• This forum is strictly intended to be used by members of the VS Battles wiki. Please only register if you have an autoconfirmed account there, as otherwise your registration will be rejected. If you have already registered once, do not do so again, and contact Antvasima if you encounter any problems.

    For instructions regarding the exact procedure to sign up to this forum, please click here.
  • We need Patreon donations for this forum to have all of its running costs financially secured.

    Community members who help us out will receive badges that give them several different benefits, including the removal of all advertisements in this forum, but donations from non-members are also extremely appreciated.

    Please click here for further information, or here to directly visit our Patreon donations page.
  • Please click here for information about a large petition to help children in need.

Sonic General Discussion Zone Act 1: New Frontiers

Remus1998 said:
What about Solaris consuming, the meaning of time?
Click to expand...
Ian said Solaris had dimensional destroying power
He said the emeralds could wreck everything and do whatever the plot wants them to do, and he thinks Solaris was empowered by the emeralds with it was rebirthed.

Yeah no our tiering could still stay intact even with Ian's inconsistent thoughts.
 
The_Fastest_Savior said:
Ian said Solaris had dimensional destroying power
He said the emeralds could wreck everything and do whatever the plot wants them to do, and he thinks Solaris was empowered by the emeralds with it was rebirthed.

Yeah no our tiering could still stay intact even with Ian's inconsistent thoughts.
Click to expand...
I meant in the JP script which states that Solaris will destroy the very meaning of time
 
omegabronic said:
a lead question from Zastando......yeah no, never will we use something that came from the shame of the sonic fandom such as Zastando here, no
Click to expand...
I don’t see anything wrong with it. Proof is proof and it’s blatant. You can’t just dismiss something because it came from Geburah, that’s not how evaluating evidence works and it isn’t against the rules. The case being implied from you is it’s okay to dismiss proof because it came from a specific person rather than the quality of the proof itself which sets a bad example for the community. So do you have a rebuttal for the statement or do you not?
 
ThatBusyDude said:
Can you show the rule? I still haven’t been shown the quote.
Click to expand...
On the "Offsite Rules" section of this page, it says as follows:

Do not pester or harass the authors of various works on social media about versus debating or character statistics. They are often bombarded by numerous questions from fans, and thus are rarely interested in giving a serious response. In addition, the statements they give to appease users are often contradictory to the feats in the stories of the works they have written. Thus, it is frowned upon to bother them over these topics.
Click to expand...
 
CloverDragon03 said:
On the "Offsite Rules" section of this page, it says as follows:
Click to expand...
The question wasn’t about versus debating or character statistics, I’m pretty sure the question was actually about Solaris’ capabilities based on lore and if you look at the reasoning for this in the same quote it states “They are often bombarded by numerous questions from fans, and thus are rarely interested in giving a serious response. In addition, the statements they give to appease users are often contradictory to the feats in the stories of the works they have written”

I could be wrong but I think the actual concern is that the authors aren’t serious or genuine about their responses and they might contradict the story rather than the use of author statements themselves because this site has used author statements on some occasions I’m pretty sure.

Edit: So if you can prove that the Author isn’t serious then it’s invalid but if you can’t prove he’s not serious or there’s proof he’s serious then it can go through.
 
Last edited:
omegabronic said:
Leading questions are
Click to expand...
I don’t see the point you’re making, you could make a leading question but it doesn’t matter because he said yes anyway not maybe or possibly. A yes is a yes. This isn’t a court where these kinds of questions determine if someone is innocent or guilty. This is about fictional characters.
 
ThatBusyDude said:
I don’t see the point you’re making, you could make a leading question but it doesn’t matter because he said yes anyway not maybe or possibly. A yes is a yes. This isn’t a court where these kinds of questions determine if someone is innocent or guilty. This is about fictional characters.
Click to expand...
A leading question, as the name says, is all about leading the one being questioned to an specific answer
 
ThatBusyDude said:
I don’t see the point you’re making, you could make a leading question but it doesn’t matter because he said yes anyway not maybe or possibly. A yes is a yes. This isn’t a court where these kinds of questions determine if someone is innocent or guilty. This is about fictional characters.
Click to expand...
It means you can ask a question in a specific way to get the answer you want, and then use that to change profiles. That's pretty much manipulation
 
omegabronic said:
A leading question, as the name says, is all about leading the one being questioned to an specific answer
Click to expand...
Well

Leading questions are questions that suggest a particular answer or contain information that the questioner wants to have confirmed. Some can argue that leading questions are still valid as proof for certain purposes, examples being:

- Legal cases: Leading questions can be used by lawyers to elicit specific information from witnesses or to challenge their credibility. For example, a lawyer might ask a witness, "Isn't it true that you saw the defendant leave the scene of the crime?" This question implies that the witness did see the defendant and expects a yes or no answer. Leading questions can help lawyers to establish facts, test memory, or expose inconsistencies in testimonies.

- Persuasion: Leading questions can be used by marketers, politicians, or activists to persuade their audience to agree with their point of view or to take action. For example, a marketer might ask a potential customer, "How would you like to save money and time by using our product?" This question assumes that the customer wants to save money and time and suggests that the product can offer these benefits. Leading questions can help persuade people by appealing to their emotions, values, or needs.

- Exploration: Leading questions can be used by researchers, teachers, or therapists to explore new ideas, perspectives, or possibilities with their subjects. For example, a researcher might ask a participant, "What if you could travel back in time and change one thing in your life?" This question invites the participant to imagine a different scenario and to share their thoughts and feelings about it. Leading questions can help explore topics by stimulating creativity, curiosity, or reflection.

Therefore, leading questions are not inherently invalid as proof and rather depend on the context and the goal of the questioner. Leading questions can be useful tools for certain purposes.

That said, I think leading questions are invalid if it’s not genuinely their own thoughts but can still be used otherwise.

Ian consistently thinks that Solaris can destroy the concepts of space and time and it’s even implied he can do that in JP 06.
 
CloverDragon03 said:
It means you can ask a question in a specific way to get the answer you want, and then use that to change profiles. That's pretty much manipulation
Click to expand...
I mean not really, if what Ian says is up against the source material and it doesn’t mix then nothing happens but if it is compatible with the material then you go with it. I think if something is too goony then we leave it (obviously).

Geburah seemed to be asking this from a “supported” point of view like if Ian thinks this based on the material on Solaris so I don’t see it as a bad thing rather than just Ian’s own opinion.

I mean I can ask around to some people that I know that have scans from JP 06 that state Solaris would’ve destroyed the very meaning of time and use that but that particular Geb question doesn’t strike me as goony for some reason.
 
This has like, been shared here since long ago. I myself shared it here when Windii first released the translation on her original channel (That now is dead because of Megaman copyrights)

It just never got used because we never got any details of what type that was, it was around the time Conceptual manipulation was starting to become a hot topic to be revised.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Baabasaplar95
  • Locked
A simple Sonic fix
Replies
35
Views
3K
LordGriffin1000
LordGriffin1000
HonestlyBored24
Tails’ #1 Hater (WNTTAT Sonic Matchmakin’ Thread)
Replies
6
Views
1K
H3110l12345I20
H3110l12345I20
Spinoirr
Shadow the Hedgehog vs Ruby Rose
Replies
12
Views
1K
Rayfire
Rayfire
Hypercyber37
Potentially 1-C Super Neo Metal Sonic
2 3
Replies
98
Views
3K
JJSliderman
JJSliderman
Ruler_Star_Kuma
Hedgehog Caught In A Hero Summoning!
Replies
31
Views
3K
ShakeResounding
ShakeResounding
Back
Top