• 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.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Given that the consensus is inconclusive, you likely need to restart this discussion in another thread with a summary in the beginning, and then ask more staff members for help.
 
We likely don't need to make a new thread.

I've asked a few staff members to begin from my summary and they handled it pretty well without much confusion. I'll call for more staff
 
Why do we need more staff? Shake's points still need to be addressed. Cal is behind, DDM's got nothing, and they're the only ones against this.

It's been 5 days since anyone made an argument against this. The opposition needs more support, not the supporters
 
Well, this seems controversial, and only two discussion moderators support the change.
 
Why does it matter if it's controversial if no one's actively arguing against it? It's got more than enough supporters outside of moderators
 
I think the sole reason it was considered controversial was because most of the context around the feat just simply didn't get expressed properly within the OP or the calc, which I do admit is largely my fault. A lot of the arguments against this are things that were later clarified and simply wasted time, maybe aside from an argument or two from Cal that actually needed to be properly addressed which I've done.
 
Antvasima said:
Well, this seems controversial, and only two discussion moderators support the change.
Most of the controversy has been fixed and by now there is nothing stopping this from getting added.
 
Well, I personally do not mind if it is applied, but I usually prefer some sort of staff consensus.
 
Alright. What are the summarised arguments for and against then?
 
Okay. I suppose that this is probably fine then. My apologies Medeus.
 
Ultima was prodding the feat and even misunderstood some bits.

DDM is putting it on Dimensional Travel. Yeah, sure.

You have literally contributed nothing for the past few weeks in a waste of time

My points remain undeterred. Your word isn't enough, Cal, and heaven forbid you actually decide to say something productive within this thread after I've brought my points forward. You literally said you were waiting on the thread to die, but suddenly everything comes to a halt because you say no? Yeah, that's not how this works.
 
Ultima Just asked questions then never came back

DDM hasn't commented once on the thread

You haven't commented on forever and recomended others

Waiting more without anything us stonewalling
 
Okay, I'll play the game.

Ultima outright says that nothing aside from the separation implies the Exception is at the edge of the universe. He didn't ask for clarification. He said no.

My reasoning hasn't changed at all. This is all massive extrapolation. Exception and the warps are offscreen? Then that clearly means it takes place on the other side of the universe. The Eggmen are going to create a park beyond this dimension? Then not only is it not a blatant hyperbole, but it means they're going to travel outside of the universe. The plot has it affecting both worlds? Then that means the source has to be in between the two universes.

I've said it once and I'll say it again. Your best reasoning is that the two protagonists went in separate directions when the final boss was defeated. Nothing else supports this extrapolation. And I'm not even sure if this game is still canon since Blaze is now from the future with Silver.
 
Yes, I don't see the problem outside of your weird strawmans of our arguments, nothing says the Eggmen were a hyperbole

Rush is canon, Blaze is refered as being feom another dimension since almost every single game, Rush is 100% canon
 
Just chimming in to say to one:everyone calm down and two:Blaze isn't from the future, it got confirmed by Word Of God that she is from another dimension and to ignore her being from the future in 06.
 
Ultima is also the same person who said that the glittery effect in the cutscenes of Super Sonic and Burning Blaze are stars, which is why Ultima believes there was nothing to imply The Exception being seperate from the universe. News flash, Cal, that very assumption is what got the previous calc of this feat denied.

You are hilariously strawmanning every single one of the arguments for the upgrade. The Exception isn't at the other side of the unoverse, it's outside the universe. Creating Eggmanland beyond their dimension is also extremely blatant with what the calculation, and even the cutscene, shows us. It's up to you to explain why it's false when we know the void that surrounds The Exception is filled with no celestial bodies from the universe. I'm not in the mood to dance with your attitude and childish jabs today, Cal.

Good play on the canonicity, it's nice, but you'll have to make a CRT if you want to establish it as non-canon. And I won't argue it here, but let me assure you, that CRT won't be accepted.
 
Something as flowery as creating an extra dimension for the sake of a theme park needs to be proven to be legitimate instead of the opposite. Team Rocket says they blast off at the speed of light. Do I take their word for it?

Your argument relies on things that are never stated nor outright shown. It relies on your specific interpretation of events, and nothing given to us. Which is why I'm still saying no. If we get explicit proof that the Exception is at the edge of the universe, then who am I to deny that? So provide specific evidence. No workarounds. Explicit evidence.
 
There are no celestial bodies around The Exception. If it was anywhere within the universe, anywhere at all, that wouldn't be the case. Which is why their statement is legitimate, they actually have context supporting it.

Enough of your false equivalencies, Cal, I already addressed the majority of what you said throughout the thread. I don't like to repeat myself to someone who purposely abandoned this thread for weeks on end.
 
Eggman making a universe is super in character and tottaly a thing Eggman could do, literaly not absurdo when he says he will make a theme park out of the universe almost every game

That's a very blocky way of thinking, various franchises aren't going to have explicit things about about nerd stuff, doesn't make it invalid without actua reasons it is invalid
 
... That thing on the right is The Exception, Cal. That screenshot on the left only further proves my point. The previous calc was denied for assuming the sparkles are stars, and there's nothing aside The Exception all around.

If it was in a "random nebula", as you wanna claim, there would be no vacancy around it on the left and there would be more of a cosmic look to the screencap on the right. Instead, you have a purple and orange blob. That is 100% obviously not a nebula on the right.
 
The one on the right is the exception, correct. The one on the left is the nebula it takes place in. And nebulae do look like random blobs.
 
Defer to your left screencap. How many times will I have to repeat that assuming it was stars on the left got the previous calc denied? And if that's some weird residual energy on the left, it's almost 100% the same thing as the screencap you just posted. They look uncannily alike as well, and the one on the left already looks like stars. I mean, if they didn't the other calc wouldn't have made that assumption.
 
And I can say a cow and a cow are diferent, I am still wrong

This isn't a argument, you complaining about us reaching but you are doing the sane right now
 
ShakeResounding said:
Defer to your left screencap. How many times will I have to repeat that assuming it was stars on the left got the previous calc denied? And if that's some weird residual energy on the left, it's almost 100% the same thing as the screencap you just posted. They look uncannily alike as well, and the one on the left already looks like stars. I mean, if they didn't the other calc wouldn't have made that assumption.
My point is that they're one in the same. Those "stars" aren't stars.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top