Sword Art Online General Discussion/Q&A Thread #4

[Cyberblader90]

just ask akm what the policy is or ant

 

[Kaantantr]

I will abstain from saying anything until DMUA receives a response, since he is more knowledgeable about VSWiki processes than I am. Otherwise, if my CRT is rendered invalid just because I had 2 tweets from the author attached to over a dozen direct excerpts from the book, I will go ahead and link Problem's reversion attempt as the proof of how the previous arguments were absolute bollocks, since the exact same topic was argued there, just from the other perspective and that other perspective has been proven false.

While I can make up a new CRT of course, there is only a certain amount of goodwill I can put into things in an attempt to carefully fix things without destroying that's going to take me more time. The moment I cite Problem's thread, you just got destruction and no fixes to replace it.

 

[Mr. Bambu]

There are times when my frustration skyrockets so high in a short moment, it makes me hard pressed to not use the lord's name in vain.

This absurdity is one of those times.

You literally just had an argument presented using purely the book

When does it end Bambu? We show the tweets are clearly not laid back and unenthusastic answers, but apparently all of twitter is automatically invalid because some authors don't take it seriously enough

We show excerpts of the book that display that it's flowery language but apparently we need to type up a new argument without twitter stuff

Will you still say we need to arbitrarily type up a new argument after showing even the anime doesn't display the entire world/universe shaking?

Seriously.

DMUA, I'm gonna ask ye calmly to chill, aye?

I'm not the one making all of these arguments. I don't give a **** where SAO lands. I haven't interacted with SAO as a verse in years, and even then it was immensely sparingly. So, for the sake of me not losing respect for you, I'm asking you to take a moment to breathe and remember who you're speaking to. A friend.

I had the latter bit of the original argument presented. Not a new argument. On some level it relied on the context provided from the Tweets. So yes. I would like an argument that does not present itself as additional information for an argument that is invalid (the Twitter stuff). Thank you.

 

[RitsuØ1]

Will you still say we need to arbitrarily type up a new argument after showing even the anime doesn't display the entire world/universe shaking?

Actually, the anime showed this:

Then, he shouted again:

“Release… recollection!!”

What came shooting out was darkness, deeper, heavier, and
denser than the tentacles of the space beast.

When they touched each other, it created a shockwave that almost
warped the entire vicinity and the mechadragon shuddered again.
Violet-blue electricity crawled within the void, reflecting dazzling
rays of light on the imagepanel.

Steeka’s own shock had reached a level difficult to describe with
words.

How was he producing multiple iterations at the same time of a
secret technique that only seven of the highest-level Integrity
Machinists were capable of? Moreover, not even a formation of
destroyer-class mechadragons were able to deal with the Abyssal
Horror’s full-power attack, but this swordsman had blocked it by
himself.

Not this:

Eight shots of violet-blue light, looking to be three mel in diameter
each, all came screaming with metallic howls.

And then, as though they collided violently with a transparent
wall, they stopped in midair and ricocheted in different directions.

The universe trembled.

The innumerable stars reflected in Steeka’s widened eyes shook
like ripples on water. Next moment, a shockwave roared past her
and rumbled the mechadragon’s enormous body.

At a complete loss for words, Steeka noticed that the needle in the
miniature instrument on the right side of her imagepanel swung
straight up in an instant.

“You’re… joking… that’s impossible…”

Steeka had never seen the instrument, called the «Incarnation
meter», move up 20 percent like this. Her ears filled with
Laura’nei’s awed voice.

“…I don’t believe it… Such powerful Incarnation… It’s like the entire
universe is trembling…”

But the reality before their eyes was undeniable.

 

[DMUA]

I'm going to do you a few better.

There is no reason to assume, and in fact, there are reasons to assume quite against Kirito shaking the world or the universe.​

Let's start by grabbing the excerpts from the novel, translated by Stephen Paul, who has an immense amount of experience in both fan and official translations of works like this. Starting with the supposed Low 6-B feat.

They indeed describe that giant flashes and explosions shake the world itself (The explosion part will be relevant later), but, here's the issue.

This excerpt is heavily based in building up intensity and emotion to juxtapose Kirito getting his arm cut off just as he's about to deal what seems like the finishing blow, using descriptions such as "Swords brimming with starlight", "cracking off in search of eqilibrium as bolts of lightning" (I bold as, as that emphasizes the fact this is a simile, a figure of speech very similar to a metaphor to compare something to something else in an abstract sense), "The endless strength of countless prayers", and so on.

