

minimize the possibility of it being a metaphor, which is a good reason to remove the ability

You admitted you have no justification for this so I'm just gonna laugh at this.

Also this is just straight forwardly smooth brained.

"I'm gonna remove this ability which had an entire thread of arguments for because of this interpretation I have no justification to accept or to think is at all equal to the currently accepted one"

Deagon. You have failed to give reason to think this ability should be removed.

 

[Null]

The Hoffung has "hope" within the shield, I.E governance of a concept

Zero proof, There's no saying that Hope is something fundamentally a concept at all chapter

on a specific scale (The shield for instance). This is not difficult.it also says "concept whose nature is not elaborated on" as I claimed.

This is not a debunk at all.

Case-by-case specifications and explanations are necessary for such concepts and examples
You must pay attention to this section to avoid misunderstandings on terms

 

[Deceived3596]

I can provide an "expert" opinion on the Conceptual Manipulation stuff later on. I just woke up so I don't feel like typing it out right now.

 

[Damage3245]

@Damage3245 do you have any input on the "concept" matter above?

I have no opinion on it so far.

 

[Deagonx]

I'm just calling out bad debate tactics. That's not an insult.

I agree it was not an insult, but however one might describe it, it isn't helpful and I am clarifying that it isn't an appropriate way to conduct a discussion, so do not do that in the future.

So you admit we have no reason to accept this and thus downgrade? Argument over Ig.

I think it's a good reason to downgrade. The lack of solid evidence asserting a literal interpretation over a metaphorical one means this is purely subjective and thus not proven to the standard needed to include it in a profile.

It's not my burden to prove that.

Your burden? Perhaps not, but it does need to be proven by somebody in order to remain on the profile.

You admitted you have no justification for this so I'm just gonna laugh at this.

Also this is just straight forwardly smooth brained.

You were warned prior, you must respond more civilly in the future, this is a second warning.

"I'm gonna remove this ability which had an entire thread of arguments for because of this interpretation I have no justification to accept or to think is at all equal to the currently accepted one"

Deagon. You have failed to give reason to think this ability should be removed.

I'll state my case more clearly: I don't see any reason to place the literal interpretation above the metaphorical one, and the fact that it was accepted previously doesn't justify that unto itself. So in the absence of any solid evidence for accepting a literal interpretation, we must remove the ability.

So that there is not any misunderstanding, I am not saying it's definitely metaphorical, I am saying the possibility of it being metaphorical hasn't been eliminated sufficiently, which is necessary to add this ability to the profile.

 

[Arcker123]

Zero proof,

Lol go read the chapter again. The Hoffung sword (I confused it with the shield) contains hope within it.

There's no saying that Hope is something fundamentally a concept at all chapter

This is just obtuse.

Aside from Hope inherently being an abstract idea, The Hoffung works by literally turning hope into despair, as he explains.

Case-by-case specifications and explanations are necessary for such concepts and examples
You must pay attention to this section to avoid misunderstandings on terms

This is not a debunk to what I said.

I agree it was not an insult, but however one might describe it, it isn't helpful and I am clarifying that it isn't an appropriate way to conduct a discussion, so do not do that in the future

I see no reason to abide by this. I'm not breaking any rules by calling your arguments dishonest or evasive. I'm not gonna give you the ego boost of backing down to some faux notion of civility just for your sake.

I think it's a good reason to downgrade. The lack of solid evidence asserting a literal interpretation over a metaphorical one means this is purely subjective and thus not proven to the standard needed to include it in a profile.

Lol bro stop this, you already lost on this.

You do know how these equal interpretation arguments work right? You have to show they are equal interpretations, which I asked you to show and you admitted you couldn't. There's no reason to accept this line of reasoning.

Your burden? Perhaps not, but it does need to be proven by somebody in order to remain on the profile.

Do you not understand how debate works. There's a status quo (an ability) and a side arguing for and against it, the side arguing against has to provide reasoning for its removal. Burden of proof is not on me buddy, especially with the litany of claims you have made that you didn't defend.

I'll state my case more clearly: I don't see any reason to place the literal interpretation above the metaphorical one, and the fact that it was accepted previously doesn't justify that unto itself. So in the absence of any solid evidence for accepting a literal interpretation, we must remove the ability.

So that there is not any misunderstanding, I am not saying it's definitely metaphorical, I am saying the possibility of it being metaphorical hasn't been eliminated sufficiently, which is necessary to add this ability to the profile.

This is just you being confused on how your own argument works.

I already explained why this is just Dookie burden shifting.

