RWBY Volume 8 CRT - First Half

[Keeweed]

“It is proven yes, that is the average size”

You posted a picture of concept art. Concept art is not an average size of a creature it just is the art the creators originally used for reference or design.

“Not really? I flat out posted the entire page of dialogue in the blog so that full context was given”

I don’t know how to explain this point without sounding rude, but I’ll try. You didn’t take it out of context, because you provided the scan, but you did misinterpret it.

“No? The Giant Nevermore doesnt have an inconsistent size, its a puppet rig it is one size, its not capable of being varying sizes in the same shot.”

Last I checked the lifting strength for Ruby had to recalculated like half a dozen times because the Nevermore’s height was extremely inconsistent.

“Funny how if this were any other verse it would be described as 'accurate' rather than 'inflated' given the overwhelming evidence supporting the Goliaths being that size with the only arguments against them being 'they dont look that big so they must not be'.”

They not ‘looking’ or actually not being very large is a perfectly acceptable arguement when debating sizes we are trying to debate. 20 stories tall vs only a few stories is clearly noticeable by eyesight. The Goliaths are clearly never shown to be 20 stories tall and the calc you did to prove it was rejected.

When it comes to Coco. Imagine if a entomologists who has been studying insects for years was suddenly shown a new insect, from a few feet away, and only got to glance at it for a couple seconds. Then you suddenly ask them to name its exact size, is the entomologists going to be able to tell you the exact dimensions of the bug. No, and if they try to answer the question they especially won’t give a vague comparison to other creatures that can vary in size.

She knows what a Nevermore is. She knows what a Goliath is. Meanwhile she clearly was completely bewildered by the blind worm throughout the entire rest of the paragraph then gave a vague comparison for its size rather than giving an actual concrete size. It’s like call an actual elephant 5 lions tall, why would you ever say that versus feet or meters.

All of links don’t work. Also Dargoo has shown pictures, even from the show, that have the large Nevermore’s be different sizes (I’m not referring to the world of revenant pictures, I’m referring to the pictures he posted that are clearly from the show).

Though this entire size debate doesn’t even matter much because the speed came from mashing two sentences together. When it comes to the other stuff, creating a sandstorm through speed is completely unquantifiable. Also you are saying it took it 5-10 minutes. Is there a quote in the story saying it took it that long, because why is not a 100% known timeframe. Also last I checked the horizon for things on the ground is 3 miles so I’ll plug that into a speed calculator right now (travelled 3 miles in 5 minutes): I got 36 miles per hour. Which is close to being two times slower than the ‘train statement’ and is a high ball. Not a massive highball, but it still is using the minimum timeframe. Last I checked we almost always go for the low ball with these feats so the speed we should be using is 18 miles per hour.

 

[Dargoo_Faust]

@Keeweed sums up the issues with the calc fairly well once again.

None of this really matters on this thread, though. Neither calc has been formally accepted, one of them has been rejected by two calc team members (including the original member that accepted it), and that's what needs to come first before any decision to add it to profiles is made on a thread. It'd be best to wait until a calc member gives feedback on the worm calc before discussing further. I'll try and contact more active members to look over the debate here and the calc to make a judgement.

 

[WeeklyBattles]

@Keeweed sums up the issues with the calc fairly well once again.

None of this really matters on this thread, though. Neither calc has been formally accepted, one of them has been rejected by two calc team members (including the original member that accepted it), and that's what needs to come first before any decision to add it to profiles is made on a thread. It'd be best to wait until a calc member gives feedback on the worm calc before discussing further. I'll try and contact more active members to look over the debate here and the calc to make a judgement.

Welp guess i need to debunk it then

 

[WeeklyBattles]

You posted a picture of concept art. Concept art is not an average size of a creature it just is the art the creators originally used for reference or design.

Yes, the concept art is the accepted consistent average size of a mature nevermore,consistent with portrayals in the show and in supplementary material such as World of Remnant and the guidebook. And as i stated later on in the conversation, Nevermores canonically have only two sizes, small and huge, due to their rapid growth.

I don’t know how to explain this point without sounding rude, but I’ll try. You didn’t take it out of context, because you provided the scan, but you did misinterpret it.

How so?

Last I checked the lifting strength for Ruby had to recalculated like half a dozen times because the Nevermore’s height was extremely inconsistent.

Actually it was recalced so many times because the original recalc was using the siz of an average nevermore instead of the giant nevermore from the scene, not because thesize in the scene is inconsistent.