Unless we want to double down and say High 3-A off of "endless strength", it's clear that this might not be literally making a statement on the fact that the entire planet is in fact shaking. But, that's not solid, so to that end, allow me to present the anime displaying that excerpt...

As Kirito sending a bunch of shockwaves around, shaking the camera as the ground is shattered, but nowhere near physically shaking the entire planet.

Reki, as the owner of SAO, does have a strong say in how the anime adapts things, and if he intended there to be literal shaking, there's no real reason for him to not emphasize the point with a pan out to see everything quaking from this clash. But, such isn't the case.

But even then, the anime is supplementary, so, remember when I said the explosion part will be relevant later?

Well, an explosion (or series of, in this case) that cause the world to shake would generate massive craters. Specifically, massive as in 400 Kilometers.

Despite this, the immense landmark generated by this chain of events is never mentioned or addressed in any capacity, which strongly suggests the chain of events was simply an exaggeration meant to generate hype, and not in fact a statement of AP.

Now, for shaking the universe... Or, by Stephen Paul's official translation, shaking space:

"Space" does not suggest the universe actually shakes inofitself, as if they meant something significantly larger in radius than just the local area (hence, space is shaking), they would likely just say universe.

But, Stica says universe... But, here's the kicker, and this is actually in the fan translation too. She very specifically says it is "As though", the entire universe is shaking. A strange thing to say if the universe was literally, physically quaking, and that was the intent of Reki in this scene.

But, it even goes beyond how the scene inofitself is described. In unital ring, we also get this, which I don't have a fancy image for, but

Please be at ease, ladies; usually, the Abyssal Horror would be back at its full potential after just a month, but this time it has not shown up even after one and a half months. The battle itself is treated as top secret, so this information has not been made public, but based on the numerous observations that the Integrity Pilot Order has conducted, we have concluded that the fabled space beast is no more.

"Top secret" is a bizarre way to describe an event where everything, throughout the entire universe, shook, and it would be a logistical nightmare to keep the actual source of said fight a secret when the entire planet quaked.

And of course, in this case as well, the anime only shows the local area shaking as a result of their clash, as opposed to the entire universe.

In short: the statements for these feats are not literal, and such can be demonstrated through simple logic.

Why Reki's twitter is a valid source​

This isn't something we should be making a whole new sitewide CRT on, as our standards already don't prevent it from being utilized. Allow me to quote the Editing Rules

• Regarding direct information from the author/creator of a character: We do not use statements from them that are phrased in an uncertain, uncaring, and/or unspecific manner, such as "Could be", "Maybe", "Probably", "Possibly" etcetera. 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.
• When a statement from a character, guidebook, or even word of god contradicts what occurs in the series, they won't be used. For example, if an author says that a character from his work is incapable of shattering planets, even though it has destroyed galaxies on-screen, we will always go with the latter, rather than the former. The statement need to be consistent with what has been revealed within the fictional franchise itself. Otherwise, it will be considered invalid.
• Author statements will only be accepted when they clarify what has been shown or implied in the series itself, and will be rejected when they contradict what has been shown to the audience. Statements that technically do not contradict anything shown in the series will still be rejected if there is no evidence that they are accurate.

So, let's go in order.

Are the statements from Reki Kawahara phrased in an uncertain, uncaring, or unspecific manner?​

The answer to this, is actually yes, but only on one account where it's him not entirely being sure if he wants to commit on saying "yes, this is what happened.". This statement being one of the answers he gave to start this whole conversation, to quote him:

However, it appears the massive rewriting event of the mind system vibrated the very space itself. That means it's possible Kirito and Gabriel and Kirito and Abyssal Horror's battles shook the underworld, and people felt it

However, in the other statements made in that very same series of answers, he was quite clear and to the point about what he was saying.

As of now, all the stars except the sun and the two planets are spherically projected images.

There is no uncertainty here, he says as a solid statement "Right now, all of the stars are spherically projected images", which adds on to the statement, also quite certain, of him describing the underworld's night sky like this:

It is basically the same starry sky we see in open world games.

And even on the topic of the shaking, he was at least certain in giving an answer on how they worked in the underworld in general

The definition of "shaking" is important. Since there's no gas molecules in the Underworld, regardless of the explosion, it will not generate the same shock wave in the real world.

