Smash Bros: Immeasurable speed revision

[StrymULTRA]

A continuation of this as that CRT is accepted about AP, but for speed is dead as ****.

Anyway, let's keep this simple:

As accepted in the linked CRT and current Galeem's profile, his light has expanded across all the cosmology to devour it and all the characters inhabitating it.

The evidence for Galeem's light being Immeasurable is said light even reaching other time periods, due to it affecting also all the eras of the Metal Gear series, the same with Sonic's (as shown with Silver) and Mario (with Baby Mario).

And yes, characters have showcased to be able to react and being able to temporairly outrun to these beams, that being, outside of obviously Kirby:

• Link, Palutena and Mewtwo being able to cast defensive techniques, not being aware of them being obliterated anyway.
• Sonic being implied to be able to outrun these beams, other than him being stated to be the fastest Smash Fighter on the running aspect.
• Inklings being able to hide in their ink before being hit.

And so on. In the video you can see that generally everyone is able to react to these in some way without being completely blitzed.

This only makes everyone who is currently MFTL+ off this calculation Immeasurable instead.

Addressing potential counter arguments

I know some are bound to arise, so here we go:

• Isn't it just Galeem's effect of Tier 2 range? We don't make every Tier 2 character Immeasurable speed after all.

This is true, usually we don't make every Tier 2 character scale to their own destruction in speed, heck even with that, we only scale to what said destructive attack has visually shown to be speed-wise, like DBS Goku is not Immeasurable but just MFTL+ from the destruction of the 2-C Universe 7. However we do see instead the light physically expanding and even invading other time periods unlike DBS Goku's case which only involves the physical space.

• Why would Galeem even scale to his own light then?

Had it not for the Fighters physically reacting to said light I would not have suggested said scaling. Usually we do not scale a Tier 2/1 character's speed to their cosmology wipe unless they have evidence of them being able to physically react to it (otherwise every High 3-A character would have Infinite speed). However in this case we do see the characters physically reacting to that light with their movements, implying they're relative to it, similar to how Asriel Dreemurr is Immeasurable not because of him having destroyed a timeline, but because of him scaling to a character to physically avoided said timeline destruction. They absolutely would scale to this.

• Why can't it be that the light is just MFTL+ and reached other time periods with hax?

This is a baseless assumption. All we see is the light physically expanding and then everything is already covered by said light, with instantly after we see only the aftermath of what happened, with Galeem making puppets of everyone that was devoured by him. All we saw is the light invading these eras by sheer physical movement, and we don't need to make assumptions like that only because we don't want a character to be Immeasurable, when we have Occam's Razor here.

And I think it's all.

 

[Sir_Marvulous]

Yuh

 

[Luckyfun]

Nice

 

[Compsito]

Yes, I agree

 

[OrangeFR]

Yay I agree

 

[StrymULTRA]

Bump

 

[Eficiente]

• Why can't it be that the light is just MFTL+ and reached other time periods with hax?

This is a baseless assumption. All we see is the light physically expanding and then everything is already covered by said light, with instantly after we see only the aftermath of what happened, with Galeem making puppets of everyone that was devoured by him. All we saw is the light invading these eras by sheer physical movement, and we don't need to make assumptions like that only because we don't want a character to be Immeasurable, when we have Occam's Razor here.

How is that not the more likely assumption considering the alternative? "The ability to time travel" is far more common than essentially "having infinite speed across space + infinite speed when using time travel." It assumes far less out of the situation since it's made up of less in general. Yes, we see the things physically expanding, but that's meaningless, we also know that they didn't physically expand to the present only, so they had to time travel. From there, if it is "time travel as an ability" or "immeasurable speed," it doesn't matter, they're both a form of time travel, and thus you can't grab onto the fact that they physically expand so say that it couldn't be time travel as an ability. The "sheer physical movement" we see is irrelevant.

Furthermore, across all the lore we're given for the fighters, I'm pretty sure the passage of time is demonstrably present across their adventures, even stages have this.

 

[StrymULTRA]

How is that not the more likely assumption considering the alternative? "The ability to time travel" is far more common than essentially "having infinite speed across space + infinite speed when using time travel."

Bruh.

It assumes far less out of the situation since it's made up of less in general. Yes, we see the things physically expanding, but that's meaningless, we also know that they didn't physically expand to the present only, so they had to time travel.

You saying that because you don't want it to be Immeasurable isn't an argument.

We literally have Dragon Ball Heroes' Dark Dragon Balls to be Immeasurable off the same argument too after all, this isn't any different.

The "sheer physical movement" we see is irrelevant.

Actually it is, we don't see the light to teleport or warp after all. Only Kirby's stated to escape thanks to that ability, wouldn't make sense if Galeem's light also does that, right?

Furthermore, across all the lore we're given for the fighters, I'm pretty sure the passage of time is demonstrably present across their adventures, even stages have this.

This is the most dishonest argument by you tbh. The passage of time passing literally isn't an argument against Infinite/Immeasurable, because it literally happens for every single verse in existence outside these single feats, right to make the story still comprehensible to us.

 

[PlozAlcachaz]

How is that not the more likely assumption considering the alternative? "The ability to time travel" is far more common than essentially "having infinite speed across space + infinite speed when using time travel." It assumes far less out of the situation since it's made up of less in general.

My dude, we're literally talking about an all-encompassing attack that physically spanned across creation. We're not talking about a generic "moved so fast that it accomplished time travel" feat. We already attribute this cosmology-wiping attack to speed due to the nature of it. Please explain how tacking on an entirely unstated secondary effect to Galeem's attack is the more reasonable interpretation than the already incredibly fast beams that enveloped the cosmology moved so fast that they went and affected different periods of time through from that same speed (something we see the effects of)?

 

[Eficiente]

Bruh.

You saying that because you don't want it to be Immeasurable isn't an argument.

Don't make stuff up. My first argument was 1 interpretation being more likely than another interpretation due to being simpler, the other being literally infinitely more complex. That's a logical throughline, you don't see it and so you don't counter it.

We literally have Dragon Ball Heroes' Dark Dragon Balls to be Immeasurable off the same argument too after all, this isn't any different.

Whataboutism.

Actually it is, we don't see the light to teleport or warp after all. Only Kirby's stated to escape thanks to that ability, wouldn't make sense if Galeem's light also does that, right?

Please explain how tacking on an entirely unstated secondary effect to Galeem's attack is the more reasonable interpretation than the already incredibly fast beams that enveloped the cosmology moved so fast that they went and affected different periods of time through from that same speed (something we see the effects of)?

