The proof MGQ gave was already linked in the OP, if you read the op you wouldve already seen that information.
This is true, but I suppose Ultima and DT are too busy debating each other on the R>F thread.
I only mentioned the change about the new standards because he didn't seem to know about it in his comment.
Their input would take quite a while nonetheless. The preferable and likely outcome possible is Qaws changing his perspective on this.
Got it.
No you said in addition that they changed the standards because they had no proof. This is an accusation that wasn't needed in the comment you made. Now stop please.I only mentioned the change about the new standards because he didn't seem to know about it in his comment.
Is this really what people think about my comment from the outside? Wow
I read the OP. I find the proof just as insufficient evidence of two time dimensions rather than multiple places partaking of a single one as I did before. What I praised was the effort.
Fixed them.
Based Dereck as always.
And that's why I said this is not the place for that. Go make a crt and disprove it. Currently 2-C universes are accepted so you working against this in a non relevant thread is kind of a problem. So just make a thread that says why DB multiverse has one time or sth. If it's good I will even agree with it. But don't disrupt this thread, especially when a user already linked some stuff to your profile (which is a better place to do it than here).
I mean its already accepted ages ago, but if you want shin calls the living realm a temporal world otherworld and living world are seperated by time and space, .
No more hostility,please. Let's not clog the thread further.
This again. Here's a very short summary of what I am trying to say.
Thanks. I'll take a look in more detail and respond further when I'm back home. Busy at the moment, to keep up with everything.
Sorry I didn't mean to come off as hostile. Maybe I should have chosen better words. Regardless @Magicomethkuon please post to a supporter's wall for that and if you feel it's not enough to convince you make a crt for it.
Ik it's used as evidence for separate space times, but I was wondering if an argument could be made for universe 7 having it's own overarching space-time over otherworld and living world
I think the site's overreliance on DT and Ultima for every little thing is unhealthy, but thats not a topic suited for here.
I dont know, but if you dont have any new scans to help strength the argument, or any counterpoints, please dont comment until another staff decides to take a look, to keep this as short as possible.
There’s not really evidence for something like that as of now.
They literally changed the rules that got it rejected, there isn't a need for a discussion rule
They did not, reiner added something for the sake of Ben 10 but either way it can be fixed.
I did, I was just bringing in another interpretation that could change it
please, stop with the side chat ( comment 69 lmao)
They did change the standard, just because Reiner did it for ben 10, doesn't mean it can't be applied to other verses, if you disagree with the standards or whether the new standards actually apply here, your welcome to make a new crt or bring up counterpoints instead of saying "nu huh"
Nu huh /j
I wouldn't say its unhealthy, as much as a lot of moderators don't get Tier 1 and they were major in making that system. There's a reason why there's only like six mods who actively participate in Tier 1 threads since they can easily go rapidly downhill.
Yeah that was a bit weird.
With the changed standards Low 1-C timelines fit the definition imo. I still wouldn't call a singular Macrocosm Low 1-C though.
We arent calling a single macrocosm l1-c, just the timeline.
I know, I just wanted to add that in case someone in the future wants to upgrade a Macrocosom to be Low 1-C and links this thread.
I'll apply the changes for DBH, then create a new thread to discuss canon stuff.
