DBS Low 1-C upgrade pt2

[TiltedFN]

So this is a continuation from this thread with updated arguments, we came to a conclusion that the neutral zone was an "insignificant 5-D space". So here I will be continuing with the new arguments that were not responded to, because it was 6 pages long, and I know no staff wants to read through all of that.


Neutral Space Temporal Dimension.
In the last thread, I brought forth the argument that the neutral space had it's own time axis because of this scan:

宇宙とは異なる空間に浮かぶ惑星: 12 Planets floating in different spaces from that of the 12 universes. As I said before, calling "different space" (異なる空間), does sound more how they call what is generically here a different dimension, especially considering that they put stuff like the World of Void. Also, looking into the complete scan, They put the nameless planet in the "neutral space between universes" in the same "space different from that of the 12 universes" as the World of Void and Zen'O palace. So yes, here it's completely in the meaning of a different dimensional space and can be used as proof that the neutral space between universes is like a "neutral dimension between universes", unless the World of Void is now seen just as another part of the same universal space that all 12 universes share and you can get there with a spaceship. Translation by @Executor_N0 about the neutral space between the Universes.

With the evidence here, it becomes kind of blatant that the neutral zone would be a different dimensional structure and should be considered to have its own time axis. Now what does this mean for the neutral zone in it's entirety? Basically, since the neutral zone's space was deemed insignificant 5-D, we needed an infinite statement for it to be considered low 1-C, or qualitatively superior. And now with a temporal dimension that encompasses all of this, it would fulfill that qualitative superiority gap by being uncountably infinitely larger due to being a higher temporal dimension. So not only does this higher temporal dimension encompass the neutral zone's space, it also encompasses all the macrocosms that reside in the neutral zone, so this on it's own should be enough to qualify for low 1-C, as the temporal dimension would be "constructed" from uncountably infinite snapshots of insignificant 5-D spaces that encompass other timelines/4d macrocosms. Which is also stated as per our tiering system here:

Q: How do temporal dimensions impact on tiering?​

A: The relationship between the spatial dimensions of a universe and the additional temporal dimension(s) may be visualized as something akin to the frames of a movie placed side-by-side. Basically, the time-like direction may be thought of as a line comprised of uncountably infinite points, each of which is a static "snapshot" of the whole universe at any given moment, with the set of all such events comprising the totality of spacetime.

This structure can then be generalized to any amounts of dimensions, and is also the reason destroying a spacetime continuum is a greater feat than destroying only the contents of the physical universe (Low 2-C, rather than 3-A or High 3-A). So, for example, a spacetime continuum comprising two temporal dimensions (Instead of just one) would have an additional time direction whose "snapshots" correspond to the whole of a 4-dimensional spacetime, and so on and so forth.

So now with this temporal dimension: this unquantifiable construct, now becomes quantifiable and significant enough to be tiered. So this would put the neutral zone entirely at 5-D low 1-C.


Main Timeline
Last but not least, we have the actual main timeline, the one that the time ring represents. This is the higher timeline from even the neutral space that contains everything below it, including zeno's realm, macrocosms, literally just everything, it acts as a higher time flow for EVERYTHING. Now in nature, due to being a higher time flow and encompassing these lower dimensional structures compared to itself, that would mean it acts as an overarching timeline from even the neutral zone's temporal dimension, which means it would contain uncountable infinite snapshots of low 1-C neutral zones. Which means this would bump the entire timeline to low 1-C 6-d due to the timeline just being +1 additional higher time direction. So this just acts as extra evidence that there is multiple higher temporal dimensions in the dragon ball cosmology and makes no sense to be anything less than low 1-C at the least. A temporal dimension should always give qualitative superiority or +1d to constructs that are at the very least 3-A or higher, to argue that it's not would be the same as saying a universe with its own time axis is just another high 3-A structure, it doesn't make any sense at all. And in this context, I have provided evidence of 2 higher temporal dimensions from the macrocosms that are already accepted to be 2-C structures each with their own timelines, you could lowball it not even factoring in the neutral zone and it would still be low 1-C. Can keep it simple, so this would only scale to zeno in the canon series for starters if this were to be accepted.