StrymULTRA, you ignore my other argument again:

"we see the things physically expanding, but that's meaningless, we also know that they didn't physically expand to the present only, so they had to time travel.. From there, if it is "time travel as an ability" or "immeasurable speed," it doesn't matter, they're both a form of time travel, and thus you can't grab onto the fact that they physically expand so say that it couldn't be time travel as an ability. The "sheer physical movement" we see is irrelevant."

It means that you have no grounds to see something time travel via movement & claim it didn't use the ability to time travel, because it does time travel anyway. I'm talking about the logic behind claiming it's Imm. speed when you see the feat. You can't dismiss it as hax, because that literally doesn't mean anything, it's hax either way (not that it matters). How can you explain that the more likely interpretation is the method of time travel that's more complex? What makes my interpretation a bigger assumption?

Same goes for PlozAlcachaz, calling it a "secondary effect" is like saying an old phone that can only do calls has a secondary effect next to a new phone that can do that & much more. It's a feeling of oppression with no grounds where to stand on, it just feels like that will win the argument.

This is the most dishonest argument by you tbh. The passage of time passing literally isn't an argument against Infinite/Immeasurable, because it literally happens for every single verse in existence outside these single feats, right to make the story still comprehensible to us.

That's more whataboutism. Calling bringing up consistency a dishonest argument is pretty extreme. I say that you're trying to dismiss consistency here, and that I try to care more about it to discern what stats are correct, would you be able to counter that? Also please don't reply with things like "Bruh," quick dismissals of whatever I say, or more whataboutism. If you explain how your position makes the most sense, I will see.

My dude, we're literally talking about an all-encompassing attack that physically spanned across creation. We're not talking about a generic "moved so fast that it accomplished time travel" feat.

The premise has part of what you try to prove, the "physically spanned" bit. Aside from that, look at how the rest stands on its on; "all-encompassing attack" Doesn't mean anything. It went "across creation" doesn't mean anything. These things sound & are really powerful, but they're not related to the topic at hand.

We already attribute this cosmology-wiping attack to speed due to the nature of it.

I don't see in his profile but if we do then I have disagreed with it so far.

 

[StrymULTRA]

Don't make stuff up. My first argument was 1 interpretation being more likely than another interpretation due to being simpler, the other being literally infinitely more complex. That's a logical throughline, you don't see it and so you don't counter it.

"More complex"

Lil' bro you see the light physically expanding to cover like everything, your interpretation of it suddenly teleporting in other time periods is asinine and just ignores anything else in your attempt to downplay.

Whataboutism.

Don't call it that if you can't counter it.

Oh wait, I remember you trying to refute DBH being Immeasurable too in the past and that was rejected, mh.

It means that you have no grounds to see something time travel via movement & claim it didn't use the ability to time travel, because it does time travel anyway.

Via speed, not hax. Moving on.

You can't dismiss it as hax, because that literally doesn't mean anything, it's hax either way (not that it matters).

Hax implies that it wasn't a physical movement at all, but merely the usage of an ability that allowed it. Such thing wasn't implied at all with Galeem, Occam's Razor tells us it was pure physical movement, it's how Bill Cipher got Imm. speed too after all.

That's more whataboutism. Calling bringing up consistency a dishonest argument is pretty extreme. I say that you're trying to dismiss consistency here, and that I try to care more about it to discern what stats are correct, would you be able to counter that? Also please don't reply with things like "Bruh," quick dismissals of whatever I say, or more whataboutism. If you explain how your position makes the most sense, I will see.

This is just your warped definition of people debunking you, but whatever makes you chill.

Besides is not even whataboutism, is literally like.... every verse in existence that has an Immeasurable speed chain, you'd need to, like... make a wiki-wide revision about it.

 

[StrymULTRA]

I don't see in his profile but if we do then I have disagreed with it so far.

Since I forgot about this, it's in his range:

Range: Hundreds of Meters (His attacks can cover a majority of the stage and beyond. Could fight Dharkon from a considerable distance away) up to Multiversal (His light can cover the entire universe and is implied to also have reached almost all the other universes, as it could capture the spirits of all the characters across different worlds that were devoured by said light, including ones from parallel timelines and alternate realms, with the narration stating that there's a "last remaining world" after the spreading of said light)

Plus the "I have disagreed with it" kinda implies that you disagree with it to begin with just because.

 

[Eficiente]

we don't see the light to teleport or warp after all. Only Kirby's stated to escape thanks to that ability, wouldn't make sense if Galeem's light also does that, right?

Btw, what are you implying Kirby did?; What does "warp" mean to you? It varies between moving really fast or teleporting in fiction, and we always see the Warp Star move fast in Smash. Kirby physically dodged the rays, as if they were not covering 100% of the whole universe, but leaving tiny spaces free for Kirby to be able to do that, which is how they were moving at the start in that cliff area. It didn't seem as if they were going to leave tiny spaces free after that, but that can only matter so much.

Iirc, Sakurai's comment on this refers back to the Warp Star "having always been able to warp" in the Kirby series, but it just moves you from place to place really fast in the games up to that point.

 

[StrymULTRA]

Btw, what are you implying Kirby did?; What does "warp" mean to you? It varies between moving really fast or teleporting in fiction, and we always see the Warp Star move fast in Smash. Kirby physically dodged the rays, as if they were not covering 100% of the whole universe, but leaving tiny spaces free for Kirby to be able to do that, which is how they were moving at the start in that cliff area. It didn't seem as if they were going to leave tiny spaces free after that, but that can only matter so much.

Iirc, Sakurai's comment on this refers back to the Warp Star "having always been able to warp" in the Kirby series, but it just moves you from place to place really fast in the games up to that point.

I forgot to link that in OP, my bad there.

• Sakurai saying that Kirby had to warp to escape the attack, as Galeem's light has reached also other realms, something we see also in the game.

If you check the 1st, we see this interesting detail:

Given that its assault enveloped the ends of the galaxy, only a vehicle that could defy the laws of physics would work. Even short-distance teleportation wouldn’t be enough.

I think that is either:

• Higher-end Immeasurable speed for the Star Rod alone.
• Just a very strong teleportation that's beyond Galeem's light.

Either of these in any case kinda shoot down your argument of Galeem's reaching the other eras being merely hax, as in Kirby's case, he explicitly used an ability to escape, which would have put it above Galeem's light (which envelop past, present and future, mind you), and given how Sakurai worded it, it would have been impossible to escape Galeem's light with other ways.