It's not my burden to debunk it, it's your burden to prove its a likely possibility. That's how equal interpretation arguments work. You don't understand what you are talking about.

 

[EldemadeDityjon]

Toshiro stops sword function by stopping Hope. If it's metaphor there was no need for Toshiro to stop hope. He could have just nulled the sword function. The fact he needed to stop hope shows it was literal not metaphor.

 

[Deagonx]

You have to show they are equal interpretations, which I asked you to show and you admitted you couldn't. There's no reason to accept this line of reasoning.

The absence of evidence granting a literal interpretation prority over a metaphorical one itself shows that they are equal from an evidential standpoint. I have yet to see any good reason to prioritize a literal reading.

Do you not understand how debate works. There's a status quo (an ability) and a side arguing for and against it, the side arguing against has to provide reasoning for its removal.

The ability already having been accepted doesn't influence the debate.

 

[Arcker123]

The absence of evidence granting a literal interpretation prority over a metaphorical one itself shows that they are equal from an evidential standpoint.

This is just straight fowardly false and proves you haven't been paying attention.

Toshiro stops sword function by stopping Hope. If it's metaphor there was no need for Toshiro to stop hope. He could have just nulled the sword function. The fact he needed to stop hope shows it was literal not metaphor.

There's also the intuitive/occams arg if you want to go down that route.

I have yet to see any good reason to prioritize a literal reading.

Deagon. Stop evading. It's not my burden to show this.

The ability already having been accepted doesn't influence the debate.

Are you gonna address what I said or no? You still have yet to fulfill your burdens.

 

[Arc7Kuroi]

For the sake of it, I'm going to compile the scans that led to EE being accepted since I doubt anyone other than Deceived, Arcker, Damage, and I remember that original thread, and I don't believe any of the opponents in this thread have taken the time to diligently review a 5 page thread.

In chapter 409, Aizen walks by someone and the portion of the person within Aizen's aura is just deleted. Aizen describes that humans (at that close range) cannot withstand his power, power referring to the ability granted by his aura. Power in this instance is not talking about something like power levels or anything of the sort, it's important to recognize that power very often refers to the ability to do something, so let's not let our powerscaler brainrot trick us into thinking power only means AP.

In chapter 410, Aizen applauds Tatsuki and gang for maintaining their identities while near Aizen. Now keep in mind that Tatsuki isn't within the actual EE aura at this point yet (that aura is extremely close to Aizen, closer than his arm's reach). This scan informs us that Aizen's aura goes beyond mere physical deconstruction, which shouldn't exactly be that crazy considering it's erasing people's souls as well (as per chapter 409).

In chapter 411, Aizen states verbatim that any human that comes into contact with him will have their existence erased. Additionally, we see that once Kanonji's staff gets close enough to the aura it starts to erase. Occam's Razor supports the interpretation that this is existence erasure. Aizen states it as so and he is the smartest character in the series (excluding Kisuke), we see it delete people and objects it comes in contact with the aura, thus the simplest conclusion is that the aura does what Aizen says it does.

In chapter 413, Mizuiro throws a bottle at Aizen and it starts to get deleted causing Mizuiro to say it turned to ashes. This is being used to argue that the ability is just deconstruction which turns the object into ashes. However, that is not supported at all. In both instances we see the object in question in the middle of the process of being deleted. Visually that's portrayed as the object breaking down into smaller particles before disappearing entirely. It's nothing more than a visual effect to denote the ability in progress. Which is supported considering we don't see any ashes/dust at all when Aizen walks through the humans (in chapter 409). There is nothing left from the portion of the human Aizen walks through, no visible dust at all. Additionally, Mizuiro stating it was turned to ashes is not anywhere close to a valid debunk for Aizen's EE. To liken it to something else, imagine you as a normal human see and Alien and they fire what looks like a lightning bolt at you. You would describe that as an Alien shooting lightning, but to the Alien that is not the case, they are simple using mental energies to make a lightning-like effect of an attack. Despite it looking like a lightning bolt and you (an unknowledgeable human) claiming that is the case, it doesn't make that true in the slightest. Similarly here, Mizuiro sees the ability work in real time and all his eyes can see is the bottle being reduced to smaller particles before leaving eyesight. So, he deduces it's turning it to ash; however, Mizuiro cannot prove that claim at all and is entire subject to his lack of information. Human eyes are bad at seeing small things, so Mizuiro isn't going to be able to tell the difference between something being atomized, dusted, erased, etc etc etc. Furthermore, this would require us to take Mizuiro's word over Aizen's, which is not logically consistent whatsoever.