 

[Antvasima]

@Elizhaa @SamanPatou @DarkDragonMedeus @Theglassman12 @Flashlight237 @Qawsedf234 @ByAsura @Sir_Ovens @Ultima_Reality @DontTalkDT @Planck69 @Agnaa @Ovy7 @IdiosyncraticLawyer @PrinceofPein @Therefir @DemonGodMitchAubin @UchihaSlayer96 @Maverick_Zero_X @Migue79 @LordGriffin1000 @Starter_Pack

What do you think about this?

 

[PrinceofPein]

First, different temporal dimensions happens when time flows in different directions. For example time flowing backward. So unless time flows backward in the neutral zone, then it is the same time axis, same for the whole overarching timeline that I see no scan of, if affecting time such as turning back time in one universe affects the other, then they are not spatio-temporally separate to begin with and would not qualify for higher levels of tier 2.
Also I will like to know how you interpreted this " 12 Planets floating in different spaces from that of the 12 universes" to mean the neutral zone moves in a different time direction, since I just cannot wrap my head around it.

Disagree, this is just a scan interpreted to inflate things.

 

[ArcaneAbyss]

This is a staff discussion thread, we don't need anyone adding unnecessary page numbers like the last one, wait for the staff to comment

 

[PrinceofPein]

This is a staff discussion thread, we don't need anyone adding unnecessary page numbers like the last one, wait for the staff to comment

I have an idea of what you mean but

@Elizhaa @SamanPatou @DarkDragonMedeus @Theglassman12 @Flashlight237 @Qawsedf234 @ByAsura @Sir_Ovens @Ultima_Reality @DontTalkDT @Planck69 @Agnaa @Ovy7 @IdiosyncraticLawyer @PrinceofPein @Therefir @DemonGodMitchAubin @UchihaSlayer96 @Maverick_Zero_X @Migue79 @LordGriffin1000 @Starter_Pack

What do you think about this?

I was called here to comment so it is not an unnecessary comment, yours on the other hand is and you should get permission before posting in staff threads.

 

[DarkDragonMedeus]

I already voiced that I disagree with Low 1-C for reasons stated numerous times.

 

[Reiner04]

I got permission from from @DarkDragonMedeus for single post comment;

As I stated in previous thread, there is no additional temporal axis that contains uncountable infinite amount 2-C structures but rather just one temporal axis that orders/services the events/continuum of uncountable infinite snapshots of all Universes, they all are 2-C structures (contains uncountable infinite snapshots as each) and do not intersect due to being displaced in insignificant 5-D/multiversal structure. It was long explained by DT and Ben 10 follows the same structure with exactly same explanation. It's not Low 1-C, that's just any basic multiversal structure we have.

 

[TiltedFN]

First, different temporal dimensions happens when time flows in different directions. For example time flowing backward. So unless time flows backward in the neutral zone, then it is the same time axis

Where did you come to that conclusion? Time doesn't have to flow backwards to be a higher time flow, we know the neutral dimension sits on a different time axis because it is a different dimensional space via the translations I posted. So that means it would have a space that encompasses the macrocosms which was already unquantifiable 5-D, and then a temporal dimension that encompasses everything below and acts as a higher time flow. Which is constructed by uncountable infinite snapshots of that unquantifiable 5-D space, so its quantifiable now.

, same for the whole overarching timeline that I see no scan of, if affecting time such as turning back time in one universe affects the other, then they are not spatio-temporally separate to begin with and would not qualify for higher levels of tier 2.

This is wrong, the overarching timeline is the temporal dimension of the neutral zone, and and the timeline that the time ring represents. When one travels to a different parallel world, the timeline splits from that moment and creates an entire new MULTIVERSE. Not just a universe, so that has nothing to do with the macrocosms being spatiotemporally separate, even though they are, so that means the timeline would also be a completely higher time flow and be a higher time axis.

Also I will like to know how you interpreted this " 12 Planets floating in different spaces from that of the 12 universes" to mean the neutral zone moves in a different time direction, since I just cannot wrap my head around it.

Well as said before, "different space" in this context would mean a different dimension in its entirety, and its even compared to zeno's realm and other spaces that are separate from the timeline itself, so that means with it obviously holding the macrocosms, it can't share its time axis and has to be a higher one since it encompasses everything below.