If anything it implies that Galeem's light is something normal to him, which does not require weird abilities. Kirby was the one needing it to escape, but it does not need Galeem to do the same.

 

[DarkDragonMedeus]

I think Immeasurable makes more sense than not given the OP's explanations.

 

[Eficiente]

"More complex"

Lil' bro you see the light physically expanding to cover like everything, your interpretation of it suddenly teleporting in other time periods is asinine and just ignores anything else in your attempt to downplay.

That doesn't reply to the argument though, and is covered by the rest of what I said. If you know my argument you wouldn't be saying what happens in the cutscene for the 3º time, I already know that. And you can keep to yourself saying things like I try to downplay.

Don't call it that if you can't counter it.

Oh wait, I remember you trying to refute DBH being Immeasurable too in the past and that was rejected, mh.

That's not how it works, a CRT about X verse demands knowledge about X verse, not Y verse. You make a random, nonsensical rule as to why whataboutism is ok.

Don't act so immaturely, please. I don't remember using the same arguments there, so that's a start. And that's that, I won't beat me over it. Don't you think it's strange that you act like I have to be wrong here bc I was wrong there when I made arguments you're yet to counter or shown to understand? It's backwards, you could have just replied to what you needed to reply and be done with it.

Via speed, not hax. Moving on.

Hax implies that it wasn't a physical movement at all, but merely the usage of an ability that allowed it. Such thing wasn't implied at all with Galeem, Occam's Razor tells us it was pure physical movement,

No, you view it in a black & white way. Time travel hax can be done via movement in fiction, it's done a lot. And besides, if the ability is moving you at all then those are movements being done, which goes back to the same issue.

it's how Bill Cipher got Imm. speed too after all.

See above.

This is just your warped definition of people debunking you, but whatever makes you chill.

Again, you ignore my argument. You comfortably think that it has to be that I'm wrong, claiming some negative things about me that need to be backed up by you explaining how it is that I got there, but you don't bother to. That's some lack of decency, you should not be doing that.

Besides is not even whataboutism, is literally like.... every verse in existence that has an Immeasurable speed chain, you'd need to, like... make a wiki-wide revision about it.

See above. I don't know "every verse in existence," I do know some where Immeasurable speed is hesitated due to the lack of consistency (not that it matters).

Since I forgot about this, it's in his range:

Range: Hundreds of Meters (His attacks can cover a majority of the stage and beyond. Could fight Dharkon from a considerable distance away) up to Multiversal (His light can cover the entire universe and is implied to also have reached almost all the other universes, as it could capture the spirits of all the characters across different worlds that were devoured by said light, including ones from parallel timelines and alternate realms, with the narration stating that there's a "last remaining world" after the spreading of said light)

Well, if it's picky, then it's not the same as a "cosmology-wiping attack." I already knew it could reach things from other universes.

I forgot to link that in OP, my bad there.

• Sakurai saying that Kirby had to warp to escape the attack, as Galeem's light has reached also other realms, something we see also in the game.

If you check the 1st, we see this interesting detail:

Given that its assault enveloped the ends of the galaxy, only a vehicle that could defy the laws of physics would work. Even short-distance teleportation wouldn’t be enough.

I think that is either:

• Higher-end Immeasurable speed for the Star Rod alone.
• Just a very strong teleportation that's beyond Galeem's light.

He says "Some of you may have forgotten, but Kirby’s Warp Star has been able to, y’know, warp since his very first game. That alone made him a pretty solid contender." And in the first game of his series, the thing just moves really fast. Defy the laws of physics could mean anything, like ftl travel.

Either of these in any case kinda shoot down your argument of Galeem's reaching the other eras being merely hax, as in Kirby's case, he explicitly used an ability to escape, which would have put it above Galeem's light (which envelop past, present and future, mind you), and given how Sakurai worded it, it would have been impossible to escape Galeem's light with other ways.

If anything it implies that Galeem's light is something normal to him, which does not require weird abilities. Kirby was the one needing it to escape, but it does not need Galeem to do the same.

He was talking about speed though. And even if the first Kirby game was a mystery to all of us, he could have been talking about speed or teleportation. The idea of hax not being the same as movement is covered above.

@DarkDragonMedeus StrymULTRA's attitude towards me was been off, could you see that and comment about it. Also, he feels justified to use whataboutisms, could you please comment about it as well?

 

[The_2nd_Existential_Seed]

Not anyone important but I came to say I don't see any problems with Immeasurable

 

[StrymULTRA]

Don't act so immaturely, please. I don't remember using the same arguments there, so that's a start. And that's that, I won't beat me over it. Don't you think it's strange that you act like I have to be wrong here bc I was wrong there when I made arguments you're yet to counter or shown to understand? It's backwards, you could have just replied to what you needed to reply and be done with it.

I said it mostly because of the exact same happening there and you being refuted, so I see this as history happening again.

No, you view it in a black & white way. Time travel hax can be done via movement in fiction, it's done a lot. And besides, if the ability is moving you at all then those are movements being done, which goes back to the same issue.

Not really. If the light encompasses everything in an omnidirectional way, and it shows to physically expand in a similar way to other universes, the most obvious implication is it doing so by speed. It using an ability is not only not implied anywhere, but needs an additional assumption.

Again, you ignore my argument. You comfortably think that it has to be that I'm wrong, claiming some negative things about me that need to be backed up by you explaining how it is that I got there, but you don't bother to. That's some lack of decency, you should not be doing that.

If I am arguing in favor of it, it just means I think you're wrong. Moving on.

See above. I don't know "every verse in existence," I do know some where Immeasurable speed is hesitated due to the lack of consistency (not that it matters).

Considering that Smash Bros not only does not gaf about the canon scaling (ex. Pichu deals more damage than Pikachu, or Pirahna Plant is on the same footing as Bowser and Mario), and does not have many feats outside of cutscenes, but mostly in gameplay, calling it inconsistent is just unfair. They have no reason to say they're slower than it "realistically", because they just... lack anti-feats on it.

He says "Some of you may have forgotten, but Kirby’s Warp Star has been able to, y’know, warp since his very first game. That alone made him a pretty solid contender." And in the first game of his series, the thing just moves really fast. Defy the laws of physics could mean anything, like ftl travel.

Or teleportation, you know. You admitted yourself that Kirby could have avoided them through like anything, meaning it's more likely hax than not, going back to "Galeem did not use hax, but Kirby yes".

He was talking about speed though. And even if the first Kirby game was a mystery to all of us, he could have been talking about speed or teleportation. The idea of hax not being the same as movement is covered above.

