Devil May Cry: A Lore Revision

[Agnaa]

I already pointed out why I had to make this thread in rush as you can see here in this thread to Crabwhale.

The "train" of arguments has already reached its "stop" a month ago by that point soo it's an issue of OP who was handling that thread as I on point conceded there and I don't see why their vote matters anymore as the votes have been concluded in that thread long ago.

1. The thread wasn't applied, as should be patently obvious by the fact that Pluto's profile wasn't deleted or edited.
2. Even if it was, creating another thread like this to overturn a change, in such a short timeframe, is against the rules. Your justification of "well it's been a month without people really saying much" is irrelevant. And so, their votes still matter. You cannot keep running back threads where staff disagree with you, until you hit two staff who FRA it. By doing this, I am implementing our safeguard against that.

In short, I don't see any issue what's wrong with this thread. Especially when this isn't the first time someone made two threads over the same topic which, mind you, was under the direct supervision of Deagonx before on this verse while they both were far from grace period and have exactly the same issue these both thread have.

Turning an overly-lengthy ordinary CRT into a staff-only thread is acceptable, actually. That's how many staff-only threads originate, as attempts to reign in ordinary CRTs that are getting flooded out of control.

And even if it wasn't, what do you expect me to do? Not enforce a rule because someone broke it over a year ago? Try to overturn those threads that have been closed for over a year? That's nonsense.

 

[SuperSonicTL]

Currently busy but I'll reply soon.

 

[SuperSonicTL]

Now sorry Agnaa if I feel aggressive to you but that's just how I debate when take things seriously & I genuinely wanna clarify some things here for my knowledge in future events, because I feel like some things are missing here:

1. The thread wasn't applied, as should be patently obvious by the fact that Pluto's profile wasn't deleted or edited.
2. Even if it was, creating another thread like this to overturn a change, in such a short timeframe, is against the rules. Your justification of "well it's been a month without people really saying much" is irrelevant. And so, their votes still matter. You cannot keep running back threads where staff disagree with you, until you hit two staff who FRA it. By doing this, I am implementing our safeguard against that.

1. The thread being applied or not is not my fault. If a thread is under my wings, I make sure I occasionally bump it around soo it can be finished. It has been accepted over a month ago but nobody took any action, especially OP of that thread who was active enough to argue here mind you.
2. I don't consider an accepted CRT after passing grace for a whole month period any "short time" if you ask me personally. As for FRA train, you don't want me to tag mods who have been doing this since time immemorial. Heck, even in the previous threads you were part of had mods FRAing around when it came to disagreements without any explanation whatsoever yet I count those votes without any issues.
3. This thread has took EVERY. SINGLE. COUNTERMEASURES. from that previous thread from not just OP but sideline users as well and went over it in detail unlike the previous thread which was nothing but bunch of nonsense and blatant denying of every obvious scan that literally proves his existence in the franchise before PoC was even a thing.
4. I not only explained why Pluto is the world splitter but also took an in-depth review of the entire lore from scratch and made reasonable changes to it. In other words, it is basically a CRT that had to get Ningenron's thread involved no matter how you gonna look at it so I have no choice but to address it before I carry on with other stuff.

Turning an overly-lengthy ordinary CRT into a staff-only thread is acceptable, actually. That's how many staff-only threads originate, as attempts to reign in ordinary CRTs that are getting flooded out of control.

I'm pretty sure staff threads were supposed to discuss genuine issues that not only related to a verse but in general that can effect the site around. Is this supposed to justify the counter-thread for a thread that was on-going and haven't even passed grace period? I was atleast humble enough to give the previous thread enough time unlike that one I linked to you. In any case, there is no point in making this staff thread now. It has been concluded fair and square and staff thread in this case is nothing but a source of stonewalling general voices to me. There is really no point in making staff threads in such cases around.

Also while we are it, could you cite me where it says that thread & counter-thread situations can only be valid for staff threads? Just for future reference.

And even if it wasn't, what do you expect me to do? Not enforce a rule because someone broke it over a year ago? Try to overturn those threads that have been closed for over a year? That's nonsense.

"Even" is not the word that should be used it literally happened in front of everyone. And yeah... Mods or admins for that matter supposed to make rules for such situations into the future. Take this as a valid scenerio and make a rule over it.

