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

[H3110l12345I20]

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.

Can you sum up the standards for athletic & peak humans for realistic depictions? I can only understand the athletic part.

 

[Crabwhale]

Our AP, Speed, Durability and Lifting Strength pages have them all listed. As does the Peak Human Physical Characteristics page.

 

[H3110l12345I20]

Our AP, Speed, Durability and Lifting Strength pages have them all listed. As does the Peak Human Physical Characteristics page.

So, we're leaning to deletion of both pages, am I correct?

Wouldn't 10-A in AP & Durability, & Athletic Human in speed be oversimplistic for realistic depictions? Although awhile ago, females of Cro-magnons & Neandethals were rated at least 10-B since they were weaker than males. Plus, although the neanderthal's running speed varies depending on the study, prehistoric homo sapiens were confirmed to run around peak human speed. There's also a study where it's implied that athletic men could throw spears to speeds in superhuman level range. So what do you think we should do with this info?

 

[Crabwhale]

prehistoric homo sapiens were confirmed to run around peak human speed

I take issue with this interpretation since to my knowledge this individual is the only one to have estimated their speed to have been this high. I also see any evidence of early modern humans and similar ancestor species as being superior to the top athletes of today as being EXTREMELY suspect, as they did not have the nutritional, training and recovery knowledge that we have today.

 

[H3110l12345I20]

I take issue with this interpretation since to my knowledge this individual is the only one to have estimated their speed to have been this high. I also see any evidence of early modern humans and similar ancestor species as being superior to the top athletes of today as being EXTREMELY suspect, as they did not have the nutritional, training and recovery knowledge that we have today.

They were evolved to be athletic in endurance & upper body strength. The former is from the fact that they regularly used persistance running to outexhaust their prey. The latter is from the fact that they did use weapons a modern person wouldn't easily use like spears. They also lived in more dangerous environments than today & would be encouraged to have at least some form of athletic strength sustain their hunter-gatherer lifestyle.

Proof: It's implied that comparable hominids were exposed to athletic stresses since their adolescence. Their shins were more reinforced than country athletes ran 80 to 100 miles per week since adolescence, implying they ran very long distances to get what they need. They had an active lifestyle & healthy diet that allowed them to do stuff like regularly run under heavy weight in uneven terrain unlike modern athletic runners. Heck, the last scan I linked says: "They were much stronger than the long-distance runners of today," says Shaw. In a study he published earlier this year, he concluded that "the people back then were monsters by comparison. What you see today is quite pathetic."" This is comming from "Colin Shaw of Cambridge University's Phenotypic Adaptability" too.

On their upper arms, IDK how strong they should be but they should be strong enough to be capable of contending with or overpowering modern athletes.

Edit: Just because they didn't have the stuff we have today doesn't mean they weren't encouraged to be more athletic than normal athletes btw. As for the recovery part, they did have impressive prehistoric knowledge in that area during their time. The links are there for you to see.

 

[Crabwhale]

I'm not going to be the one to doubt an official study, but I think you and it are missing the point.

Modern runners don't have that strength because...they don't train for strength? Their intention is to run the best that they can, not to haul game alongside them as well. This is why you see a decreased level of strength in them as opposed to ancient humans. Specificity in training is very important.

And I would like to also point out that none of these studies seem to have taken into account the people who actually train for strength. You know, strength athletes. Martial artists. Armwrestlers. There's that specificity in training again. In that regard, with the advent of modern technology and more importantly performance enhancing substances, I am inclined to seriously doubt ancient people could match up to the level of physical strength displayed by top STRENGTH athletes alive today.

As for speed, even the articles you linked compounded the unreliability and questionable nature of measuring speed by stride length that I mentioned in my previous comment.

As for the recovery part, they did have impressive prehistoric knowledge in that area during their time. The links are there for you to see.

A cool factoid, but that's not what I meant. Recovery in the context of athletic activity means the ability of your muscles and central nervous system to recuperate after strain. Not injuries. Things like hot-and-cold therapy, hyperbaric therapy and professional masseurs fall under this umbrella. Recovery methods have been revolutionary in the fitness world in terms of pushing performance (at least in regards to strength), and this is factor that early modern humans most certainly did not have.

 

[H3110l12345I20]

I'm not going to be the one to doubt an official study, but I think you and it are missing the point.

Modern runners don't have that strength because...they don't train for strength? Their intention is to run the best that they can, not to haul game alongside them as well. This is why you see a decreased level of strength in them as opposed to ancient humans. Specificity in training is very important.