Not really, he attributed Galeem's light to speed lmao

We needed a solid, convincing reason for why said character could outrun Galeem. All fighters possessing “normal” abilities were immediately disqualified. Given that its assault enveloped the ends of the galaxy, only a vehicle that could defy the laws of physics would work. Even short-distance teleportation wouldn’t be enough.

Galeem's light alone defies physics (given it deadass covered a whole universe in seconds after all), and then said that abilities like short-range teleportation aren't enough. It just implies more that Galeem's beams were so fast that Kirby had to cheat his way out of it with ways that his physical speed wouldn't allow him to, your argument just isn't holding here.

 

[Eficiente]

I said it mostly because of the exact same happening there and you being refuted, so I see this as history happening again.

I don't know if you read what I said, you just say why you said that. I gave reasons as to why doing that was wrong and the approach was inappropriate, beats me what you think about it.

Not really. If the light encompasses everything in an omnidirectional way, and it shows to physically expand in a similar way to other universes, the most obvious implication is it doing so by speed. It using an ability is not only not implied anywhere, but needs an additional assumption.

You say that this is the case but what's the logical throughline behind it? I already gave mine, one thing being infinitely more complex than the other. Why is the attack being omnidirectional any different, mechanically? Why is it "the most obvious implication"? You still say the "physically expand" and "using an ability" bit, so you may portray it as if this was different to what I said, but it doesn't seem like you understand my argument, otherwise why are you saying that? You're using invalid reasons to reach the conclusion that it has to be Imme. speed.

Alternatively, you don't actually agree with what I said, but you don't say that, you just say that this case is still valid due to its own reasons. If so, that's not transparent and doesn't address my arguments.

If I am arguing in favor of it, it just means I think you're wrong. Moving on.

Agreeing to disagree and not bother to debate about it in your own thread is one thing (It's fine, if pretty bad at that). Saying that something I say is "[my] warped definition of people debunking [me]" means that you have confidence in that position, beyond just me being wrong (which I already know you think that), and it follows that you explain yourself. There is no "moving on" from that ideally.

Would it not be reasonable for me to think that you just exaggerated how wrong I am? Imagine I were to say that to someone, not explain why, and say that we should move on. I could say that to someone, but I would probably present it as a mere possibility or how they're coming across as, and I would always explain how so so that they may reflect on that. And if I don't have the time to do that, I don't bring it up. See the difference?

Considering that Smash Bros not only does not gaf about the canon scaling (ex. Pichu deals more damage than Pikachu, or Pirahna Plant is on the same footing as Bowser and Mario), and does not have many feats outside of cutscenes, but mostly in gameplay, calling it inconsistent is just unfair. They have no reason to say they're slower than it "realistically", because they just... lack anti-feats on it.

I can get behind the fighters being extraordinary and around as powerful as each other, regardless of their position "in their series within Smash." They're fight among each other for a reason, and Master Hand picks them at least rarely. Even then, random members of a species can be extraordinary next to the rest of their species. Pikachu is quite the example of that. Furthermore, there is no reason to believe every Pirahna Plant has the same moves, abilities (like Final Smash), and power as the playable Pirahna Plant, who can fight Bowser, so that's an example of a fighter being extraordinary. But even then, still, if they had no reason to be comparable to each other, they fact that they are forms a new consistency in which they're comparable to each other, which they do a lot, and within that consistency, Imme. speed is not consistency based on everything they do together.

Those are not good reasons to call the appear to consistency unfair and look down on anti-feats. What do you mean with the last sentence?

Before I said: "I say that you're trying to dismiss consistency here, and that I try to care more about it to discern what stats are correct, would you be able to counter that?" I think that's a great question. Please, convince me that your way of doing this makes the most sense.

Or teleportation, you know. You admitted yourself that Kirby could have avoided them through like anything, meaning it's more likely hax than not, going back to "Galeem did not use hax, but Kirby yes".

Sure, could be, but do you see how it's vague enough to allow speed as a possibility? Also, I did present a reason there; 1) "Kirby’s Warp Star has been able to, y’know, warp since his very first game" 2) Warp Stars only move fast in the first game. 3) Therefore, the Warp Star's "warp" most likely refers to fast movement here.

Not really, he attributed Galeem's light to speed lmao

See above.

We needed a solid, convincing reason for why said character could outrun Galeem. All fighters possessing “normal” abilities were immediately disqualified. Given that its assault enveloped the ends of the galaxy, only a vehicle that could defy the laws of physics would work. Even short-distance teleportation wouldn’t be enough.

Galeem's light alone defies physics (given it deadass covered a whole universe in seconds after all), and then said that abilities like short-range teleportation aren't enough. It just implies more that Galeem's beams were so fast that Kirby had to cheat his way out of it with ways that his physical speed wouldn't allow him to, your argument just isn't holding here.

You assume that has to be the case, but the special ability of the Warp Star has always been, "being really fast." It's faster than how Kirby can run, it can travel galaxies, why would "outmaneuver at super speed" not be a physics-defying way to cheat his way out of it? What disqualify that? I mean heck, why would it be able to teleport larger distances than what the rest of the characters can do, when it has never been able to teleport its users? (Unless you count time travel & dimensional travel in modern Kirby games), let alone since the first Kirby game. I get why one could jump from Sakurai saying "short-distance teleportation" into it having to be long-distance, but that doesn't necessarily follow, he could just mention that for the sake of mentioning that, or bc nobody can teleport out of the range of the rays, in the Real World or Final Destination.

 

[StrymULTRA]

I don't know if you read what I said, you just say why you said that. I gave reasons as to why doing that was wrong and the approach was inappropriate, beats me what you think about it.

You talk as if I'm objectively wrong. I'm not falling for this bullshit, Efi, instead of whining just focus on the argument rather than using gaslighting tactics in an attempt to trick me in changing my mind.

I'm not replying to any more points that aren't about the feat, because it's getting ridiculous.

You say that this is the case but what's the logical throughline behind it? I already gave mine, one thing being infinitely more complex than the other. Why is the attack being omnidirectional any different, mechanically? Why is it "the most obvious implication"? You still say the "physically expand" and "using an ability" bit, so you may portray it as if this was different to what I said, but it doesn't seem like you understand my argument, otherwise why are you saying that? You're using invalid reasons to reach the conclusion that it has to be Imme. speed.

Alternatively, you don't actually agree with what I said, but you don't say that, you just say that this case is still valid due to its own reasons. If so, that's not transparent and doesn't address my arguments.

