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.
Several factors can potentially play a role in the evaluation of the potency of this ability, including the mechanisms involved, the scale of influence, demonstrated resistance-breaking abilities, the number of individuals it can influence simultaneously, and the overall effects. For more details, refer to our Hax page.
Quite specifically this was agreed on by multiple staff to not be inherently the case as a lot of assumptions are made to correlate this to potency then comparing it to a resistance (read the OP).Given that the effect would be spread out over many minds, I think that the number of affected individuals should still play a part in evaluating the strength of a telepath.
It's already concluded, it's already closed and the last posts even make it clear the accepted stuff was applied, please stop making non-sequiturs.Ya, I think Bob needs to finish this thread and conclude it. There is a reason why it is not applied either the thread is closed.
@Bobsican I would like you to suggest concluding the thread:
Discuss it there.
Which changes in particular? I'm starting to think you're thinking of something else than me.How it comes it is concluded (2021) and you never apply the changes? This is really poorly made, but I won't judge it. And don't tell me it is not, since the text is literally there.
But you never remove it since 2021.Generally speaking, we judge the potency of Mind Manipulation both by what it can do and by how many people its user can affect at once with it. This may range from only a few people at a time to entire planetary populations.
Generally speaking, we judge the potency of Mind Manipulation both by what it can do and by how many people its user can affect at once with it. This may range from only a few people at a time to entire planetary populations.
When judging the potency of Mind Manipulation, and the resistance against it, there is a variety of factors to be potentially considered. Such as the mechanisms involved, how many people the Mind Manipulation can affect, whether it has demonstrated to break through resistances, how great the effects are, etc. For more information visit the Hax page.
Mind Manipulation's potency is assessed based on its capabilities and the number of individuals it can influence simultaneously. Several factors play a role in this evaluation, including the mechanisms involved, the scale of influence, demonstrated resistance-breaking abilities, and the overall effects. For more details, refer to our Hax page.
This part should be removed since it is outdated. I asked, why is it not removed while you were the one who created a thread for it in 2021.Generally speaking, we judge the potency of Mind Manipulation both by what it can do and by how many people its user can affect at once with it. This may range from only a few people at a time to entire planetary populations.
A more concice version that has vaguer wording and is inviting misconceptions the 2021 thread I'm bringing up for starters was meant to remove, which is why I even proposed an alternative based on your version that avoids that while also being even shorter.@Bobsican Without back and forth discussion, I will give my entire stance:
This description is repetitive
I formulated to be less repetitive: (a more concise version)
The 2021 thread never brought it up as something to add, so it'd stand to reason it's an outdated segment by innately going against our current standards (which is why I've been sitting such 2021 thread), please apply common sense, it's possible for stuff to get missed even after such timeframe.You came here and say:
This part should be removed since it is outdated. I asked, why is it not removed while you were the one who created a thread for it in 2021.
And it does not matter because in fact it is not removed. So if you want to change the core of description, please create new staf thread. I don't believe your staff thread was to remove this part, because if it was, it would have been removed since 2021.
This just comes off as mean.I am not interested in this argument,
You are desiring to apply a change too, the staff thread would be something you'd have to do as well if we want to go like that.if you want to change it. Create a new staff thread and apply it. I am only removing repetition from the description.
Just a query, what's wrong in Ant's current proposal according to u.Ant hasn't explicitly disagreed, he has merely said his current stance and is yet to address what has been brought up.
As said before you'd also have to do a staff thread on the matter either way for the same reasons if you stand on that line of thought, both cases ultimately involve rewriting a segment of a P&A page.
Just a query, what's wrong in Ant's current proposal according to u.
What would u like to modify.
The same applies to @ImmortalDread what do u propose to change, just give both of ur views instead of arguing with each other.
Both of u just give a concise view of what changes you would like to implement and how is it better than what is already accepted.
