Jujutsu Kaisen Hax/Ability & AP Upgrade Thread Pt. 3

[Vietthai96]

uh, when you say blog do you mean this thread we're in? or that sandbox blog one. cuz i was asking about this thread which is why i excluded the sandbox blog.

The sandbox blog in that Ontology thread

 

[TheGunsFinalWrath]

The sandbox blog in that Ontology thread

aight but i wasn't asking about that. i was asking about this thread. im assuming you did read through this thread entirely, but not sure if you did given that it is also long with all these long texts here. because this entire thread easily outweighs the ontology blog in word and character count by a very far length.

 

[Vietthai96]

aight but i wasn't asking about that. i was asking about this thread. im assuming you did read through this thread entirely, but not sure if you did given that it is also long with all these long texts here. because this entire thread easily outweighs the ontology blog in word and character count by a very far length.

If i did not read, how i gonna arguing with @Dr._whiteee about Dimensional Manipulation being invalid???. Seriously can we have better conversation rather than you asking me did i read this and that??, we spent 10 comments for this same kind of question which we could do more contributive comment to the thread with the same amount

 

[Dr._whiteee]

I will get a round to dropping some responses in a bit.

 

[Dr._whiteee]

Cool, now prove that’s what Nirvana entails in JJK, because without a direct statement of such, this wouldn’t apply to the series. Having like terms doesn’t equate to the same direct meanings as them in religious standards.

I already did, literally just spent time outlining the verses correlation with the term.

You once again seem to be confused about how the wiki standards work. I am not saying the Nirvana in JJK is the same one mentioned in Buddhism verbatim. I don't need a direct 1 to 1 correlation to prove the the concept of Nirvana exists in JJK because I already shown how the verse outright incorporated the framework for Buddhism into the verses ontology, especially given the stuff about Tengen dissolving her ego and becoming one with the universe, that is a blatant ontological correlate.

No it doesn’t. This part is I think the point @Dereck03 was trying to say in their previous post.

Yes it does, if you're going to make a claim like such you have to substantiate it.

You’re literally saying “Tengen created Buddhism in JJK, therefore Buddhism fundamentally exists in JJK in the standards we understand Buddhism to be.” Literally, that’s literally the point you just said to me in the section I just bolded. And I think that @Dereck03 was saying in the quote above is that that kind of extrapolation done isn’t a standard we apply to the wiki.

This is a complete misrepresentation of what is being said and the overall correlates provided in the blog. To begin with, Tengen didn't create Buddhism...He spread "Japanese Buddhism" or Mahayana Buddhism. Once again, this understanding of Buddhism and how it works, is what led to Tengen discoveringthe foundations for Jujutsu. This 100% means that Jujutsu and Buddhism go hand in hand on an ontological level.

Second off, you are literally ignoring 99% of the evidence which is leading to my statements. This isn't some random character mentioning Buddhism and me trying to scale from statements in the religion. The manga is fundamentally based on Buddhism and the framework for the verses power is 100% dependant on said concepts.

There needs to be a lot more direct evidence that Buddhism is fundamentally linked to Jujutsu in a foundational aspect than just having a statement of a character “creating Buddhism” or what have you.

Yeah see, this is where I am going to stop humoring you because we're getting into blatantly dishonest territory.

The whole blog is available to you outlining how Buddhism and Jujutsu are inexorably linked. The fact that you think it boils down solely to Tengen spreading buddhism and jujutsu together, just shows me you are willfully ignoring the evidence that is available to you to be able to put together a full picture.

Well until that “supernatural stuff” is expressly clarified within the series itself, it will remain as an unknown and cannot be extrapolated upon from Buddhism as being those “supernatural abilities” because there is no direct evidence of that.

It has been read the blog.

Yeah and again you’re gonna need more concrete and direct evidence explaining what “heaven” is in the context of the series. This doesn’t have to be a direct statement by Tengen, it can be a symbolic one referring to “heavens and the earth” because even in the statement of Tengen being the world, she refers to the people’s impurity on earth flooding that world. Not the whole universe, just the planet earth.