And I would like to also point out that none of these studies seem to have taken into account the people who actually train for strength. You know, strength athletes. Martial artists. Armwrestlers. There's that specificity in training again. In that regard, with the advent of modern technology and more importantly performance enhancing substances, I am inclined to seriously doubt ancient people could match up to the level of physical strength displayed by top STRENGTH athletes alive today.

As for speed, even the articles you linked compounded the unreliability and questionable nature of measuring speed by stride length that I mentioned in my previous comment.

A cool factoid, but that's not what I meant. Recovery in the context of athletic activity means the ability of your muscles and central nervous system to recuperate after strain. Not injuries. Things like hot-and-cold therapy, hyperbaric therapy and professional masseurs fall under this umbrella. Recovery methods have been revolutionary in the fitness world in terms of pushing performance (at least in regards to strength), and this is factor that early modern humans most certainly did not have.

"missing the point"

Ok. Since there's miscommunication, I'll restate your points & I'll try to refute them.

1: We don't have too much concrete knowledge on their top speed. We only have 1 individual's speed recorded.

That's true, but that doesn't mean we should disregard the fact that evolution has adapted these humans to their fullest potential in the time evolution has.

"Evolution only encourages the evolution of things that would be an advantage & increase the things’ evolutionary fitness, not the other way around. This causes adaptations that are beneficial to the organism to be enhanced or possibly to their fullest potential over the course of countless generations."

The scan for the estimated speed for the Cro-magnon's top speed involved Aborigines. They were also hunter-gatherers, & homo sapiens evolved to run long distances. We would've evolved the likely estimated top speed since much of the environments' animals that humans encountered didn't have the stamina for long term running. Evolution would pushed the humans' speed at its full potential just to maximize the persistence hunting strategy's effectiveness. They have countless generations for much of the Cro-magnon's persistence hunting to be casual for them or at their full potential.

And you wanted how hard they trained for speed? It's a combination of education from their previous generation & practice. There's love, & pressure for survival & competition during their time that would push this speed. Same goes for strength.

2: They don't have the training like top strength modern athletes. They don't succeed normal athletes in physical strength. They don't have the recovery modern people have.

The second point is true. I was trying to disprove the point that just because they didn't have the training of modern athletes, doesn't mean they didn't regularly expose themselves to similar or slightly more stresses than normal athletes.

Sure, they're not as strong as mike tyson, but their adaptations in their arms suggest that they're very experienced & trained from a young age to utilize tools like spears. Education from the previous generation & experience from adolescence would've significantly increased their upper body strength. Hence, they're athletic human in lifting strength.

+around the ages of 8-14, a human's strength is mostly developed at that time, & the average age for people at the time is 30. Plenty of years for training & experience.

Also, they used their upper body strength to do daily activities like drag animal carcasses, lift heavy loads & move materials. Evolution & daily activities surrounding this would make them naturally strong here even when it's not training.

Technically, strengthened leg muscles would give stronger kicks, but that's 9-C, so I'll not go this route.

 

[Crabwhale]

Ok. Since there's miscommunication, I'll restate your points & I'll try to refute them.

1: We don't have too much concrete knowledge on their top speed. We only have 1 individual's speed recorded.

That's true, but that doesn't mean we should disregard the fact that evolution has adapted these humans to their fullest potential in the time evolution has.

"Evolution only encourages the evolution of things that would be an advantage & increase the things’ evolutionary fitness, not the other way around. This causes adaptations that are beneficial to the organism to be enhanced or possibly to their fullest potential over the course of countless generations."

The scan for the estimated speed for the Cro-magnon's top speed involved Aborigines. They were also hunter-gatherers, & homo sapiens evolved to run long distances. We would've evolved the likely estimated top speed since much of the environments' animals that humans encountered didn't have the stamina for long term running. Evolution would pushed the humans' speed at its full potential just to maximize the persistence hunting strategy's effectiveness. They have countless generations for much of the Cro-magnon's persistence hunting to be casual for them or at their full potential.

And you wanted how hard they trained for speed? It's a combination of education from their previous generation & practice. There's love, & pressure for survival & competition during their time that would push this speed. Same goes for strength.

That's all well and good, but since you mentioned evolution, I would like to point out that humans aren't evolved for sprinting.

