Giving Toneri a Second Chance (Obito Style)

[Arc7Kuroi]

Because to add onto KingogKing777's point, at 1:34:14 we can see that there is dust still clearing from Toneri's attack, meaning that the attack had just happened and there is no sign of the Moon halves having been brought closer together. No disturbance in the rocks or the dust patterns; no sign of Hinata or Toneri having moved.

There is a sign, we see them far apart, then we see them close together. But Toneri and Hinata don't hold any barring on this.

It just doesn't very reasonable that the most likely explanation is something we don't see happening. No sign of Toneri reacting to the Moon's drifting apart, no sign of the Tenseigan being activated to bring them together, no sign of the Moon halves in motion...

Toneri doesn't need to be comment on the moon, and we dont need to explicitly see the Tenseigan light up or sumn.

I get wanting a logical explanation that can account for the scene without having to resort to it being an inconsistency... but inconsistencies can and do happen. If writer's were perfect we wouldn't have plot holes but we do. If animators were perfect we would have animation mistakes, but we do...

Why is an offscreen series of events more likely than a simple continuity error / animator's oversight?

I'd just repeat my prior arguments from the past two pages, but I've explained several times why I think my interpretation is more likely.

Want to be moved back to disagree?

 

[Deagonx]

Keep in mind, 61km/40mi is not a short distance at all. At that distance they wouldn't even have been able to see eachother. The scene we're envisioning is that in a very short period of time the moon drifted apart by 40 miles, and then was rapidly brought back together to them being within speaking range (but didn't collide), all before any of the dust settled via Tenseigan, off-screen within 15 seconds.

 

[Damage3245]

@Arc7Kuroi; what about the dust rising from Toneri's attack? You didn't address that part. Please rewatch the movie around 1:34:13 onwards.


I'm still neutral, but I need to explore every avenue of this if it is going to pass, which looks likely.

 

[Arc7Kuroi]

Keep in mind, 61km/40mi is not a short distance at all. At that distance they wouldn't even have been able to see eachother. The scene we're envisioning is that in a very short period of time the moon drifted apart by 40 miles, and then was rapidly brought back together to them being within speaking range (but didn't collide), all before any of the dust settled via Tenseigan, off-screen within 15 seconds.

Considering the moon separated in like 2 seconds sure I don't see the issue.

@Arc7Kuroi; what about the dust rising from Toneri's attack? You didn't address that part. Please rewatch the movie around 1:34:13 onwards.


I'm still neutral, but I need to explore every avenue of this if it is going to pass, which looks likely.

Well considering it happened so quickly (the rejoining of the halves) and we are in space essentially a vacuum (little to no medium for a shockwave to propagate and collide with the dust) they didnt move.

 

[Damage3245]

@Arc7Kuroi; as best I can tell, your argument mostly boils down to "If Toneri didn't use the Tenseigan to bring the Moon halves together, then there'd be a plot hole as he would have screwed over his own plan."

But if the size of the gap in the Moon is already a mistake, then that'd just be an error-induced plot hole. Remove the error, and the plot hole no longer exists. If the gap isn't 60+ km wide (as the more consistent shots in the movie depict), then Toneri didn't screw over his plan.

 

[Arc7Kuroi]

@Arc7Kuroi; as best I can tell, your argument mostly boils down to "If Toneri didn't use the Tenseigan to bring the Moon halves together, then there'd be a plot hole as he would have screwed over his own plan."

But if the size of the gap in the Moon is already a mistake, then that'd just be an error-induced plot hole. Remove the error, and the plot hole no longer exists. If the gap isn't 60+ km wide (as the more consistent shots in the movie depict), then Toneri didn't screw over his plan.

Right those are the two options, in my opinion based on the argument mainly provided in the OP, option 1 has more evidence than option 2. As we know the Tenseigan can move the moon, so we have a logically deduced explanation that comes from the provided lore in the movie, as opposed to just making an assumption with an evidence backed explanation.