Yeah this makes absolutely no sense, you are waffling here. This statement is in direct contradiction to your point about Earth and is fully contextualized by the manga as being metaphsycial, especially given ya know, the whole reality of JJK is inherently abstract.

Yes because a “higher existence” needs to be directly explained of what it entails in the series itself and cannot be extrapolated upon from religious understandings of what “higher existence” entails. That’s just not how the wiki works and I’ve literally dealt with series that have far far more direct linkage to Buddhism where “higher existence” still wasn’t totally accepted for a character reaching Nirvana.

Yes, and the point about Tengen being HDE has been dropped for some time now. I expressly stated that that ability was the only one the blog didn't touch on and instead was based on a scan from the most recent chapter. I have literally not argued for HDE passed that point. That is a separate point to Tengen being one with the universe.

Nope, you need a direct confirmation and statement that they’re “going against the Samsara framework of rebirth” otherwise that’s just extrapolation off of Buddhist concepts off of NAME ALONE.

Yeah bro, NGL. I'm done with you until you actually show enough integrity to read my evidence. You literally keep claiming things I have already outlined in the blog. I am not going to copy and paste the blog because "You don't want to read a book". That's not how this works.

I am going to report for derailing if you keep doing this moving into the thread.

 

[Dr._whiteee]

I will say a few points, I am not familiar with JJK other than the 1st season of the anime, I am not at all familiar with Buddhism, the most I can attest to is that the L2-C rating for cosmology seems valid, may change my opinion if someone more knowledgeable finds some flaw in some scan or whatever.

I'm not sure why you commented on that aspect. That low 2-C was a literal footnote at the end of the thread meant for people to understand I was not trying to scale realms for Buddhism. My point being you expressly read the thread based on your comment "that was a long read" and didn't bring up any contentions at that point of time.

Yet now, you are agreeing with someone who expressly didn't read the blog and has since been given evidence which directly runs counter to the point you agreed with them on? That math doesn't math for me.

My opinion never went to the direct use of Buddhism, even Planck questioned the use of Buddhism to in-universe powers and extrapolate abilities, and to which he later said he assumed you were going to use those terms and concepts for scaling, which is what you are trying to do now.

Incorrect, me and planck had a discussion regarding using the thread for Ontological reasons vs Cosmological reasons. Once explained, Planck expressly agreed with the ontological applications discussed in the thread.

Nothing from the blog was used for scaling, the only scan that was used for anything close to that was the HDE panel from the recent chapter, an argument that was removed.

Right now I am against the extrapolated use of Buddhism to give abilities based on vague little mentions arguing for their use IRL, so disagree and still agree with Maitreya and Tatsumi reasons.

Sure, but you and the other side still have yet to actually outline what aspects I took from Buddhism without evidence. One of the main contentions for instance, was the void stuff mentioned. Tatsu was given a post above which outlined information only from JJK which outlined my point in the blog. He is now going to read it.

So given the above, has your stance changed?

 

[Dr._whiteee]

Anyway, the blog is too long and it triggered my laziness, so i can't read all of it (coupled with being busy), however i do agree with @Dereck03 and @Maitreya about refrain from using Buddhism too much, if those ability perform at least 1 feats that like Buddhism then i agree with giving the abilities that kind of hax, but if they don't and just have a name tied to Buddhism, i disagree. I not fault your argument @Dr._whiteee , and while i can understand what logic you use, at least on this wiki, it fall under highest leap in assumption, which not many gonna agree with

Literally none of the thread is doing that. Everything in the blog is sourced from the series except for the links to the general concepts I am proving exist in JJK. The OP also has no links or statements from places outside of the manga. I am really confused as to why this point keeps getting brought up, and yet no one can actually point out where this is occurring.

 

[Arkenis]

Can we please just get admins in here to discuss this instead of ya just arguing about it? Nothing this big is gonna get accepted off ya going back and forth.

 

[BestMGQScalerEver]

Can we please just get admins in here to discuss this instead of ya just arguing about it? Nothing this big is gonna get accepted off ya going back and forth.