So what is the common ground here? Either get other mods on the thread to vote here or just apply that thread and then apply this thread on top of it which negates that one by virtue. In either case, it's a waste of time, atleast to me. I suggest just let it how it is and if someone still have doubt, they are free to make another thread regarding the lore in the future. For now, it's of no use as every argument has been buried deep into the ground.

 

[Unoriginal777]

1. The thread wasn't applied, as should be patently obvious by the fact that Pluto's profile wasn't deleted or edited.
2. Even if it was, creating another thread like this to overturn a change, in such a short timeframe, is against the rules. Your justification of "well it's been a month without people really saying much" is irrelevant. And so, their votes still matter. You cannot keep running back threads where staff disagree with you, until you hit two staff who FRA it. By doing this, I am implementing our safeguard against that.

Turning an overly-lengthy ordinary CRT into a staff-only thread is acceptable, actually. That's how many staff-only threads originate, as attempts to reign in ordinary CRTs that are getting flooded out of control.

And even if it wasn't, what do you expect me to do? Not enforce a rule because someone broke it over a year ago? Try to overturn those threads that have been closed for over a year? That's nonsense.

1. The thread wasn't applied, as should be patently obvious by the fact that Pluto's profile wasn't deleted or edited.
2. Even if it was, creating another thread like this to overturn a change, in such a short timeframe, is against the rules. Your justification of "well it's been a month without people really saying much" is irrelevant. And so, their votes still matter. You cannot keep running back threads where staff disagree with you, until you hit two staff who FRA it. By doing this, I am implementing our safeguard against that.

Turning an overly-lengthy ordinary CRT into a staff-only thread is acceptable, actually. That's how many staff-only threads originate, as attempts to reign in ordinary CRTs that are getting flooded out of control.

And even if it wasn't, what do you expect me to do? Not enforce a rule because someone broke it over a year ago? Try to overturn those threads that have been closed for over a year? That's nonsense.

Hello Agnaa,

Now coming from a newb's perspective I find it a tad strange that Sonic who had done the homework of waiting out the grace period and waiting until an opportunity opened up after that grace period to make a counter thread is marked in the red while the person on the other side of the DMC issue, the late Mad Dog as it were who didn't even give the benefit of 6 days was approved. Additionally, what is this arbitrary difference between staff and revision threads? How does one make a revision thread a staff thread? I would like answers with citations to these issues because I can't shake the feeling something's amiss. Additionally, Sonic should be more or less blameless from the stance that he was not only aware of the grace period, but operates in a manner that was exemplified by the collusion of Mad Dog and staff in the past in much the same as any person would adhere to standards/prior actions done by staff (which was greenlit btw) on any set of rules in any community.

I'd recommend that these rules have a stronger clarification to prevent issues such as these regardless of where one stands on DMC or issues pertaining to any verse, but that's just my opinion from my brief observations.

In any case, I mean no offense by what was said above and apologize for any potential offense perceived.

Sincerely,
Unoriginal777

 

[Agnaa]

Now sorry Agnaa if I feel aggressive to you but that's just how I debate when take things seriously & I genuinely wanna clarify some things here for my knowledge in future events, because I feel like some things are missing here:

1. The thread being applied or not is not my fault. If a thread is under my wings, I make sure I occasionally bump it around soo it can be finished. It has been accepted over a month ago but nobody took any action, especially OP of that thread who was active enough to argue here mind you.
2. I don't consider an accepted CRT after passing grace for a whole month period any "short time" if you ask me personally. As for FRA train, you don't want me to tag mods who have been doing this since time immemorial. Heck, even in the previous threads you were part of had mods FRAing around when it came to disagreements without any explanation whatsoever yet I count those votes without any issues.
3. This thread has took EVERY. SINGLE. COUNTERMEASURES. from that previous thread from not just OP but sideline users as well and went over it in detail unlike the previous thread which was nothing but bunch of nonsense and blatant denying of every obvious scan that literally proves his existence in the franchise before PoC was even a thing.
4. I not only explained why Pluto is the world splitter but also took an in-depth review of the entire lore from scratch and made reasonable changes to it. In other words, it is basically a CRT that had to get Ningenron's thread involved no matter how you gonna look at it so I have no choice but to address it before I carry on with other stuff.