Excluding this unnecessary wall of text of yours, I simply saw the light expanding real fast across the cosmology, we see it reaching even other time periods at the same time as it expanded to also the other universes, so I just apply Occam's Razor and say it was all a physical movement without the need of weird abilities.

You on the other hand spam assumptions, mental gymnastics, and walls of text in an attempt to make those look solid, when they're really not. Not really going to bother with baseless assumptions, if their basis is non-existent, ain't it?

But even then, still, if they had no reason to be comparable to each other, they fact that they are forms a new consistency in which they're comparable to each other, which they do a lot, and within that consistency, Imme. speed is not consistency based on everything they do together.

I literally don't see anything that wouldn't make Immeasurable speed inconsistent. Smash in itself doesn't have many feats, and especially, it doesn't have any real anti feat against Immeasurable. You're just climbing on mirrors in an attempt to say that's inconsistent when there's literally no reason for it to be, outside your fanfiction nitpicks.

Those are not good reasons to call the appear to consistency unfair and look down on anti-feats. What do you mean with the last sentence?

Simple: Find me glaring anti feats against Immeasurable speed, or else don't speak about inconstencies, as you clearly are using the terms incorrectly.

Sure, could be, but do you see how it's vague enough to allow speed as a possibility? Also, I did present a reason there; 1) "Kirby’s Warp Star has been able to, y’know, warp since his very first game" 2) Warp Stars only move fast in the first game. 3) Therefore, the Warp Star's "warp" most likely refers to fast movement here.

You do realize this would still mean that Kirby used a special ability, regardless of it being teleportation or not?

It just means that the Warp Star has a higher end in Immeasurable speed than both Kirby's and Galeem's regular speed. You have no proof that Galeem used an ability that would totally exclusive his physical speed to expand to the time periods on the other hand.

You assume that has to be the case, but the special ability of the Warp Star has always been, "being really fast." It's faster than how Kirby can run, it can travel galaxies, why would "outmaneuver at super speed" not be a physics-defying way to cheat his way out of it? What disqualify that?

Look dude, I clearly know next to nothing about Kirby, but if Sakurai meant the Warp Star to have similar abilities to the canon one about being far faster than Kirby then ok (I'd like some scans about it from the Kirby canon, that is), then, again, it just means that the Warp Star has just greater Immeasurable speed than Galeem's light, but, as said again, that doesn't discredit the interpretation of Kirby using an ability that allows him to outrun Galeem's light while his physical speed wouldn't be enough.

Moving at Immeasurable speed besides does break the law of physics anyway, so I don't get why you treat it as a point against Immeasurable speed lmao.

 

[TheOrangeGuy09]

My opinion doesn’t matter but yeah, I agree.

 

[Eficiente]

You talk as if I'm objectively wrong. I'm not falling for this bullshit, Efi, instead of whining just focus on the argument rather than using gaslighting tactics in an attempt to trick me in changing my mind.

I'm not replying to any more points that aren't about the feat, because it's getting ridiculous.

I gave reasons as to why you're wrong and were immature, you again don't care to cover that while presenting youself as being right, and make daring claims that need to be backed up if you're going to bother to make them. I'm gonna report this if I can't talk it with you.

Excluding this unnecessary wall of text of yours,

That's wrong; I bothered to interpret your comment in good faith, replied to it like that, and then replied to it if I didn't interpret it in good faith, and turns out the latter was right. There is nothing "unnecessary" about it, you should have been less vague and more transparent. You can't blame me for putting effort into the thread. This is some superficial reason as to why I'm wrong, writing too much for no reason. I predict you're just not gonna care that I point this out, if your previous attitude is anything to go by.

I simply saw the light expanding real fast across the cosmology, we see it reaching even other time periods at the same time as it expanded to also the other universes, so I just apply Occam's Razor and say it was all a physical movement without the need of weird abilities.

You on the other hand spam assumptions, mental gymnastics, and walls of text in an attempt to make those look solid, when they're really not. Not really going to bother with baseless assumptions, if their basis is non-existent, ain't it?

You say what happens in the cutscene & your initial position for like the 5º time already, but you don't reply to my arguments against that. Look, here they are, in the first "wall of text" (4 small paragraphs). You are expected to tackle the logic behind it to explain why it's wrong, since it is something that counters your position.

Likewise, you need to explain how I "spam assumptions, mental gymnastics, and walls of text," and you do explain some of that, but then every time you do I find it super easy to counter it, and then you don't say anything if even you see that I'm right about those cases. But even then, you do need to explain how I do those bad things every time it happens, and you either don't or put no effort into it. It's as if you're going off the vague memory that I'm doing things terrible, and if it's correct or not, you don't double check, that vague feeling is good enough to chastise me about it. Dig into all of that is too much to ask for. Consider how much of what I said you overlooked and how much you know that it's me doing things wrong.

I literally don't see anything that wouldn't make Immeasurable speed inconsistent. Smash in itself doesn't have many feats, and especially, it doesn't have any real anti feat against Immeasurable. You're just climbing on mirrors in an attempt to say that's inconsistent when there's literally no reason for it to be, outside your fanfiction nitpicks.

Simple: Find me glaring anti feats against Immeasurable speed, or else don't speak about inconstencies, as you clearly are using the terms incorrectly.

For example, the Sub-space Emissary the bombs that turned parts of space into parts of the sub-space were time bombs, and the fighters needed to beat enemies or deal with them in time before they go off. The story starts in an arena full of an audience watching Mario fight Kirby, who knows how common this is. Stages have like the PKMN ones have as much of an audience watching, or lesser audiences watching. Time passes in stages like Battlefield.

You do realize this would still mean that Kirby used a special ability, regardless of it being teleportation or not?

It just means that the Warp Star has a higher end in Immeasurable speed than both Kirby's and Galeem's regular speed. You have no proof that Galeem used an ability that would totally exclusive his physical speed to expand to the time periods on the other hand.

Sure, but I have no reason to see that as something bad.

Try to understand where I'm coming from; Kirby's Warp Star was able to outmaneuver that. If it has Immeasurable speed or not, we will see.