The curse of JJK

 

[TheGunsFinalWrath]

If i did not read, how i gonna arguing with @Dr._whiteee about Dimensional Manipulation being invalid???. Seriously can we have better conversation rather than you asking me did i read this and that??, we spent 10 comments for this same kind of question which we could do more contributive comment to the thread with the same amount

ye cuz here comes my question, Which I find odd about some of yall. How do some of yall read through this thread which contains at least DOUBLE the word count and character count compared to the ontology blog. All that back and forth yall read but not the ontology blog which contains way less?
Not to mention, I find any of what yall said quite unconvincing when you don't read the full context (your own self admittance), which mainly includes Mait and Tatsumi (Although the latter did bother later on to read it which is good, but like bruh how do you come in to debate in this thread whilst purposefully ignoring the full context needed to better understand the thread?) so when any of yall who hasn't read the full context but come here to either argue, or agree, yall kinda make your words or the side you hold quite invalid. Like no offense but, what are you doing? This is a CRT.

Oh yeah, I should also reply to Dereck's argument about people being able to agree to any argument even if they don't know the full context..

It is not your duty to question a person in that way, what does it matter to you if the person has read everything or only the arguments of both sides or nothing, everyone has the right to agree with whoever they find most reliable and even more so if they provide their explanations as to why or why not they agree with the thread.

First off, I have no issue with a person agreeing with somebody else or not, but if that person has not read the full context of this CRT (I want you to focus on what CRT stands for), comes to argue/agree to somebody's else argument without knowing the full context of both sides to truly choose a side, then I don't see as to why that person's words wouldn't be invalid, or straight up ignored to even count as a vote or whatever. I am specifically talking about PEOPLE not reading the full context that the OP tells you to read.

So that being said, I'm sure the site, specifically in CRT threads, do not work like how you're presenting it.

 

[Dereck03]

First off, I have no issue with a person agreeing with somebody else or not, but if that person has not read the full context of this CRT (I want you to focus on what CRT stands for), comes to argue/agree to somebody's else argument without knowing the full context of both sides to truly choose a side, then I don't see as to why that person's words wouldn't be invalid, or straight up ignored to even count as a vote or whatever. I am specifically talking about PEOPLE not reading the full context that the OP tells you to read.

Okay, you already quoted me and answered to my comment so why are you doing it again?

 

[TheGunsFinalWrath]

Okay, you already quoted me and answered to my comment so why are you doing it again?

Mainly because I didn't bother at that time (was quite late in the night and I was tired) to go over with what I found to be wrong about what you said.

 

[Maitreya12]

I already did, literally just spent time outlining the verses correlation with the term.

And I outlined how having correlating terms means nothing for the proposed upgrades.

You once again seem to be confused about how the wiki standards work. I am not saying the Nirvana in JJK is the same one mentioned in Buddhism verbatim. I don't need a direct 1 to 1 correlation to prove the the concept of Nirvana exists in JJK because I already shown how the verse outright incorporated the framework for Buddhism into the verses ontology, especially given the stuff about Tengen dissolving her ego and becoming one with the universe, that is a blatant ontological correlate.

No I’m not confusing how the wiki standards work because I literally have both dealt with these same standards before and the staff that have commented in this thread have said that the standards you’re employing aren’t the standards the wiki uses. So no, I think I’m right on the mark with how wiki standards work.

And yeah you do need a direct 1:1 correlation to prove the concept of Nirvana exists in the way we understand it to in JJK. That’s what “ontologically” means, that they share the same fundamental being of existence, but you can’t prove they share the same fundamental being of existence without proving Nirvana shares the same fundamental being in JJK as it does with Buddhism, which there is no direct evidence for in the series. There isn’t even proper evidence that Tengen “became one with the universe” since there is no evidence in JJK that stops Tengen from becoming one with the planet, you only find that evidence in Buddhism and extrapolate that logic into JJK that Tengen can’t be one with the earth because it’s “trapped in samsara” despite no such statement like that existing within the series itself.

Tengen may SHARE some similarities with enlightenment of Buddhism, but that doesn’t mean they are ONTOLOGICALLY the same as one another without more substantiative proof.