 

[TiltedFN]

I got permission from from @DarkDragonMedeus for single post comment;

As I stated in previous thread, there is no additional temporal axis that contains uncountable infinite amount 2-C structures

Yes there is, it would be the higher temporal axis of the neutral zone, if a timeline is able to overarch these macrocosms and the unquantifiable 5-Dneutral space, then it absolutely would be constructed from an uncountable infinite amount of snapshots of UQ 5-D neutral spaces that contain 2-C macrocosms.

but rather just one temporal axis that orders/services the events/continuum of uncountable infinite snapshots of all Universes, they all are 2-C structures (contains uncountable infinite snapshots as each) and do not intersect due to being displaced in insignificant 5-D/multiversal structure.

One temporal axis is also an additional one lol, we have the timelines of the macrocosms structure, which in terms is still under the neutral spaces timeline, which is still overarched by the main timeline. There is not just one timeline that encompasses everything, there's 2 higher overarching timelines. One temporal dimension that is constructed by uncountable infinite amounts of UQ 5-D spaces and 2-C macrocosms, and another that overarches even that. There is multiple.

It was long explained by DT and Ben 10 follows the same structure with exactly same explanation. It's not Low 1-C, that's just any basic multiversal structure we have.

And stop using this, this was back in 2021 when the universe were still argued to be spacetimes in general lmao, and this is DT trying to debunk the macrocosms being spatial temporally separate, so it is not even viable to here when you can't even prove that it follows this logic, it makes no sense. You just used this argument in a totally different context from what is being argued.

 

[TiltedFN]

I already voiced that I disagree with Low 1-C for reasons stated numerous times.

Can you actually explain how 2 overarching timelines is still 2-C? Each being constructed of uncountable infinite snapshots of what it is overarching? That isn't a 2-C multiverse, that is a low 1-C multiverse at the least.

 

[TiltedFN]

What do you think about this?

Note: We consider the universes in Dragon Ball alternate time-spaces relative to each other, hence why Zen'ō is rated as 2-C, despite the events in the Goku Black Saga showing parallel timelines encompassing the whole of the multiverse.

Ant, this is from zeno's page, we already acknowledge that the timelines encompass the multiverse, the multiverse which includes macrocosms that each are made up of several timelines, which in terms are contained in a unquantifiable 5-D space, which has its OWN timeline, and the multiverse still encompasses that.

Q: How do temporal dimensions impact on tiering?​

A: The relationship between the spatial dimensions of a universe and the additional temporal dimension(s) may be visualized as something akin to the frames of a movie placed side-by-side. Basically, the time-like direction may be thought of as a line comprised of uncountably infinite points, each of which is a static "snapshot" of the whole universe at any given moment, with the set of all such events comprising the totality of spacetime.

This structure can then be generalized to any amounts of dimensions, and is also the reason destroying a spacetime continuum is a greater feat than destroying only the contents of the physical universe (Low 2-C, rather than 3-A or High 3-A). So, for example, a spacetime continuum comprising two temporal dimensions (Instead of just one) would have an additional time direction whose "snapshots" correspond to the whole of a 4-dimensional spacetime, and so on and so forth.

Does it really make sense to you, that the timeline is only a 2-C multiverse with the evidence I have gathered, I mean like it basically fits the standards word for word. The timeline would contain uncountable infinite snapshots of 2-C macrocosms at the least, and more realistically, unquantifiable 5-D neutral zones, with its own timeline.

 

[PrinceofPein]

@TiltedFN please stop multi posting, you can edit all your replies into a single message
And since you have not really bothered to substantiate your claims, this may be my last reply here

Where did you come to that conclusion? Time doesn't have to flow backwards to be a higher time flow

Time has to flow in a different direction for it to be a different time axis, which is what you claim is that I quoted.

, we know the neutral dimension sits on a different time axis because it is a different dimensional space via the translations I posted.

No we do not know, it is your claim that you are yet to prove. By your logic all universes have different time aixs.
Different dimensional space does not mean different time axis.

So that means it would have a space that encompasses the macrocosms which was already unquantifiable 5-D, and then a temporal dimension that encompasses everything below and acts as a higher time flow. Which is constructed by uncountable infinite snapshots of that unquantifiable 5-D space, so its quantifiable now.

I feel like this is you throwing around things you dont understand, without really proving anything.

This is wrong, the overarching timeline is the temporal dimension of the neutral zone, and and the timeline that the time ring represents. When one travels to a different parallel world, the timeline splits from that moment and creates an entire new MULTIVERSE. Not just a universe, so that has nothing to do with the macrocosms being spatiotemporally separate, even though they are, so that means the timeline would also be a completely higher time flow and be a higher time axis.