We're persistence hunters, that chase down prey until its exhausted or literally tired to death. So mentioning evolutionary pressure in regards to human speed is ...off-kilter? I get kinda what you're trying to say, what with it being relative to modern humans, but it's a weird point to make when we're specifically adapted to not be very fast.

2: They don't have the training like top strength modern athletes. They don't succeed normal athletes in physical strength. They don't have the recovery modern people have.

The second point is true. I was trying to disprove the point that just because they didn't have the training of modern athletes, doesn't mean they didn't regularly expose themselves to similar or slightly more stresses than normal athletes.

Sure, they're not as strong as mike tyson, but their adaptations in their arms suggest that they're very experienced & trained from a young age to utilize tools like spears. Education from the previous generation & experience from adolescence would've significantly increased their upper body strength. Hence, they're athletic human in lifting strength.

I never disputed such a thing.

+around the ages of 8-14, a human's strength is mostly developed at that time

The article you're citing states that there's similar rates of development between the ages of 8-14, not that strength is mostly developed during that time. It isn't. No athlete reaches their peak performance during their late childhood to early adolescence. Specifically, strength trained through the decades typically reaches its peak between the ages of 30-35 in males, and around the early 40s in females.

 

[H3110l12345I20]

That's all well and good, but since you mentioned evolution, I would like to point out that humans aren't evolved for sprinting.

We're persistence hunters, that chase down prey until its exhausted or literally tired to death. So mentioning evolutionary pressure in regards to human speed is ...off-kilter? I get kinda what you're trying to say, what with it being relative to modern humans, but it's a weird point to make when we're specifically adapted to not be very fast.

I never disputed such a thing.

The article you're citing states that there's similar rates of development between the ages of 8-14, not that strength is mostly developed during that time. It isn't. No athlete reaches their peak performance during their late childhood to early adolescence. Specifically, strength trained through the decades typically reaches its peak between the ages of 30-35 in males, and around the early 40s in females.

I mean, for speed, the peak human speed listed does suggest the capabilities of our ancestors. But much of them lived in different environments than Austraila.

Wait, why am I disputing the fact that our ancestors weren't stronger than athletes? Even if they're not, they're naturally evolved to, have education & genetics from the previous generation, & have the pressure to be just as or possibly stronger than a normal athlete. Normal athletes conpensate for some of their recent ancestors not being athletic via stuff like training. Normal athletes are in different environments compared to Cro-magnons.

 

[H3110l12345I20]

bumpity.

That's all well and good, but since you mentioned evolution, I would like to point out that humans aren't evolved for sprinting.

We're persistence hunters, that chase down prey until its exhausted or literally tired to death. So mentioning evolutionary pressure in regards to human speed is ...off-kilter? I get kinda what you're trying to say, what with it being relative to modern humans, but it's a weird point to make when we're specifically adapted to not be very fast.

I never disputed such a thing.

The article you're citing states that there's similar rates of development between the ages of 8-14, not that strength is mostly developed during that time. It isn't. No athlete reaches their peak performance during their late childhood to early adolescence. Specifically, strength trained through the decades typically reaches its peak between the ages of 30-35 in males, and around the early 40s in females.

Still want to debate?

 

[Firestorm808]

Unless we have justification of prehumans being past peak human feats or baseline human abilities, I think it can be removed.

 

[Crabwhale]

Still want to debate?

I think I've said enough.

 

[H3110l12345I20]

Unless we have justification of prehumans being past peak human feats or baseline human abilities, I think it can be removed.

Clarify.

If you mean if prehistoric humans are past peak human or baseline human abilities, they fit the latter. They're stronger, more fit & they do have abilities that average joes don't have, like enhanced smell & weapon mastery of prehistoric weapons like spears. Them having athletic human in lifting strength puts them in peak human physical characteristics last time I recalled.

The thing here is that Cro-magnons were real, living people, & Neanderthals are comparable. By wiki rules, their existence is a double standard, that's what this thread is for.

Also, Crabwhale doesn't want to debate, but I think we need to know how to officially address this. Even though powers and abilities are meant to be superpowers spiritually, even regular humans have defacto powers and abilities.

 

[Firestorm808]

Clarify.

If you mean if prehistoric humans are past peak human or baseline human abilities, they fit the latter. They're stronger, more fit & they do have abilities that average joes don't have, like enhanced smell & weapon mastery of prehistoric weapons like spears. Them having athletic human in lifting strength puts them in peak human physical characteristics last time I recalled.