Sharing some similarities=/=ontologically the same. That’s just now how wiki standards work.

Yes it does, if you're going to make a claim like such you have to substantiate it.

I literally did substantiate it…with a staff quote that agreed with the position I took.

This is a complete misrepresentation of what is being said and the overall correlates provided in the blog. To begin with, Tengen didn't create Buddhism...He spread "Japanese Buddhism" or Mahayana Buddhism. Once again, this understanding of Buddhism and how it works, is what led to Tengen discoveringthe foundations for Jujutsu. This 100% means that Jujutsu and Buddhism go hand in hand on an ontological level.

No they don’t, not at all whatsoever and this is not how wiki standards work. That simply isn’t enough evidence to demonstrate ontological similarities between one another, more direct and explanative statements and showings are needed to show ontological likeness as I’ve already laid out multiple times now.

Second off, you are literally ignoring 99% of the evidence which is leading to my statements. This isn't some random character mentioning Buddhism and me trying to scale from statements in the religion. The manga is fundamentally based on Buddhism and the framework for the verses power is 100% dependant on said concepts.

The manga being based off of Buddhism and sharing similar concepts to Buddhism isn’t enough to claim they have the same fundamental foundational basis with those concepts as I and other people have already outlined in previous posts.

Yeah see, this is where I am going to stop humoring you because we're getting into blatantly dishonest territory.

Again more accusations that serve no purpose for this discussion.

The whole blog is available to you outlining how Buddhism and Jujutsu are inexorably linked. The fact that you think it boils down solely to Tengen spreading buddhism and jujutsu together, just shows me you are willfully ignoring the evidence that is available to you to be able to put together a full picture.

The evidence presented in your blog still doesn’t change the position I took against yours. Showing how Buddhism and Jujutsu have links to one another doesn’t prove ontological likeness to one another. Sharing similarities doesn’t prove having the exact same foundational basis. A lot more needs to be presented and directly explained to prove that.

Your blog isn’t the end all be all of things, I read your blog and I’m still against the position you’re taking.

It has been read the blog.

No it has not, I have read the blog and the position still remains the same.

Yeah this makes absolutely no sense, you are waffling here. This statement is in direct contradiction to your point about Earth and is fully contextualized by the manga as being metaphsycial, especially given ya know, the whole reality of JJK is inherently abstract.

Yes, and the point about Tengen being HDE has been dropped for some time now. I expressly stated that that ability was the only one the blog didn't touch on and instead was based on a scan from the most recent chapter. I have literally not argued for HDE passed that point. That is a separate point to Tengen being one with the universe.

It’s not just about Tengen having HDE, tengen having immortality type 9 because of the claim of being one with the universe is another position I disagreed with. Along with causality manipulation for Mahoraga which multiple other people have took issue with, it’s not just about Tengen having HDE though that point certainly relates to the position we’re arguing against.

Yeah bro, NGL. I'm done with you until you actually show enough integrity to read my evidence. You literally keep claiming things I have already outlined in the blog. I am not going to copy and paste the blog because "You don't want to read a book". That's not how this works.

Literally never said that and I’ve read your blog. Your blog isn’t the magical end all he all of discussions, my position still remains the same that the evidence you presented isn’t enough to substantiate the claims you’re making here. Your blog doesn’t change that.

I am going to report for derailing if you keep doing this moving into the thread.

You’re welcome to lil bro. If you honestly believe anything I’ve said in this thread is report worthy in the slightest go ahead and try to report me bro, we can let staff deal with that. All Imma say is that nothing I’ve said here is report worthy in the slightest, in fact I find you’ve been more rude to me in this conversation by far, and nothing I’ve said is derailing this thread as the points I make all relate to the positions brought up in the OP.

But go ahead dude, you do you.

 

[ImmortalDread]

I am opposed to the suggested abilities Mait has been arguing against for the same reasons. He is making sense to me.

