- 167,679
- 76,256
- Thread starter
- #22,601
That is correct, yes.Just to point out, Ant did confirm he did restore the deleted messages.
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.
That is correct, yes.Just to point out, Ant did confirm he did restore the deleted messages.
No.
No, also he does not have these.
If he was facing a grizzly bear he would also be screwed. Not to mention the fact that dinosaurs are known for their tougher, more scaly skin regardless.
I literally wrote the stomp page, Agnaa. I know how it works. Walt is screwed. The existence of people ignorant to the fact that his tiny gun is completely incapable of doing anything worthwhile to it does not prove otherwise. He's an untrained cancer patient with a glock versus a large dinosaur. Quit it.
For the record, I agree with Moritzva about that this matchup seems to seriously lack common sense.There is literally nothing Walter can even do. It's a cancer ridden middle aged man vs one of the largest terrestrial predators in history. He has no win conditions.
I don't know enough Jason to know whether there are people who seriously believe he deserves high tiers, even if they have horribly mistaken evidentiary standards. And that edit did also involve some legitimate cleanup of media links into proper capitalisation, so I was unsure.Accounts that only show up to blatantly severely troll and/or vandalise within our wiki should almost always be given instant permanent bans.
Jason is no where close to 1-A. Even with the worst the absolute dumbest wanks you only get him to like... 2-C scaling to Freddy who has to be wanked to that level as well lol.I don't know enough Jason to know whether there are people who seriously believe he deserves high tiers, even if they have horribly mistaken evidentiary standards. And that edit did also involve some legitimate cleanup of media links into proper capitalisation, so I was unsure.
Thank you. However, there is a big difference between being blatantly clueless and being a blatant clueless vandal.Alright, I'll permaban for edits like those in the future.
There is literally nothing Walter can even do. It's a cancer ridden middle aged man vs one of the largest terrestrial predators in history. He has no win conditions.
Yeah, I definitely agree with closing that thread.For the record, I agree with Moritzva about that this matchup seems to seriously lack common sense.
While making spite threads is indeed against the rules, they were being honest while also apologizing. And was mostly accusing various offsite people of sever wank rather than our community. I would suggest closing all of those threads and warning the user to stay away from Kirby related topics; as far as I know they weren't that menacing other than some of those topics.@Rose_of_Ragnarok has been making spite matches due to his anti-Kirby bias and admitted to such himself many times.
Obviously this isn't bad enough to warrant a perma-ban or anything like that, just a warning.
Yeah, the dude seems chill enough, hence why I only suggested a warning.While making spite threads is indeed against the rules, they were being honest while also apologizing. And was mostly accusing various offsite people of sever wank rather than our community. I would suggest closing all of those threads and warning the user to stay away from Kirby related topics; as far as I know they weren't that menacing other than some of those topics.
We have been talking in private for a while, and he is not mentally well currently, but I have been trying to help him out, and he is welcome to continue to talk with me if he wishes.@Rose_of_Ragnarok has been making spite matches due to his anti-Kirby bias and admitted to such himself many times.
Obviously this isn't bad enough to warrant a perma-ban or anything like that, just a warning.
Maybe the opposition should consider not repeatedly and blatantly lying to my face. That could perhaps diffuse tensions, although nobody seems interested in doing that.
The OP is creating a heated and toxic environment and refuses to cool down when a staff member pointed this out.
Gilver, Tanin and Tony intend to address your claims later, just wait patiently. That is still not a good excuse for you to lash out like that, let alone throw out accusations without actually showing where they lied.Maybe the opposition should consider not repeatedly and blatantly lying to my face. That could perhaps diffuse tensions, although nobody seems interested in doing that.
I... literally did show where they lied though???let alone throw out accusations without actually showing where they lied.
Then, I kindly ask you, can you show me the link to the comments where they said this? That the term "size" is not in the Tiering System FAQ?I... literally did show where they lied though???
People in that thread have repeatedly claimed that the standards for qualitative superiority only refer to POWER, and not SIZE.
This is objectively false:
There is no "accusation" here. The claims that the tiering FAQ don't mention size are verifiably false, unless you wanna try gaslighting me into thinking I just imagined this.
Here (Aside from that Ultima has already clarified that the excepts you posted from tiering QnA apply for power of characters not size of structures). It is clearly saying that the quotes on qualitative superiority - which use the word size - do not actually have anything to do with size. Which is absolutely insane if you stop to think about it for two seconds.Then, I kindly ask you, can you show me the link to the comments where they said this? That the term "size" is not in the Tiering System FAQ?
While also conveniently ignoring the other quote from DT that explains why no, the size comparison still wouldn't count (and also claiming that DT is actually wrong in the same breath). Interesting!Also I talked with Gilver, he literally said this:
"Even though I explained why the size comparison standard she cited was irrelevant, DT had already mentioned it in his own words. Whatever, busy in work. Will look at it later."