1. It's not your fault that the thread wasn't applied, it's your fault that you claimed it was to get a staff member to close it. And you don't really have fault for this, but you claimed that it was, so I felt compelled to correct that falsehood.
2. Our rules, which I quoted to you, do consider a month a short time. It says you should wait at least 3-4 months. It's not about the fact that staff FRA'd it, it's about the fact that you grabbed a new selection of staff without seeing if the new arguments actually changed the old staff's mind, and not counting the votes of the old staff despite that lack of clarity.
3. Didn't take the countermeasure of counting old staff votes.
4. If you feel that you can't revise the verse unless you overturn a CRT that just passed, then you can only do so by forming an argument which the staff who rejected the last CRT find convincing, or getting a significantly greater number of staff to agree that those arguments change things after having them read both threads' arguments.

I'm pretty sure staff threads were supposed to discuss genuine issues that not only related to a verse but in general that can effect the site around. Is this supposed to justify the counter-thread for a thread that was on-going and haven't even passed grace period? I was atleast humble enough to give the previous thread enough time unlike that one I linked to you. In any case, there is no point in making this staff thread now. It has been concluded fair and square and staff thread in this case is nothing but a source of stonewalling general voices to me. There is really no point in making staff threads in such cases around.

Also while we are it, could you cite me where it says that thread & counter-thread situations can only be valid for staff threads? Just for future reference.

Staff threads aren't only for site-wide issues, a glance there shows this definitively; out of the 12 most-recent threads there, 4 of them are for specific verses.

Our written rules on this are quite inadequate, but being able to move to a staff only thread to continue a disagreement is something that's had a consistent history longer than I've been on the wiki.

"Even" is not the word that should be used it literally happened in front of everyone. And yeah... Mods or admins for that matter supposed to make rules for such situations into the future. Take this as a valid scenerio and make a rule over it.

If you want a rule made clarifying whether or not staff-only threads can be made continuing CRTs, then I will give you permission to make a staff-only thread on that issue.

If you're saying that because I'm an admin I should drop everything and do that, no lol, I've got more important staff duties to fulfill.

So what is the common ground here? Either get other mods on the thread to vote here or just apply that thread and then apply this thread on top of it which negates that one by virtue. In either case, it's a waste of time, atleast to me. I suggest just let it how it is and if someone still have doubt, they are free to make another thread regarding the lore in the future. For now, it's of no use as every argument has been buried deep into the ground.

It's as I said in my first post; get the staff who voted on this thread to have a look at the previous thread and see whether they're convinced by the arguments or not, and get the staff who voted in the previous thread to look at this one and see whether they're convinced by the arguments or not. That, or, get a few more staff members to look at both threads and render their judgements accordingly.

Hello Agnaa,

Now coming from a newb's perspective I find it a tad strange that Sonic who had done the homework of waiting out the grace period and waiting until an opportunity opened up after that grace period to make a counter thread is marked in the red while the person on the other side of the DMC issue, the late Mad Dog as it were who didn't even give the benefit of 6 days was approved.

As said, he didn't wait the appropriate period; our rules outline that one should wait 3-4 months, unless a staff member believes there's a particularly good reason to do so; vitally important information that hadn't been considered yet, violation of site standards, and the like. And our rules don't outline this, but it's been common practice to remake CRTs as staff threads in the case where they're clusterfucks, and these remakes often have different OPs from the main thread. If the thread was becoming hard to manage/evaluate due to many non-staff users posting back and forth, such a change in setting makes sense.

Y'all have driven me to look back to those threads to see which of these cases that remake meets, and it actually satisfies the former one. Fuji's new thread brings up the important point that the scans are fake, which would be a heavy violation of our site standards. This was not brought up earlier in the first thread, aside from one joke, and a person saying "we should be careful since these could be faked".

Additionally, what is this arbitrary difference between staff and revision threads? How does one make a revision thread a staff thread?

As our discussion rules state, you can make a staff thread by asking an admin for permission (before you ask, the rules at the time didn't specify who can grant permission, which is why Deagon, a discussion mod, was able to grant permission).

