Discussing IRL Human standards for the Cro-Magnon, Neanderthal & the like

[H3110l12345I20]

FYI, Ant gave me this idea, so why not explore the opportunity of the Cro-magnon & the Neanderthal, & our standards in regards to real world people in staff discussion? Clearer boundaries need to be set in cases of the former & latter tho, we are a fictional indexing website. We can’t just make profiles of your mom anyways, it derails the purpose of the site.

Spoiler: Points

Technically, we have profiles that are mentally comparable to real world people. Specifically, we have the Cro-magnon & the Neanderthal.

Spoiler: 1

• A while ago, when Long ago when Deleted Username & I were more active in PMs, she questioned the status of prohibiting even a blank slate IRL average person profile. I showed her the thread on why it's not the case & presented the (inspirations for) the points I had on the hominids. It got me really thinking on what boundaries we should really put for stuff like IRL cavemen. Like chimps are more savage & different, but cavemen are a different & ironically comparable animal to people.
• Cro-magnons & Neanderthals lived during & after the time modern human behavior developed by 50 thousand years ago. Their brains would likely have reached modern size at this point. This makes them comparable to real people mentally.
• Humans are de facto animals scientifically & the wiki acknowledges this
• We do have a cavemen category. The vast amount of fiction we humans wrote suggests the possibility of a fictional character that has the physical attributes of neanderthals & Cro-Magnon.
• We have fictional characters that are physically comparable to their real counterparts (like mittens).

Knowing all of this, what should we do with the neanderthal & cro-magnon profiles? What if we need said profiles if a fictional character scales to them in one of their physical stats. What if the character is the neanderthal or cro-magnon in both appearance & physical attributes (like how Mufasa is to a real world lion)? Aren’t the 2 profiles a bit related to modern hunter-gatherer groups?

Normal people technically have base powers & abilities contrary to belief

Spoiler: 2

• Conventional Bodily Weaponry: Our bites are a dirty move that has been used in street fights (& they’re quite potent). We also have nails that are capable of puncturing human skin, but they’re trash in a normal street fight besides as distraction.
• Statistics Amplification: Our fight-or-flight response is capable of enhancing our senses, attention & strength temporarily. There’s even context that when pushed to our physical limits, we undergo hysterical strength. Hysterical strength is a known phenomena where humans have a temporary burst of superstrength in highly stressed out situations. It pushes us from using our 67% normal strength to 100% of our strength (on par with chimps, since 100/67 = 1.5 times stronger than normal). While there’s other sources that suggest that our normal strength is lower, Zatorsky’s research is the most consistent.
• Limited Pain Tolerance: We have stress-induced analgesia. It temporarily suppresses people’s sense of pain. A person may not notice injuries to themselves for hours to weeks after a stressful situation.

Problem is, there’s going to be that one guy who tries to make a 10-B profile on some random 10-B fictional character without powers based off of these abilities.

Solution: Restrict profiles that have only these common abilities unless they’re notable as stated in the rules is one, but what happens if X character is from the human race that’s proven to have either of these abilities? Also, we already a policy intended to restrict IRL people. Why not continue to follow its intentions & say that we mean all animals except IRL homo sapiens?

Spoiler: 3 - IRL human profile is nigh useless & very liable

The only uses I could think of for a IRL average human profile would be to make some stats physically human characters more precise & judge vague stats (like stamina & intelligence. Kicks go at 60 mph & our LS on hysterical strength is around above average human to athletic human). There’s also scaling purposes of a average human profile for animals like chimpanzees, dogs, leopards, wolves, etc. Heck a real person's durability varies from 10-C to at most 10-B to 10-B+, & some animals can breach a person's durability like chimps & huskies

Spoiler: Justification if you want to look

(Unlike Chimps & Orangutans, modern people aren't always adapted to withstand full strikes from a person of comparable strength & have less durable muscle & bone than other primates of comparable strength. Physical training & martial arts dedicated to withstanding strikes can help them withstand strikes from each other more easily. Although the amount of people that does the latter is unknown & the amount of people that exercise varies among people)

However, showing them as a profile on site even with precautions would get controversial. Most of the stats on legit 10-Bs on site if they’re physically a normal person on their own are judged on common sense. The site is generally fine without having a profile about general human physical characteristics. As it's just going to affect only 10-Bs & 10-As, it's that insignificant (humans at full strength are at least 10-B, possibly 10-A (see rage power description in the points where I proved humans technically have abilities)).