The thing here is that Cro-magnons were real, living people, & Neanderthals are comparable. By wiki rules, their existence is a double standard, that's what this thread is for.

Also, Crabwhale doesn't want to debate, but I think we need to know how to officially address this. Even though powers and abilities are meant to be superpowers spiritually, even regular humans have defacto powers and abilities.

I'm asking if Prehuman feats are impossible for a trained/special human to do?

 

[H3110l12345I20]

I'm asking if Prehuman feats are impossible for a trained/special human to do?

Define what's "prehuman." Prehuman could literally mean our fish ancestors in our evolutionary lineage.

If you're still refering to prehistoric humans, then yes. With training & regular practice, trained & special humans can preform the feats our ancestors did. A regular farmer can kill a Tiger with a spear, a regular person can kill a grizzly with a knife, & modern people survived injuries from 9-C animals. Our ancestors did something similar abeit with a lot more injury stamina.

This also includes physical strength feats like being able to deadlift as much as a Neanderthal.

 

[H3110l12345I20]

I forgot to mention that hysterical strength damages the body since it's strength exceeds the amount the body usually uses. So rage power should be stat amp.

Since no one is at a good conclusion with the things I noted out, I'll start thinking of one.

 

[H3110l12345I20]

Spoiler: Last thing to point out (for notable humans & 10-B human characters)

I know I haven't mentioned this but why not mention why being more fully precise on regular human characters' stats is going to be disallowed. Like I know a bunch of stuff on a regular human that when fully applied, it's going to feel like an average joe profile import. This is something that's going to happen. From a minimalist standpoint, this last one should be notable enough for notable 10-Bs & be slight enough to not hurt the wiki.

Anyone with enough upper body strength can throw something tens of feet away from them (I know its a baseball, but its there as an example of something that can be thrown a distance). We are born to throw things. I know there's going to be a big logistics issue on applying ths but, why does much of the regular humans on site have a "several meters via throwing objects" range rating?

Ok. Here's the suggestions:

Spoiler: Cro-magnon & Neanderthal pages

They were real people. The rules say that real people shouldn't be allowed & from what I've heard, there's 2 reasons for the rule existing. It's morally wrong for people (even underaged people on-site) to debate real people killing each other & this wiki should be about indexing fictional francises.

I see that that both pages will be removed eventually, but I still see the Neanderthal getting an info blog in the event we get a realistic fictional portrayal of one.

It's implied through prehistoric humans' bone structure that they were exposed to a lot more exercise in their lifestyle than normal athletes (another supporting source) despite lacking modern tech & training techiques. This should support the neanderthal's AP & speed, the former isn't going to change while the latter's likely going to be "At least Athletic Human, likely Peak Human (One was capable of running (peak human speed value). Despite being one individual, prehistoric humans exerted themselves far more than normal modern athlete runners)"

With this info, how should the info blog be like without turning it back into a profile?

Spoiler: Normal people have defacto Powers & Abilities

This might have the implication of having a regular 10-B without superpowers from a notable verse being on-site. It having only those 3 defacto powers I listed.

Since the purpose of the powers are supposed to be superpowers at heart, in the event that some guy decides to justify a not-so-notable profile I'll propose this:

We restrict giving characters with abilities comparable or lower abilities to a regular human's powers & abilities. We do this by either modifying the defacto powers and abilities of the average person or wiki rules so it doesn't apply normal people anymore.

 

[H3110l12345I20]

bump
vvv

Spoiler: Last thing to point out (for notable humans & 10-B human characters)

I know I haven't mentioned this but why not mention why being more fully precise on regular human characters' stats is going to be disallowed. Like I know a bunch of stuff on a regular human that when fully applied, it's going to feel like an average joe profile import. This is something that's going to happen. From a minimalist standpoint, this last one should be notable enough for notable 10-Bs & be slight enough to not hurt the wiki.

Anyone with enough upper body strength can throw something tens of feet away from them (I know its a baseball, but its there as an example of something that can be thrown a distance). We are born to throw things. I know there's going to be a big logistics issue on applying ths but, why does much of the regular humans on site have a "several meters via throwing objects" range rating?

Ok. Here's the suggestions:

Spoiler: Cro-magnon & Neanderthal pages

They were real people. The rules say that real people shouldn't be allowed & from what I've heard, there's 2 reasons for the rule existing. It's morally wrong for people (even underaged people on-site) to debate real people killing each other & this wiki should be about indexing fictional francises.