He clearly states how the underworld doesn't have gas molecules, and so the explosion won't generate a conventional shockwave, but space (which isn't applicable for AP) could shake, and by extension, it might be possible that Kirito's fights with Gabriel and the Abyssal Horror did cause it to shake, but he's not certain about that part so he leaves it ambiguous.

Are the statements from Reki Kawahara contradictory of what happens in the series?​

No, they are not. I'll admit, most of the statements I just quoted run into the problem of the fact I can't prove a negative (We never see them go up to the stars and indeed confirm "These are just fancy lights far off into the distance", for example), but, on the point of the Underworld not having air particles, this is something I can actually go into.

The first time she was shown to the room, Asuna’s initial thought was that it must be incredibly hard to clean…but in the Underworld, dust and dirt were essentially treated like visual effects, not physical matter, so a bit of swinging away with a broom or duster was all it took to dispel the grime. It was Kirito who noted wryly that the process was more like retouching a digital photo than actual cleaning.

Here's a statement from Unital Ring on the topic. It quite clearly states that dust and dirt are just visual effects instead of actual matter, and air by proxy would behave in a similar fashion. This is shown when, even after 200 years spent outside the Underworld by Alice and no preparation before the fact, she has no trouble breathing far outside the atmosphere.

There's not much I can say without encroaching upon the next section, so

Are Reki Kawahara's statements never shown or implied within the work itself?​

This, is also, no. Again, this already overlaps with the above, but, let's go into that skybox bit I brought up earlier.

The Underworld is founded on something known as the Cardinal System, the same sort of "engine" that SAO and every VRMMO runs off of. The Cardinal System works via procedural Generation. If new content is needed due to someone stepping out of the bounds of the previous content, more will be generated in the process. If everyone stays within a, let's say, 100 Kilometer radius, nothing outside of that radius will be generated in a great deal of detail, it will just fill out the background.

But, if they go into space, like in the Underworld's case, the sun and an entirely different planet will be generated to accommodate.

All of this is perfectly in line with the statement that the stars haven't been generated in detail yet.

In short, by our standards and by judgement of Reki Kawahara's statements specifically, indiscriminately of other authors who do not put any of the same care in their WoG, we can say with certainty that Reki Kawahara's twitter is in fact, a reliable source of WoG. Denying them on the basis of other authors that he has no control over is not a sensible action.

Why, exactly, I was not calm about this in any capacity.​

Now, this is not the first time the downgrades have been questioned under rationales I disagree with severely. The initial downgrades experienced some resistance, even if they were swiftly dispelled by the same counterarguments I have just restated.

What has escalated this situation is the insistence on overturning it after it's been accepted under poor reasoning, in a way best summarized in this report.

I will admit, I am generating an inordinate amount of heat over what is ultimately an even more nerdy subset of talking about popular anime, yes. And in Bambu's case, they didn't even want to be here, they were obligated to as staff.

But, to have people, entirely unfamiliarized with the context of this situation wholesale, barge in and criticize a downgrade that was already discussed and accepted by many people, including staff members, makes one feel as though nothing they've done to this point is actually relevant, as they refuse to give it the light of day over a minor thing such as twitter statements being unreliable with "most" authors.

So, yes, I do not wish to continue being antagonistic, and it was a clear mistake to do so.

But I'm still pretty damn pissed, and I'll need to take a bit to really cool myself after posting this. Allow me to link you the music I shall use, in case you're interested:



I'm probably a bit of a weirdo in the sense I use intense music to calm an intense mood, but, I find it pleasant to ride my anger like it's a tidal wave until it disperses through a banger tune.

Peace.

 

[Kaantantr]

Nice write-up, certainly more than what I intended to do for a second time. My intention at this point was just to disprove the previous claims and just get rid of them, without replacing them with corrections.

Either way, the amount of times we are put in a position to prove a negative, solely because years upon years, a lot of things were built upon headcanon and deception. The amount of bottom floors that is being tried to fix without harming a 100 floor skyscraper is massive. The fact that we need to remind people of basics of this world/these worlds built by the Seed solely because a bunch of people who have not read the book have passed their fanfictions for so long solely by misleading reviewers by purposefully providing lacking information. The sheer audacity to showcase such amounts of hypocrisy that the moment the fan translator they have been using the translations of for years as "100% trustworthy citations" clarifies his translation, they denounce the translator and waste the time of the translators of this website as a last ditch effort to save their dreams.

