• 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.

Removal of "Negative Theology" Scaling

Status
Not open for further replies.
I have added the suggestions from Darkgrath, but given the fact there are still contentions against it from Ultima, I am still waiting for the thread to be concluded.
 
I have added the suggestions from Darkgrath, but given the fact there are still contentions against it from Ultima, I am still waiting for the thread to be concluded.
I'm not trying to steamroll Ultima, but his view on it wasn't the majority and this thread has lost most of its steam. I believe we should apply the current majority opinion and later on we can do another CRT if someone feels particularly strongly about making a change to it.
 
Any objections?
As said elsewhere, I'm not exactly in a position to do wiki stuff at length, presently, and my priorities even on the wiki currently lie elsewhere (Marvel revisions). That said:

I endorse the use of that counterargument.
Would you elaborate on that? Because that seems like it kinda clashes with what you've just said (In that you're willing to apply the aforementioned line of thought to invalidate a statement, but not when the statement is valid to start with). Not too sure if I'm gonna argue any further, so, clarification here is what I want, largely.
 
Last edited:
I am patiently awaiting the conclusion of the Agnaa/Ultima debate to finalize the current draft. It appears that Ultima is already anticipating Agnaa's response.
 
Hey, I think you should stop @ing him... Clearly he's busy and probably doesn't have the time to respond right now. I'm sure he'll be explaining that at some point regardless of this thread, anyway.
 
We should likely just focus on applying the page after making some edits to it.
 
So what do we still need to do here before making the page?
Ultima wanted to finish a discussion, but that was over three months ago. Dread made a draft page but it could use a fair bit of editing before making it official. I can help rewrite it.
 
Apophatic theology in its pure glory (And therefore as the "debunk" in this thread pertains to it), in my view, is incoherent and shouldn't really be tiered on that basis. Granted, a milder form of it is incorporated into my proposals for Tier 0, so, in that sense this thread's existence is made a bit awkward by that. I suggest we close this until discussion of the Tiering System revisions is finished.
 
Apophatic theology in its pure glory (And therefore as the "debunk" in this thread pertains to it), in my view, is incoherent and shouldn't really be tiered on that basis. Granted, a milder form of it is incorporated into my proposals for Tier 0, so, in that sense this thread's existence is made a bit awkward by that. I suggest we close this until discussion of the Tiering System revisions is finished.
That is probably fine, but somebody needs to remember to reopen this thread afterwards as well.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top