 

[DontTalkDT]

Not going to put myself as agree or disagree or really get deeper into this at all here, but I just want to express one opinion:

The majority of staff agree that scenes in which "large sizes" (in this case the intentional depiction of Toneri's feat) are the focal point are better than scenes in which "smaller sizes objects" (in this case the peeps chatting) are the focal point.

IMO this should apply the exact opposite way here. If they want to depict the moon splitting obviously they have to make the tiny crack visible on the full moon shot.

Like, the idea is that if an author has to depict a really big and really small thing at once, then they might have to inflate the small things size to make it visible. Based on that it's argued that scaling from a small object to a large one, might lead to an underestimation of the large object's size. However, if we scale from a big object to a small object it might inflate the small object's size by the same reasoning. And that has to be equally taken into account. Can't just have the upgrade side of things.
In this case, the animators had to show the whole moon in order to make it clear that the entire things was getting split. And to make it visible that the thing was getting split, they were forced to draw the split large enough that one could at least see it, which for something the size of the moon just results in a gigantic split.

Meaning that, in this case, this type of consideration should really go in favour of not using that scaling.

 

[Damage3245]

Right those are the two options, in my opinion based on the argument mainly provided in the OP, option 1 has more evidence than option 2. As we know the Tenseigan can move the moon, so we have a logically deduced explanation that comes from the provided lore in the movie, as opposed to just making an assumption with an evidence backed explanation.

I'm not sure if I just have a different standard of evidence when it comes to this, but you haven't actually shown that there is more evidence that it did happen, only that it could be possible.

The Tenseigan having the capability of moving the entire Moon, and presumably the two halves of the Moon? That's not evidence that it did happen. Something being capable of taking place, does not mean it did take place.

The gap between the Moon being 60+ km at one moment and then 10's of meters in the next? That inconsistency is what we're trying to resolve in the first place. The gap altering from one scene to the next is not evidence that the Tenseigan did move the Moon halves.

Toneri's plan would be ruined by the gap between the Moon halves being so large? The existence of a potential plot hole is not evidence either.

An explanation is not by itself evidence of said explanation. Creating a perfectly logical explanation for what did happen (even if I agreed with your points on the Tenseigan's capabilities) could still be completely false.


I do not think that this is a case of equal interpretation. I am not arguing that the Tenseigan did nothing. I am not arguing that the Moon halves zipped back towards each other of their own accord either. I am not making a positive claim that something happened offscreen to magically shrink the gap between the Moon halves.

I just think that this is a simple case of inconsistency between the first scene, and then all subsequent scenes. The inconsistency is self-demonstrable. And that the most consistent depiction of the gap should be given higher merit, instead of trying to explain away the inconsistency.


I think you should probably move me back to "Disagree" for now but note I'd still be fine with a "possibly" compromise.

 

[Arc7Kuroi]

I'm not sure if I just have a different standard of evidence when it comes to this, but you haven't actually shown that there is more evidence that it did happen, only that it could be possible.

The Tenseigan having the capability of moving the entire Moon, and presumably the two halves of the Moon? That's not evidence that it did happen. Something being capable of taking place, does not mean it did take place.

Ok I think there's a bit of a miscommunication. When I say the Tenseigan can move the halves of the moon, I am not immediately saying that without a shadow of a doubt that did happen. Rather I am using the fact that it can do that to support the claim that it likely did do that. It's not "Tenseigan can do it so it did" it's "Tenseigan can do it so it likely did (when factoring in additional info)".

The gap between the Moon being 60+ km at one moment and then 10's of meters in the next? That inconsistency is what we're trying to resolve in the first place. The gap altering from one scene to the next is not evidence that the Tenseigan did move the Moon halves.

Toneri's plan would be ruined by the gap between the Moon halves being so large? The existence of a potential plot hole is not evidence either.

An explanation is not by itself evidence of said explanation. Creating a perfectly logical explanation for what did happen (even if I agreed with your points on the Tenseigan's capabilities) could still be completely false.