Spoiler: TL; DR

Spoiler: Main & Primary One

The Cro-magnon & the Neanderthal are profiles that somehow survived in-spite of our standards. They're mentally comparable to real hunter-gatherers & people & technically animals despite being extinct or not around in their initial forms. What should we do?

Consensus: They should be removed from the wiki since they're real people. With realistic portrayals of Neanderthals, Crabwhale states that our athletic statistics should cover this. As for making the ratings a bit more precise, they didn't have the training & science we had today, therefore, they weren't stronger than modern athletes (Qawsedf234)

• Opposition:
  • They're in a better place as profiles in their current tier. There's nothing wrong with them being onsite since they don't cover people today (Agnaa)
  • Spoiler: Thing I wanted to point out for everyone

    I think everyone here just overlooked something. The rules state REAL-world people. Do we consider extinct animals/hominids as real entities by definition?
    For now, I'll side no, when we say extinct, we mean they ONCE existed. Now they don't. That's what my common sense says.
    
    Now, Antvasima, what does the staff think of this notable point? There's a chance that the pages may stay & that we just have to put a note on there. Although conversely, since they're mentally comparable, could they be as subjected to the "no real human profiles" rule as any other profile?
    [*]Agree: Antvasima, Agnaa, me, Flashlight237 (Neanderthal's stay)
    [*]Disagree: Crabwhale, DarkDragonMedeus, Flashlight237 (Cro-magnon's removal)
    [*]Neutral:

Spoiler: Other points

I wanted to point out that real Homo Sapiens technically have powers & abilities by our site's standards. But their profiles are not allowed anyways by the site's rules, we should be fine.

Consensus: The heart of the matter is that powers and abilities are specifically superpowers & real homo sapiens' abilities aren't allowed. I'm fine if that goes through since we haven't had a IRL human profile for the past 13 years.

• Other points: The real homo sapiens have abilities, but that doesn't mandate that all human profiles should have the abilities unless the fiction stresses that they do (Agnaa)
• There's only a rather low usefulness for an average human profile & it would be more liable since it goes against our rules & site's intentions even with precautions like "matchbanning" the profile. I'm pretty much one of the only people that explored such a concept on my own & in a blog. I figured we're fine without real people profiles unless there's a really good reason for it.

 

[H3110l12345I20]

first bump

 

[H3110l12345I20]

bump

 

[H3110l12345I20]

bump

 

[H3110l12345I20]

bump

 

[H3110l12345I20]

bump

 

[Flashlight237]

As a real-life supporter, technically Neanderthals and Cro-Magnon people are okay here (neanderthals more so since I feel Cro-Magnons might be a little too close, idk). I mean they same just as much of our DNA as chimpanzees (our closest living relatives) do if I recall correctly. That and unlike us humans who are largely capable of tasks such as, well, making this website, Neanderthal and Cro-Magnon people were largely animalistic in the same way Chimpanzees are. Can't say we've really assessed the abilities of either, however.

 

[H3110l12345I20]

As a real-life supporter, technically Neanderthals and Cro-Magnon people are okay here (neanderthals more so since I feel Cro-Magnons might be a little too close, idk). I mean they same just as much of our DNA as chimpanzees (our closest living relatives) do if I recall correctly. That and unlike us humans who are largely capable of tasks such as, well, making this website, Neanderthal and Cro-Magnon people were largely animalistic in the same way Chimpanzees are. Can't say we've really assessed the abilities of either, however.

Intelligence: Chimps have the intelligence of a human toddler. While both can think the same stuff, homo sapiens brains develop at a more rapid pace than chimps during our first 2 years of our lives. Prehistoric humans have hunted down bigger animals like mammoths in groups. I even shown that they did develop modern human behavior by 50 thousand years ago, so they should be different than chimps.