If anybody is curious why some people are heated in this conversation, it's caused by all of this. It's because information is scrutinized and headcanon leaves unquestioned.

 

[PsychicCipher-2]

Okay, so what is the conclusion out of all of this?

 

[Mr. Bambu]

That remains to be decided by the verse people. Given the above has been purged of Twitter content, my part in this thread returns to one of a passive observer.

 

[ProfessorKukui4Life]

That remains to be decided by the verse people. Given the above has been purged of Twitter content, my part in this thread returns to one of a passive observer.

^

Literally my only place in this thread I’m the first place was questioning the method of the downgrades via using twitter and not a single thing more. The whole issue could’ve been resolved sooner if people simply proved the source was valid sooner or did a write up on the downgrade without it (since if it’s as ironclad as claimed, you wouldn’t need social media as an integral part of the arguments) instead of making things more difficult than needed.

 

[Kaantantr]

If you are going to continue to be snarky about it, I'll just go ahead and say this "issue" would not have even existed if VSWiki did not consistently allow so much headcanon to fester around for years that it reached a point the misinformation started creeping into other communities, as well as SAO Wikia itself that I had to seek a solution through our Wikia manager who sent me over here, which if I'm being frank, is the definition of "making things more difficult than needed".

The amount of effort that has been put into trying to validate hours of work with over a dozen direct citations from the book just because it featured 2 tweets as side arguments would have been helpful all that time ago before some profiles became a significant source of misinformation.

 

[Mr. Bambu]

If you are going to continue to be snarky about it, I'll just go ahead and say this "issue" would not have even existed if VSWiki did not consistently allow so much headcanon to fester around for years that it reached a point the misinformation started creeping into other communities, as well as SAO Wikia itself that I had to seek a solution through our Wikia manager who sent me over here, which if I'm being frank, is the definition of "making things more difficult than needed".

The amount of effort that has been put into trying to validate hours of work with over a dozen direct citations from the book just because it featured 2 tweets as side arguments would have been helpful all that time ago before some profiles became a significant source of misinformation.

I don't feel he's the one being snarky, of the two. If I'm being frank, we have rules against social media. If you want to fix stuff, I absolutely applaud this, but if you want it to be simple, follow the rules.

Now, if the thread could manage to refocus itself, we still need discourse over DMUA's new thing. If none is had, I will take it as no particularly compelling arguments can be made by those favoring an upgrade (or removal of the downgrade, however you see it) and the downgrade will be kept in effect. Thanks, lads.

 

[ProfessorKukui4Life]

I mean, its not exactly my problem that you found the SAO ratings before the downgrade so problematic. And like I said before, if you want to downgrade the verse to where you think its most accurate at so badly and remove what you think is inaccurate, by all means go right ahead. Where the verse is tiered at means nothing to me, and neither does the personal takeaways between you and others who are against said downgrades.

But we have standards and rules on this site for a reason, and people here must follow said rules and said standards if they don't want to go to another forum. And if a revision of any kind is done where its basis/part of its arguments are done in ways that go against standards, I will advocate for its dismissal. Its as simple as that.

Whether or not you can make your case with things other than what I find issues with is a different story, but thats the gist of it. If these tweets weren't such an integral part of your case, you could've saved time by simply revising the downgrades arguments to go without them, and this whole conversation wouldnt have needed to be had. Or if your so against our standards, then like everything else, you could've made an attempt to change them. Thats how it works here.

 

[DMUA]

But we have standards and rules on this site for a reason

And those standards and rules didn't even invalidate the argument to begin with. As I extensively went over, Reki's twitter is distinctly not in violation of any of our editing standards, and if you want to put a blanket ban on using twitter unless the author's validity can be proven, you should be the one to make that thread, because that would be the thing challenging our standards as they are now.

This whole situation is layers upon layers of people not understanding the context of this whole ordeal at several points, even if Kaantantr needs to lighten a bit up on saying that in nearly as aggressive a tone as he has.

If you're done questioning the downgrade you don't have to keep responding. Repeating the earlier argument doesn't exactly get us anywhere.

 

[ProfessorKukui4Life]

And those standards and rules didn't even invalidate the argument to begin with. As I extensively went over, Reki's twitter is distinctly not in violation of any of our editing standards, and if you want to put a blanket ban on using twitter unless the author's validity can be proven, you should be the one to make that thread, because that would be the thing challenging our standards as they are now.