Look dude, I clearly know next to nothing about Kirby, but if Sakurai meant the Warp Star to have similar abilities to the canon one about being far faster than Kirby then ok (I'd like some scans about it from the Kirby canon, that is),

You don't need to know Kirby, we have all the info we need to know here. That said, since you asked it:

• There are no statements directly saying that, but
• The Warp Stars are always used as vehicles that move faster than base Kirby in gameplay. (Only once in a racing game Kirby could match them with 2 speed-based Copy Abilities.)
• Often times they're used to quickly move great distances. For the most part though, you're not given the option to travel those same distances yourself, but in Kirby's Adventure, you can use Warp Stars to fast travel from Level to Level, when you can actually move between them on your own in a slower way.
• In Kirby Air Ride a Warp Star is used as a vehicles for races, and base Kirby could move on his own as well, being slower than the vehicles in the game.
• In 1 of the few games where characters talk all the time, it's pointed out how fast it could travel.

then, again, it just means that the Warp Star has just greater Immeasurable speed than Galeem's light, but, as said again, that doesn't discredit the interpretation of Kirby using an ability that allows him to outrun Galeem's light while his physical speed wouldn't be enough.

Moving at Immeasurable speed besides does break the law of physics anyway, so I don't get why you treat it as a point against Immeasurable speed lmao.

Let's get on the same page here, are you saying that Kirby used the Warp Star's Immeasurable speed to move across time, away from the present? Or are you saying that simply having Immeasurable speed is good enough, and he dodged that w/o moving across time?

As you know, my position is that it makes the most sense to say that he simply moved at MFTL+ speeds, and dodged the rays of light bc they did not cover 100% of the universe, leaving minuscule gaps for Kirby to do that. Either that or they did cover 100% of the universe, but did not do so all at once, also allowing anyone fast enough to dodge that.

 

[StrymULTRA]

I am not replying to all the stuff related to behavior ngl, because I don't wanna to derail this and just reply to the things related to the feat.

For example, the Sub-space Emissary the bombs that turned parts of space into parts of the sub-space were time bombs, and the fighters needed to beat enemies or deal with them in time before they go off. The story starts in an arena full of an audience watching Mario fight Kirby, who knows how common this is. Stages have like the PKMN ones have as much of an audience watching, or lesser audiences watching. Time passes in stages like Battlefield.

This isn't a contradiction, is just an example of authors not knowing of the implications of the speed feats of their characters.

I remember making a detailed post about it here, as that'd answer your question.

You don't need to know Kirby, we have all the info we need to know here. That said, since you asked it:

• There are no statements directly saying that, but
• The Warp Stars are always used as vehicles that move faster than base Kirby in gameplay. (Only once in a racing game Kirby could match them with 2 speed-based Copy Abilities.)
• Often times they're used to quickly move great distances. For the most part though, you're not given the option to travel those same distances yourself, but in Kirby's Adventure, you can use Warp Stars to fast travel from Level to Level, when you can actually move between them on your own in a slower way.
• In Kirby Air Ride a Warp Star is used as a vehicles for races, and base Kirby could move on his own as well, being slower than the vehicles in the game.
• In 1 of the few games where characters talk all the time, it's pointed out how fast it could travel.

K. Still means that's an ability that makes Kirby way faster than his physical speed.

Let's get on the same page here, are you saying that Kirby used the Warp Star's Immeasurable speed to move across time, away from the present? Or are you saying that simply having Immeasurable speed is good enough, and he dodged that w/o moving across time?

As you know, my position is that it makes the most sense to say that he simply moved at MFTL+ speeds, and dodged the rays of light bc they did not cover 100% of the universe, leaving minuscule gaps for Kirby to do that. Either that or they did cover 100% of the universe, but did not do so all at once, also allowing anyone fast enough to dodge that.

I do not get why are you overthinking this too much.

I simply see a character outrunning an Immeasurable speed attack, so I say that's higher in Immeasurable, too. It's basic scaling, Efi.

Plus you're still saying that he dodged an attack that covered past, present and future at once with a finite speed, do you know how absurd it sounds?

 

[Bernkastelll]

As you know, my position is that it makes the most sense to say that he simply moved at MFTL+ speeds, and dodged the rays of light bc they did not cover 100% of the universe, leaving minuscule gaps for Kirby to do that. Either that or they did cover 100% of the universe, but did not do so all at once, also allowing anyone fast enough to dodge that.

How the hell he simply moved at MFTL+ speeds if the attack was Immeasurable? Do you know how absurd this sounds? Even if he had Infinite Speed he wouldn't be able to escape

 

[The_King_of_Prudence]

To be fair, it looked like the expansion exploded after Kirby escaped, so it's possible it wasn't immeasurable until then.
Only possible, though.

 

[StrymULTRA]

To be fair, it looked like the expansion explodes after Kirby escaped, so it's possible it wasn't immeasurable until then.
Only possible, though.

Rn it's accepted that the Fighters scale to the full speed of the light.

Though tbh I think it's just cinematic time.

 

[StrymULTRA]

I think Immeasurable makes more sense than not given the OP's explanations.

Mind pinging people please?

 

[LordGriffin1000]

Question, are they tagged by less? Because at this point we'd be scaling a bunch of characters to a single Immeasurable Speed feat (I don't like how the feat is preformed but that's not to say it's not Immeasurable). Like if I go back to previous instalments and stuff from this game, would I find examples of them getting tagged by less?

 

[DarkDragonMedeus]

Question, are they tagged by less? Because at this point we'd be scaling a bunch of characters to a single Immeasurable Speed feat (I don't like how the feat is preformed but that's not to say it's not Immeasurable). Like if I go back to previous instalments and stuff from this game, would I find examples of them getting tagged by less?

I think Brawl is probably the only previous Smash Bros game worth looking at for reference as it's the only other Smash game with cinematic cutscenes or a main story. But "Other Smash Bros" characters or other Boss characters such as Tabuu, Master Hand, ect are the only ones who officially "Tagged" them. Nothing really locked to specific speed ratings have officially tagged the cast.

 

[StrymULTRA]

Question, are they tagged by less? Because at this point we'd be scaling a bunch of characters to a single Immeasurable Speed feat (I don't like how the feat is preformed but that's not to say it's not Immeasurable). Like if I go back to previous instalments and stuff from this game, would I find examples of them getting tagged by less?

If by "tagged" you mean objects that objectively can't be Immeasurable, no.

Only thing they fight are other playable characters and bosses in cutscenes (in Smash Brawl).

That's an advantage of not having many feats ngl.

 

[Maverick_Zero_X]

I think Immeasurable makes more than the "it's just hax" interpretation given the OP's arguments.

 

[StrymULTRA]

Given that it's still Immeasurable speed what we're talking about, I'll wait for @LordGriffin1000 to give their final input.

If they won't in some days I'll apply this.

Stuff

When you're free please reply back.

 

[Psychomaster35]

I'd say Strym just about makes sense here, so I agree with the immeasurable speed proposal.