Relation: We're more closer to prehistoric homo sapiens & neanderthals than chimps. The former & latter is significantly more recent than chimps (400,000 years ago > 9.3-6.5 million years ago). The profile on the neanderthal even states they're more related to us than us to chimps.

Abilities: Physically, neanderthals are the most closely related & Cro-magnons are a prehistoric version of us. They lived in tougher environments & would've encountered other hostile hominids & animals. Stuff like rage power & limited pain tolerance carries over due to the need to get out of danger alive (as stated in sources for the fight-or-flight response). That danger includes the dangers of the environment they lived in.

 

[H3110l12345I20]

bump

 

[H3110l12345I20]

bump

 

[H3110l12345I20]

bump

 

[Antvasima]

@DarkDragonMedeus @Mr._Bambu @Celestial_Pegasus @Wokistan @Ultima_Reality @Elizhaa @Qawsedf234 @ByAsura @Sir_Ovens @Damage3245 @Starter_Pack @Abstractions @LordGriffin1000 @Colonel_Krukov @SamanPatou @GyroNutz @Firestorm808 @Everything12 @Maverick_Zero_X @Crabwhale @Agnaa @Just_a_Random_Butler

What do you think about this?

 

[Crabwhale]

As a real-life supporter, technically Neanderthals and Cro-Magnon people are okay here (neanderthals more so since I feel Cro-Magnons might be a little too close, idk). I mean they same just as much of our DNA as chimpanzees (our closest living relatives) do if I recall correctly.

This is very false.

Humans and Neanderthals are part of the same genus, the genus Homo. Chimpanzees are of the genus Pan, making them very far removed relatively speaking. For Cro-Magnons, there is absolutely no basis for argument whatsoever; they're literally just a group of anatomically modern humans that inhabited mainland Europe and interbred with the Neanderthal population.

Normal people technically have base powers & abilities contrary to belief

Spoiler: Points

• Conventional Bodily Weaponry: Our bites are a dirty move that has been used in street fights (& they’re quite potent). We also have nails that are capable of puncturing human skin, but they’re trash in a normal street fight besides as distraction.
• Rage Power: Our fight-or-flight response is capable of enhancing our senses, attention & strength temporarily. There’s even context that when pushed to our physical limits, we undergo hysterical strength. Hysterical strength is a known phenomena where humans have a temporary burst of superstrength in highly stressed out situations. It pushes us from using our 67% normal strength to 100% of our strength (on par with chimps, since 100/67 = 1.5 times stronger than normal). While there’s other sources that suggest that our normal strength is lower, Zatorsky’s research is the most consistent. The reason why rage power is here is because since anger causes stress & stress can lead to increased strength in certain situations
• Limited Pain Tolerance: We have stress-induced analgesia. It temporarily suppresses people’s sense of pain. A person may not notice injuries to themselves for hours to weeks after a stressful situation.

Problem is, there’s going to be that one guy who tries to make a 10-B profile on some random 10-B fictional character without powers based off of these abilities.

Solution: Restrict profiles that have only these common abilities unless they’re notable as stated in the rules is one, but what happens if X character is from the human race that’s proven to have either of these abilities? Also, we already a policy intended to restrict IRL people. Why not continue to follow its intentions & say that we mean all animals except IRL homo sapiens?

This may be technically accurate but goes completely against the spirit of our indexing. The whole point of a superpower is the fact that it is superior to anything displayed by ordinary or even extraordinary people. Our bite wounds being nasty isn't a superpower. Our fight-or-flight response isn't a superpower. Our ability to shrug off injuries due to epinephrine flooding our system isn't a superpower. They're things literally any of us without a very compromised physiology can do.

 

[H3110l12345I20]

This may be technically accurate but goes completely against the spirit of our indexing. The whole point of a superpower is the fact that it is superior to anything displayed by ordinary or even extraordinary people. Our bite wounds being nasty isn't a superpower. Our fight-or-flight response isn't a superpower. Our ability to shrug off injuries due to epinephrine flooding our system isn't a superpower. They're things literally any of us without a very compromised physiology can do.