I would like answers with citations to these issues because I can't shake the feeling something's amiss. Additionally, Sonic should be more or less blameless from the stance that he was not only aware of the grace period, but operates in a manner that was exemplified by the collusion of Mad Dog and staff in the past in much the same as any person would adhere to standards/prior actions done by staff (which was greenlit btw) on any set of rules in any community.

I'd recommend that these rules have a stronger clarification to prevent issues such as these regardless of where one stands on DMC or issues pertaining to any verse, but that's just my opinion from my brief observations.

Yeah, I do agree that the written rules are insufficient. Crabwhale and DontTalkDT seem to agree, too, last I saw.

 

[SuperSonicTL]

1. It's not your fault that the thread wasn't applied, it's your fault that you claimed it was to get a staff member to close it. And you don't really have fault for this, but you claimed that it was, so I felt compelled to correct that falsehood.

Well sorry if you felt that way, my intentions were never like that. That thread was just concluded as a side effect of this thread so reasonably, I asked Garrixian to close it because people can't handle the threads they make soo I have to clean their mess up.

1. Our rules, which I quoted to you, do consider a month a short time. It says you should wait at least 3-4 months. It's not about the fact that staff FRA'd it, it's about the fact that you grabbed a new selection of staff without seeing if the new arguments actually changed the old staff's mind, and not counting the votes of the old staff despite that lack of clarity.

Correct me if I'm wrong but aren't 3-4 months timer supposed to work after the thread being concluded? That thread was still in the process of conclusion as it just got the greenlight to apply the thread which Ningenron didn't.

1. Didn't take the countermeasure of counting old staff votes.

I feel like those votes were only relevant for that thread, not this one. It would've made sense if I ditched the arguments from that thread which you can clearly see I didn't or anybody who was in that thread overseeing it for that matter. Feel free to verify it.

1. If you feel that you can't revise the verse unless you overturn a CRT that just passed, then you can only do so by forming an argument which the staff who rejected the last CRT find convincing, or getting a significantly greater number of staff to agree that those arguments change things after having them read both threads' arguments.

Hmmm...

Staff threads aren't only for site-wide issues, a glance there shows this definitively; out of the 12 most-recent threads there, 4 of them are for specific verses.

Well yeah but isn't it on me whether I would wanna make it staff or not? I was honest enough to give everyone a chance to talk around without any disruption.

Our written rules on this are quite inadequate, but being able to move to a staff only thread to continue a disagreement is something that's had a consistent history longer than I've been on the wiki.

Well I'm not that experience myself to understand this "history" of the wiki you are speaking of—It's just so I seen a similar situation and thought it could apply.

Also mind you that thread I linked had also made it clear that it wasn't going to bring the scans back but rather discuss if PoC is still useable by that point. The counter thread of Fuji could be made later after it was concluded and everything would be perfectly fine.

If you want a rule made clarifying whether or not staff-only threads can be made continuing CRTs, then I will give you permission to make a staff-only thread on that issue.

If you're saying that because I'm an admin I should drop everything and do that, no lol, I've got more important staff duties to fulfill.

But mods & admins are supposed to look over these situations, nah? Anyway, I do have some things to talk about aside from this soo maybe in the future but not now.

It's as I said in my first post; get the staff who voted on this thread to have a look at the previous thread and see whether they're convinced by the arguments or not, and get the staff who voted in the previous thread to look at this one and see whether they're convinced by the arguments or not. That, or, get a few more staff members to look at both threads and render their judgements accordingly.

Could you tag them? I'm tired of tagging mods around who barely cares enough to hop in the threads like these lol.

 

[Agnaa]

Correct me if I'm wrong but aren't 3-4 months timer supposed to work after the thread being concluded? That thread was still in the process of conclusion as it just got the greenlight to apply the thread which Ningenron didn't.

That's how the rules are written, another aspect of why they're sufficient, but I think their intention is pretty obvious. If we wouldn't allow people to create another thread for a topic 3 months later, since there's no point rehashing it unless there's extenuating circumstances, why would we let people do that before the thread's even done if there aren't extenuating circumstances?

I feel like those votes were only relevant for that thread, not this one. It would've made sense if I ditched the arguments from that thread which you can clearly see I didn't or anybody who was in that thread overseeing it for that matter. Feel free to verify it.

I don't understand your logic here, so all I can say is that I think the votes are still relevant.

