• 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.
Status
Not open for further replies.
What kind of elaboration would even be needed? Feels like Immeasurable speed standards are all over the place sometimes
You need to context that ehhh...free from shackle of time (is that the statement??), or unbound by the concept of time, etc......are refering to their physical movement, speed

But i do agree that the Immeasurable speed standard is somewhat all over the place, due to different peoples handled different threads with different opinions on what could qualify and what couldn't
 
Mental health sucks so I can't do much rn but I at least wanna bump this thread so it doesn't risk falling into obscurity
 
Mental health sucks so I can't do much rn but I at least wanna bump this thread so it doesn't risk falling into obscurity
I would recommend applying the non-Immeasurable speed parts and leaving the discussion on Immeasurable speed for later. At least, if you are up to it.

There's more than substantial enough agreement for everything else, and it seems unlikely a clear consensus will be reached on Immeasurable speed at present without more detailed analyses of past precedents.
 
I would recommend applying the non-Immeasurable speed parts and leaving the discussion on Immeasurable speed for later. At least, if you are up to it.

There's more than substantial enough agreement for everything else, and it seems unlikely a clear consensus will be reached on Immeasurable speed at present without more detailed analyses of past precedents.
I wouldn't mind that either, though I'm not necessarily in a position to freely apply stuff, unfortunately (I've been away from my PC for the past week because of what's been going on)

Should Merged I-No be downgraded to "At least Relativistic+, likely far higher" as a result as well? Scaling far above her previous form, since Immeasurable doesn't have a clear consensus
 
I wouldn't mind that either, though I'm not necessarily in a position to freely apply stuff, unfortunately (I've been away from my PC for the past week because of what's been going on)

Should Merged I-No be downgraded to "At least Relativistic+, likely far higher" as a result as well? Scaling far above her previous form, since Immeasurable doesn't have a clear consensus
That speed rating makes sense, at least until you're in a position to work on the Immeasurable speed aspect.
 
I wouldn't mind that either, though I'm not necessarily in a position to freely apply stuff, unfortunately (I've been away from my PC for the past week because of what's been going on)
I'm not available to do so at this moment, but I could apply the contents of the blog for you later if you would be content with that.

Should Merged I-No be downgraded to "At least Relativistic+, likely far higher" as a result as well? Scaling far above her previous form, since Immeasurable doesn't have a clear consensus
I'd be willing to approve that, and I think changing a "likely higher" speed rating to "likely far higher" for this justification would fall under a minor content revision as per our rules. So that should be fine.
 
I'm not available to do so at this moment, but I could apply the contents of the blog for you later if you would be content with that.
I would be, yeah. Thanks!
I'd be willing to approve that, and I think changing a "likely higher" speed rating to "likely far higher" for this justification would fall under a minor content revision as per our rules. So that should be fine.
That speed rating makes sense, at least until you're in a position to work on the Immeasurable speed aspect.
Appreciate it a lot!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top