That's the point of the post? We have high-end feats of men being able to kill a leopard & hold out against a hyena with their bare hands.

We include low powered characters in accordance to this site's editing rules. We also have characters that don't have superpowers that are notable in their verses like Big Smoke, & Saul Goodman.

I know that the powers & abilities front has already been dealt with by the wiki rules. Unless you or anyone else has something to add, Wiki rules, common sense & sticking to the purpose of this site is going to make things fine here.

Although 2 quick questions, the rules make it extremely hard for this scenario to happen. But given the large volume of fiction humans wrote, what happens if "X character follows the wiki's rules & only has some either ability listed in my post?" What if "a notable & well written 10-B/10-A regularly has shown the ability to shrug off injuries like normal people?"

 

[Crabwhale]

That's the point of the post? We have high-end feats of men being able to kill a leopard & hold out against a hyena with their bare hands.

I'd like to see the source of either of these. Also that's an AP issue, not a powers and abilities one.

We include low powered characters in accordance to this site's editing rules. We also have characters that don't have superpowers that are notable in their verses like Big Smoke, & Saul Goodman.

And notice how neither of them have Rage Power or Natural Weaponry or anything of the kind. We consider Natural Weaponry a superpower because it is superior to anything a human can do. A gorilla has ridiculous jaw strength and incisor teeth that can never be matched by any human being, for instance.

 

[H3110l12345I20]

I'd like to see the source of either of these. Also that's an AP issue, not a powers and abilities one.

?

Rage Power can be linked to attack potency by increasing a person's strength. We have these leopard & hyena feats. Hysterical strength can make you 1.5 times stronger than normal, that would make your strength on par with a chimp.

And notice how neither of them have Rage Power or Natural Weaponry or anything of the kind. We consider Natural Weaponry a superpower because it is superior to anything a human can do. A gorilla has ridiculous jaw strength and incisor teeth that can never be matched by any human being, for instance.

The upper end of a domestic cat bite is 75 psi & apparently we consider their teeth as bodily weaponry on their official page on-site.

Like, I get that a power has to be special but an ability is something that you can do (& we restrict it to the powers we have on site for indexing purposes). Since where in these pages does it say it has to be a superpower in those pages (mentioning pain tolerance, rage power, bodily weaponry)? Not every ability on a character's profile has to be a superpower. We have peak human physical characteristics for example.

Like I get that superpowers are a reason to separate real people, but what are we intending to do with this info?

& what are we going to do with the Cro-magnon & Neanderthal pages?

 

[Crabwhale]

Rage Power can be linked to attack potency by increasing a person's strength. We have these leopard & hyena feats. Hysterical strength can make you 1.5 times stronger than normal, that would make your strength on par with a chimp.

The figures for chimp strength vary a lot depending on who you ask and when. It's one of the most misinformation fuelled animal factoids I've ever seen, even.

The leopard feat is basically dura negation (and I hate using the term for a real life thing, believe me). The man went for the throat, didn't let go. That doesn't show an ability to physically overpower a leopard, it just means he positioned himself just right to stay out of its attack range and not get thrown off.

The hyena attack is even less supportive. No mention of the hyena's size or species, which are important. I'd rather not debate this point much more though, since scaling AP in real life is an exercise in futility.

The upper end of a domestic cat bite is 75 psi & apparently we consider their teeth as bodily weaponry on their official page on-site.

Because a cat's teeth are proportionally more deadly a weapon than ours are. They're bigger and sharper than the teeth of a human taking into account size differences.

Like, I get that a power has to be special but an ability is something that you can do (& we restrict it to the powers we have on site for indexing purposes). Since where in these pages does it say it has to be a superpower in those pages (mentioning pain tolerance, rage power, bodily weaponry)? Not every ability on a character's profile has to be a superpower. We have peak human physical characteristics for example.

Again, refer to my comment on being technically correct but spiritually wrong. We're abusing the heart if not the letter of power and ability pages to add them, if we do add them. Sure you could add Rage Power, Natural Weaponry, etc to a human page. But then you'd have to add to EVERY human page on the wiki. Every single one. Do you get the inherent problem of the concept now?