Well yeah but isn't it on me whether I would wanna make it staff or not? I was honest enough to give everyone a chance to talk around without any disruption.

idk what this has to do with what I said, but sure.

Also, I'm pretty sure that if we make staff-only threads because the original one went to shit, that we still count the staff votes from the earlier clusterfuck.

But mods & admins are supposed to look over these situations, nah? Anyway, I do have some things to talk about aside from this soo maybe in the future but not now.

Yeah, I'll probably have a look at the thread you make eventually.

Could you tag them? I'm tired of tagging mods around who barely cares enough to hop in the threads like these lol.

Already did in my first post here, I'll leave 'em alone for a few days before pinging again.

 

[Agnaa]

Reopening. This thread was an unapproved reversal of this thread, which was still open at the time.

That thread had two staff accepts, @Deagonx and @Maverick_Zero_X, and zero staff rejections.

Since the train of argument is still essentially the same, that leaves this thread at 3-2, which is not a conclusive acceptance.

This thread may be the better one to continue conversation in, since it's shorter, but the staff who voted positively here, @Planck69 @Theglassman12 @UchihaSlayer96 should reread the old thread to understand the counterarguments made.

Since some staff members may not have been aware of the arguments taking place in the other thread (on both sides), I think that we should aim for all staff votes to be restated along with acknowledgement that they read the other thread's relevant arguments. Or if they're not willing to do so, that they should retract their votes. Or that if they don't respond, we should play it safe and assume that their votes remain the same, and have more staff members weigh in until we reach a conclusive result.

Everyone involved, please take care to make sure that clusterfucks like this don't happen again.

@Deagonx @Maverick_Zero_X @Planck69 @Theglassman12 @UchihaSlayer96

Please help me sort this shit out.

 

[SuperSonicTL]

Tag

Now what to do about this one?

 

[Agnaa]

Keep doing this every few days until they respond. Maybe I'll chuck in some other random staff too.

Reopening. This thread was an unapproved reversal of this thread, which was still open at the time.

That thread had two staff accepts, @Deagonx and @Maverick_Zero_X, and zero staff rejections.

Since the train of argument is still essentially the same, that leaves this thread at 3-2, which is not a conclusive acceptance.

This thread may be the better one to continue conversation in, since it's shorter, but the staff who voted positively here, @Planck69 @Theglassman12 @UchihaSlayer96 should reread the old thread to understand the counterarguments made.

Since some staff members may not have been aware of the arguments taking place in the other thread (on both sides), I think that we should aim for all staff votes to be restated along with acknowledgement that they read the other thread's relevant arguments. Or if they're not willing to do so, that they should retract their votes. Or that if they don't respond, we should play it safe and assume that their votes remain the same, and have more staff members weigh in until we reach a conclusive result.

Everyone involved, please take care to make sure that clusterfucks like this don't happen again.

@Deagonx @Maverick_Zero_X @Planck69 @Theglassman12 @UchihaSlayer96

@Crabwhale @AbaddonTheDisappointment @AKM sama

Please help me sort this shit out.

 

[Agnaa]

Reopening. This thread was an unapproved reversal of this thread, which was still open at the time.

That thread had two staff accepts, @Deagonx and @Maverick_Zero_X, and zero staff rejections.

Since the train of argument is still essentially the same, that leaves this thread at 3-2, which is not a conclusive acceptance.

This thread may be the better one to continue conversation in, since it's shorter, but the staff who voted positively here, @Planck69 @Theglassman12 @UchihaSlayer96 should reread the old thread to understand the counterarguments made.

Since some staff members may not have been aware of the arguments taking place in the other thread (on both sides), I think that we should aim for all staff votes to be restated along with acknowledgement that they read the other thread's relevant arguments. Or if they're not willing to do so, that they should retract their votes. Or that if they don't respond, we should play it safe and assume that their votes remain the same, and have more staff members weigh in until we reach a conclusive result.

Everyone involved, please take care to make sure that clusterfucks like this don't happen again.

@Deagonx @Maverick_Zero_X @Planck69 @Theglassman12 @UchihaSlayer96

@ByAsura @Catzlaflame @Qawsedf234

So far this has been mishandled. Come on people.

 

[Qawsedf234]

So far this has been mishandled. Come on people.