They not ‘looking’ or actually not being very large is a perfectly acceptable arguement when debating sizes we are trying to debate. 20 stories tall vs only a few stories is clearly noticeable by eyesight. The Goliaths are clearly never shown to be 20 stories tall and the calc you did to prove it was rejected.

It has yet to be rejected actually, thats the reason why we are having this debate in the first place.

When it comes to Coco. Imagine if a entomologists who has been studying insects for years was suddenly shown a new insect, from a few feet away, and only got to glance at it for a couple seconds. Then you suddenly ask them to name its exact size, is the entomologists going to be able to tell you the exact dimensions of the bug. No, and if they try to answer the question they especially won’t give a vague comparison to other creatures that can vary in size.

Yes actually, they would be able to give an approximate size as they would be required to have the experience and ability to do so given their mostly hands off study in the field, just like Coco. Unless of course you think its hard for even a normal person to look at a large bug and give a rough comparison of 'its about as big as my hand' or 'its about as big as a quarter' which is basic scientific observation that even third graders are taught how to do.

She knows what a Nevermore is. She knows what a Goliath is. Meanwhile she clearly was completely bewildered by the blind worm throughout the entire rest of the paragraph then gave a vague comparison for its size rather than giving an actual concrete size. It’s like call an actual elephant 5 lions tall, why would you ever say that versus feet or meters.

How does seeing a new species of grimm take away your ability to ******* see??? Seriously wtf are you even trying to argue here?

All of links don’t work. Also Dargoo has shown pictures, even from the show, that have the large Nevermore’s be different sizes (I’m not referring to the world of revenant pictures, I’m referring to the pictures he posted that are clearly from the show).

If the links dont work then its a problem on your end because they work for me but okay i'll post them all here, in order that they are in the paragraph:

Though this entire size debate doesn’t even matter much because the speed came from mashing two sentences together. When it comes to the other stuff, creating a sandstorm through speed is completely unquantifiable. Also you are saying it took it 5-10 minutes. Is there a quote in the story saying it took it that long, because why is not a 100% known timeframe. Also last I checked the horizon for things on the ground is 3 miles so I’ll plug that into a speed calculator right now (travelled 3 miles in 5 minutes): I got 36 miles per hour. Which is close to being two times slower than the ‘train statement’ and is a high ball. Not a massive highball, but it still is using the minimum timeframe. Last I checked we almost always go for the low ball with these feats so the speed we should be using is 18 miles per hour.

Then use the lowball, it still ends up being 8-B

 

[Dargoo_Faust]

It has yet to be rejected actually, thats the reason why we are having this debate in the first place.

Nah. Worm calc hasn't been commented on meaningfully but the Goliath calc's been discarded and for a while now.

Calcs are vetted by our calculation team. Please stop trying to bypass their judgement of your calc.

 

[WeeklyBattles]

Its funny that you think im talking about the Goliath height calc

 

[Dargoo_Faust]

Its funny that you think im talking about the Goliath height calc

ok

 

[WeeklyBattles]

Yes, th blind worm calc has yet to be rejected and it is one of the supporting calcs that will give the Goliaths a set height

 

[Dargoo_Faust]

Yes, th blind worm calc has yet to be rejected and it is one of the supporting calcs that will give the Goliaths a set height

Goliaths don't have a set height.

It was as clear as day what calc Keeweed was talking about, too.

 

[WeeklyBattles]

Goliaths don't have a set height.

It was as clear as day what calc Keeweed was talking about, too.

Im not sure if you think we're still using the 20 story tall statement but we're not, we are using the 7 story tall depictions from the show. The Blind Worm calc even without using Goliaths as a scale yields a result consistent with 7 story tall goliaths

 

[Dargoo_Faust]

Im not sure if you think we're still using the 20 story tall statement but we're not, we are using the 7 story tall depictions from the show. The Blind Worm calc even without using Goliaths as a scale yields a result consistent with 7 story tall goliaths

Not really. Coco said the worm was "the length of six Goliaths", she didn't specify Goliath height, width, or length, all of which are different measurements. Which is an issue you run into when using non-objective measuring scales like that. So whatever the worm calc is has basically nothing to do with Goliaths since Coco doesn't give enough information with her off-handed thought to derive accurate measurements.

Also Goliaths are not consistently 7 stories tall either. They can be considerably smaller, so no, they don't have a "set height". 7 stories is just the largest we see on screen. They range from being smaller to light poles, visibly larger than trees that likely don't go up to one-two stories, and 7 stories, with a few sizes inbetween.