'''Note 2:''' When judging the potency of hax-based abilities such as [[Mind Manipulation]] and [[Soul Manipulation]], and the resistance against them, there is a variety of factors to be potentially considered. Such as the mechanisms involved, how many people the power can affect, whether it has demonstrated to break through resistances, how great the effects are, etc.
When were were first discussing them; there was debate on Universal Energy Systems, Connected Energy Systems or Universal/Connected Power Sources would have been better names DonTalkDT basically just picked Universal Energy Systems naming the page. And since that is just one of three types with the other two types often being overlooked. But I basically agreed Connected Energy Systems or Connected Power Sources would have been better names to account that Limited or Non-Physical examples that aren't fully universal are also included in the page.Can we change the Universal Energy Systems page's name to "Energy Systems"?
Cause the page doesn't speak of just Universal Energy Systems, it speaks about them all.
This is like naming the durability page "tanking"
Yeah cause this makes it seem as if we called the regen page "High-Godly Regen" then listed all the inferior ones below it. Doesn't seem logicalWhen were were first discussing them; there was debate on Universal Energy Systems, Connected Energy Systems or Universal/Connected Power Sources would have been better names DonTalkDT basically just picked Universal Energy Systems naming the page. And since that is just one of three types with the other two types often being overlooked. But I basically agreed Connected Energy Systems or Connected Power Sources would have been better names to account that Limited or Non-Physical examples that aren't fully universal are also included in the page.
That seems fine to me, but other regular wiki pages that link to it also need to have those links updated.Can we change the Universal Energy Systems page's name to "Energy Systems"?
Cause the page doesn't speak of just Universal Energy Systems, it speaks about them all.
This is like naming the durability page "tanking"
Most of the pages that link there seem to do so only with the top navigation template, so it'd be a mostly trivial change with sufficient editing rights.That seems fine to me, but other regular wiki pages that link to it also need to have those links updated.
As a minor gripe (not with you), I think some of the pages linking to it shouldn't, specifically characters, since I think verse pages should clarify rather than doing it multiple times on an individual level.I took the time to rename the "Universal Energy Systems" page, and updated the links to it, but on second thought I may have done something very stupid here, due to being stressed out due to time running out before my vacation.
Pages that link to "Energy Systems" | VS Battles Wiki | Fandom
vsbattles.fandom.com
@Mr._Bambu @Damage3245 @Agnaa @DarkGrath @DontTalkDT
Can you evaluate if if have done something stupid here please?
@Dereck03 @Catzlaflame @GarrixianXD
And if I have done something inappropriate here, are you willing to clean up my mess/undo the related edits please?
@Mr._BambuThank you very much for your reply, but I meant, did I make an error in renaming that page and all of the links to it from regular pages? If so, it all likely needs to be changed back to the way it was.
I don't believe so, no. I CTRL+F'd all of them, and they all appear to match the new page's name.Thank you very much for your reply, but I meant, did I make an error in renaming that page and all of the links to it from regular pages? If so, it all likely needs to be changed back to the way it was.
@Mr._Bambu @Damage3245 @Agnaa @DarkGrath @DontTalkDTOkay. I am uncertain due to that "Energy Systems" sounds so unspecific and hard to understand. "Verse-specific Energy Systems" or some similar name is easier to intuitively understand the point of.
Just a minor note. I did agree with the name change, but the "Universal" was still one of the three types. And the word Universal seemed to be removed from the whole page including the sub type that was supposed to be called Universal. I took care of editing to add them all back.I took the time to rename the "Universal Energy Systems" page, and updated the links to it, but on second thought I may have done something very stupid here, due to being stressed out due to time running out before my vacation.
Pages that link to "Energy Systems" | VS Battles Wiki | Fandom
vsbattles.fandom.com
@Mr._Bambu @Damage3245 @Agnaa @DarkGrath @DontTalkDT
Can you evaluate if if have done something stupid here please?
@Dereck03 @Catzlaflame @GarrixianXD
And if I have done something inappropriate here, are you willing to clean up my mess/undo the related edits please?