 

[Dalesean027]

Yeah gotta agree with Maitreya here, that's just a given as the burden of proof would fall on you. If there's no sufficient enough evidence of them being the same as our real world counterparts in every aspect or statements of confirmation then you can't use it cause its "similar"

 

[TheGunsFinalWrath]

Literally never said that and I’ve read your blog. Your blog isn’t the magical end all he all of discussions, my position still remains the same that the evidence you presented isn’t enough to substantiate the claims you’re making here. Your blog doesn’t change that.

You would need to go over the blog, breaking down the evidence to prove that it isn't enough to substantiate the claims Dr is making then. Because you two are just going back and forth without getting really anywhere. So address the source directly.

 

[Maverick_Zero_X]

Yeah gotta agree with Maitreya here, that's just a given as the burden of proof would fall on you. If there's no sufficient enough evidence of them being the same as our real world counterparts in every aspect or statements of confirmation then you can't use it cause its "similar"

Agree with this.

 

[Dr._whiteee]

Yeah gotta agree with Maitreya here, that's just a given as the burden of proof would fall on you. If there's no sufficient enough evidence of them being the same as our real world counterparts in every aspect or statements of confirmation then you can't use it cause its "similar"

Dale.

The OP has an accepted cosmology blog linked and the evidence laid out in the thread is also available in the OP. Maitreya admitted to not reading the thread of evidence before commenting.

The single thing not linked on shaky grounds from a new panel from the latest chapter was already removed.

I fail to understand how you are going tk make this claim without actually looking into the ckntext here as it relates to thread.

No offense, but if your surmisation here is that i just picked key words out and gave characters powers based on that alone, then you have not actually evaluated the OP.

 

[BestMGQScalerEver]

Dale.

The OP has an accepted cosmology blog linked and the evidence laid out in the thread is also available in the OP. Maitreya admitted to not reading the thread of evidence before commenting.

The single thing not linked on shaky grounds from a new panel from the latest chapter was already removed.

I fail to understand how you are going tk make this claim without actually looking into the ckntext here as it relates to thread.

No offense, but if your surmisation here is that i just picked key words out and gave characters powers based on that alone, then you have not actually evaluated the OP.

From what I'm getting the staff who accepted the blog didn't quite understand the implications (or it wasn't their intent) you were going to go for with cross scaling in future threads so it was likely an oversight on their part. Even multiple staff disagreed with scaling (scaling includes hax/abilities) actual buddhism to JJK in the thread.

 

[Dr._whiteee]

From what I'm getting the staff who accepted the blog didn't quite understand the implications (or it wasn't their intent) you were going to go for with cross scaling in future threads so it was likely an oversight on their part. Even multiple staff disagreed with scaling (scaling includes hax/abilities) actual buddhism to JJK in the thread.

No, I already went over this and you can directly read the exchange with Planck.

Planck was asking about cosmological scaling, none of which is occuring im this thread. Staff explicitly okay’d the ontological aspects to be used for abilities, which the OP of that thread and the title clearly outline.

 

[BestMGQScalerEver]

No, I already went over this and you can directly read the exchange with Planck.

Planck was asking about cosmological scaling, none of which is occuring im this thread. Staff explicitly okay’d the ontological aspects to be used for abilities, which the OP of that thread and the title clearly outline.

Doesn't seem so explicit to me and is actually quite up in the air how the acceptance can be interrpeted. Even Dereck who accepted the previous thread disagrees with part of this thread regarding the ontology side so you should take that into consideration

 

[LordGinSama]

I'm fine with the cosmology being like this via Buddhism jazz as long as it doesn't actually scale to anyone.

 

[BestMGQScalerEver]

The fundamental nature of the JJK universe is emptiness. Cursed energy and existence flicker darkly in the chaos, and we can see the same is true of the core of cursed energy, innate domains/souls

One thing that's also quite weird is using visual representation of a metaphor and extrapolating it so far and wide.

 

[Dr._whiteee]

Doesn't seem so explicit to me and is actually quite up in the air how the acceptance can be interrpeted. Even Dereck who accepted the previous thread disagrees with part of this thread regarding the ontology side so you should take that into consideration

No it's not. The thread was literally titled

"Jujutsu Kaisen Ontology/Ability Explanation Thread"​

The OP stated

Hello,

I am proposing my blog here to act as the foundation for understanding the abilities found in Jujutsu Kaisen. I wasn't sure of this process, so I figured I would open my document up to the public for comment. I encourage comments and criticisms; please try to keep it civil, and please try not to spam the thread with comments that don't contribute to the discussion. I don't want this thread to be 20 pages long. With that said, below is a link to the sandbox I made discussing the titular content.