I'm not saying that my having a logically deductable explanation is all that makes my interpretation superior. I am arguing that because there is a logically deduced explanation (the Tenseigan can and would move the halves together) that makes sense and is consistent with the characters and plot (slamming the moon into earth, etc), that my interpretation is therefore superior to one that lacks any sort of explanation and is rather just an assumption based on what we see. Because both claims assume something based on what we see, to determine which is better we should examine which is better supported. Hence, I think my explanation backed with evidence mechanically and narratively is superior than one without those.

I do not think that this is a case of equal interpretation. I am not arguing that the Tenseigan did nothing. I am not arguing that the Moon halves zipped back towards each other of their own accord either. I am not making a positive claim that something happened offscreen to magically shrink the gap between the Moon halves.

I just think that this is a simple case of inconsistency between the first scene, and then all subsequent scenes. The inconsistency is self-demonstrable. And that the most consistent depiction of the gap should be given higher merit, instead of trying to explain away the inconsistency.

You are inherently making the claim that the animators depicted the scene incorrectly with the conclusion that the split is therefore inconsistent. I am making the counter claim that the animators depicted the scene corretly with the conclusion that the Tenseigan likely moved the halves back together. It's a matter of the split is inconsistent vs the split isn't inconsistent. They are just opposite claims of each other, and in a vacuum they would fall under equal interpretation. Hence why I have brought forth the evidence backed explanation to argue in my opinion why I think claiming the split isn't inconsistent is superior.

 

[Deagonx]

I don't see how writing off-panel headcanon to resolve an inconsistency is better than just recognizing that it's an inconsistency. I definitely think your claim of having 'evidence' for it is pretty bunk. Both options are working with the same amount of evidence: The inconsistent portrayal of the gap.

 

[KingTempest]

KT hard muted me on Discord for speaking the truth

You're a weenie

 

[Stryker861]

I don't see how writing off-panel headcanon to resolve an inconsistency is better than just recognizing that it's an inconsistency. I definitely think your claim of having 'evidence' for it is pretty bunk. Both options are working with the same amount of evidence: The inconsistent portrayal of the gap.

If we can make a logical claim based on what we know than why not use it?

 

[KingogKings777]

I edited my above post but others have responded to it, in it's pre-edited state. To repeat my point here:


Because to add onto KingogKing777's point, at 1:34:14 we can see that there is dust still rising from Toneri's attack, meaning that the attack had just happened and there is no sign of the Moon halves having been brought closer together. No disturbance in the rocks or the dust patterns; no sign of Hinata or Toneri having moved.

It just doesn't very reasonable that the most likely explanation is something we don't see happening. No sign of Toneri reacting to the Moon's drifting apart, no sign of the Tenseigan being activated to bring them together, no sign of the Moon halves in motion...

I get wanting a logical explanation that can account for the scene without having to resort to it being an inconsistency... but inconsistencies can and do happen. If writers were perfect we wouldn't have plot holes but we do. If animators were perfect we wouldn't have animation mistakes, but we do...

Why is an offscreen series of events more likely than a simple continuity error / animator's oversight?

We also have a time on when it occurred.

It happened with 10 mins before they planed on teleporting/destroying the moon.

 

[Deagonx]

If we can make a logical claim based on what we know than why not use it?

Because it involves adding story events that are not in the story.

 

[Stryker861]

Because it involves adding story events that are not in the story.

The point of this was to provide why its likely that the tensigan was able to bring the two halves back together, We dont have to see every single aspect of a scene to make an educated guess on what occured

 

[KingogKings777]

We also have another shot of the moon with the crack too after the fight and after telling the people they won.

 

[Arc7Kuroi]

None of these post-split shots address my argument at all, since I agree that the moon halves got closer lol. They aren't some magical debunk to my argument, when my argument is based around the Tenseigan likely moving the halves back together.