I see that that both pages will be removed eventually, but I still see the Neanderthal getting an info blog in the event we get a realistic fictional portrayal of one.

It's implied through prehistoric humans' bone structure that they were exposed to a lot more exercise in their lifestyle than normal athletes (another supporting source) despite lacking modern tech & training techiques. This should support the neanderthal's AP & speed, the former isn't going to change while the latter's likely going to be "At least Athletic Human, likely Peak Human (One was capable of running (peak human speed value). Despite being one individual, prehistoric humans exerted themselves far more than normal modern athlete runners)"

With this info, how should the info blog be like without turning it back into a profile?

Spoiler: Normal people have defacto Powers & Abilities

This might have the implication of having a regular 10-B without superpowers from a notable verse being on-site. It having only those 3 defacto powers I listed.

Since the purpose of the powers are supposed to be superpowers at heart, in the event that some guy decides to justify a not-so-notable profile I'll propose this:

We restrict giving characters with abilities comparable or lower abilities to a regular human's powers & abilities. We do this by either modifying the defacto powers and abilities of the average person or wiki rules so it doesn't apply normal people anymore.

 

[Firestorm808]

@Crabwhale

What are your thoughts on just having a single page to cover pre-human ancestors?

 

[Crabwhale]

That depends on what we define as "pre-human ancestors".

 

[H3110l12345I20]

@Crabwhale

What are your thoughts on just having a single page to cover pre-human ancestors?

What do you mean by prehuman though? Cro-magnons & Neanderthals are real people, the latter is mentally comparable to the former since they're like modern people.

 

[Firestorm808]

I would suppose those that fall under this Genus.

Homo - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[H3110l12345I20]

I would suppose those that fall under this Genus.

Homo - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Ok. So we're basically discussing what to do with the pages that relate genus Homo. Although that means pages like homo erectus will be removed from the site. Also, this thread started on the premise with Cro-magnons & Neanderthals are mentally comparable to real individuals.

 

[Crabwhale]

The genus Homo includes multiple species. I'm not sure exactly how to proceed since we've got both lion species and every elephant species listed as profiles under the same genus.

 

[H3110l12345I20]

The genus Homo includes multiple species. I'm not sure exactly how to proceed since we've got both lion species and every elephant species listed as profiles under the same genus.

I mean, what's wrong with kicking out profiles like homo erectus? This thread was orginally pointing out that Cro-magnons are real people & Neanderthals are comparable. Therefore, they should be removed. Are there any other species that are comparable to real people that are on-site as a profile?

Some lion & tiger species are different, but I assume they have universal characteristics that make them not too different from each other. I can always point out differences between hominids like homo erectus & homo sapiens Cro-magnons. But what's really the difference here? I agree.

I think someone could focus on putting info for Neanderthals first. If the genus homo is a problem, then that someone could put said info on the blog after Neanderthals.

 

[H3110l12345I20]

bump

 

[Qawsedf234]

What do you think about this?

I'm more with Crabwhale here. I don't see why the profiles should remain when they're just humans with slightly different average physical characteristics.

 

[Antvasima]

So what is the staff consensus here, and would somebody be willing to remove all of the links to the pages in question if we remove them?

 

[H3110l12345I20]

So what is the staff consensus here, and would somebody be willing to remove all of the links to the pages in question if we remove them?

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, me (removal of profiles. However, despite their primitive tech & capabilities, it's implied they exercised & exerted themselves far more than modern, average athletes. This gives Neanderthals & the like the ratings from their respective profiles))
• 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.
    • Counterpoint: However, there are extraordinary people in real life that technically have some of the powers and abilities on the site that aren't universal to every human (some people have peak human strength or durability -> Peak Human Physical Characteristics, martial artist have shown notable skill in holding out against a crowd of people -> martial arts, Ferdinand Waldo has shown learn almost anything in a short period of time -> accelerated development, etc)

This is basically it, but Crabwhale thought that he said enough. The counterpoints though haven't been adressed, an info blog on Neanderthals is indecisive (a staff interpreted this as an info blog for the genus homo when my point was focusing on Neanderthals & Cro-magnons), & people's ability to throw stuff for range hasn't been addressed.

 

[Antvasima]

Well, for what it is worth, I do not mind if we remove those pages, but cleanup work of all VSBW links to them is necessary afterwards.

