- 3,227
- 3,556
Yeah, ok? Wasn't directed to you. Lol.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Yeah, ok? Wasn't directed to you. Lol.
Your comment is misrepresenting the staff members who have contributed here using words that came from my mouth in jest. idc if you were referring to me, you're implicitly misrepresenting me as well.Yeah, ok? Wasn't directed to you. Lol.
Comment from him is true, i don't see why you would feel offended, given that this is what is happening here, people barely read it and already disagreed.Your comment is misrepresenting the staff members who have contributed here using words that came from my mouth in jest. idc if you were referring to me, you're implicitly misrepresenting me as well.
I'm not offended, and it's clear in my comment what I didn't like about it.His comment is true, i don't see why you would feel offended, given that this is what is happening here, people barely read it and already disagreed.
Look, let me be direct : feel how you wanna feel. I ain't playing your game.Your comment is misrepresenting the staff members who have contributed here using words that came from my mouth in jest. idc if you were referring to me, you're implicitly misrepresenting me as well.
No idea what you're talking about here. You can't seriously be judging someone off of liking a comment?Look, let me be direct : feel how you wanna feel. I ain't playing your game.
I'm not speaking to you, but to Damage. Your comment just gave me the opportunity to address an issue I had.
He's liking a comment which it clearly Isn't a misinterpretation of what HE thinks. He made that clear in the past.
Besides, people doubting his fairness? He's got only himself to blame.
I don't think he's wrong, since there were several times you just disagreed because you didn't like things, like now that you're doing.No idea what you're talking about here. You can't seriously be judging someone off of liking a comment?
I never even said I was planning on making a thread to de-composite the cosmology. I said that I planned that months ago.
You're more the welcome to doubt the reasons for my voting... but don't make up false accusations on here, okay?
Ngl here, but in my country there is a saying: without fire there is no smoke. There is a reason for why accusation suddenly come out, aren't no way people suddenly throwing out accusation without knowing the target of the accusation. Sometime, it will be nice if people reflect on themselves and question that why i get accused, rather than keep the mindset: i always right and will never be wrongYou're more the welcome to doubt the reasons for my voting... but don't make up false accusations on here, okay?
I don't care. If I just agreed with the thread would you have said "You're only agreeing with it because you like Dragon Ball"?I don't think he's wrong, since there were several times you just disagreed because you didn't like things, like now that you're doing.
Ngl here, but in my country there is a saying: without fire there is no smoke. There is a reason for why accusation suddenly come out, aren't no way people suddenly throwing out accusation without knowing the target of the accusation. Sometime, it will be nice if people reflect on themselves and question that why i get accused, rather than keep the mindset: i always right and will never be wrong
I would ask twice, knowing you i know that you automatically disagree.I don't care. If I just agreed with the thread would you have said "You're only agreeing with it because you like Dragon Ball"?
I have seen people do this. SoI don't care. If I just agreed with the thread would you have said "You're only agreeing with it because you like Dragon Ball"?
I mean, yeah you can do whatever you want, but when the accusation start piling up to a certain degree, that mean something is wrong, because they can't accuse you if you don't have any ground for them to based on that to accuse, so.......I repeat; I don't care about random user's accusations. I just think they needlessly fill up the thread and get off-topic.
I'm back.I mean, yeah you can do whatever you want, but when the accusation start piling up to a certain degree, that mean something is wrong, because they can't accuse you if you don't have any ground for them to based on that to accuse, so.......
Beside, staffs is the face wiki, you guys get promoted, have authority, at the same time responsibility, it will be not nice if staffs keep destroying wiki reputation rather than making it go up
And please, can y'all stop pretending that you don't care? You, we,cared enough to talk about it. We felt involved, so we do care about it.
It's not true that we don't care. Those small details are part of what led people to not trust us.
Everything you are saying is irrelevant. Take it up to HR if his conduct as staff is in question.I'm back.
At best it's a misinterpretation, sure. Let's say it is, if the person or people involved are always the same, putting the blame on one side is absolutely not the way to go.
And btw, I need to say this out loud since I think this is important for us all, but the people who get accused, staff wise, are pretty often the same ones, independently of the verse involved.
My comment isn't based on nothing.
And please, can y'all stop pretending that you don't care? You, we,cared enough to talk about it. We felt involved, so we do care about it.
It's not true that we don't care. Those small details are part of what led people to not trust us anymore.