But your OP said there are two different higher timelines, so how can the neutral zone be two timelines?
There is no higher time flow, the universes just have anti-feats that they are not spatio-temporally separate.

Well as said before, "different space" in this context would mean a different dimension in its entirety, and its even compared to zeno's realm and other spaces that are separate from the timeline itself, so that means with it obviously holding the macrocosms, it can't share its time axis and has to be a higher one since it encompasses everything below.

"Has to be" and speculations are not valid arguments, please provide scans saying it is operated on a different time axis.

Does it really make sense to you, that the timeline is only a 2-C multiverse with the evidence I have gathered

You gathered a single scan that says the neutral zone is a different dimension to the 12 universes, then proceed to make an out of verse statement that it has a different time axis and called it evidence you have gathered. So yes it makes sense to me that it is 2-C, makes more sense if it is lower since this universes are not spatio-temporally separate.

In Summary
Reiner my little bot has already dropped the diagram to explain it, but it is all a single time axis, in which all the universes exist in the neutral zone and all follows a single time axis which is time moving forward, its just a basic multiverse structure.
Also the fact that time shenanigans in one universes affects the whole timeline means it is a single flow of time and not multiple like the OP claims.
I should add since you keep saying "how can two overarching timelines be 2-C" which has no real meaning but I will assume you mean a place with 3 different time axis, the one that governs the universe, the one that governs the neutral zone which in turns also covers the universe (everything essentially) and the one that you claim again governs everything. Well although two different time axis that governs everything is not possible but let us say it is.
Yes that would be low 1-C, no one is disputing that, what we are disputing is the jump in logic to say everything has different time axis from a single scan that says the neutral zone is another dimension.
So you can stop asking that question and prove with scans and not interpretations that there are other time directions and axis in DB, that's all.

 

[TiltedFN]

@TiltedFN please stop multi posting, you can edit all your replies into a single message
And since you have not really bothered to substantiate your claims, this may be my last reply here

I posted one reply to everyone has replied here.

Time has to flow in a different direction for it to be a different time axis, which is what you claim is that I quoted.

No it does not, time can flow in the same direction, time is usually assume to flow in a straight line, saying time has to flow backwards makes no sense at all and you would need to prove that. Just how different temporal axis can flow in the same direction, yet still be separate.

No we do not know, it is your claim that you are yet to prove. By your logic all universes have different time aixs.
Different dimensional space does not mean different time axis.

Yes we do know, it has been long accepted that the universes in dragon ball are completely separate and have their own timelines, now the neutral zone encompassing these timelines means that they are outside of its temporal flow, and it is encompassed by a higher one. Why do you think the universes are 2-C? A different dimensional space in this CONTEXT would mean it has its own separate time axis, because it doesn't share the macrocosms because its literally ABOVE IT, as shown. And the scan I used literally implies its own dimension, or a it's own space. I can provide more evidence that being called a separate space in db usually means to a separate spacetime. Like for example, hit makes a parallel world, and its called a space, when clearly it is a spacetime, and accepted as such. And going back to the scan, it clearly references the neutral space as its own dimension, so it would be assumed to have its own temporal axis that is separate from the timeline itself, just like zeno's realm. And this is still ignoring the already accepted notion that the timeline is completely separate, encompasses the entire multiverse, yet the macrocosms themselves already have their own timelines.

I feel like this is you throwing around things you dont understand, without really proving anything.

Nice rebuttal, but that is how it works, according to your literal tiering system lol, im just proving it applies to dragon ball.

But your OP said there are two different higher timelines, so how can the neutral zone be two timelines?
There is no higher time flow, the universes just have anti-feats that they are not spatio-temporally separate.

Yes there ARE two higher temporal axis, one is the neutral zone temporal dimension, and the other is the main timeline, (the one the time rings represent). The neutral zone isn't two timelines, when did I ever say that? I said the neutral dimension has its own higher temporal axis that encompasses the insignificant 5-D space which holds the 2-C macrocosms. The universes do not have anti feats, we have been over this many times so why are you arguing it here? The universe are their own 2-C structures with 6 universal spacetimes currently. Each their own timeline.

"Has to be" and speculations are not valid arguments, please provide scans saying it is operated on a different time axis.

