Mcu What if…. equalization reversion

[The_one_you_least_expect]

Damn, it is self-evident what you said. It is a leading question. It means you are asking a source for information that you can use in a project until they give you the information you need.

Read this for more info

---

• https://vsbattles.fandom.com/wiki/Statements
• https://vsbattles.com/threads/about-unofficial-author-statements.98777/
• https://vsbattles.com/threads/author-statements-used-for-upgrades.135470/
• Arc7Kuroi questions and answer thread about author statements

Editing rules regarding author statements

---

• Editing rules #1
• Editing rules #2
• Editing rules #3

Ya so why are those fine and not mine(especially when it’s backed up by other source’s). Ok

hmm, looking at these and some other exceptions. It seems that while people don’t like them(as Qaw said) they’ll let it slide if there’s enough backing evidence

 

[ImmortalDread]

Eh? The links I shared has absolutely 0 acquaintance to any cosmology threads. You did not even bother to open any links, and you asked this question?
It seems you are arrogant enough to not even accept the guidelines and did not check the threads I posted. Sorry, but if you keep this attitude, I will no longer respond to you. You are playing as a victim, but I can assure you, you did not even see the reason yourself why they are allowed.

And of course, one more evidence of my assumption that you dropped this question

Ya so why are those fine and not mine(especially when it’s backed up by other source’s). Ok

This question would be answered if you give some effort reading each link I shared and not simply ignoring.

 

[Valiant_Abyss]

I suggest you drop the WoG argument. Multiple staff and users have agreed that the question violates the rule. If you take issue with that then make another thread. Focus on your other arguments.

 

[Dalesean027]

I suggest you drop the WoG argument. Multiple staff and users have agreed that the question violates the rule. If you take issue with that then make another thread. Focus on your other arguments.

Well even there that specifc kind of WoG shouldn't have been used from the start and as there's been no new evidence for why they should scale I fully disagree with even doing that

 

[ImmortalDread]

Well even there that specifc kind of WoG shouldn't have been used from the start and as there's been no new evidence for why they should scale I fully disagree with even doing that

I am aware. I was not even defending them. For me, you can do downgrade and I would agree with this. But I just suggest looking at how they came to this conclusion.
Because this is important to be aware, why it is accepted, is the statement leading? Is it reliable? Is it contradicting the story or give an additional uncanon information?

You need to take care a lot of factors before making a such controversy or use whataboutism. We allow author statements, we have guidelines for it (check my post, I posted all links there, and it is worth to read them)

 

[The_one_you_least_expect]

Eh? The links I shared has absolutely 0 acquaintance to any cosmology threads. You did not even bother to open any links, and you asked this question?
It seems you are arrogant enough to not even accept the guidelines and did not check the threads I posted. Sorry, but if you keep this attitude, I will no longer respond to you. You are playing as a victim, but I can assure you, you did not even see the reason yourself why they are allowed.

And of course, one more evidence of my assumption that you dropped this question

This question would be answered if you give some effort reading each link I shared and not simply ignoring.

I did I was refrring to things that I looked up on my own in addition to what you brought up. Agian I did, most of the links you posted had either people occasionally mention it leading questions or didn’t refer to them at all, the only exception was the second one and that just ended with them updating the rules. Not really, I’m just going off of what I’m seeing. Ok

Not really, none of the links you posted were in relation to my actual question. Multiple verses already have accepted WoG with leading questions just like mine yet mine isn’t acceptable.

I suggest you drop the WoG argument. Multiple staff and users have agreed that the question violates the rule. If you take issue with that then make another thread. Focus on your other arguments.

Which is kinda BS but sure whatever. I’ll take it off

 

[ImmortalDread]

All my links has no relation to the question itself, rather to your unfortunate awareness about how our guidelines in these instances works. (no offense, but I assume you don't know how the rules works in these instances). Feel free to downgrade the verse, but also don't use it as an argument for this thread, as it has no connectedness whatsoever. This is just whataboutism.

 

[The_one_you_least_expect]

All my links has no relation to the question itself, rather to your unfortunate awareness about how our guidelines in these instances works. (no offense, but I assume you don't know how the rules works in these instances). Feel free to downgrade the verse, but also don't use it as an argument for this thread, as it has no connectedness whatsoever. This is just whataboutism.

Then why were you saying to go read them and then my question would be answered? It’s fine, I actually didn’t know everything before this so thank you. You mean GoW? It dose considering the topics are of the same nature

 

[ImmortalDread]

You can downgrade it any time. But also don't accept winning it as your argument is only based on “tweets” but rather not at the thread context and the reason it is given. I would suggest reading the thread entirely before creating such a thread.

This became derailing, is there any other points to discuss or is this the only evidence?

 

[KLOL506]

Then why were you saying to go read them and then my question would be answered? It’s fine, I actually didn’t know everything before this so thank you. You mean GoW? It dose considering the topics are of the same nature

Once again I will clarify about God of War:

The WoG tweets are not leading questions, were asked by other people in relation to and to clarify stuff that already exists within the game or other source material like the comics, novels and guidebooks etc., none of the tweets or DMs are remotely contradictory in any sense of the word, we dealt with this argument right back when we made the upgrades. They are not of the same nature.

So yeah, don't bother derailing with this and focus solely on Marvel at hand.

 

[KLOL506]

Even ignoring the tweet for a second and assuming it to be acceptable, it is unfortunately contradicted in the Ultron episode itself.

 

[ImmortalDread]

Thanks for clarification @KLOL506, this summed up the difference between these two cases.
Unfortunately, it was misunderstanding from your side. @The_one_you_least_expect.