I'm sorry,who are you?Everything you are saying is irrelevant.
The issue is that they’re misinterpreting the argument. Mav, Deagon, and DDM don’t even seem to know what the crt is trying to achieve based on what they said. Mav liking a comment that said we’re trying to merge the canon and manga into one storyline when that isn’t the case. DDM mentioned how he disagreed with that, but was fine with taking the elements. The thing is we never argued that in the first place, we only wanted to take the elements applied similarly to how we treat DBZ Kakarot. So basically he agreed with what we were suggesting and disagreed with something we didn’t even argue.dragon ball supporters when someone disagrees:
The issue is that they’re misinterpreting the argument. Mav, Deagon, and DDM don’t even seem to know what the crt is trying to achieve based on what they said. Mav liking a comment that said we’re trying to merge the canon and manga into one storyline when that isn’t the case. DDM mentioned how he disagreed with that, but was fine with taking the elements. The thing is we never argued that in the first place, we only wanted to take the elements applied similarly to how we treat DBZ Kakarot.
Could you ping them and get them to clarify if they’re aware of that? Since the whole time we were pretty much arguing what DDM agreed with. (The other stuff DDM said we never argued though)Only my first comment was asking about if it was merging the anime & manga together, and that was answered right away. I can't speak for the others.
1. We have seen the usual "macrocosm" visual we're familiar with in the super manga.Well, I think there are differences between GT and Super U7 universe:
1. Universe 7 is shown as a giant sphere
2. Universe 7 is linked with universe 6
3. Universe 7 has only 28 planets with life
There are more, but I don't think you can use these statements and apply it to GT
I don't think them sharing the same contents is also counted for the merging3. Universe 7 has only 28 planets with life
Thank you so much for your attention, you're amazing, manThis CRT became (inevitably) a crapshoot, it's very disheartening when arguments spill over into questioning the integrity of individuals and misunderstandings/miscommunication that lead to derailment.
The premise of the CRT was to further solidify the shared cosmology of Dragon Ball with potentially different backstories, development and power-levels for establish characters from different timelines (e.g DB minus Bardock and Toei Bardock both exist in the same greater cosmology but are from different continuities and don't scale to each other) based on already accepted threads, it's not to make "everything is canon" and the crosscaling that comes alongside it (iirc DBS and DBGT have two completely different scaling and AP values in tier 2) and looking at the evidence I find myself actually agreeing with the CRT.
Also I wish peeps would keep that same scrutiny energy when it comes to all high tier indexing and not just the usually popular franchises. I've legit seen similar indexing and content get approved here in the fraction of the time it takes popular franchises like Dragon Ball to pass a revisionwhile providing less evidence from more dubious sources but that's whataboutism territory so I'll drop it... for now...
Tremendously grateful for your input, thanks!Oh, so not a continuity merge, but just a general statement that lore related things regarding the size of various planets or locations or size of the afterlife should apply to the original canon as well? I suppose I am more neutral but leaning towards being fine with using those for reference purposes.
Thank you very much, broOh, so not a continuity merge, but just a general statement that lore related things regarding the size of various planets or locations or size of the afterlife should apply to the original canon as well? I suppose I am more neutral but leaning towards being fine with using those for reference purposes.
Dude, i asked already, remove me from the disagree sectionThank you very much, bro
Just a small thing, DDM Is neutral leaning towards agreeing, Put him in the Neutral section, not the agreeing one (For now)Thank you very much, bro
It is already accepted that cosmology is composite, this is just the justification for it still being used.Does all that information also apply to DBS?
Well yeah, we already accept all the continuities as having the same composite cosmology so if the thread's just adding supplementary evidence to solidlfy it then anything which is present in the Toei anime applies to Super by defaultDoes all that information also apply to DBS?
Yes, the elements pretty much. Could you ping the Mav and Deagon to clarify if they’re aware of what we’re trying to argue.Oh, so not a continuity merge, but just a general statement that lore related things regarding the size of various planets or locations or size of the afterlife should apply to the original canon as well? I suppose I am more neutral but leaning towards being fine with using those for reference purposes.
@Maverick_Zero_X @DeagonxYes, the elements pretty much. Could you ping the Mav and Deagon to clarify if they’re aware of what we’re trying to argue.
Tag others too to help with this, bro
Thank you for your supportDragon Ball just can't catch a break here.... Anyways, I agree,if that even matters now