 

[WeeklyBattles]

Not really. Coco said the worm was "the length of six Goliaths", she didn't specify Goliath height, width, or length, all of which are different measurements. Which is an issue you run into when using non-objective measuring scales like that. So whatever the worm calc is has basically nothing to do with Goliaths since Coco doesn't give enough information with her off-handed thought to derive accurate measurements.

Also Goliaths are not consistently 7 stories tall either. They can be considerably smaller, so no, they don't have a "set height". 7 stories is just the largest we see on screen. They range from being smaller to light poles, visibly larger than trees that likely don't go up to one-two stories, and 7 stories, with a few sizes inbetween.

Man its almost like we have to make small but logical assumptions for every single calc on this wiki rather than just throw our hands up in the air and discredit a calc for no reason.

Even without the goliath scaling it still comes out to 7 stories tall for the goliaths she was referring to as the ones she was talking about wer the ones in mountain glenn not the ones in beacon.

Also you do realize you justposted a scan of 7 story tall goliaths as a means of trying to say theyre not 7 stories tall right? Just making sure you know that.

 

[ShadowWhoWalks]

The concept art is for a Nevermore that appeared in an episode. Nothing makes it an average.
Unless there is a statement that the Nevermore being compared to is especially large, not using the smaller mature Nevermore in the calc is not justified.

vs​

'Mature' Nevermore don't need to have a +14.5 meter wing span. For all we know, the Nevermore flying around Vacuo might even be smaller on average than the ones in other kingdoms.

To be honest, if we don't go with the large Nevermores, which I among others consider to be unjustified, the worm calc is looking like 9-A. Coincidentally, Dargoo's lower-ball recalc with 7 stories tall Goliaths is 9-A.

 

[WeeklyBattles]

The concept art is for a Nevermore that appeared in an episode. Nothing makes it an average.
Unless there is a statement that the Nevermore being compared to is especially large, not using the smaller mature Nevermore in the calc is not justified.

vs​

'Mature' Nevermore don't need to have a +14.5 meter wing span. For all we know, the Nevermore flying around Vacuo might even be smaller on average than the ones in other kingdoms.

To be honest, if we don't go with the large Nevermores, which I among others consider to be unjustified, the worm calc is looking like 9-A. Coincidentally, Dargoo's lower-ball recalc with 7 stories tall Goliaths is 9-A.

It not though? Look at the concept art vs the size of the nevermore you just posted, theyre two different sizes, hell the difference in size between the concept art and the giant nevermore in the show is the reason why the weight of the nevermore in episode 6 was recalced, because the concept art nevermore is way smaller.

As i already said 8000000 times Nevermores are incapable of being medium sized due to their hyperaccelerated growth rate.

The worm knocking over the flatback slider was also calced at 8-B, just saying

 

[Dargoo_Faust]

Man its almost like we have to make small but logical assumptions for every single calc on this wiki rather than just throw our hands up in the air and discredit a calc for no reason.

Even without the goliath scaling it still comes out to 7 stories tall for the goliaths she was referring to as the ones she was talking about wer the ones in mountain glenn not the ones in beacon.

Also you do realize you justposted a scan of 7 story tall goliaths as a means of trying to say theyre not 7 stories tall right? Just making sure you know that.

I mean, you literally don't have objective measurements to work with to make your claim? It's not a small assumption, you're essentially tacking things onto the calc that aren't there at that point.

And considering how many "small" assumptions like these are tacked onto the calc, it just makes it a bad calc - the first variety of these "small assumptions" being several orders of magnitude off at a minimum on your last attempt at calcing stuff like this.

Those lightposts being aren't > 7 stories tall, lol.

 

[WeeklyBattles]

I mean, you literally don't have objective measurements to work with to make your claim? It's not a small assumption, you're essentially tacking things onto the calc that aren't there at that point.

And considering how many "small" assumptions like these are tacked onto the calc, it just makes it a bad calc - the first variety of these "small assumptions" being several orders of magnitude off at a minimum on your last attempt at calcing stuff like this.

Those lightposts being aren't > 7 stories tall, lol.

We absolutely do. In what world would anyone assume that something is 'as long as x creatures' is referring to their width or height? At this point youre blatantly just strawmanning to stonewall the revision from going through. It is stated in black and white what she is comparing them to.

Stop. Bringing. Up. The. *******. Goliath. Calc. We. Are. Not. Using. It.