Please let me know where there is room for confusion with my intentions regarding the thread.

And yeah, Dereck apparently was only commenting on the Low 2-C stuff since they addmitedly have only seen season 1 of the anime and have no context regarding buddhism. So not sure why you are bringing them up.

 

[TheGunsFinalWrath]

Doesn't seem so explicit to me and is actually quite up in the air how the acceptance can be interrpeted. Even Dereck who accepted the previous thread disagrees with part of this thread regarding the ontology side so you should take that into consideration

the thread already made it quite clear though? Like dr white showed rn. Dereck only commented about the low 2-C part but made no comment about the other parts even though Dereck said that he read through the blog fully. (the ontological parts were the main theme too) only reason dereck disagrees from what I understand is simply because two other people said disagreed.

 

[BestMGQScalerEver]

No it's not. The thread was literally titled

"Jujutsu Kaisen Ontology/Ability Explanation Thread"​

The OP stated


Please let me know where there is room for confusion with my intentions regarding the thread.

And yeah, Dereck apparently was only commenting on the Low 2-C stuff since they addmitedly have only seen season 1 of the anime and have no context regarding buddhism. So not sure why you are bringing them up.

I stand corrected. But I still don't see the resolution of the agreements as clear. Dereck agrees with L2-C but clarifies he disagrees with ability parts here. Planck suggests with his agreement here that he didn't agree with scaling to abilities and AP but also agreed with general ontology parts of it as seen here. Although I could be misinterpreting what Planck said.

I see what you mean. I guess I assumed it was applying scaling from said concepts.

Well, I agree with the thread in terms of the ontology aspects, though the cosmology doesn't really need proof of being Low 2-C, since that's obvious.

So yea it's still pretty inconcise

 

[Dr._whiteee]

Yeah

I stand corrected. But I still don't see the resolution of the agreements as clear. Dereck agrees with L2-C but clarifies he disagrees with ability parts here

Yes, despite Dereck having the oppurtunity to comment after reading the thread, he didn't. Until now, where he was convinced by two people who didn't read the thread. I am just as confused as you on that part.

. Planck suggests with his agreement here that he didn't agree with scaling to abilities and AP but also agreed with general ontology parts of it as seen here.

Incorrect, once again MGQ, read the exchange. Planck agreed to adding the ontological aspects to abilities, he didn't agree with using stuff in Buddhism not mentioned in the series to scale the actual cosmological scale of the universe. None of that has happened.

I think there may some misunderstanding of what this thread is trying to accomplish. This thread mostly highlights how the Buddhist concepts and Buddhism overall correlate to the nature of reality in JJK. I am not, say, using cosmological elements of Buddhism (such as it's many higher planes, and crazy 1-A+ statements, etc) that have not been shown in the manga proper.

The examples you have all have to due with applying background mythological events to the story proper. This thread isn't doing anything like that outside of what the manga tells us directly happening (Tengen, a buddha who did eventually become one with the universe, teaching Jujutsu and Buddhism hand in hand and spurring the greatest age of jujutsu being notable) or happened in the story. The thread is highlighting how the ontology of JJK is placed firmly in Buddhist thought and pretty much inseparable from it.

So I can see your points (being a Megami Tensei fan I'm familiar with the standards for correlating IRL philosophy with verse-specific cosmologies) but I don't think they apply to this specific blog and what it is trying to accomplish.

I see what you mean. I guess I assumed it was applying scaling from said concepts.

Well, I agree with the thread in terms of the ontology aspects, though the cosmology doesn't really need proof of being Low 2-C, since that's obvious.

So yea it's still pretty inconcise

Not really.

 

[BestMGQScalerEver]

I am very indeed confused about this all.