 

[Eficiente]

This isn't a contradiction, is just an example of authors not knowing of the implications of the speed feats of their characters.

"An example" is many, many examples.

That is a contradiction because, there is no distinction between "a contradiction" and "authors not knowing of the implications [Stats stuff]"; Every contradiction has that (unless done on purpose). You made up a rule as to why anti-feats can't be seen as anti-feats but there is no logic behind it. It's not the first time you do this in thread, you present something nicely as if it had to be that way, but then you look at the logic that builds it up and it doesn't add up. I don't point this out to be mean, but bc looking at the logic behind any claim is the normal thing to do, and it results me very easy to see & explain the issues so far.

I remember making a detailed post about it here, as that'd answer your question.

I don't remember the full consistency and context in that verse so whatever I say about it applies in an undesirable way (One of the reasons why whataboutism is terrible).

But, time limits and timeframes against higher ends speeds feats are an argument due being contradictions. The higher the speed, the more normal the timeframes move, the bigger the contradiction. So moving a lightspeed and having a timeframe contradict that isn't the same as moving at infinite speed and having a timeframe contradict that. The contradiction would be infinitely bigger, and that's all based on logic, not wonky rules.

Hence, what's the argument against it?; That we (sometimes) don't do that in other verses? It obviously needs whataboutistm here & there, bc it doesn't make sense. I predict that if a future verse gets a similar feat & some debate against the stats happens, more whataboutistm will be used. And that will repeat over and over, bc we can't possibly explain how it stands up on its own. And if other people doesn't know those other verses that got those stats accepted, well, sucks to be them. Do you see the issue?

K. Still means that's an ability that makes Kirby way faster than his physical speed.

Yes.

I do not get why are you overthinking this too much.

We index info about characters based on feats & lore, interpreting stuff based on what's more likely, as complex as things may get. The overthinking part starts at "index info about characters."

I simply see a character outrunning an Immeasurable speed attack, so I say that's higher in Immeasurable, too. It's basic scaling, Efi.

Plus you're still saying that he dodged an attack that covered past, present and future at once with a finite speed, do you know how absurd it sounds?

Please put yourself in my position; I don't agree with Immeasurable speed attack, so put it on the table, even if you don't agree with it. Kirby outruns the attack, so that's not Immeasurable speed to me, hence A) the attack did not cover 100% of the universe, leaving minuscule gaps for Kirby to do that. Or B) it did cover 100% of the universe, but did not do so all at once, also allowing anyone fast enough to dodge that.

And that is not the same motion the attack was portrayed to have before, the whole "omnidirectional blast that covers the cosmology, past, present, and future," It was already picky about which characters from the past and future it affected, and now it only covers as much of the universe as it needs to to destroy it. It's a very "controled, meticulous" thing, rather than the "raw, sheer physical movement" thing you portrayed it as.

Furthermore, the question I made was super important ("are you saying that Kirby used the Warp Star's Immeasurable speed to move across time, away from the present? Or are you saying that simply having Immeasurable speed is good enough, and he dodged that w/o moving across time?"). Because, Kirby wouldn't know how to move across time with the Warp Star to dodge such an attack. Ergo, he didn't do that, he was in the present.

How the hell he simply moved at MFTL+ speeds if the attack was Immeasurable? Do you know how absurd this sounds? Even if he had Infinite Speed he wouldn't be able to escape

See above. Really, if I were to agree that the rays of light move at Immeasurable rather than use time travel to reach other points in time, then the cast scales to them, and what would I be doing here.

Question, are they tagged by less? Because at this point we'd be scaling a bunch of characters to a single Immeasurable Speed feat (I don't like how the feat is preformed but that's not to say it's not Immeasurable). Like if I go back to previous instalments and stuff from this game, would I find examples of them getting tagged by less?

I mention this before: "For example, the Sub-space Emissary the bombs that turned parts of space into parts of the sub-space were time bombs, and the fighters needed to beat enemies or deal with them in time before they go off. The story starts in an arena full of an audience watching Mario fight Kirby, who knows how common this is. Stages have like the PKMN ones have as much of an audience watching, or lesser audiences watching. Time passes in stages like Battlefield."

If I were to list how many times each of those things happen, it would be a few dozens of anti-feats.

I think Brawl is probably the only previous Smash Bros game worth looking at for reference as it's the only other Smash game with cinematic cutscenes or a main story. But "Other Smash Bros" characters or other Boss characters such as Tabuu, Master Hand, ect are the only ones who officially "Tagged" them. Nothing really locked to specific speed ratings have officially tagged the cast.

Well, the stages count as well:

• At the start of Smash 64 we see a stage being canon.
• The secret unlockables in Sub-space are played in stages.
• World of Light has you fight spirits in stages.
• Classic Mode can be canon, the ""story"" is that the characters aim to go from the world of imagination to the real world.

 

[Eficiente]

I think Immeasurable makes more than the "it's just hax" interpretation given the OP's arguments.

Well, here are my argumentss against that:

• The rays of light are either "The ability to time travel" or essentially "having infinite speed across space + infinite speed when using time travel." The former assumes far less out of the situation since it's made up of less in general.
• "we see the things physically expanding, but that's meaningless, we also know that they didn't physically expand to the present only, so they had to time travel.. From there, if it is "time travel as an ability" or "immeasurable speed," it doesn't matter, they're both a form of time travel, and thus you can't grab onto the fact that they physically expand so say that it couldn't be time travel as an ability. The "sheer physical movement" we see is irrelevant."
• "[The argument above] means that you have no grounds to see something time travel via movement & claim it didn't use the ability to time travel, because it does time travel anyway. I'm talking about the logic behind claiming it's Immeasurable speed when you see the feat. You can't dismiss it as hax, because that literally doesn't mean anything, it's hax either way (not that it matters). How can you explain that the more likely interpretation is the method of time travel that's more complex? What makes my interpretation a bigger assumption?"
• "Calling it a "secondary effect" [hax] is like saying an old phone that can only do calls has a secondary effect next to a new phone that can do that & much more. It's a feeling of oppression with no grounds where to stand on, it just feels like that will win the argument."

• Hax implies that it wasn't a physical movement at all, but merely the usage of an ability that allowed it. Such thing wasn't implied at all with Galeem, Occam's Razor tells us it was pure physical movement,

  "No, you view it in a black & white way. Time travel hax can be done via movement in fiction, it's done a lot. And besides, if the ability is moving you at all then those are movements being done, which goes back to the same issue."

So, what do you mean with "it's just hax"?; It's time travel both ways, why is "hax" a damning word here?