 

[Deagonx]

The point of this was to provide why its likely that the tensigan was able to bring the two halves back together, We dont have to see every single aspect of a scene to make an educated guess on what occured

No one is claiming otherwise, but this isn't like a character randomly showing up with a black eye and inferring that he was punched off-screen. We are taking a pixel calc as a gospel interpretation of what was actually going on in a fictional universe, and deciding that because this pixel calc was contradicted by more close-up drawings of the gap being smaller that the best way to handle this discrepancy is to insert ourselves as authors of the movie and write in an explanation that maintains the integrity of the pixel calc.

I think it makes far more sense to just recognize the limitations of drawing the moon with a split in it that is as small as it was shown to be, whilst also effectively demonstrating to the reader that it was split in half, and that the several close ups of the gap we see are the accurate ones.

 

[Arc7Kuroi]

We know Deagonx, you don't need to keep repeating you disagree with the thread, just repeating you think calling it an inconsistency is more sensible isn't all too productive in progressing this thread. It's okay to agree to disagree and leave it at that.

But regardless, I am not inserting myself as the author in order to headcanon in an explanation. I'm making an argument on what I believe likely happened based on the information presented in the movie itself. Similarly to how if we know a character was fighting and came back injured, you'd deduce that they got injured in that fight. Or is that character's injuries inconsistent cuz we didn't explicitly see or are told how it happened?

 

[Deagonx]

Similarly to how if we know a character was fighting and came back injured, you'd deduce that they got injured in that fight. Or is that character's injuries inconsistent cuz we didn't explicitly see or are told how it happened?

Not at all the same thing. In your example, the fact that they have injuries is concrete and known. In this example, the basic premise of whether or not the halves of the moon were forty miles apart is an assumption.

 

[Arc7Kuroi]

Not at all the same thing. In your example, the fact that they have injuries is concrete and known. In this example, the basic premise of whether or not the halves of the moon were forty miles apart is an assumption.

Lol in your own example you are assuming the author drew the character with injuries correctly. To claim the character is injured you assume he is drawn correctly with the injuries. Same exact thing with the moon split. To claim it is 40 miles apart I must assume it is drawn correctly.

Is the character injured? yes you say. why? cuz we see injuries on him. so he's drawn correctly? yes.
Is the moon 40 miles apart? yes I say. why? cuz we see it split by a large distance. so it's drawn correctly? yes.

 

[KingTempest]

Honestly, I didn't want to be involved, but mark my disagreeal.

The thread's premise is "since Toneri can move the moon, it would make sense that he would move it together", and it's seemingly embarrassing that that's all it took for everyone to agree.

There's a dramatic amount of inconsistencies with that headcanon solution.

1. We never see the other half moving. We see the split right after and we don't see the split closing.
2. We don't see the split fully closed. If he brought it together, wouldn't logic deduce that he'd pull it together instead of holding them in the air?
3. We see it split, move apart, and stay apart. We see the moon halves initial distance larger than the later instance, yet we don't see it coming back together and shortening the distance? If "inconsistent size" was countered by "it was moving together", then why wouldn't it move together later?
   1. Don't say "maybe it's moving slower". The calc says the moon moved over 30 thousand meters apart. If it did that in a few seconds, it would do the same for a few dozen meters.
4. This builds another assumption, that then he would've needed to
   1. Stop the movement of the right and pull the left closer.
      1. Which would've ****** with everyone since they would've seen the clock stop its countdown, which it didn't do, since they could still tell the timespan it would take to collide literally instantly after the split.
   2. Move the right and move the left faster so it could come together faster.
      1. The fragments from the moon colliding with the moon would've made large impacts, that we don't see or hear (don't say no sound travels in space, they can breathe and talk).

Also please. None of yall are animators, so please don't speak of the thought process of the animators. Questioning the creative process of animators is inherently just an Argument from Belief. "Why would the animators do that?" Stop it. We don't do it with the calculations made by each other on the wiki, so I fail to see why we do it for the animators.

The OP's premise is based on a bunch of fallacious evidence with the only evidence with no supports other than "he could have" without even an implication says a lot about the integrity of the argument in itself.