Its been awhile on my end, what needs to be clarified on my point?

 

[SuperSonicTL]

Its been awhile on my end, what needs to be clarified on my point?

Basically, he wants you to check the main arguments of the first thread to confirm whether the arguments in this thread I made addressed everything or not. (I know I covered every single point but he’s asking again just for better clarification and context.)

On such basis, he wanna re-evaluate the votes from scratch to those who participated here and there in voting altogether.

 

[Agnaa]

Its been awhile on my end, what needs to be clarified on my point?

There's been some arguments, split across both threads, on whether to make a certain change.

Staff votes are currently 3-2 in support of the status quo, but the 3 "for" votes, and the 2 "against" votes, were made in different threads.

 

[Qawsedf234]

On such basis, he wanna re-evaluate the votes from scratch to those who participated here and there in voting altogether.

I'll try and get a response in by tomorrow then

 

[Qawsedf234]

First we need to understand that DMC isn't a series that is known for Japanese content, heck nobody knows Capcom as a Japanese company.

The latter part just, isn't true. Capcom was founded in Japan and has its stock traded on the Tokyo Stock Exchange rather than a Western One.

For the former the primary canon for any source material, unless explicitly said otherwise, is the language it was written in. If the text is entirely composed in Japanese, unless there's explicit evidence otherwise, then the canon version of that text will be Japanese.

This, and the fact that there are official English contents like this website and multiple guidebooks scattered around, you really wanna disregard English version of the series like it has no value whatsoever?

To dismiss then as no value is incorrect, however, the core canon will be based around the original language of the game.

For the original thread the topic at hand was the following:

TL;DR: Nuke Pluto's profiles or make it PoC exclusive.

Anyways for the topic at hand Pluto does exist in some capacity in the grander DMC setting so the profile existing is fine in my view. It doesn't change any feats or scaling either, since Sparda would still directly scale to any event. So his existence is whatever imo.

 

[SuperSonicTL]

The latter part just, isn't true. Capcom was founded in Japan and has its stock traded on the Tokyo Stock Exchange rather than a Western One.

For the former the primary canon for any source material, unless explicitly said otherwise, is the language it was written in. If the text is entirely composed in Japanese, unless there's explicit evidence otherwise, then the canon version of that text will be Japanese.

To dismiss then as no value is incorrect, however, the core canon will be based around the original language of the game.

I respect your stance but my main concern is that some people treat the English localization as if it doesn't act as an alternative view, even when the Japanese text contradicts it in wording while conveying the same meaning beneath the surface. That’s why I wanted to clarify that part of the discussion.

As for Capcom, I was specifically referring to the team behind Devil May Cry. Apologies for not making that clear earlier. The series was indeed created with Western influences in mind, with English being the primary language for the first three games—at least for the voice lines.

For the original thread the topic at hand was the following:

Anyways for the topic at hand Pluto does exist in some capacity in the grander DMC setting so the profile existing is fine in my view. It doesn't change any feats or scaling either, since Sparda would still directly scale to any event. So his existence is whatever imo.

Should I take this as agreement that you're fine with Pluto's existence in the original continuity then?

 

[Unoriginal777]

The latter part just, isn't true. Capcom was founded in Japan and has its stock traded on the Tokyo Stock Exchange rather than a Western One.

For the former the primary canon for any source material, unless explicitly said otherwise, is the language it was written in. If the text is entirely composed in Japanese, unless there's explicit evidence otherwise, then the canon version of that text will be Japanese.

To dismiss then as no value is incorrect, however, the core canon will be based around the original language of the game.

For the original thread the topic at hand was the following:


Anyways for the topic at hand Pluto does exist in some capacity in the grander DMC setting so the profile existing is fine in my view. It doesn't change any feats or scaling either, since Sparda would still directly scale to any event. So his existence is whatever imo.