I can calc it to prove otherwise if youd like bcause the boarbatusk at the Goliath's feet is almost as tall as weiss

 

[Dargoo_Faust]

We absolutely do. In what world would anyone assume that something is 'as long as x creatures' is referring to their width or height? At this point youre blatantly just strawmanning to stonewall the revision from going through. It is stated in black and white what she is comparing them to.

Stop. Bringing. Up. The. *******. Goliath. Calc. We. Are. Not. Using. It.

I can calc it to prove otherwise if youd like bcause the boarbatusk at the Goliath's feet is almost as tall as weiss

You... do realize you’re comparing it to it’s the Worm length to the Goliath height, right? And it’s just how Coco is describing it. Sorry the statement isn’t as specific as you’d like it to be.

No need to get aggressive over a mammoth calc. I’m pointing out that these kinds of oversights historically result in vastly inflated calcs - they’re anything but small assumption.

Whatever you want to do.

 

[WeeklyBattles]

You... do realize you’re comparing it to it’s the Worm length to the Goliath height, right? And it’s just how Coco is describing it. Sorry the statement isn’t as specific as you’d like it to be.

No need to get aggressive over a mammoth calc. I’m pointing out that these kinds of oversights historically result in vastly inflated calcs - they’re anything but small assumption.

Whatever you want to do.

No, the calc would be comparing the worm's length to the goliath's length, that is what was calced

No need to bring up a calc that we havent used since before the calc was even done either but you keep doing it anyways as though it makes you right whn really it just makes you look like an ass who does not know what is being discussed.

 

[Dargoo_Faust]

No, the calc would be comparing the worm's length to the goliath's length, that is what was calced

No need to bring up a calc that we havent used since before the calc was even done either but you keep doing it anyways as though it makes you right whn really it just makes you look like an ass who does not know what is being discussed.

7 stories is the Goliath’s height, not its length.

The only thing I’m bringing up that calc for at the moment is showcasing a precedent that your claim of these being "small assumptions" doesn’t add up with how extremely similar calcs with similar mistakes were off by so much. And again, chill.

 

[WeeklyBattles]

7 stories is the Goliath’s height, not its length.

The only thing I’m bringing up that calc for at the moment is showcasing a precedent that your claim of these being "small assumptions" doesn’t add up with how extremely similar calcs with similar mistakes were off by so much. And again, chill.

Yes, 7 stories is the goliath's height, the goliath's length would be ~13 stories when its length is taken into account proportional to its height

Okay but that calc has nothing to do with the current conversation so no, youre not bringing it up to showcase anything other than youre insistent need to be rude and condescending towards me for no reason, so no, i will not chill.

 

[Keeweed]

I just want to come into this thread to say I had to work today and I have school tomorrow, so I may comment tomorrow, but I’m not sure. Sorry for any inconveniences.

 

[Dargoo_Faust]

Yes, 7 stories is the goliath's height, the goliath's length would be ~13 stories when its length is taken into account proportional to its height

Okay but that calc has nothing to do with the current conversation so no, youre not bringing it up to showcase anything other than youre insistent need to be rude and condescending towards me for no reason, so no, i will not chill.

Okay, and? This doesn't really do much to change the issues with how vaguely Coco was describing it, alongside what @ShadowWhoWalks brought up in regards to the "average Nevermore" figure that still hasn't been evidenced.

What's relevant for the discussion isn't up for you to decide, first and foremost. You're the one who started blowing the point out of proportion and hurling insults at the other person debating.

I just want to come into this thread to say I had to work today and I have school tomorrow, so I may comment tomorrow, but I’m not sure. Sorry for any inconveniences.

No worries. It's an argument on a mammoth KE calc - I doubt many here are taking it too seriously.

 

[WeeklyBattles]

No one here but you is talking about the goliath calc Dargoo

 

[WeeklyBattles]

Okay, and? This doesn't really do much to change the issues with how vaguely Coco was describing it, alongside what @ShadowWhoWalks brought up in regards to the "average Nevermore" figure that still hasn't been evidenced.

It has in fact been evidenced, overwhelmingly so as a matter of fact, with now almost a dozen scans showing what the average nevermore is

What's relevant for the discussion isn't up for you to decide, first and foremost.

It is actually seeing as im the only one actually debating while you are just trolling for the sake of trolling by bringing up things that have already been discussed and moved past to inflate your own ego

 

[Dargoo_Faust]

It has in fact been evidenced, overwhelmingly so as a matter of fact, with now almost a dozen scans showing what the average nevermore is

I mean, I could get a dozen unrelated scans of Jaune training his his sword and claim that they're relevant to the point I'm making, that doesn't necessarily make them relevant. So the "dozen scans" figure doesn't really mean anything, and if they're the scans I'm aware of a large number of them aren't really relevant or prove what you're saying.