 

[Dereck03]

Okay, i see intention of somewhat question the validity of my vote saying that i agreed with 2 persons who haven't read the thread, to make it clear, I read the OP, then I read the arguments, then I agreed with Tatsumi and Maitreya's argument, is that hard to understand?

the thread already made it quite clear though? Like dr white showed rn. Dereck only commented about the low 2-C part but made no comment about the other parts even though Dereck said that he read through the blog fully. (the ontological parts were the main theme too) only reason dereck disagrees from what I understand is simply because two other people said disagreed.

Okay, this is like the 10th time I see you questioning the validity of our votes for X or Y reason, stop doing so, it's annoying, take this as and advise.

Also yeah, planck disagreed with the use of buddhism in verse abilities or concept application over it. As he said he thought you were trying to achieve that in the ontology thread but that's literally what are you trying to do here so the point comes back the the start.

 

[Dereck03]

Anyway, staff summary of the votes

Agree.

Disagree. Dalesan027 (Buddhims scale), MaverickZero (Buddhims scale) , Dereck03 (Buddhims scale)

Neutral.

If someone can summ up the regular votes would be appreciated.

 

[Dr._whiteee]

Okay, i see intention of somewhat question the validity of my vote saying that i agreed with 2 persons who haven't read the thread, to make it clear, I read the OP, then I read the arguments, then I agreed with Tatsumi and Maitreya's argument, is that hard to understand?


Okay, this is like the 10th time I see you questioning the validity of our votes for X or Y reason, stop doing so, it's annoying, take this as and advise.

Also yeah, planck disagreed with the use of buddhism in verse abilities or concept application over it. As he said he thought you were trying to achieve that in the ontology thread but that's literally what are you trying to do here so the point comes back the the start.

No he didn't. You are just blatantly lying right now.

Yes I am questioning the validity of your vote for the reasons you chose to ignore above. I will outline those arguments again in cause you missed them.

Anyway, staff summary of the votes

Agree.

Disagree. Dalesan027, MaverickZero, Dereck03

Neutral.

If someone can summ up the regular votes would be appreciated.

This is also extremely dishonest. Dale and Maverick only agreed to Maitreya's singular point regarding using Buddhism scaling. They did not even touch the thread itself, nor did they outline anything regarding which points were or were unacceptable. Maitreya himself has agreed with several aspects of the upgrade. Tatsu also explicitly went back on some of his arguments, which you still haven't addressed, thus making those points of yours moot.

 

[SunDaGamer]

Anyway, staff summary of the votes

Agree.

Disagree. Dalesan027, MaverickZero, Dereck03

Neutral.

If someone can summ up the regular votes would be appreciated.

Can we at least get the non-controversial additions (Kenjaku Type 6 immortality, Yuki's Black Hole Creation, Aura additions) accepted even if the ontological hax abilities are rejected?

 

[TheGunsFinalWrath]

Okay, i see intention of somewhat question the validity of my vote saying that i agreed with 2 persons who haven't read the thread, to make it clear, I read the OP, then I read the arguments, then I agreed with Tatsumi and Maitreya's argument, is that hard to understand?

i think it is quite clear that we already understand. it is just strange that you never commented about the previous thread about the ontological parts when it was quite clear and clarified yet now you have a hard disagree about it despite the main theme of it being shoved to our face on the intention. that's what we don't get. but

Okay, this is like the 10th time I see you questioning the validity of our votes for X or Y reason, stop doing so, it's annoying, take this as and advise.

??? I think this is a really valid concern, so your attempts to shut that down is quite weird. How do you agree with somebody that argues about something they do not have full context about? Literally they come in, and ignore the full context and try to argue against the OP.

I don't think in crts we should agree with somebody that self admittedly says that they don't really truly understand what they're talking about tbh (or to be precise: "yeah i never read the full context")

 

[Dereck03]

Can we at least get the non-controversial additions (Kenjaku Type 6 immortality, Yuki's Black Hole Creation, Aura additions) accepted even if the ontological hax abilities are rejected?

I think I gave myself to misinterpretation, there are things that are non-controversial in the thread that the majority accepted without problems so for that there is no problem. Gotta edit my post.

