- 4,524
- 2,242
Well, it nuked High 1A(especially 1A)
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.
Well, it nuked High 1A(especially 1A)
It nuked your mamaWell, it nuked High 1A
It nuked your mama
That is the pointOh, yeah. Guys, we ain't making any progress here.
Ok, We like waiting, have any problems?Oh, yeah. Guys, we ain't making any progress here.
With a downgrade as big as this, discussion is required, not just mere numbersI'm vote disagree.
Of course, but it is understandable that people want this thing to go by faster. However, it’s best to wait until DT is ready to respond againAs I said earlier, we are waiting for DontTalk to get some free time from his real life responsibilities. That is going to take at least a week. I would appreciate if the rest of you stop spamming unnecessary posts until then.
Sorry i though this will helpMost of these points were already brought up.
And the author litteraly said that "infinite" was a mistranslation, as shown in one of the previous pages.
It would be better to not just copy/paste arguments without taking into account what has already been said.
so we're waiting for DontTalk even though its pretty clear that majority of people agree with the downgradeSoooo....
yeah its based on already provided proof of daimao simply not qulifing for our standards of high 1-A or 1-A in general for that matterA downgrade like this isn't based on a bunch of people saying "I agree".
I didn't say he did and/or does meet them, I'm saying, this CRT won't be applied on the basis of a bunch of people saying "I agree".yeah its based on already provided proof of daimao simply not qulifing for our standards of high 1-A or 1-A in general for that matter
yes I know its just we are prologing a crt that is pretty damn conclusive with concrete info behindI didn't say he did and/or does meet them, I'm saying, this CRT won't be applied on the basis of a bunch of people saying "I agree".
No, but it will make it clear that this will be an uncontroversial upgrade/downgrade.I didn't say he did and/or does meet them, I'm saying, this CRT won't be applied on the basis of a bunch of people saying "I agree".
I plan to get to it this weekend.
Yes, but because of how known the verse is for its power, it's definitely going to be controvertial. No reason why it wouldn't be. Besides, the counter arguments that were made were pretty interesting, so this CRT can still go on. Like the Umineko thread, this thread should be based on discussion, not just the number of agrees/disagrees in it.yes I know its just we are prologing a crt that is pretty damn conclusive with concrete info behind
oh I know that but im more than certain about 60% doesn't agree with the ratingYes, but because of how known the verse is for its power, it's definitely going to be controvertial. No reason why it wouldn't be. Besides, the counter arguments that were made were pretty interesting, so this CRT can still go on. Like the Umineko thread, this thread should be based on discussion, not just the number of agrees/disagrees in it.
That said, I personally think the OP is extremely blatant with their arguments, and Umy and I have discussed some of this stuff before, so I agree for now. I'll wait for DT's response before making a conclusive statement.
However, if I'm could offer my 2 cents. From what I've seen, the hierarchy of stories thingy, even if it were just hypothetical or not proven, would still prove the nature of higher levels of existence. It being metaphorical doesn't remove that basis on higher planes of existence in the verse. Then again, if it were metaphorical, it would still downgrade the verse by a lot.
I personally agree that the High 1A rating should probably be removed. As well as that, just overlooking the OP again, the R>F hierarchy does just seem to be a bit of a misinterpretation by those that used it in the cosmology in the first place. Then again, I don't know nearly enough about the verse to make a confident reply, so I won't pretend that I do.oh I know that but im more than certain about 60% doesn't agree with the rating
although i do think they are a tad above 4-B but definitly not high 1-A at least not by wiki standards
well from what I've seen high 1-B low 1-A would be actually some what reasonable but I'm no expert on the verse just know damn well its not high 1-A by any standardsI personally agree that the High 1A rating should probably be removed. As well as that, just overlooking the OP again, the R>F hierarchy does just seem to be a bit of a misinterpretation by those that used it in the cosmology in the first place. Then again, I don't know nearly enough about the verse to make a confident reply, so I won't pretend that I do.
well from what I've seen high 1-B low 1-A would be actually some what reasonable but I'm no expert on the verse just know damn well its not high 1-A by any standards
Hmm then how about the Extra info such as the foreword,etc?Everything you just brought has already been addressed tho...
I don't too much like CSAPbesides CSAP
you're not really alone tbhI don't too much like CSAP