Assuming that because he can move the moon towards the earth means he would just split the moon apart and pull it back "together" (a dozen meters apart from each other), when that doesn't make logical sense and it would've just been easier to push both of the halves.

We never see the moon's halves move.
We get a visual on the moon's halves. Didn't move.
We see it split apart and stay apart.

Just let inconsistencies be inconsistencies. This isn't Naruto in SM+KCM flying when he couldn't do that before and we say "welp, he can fly now".
We can't just rationalize inconsistencies and theoretical arguments with literally no proof.

 

[KingogKings777]

Did it even break the GBE?

 

[Deagonx]

Lol in your own example you are assuming the author drew the character with injuries correctly

Comparing this to the proportions of objects is ridiculous to the point of bordering on bad faith.

 

[Arc7Kuroi]

Honestly, I didn't want to be involved, but mark my disagreeal.

The thread's premise is "since Toneri can move the moon, it would make sense that he would move it together", and it's seemingly embarrassing that that's all it took for everyone to agree.

Boohoo cry me a river goober

There's a dramatic amount of inconsistencies with that headcanon solution.

1. We never see the other half moving. We see the split right after and we don't see the split closing.

We can deduce things without being spoonfed. We apply deductive reasoning ALL the time on site, let's not pretend we don't.

1. We don't see the split fully closed. If he brought it together, wouldn't logic deduce that he'd pull it together instead of holding them in the air?

It could just be that Toneri didnt want the Tenseigan to accidentally slam the halves together and completely destroy the fortress, whatever the reason, it isn't relevant.

1. We see it split, move apart, and stay apart. We see the moon halves initial distance larger than the laterinstance, yet we don't see it coming back together and shortening the distance? If "inconsistent size" was countered by "it was moving together", then why wouldn't it move together later?

Can you elaborate on this, I'm not quite sure I follow.

1. 1. Don't say "maybe it's moving slower". The calc says the moon moved over 30 thousand meters apart. If it did that in a few seconds, it would do the same for a few dozen meters.

I don't think anyone is saying this?

• This builds another assumption, that then he would've needed to
  1. Stop the movement of the right and pull the left closer.
     1. Which would've ****** with everyone since they would've seen the clock stop its countdown, which it didn't do, since they could still tell the timespan it would take to collide literally instantly after the split.

I agree that the moon doesn't stop moving towards earth except for the times we are told it does. But this just aids my point that the Tenseigan can move both halves of the moon if the clock didnt stop when it was split, that follows that the Tenseigan kept moving both halves.

• Move the right and move the left faster so it could come together faster.
  1. The fragments from the moon colliding with the moon would've made large impacts, that we don't see or hear (don't say no sound travels in space, they can breathe and talk).

They could've simply not been close enough for the characters to hear or just weren't loud. Nothing says large boom booms must have happened if the moon got brought back together.

Also please. None of yall are animators, so please don't speak of the thought process of the animators. Questioning the creative process of animators is inherently just an Argument from Belief. "Why would the animators do that?" Stop it. We don't do it with the calculations made by each other on the wiki, so I fail to see why we do it for the animators.

You don't need much guesswork to understand when something is being emphasized in a scene.

The OP's premise is based on a bunch of fallacious evidence with the only evidence with no supports other than "he could have" without even an implication says a lot about the integrity of the argument in itself.

No but pop off King, the OP's premise is based on what I believe is most likely. In fact I state that several times.

Assuming that because he can move the moon towards the earth means he would just split the moon apart and pull it back "together" (a dozen meters apart from each other), when that doesn't make logical sense and it would've just been easier to push both of the halves.

It wouldn't be easier to push just both halves, it's the same amount of stuff, it'd be just as easy either way.

We never see the moon's halves move.
We get a visual on the moon's halves. Didn't move.
We see it split apart and stay apart.

I reiterate my point on us not needing to be spoonfed information to deduce a conclusion.