In chapter 415, Aizen barely grazes Gin without actually making physical contact with Gin and we see that part of Gin's arm is just deleted. Again here we see no ashes or dust whatsoever either. All we see is the part of Gin that got in Aizen's EE zone is just gone.

In chapter 618, we see someone try to get near Aizen and they get their fingers erased. In this case we see the fingers get deleted and then the blood floats upwards. If all Aizen was doing was turning the dude to dust, gravity would take the dust downwards. The blood rising is just a visual touch to the "attack". It is not an inherent contradiction to Aizen's statement at all.

If you want to assert that all Aizen is doing is deconstructing someone, or if you want to assert it is equally likely to the EE interpretation you need to check a few boxes. First, you have to prove that Mizuiro is a more reliable source than Aizen. Second, you have to prove that the those dust particles stayed around after the bottle went fully into the aura, as that is the only way to prove that Aizen's aura stopped the destruction at just the particle level. Third, you have to prove Aizen is being hyperbolic. Merely stating "oh but Aizen could just be speaking metaphorically and Mizuiro is the correct one" isn't a substantiated claim whatsoever. It is pure headcanon.

Regardless, I really urge the opponents here (Deagonx and Null) to take the hour to really review the original thread in question. It was a lengthy, in depth debate, covering all sides of the topic in order to come to the most accurate conclusion.

That being said, I'm not going to fight against the suggestion of "Decon, possibly passive EE", since effectively it changes nothing when the rating was only accepted as a possibly rating to begin with. However, I don't believe the scenes warrant deconstruction in general, and I believe it should just remain a possibly rating without decon attached to it.

 

[BestMGQScalerEver]

For the sake of it, I'm going to compile the scans that led to EE being accepted since I doubt anyone other than Deceived, Arcker, Damage, and I remember that original thread, and I don't believe any of the opponents in this thread have taken the time to diligently review a 5 page thread.

In chapter 409, Aizen walks by someone and the portion of the person within Aizen's aura is just deleted. Aizen describes that humans (at that close range) cannot withstand his power, power referring to the ability granted by his aura. Power in this instance is not talking about something like power levels or anything of the sort, it's important to recognize that power very often refers to the ability to do something, so let's not let our powerscaler brainrot trick us into thinking power only means AP.

In chapter 410, Aizen applauds Tatsuki and gang for maintaining their identities while near Aizen. Now keep in mind that Tatsuki isn't within the actual EE aura at this point yet (that aura is extremely close to Aizen, closer than his arm's reach). This scan informs us that Aizen's aura goes beyond mere physical deconstruction, which shouldn't exactly be that crazy considering it's erasing people's souls as well (as per chapter 409).

In chapter 411, Aizen states verbatim that any human that comes into contact with him will have their existence erased. Additionally, we see that once Kanonji's staff gets close enough to the aura it starts to erase. Occam's Razor supports the interpretation that this is existence erasure. Aizen states it as so and he is the smartest character in the series (excluding Kisuke), we see it delete people and objects it comes in contact with the aura, thus the simplest conclusion is that the aura does what Aizen says it does.

In chapter 413, Mizuiro throws a bottle at Aizen and it starts to get deleted causing Mizuiro to say it turned to ashes. This is being used to argue that the ability is just deconstruction which turns the object into ashes. However, that is not supported at all. In both instances we see the object in question in the middle of the process of being deleted. Visually that's portrayed as the object breaking down into smaller particles before disappearing entirely. It's nothing more than a visual effect to denote the ability in progress. Which is supported considering we don't see any ashes/dust at all when Aizen walks through the humans (in chapter 409). There is nothing left from the portion of the human Aizen walks through, no visible dust at all. Additionally, Mizuiro stating it was turned to ashes is not anywhere close to a valid debunk for Aizen's EE. To liken it to something else, imagine you as a normal human see and Alien and they fire what looks like a lightning bolt at you. You would describe that as an Alien shooting lightning, but to the Alien that is not the case, they are simple using mental energies to make a lightning-like effect of an attack. Despite it looking like a lightning bolt and you (an unknowledgeable human) claiming that is the case, it doesn't make that true in the slightest. Similarly here, Mizuiro sees the ability work in real time and all his eyes can see is the bottle being reduced to smaller particles before leaving eyesight. So, he deduces it's turning it to ash; however, Mizuiro cannot prove that claim at all and is entire subject to his lack of information. Human eyes are bad at seeing small things, so Mizuiro isn't going to be able to tell the difference between something being atomized, dusted, erased, etc etc etc. Furthermore, this would require us to take Mizuiro's word over Aizen's, which is not logically consistent whatsoever.

