- 46
- 27
it's like you don't understand what I'm arguing about, Already I want to sleep
-
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.
maou gakuin no futekigousha Upgrade from 2-A to low 1-C
- Thread starter ImmortalDread
- Start date
- Status
- 1,489
- 931
Yes, he is, even he is possibly one of the strongest top 0 in MGK
- 230
- 147
what are you arguing then?
- 18,393
- 14,323
- Thread starter
- #165
Mhm, I will right now downgrade the verse since this seems not sufficient at all.
Abstractly_a_Protagonist
He/Him- 1,675
- 1,428
Can you please, clearly state, what are you arguing about?it's like you don't understand what I'm arguing about, Already I want to sleep
What problem do you have with the evidence presented in the OP?
And please, by all manner, use a simpler term and words so everyone can understand.
Saying people should read certain theory is not really helping people to understand what are you arguing about.
- 18,393
- 14,323
- Thread starter
- #167
Btw, I am joking with this because I know clearly this is adequate to get 6D XD
- 1,489
- 931
I'm on the same side as Einstein here, I agree.
- 5,392
- 4,307
I agree with 5D, the wording fits the whole "subset" thing in our tiering system, I am neutral on 6D. Plus I know pain is going to rip into this soon.
Edit; On an unrelated note, biggest Maou Gakuin CRT, and you couldn't capitalize the word "maou" XD
Edit; On an unrelated note, biggest Maou Gakuin CRT, and you couldn't capitalize the word "maou" XD
- 18,393
- 14,323
- Thread starter
- #170
W person as always.
Abstractly_a_Protagonist
He/Him- 1,675
- 1,428
He also mispell Graham name to Garham XD
- 11,410
- 20,074
I want to die as well.
- 46
- 27
Please read carefully, I will simplify it
First, I asked why with the qualitative time difference, you can get 6D, ā
Followed by the answer by the two people above, that because there is an addition of a temporal dimension, so it has two temporal dimensionsā
And
Here I make an argument that the time difference occurs not because of the addition of the temporal dimension, but because there is ā
And the arguments I'm making are based off of the theory of relativity, not just bullshit coming out of my head,
Instead of supporting the arguments I gave, they didn't care about it, and thought the arguments I brought were just nonsense.
- 230
- 147
alright i see what you're suggesting, this is debunked by the statement itself. It explains that in the silver sea time had stopped for about 699986000 years, thus it was not because of relativistic effects, but because time itself in the silver sea had stopped.
One second here in the 7th of Elenesia is exactly the same as one second in the Militia World." Sasha looked more and more puzzled. "Then, what do you mean?" "A discrepancy in time somehow occurred once. And now, it's back to normal, I guess." For example, if nearly 700 million years have passed only in the Militia World, while time has stopped in this Silver Sea, it would make sense.
- 168,536
- 77,316
Can you or somebody else here first explain what they need to evaluate in easy to understand manners please?
- 18,393
- 14,323
- Thread starter
- #176
So wait, let me understand, are the votes of people ignored, and only knowledgeable people will be valued?
Wow
- 46
- 27
Sorry, I really don't care anymore.
It seems that arguments that use logic are not appreciated here and people here (not all) are concerned with nonsense without any basis at all.
- 2,381
- 765
Bruh moment
- 18,393
- 14,323
- Thread starter
- #179
Eh?
- 625
- 434
What more do you want?
- 168,536
- 77,316
I just arrived here you know, but our staff members with thread evaluation authority have the final say, as they are supposed to act as neutral evaluators and buffers.
Non-staff members who know much about our tiering system should preferably be carefully listened to by them though.
- 7,142
- 4,658
It's basically all in the opening, a revision for this verse to be made Low 1-C; either 5D or 6D.
- 168,536
- 77,316
@First_Witch @Elizhaa @KingPin0422 @Qawsedf234 @Pain_to12 @Agnaa @GreatIskandar14045
What do you think about this? Would you be willing to help out here please?
- 11,410
- 20,074
It should be clear that not all staff are knowledgeable and there are many more regular members who can easily outclass a staff in an evaluation quality but obviously the word of the staff > regular member, anyway we only asked him to elaborate on the reason why he disagreed on X thing, saying no to X and neutral on Y is not a clear evaluation you know?
- 4,302
- 2,800
I keep hearing this "Argument from Belief" statement being thrown around, but like what does that even mean? The closest fallacy to it is Appeal to Common Belief, which is the exact opposite of what Everything is doing by disagreeing. Also like, aren't all arguments from personal belief? Yall acting like arguing based of what you believe is some sort of fallacy when it's exactly what everybody does.
