Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
So let me get this straight. The entire basis for the huge downgrades the verse has gotten recently comes from randomly asked (and specific) fan questions?.......
the downgrades used such tweets
not all, but a large chunk, yesSo let me get this straight. The entire basis for the huge downgrades the verse has gotten recently comes from randomly asked (and specific) fan questions?
Something our site explicitly forbids, and even has written in our editing rules?
Why would you ban the usage of direct statements from the author himself? If we are banning statements made by the author on social media, we should pretty much ban the usage of anything the creator says outside of the products he officially publishes.
Yea. Pretty much.So let me get this straight. The entire basis for the huge downgrades the verse has gotten recently comes from randomly asked (and specific) fan questions?
No, the entire basis for the downgrades were the fact that people here have warped the reality so much to wank up Kirito's power, so my arguments were made strictly from the information from the books that people did not want to believe despite me explicitly citing things, so I brought Reki's personal statements as further reinforcements because people here religiously believed the old "interpretations" were correct and did not want to look back at the book.So let me get this straight. The entire basis for the huge downgrades the verse has gotten recently comes from randomly asked (and specific) fan questions?
Something our site explicitly forbids, and even has written in our editing rules?
Context is what matters. None of which that were used as reinforcement was "brief or vague", Reki gave very concise and explicit answers which were used. No tweets that utilized his generic vague statements were included in the citations, which is what the rule is referring to.
- Brief or vague answers to fan-questions via social media are also generally disregarded, whereas more elaborate explanations in serious interviews are usually considered more reliable.
Nah not that. The bullet point right above it actually.
you mean this?
See above. It doesnt matter. The answers made in the first place are made to answer leading questions from fans to extract such information, which makes it easily possible that the answers are not serious.And I recommend reading your own rules:
Context is what matters. None of which that were used as reinforcement was "brief or vague", Reki gave very concise and explicit answers which were used. No tweets that utilized his generic vague statements were included in the citations, which is what the rule is referring to.
"Brief or vague answers to fan-questions via social media are also generally disregarded, whereas more elaborate explanations in serious interviews are usually considered more reliable."Do you read your own rules, before citing them to claim a previous change should be illegitimate? Because that rule literally invalidates what Problem is trying to say, while validates everything I used as a citation.
So basically... In-Verse Feats > Word of God? And no. It wasn't from an interview."Brief or vague answers to fan-questions via social media are also generally disregarded, whereas more elaborate explanations in serious interviews are usually considered more reliable."
Are these answers from an interview? Yes or no?
Not quite. The point isn't that WoG isn't valid at all, the point is that out of series answers from authors made to answer specifically-leading questions from fans are deemed unusable evidence.So basically... In-Verse Feats > Word of God?
there's a "possibly" rating that is based around this conceptexplicitly uses the language of possibilities and could be's, that is the exact kind of thing that is not allowed per your rules
Interview: An interview is essentially a structured conversation where one participant asks questions, and the other provides answers.
Don't be sarcastic and try and circumvent what I meant by "interview" because a random quick conversation on social media with a random schumk obviously doesnt qualify as that (and if your bent on thinking it does, good luck with changing the rules to consolidate that). Otherwise the rule wouldn't exist in the first place by this logic.So yes, if you are going to ignore the entire context of your rule and focus on what can qualify as an interview and what cannot, providing questions structured in numbered bullet points to receive answers does indeed qualify as an interview.
Okay? Problems tweets wouldn't be allowed either and they arent some exception to the rule like the ones used to downgrade the verse aren't either.But again, your rule is about context. Social media answers are generally (meaning you do not have a blanket rule to disallow them and have to look at their context) not allowed because usually, they can be casual and vague answers. You have an entire sentence beforehand that tries to make this point clear to you. The tweet Problem is trying to use to wank Kirito up explicitly uses the language of possibilities and could be's, that is the exact kind of thing that is not allowed per your rules.
See above. A briefly vague bulleted answer is not enough to say beyond reasonable doubt that it's valid.The tweets I have used are explicit and direct statements with 0 vagueness in them
And see above., they are direct and non-disputable statements from Reki himself. But go ahead, call a mod so we don't need to continue this for an entire week...
oh i thought it was a problem on my end lol , yeah don't worry about itAlso my bad, for some reason I also responded to Zencha...