 

[H3110l12345I20]

The figures for chimp strength vary a lot depending on who you ask and when. It's one of the most misinformation fuelled animal factoids I've ever seen, even.

The leopard feat is basically dura negation (and I hate using the term for a real life thing, believe me). The man went for the throat, didn't let go. That doesn't show an ability to physically overpower a leopard, it just means he positioned himself just right to stay out of its attack range and not get thrown off.

The hyena attack is even less supportive. No mention of the hyena's size or species, which are important. I'd rather not debate this point much more though, since scaling AP in real life is an exercise in futility.

I've been with Deleted Username & we've identified the hyena as the stripped hyena. We consider the hyena as around 10-A in strength. The leopard feats seem less impressive now

Although I respect your decision to not debate the hyena thing, AP joules in IRL is messy in practice.

Again, refer to my comment on being technically correct but spiritually wrong. We're abusing the heart if not the letter of power and ability pages to add them, if we do add them. Sure you could add Rage Power, Natural Weaponry, etc to a human page. But then you'd have to add to EVERY human page on the wiki. Every single one. Do you get the inherent problem of the concept now?

Oh... to be honest, we don't really need them to be on every human profile on site, considering that we've been able to get through 13 years without an actual IRL human profile. Besides,

A: I didn't intend to say that these abilities should be allowed on each human page. I wanted to note that this is true & we should continue what we've been doing with our standards on with "X human characters."

B: What are we going to do with this info? Powers like social influencing, martial arts & peak human strength is achievable by people in IRL. We have more realistic characters that have realistic powers to a realistic way like Saul.

We could set a boundary line here: "if X character has any other ability besides ones normal people generally have, they should be allowed on-site, along with said ability. Although modern humans generally have rage power, conventional bodily weaponry & limited pain tolerance, they're not allowed due to missing the point of the powers and abilities pages"

I presume the point of powers & abilities pages is to have them on powers beyond that of normal people. Although correct me or be more specific on the orginal intentions of the powers and abilities pages if I'm wrong.

C: You recgonized the Cro-magnon & Neanderthal page issue, should we keep talking about the real life human powers & abilities topic, or the Cro-magnon & Neanderthal page issue first?

 

[Agnaa]

@Agnaa

What do you think about this?

I currently have 18 threads in my "to-evaluate" backlog, I've added this to the list, and will get to it eventually.

 

[DarkDragonMedeus]

I mainly agree with Crabwhale.

 

[H3110l12345I20]

bumpity.

 

[H3110l12345I20]

bump

 

[H3110l12345I20]

bump

 

[Antvasima]

What are the staff conclusions here so far?

 

[H3110l12345I20]

What are the staff conclusions here so far?

I didn't intend to have the "technically, IRL humans have powers and abilities" to have any significance, but it's all likely going to be rejected anyways. The reason why is that the heart of the matter of powers and abilities is that they're supposed to be superpowers (powers beyond any human or extraordinary human).

While I don't mind having this part rejected, some people in real life that can be subjectively considered extraordinary by most people do techically have some of these powers and abilities.

Spoiler: Points for unusual people

Like peak human physical characteristics as a power can be applied to extraordinary or unusual people Mike Tyson in his prime. He's experienced & trained to have the most powerful punches & withstand punches from other comparable boxers.

We also have Frank Richards & Ferraro having peak human durability in their respective areas. Ferraro can withstand the energy equivalent of a full sledgehammer swing towards his skull & Richards withstanding full sledgehammer swings to the stomach.

These points & the like haven't been addressed. But we can always disallow abilities if they're comparable or lower than normal people (like not giving human characters bodily weaponry for biting with ordinary bites when anyone can do it). I don't mind waiting a billion years for something like this to be completed too.

 

[Antvasima]

@DarkDragonMedeus @Mr._Bambu @Celestial_Pegasus @Wokistan @Ultima_Reality @Elizhaa @Qawsedf234 @ByAsura @Sir_Ovens @Damage3245 @Starter_Pack @Abstractions @LordGriffin1000 @Colonel_Krukov @SamanPatou @GyroNutz @Firestorm808 @Everything12 @Maverick_Zero_X @Crabwhale @Agnaa @Just_a_Random_Butler

Are anyof you willing to help us reach a conclusion here please?

