- 3,099
- 3,340
We have a scan that literally says "There are infinite timelines."
-
This forum is strictly intended to be used by members of the VS Battles wiki. Please only register if you have an autoconfirmed account there, as otherwise your registration will be rejected. If you have already registered once, do not do so again, and contact Antvasima if you encounter any problems.
For instructions regarding the exact procedure to sign up to this forum, please click here. -
We need Patreon donations for this forum to have all of its running costs financially secured.
Community members who help us out will receive badges that give them several different benefits, including the removal of all advertisements in this forum, but donations from non-members are also extremely appreciated.
Please click here for further information, or here to directly visit our Patreon donations page. -
Please click here for information about a large petition to help children in need.
DxD 2-A Cosmology Upgrade CRT
- Thread starter MasqueTLDF
- Start date
- Status
- 686
- 150
- Thread starter
- #322
Compared to the "shoddy" evidence I have, the opponents in this discussion have NO evidence.
- 3,099
- 3,340
Yeah, the being vague part isn't helpful, if you have issue with the evidence just bring it up now why wait for a theoretical downgrade thread this is just really petty and weird.
- 686
- 150
- Thread starter
- #324
Staff is 3-1 in favor of my argument as well
- 3,099
- 3,340
Who's the one disgareeing? Cause Phoenks doesn't count as staff, it's only thread mods and admins.
- 11,234
- 10,136
You are using scans from a gacha game refrencing cosmology that is not proven to be canon to DxD AT ALL.
Literally nothing on the thread suggests it is canon. Just because the author worked on the game and had a cross over with it does NOT make it canon to DxD.
Also, staff opinions practically mean nothing when I literally showed DDM disagreeing with himself on a QnA thread from THIS year. And ActuallySpaceMan has been radio-silent ever since I @ed him back here.
Staff not doing their job properly doesn't mean anything to your arguments.
- 686
- 150
- Thread starter
- #327
- 4,886
- 5,678
Because the basis of Re:Build being canon is weak. It's just a crossover gacha game. Having involvement with people who worked on DxD isn't anything meaningful unless they actually say it's canon. Of course the writer wants his own work to be represented well too.
- 3,099
- 3,340
IIRC, Firestorm said he was leaning towards disagree, he wantd to see what other staff had to say
- 3,099
- 3,340
This is some crazy work, staff arguments don't suddenly matter because you didn't like them and think they didn't do their job.
Also the events of the game were referenced in DxD. Is that not canon enough for you?
- 686
- 150
- Thread starter
- #331
It is canon
Don't be disingenuous, there are two scans saying the author was a part of the writing team. It wasn't a game that had a crossover with DxD, it was a crossover game that prominently featured the DxD cast, was referenced in the source material, and had the author of DxD working on the writing for it. it fits VSBW's standards to a T.
They certainly mean more than yours and mine, they're kinda the authority on VSBW. And that was before the Timeline argument was presented, again, please don't be disingenuous.
I don't think it's them that's not doing their jobs correctly...
- 686
- 150
- Thread starter
- #332
If the author says he wrote it, it's canon. Simple as that.
- 686
- 150
- Thread starter
- #333
And if you guys really, truly believe I'm wrong... Why not try harder to attract more staff instead of trying to run away to another thread. Oh, I know why, it's because the staff keep siding with me instead of you and if I was actually wrong, that wouldn't happen. As the great Kendrick said, "Shape the stories how you want, hey, Drake, they're not slow"
- 4,886
- 5,678
Because the thread is 9 pages and most staff cant be arsed to go through that.
- 686
- 150
- Thread starter
- #335
All they'd need to do is look through the blog which is what the evidence and thread is based on. Just sounds like an excuse to me imo
Shiraito983
He/Him- 1,204
- 383
It already 9 pages and it has a 3:1 vote, just applied it later and waited for the downgrade if there would be
- 686
- 150
- Thread starter
- #337
Guess, I'll see Phoenks again in 3 months?
- 4,886
- 5,678
Downgrade threads after an upgrade can be made immediately afaik but might need to check back on the rule for that.
- 3,099
- 3,340
I believe it changed.
Shiraito983
He/Him- 1,204
- 383
mgk 2A was downgrade days after it was published
- 873
- 283
- 3,099
- 3,340
Nah, we'd win.
- 7,248
- 7,234
Wait. What? When did the 2-A get applied. Isn't this thread still getting staff input on it?
- 3,099
- 3,340
It got approved, then phoenks showed up, and we continued for 6 pages then Elizhaa agreed wtih the thread.
Really, it could have been closed earlier, but no other staff seemed to be showing up and we have been here a while.
- 11,234
- 10,136
I want to also mention that the staff to agreed to this thread agreed to it before they added scans from a random Gacha Game to support their 2-A arguments.
Said Gacha Game is absolutely not valid for scaling. I have VARIOUS reasons why but this thread is seriously a mess and I'd rather just release my own thread on it at this point.
And the original 2-A argument is completely, blatantly, against wiki standard!
I already almost finished a downgrade thread in my sandbox using nothing but the scans provided in the blog itself. I'll wait for when this thread closes IG.