Extra point: Nobody is obligated to give their list of reasons for disagreeing. You can ask for it if they really don't give any, but you can't disregard their vote just because they didn't explain why.
I'm neutral rn.
Extra point: Nobody is obligated to give their list of reasons for disagreeing. You can ask for it if they really don't give any, but you can't disregard their vote just because they didn't explain why.
I'm neutral rn.
- 7,142
- 4,658
They seem to think that you are treating my opinion in the post you quoted as knowledgeable on this matter and of importance for the final conclusion.
Just a case of misunderstanding what's been said.
- 168,536
- 77,316
Well, you are usually rational and do have evaluation rights, but that does not make you automatically familiar with this particular verse.
- 168,536
- 77,316
Yes.
- 11,410
- 20,074
Agreed.
Agree and disagree, Everything12 may not be a supporter or interested in this verse, but he has been participating for a long time on several occasions, that is to be appreciated as well.
- 7,142
- 4,658
Well I do have some familiarity with the verse and it's mechanics, but I understand I am only somewhat knowledgeable on Tier 1 and it's best I wait for the opinions on other more knowledgeable people before I make any final judgement.
- 18,393
- 14,323
- Thread starter
- #193
A: Disagree with the thread, don't think the evidence is sufficient.
B: Ahm, what exactly do you disagree with? Mind elaborating?
A: I just read your evidence, and my opinion based on my knowledge and experience in the wiki is that it isn't sufficient. Nothing more, nothing less.
Extra Note: he disagreed with 6D but was also unsure about 5D and request other knowledgeable members to evaluate instead of him. Was it rejecting in purpose?
How does this look to neutral evaluators for you? Btw, this is from your staff @Everything12
I want to be absolutely respectful and not offend anyone Ant, and you know that I like you, but this is somehow hilarious the way this staff acts toward my CRT.
After he ignores the whole mess he created in Acc type 5, and after one month's absence, he came into my CRT specifically dropping his disagreement.
No offence, but it took hours to create this thread and also extra hours creating the cosmology overview, not just to get rejected because ābased on my knowledge this does not seem efficientā
Also, I think you missed a point here, people who agree here, specifically agreeing with evidence. So their agreement is based on the evidence presented on CRT, his disagreement is based on āArgument from Beliefā. So, somehow there is quite a huge difference.
What do you mean, exactly, no one is obligated to give their reasoning for disagreeing? How do we suppose to continue the thread if some random people disagree without any reason? Would you like this happening to you in the CRT, where people disagree without their reasons? This is the exact reason why countless threads are being paused and ignored because simply the people never give significant input/reasoning besides their disagreement.
- 4,302
- 2,800
His disagreement is based of his own reasoning. You form reasoning through seeing the evidence and forming a conclusion. The people who agreed saw the evidence and greed, while he saw the evidence and thought it wasn't strong enough.
Once again, "Argument from Belief" isn't a thing.
The reasoning he gave was that he thought the evidence provided wasn't strong enough. It may not be a full college essay on why he disagrees, but it's a valid reason. And no, I wouldn't mind if someone did the exact same thing on mine, I would just ask what they thought was weak about and if they didn't say I would count their vote and move on. Countless threads get ignored because the premise isn't interesting or it's too complicated for alot of people, and countless threads die because the discussion ends. So no, I don't believe you need to give much reasoning for disagreement.
Anyways, i'm going to drop this topic because it's just cluttering the thread.
- 1,489
- 931
For example, if nearly 700 million years have passed only in the Militia World, while time has stopped in this Silver Sea, it would make sense.
It's not certain if the Militia World accelerated or if the other small worlds stopped.
It's not certain if the Militia World accelerated or if the other small worlds stopped.
If the work itself says that the most logical thing is basically that the time of the Silver Sea will be different from the time of the worlds, to me it sounds like a different timeline.
- 18,393
- 14,323
- Thread starter
- #196
Own reasoning? Mind presenting it? Perhaps, I could be blind and did not see it. Mind quoting it?
Oh, really? What is this?
How is this reasoning valid, when I asked him which evidence is not strong? And his answer is this?
I just read your evidence, and my opinion based on my knowledge and experience in the wiki is that it isn't sufficient. Nothing more, nothing less.
He did not even bother to tell me which evidence. How am I supposed to know why? Like be realistic and honest with yourself, and tell me, would you like such a response in your own CRT after you take hours and hours of your time and ask around if it is valid?
It is like the Boss is rejecting your work and does not give you a reason, would you like it?
- 3,247
- 3,612
About this, having a different time flow =\= being a different timeline on the wiki.
- 168,536
- 77,316
Okay. My apologies about the unintended slight then.
- 7,142
- 4,658
Don't worry, I didnāt care enough to be slighted by something like that.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