 

[Agnaa]

@Agnaa

Are anyof you willing to help us reach a conclusion here please?

I currently have 23 threads in my "to-evaluate" backlog, I've added this to the list, and will get to it eventually.

 

[Antvasima]

Okay. Thank you for helping out.

 

[DarkDragonMedeus]

Not sure what else I need to say, but I could see others input.

 

[LordGriffin1000]

Honestly I'm not sure I can say much here. I get what the OP is trying to say and Crabwhale's responses but I don't dabble in real world profile stuff so don't really have an opinion on this as a hole.

 

[Antvasima]

Okay. Thanks anyway.

 

[Firestorm808]

So the question is should we keep primitive human profiles?

 

[Antvasima]

It seems so, yes.

 

[Firestorm808]

Are there any significant differences that would make it worth a separate page from the standard human profile instead of a key?

 

[H3110l12345I20]

Are there any significant differences that would make it worth a separate page from the standard human profile instead of a key?

Physically & mentally, they're more fit to survive in their respective habitats compared to modern people. Prehistoric humans were actually intelligent too, they knew their prey & environments well for their own survival. However, they weren't as knowledgeable as modern humans in modern concepts.

If this is the case that they're staying, should we add a note on their profiles in regards to this since we're morally against living, breathing people?

 

[Crabwhale]

Are there any significant differences that would make it worth a separate page from the standard human profile instead of a key?

Neanderthals are a separate subspecies. Up to you if that constitutes enough basis for staying or not.

Cro-Magnons are literally just anatomically modern humans. That's the very definition of early modern human even, which they fall under. Sure, there are several differences in brain size and bone density, but that really don't constitute significant change necessary to differentiate a whole profile for them.

 

[H3110l12345I20]

Neanderthals are a separate subspecies. Up to you if that constitutes enough basis for staying or not.

Cro-Magnons are literally just anatomically modern humans. That's the very definition of early modern human even, which they fall under. Sure, there are several differences in brain size and bone density, but that really don't constitute significant change necessary to differentiate a whole profile for them.

The meat of the dispute on the neanderthals & cro-magnons is that they're mentally comparable to real world people by 50 thousand years ago. The former species is actually the closest relative to humans too.

Real world people shouldn't be here because they're morally living people & creating real life human profiles derails the purpose of the site. Considering this site has been here for 13 years, I don't think we need IRL human reference points from an info blog.

The differences between the Cro-magnon & real people could be reasoning for how they could stay. But how do we address the issue that they're mentally comparable to real world hunter-gatherers?

 

[Crabwhale]

I don't understand your supposition, Cro-Magnons ARE real people. They're responsible for art, culture and more on the European continent. They do not possess much that differentiates from us, besides slight anatomical differences and the passage of time.

 

[H3110l12345I20]

I don't understand your supposition, Cro-Magnons ARE real people. They're responsible for art, culture and more on the European continent. They do not possess much that differentiates from us, besides slight anatomical differences and the passage of time.

Well, they aren't living & breathing in their initial forms, & they were physically & mentally more fit to survive in their respective habitats compared to modern people. They lived in a different environment than modern african hunter-gatherer groups. That's the only differences I could think of. Neanderthals' only difference between Homo Sapiens is that they're different species. Despite this, they were like homo sapiens (us). They even shared human behaviors too

Since it's confirmed here that Cro-magnons are real world people, the wiki rules dictate that Cro-magnons & Neanderthals should be removed.

However, we do have an official character page that involves the character being durable enough to withstand hits from neanderthals & pop culture depictions of Neanderthals in fiction. Do you think that we should keep the Neanderthal page as a reference point & put a note on there for why it's kept, or should we remove it as per wiki rules & moral standards?

 

[Crabwhale]

Cavemen in fiction usually have ridiculously overblown strength feats, so the reference point isn't that important in my opinion. Furthermore, our standards for athletic and peak humans should do the trick when discussing any realistic depiction of Neanderthal or Cro-Magnon characters.