 

[The_one_you_least_expect]

You can downgrade it any time. But also don't accept winning it as your argument is only based on “tweets” but rather not at the thread context and the reason it is given. I would suggest reading the thread entirely before creating such a thread.

This became derailing, is there any other points to discuss or is this the only evidence?

You mean the ones you posted?

controversially no, actually evidence for the crt are in the OP

Once again I will clarify about God of War:

The WoG tweets are not leading questions, were asked by other people in relation to and to clarify stuff that already exists within the game or other source material like the comics, novels and guidebooks etc., none of the tweets or DMs are remotely contradictory in any sense of the word, we dealt with this argument right back when we made the upgrades. They are not of the same nature.

So yeah, don't bother derailing with this and focus solely on Marvel at hand.

Litterly most of not all of them are just yes or no questions, I doubt the people asking in the tweets were just randos

I only “derailed” when people were talking the WoG in the OP

Even ignoring the tweet for a second and assuming it to be acceptable, it is unfortunately contradicted in the Ultron episode itself.

I already countered that in like the very beginning of the op

 

[ImmortalDread]

So the evidence in OP is only the tweet part, and I can see it adds an uncanon information to the story that it does not exist in the story whatsoever. You can count me as disagree.

 

[KLOL506]

Litterly most of not all of them are just yes or no questions, I doubt the people asking in the tweets were just randos

And literally all of them are questions clarifying shit that already exists within the actual lore of the series, some even get additional explanations in detail as to how some of the aspects work out.

 

[The_one_you_least_expect]

So the evidence in OP is only the tweet part, and I can see it adds an uncanon information to the story that it does not exist in the story whatsoever. You can count me as disagree.

It’s not, there are other quotes stated by the authors and marvel

And literally all of them are questions clarifying shit that already exists within the actual lore of the series, some even get additional explanations in detail as to how some of the aspects work out.

Yes and there still yes or no questions

 

[KLOL506]

It’s not, there are other quotes stated by the authors and marvel

Care to show us such quotes?

Yes and there still yes or no questions

Difference is that a lot of those also have elaboration behind the answers to give more details and interesting tidbits never before seen, and this is still all based on the actual games and other source material like the comics, novels, guidebooks and artbooks.

 

[The_one_you_least_expect]

Care to show us such quotes?


Difference is that a lot of those also have elaboration behind the answers to give more details and interesting tidbits never before seen, and this is still all based on the actual games and other source material like the comics, novels, guidebooks and artbooks.

Read the op

Cool, still dosen’t change the nature of the question

 

[ImmortalDread]

I don't think you are understanding it. There is difference between asking a question that the context itself and information itself already exists in the story's canonicity and the author just explain it in better terms and a leading question that has no canonicity in the story or just give additional information.

 

[The_one_you_least_expect]

I don't think you are understanding it. There is difference between asking a question that the context itself and information itself already exists in the story's canonicity and the author just explain it in better terms and a leading question that has no canonicity in the story or just give additional information.

So my WoG that elaborated on the creation process behind the show and how the authors tried to stay true to the characters to make the changes in there demeanor more plausible(which is litterly the whole plot of the show) dosen’t fall under being explained in better terminology?

 

[ImmortalDread]

No, since it was a leading question.

 

[The_one_you_least_expect]

No, since it was a leading question.

But the GoW WoG aren’t, even though there just straight up yes or no questions like mine

 

[ImmortalDread]

Again, you really did not understand what I said above, and two staff members (one admin and one calculation member) already clarified it for you.
It seems it is an issue on your side for refusing to understand this mere concept. I am tired of repeating the same elucidation.

My position is remained unchanged.

 

[The_one_you_least_expect]

Again, you really did not understand what I said above, and two staff members (one admin and one calculation member) already clarified it for you.
It seems it is an issue on your side for refusing to understand this mere concept. I am tired of repeating the same elucidation.

My position is remained unchanged.

Seems more like the other way around at this point. Regardless this doesn’t matter anymore. I already took of the WoG

Ok

 

[Hellbeast]

I agree, we shou;dn't be scaling the Sacred Timeline to What If feats since that needlessly convolutes the scaling and isn't how we tend to handle alternate timelines for Marvel and stuff. Perhaps if we see these characters fight counterparts from the Sacred Timeline it'd make sense but as of now it's far too much

 

[The_one_you_least_expect]

I agree, we shou;dn't be scaling the Sacred Timeline to What If feats since that needlessly convolutes the scaling and isn't how we tend to handle alternate timelines for Marvel and stuff. Perhaps if we see these characters fight counterparts from the Sacred Timeline it'd make sense but as of now it's far too much

The comics and Mcu handle there alt timelines differently. Usually I’d be apposed to alt timeline scaling but with how much empathizes on that this are just the same characters in new situations, this should make scaling valid.

 

[The_one_you_least_expect]

Bump

 

[The_one_you_least_expect]

Bump

 

[The_one_you_least_expect]

Bump

 

[The_one_you_least_expect]

Bump

 

[The_one_you_least_expect]

Bump

 

[ImmortalDread]

What are new arguments except the tweet stuff?

 

[The_one_you_least_expect]

What are new arguments except the tweet stuff?

It’s just the stuff I had minus the tweet

 

[The_one_you_least_expect]

Bump

 

[The_one_you_least_expect]

Bump

 

[Dalesean027]

Believe this thread is rejected

 

[Aachintya31]

Tldr?

 

[ImmortalDread]

Believe this thread is rejected

fr

 

[The_one_you_least_expect]

Believe this thread is rejected

Eh, I thought that since I took the Twitter thing more discussions would be directed to the rest of the op. But I guess not

 

[ImmortalDread]

Welp the Twitter tweet is one that supports most of OP but welp.