In chapter 415, Aizen barely grazes Gin without actually making physical contact with Gin and we see that part of Gin's arm is just deleted. Again here we see no ashes or dust whatsoever either. All we see is the part of Gin that got in Aizen's EE zone is just gone.

In chapter 618, we see someone try to get near Aizen and they get their fingers erased. In this case we see the fingers get deleted and then the blood floats upwards. If all Aizen was doing was turning the dude to dust, gravity would take the dust downwards. The blood rising is just a visual touch to the "attack". It is not an inherent contradiction to Aizen's statement at all.

If you want to assert that all Aizen is doing is deconstructing someone, or if you want to assert it is equally likely to the EE interpretation you need to check a few boxes. First, you have to prove that Mizuiro is a more reliable source than Aizen. Second, you have to prove that the those dust particles stayed around after the bottle went fully into the aura, as that is the only way to prove that Aizen's aura stopped the destruction at just the particle level. Third, you have to prove Aizen is being hyperbolic. Merely stating "oh but Aizen could just be speaking metaphorically and Mizuiro is the correct one" isn't a substantiated claim whatsoever. It is pure headcanon.

Regardless, I really urge the opponents here (Deagonx and Null) to take the hour to really review the original thread in question. It was a lengthy, in depth debate, covering all sides of the topic in order to come to the most accurate conclusion.

That being said, I'm not going to fight against the suggestion of "Decon, possibly passive EE", since effectively it changes nothing when the rating was only accepted as a possibly rating to begin with. However, I don't believe the scenes warrant deconstruction in general, and I believe it should just remain a possibly rating without decon attached to it.

Makes me question why it's even a possibly

 

[LephyrTheRevanchist]

Am in agreement with Arc here.

 

[BestMGQScalerEver]

My deconstruction suggestion was more of a lower end interpretation to give a definitive ability to an existing possibly rating since a possibly rating for one ability and nothing else for an ability that atleast explicitly exists doesn't sit right with me.

 

[Arc7Kuroi]

Makes me question why it's even a possibly

That's a separate discussion, but you can read more about it in the original thread, I'll just say that I think it being a likely/possibly rating is better than it being concrete and leave it at that tho.

 

[Null]

Lol go read the chapter again. The Hoffung sword (I confused it with the shield) contains hope within it.


This is just obtuse.

Aside from Hope inherently being an abstract idea, The Hoffung works by literally turning hope into despair, as he explains.

Hoffnung contains hope that does not mean it is an abstract concept, because in his profile it is not clearly shown that hope itself stated like what I said, you have no proof but you are imposing if hope is an abstract idea, it is not more than just a headcanon

This is not a debunk to what I said.

You wasn't pay punctilious attention the purpose of the description properly, because that's why misunderstandings arise

 

[BasedNecoScaler69]

Makes me question why it's even a possibly

vsbw being vsbw being needlessly skeptical of even the smallest detail

 

[Deagonx]

This is just straight fowardly false and proves you haven't been paying attention.

There's also the intuitive/occams arg if you want to go down that route.

Deagon. Stop evading. It's not my burden to show this.

Are you gonna address what I said or no? You still have yet to fulfill your burdens.

I don't really consider this constructive. I have made my stance and reasoning clear, so for now I am agreeing with the removal of Concept Manipulation until sufficient evidence for it has been provided, as the scans do not indicate that it's meant to be literal.

 

[Hellscream]

disagree fra

 

[BasedNecoScaler69]

I don't really consider this constructive. I have made my stance and reasoning clear, so for now I am agreeing with the removal of Concept Manipulation until sufficient evidence for it has been provided, as the scans do not indicate that it's meant to be literal.

Gerard is tying physical phenomena ( his power) to emotions on multiple occasions, it is definitely not a metaphor lmao

 

[EldemadeDityjon]

Hoffnung contains hope that does not mean it is an abstract concept, because in his profile it is not clearly shown that hope itself stated like what I said, you have no proof but you are imposing if hope is an abstract idea, it is not more than just a headcanon

You wasn't pay punctilious attention the purpose of the description properly, because that's why misunderstandings arise

Hoffnung is called as a Supernatural phenomenon. Go read the chapter 671. Unless you need the meanings of supernatural thoroughly explained to you.

Supernatural - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

 

[Arcker123]

Deagon: There's no evidence that the statement is literal therefore we must reject it based on the possibility of it being a metaphor.

Arcker and Elmade: Here is concrete proof it's literal

Deagon: This isn't constructive.

I predicted this was a waste of time, and I was right, but still I debated this.

@Null ill respond to u in a bit, i have ro respond to Deagons report.