Just let inconsistencies be inconsistencies. This isn't Naruto in SM+KCM flying when he couldn't do that before and we say "welp, he can fly now".
We can't just rationalize inconsistencies and theoretical arguments with literally no proof.

Fortunately there isn't "literally no proof".

Comparing this to the proportions of objects is ridiculous to the point of bordering on bad faith.

I really don't care if you think it's bad faith. I could say that I think you are being stubborn in bad faith but that isn't productive to thread and is rather baseless don't you think.

 

[Deagonx]

Boohoo cry me a river goober

This is really childish.

I reiterate my point on us not needing to be spoonfed information to deduce a conclusion.

We can deduce things without being spoonfed. We apply deductive reasoning ALL the time on site, let's not pretend we don't.

"Spoonfed" is a really weird way to describe "written in the story in any way shape or form." You're framing this in a dishonest way.

They could've simply not been close enough for the characters to hear or just weren't loud. Nothing says large boom booms must have happened if the moon got brought back together.

It could just be that Toneri didnt want the Tenseigan to accidentally slam the halves together and completely destroy the fortress, whatever the reason, it isn't relevant.

Nothing quite like "writing even more headcanon to plug the holes in your existing headcanon to plug the hole in a brief visual inconsistency to calc a character higher"

 

[Arc7Kuroi]

This is really childish.

Banter with friends is different

"Spoonfed" is a really weird way to describe "written in the story in any way shape or form." You're framing this in a dishonest way.

Spoonfed = directly stated or told =/= written into the story in any way shape or form

Nothing quite like "writing even more headcanon to plug the holes in your existing headcanon to plug the hole in a brief visual inconsistency to calc a character higher"

Clearly you have some disconnect and think I'm some grand Naruto wanker. But sure buddy, if thinking of me as a headcanon Naruto wanker makes you feel better than knock yourself out. Really shows youre cut out to hold a position of power.

 

[Ped2018]

This is really childish.

Lol

 

[Deagonx]

Clearly you have some disconnect and think I'm some grand Naruto wanker. But sure buddy, if thinking of me as a headcanon Naruto wanker makes you feel better than knock yourself out. Really shows youre cut out to hold a position of power.

It's odd that you are getting so worked up about a notion I never expressed, and then used this notion that you personally made up in your head to indicate that I am not a good moderator.

 

[Arc7Kuroi]

It's odd that you are getting so worked up about a notion I never expressed, and then used this notion that you personally made up in your head to indicate that I am not a good moderator.

Brother more than half of your arguments are just empty insults attempting to make me look stupid. Just leave if you ain't got anything useful to add.

 

[KingTempest]

We can deduce things without being spoonfed. We apply deductive reasoning ALL the time on site, let's not pretend we don't.

You're not trying to deduce an event. You're trying to implement something that wasn't implied.
This isn't "A hurt B, so I'm assuming that A hurt B with C".
This is "A happened, nothing says it happened but I see things that could either be an inconsistency or I can headcanon that A happened, so I'm gonna say that A happened, then I'm gonna say that since the character can do B, A happened cause of C".

It could just be that Toneri didnt want the Tenseigan to accidentally slam the halves together and completely destroy the fortress, whatever the reason, it isn't relevant.

Toneri wouldn't destroy the fortress since he said that he had a powerful chakra (from the tenseigan) covering the fortress that wouldn't destroy it.

He clearly doesn't give a damn about the wellbeing of the fortress if he's splitting the moon that it resides in.

It's very relevant.

Can you elaborate on this, I'm not quite sure I follow.

In AKM's threads, he sent the moon's split at varying distances.
We see the split when Naruto is rising from the chasm, and the other half of the moon is not coming together.
It's not as close as the later instances, but we see the gap varying, but we don't see the other side of the moon coming together.

I don't think anyone is saying this?

It's a counter for any future argument on that specific point.