Said Gacha Game is absolutely not valid for scaling. I have VARIOUS reasons why but this thread is seriously a mess and I'd rather just release my own thread on it at this point.
And the original 2-A argument is completely, blatantly, against wiki standard!
I already almost finished a downgrade thread in my sandbox using nothing but the scans provided in the blog itself. I'll wait for when this thread closes IG.
- 686
- 150
- Thread starter
- #346
Tuesday, a staff member said it could be applied after it got 2 staff votes (which it did) and it was applied. Then Phoenks first disagreed an hour later. It wasn't for a while and already had enough votes which was why it was initially applied. I'll be going to sleep but could you share whether you currently disagree or agree? And if you disagree still, why that is? I'll respond later.
- 3,099
- 3,340
This isn't really helpful for you cause this means they agreed with the base arguments anyways, as the gacha game was just supporting it.
Also, "against wiki standard" my bad, 2 admins and a thread mod were wrong, thank you Phoenks, lord of rules on the wiki.
- 11,234
- 10,136
I already showcased a thread where DDM himself disagreed with the argument used to scale this to 2-A.
Being endlessly/endless/infinitely larger than 2-C structure = 2-A?????
Short easy question, is being endlessly/endless/Infinitely bigger than a 2-C structure yield a 2-A rating? If it needs more context what kind of context would it need? My train of thought was similar to the infinity x 2-C multipliers where it's just not enough. I thought that was the wiki...
If that isn't enough for you, there is also this wiki standard:
Sourced from the Tiering System
Completely invalid. The staff that agreed beforehand are simply wrong. Even according to themselves , as showcased with DDM.
- 686
- 150
- Thread starter
- #349
At this point that's irrelevant as the argument presented in the blog has evolved to be more than that, focusing solely on one half of a whole is disingenuous and the argument just comes down to if Re:Build is canon or not. DDM said that when the infinite statements are paired with infinite timeline statements, it is valid.I already showcased a thread where DDM himself disagreed with the argument used to scale this to 2-A.
Being endlessly/endless/infinitely larger than 2-C structure = 2-A?????
Short easy question, is being endlessly/endless/Infinitely bigger than a 2-C structure yield a 2-A rating? If it needs more context what kind of context would it need? My train of thought was similar to the infinity x 2-C multipliers where it's just not enough. I thought that was the wiki...vsbattles.com
If that isn't enough for you, there is also this wiki standard:
Sourced from the Tiering System
Completely invalid. The staff that agreed beforehand are simply wrong. Even according to themselves , as showcased with DDM.
"If there's an inflationary multiverse theory, expanding endlessly or infinitely in the context of new universes being born left and right easily justifies 2-B. Or if there is proof that there's an infinite number of characters who dream and each and every dream births a universe, that combo could justify 2-A. But as KLOL said, stacking multipliers wouldn't grant anything higher than 2-C or "Endless/Infinite" could just be referring to the 3-D space of the universes and not the multiverse."
But gn everyone
- 11,234
- 10,136
The point I am making is that the arguments staff agreed with on this thread are objectively not viable for 2-A.
And they agreed before the Gacha stuff was added.
@Firestorm808
To summarize...
This thread was made with the argument being that the Dimensional Gap is 2-A because it is 4-D on an infinite scale.
2 staff apparently agreed with this, before any arguments were presented against it. So the thread was applied.
I then came in and went against the thread. As seen above, I have sourced reasons as to why this logic is just objectively not viable on the wiki for a 2-A upgrade.
The OP then changed the argument to include statements from a Gacha game that was never accepted as being canon to DxD.
And now, the OP is claiming since he got 2 staff to agree before these arguments were presented, these new statements from the Gacha game should also be accepted as evidence.
This is pretty sketchy!
- 686
- 150
- Thread starter
- #351
"Shape the stories how you want, hey, Drake, they're not slow"
- 3,099
- 3,340
You could have easily left out that last part, randomly attacking our character and claiming we're sketchy is rather rude.
The argument did not change, in fact these scans were used as supporting evidence, the argument has always remained the same.
- 11,234
- 10,136
It is objectively sketchy behavior that you went back and added scans from a source never accepted as canon, and then try to play this off as if they were and that staff accepted it.
It's not rude, it is purely truthful.
- 686
- 150
- Thread starter
- #354
Prove they aren't canon (I'll check back later)
- 11,234
- 10,136
I got a thread ready to prove it. Waiting to see what happens with this one.
- 4,886
- 5,678
Honestly just shoehorning in something suddenly being canon IS sketchy. That should be handled in a separate dedicated thread.
- 686
- 150
- Thread starter
- #357
Sure
- 1,098
- 374
Why isn’t this applied already
- 8,108
- 1,354
Naw we got a bunch of people that ain’t agreeing and it was still agreed upon. Something ain’t adding up or a few of the staff barely looked at the blog. Idk how yall feel about the 2-A rating but nothing was ever said that the stars was actually real and the OP never proved they were actually real
Vietthai96
He/Him- 9,691
- 13,362
Damn, 9 pages, at this point i think just close this thread, take a break and make a new one with compiled evidences and arguments from both sides
- Status
Similar threads