It is actually seeing as im the only one actually debating while you are just trolling for the sake of trolling by bringing up things that have already been discussed and moved past to inflate your own ego

I'm bringing them up because you wanted to debate general calcing philosophy, so I used one of your own calcs as an example. To quote you, specifically:

Man its almost like we have to make small but logical assumptions for every single calc on this wiki rather than just throw our hands up in the air and discredit a calc for no reason.

So yes, I will bring up a previous calc that used "small but logical assumptions" if you're going to downplay the effect that these oversights have on your calcs.

It seems you're convinced of this narrative that I'm trolling you, though. Debating a user's intentions is also poor form in a debate in general - as well as throwing insults their way.

 

[WeeklyBattles]

I mean, I could get a dozen unrelated scans of Jaune training his his sword and claim that they're relevant to the point I'm making, that doesn't necessarily make them relevant. So the "dozen scans" figure doesn't really mean anything, and if they're the scans I'm aware of a large number of them aren't really relevant or prove what you're saying.

How exactly are scans of jaune relevant to a point about nevermores? And yes the scans i have posted do prove what I am saying

I'm bringing them up because you wanted to debate general calcing philosophy, so I used one of your own calcs as an example. To quote you, specifically:

So yes, I will bring up a previous calc that used "small but logical assumptions" if you're going to downplay the effect that these oversights have on your calcs.

Small logical assumptions are in fact necessary, bringing up calculations that have nothing to do with the topic at hand is not. This is the equivalent of taking the small error that miscalculatd the yield of the ivy mike bomb and bringing it up while discussing how to build a skyscraper, it has no connection and is just beig used to divrt attention away from the conversation at hand.

It seems you're convinced of this narrative that I'm trolling you, though. Debating a user's intentions is also poor form in a debate in general - as well as throwing insults their way.

At this point form means nothing, i am simply pointing out what i am seeing.

 

[Ryukama]

Then use the lowball, it still ends up being 8-B

If this is the case, then I guess that is the best option to do.

 

[Dargoo_Faust]

How exactly are scans of jaune relevant to a point about nevermores? And yes the scans i have posted do prove what I am saying

The point flew entirely over your head. I was giving an example of something that would have nothing to do with my point, and saying that me posting 12 of it wouldn’t make my point any more relevant.

Most, if not all of the scans you’ve brought up have been removed from context or misinterpreted to give figures that ultimately can’t be found out or are drastically higher than what you’d realistically see. Various users on the thread have all pointed out these jarring contradictions, such as Community_Gamer, Keeweed, and Shadow among others. I don’t think it’s much of a debate anymore that the calc in its current state shouldn’t be used.

Small logical assumptions are in fact necessary, bringing up calculations that have nothing to do with the topic at hand is not. This is the equivalent of taking the small error that miscalculatd the yield of the ivy mike bomb and bringing it up while discussing how to build a skyscraper, it has no connection and is just beig used to divrt attention away from the conversation at hand.

I’m bringing up a KE via size calc by the same user claiming that stapling in information that doesn’t exist in their scans is a "small assumption" necessary for the calc.

The calc itself isn’t necessary. If you don’t have enough information to make conclusions without filling in the blanks with stuff you don’t have then the feat is simply too vague. What we see with both the Worm and "20-story" Goliath calc is just that - pushing figures that aren’t cited and skimping out on necessary details.

Pointing out a common trend between these calcs - lack of evidence, borderline dishonest feat interpretation, downplaying significant jumps in logic - seems fine to me. I sure others have noticed the similarities.

 

[Community_Gamer]

So are we concluding?

 

[Dargoo_Faust]

So are we concluding?

I’d say that we just don’t have enough information for it, personally. The stuff that’s uncertain can make the calc drastically larger or smaller.

There still hasn’t been any Calc team input for the calc itself, which will determine whether or not the discussion here really matters (since the calc needs to be vetted before we can think about applying it), and I’ve contacted a few calc members about going over it, so hopefully I’ll get a response in a day or two.

 

[WeeklyBattles]

So are we concluding?

Not even close, we still havent come to an agreement and there are people who agree with both sides of th argument

That and you guys still hav yet to post a single shred of evidence to counter anything i have said

 

[WeeklyBattles]

Most, if not all of the scans you’ve brought up have been removed from context or misinterpreted to give figures that ultimately can’t be found out or are drastically higher than what you’d realistically see. Various users on the thread have all pointed out these jarring contradictions, such as Community_Gamer, Keeweed, and Shadow among others. I don’t think it’s much of a debate anymore that the calc in its current state shouldn’t be used.