KLOL, below are the excerpts I quoted. Please explain to me, in detail, how they are not in fact talking about SIZE. Because I'm very curious on how you came to that conclusion.To me, this only sounds like he's saying that in this case the excerpts are not talking about size, but rather power. Nothing about "The standards say".
Regardless, I will ask @GilverTheProtoAngelo to elaborate.The excerpts say "power or size" though, so it's not strictly one or the other
I... know that? But the opposition is trying to say that it's ONLY power, and that size isn't really relevant at all, which you can clearly see isn't true.The excerpts say "power or size" though, so it's not strictly one or the other
@DarkDragonMedeus @Mr._Bambu @Celestial_Pegasus @Wokistan @Ultima_Reality @Elizhaa @Qawsedf234 @ByAsura @Sir_Ovens @Damage3245 @Starter_Pack @Abstractions @LordGriffin1000 @Colonel_Krukov @SamanPatou @GyroNutz @Firestorm808 @Everything12 @Maverick_Zero_X @Crabwhale @Agnaa @Just_a_Random_Butler
The OP is creating a heated and toxic environment and refuses to cool down when a staff member pointed this out.
Giving a temp-ban/short-ban to the user in question is not necessary, but we would appreciate a request for chat moderation on the thread and possibly a warning.
For the record, this type of behaviour is not the first time. She has a consistent history of this type of attitude and persistent temperament.
Aside from that Ultima has already clarified that the excepts you posted from tiering QnA apply for power of characters not size of structures.
I don't think the scenario you're describing is equivalent to what I'm talking about. The part of the FAQ you're citing really only applies to a character's power in relation to others whose power is only stated or expressed as countable infinity. Multiplying countable infinite power with any finite or even (countably) infinite variable would always lead to the same result simply because you can't add, divide, multiply, or subtract from infinity. It doesn't really apply the same way in regards to size where principles regarding how a character who is bigger than a countably infinite large 4-D space are often different from the scenario you and I just described.
Regular members aren't allowed to post in this Rule Violation Reports thread, unless they are making a report here, have direct involvement in a report, or have relevant information about a report that has not been brought up yet, in order to not derail or delay the processing of the reports, or worse instigate further rule violations. Repeated violations will be followed with a strict warning, followed by a threadban for one week to a site ban for some duration, depending on the severity of their conduct.
Regular members aren't allowed to post in this Rule Violation Reports thread, unless they are making a report here, have direct involvement in a report, or have relevant information about a report that has not been brought up yet, in order to not derail or delay the processing of the reports, or worse instigate further rule violations. Repeated violations will be followed with a strict warning, followed by a threadban for one week to a site ban for some duration, depending on the severity of their conduct.
Well for the former case, it isn't spite in the slightest. I'm just making a joke about how silly that sort of logic looks when you apply it to another verse (which is why it's in F&G).Okay so originally I was going to abstain from responding to this thread simply because I wasn't sure if I had any input that would be relevant to the report Dread had created, but several hours ago Fuji had made this thread in conjunction to the DMC downgrade thread she had created; clearly in a antagonistic, probably spiteful, manner to the DMC supporters and their arguments. For many who have payed attention to that thread, Fuji frequently tried to apply the arguments DMC supporters made in favor of Low 1-C to Touhou, the verse she has been in control of revisions for the past year or two. This thread is pretty much all about that.
In that thread I asked Fuji what her intentions were in creating that thread and whilst she gave said that she merely wanted to establish the DMC supporters logic, another person participating in it (Robo432343) admitted that it was created to make fun of the DMC supporters. I do not know if they were being serious or not, but I felt that that was a horrible response. And the thing is, even if she wasn't trying to mock the DMC members (which I believe to be unlikely), this is still extremely suspicious and troublesome behavior coming from her. The reason why I am bringing this up instead of waiting is because even though I knew that Fuji has had huge temperament issues, I am still hugely surprised for what she had done and I felt that telling the staff about it now to investigate would be the best that I can do.
As for my comment Agnaa had pointed out to everyone, I was simply trying to apply the information that was contained in the FAQ to counterargue Mokou's argument in the OP who, at the time at least and from my perspective, was primarily basing her point out of power differentials between people, at least in regards to that between Demons and Humans. However, given staff responses particularly by Ultima and Agnaa my assertion was wrong and that I misinterpreted the text and likely Fuji's argument. So I just want to apologize for the misinformation I created. In the case of Giver, I do not know his intentions in his arguments, but like the others I do strongly believe that he was misinterpreting the text and that he wasn't being malicious.
That's all from me.
No, it’s in a F&G thread because there's no where else to make fun of dmc supporters logicWell for the former case, it isn't spite in the slightest. I'm just making a joke about how silly that sort of logic looks when you apply it to another verse (which is why it's in F&G).
And for the latter, I'm just glad the confusion has cleared up somewhat.
(Staff, you can delete my reply later)No, you moved it to a F&G thread because there's no where else to make fun of dmc supporters logic
Thats not what I meant lol(Staff, you can delete my reply later)
No, you need to ask a staffs to move your thread to a different discussion type, otherwise the regular members can't do that