Well I did, with the translations of the realms, and the hit comparison.

You gathered a single scan that says the neutral zone is a different dimension to the 12 universes, then proceed to make an out of verse statement that it has a different time axis and called it evidence you have gathered. So yes it makes sense to me that it is 2-C, makes more sense if it is lower since this universes are not spatio-temporally separate.

Not gonna respond to this, there is not point, we already accept the universe are completely separate in all regards. Many crt's on it, and its in our blog, feel like I'm just repeating myself now.

In Summary
Reiner my little bot has already dropped the diagram to explain it, but it is all a single time axis, in which all the universes exist in the neutral zone and all follows a single time axis which is time moving forward, its just a basic multiverse structure.

He used arguments from years ago that were used in totally different context.

Also the fact that time shenanigans in one universes affects the whole timeline means it is a single flow of time and not multiple like the OP claims.

You're wrong again, time shenanigans from the TIMELINES, create a new multiverse, not just the universe, that is why it's an overarching timeline. Like when trunks travels to an alternate world, the timeline splits from that moment and creates another one, all with copies of every dimension below it. Which proves its a higher temporal flow, because the universe have their own timelines already.

I should add since you keep saying "how can two overarching timelines be 2-C" which has no real meaning but I will assume you mean a place with 3 different time axis, the one that governs the universe, the one that governs the neutral zone which in turns also covers the universe (everything essentially) and the one that you claim again governs everything. Well although two different time axis that governs everything is not possible but let us say it is.
Yes that would be low 1-C, no one is disputing that, what we are disputing is the jump in logic to say everything has different time axis from a single scan that says the neutral zone is another dimension.

So you admit it would be low 1-C? Okay then, you are using accepted arguments to disprove that, like the universe being completely separate, how are you going to say that when it has long been accepted already? And it is possible, to have two higher timelines, its just the main one governs everything, so its constructed from the snapshots of everything below, which is uncountable infinite. That becomes clear when copies of everything below gets duplicated.

So you can stop asking that question and prove with scans and not interpretations that there are other time directions and axis in DB, that's all.

Proof the timelines are an overarching timeline.

 

[PrinceofPein]

I am only interested in the scan you sent to proof overarching timelines/different time axis, since the rest of the post are not important and if that is your scan to prove different time axis then please hard disagree, i have seen all I need to see.

What do you think about this?

The OP and the arguments to support it are simply mental gymnastics, and not really substantial at all. So imo, this thread should not have been made to begin with.

 

[TiltedFN]

I am only interested in the scan you sent to proof overarching timelines/different time axis, since the rest of the post are not important and if that is your scan to prove different time axis then please hard disagree, i have seen all I need to see.

Lol you say this when you're making the argument that the universes are separate

The OP and the arguments to support it are simply mental gymnastics, and not really substantial at all. So imo, this thread should not have been made to begin with.

"mental gymnastics" is crazy tbh considering what you have been arguing. We have a not that literally accepts the timelines encompasses the whole of the multiverse, including the macrocosms which are their own separate 4-D structures, with their own timelines. I think my proof is substantial enough to prove the neutral space has its own temporal axis, and the temporal axis of the timeline is higher than even that. Your argument simply does not work the moment you said the universes are not spatialtemporally separate.

 

[Maverick_Zero_X]

PrinceofPein makes sense to me.

 

[Reiner04]

Reiner my little bot

Can confirm I'm yours. Bot. Yeah.

 

[TiltedFN]

It is already accepted the universes are 2-C structures, each containing 6 universal sized bodies with their own timeline, we know zeno erased 6 universes in the present timeline, yet the time ring was still there, that proves an overarching timeline is at play here. So the timelines, which what the time rings represent, are totally separate, and the timeline would span 4-D macrocosms and the insignificant 5-D neutral space, which would be low 1-C.

Note: We consider the universes in Dragon Ball alternate time-spaces relative to each other, hence why Zen'ō is rated as 2-C, despite the events in the Goku Black Saga showing parallel timelines encompassing the whole of the multiverse.

The reason for this is that Universe 7 by itself has already been shown to contain parallel space-time continuums within its globe, such as the Room of Spirit and Time, which is still affected by time travel; which proves that the new timelines can encompass other space-times as well, and thus the events in the Future Trunks Saga don't prove anything in the way of the universes being physically connected.