No, they have not. You dontseem to understand that i dont post anything out of contxt i purposely posted entire pages worth of scans solely to show context and posted entire videos so people could see context so dont give me that crap. Various users have agreed with me such as Medeus, Ryu, and Zebra, and Ovens agrees with me on discord and is going to post as such here later, so dont try to act like you are the the sole person here getting support.

I’m bringing up a KE via size calc by the same user claiming that stapling in information that doesn’t exist in their scans is a "small assumption" necessary for the calc.

Cool, doesnt make it any less meaningless in this conversation.

The calc itself isn’t necessary. If you don’t have enough information to make conclusions without filling in the blanks with stuff you don’t have then the feat is simply too vague. What we see with both the Worm and "20-story" Goliath calc is just that - pushing figures that aren’t cited and skimping out on necessary details.

It is necessary and there is more than enough information for anyone with mor ethan two brain clls to understand

Pointing out a common trend between these calcs - lack of evidence, borderline dishonest feat interpretation, downplaying significant jumps in logic - seems fine to me. I sure others have noticed the similarities.

Bitch you have yet to post a single god damn scan while ive posted damn near an entire book dont you dare ******* claim that i have a lack of evidence all i have done is post evidence.

 

[WeeklyBattles]

Dargoo im going to be blunt here, your blatant ignorance towards everything that is being discussed here coupled with your flat out denial that anything has been posted to counter your argument when in reality you are the one who is not posting evidence while your opposition is posting overwhelming amounts of evidence to which your response is to simply plug your ears, shut your eyes, and pretend that it does not exist very clearly shows that you are unfit to take part in this debate and are just wasting everyone's time here. I am going to report this directly to Ant along with everything else that has taken place over the past few days.

 

[Sir_Ovens]

Honestly, this thread is too messy to work through. Can we just make a new thread and focus on the calcs that are being disputed?

It would also help if the main points of contention are written in the OP of the thread.

 

[WeeklyBattles]

Honestly, this thread is too messy to work through. Can we just make a new thread and focus on the calcs that are being disputed?

It would also help if the main points of contention are written in the OP of the thread.

Calc. Singular. The other one was deleted.

Plus there were lik 5 other things that never got discussed because Dargoo derailed this thread with his nonsense

 

[DarkDragonMedeus]

I agree with Ovens that a refreshed shit storm free thread should be made.

 

[Spinoirr]

Plz make a crt about thisb

 

[AKM sama]

At this point, I agree with starting a new CRT with TLDR points of both sides in the OP.

Weekly, if you want to actually conclude a topic, try not to play a victim every time Dargoo argues against your points. This attitude of yours that "Dargoo is out there to get me" doesn't help at all.

 

[WeeklyBattles]

At this point, I agree with starting a new CRT with TLDR points of both sides in the OP.

Weekly, if you want to actually conclude a topic, try not to play a victim every time Dargoo argues against your points. This attitude of yours that "Dargoo is out there to get me" doesn't help at all.

Perhaps if he actually posted evidence to counter my argument instead of simply arguing 'no because i said so' and getting people to bandwagon on him being against it with no actual counterargument then i wouldnt have to claim that he is out to get me but he does so i do because it is true and i am not the only one who feels this way. If you dont believe me then you are free to look for yourself, go back through the argument, i am the only one who posted scans this entire debate, dargoo did not and just said 'no' and people went with it.

 

[Dargoo_Faust]

Saying that I "did not post scans this entire debate" is not true. Multiple people including myself have brought up both specific details on your scans as well as new scans to showcase issues with the calc. The only thing I've noticed is that they're scans you don't like, and details on your scans that you don't like, not that they do not exist.

The only person using dishonest debate tactics here is you, Weekly. As with numerous previous threads resorting to insulting and berating the opponent and proverbially flipping off people who were more partial to your points is what is making people dismiss the arguments here and call for a new thread. There is no bandwagon, no conspiracy, it's a KE calc discussion.

Honestly I'm amazed at the sheer kindness and leniency AKM and Ovens are showing you right now, and you should at least be more appreciative towards that.

Also, who cares what people tell you on discord. Have the discussion on the forum, no one wants to play a game of telephone with people who already use this platform and already commented on this thread.

I'll be waiting until a formal thread is made for this calc or if a calc member actually evaluates this calc.