The_Pink_God
She/Her- 2,641
- 733
"Giving Up" is simply not an existing concept for this man
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.
I already said multiple times that character tier discussions shouldn't even be a part of this thread, let alone a priority. It doesn't stop people from getting excited though, which unfortunately leads to minor derailment.I don't like where the priorities are placed.
I'm struggling to understand what you mean by that. Are you saying we need to change the FAQ standards again in order to shut down this upgrade? Because merely changing the wording isn't gonna do anything against the main argument.Even if this was correct and that much to be applied (which is not), the thing to do isn't to roll with "some agree, some disagree" and apply it to a profile, but to change the wordings on standards we have to better clarify that's right and what's wrong from the point of view of anyone evaluating cases like this.
Even if the cosmology as a whole is Low 1-C, Magolor's feat could still just be 2-C for reasons that would take long to explain and would distract from the topic at hand. In other words, even if the cosmology revision is accepted, it doesn't automatically translate to a tier upgrade for the Kirby cast. It's possible that Forgotten Land changes that by bringing a cosmology breaking feat, but again, I digress (and that's wishful thinking).I said IF this gets excepted
No worries. I just hope it's cleared up for everyone else.Sorry about that btw
27-4, but it's not like it makes much of a difference lolJesus Christ, this is not only slow and boring, but also incredibly undemocratic.
24-4, yet the 4 nays are winning.
That's what you're bound to get yourself into when you release a CRT on this Wiki. I knew what to expect, so the problem isn't the "tyranny of the minority" as much as it is the fact that I'm honestly being pretty generous with the 4 disagreeing votes... They're either backed by outdated evidence or by stuff I already debunked and never got any refute against. Looking back, it seems only one of them even tries to challenge the main argument and that was Everything12 with his "kanjis and meaning are worthless" argument. It's very odd, so hopefully Eli and Ultima can bring some clarity.Even the electoral college ain't this undemocratic.
Lemmie stop you right there. That's not my argument. "ru" and "ta" are not the difference between the "越える" and "超える" forms of koeru. You can even see they end with the same katakana. The difference between the two is the kanji at the start. The one that leads with "越" translates to going beyond (outside of) something whereas the one that starts with "超" translates to being beyond (surpassing) it. You can look over my sources again if you feel the need.I've come to slightly harm your argument today. I was meaning to say this for a while but i was a bit worried about my own thoughts and whether or now i was right but yeah, i am right, i haven't been learning japanese for nothing.
Your argument about the japanese words having a "ru" instead of a "ta" at the end is useless.
alright makes sense, sorry i am feeling like shiz as of late so i may not notice stuff that ain't obvious. Either way i shall stop arguing against your pointLemmie stop you right there. That's not my argument. "ru" and "ta" are not the difference between the "越える" and "超える" forms of koeru. You can even see they end with the same katakana. The difference between the two is the kanji at the start. The one that leads with "越" translates to going beyond (outside of) something whereas the one that starts with "超" translates to being beyond (surpassing) it. You can look over my sources again if you feel the need.
Thanks for voicing your concerns regardless. I guess that's more constructive than a plain old "bump".
i still think it is low 1-C, though i feel like it may not be quite enough around these parts...idk, all i can do is wish you luckNo worries man. You still have the right to argue against the upgrade in other ways that may make sense to you. That's your right to freedom of speech and I'd rather spend time debunking any remaining counterargument than I would by trying to convince staff members to give a damn about this old ass thread lol
That's exactly why I was asking for yours. Of course, I'm not forcing you to approve, but if you still disagree, it's crucial that you give me a reason for it that I haven't already debunked. The last time I contacted you to take a look at the thread, this is all you left me with:At this point, at best, I would say restart this thread as staff threads with a summary of the arguments for more inputs. Currently, there are not enough approvals for implementation.
What if the right conclusion isn't Low 1-C Kirby tho?I have no doupt it will. With all due respect, I don't trust you guys enough to give up the already small amount of power I have over this thread and place its fate in the hands of staff members who have continually neglected it and ignored my arguments. At this point, with this discussion being around half a year old in total, I don't care how quickly we reach a conclusion. I just want it to be the right one. If you really want this thread to go quicker, either refute my points or agree with the upgrade. If you need another summary of my arguments, I can provide it. If you have any questions, ask away.
There is no instance of a nation benefitting from prolonged warfare.What if the right conclusion isn't Low 1-C Kirby tho?
Ultima hasn't said much, but what he did say had substance. He deserves a mention too, and it's a real shame he seems to have ghosted me (and the thread as a whole). LolThere is no instance of a nation benefitting from prolonged warfare.
-Sun tzu, The art of war
We're tired of this, we just wanna end it with people properly refuting Pepto or low 1-C cosmology getting accepted. It doesn't matter, what we need is just a conclusion. This thread was only ever truly replied to by Eficiente and Everything12 neither of whom have properly refuted Pepto's recent rebuttals
I do regret having taken time in the thread over something that should purely be rules saying what not to do.This thread was only ever truly replied to by Eficiente and Everything12 neither of whom have properly refuted Pepto's recent rebuttals
Determinationits insane how this thread is still going