Like it's accepted on site. This alone proves that the timeline is a higher temporal axis, which would contain snapshots of everything below it, including the insignificant 5-D neutral space, even if I were to go with the notion that it in fact does not posses its own time axis. So your argument completely falls apart because it is accepted already that the timeline contains other timelines, therefore it acts as a higher temporal flow, +1d. So the timeline is constructed from uncountable infinite snapshots of unquantifiable 5-D spaces, and 4d macrocosms at the least.

 

[Elizhaa]

I disagree from the opposition's points.

 

[Reiner04]

Since the thread has been rejected, it can be closed.

 

[TiltedFN]

Since the thread has been rejected, it can be closed.

we are waiting for ant to reply to see if we could get some DB supporters in here.

 

[Antvasima]

Thank you to everybody who helped out here.

I think that we can close this thread then.

 

[PrinceofPein]

Thank you to everybody who helped out here.

I think that we can close this thread then.

Yes

 

[Ottavio_Merluzzo]

Got permission from @Celestial_Pegasus as well as @Vietthai96

We have some things to say and we were just granted permission, so could you please refrain from closing the thread? We waited all this time to be able to comment.

 

[Excellence616]

Bump

 

[TiltedFN]

Yeah since ant didn't close this, i assume it was because more people wanted to contribute, are the DB supporters allowed to speak their thoughts on the matter since they didn't get a chance to?

 

[PrinceofPein]

Yeah since ant didn't close this, i assume it was because more people wanted to contribute, are the DB supporters allowed to speak their thoughts on the matter since they didn't get a chance to?

Yes, that is why the thread is still opened. I am also still following this cause of the arguments they said they have and it's been 3 days

 

[TiltedFN]

Yes, that is why the thread is still opened. I am also still following this cause of the arguments they said they have and it's been 3 days

They might have been confused if they could respond or not, because they asked ant. But I guess just wait for them, they likely are still following the thread. @Ottavio_Merluzzo @Vietthai96

 

[Vietthai96]

Me and Otta is busy until weekend, i could comment here if i get permission sooner, but real life problem come when me and Otta get the permission so.......as bad as it sound, i hope peoples are fine waiting for some more days

 

[TiltedFN]

Me and Otta is busy until weekend, i could comment here if i get permission sooner, but real life problem come when me and Otta get the permission so.......as bad as it sound, i hope peoples are fine waiting for some more days

No problem man, real life stuff always comes before any fiction

 

[Agnaa]

@Agnaa

What do you think about this?

I currently have 39 threads in my "to-evaluate" backlog, I've added this to the list, and will get to it eventually.

 

[Omegabronic]

bump

 

[KingNanaya]

The current vote is 0-3 in favor of rejecting this thread

Agree: None
Disagree: @DarkDragonMedeus @Maverick_Zero_X and @Elizhaa

The DB supporters that were given permission to comment should probably do so soon.

 

[Omegabronic]

bump

 

[KingNanaya]

Got permission from @Celestial_Pegasus as well as @Vietthai96

We have some things to say and we were just granted permission, so could you please refrain from closing the thread? We waited all this time to be able to comment.

Me and Otta is busy until weekend, i could comment here if i get permission sooner, but real life problem come when me and Otta get the permission so.......as bad as it sound, i hope peoples are fine waiting for some more days

No problem man, real life stuff always comes before any fiction

do yall plan on continuing this thread?

 

[TiltedFN]

do yall plan on continuing this thread?

yes

 

[Omegabronic]

bump

 

[Vietthai96]

do yall plan on continuing this thread?

well, i think we can close the thread, my PC is busted so i can't even reply anymore, we can re-visit this matter in the future, when I get less busy and have a new PC, reply on phone is a pain especially a wall of text from @PrinceofPein

 

[PrinceofPein]

well, i think we can close the thread, my PC is busted so i can't even reply anymore, we can re-visit this matter in the future, when I get less busy and have a new PC, reply on phone is a pain especially a wall of text from @PrinceofPein

You dont need to reply to me, you just need to send evidences for why the neutral zone has another time axis like the OP claimed.
There is no rush we can wait, you can have someone else make the reply for you also. There is no point in revisiting old subjects over and over again.

 

[Deagonx]

I'm also more inclined to Pein's arguments here, I disagree with the upgrade.