I agree that the moon doesn't stop moving towards earth except for the times we are told it does. But this just aids my point that the Tenseigan can move both halves of the moon if the clock didnt stop when it was split, that follows that the Tenseigan kept moving both halves.

My point is that you're arguing that the moon's sides would yank together, and I said one of the 2 options would've happened, and I noted the issues for both, including the clock stopping.

They could've simply not been close enough for the characters to hear or just weren't loud. Nothing says large boom booms must have happened if the moon got brought back together.

There was the loudest sound ever when the moon just moved apart after they were already separated. They would've heard shit colliding, especially probably a few meters under where they're standing.

You don't need much guesswork to understand when something is being emphasized in a scene.

Nothing is being emphasized except "the moon split", not "the shit came back together".

95% of your argument is guesswork. You have more guesswork than arguments. That's an issue.

You think if they yank the right back to the left, the contents of the insides wouldn't fly to the other side too? Where are all the issues from that too.

No but pop off King, the OP's premise is based on what I believe is most likely. In fact I state that several times.

Which is headass.

It wouldn't be easier to push just both halves, it's the same amount of stuff, it'd be just as easy either way.

It would be easier to just shoot both halves straight instead of pulling it back just to push it back the other way again, but logic's out the window.

I reiterate my point on us not needing to be spoonfed information to deduce a conclusion.

You're not just deducing a conclusion.
You're creating a problem that didn't need to be created, then deducing a conclusion to said problem, and trying to use that to counter previously shown issues.

Fortunately there isn't "literally no proof".

Yes there is.

The difference between your arguments and my arguments are that my arguments are "what happened" or "what should've happened" and your arguments are all "what could've happened".

Literally every reply of yours was "it could've", which means "there's nothing saying it did, but it could've done this".

This is the conversation.

"The moon is calced to have split thousands of meters apart"
"The moon is shown to be a few dozen meters apart in the next few scenes"
"I'm gonna assume that the moon was pulled back together"
"Why are you going to assume that?"
"Because it was calced to have split thousands of meters apart and it was later calced to split a few dozen"
"That doesn't explain why it was pulled together"
"Since he pushed the moon, he probably pulled it back together"
"How did you deduce that?"
"Because it was calced to have split thousands of meters apart and it was later calced to split a few dozen"

You literally have no argument outside of coulds.

 

[KingTempest]

This is really childish.

That's my lieutenant captain weenie. He's fine

 

[Stryker861]

Nothing quite like "writing even more headcanon to plug the holes in your existing headcanon to plug the hole in a brief visual inconsistency to calc a character higher"

Arc is one of the last people ik to try and wank Naruto so idk where you were going with that

 

[KingTempest]

Arc is one of the last people ik to try and wank Naruto so idk where you were going with that

that doesn't say much since 1-999 is wank after like 2022

 

[Arc7Kuroi]

That's my lieutenant captain weenie. He's fine

ill respond to your response in a bit reading Bleach atm

 

[Stryker861]

that doesn't say much since 1-999 is wank after like 2022

have no clue what this means

 

[KingTempest]

have no clue what this means

everybody wanks naruto, him being one of the last ppl doesn't say much

 

[Stryker861]

everybody wanks naruto, him being one of the last ppl doesn't say much

ah i see

 

[Deagonx]

Brother more than half of your arguments are just empty insults attempting to make me look stupid. Just leave if you ain't got anything useful to add.

This is untrue, and a childish accusation.

I don't know why hostility is the modus operandi for your debating style, but consider this an official warning to stop. You're a grown up, people are going to disagree with you sometimes, and that is not an excuse to mock them, sarcastically dismiss them, make weird accusations, et cetera.

 

[CloverDragon03]

It's odd that you are getting so worked up about a notion I never expressed, and then used this notion that you personally made up in your head to indicate that I am not a good moderator.

I'm gonna be real with you.

This:

Nothing quite like "writing even more headcanon to plug the holes in your existing headcanon to plug the hole in a brief visual inconsistency to calc a character higher"

Is a very adamant notion of someone attempting to wank a calc