No he didn't. You are just blatantly lying right now.

As for the rest of this, I'm rather hesitant to rely that much on extrapolation of IRL theology and philosophy for in-universe powers, no matter how inspired it is. It would be better if there was a more direct confirmation of such a scale for their powers.

My issues aren't that it doesn't have a clear enough connection to Buddhism and its concepts, that's not really relevant whether it's very loose reference or a Journey to the West tier play-by-play.

But rather how much site standards would allow for using that connection and those referred concepts to give powers a scale that isn't really presented otherwise in the story.

"I don't think we allow jumps from those concepts existing to applying them in-universe".

I see what you mean. I guess I assumed it was applying scaling from said concepts.

Planck agreed because he assumed that you were not trying to make use of concepts of Buddhism to scale up abilities in verse, which is what is being proposed here, by assimilating vague mentions of Buddhism and using its definition to acquire the abilities when they were never fully elaborated or specified.

Yes I am questioning the validity of your vote for the reasons you chose to ignore above. I will outline those arguments again in cause you missed them.

My vote was not changed nor did I say anything, because it remains the same.

This is also extremely dishonest. Dale and Maverick only agreed to Maitreya's singular point regarding using Buddhism scaling. They did not even touch the thread itself, nor did they outline anything regarding which points were or were unacceptable. Maitreya himself has agreed with several aspects of the upgrade. Tatsu also explicitly went back on some of his arguments, which you still haven't addressed, thus making those points of yours moot.

Refer to my reply to @SunDaGamer.

 

[BestMGQScalerEver]

Planck agreed because he assumed that you were not trying to make use of concepts of Buddhism to scale up abilities in verse, which is what is being proposed here, by assimilating vague mentions of Buddhism and using its definition to acquire the abilities when they were never fully elaborated or specified.

I think you should probably ping him so he can clarify.

 

[Dereck03]

I think you should probably ping him so he can clarify.

@Planck69

 

[Dr._whiteee]

Planck agreed because he assumed that you were not trying to make use of concepts of Buddhism to scale up abilities in verse, which is what is being proposed here, by assimilating vague mentions of Buddhism and using its definition to acquire the abilities when they were never fully elaborated or specified.

Dereck, for the fifteenth time. The "Scaling" planck is referring to, is scaling to stats my guy. You purposefully left out my clarifications to him regarding ontological vs cosmological.

So basically, you are saying Planck walked into a thread that said "Abilities thread" where the OP said "this thread will act as the foundation for abilities" and thought after reading my and Planck's conversation, that he meant he was okay with my thread as long as I wasn't going to apply it to abilities?

That makes 0 sense, and Planck never said what you are trying to state.

My vote was not changed nor did I say anything, because it remains the same.

Yes, your vote remains the same despite you not even knowing what we are arguing about, and the person who you attached your vote to also gave some ground. So I am wondering how you are keeping the same position despite those changes

 

[Nierre]

Yeah, Planck was specifically referring to stats iirc, not abilities. The whole point of that thread was for abilities lol, if he disagreed with it being for abilities, then he'd disagree with the thread, but he didn't.

He was just specifically against it scaling for stats.

 

[TheGunsFinalWrath]

Yeah, Planck was specifically referring to stats iirc, not abilities. The whole point of that thread was for abilities lol, if he disagreed with it being for abilities, then he'd disagree with the thread, but he didn't.

He was just specifically against it scaling for stats.

somebody gets it.

 

[ImmortalDread]

I believe (or don't think) that @Planck69 would agree with applying the concept of Buddhism to the verse and using its context to determine abilities and hax. I want to clarify that I am not speaking on his behalf, but it's widely recognized that his philosophy on scaling and evaluation is well-established.

But we can wait for his stance clarification on this matter.

You can y'all drop the mini-accusations and ad hominem attacks. Dereck disagreed with the thread, so leave it as it is.

Anyway, staff summary of the votes

Agree.

Disagree. Dalesan027 (Buddhims scale), MaverickZero (Buddhims scale) , Dereck03 (Buddhims scale)

Neutral.

This seems to be a valid vote tally as well.