I hope you realize that Capcom has a history of casting English actors for Western settings because they felt the portrayal was more authentic and this extends to DMC as well. Itsuno seems to go right along with this trend as he himself was very happy with Reuben and his portrayal of Dante because it aligned with his vision for Dante as a character in every way, shape, or form. So already we have precedent for the English being just as authentic if not more so (considering Capcom's established practices) then the Japanese as it is arguably more faithful to the vision of the character Itsuno and Capcom by extension was striving for at its inception. Additionally, you should be aware that your logic that the source material of a Japanese game must itself be the Japanese text is plainly non-sequitur in this case seeing as the primary director dragging the series' writing forward went out of his way to say why the English>Japanese in his eyes (like how are you going to tell a director that they can't slate a different translation as the more authentic one as though you own the intellectual property). And this is without mentioning the purely English guidebooks like the Bradygames guidebooks which are canon directly regardless of our feelings on the matter.

At best you end up with English>Japanese as far as games are concerned, at worst English=Japanese and you can't dance around Pluto either as the Japanese doesn't contradict that it was Pluto who split heaven and earth, but rather uses a different title for him with PoC affirming he was the original god of evil preceding Mundus's reign as guidebooks clarify. At worst it's an omission and omissions aren't contradictions (those who argue that they are fall prey to non-sequitur fallacy). So yeah Japanese isn't core canon for DMC, just half of the picture with English mattering just as much when all is said and done.

Additionally, since you seem to agree on Pluto being the one who split heaven and earth so you wouldn't mind that we make a page of him having the necessary scaling, yes? So are we to believe you're in support of @SuperSonicTL's view?

 

[Qawsedf234]

Additionally, since you seem to agree on Pluto being the one who split heaven and earth so you wouldn't mind that we make a page of him having the necessary scaling, yes? So are we to believe you're in support of @SuperSonicTL's view?

In my mind the character existing isn't questionable, so a profile being made or being kept is fine.

 

[Agnaa]

The latter part just, isn't true. Capcom was founded in Japan and has its stock traded on the Tokyo Stock Exchange rather than a Western One.

For the former the primary canon for any source material, unless explicitly said otherwise, is the language it was written in. If the text is entirely composed in Japanese, unless there's explicit evidence otherwise, then the canon version of that text will be Japanese.

To dismiss then as no value is incorrect, however, the core canon will be based around the original language of the game.

For the original thread the topic at hand was the following:


Anyways for the topic at hand Pluto does exist in some capacity in the grander DMC setting so the profile existing is fine in my view. It doesn't change any feats or scaling either, since Sparda would still directly scale to any event. So his existence is whatever imo.

Ye so you think that after having read both threads? Fair enough then.

Reopening. This thread was an unapproved reversal of this thread, which was still open at the time.

That thread had two staff accepts, @Deagonx and @Maverick_Zero_X, and zero staff rejections.

Since the train of argument is still essentially the same, that leaves this thread at 3-2, which is not a conclusive acceptance.

This thread may be the better one to continue conversation in, since it's shorter, but the staff who voted positively here, @Planck69 @Theglassman12 @UchihaSlayer96 should reread the old thread to understand the counterarguments made.

Since some staff members may not have been aware of the arguments taking place in the other thread (on both sides), I think that we should aim for all staff votes to be restated along with acknowledgement that they read the other thread's relevant arguments. Or if they're not willing to do so, that they should retract their votes. Or that if they don't respond, we should play it safe and assume that their votes remain the same, and have more staff members weigh in until we reach a conclusive result.

Everyone involved, please take care to make sure that clusterfucks like this don't happen again.

@Deagonx @Maverick_Zero_X @Planck69 @Theglassman12 @UchihaSlayer96

The rest of you, get in here.

 

[Planck69]

I'm not gonna comment on the whole thread/counter thread thing, seems like its own issue. But I think the overall OP here is still fine, even with checking out the other thread.

 

[SuperSonicTL]

Tags.

A minor question. Is the voting about to be started again from new or is it gonna carry on the chain?

 

[Agnaa]

As I said, I'd prefer people reiterate votes, but I'd still count old ones.

I think at this point there's not much to be done, many ping waves have resulted in very little, and the movement it's caused has just moved things to a 4-2 acceptance.

So with that, I think I'd say that this thread is accepted.

 

[SuperSonicTL]

As I said, I'd prefer people reiterate votes, but I'd still count old ones.

I think at this point there's not much to be done, many ping waves have resulted in very little, and the movement it's caused has just moved things to a 4-2 acceptance.

So with that, I think I'd say that this thread is accepted.

Great then that means this thread should be closed as well. Seriously do it given 5-6 threads are currently running around openly