No, it really didnt, you saying
nah i dont wanna count it, doesnt make you right or it to be even slightly good of a rebuttal. You aren't God Weekly, you dont get to decide on what opinions on an opinionative matter count or do not count.
Hmm well given he wasnt utilizing his melting ability in any instance where he fought a Stand but when he did he showed the ability to melt a Stand, well how much spoonfeeding do you want ƒñö
I dont think you understand what explicitly means.
ex┬Àplic┬Àit┬Àly
/ik╦êsplisitlē/
adverb
- in a clear and detailed manner, leaving no room for confusion or doubt
No offense, but neither is true, nothing was detailed, especially given context and the narrative oprogression of events, which leaves extreme doubt for your supposed explicit claim. Secco pummeling SF means nothing because even when touching Bruno or Mista he wasnt melting anything, hell in the same fight where he's pummeling SF he lands blows on Bruno too, which doesnt melt him, ergo not once, in the entire arc, when SF was out or fighting Secco, was Secco utilizing his melting powers, if he was using the melting when SF was fighting him Bruno wouldve been melted too in that very same fight (also despite him saying he's gonna kill Bruno, he seems very calm and collected, even stopping the attack temporarily to ask Bruno if he saw Pol). He may of been trying to kill him, but he wasnt using his full power, whether or not that makes sense in character doesnt matter, that's what happened. Take it up with Araki if it bothers you so much.
Now instead of pulling the ol no u card, actually explain why his Stand doesnt count for some reason you seem to think. His liquification, in the one instance where he was actively making an effort to liquify on hand contact, effected both people and stands, in the same motion even, whether or not it's his own doesnt matter because in the instances where he was fighting another Stand, he wasnt using that power. The fact it effected his own Stand aleady means the liquification has NPI so this conversation is pointless, but not only that the fact it effected a Stand in general, one that is fine burrowing in the mud without getting completely gooped, means it's just as fine as anything else. Actually, inoring the fact pulling the
purden of proof card being the oldest way in the book to actually get out of properly formulating a rebuttal, the burden of proof was for me to show that it effected a Stand, because that's what you originally asked, you're moving the goalposts now, in reality it's up to you now to prove an supply evidence that Secco's very own Stand is somehow different than any other Stand in this very specific case and that Oasis for some reason has less resilence to being mud even though it's showed to be the same up till Secco actively tried melting a target, and it worked. But, as said, even if it only somehow effects his Stand, that's still NPI, which is enough here.