 

[H3110l12345I20]

bump

 

[H3110l12345I20]

bump

 

[H3110l12345I20]

bump

 

[Agnaa]

I've only really read the OP, and I don't really understand the point of this thread, or what we're supposed to do.

I don't care whether the Cro-Magnon and Neanderthal profiles stay or go. They're in a much better place than they used to be, but I understand people's skittish-ness.

I don't get the point about humans having powers and abilities. Sure, we technically do, but unless the fiction stresses it we shouldn't consider apply them to every single human profile. And "lack of abilities" isn't the reason we don't have profiles for IRL humans.

I don't understand the point of the rest of the post.

 

[H3110l12345I20]

I've only really read the OP, and I don't really understand the point of this thread, or what we're supposed to do.

I don't care whether the Cro-Magnon and Neanderthal profiles stay or go. They're in a much better place than they used to be, but I understand people's skittish-ness.

I don't get the point about humans having powers and abilities. Sure, we technically do, but unless the fiction stresses it we shouldn't consider apply them to every single human profile. And "lack of abilities" isn't the reason we don't have profiles for IRL humans.

I don't understand the point of the rest of the post.

Thanks for your participation btw.

What do you want me to clarify if possible? What do you don't understand?

 

[Agnaa]

I've made that as clear as I can.

I've gone over every part of your post, talked about how I feel about some parts, and said I don't understand other parts. idk what else I can say.

If that doesn't help, maybe a place to start would be; is there anything you tried to get across that I didn't touch on in my post?

 

[H3110l12345I20]

I've made that as clear as I can.

I've gone over every part of your post, talked about how I feel about some parts, and said I don't understand other parts. idk what else I can say.

If that doesn't help, maybe a place to start would be; is there anything you tried to get across that I didn't touch on in my post?

How are the Cro-magnon & Neanderthal profiles in a better place? They are real people (the latter is mentally comparable to us) & our wiki rules should disallow such profiles on-site morally & by this site's purpose. Clarify.

The IRL people having defacto abilities was something I wanted to point out, but it had unintended implications on my part. Crabwhale was the one who stated that at heart, the powers & abilities are supposed to be superpowers. I pointed out that we have more realistic verses with abilities that anyone could achieve & that there are powers & abilities that extraordinary people could have.

 

[Agnaa]

How are the Cro-magnon & Neanderthal profiles in a better place? They are real people (the latter is mentally comparable to us) & our wiki rules should disallow such profiles on-site morally & by this site's purpose. Clarify.

They used to be 9-C, 9-B with weapons, which is a disgraceful exaggeration for species so close to our own.

I'm happy to draw the line at species, rather than whatever metric you're using to say they should be disallowed.

I see no moral issue or site purpose issue that should propel us to remove those profiles.

The issue I see with a homo sapien sapien profile is that it covers people alive today. If neanderthals were still around, I would be against creating profiles for them.

The IRL people having defacto abilities was something I wanted to point out, but it had unintended implications on my part. Crabwhale was the one who stated that at heart, the powers & abilities are supposed to be superpowers. I pointed out that we have more realistic verses with abilities that anyone could achieve & that there are powers & abilities that extraordinary people could have.

Yeah, as I said, they technically would, but that doesn't mandate that we create a profile for them, and those aren't things I think should be put on every profile of a human in fiction.

 

[H3110l12345I20]

How are the Cro-magnon & Neanderthal profiles in a better place? They are real people (the latter is mentally comparable to us) & our wiki rules should disallow such profiles on-site morally & by this site's purpose. Clarify.

They used to be 9-C, 9-B with weapons, which is a disgraceful exaggeration for species so close to our own.

I'm happy to draw the line at species, rather than whatever metric you're using to say they should be disallowed.

I see no moral issue or site purpose issue that should propel us to remove those profiles.

The issue I see with a homo sapien sapien profile is that it covers people alive today. If neanderthals were still around, I would be against creating profiles for them.

Okay, thanks for the input here.

The IRL people having defacto abilities was something I wanted to point out, but it had unintended implications on my part. Crabwhale was the one who stated that at heart, the powers & abilities are supposed to be superpowers. I pointed out that we have more realistic verses with abilities that anyone could achieve & that there are powers & abilities that extraordinary people could have.

Yeah, as I said, they technically would, but that doesn't mandate that we create a profile for them, and those aren't things I think should be put on every profile of a human in fiction.

I know, thanks for the input for this thing I had unintentional implications!

 

[Dalesean027]

Oooo this seems interesting