has been adressed earlier. I'll be back by friday.
Apparently I'm expected to read the thread from beginning to end now, and that doesn't seem reasonable to me. If there is a specific point somewhere early in the thread that disproves my ideas, then it would be better for someone who has actually been here since the beginning to find it and show me it, since that person wouldn't need to search as hard.
So is somebody willing to help out with this?
Possibly what?
Possibly Low 1-C
I'd be down for that.
Yeah, your issue is that you disagree with the translation provided by Japanese experts both on-site and off-site. You made that pretty clear the last time you commented. And that's fine, but then, how is debating it with me supposed to help? Bring out more translators and hope to find one who agrees with you. Idk.
Wait, so then you do disagree with the translation provided...
...unless what you mean to say is that even with the accurate translation, the Kirby writers still decided to use those words inaccurately. It seems like this might be what you were going for, but it's a completely baseless assumption. It would require counter-evidence that proves AD CAN'T be 5D.
I don't disagree with the translation. I explained why I don't. I already explained why your conclusion doesn't naturally get produced from the statement that got translation and that you analyzed, not that the writers "decided" to use those words "inaccurately". Read the following paragraph while thinking that every time I write that Another Dimension is stated to transcend space-time, I'm referring to it being in the sense of dimensional complexity.
What about the 4-D stuff?
I should clarify that when I wrote "it's not unreasonable to regard Another Dimension as possibly tier 1", I wasn't referring to what's viable to put on the VS Battles Wiki pages, I meant that I understand why some people personally think this. I still think their conclusion is false, probably in the same way that you do.
This kind of aggression, claiming the opposition just doesn't understand what they're talking about, is seriously uncalled for and doesn't contribute to any meaningful discussion
It's already a small multiverse, in that sense it's already 4-D.
Being direct isn't the same as being aggressive, claiming some people "doesn't understand what they're talking about" is in fact something you can do in a discussion if concluded that way. If true, it sets the state of things and how things need to be worked from that. I wouldn't for example say this on their back, it needs to be said in the discussion itself. You may be confusing being aggressive with the reality I proposed being harsh, which is not the same.
I can't really say I agree with that, because... What does that even accomplish? Like, I can kinda see what you're saying, but that's more of an ideal scenario. In reality, what happens is just that the people who you claim to "not know what they're talking about" just end up feeling insulted by it.
Although it'd be preferable for him to not be coldly blunt, I should point out that his message did contribute to meaningful discussion, because it made me realize that my previous message could be misinterpreted so I made a clarification after, and because his message did confirm that his viewpoint is the same as it has been. I describe Eficiente's contributions as a double-edged sword.
AD does transcend space & time, and this is meaningless w/o the way in which it transcends space & time being infinitely so. Because anything can transcend anything, you may even hear the word in real life, where no target of it is infinitely greater than what it transcends. This was talked about in the thread before and you can read about it in the Tiering Q&A.
Well, in general saying something like that can at best make others summon more knowledgeable users about a topic, or make the people already in the thread be a bit more sharp because maybe that's needed, maybe in part that comes in the form of a bigger effort to explain things being made. At worst, it's still pretty worth it as it states one's perspective of the truth of the matter around, and that alone is good enough, imagine in the future after the thread is done someone else comes to read it, as we have most of everything registered, and imagine am I right on my assertion, see more value on it now? I would rather not have people read threads and think "Ok so I'm noticing [X bad or improvable thing] and nobody is catching up to it (Bold, but fair)/they're not even saying they notice it (More true...unless there really is no one catching up to it), how would they let alone overcome it?". Take the third person view as more of an example, it improves things to have an accurate analysis of everything so far to decide what to do next or simply keep on participating, which includes opinions that aren't hard facts that would take a second to test, which includes negative takes.
Exactly. The disagreement is over whether or not it transcends it infinitely. I and Pepto at least view it as such, you clearly disagree and think it does so to a lesser extent not justifying a full tier jump, that's fine -- I fully understand what's going on here and how the Tiering System works. I'm just saying a "possibly" rating would at least allow some nuance to show that it could be interpreted as 5D, though it's not a certainty. Even without that, we could at the very least have some mention of the possibility in the blogs, if nothing else.
I just said what the problem is... You are too angry..
That's the golden mean fallacy. It's not that (Eficiente and) I only disagree with the interpretation as if the truth is that much of a mystery. I go further than that, explaining how the interpretation of Another Dimension being 5D isn't viable for the VS Battles Wiki. I have not seen that the way I explained it has been disproven.
Undertale fans and Dragon Ball fans are toxic kids, it makes sense.
I will allow that comment respectfully
This thread is not about upgrading the character, it's upgrading the cosmology, so your posts on the matter are only clogging the thread further. Yes, an upgrade to the cosmology would likely lead to an upgrade for Kirby. It's obvious that the attempt would happen if this upgrade goes through. But instead of doubling down on a topic this thread was never meant to handle, the thread needs to be honed in on what it has been trying to accomplish FOR YEARS. This is exactly why it has taken so long to get literally anywhere, be it upgrade or not. (This isn't a tirade against you, btw)
You quoted my message out of context to do the straw man fallacy. However, I should clarify that I meant to be doing a comparison example.
The Fallacy Fallacy AND an assumption of my intent, it wasn't my goal to strawman you but it doesn't make my point of needing to keep this revision on track any less valid.
That one I'll say is on me, my b. Still, it could set the precedence that these things can and should be discussed when they really shouldn't be.
My point was to show how indulging in the golden mean fallacy leads to bad consequences, which was the premise of my message that I established in the first paragraph, which you left out in your quote. I only used Kirby's power as a comparison example to make my first paragraph more comprehensible. I could've used a different character from a different fictional work as a comparison example. Kirby scaling to Another Dimension is indeed irrelevant to the overall point of this thread, but my message was already on track.
Completely fine, my dude! Was definitely just a misunderstanding on my part lol, glad we solved that quickly
Like Eficiente wrote in post number 897: "It's already a small multiverse, in that sense it's already 4-D." Plus, it already clearly has a special connection to wormholes. Another Dimension being stated to be higher-dimensional could've been referring to its nature and legitimate 4D effects rather than its size. None of the statements about it being beyond space-time explicitly refer to its size.
I personally enjoy embracing how fictional characters can be interpreted in many different ways, but it's unclear how all of the staff feels about that and apparently a speculative ranking isn't the proper usage of "possibly" on the VS Battles Wiki.
2 staff?
You're not staff it just shows you in the list because Image Helpers and Calc Group Members are quite useful in some scenarios.