 

[Maverick_Zero_X]

So, what do you mean with "it's just hax"?; It's time travel both ways, why is "hax" a damning word here?

"Just" is the operative word here. "Just hax" would mean Galeem is simply using a special ability that wouldn't warrant any statistic (such as teleporting through time).

 

[StrymULTRA]

Bro had to ping me twice lmao.

Anyway.

"An example" is many, many examples.

That is a contradiction because, there is no distinction between "a contradiction" and "authors not knowing of the implications [Stats stuff]"; Every contradiction has that (unless done on purpose). You made up a rule as to why anti-feats can't be seen as anti-feats but there is no logic behind it. It's not the first time you do this in thread, you present something nicely as if it had to be that way, but then you look at the logic that builds it up and it doesn't add up. I don't point this out to be mean, but bc looking at the logic behind any claim is the normal thing to do, and it results me very easy to see & explain the issues so far.

This is a nothingburger.

But, time limits and timeframes against higher ends speeds feats are an argument due being contradictions. The higher the speed, the more normal the timeframes move, the bigger the contradiction. So moving a lightspeed and having a timeframe contradict that isn't the same as moving at infinite speed and having a timeframe contradict that. The contradiction would be infinitely bigger, and that's all based on logic, not wonky rules.

Hence, what's the argument against it?; That we (sometimes) don't do that in other verses? It obviously needs whataboutistm here & there, bc it doesn't make sense. I predict that if a future verse gets a similar feat & some debate against the stats happens, more whataboutistm will be used. And that will repeat over and over, bc we can't possibly explain how it stands up on its own. And if other people doesn't know those other verses that got those stats accepted, well, sucks to be them. Do you see the issue?

What about you actually show me the characters struggling from these timeframes rather than "huh huh timeframe = speed is bunk!!!", because there's litrally nothing about Smashers struggling with said timeframes lmao.

We index info about characters based on feats & lore, interpreting stuff based on what's more likely, as complex as things may get. The overthinking part starts at "index info about characters."

Blud if 2 staff and like... everyone in this thread agrees with me and not you, then that should make you start question things.

Please put yourself in my position; I don't agree with Immeasurable speed attack, so put it on the table, even if you don't agree with it. Kirby outruns the attack, so that's not Immeasurable speed to me, hence A) the attack did not cover 100% of the universe, leaving minuscule gaps for Kirby to do that. Or B) it did cover 100% of the universe, but did not do so all at once, also allowing anyone fast enough to dodge that.

This is just your argument from incredulity, got it. Like... what does this try to say outside "It's not Immeasurable because I say so", really?

And that is not the same motion the attack was portrayed to have before, the whole "omnidirectional blast that covers the cosmology, past, present, and future," It was already picky about which characters from the past and future it affected, and now it only covers as much of the universe as it needs to to destroy it. It's a very "controled, meticulous" thing, rather than the "raw, sheer physical movement" thing you portrayed it as.

Picky from what lmfao?

Furthermore, the question I made was super important ("are you saying that Kirby used the Warp Star's Immeasurable speed to move across time, away from the present? Or are you saying that simply having Immeasurable speed is good enough, and he dodged that w/o moving across time?"). Because, Kirby wouldn't know how to move across time with the Warp Star to dodge such an attack. Ergo, he didn't do that, he was in the present.

"Character did not show to know how to travel across eras so that's a debunk against immeasurable", ngl this is just getting desperate. You literally see the feat happening, like in front of your eyes. You're just making a bunch of sorry excuses in trying to downplay this for the sake of downplaying.

I mention this before: "For example, the Sub-space Emissary the bombs that turned parts of space into parts of the sub-space were time bombs, and the fighters needed to beat enemies or deal with them in time before they go off. The story starts in an arena full of an audience watching Mario fight Kirby, who knows how common this is. Stages have like the PKMN ones have as much of an audience watching, or lesser audiences watching. Time passes in stages like Battlefield."

Bro if these are anti-feat, then you'd have to like... downgrade every verse that has Immeasurable stuff off the notion of time passing. You do realize that the story has to still be comprehensible to us, and the game has to be still playable, correct? You're under the assumption that every character who is Infinite/Immeasurable must always do everything in 0 time, but if they do, the story just wouldn't be able to progress. Even if they're MFTL+, with the current calculation, the audience wouldn't still be able to perceive them, and the fights would always realistically end in not even a second. Ergo this falls back to "authors don't realize how fast their characters are so they make goofy stuff like that" without thinking too much. These aren't anti-feats at all, only under your warped standards of it.

If the wiki is this strict about Immeasurable speed scalings, then almost no character would qualify outside of... 5 or 6 verses at most. But it's clearly not the case.

Well, the stages count as well:

• At the start of Smash 64 we see a stage being canon.
• The secret unlockables in Sub-space are played in stages.
• World of Light has you fight spirits in stages.
• Classic Mode can be canon, the ""story"" is that the characters aim to go from the world of imagination to the real world.

No one said stages aren't canon, it's just that we prioritize cutscenes over gameplay stuff.

 

[Eficiente]

"Just" is the operative word here. "Just hax" would mean Galeem is simply using a special ability that wouldn't warrant any statistic (such as teleporting through time).

That doesn't address anything. Replace "hax" for "special ability" and my argument is the same, he is time traveling all the same. Please read my comment again.

 

[StrymULTRA]

That doesn't address anything. Replace "hax" for "special ability" and my argument is the same, he is time traveling all the same. Please read my comment again.

Efi can you ******* stop pretending that the only explanation for people disagreeing with you is not reading and/or understanding your arguments?

They do, and they still disagree with you at that, it's not like the only reason is them not being able to comprehend what you're saying. It's pretty damn annoying and even looking condescending.

 

[Eficiente]

Efi can you ******* stop pretending that the only explanation for people disagreeing with you is not reading and/or understanding your arguments?

They do, and they still disagree with you at that, it's not like the only reason is them not being able to comprehend what you're saying. It's pretty damn annoying and even looking condescending.

That's a big accusation, saying I pretent that's the case rather than bc I have reasons to back it up. I believe you just say that bc you felt that was right at the time, regardless of how it holds up, or if you can make it hold up, bc "I'm just that terrible" I guess.

I explain why something doesn't matter and he uses a synonym of something I say to explain why it matters, when that makes it covered by my argument. How would it not be reasonable for me to believe that maybe he didn't understand my argument? Moreover, why get offended by the idea?? Let's say that he's correct, right; he would be able to explain how so by going over the flaws in my arguments and stuff.