You misunderstand.
2 years back was when we first attempted the hypertimeline upgrade. As many of you remember, there was still plenty of discourse over whether or not the other Macrocosms being affected by time travel meant they all shared a single space-time. It was eventually pointed out that if the Macrocosms are to stay Low 2-C, then unless the staff wanted to downgrade them to 3-A, they’d
have to recognize the overarching timeline as Low 1-C. Even Ultima was arguing that whether the Timeline was Low 2-C or Low 1-C depended on the evidence for the Macrocosms being separate space-times, otherwise the wiki would go with the lower-end interpretation which is 3-A Macrocosms.
In comes DontTalkDT,
explaining to everyone (including Ultima) that there is no anti-middle ground where the Timeline is either Low 2-C or Low 1-C. There’s literally nothing preventing the Timeline from being a simple 2-C structure. He further elaborates on this model
here and
here, but this is the basic idea:
A cosmology that consists of an overarching timeline doesn’t need to be Low 1-C because spatiotemporal separation doesn’t inherently introduce new time axes. This means you can use a single time axis (that of the overarching timeline) to service multiple space-times, and the cosmology therefore doesn’t need to consist of two temporal dimensions.
Ultima even used DontTalk’s model to reject the Kingdom Hearts upgrade later. He explained that an overarching timeline isn’t proof of Low 1-C in itself and that in order to qualify for Low 1-C, you’d have to prove that the lesser space-times have their own temporal axes.
.