Anyways, I have work now. And for the record, I don't care if SAO is or actually isn't tier 4. My current problem is with the circumstances and method of how it was downgraded.
So what happens now?Anyways, I have work now. And for the record, I don't care if SAO is or actually isn't tier 4. My current problem is with the circumstances and method of how it was downgraded.
There's no proof that the person who asked was from VSBW, and at that, the basis of the downgrades were the fact that the feats were clearly hyperbolic/misinterpreted wholesale, and the twitter statements just supported that suggestion as such.So let me get this straight. The entire basis for the huge downgrades the verse has gotten recently comes from randomly asked (and specific) fan questions?
Something our site explicitly forbids, and even has written in our editing rules?
The user who asked the fan demanding questions was banned from VSBWThere's no proof that the person who asked was from VSBW, and at that, the basis of the downgrades were the fact that the feats were clearly hyperbolic/misinterpreted wholesale, and the twitter statements just supported that suggestion as such.
That is exactly what I am going to do, if you are trying to circumvent the rules by trying to apply a blanket social media ban.Don't be sarcastic and try and circumvent what I meant by "interview" because a random quick conversation on social media with a random schumk obviously doesnt qualify as that (and if your bent on thinking it does, good luck with changing the rules to consolidate that). Otherwise the rule wouldn't exist in the first place by this logic.
Tweets made by Reki are his main official source of communication. You will not get anything more official than that. No editorial that causes lacking context to fit time or page span, no need for diluted topics because an "official interview" needs to cover a variety of things... Reki is literally tasked with explaining his books, stories and anime specifically on twitter after they get released. That is part of his job. So yes, Reki has been proven to give officialized details and information about a series on his twitter.The point is that OFFICIAL interview conversations (you know, like on a blog or news site between the participant and the author who agrees with partaking in said conversation) and social media outlets proven to give officialized details and information about a series are the only exceptions we allow to this rule. Otherwise, it goes nowhere.
You need to get better than whatever it is you have been doing so far to apply a blanket twitter ban. None of your rules state social media is banned. It states "based on context, it is generally banned".It being "bulleted out" doesn't at all mean it can't be counted as a brief explanation made to answer a leading question. You need better than that to get it acceptable.
I am not here to disallow someones arguments specifically. I don't care if Problem's tweet is allowed or not. What matter is its context. Whether it is an explicit statement, or whether it is a vague idea with no conclusion. The medium for it doesn't matter. And your rules state as such.Okay? Problems tweets wouldn't be allowed either and they arent some exception to the rule like the ones used to downgrade the verse aren't either.
See above. Twitter is Reki's main source of communication for clarifications regarding his stories.The "context" involved to differentiate social media answers from either being serious or not is the validity of the source itself and whethee it can be taken seriously.
I have. That's why I have pages upon pages of citations straight from the books.Validity that you havent provided for the answers used for the downgrade. And when these answers are made to answer leading questions, at the bare minimum, it makes them questionable.
Why does this matter? Is it the fan that is answering the questions? Did the fan coerce Reki into giving a specific answer? For all we know, you did coerce people to get others banned just because they did not think the way you do.
Social Media is used all the time on this site, it's just, if people deliberately try to force answers we entirely disregard that, and strongly discourage it as it's pretty much just harassment. And it shouldn't be used if it blatantly contradicts the source material.You need to get better than whatever it is you have been doing so far to apply a blanket twitter ban. None of your rules state social media is banned. It states "based on context, it is generally banned".
The person doesn't need to be from our site whatsoeverThere's no proof that the person who asked was from VSBW, and at that, the basis of the downgrades were the fact that the feats were clearly hyperbolic/misinterpreted wholesale, and the twitter statements just supported that suggestion as such.
Ben 10 threads with Alien X would like a word with you sir.How long will your job take?
Is asking that genuine and simple question to see how long it'll take for you to get back an act of blatant manipulation, extorting information out of you?
No, it's just a question.
No one on the site treats it that way. I have not seen a single thread where someone pulled out a twitter quote and everyone flipped their lid because the writer was clearly being manipulated into giving a specific answer, unless they were indeed actually actively manipulated to give such a response.
Sure, there are plenty of instances of denying such statements but they have their own rationales as opposed to something this extreme.