Then, once again, YOU should have done this sooner and saved the trouble of going through this entire discussion DMUA. That is your job to do.

If you were able to prove the source as valid, bravo. All the power to you. But this a burden of proof that should've been met an entire page ago, and had it been done, we wouldnt be here talking about this in the first place.

 

[ProfessorKukui4Life]

PS- I also don't need to make a thread about our editing rules when our most recent thread on this was done a year or so ago, as a staff thread, where this conclusion was reached.

But thats beside the main point.

 

[Kaantantr]

When a mod says "Stop it", I stop it. Unless it continues even after the stop warning that is...

I mean, its not exactly my problem that you found the SAO ratings before the downgrade so problematic.

It is VS"Wiki"s problem if they are trying to retain the "Wiki" in their title that is, allowing such far fetched headcanon onto their articles by not doing sufficient reviews, and then have their members go out of their way to harass others all over the internet based on said misinformation that they act like is the irrefutable Bible and then when refuted, they go ahead and try to regularly defame a user by DMing mods about previous instances while hiding their own involvement in said instances as they otherwise cannot play victim.

What I find "problematic" is not necessarily whether you have false information or not, I could not care any less. The problem is the entire collective mess that stems from it.

But we have standards and rules on this site for a reason, and people here must follow said rules and said standards if they don't want to go to another forum. And if a revision of any kind is done where its basis/part of its arguments are done in ways that go against standards, I will advocate for its dismissal. Its as simple as that.

Feel free to go back and retroactively fix the mess that this has caused then way before my arrival. There are plenty of old threads that have been approved by plenty of mods like our downgrade despite not being made according to your "standards" that are the source of this issue in the first place. Either all of it is okay, or none of it is.

In 2 months, I have already seen countless instances where the standards have failed to apply, because the standards assume certain things that not always reflect the reality of the situation. Your "prove Reki's twitter is legit" argument while there being literally 0 ways of actually proving it is legit set by "the standards™" is one of those showcases.

If these tweets weren't such an integral part of your case, you could've saved time by simply revising the downgrades arguments to go without them, and this whole conversation wouldnt have needed to be had.

Why did you allow the CRT to go through back then? Why did all the participating reviewers approve it without an issue? Surely, if the twitter arguments were so integral, someone would have realized there was an issue...

But they didn't. Because the two tweets were not the argument at all. All the over-a-dozen citations straight from the book were sufficient enough for there to be a complete agreement. Because as I said before, for a place that is so reliant on context for conclusions, the lack of context that is running rampant is baffling. The fact that you can ignore 10+ citations with extensive explanations, just because 2 tweets (that are legitimate with no reasonable ways to prove they are legitimate) exist on the side is baffling and showcases a severe lack of understanding of the case... Which surprisingly explains how so much headcanon snuck in over the years.

Or if your so against our standards, then like everything else, you could've made an attempt to change them. Thats how it works here.

Go advocate for that yourself. I am here to ensure the damage done is minimal, both to outside communities from this place, and from me to this place in the form of corrections rather than destruction. The lack of common sense shown time and time again is making me regret my decision.

DMUA should have needed to done all of this. The fact that the previous CRT was approved by a dozen mods & reviewers with the entire existing context should have been enough. The following reversion CRT being rejected with the exact same arguments straight from the book with the involvement of even more reviewers should have further sealed it.

And if it didn't because you care so much about standards to ignore context, then I strongly recommend you "advocate" for a look into the mod & reviewer team too.

Then, once again, YOU should have done this sooner and saved the trouble of going through this entire discussion DMUA. That is your job to do.

If you were able to prove the source as valid, bravo. All the power to you. But this a burden of proof that should've been met an entire page ago, and had it been done, we wouldnt be here talking about this in the first place.

But that has been done. Not even by DMUA, but by me. Countless times in this thread it has been stated how what he is saying is perfectly in line with the in-universe explanations. Heck, this was explained by me in the original downgrade thread, as I was actively linking between arguments solely to showcase this, which Bambu deemed to be "using tweets as a core argument".

I have thoroughly talked about the language Reki uses between vague answers and serious/specific answers. I have talked about how he is tasked with offering clarifications for the Anime's portrayal of things to give all events background information (straight from his books or tying into his old material for new, anime original scenes).

I have talked about how Reki's twitter is his main source of communication that is not run "by an intern", how he has manuscripts for all of these in the first place, how he even puts his legitimacy to the test with things like "This is the general answer, you'll have a more specific one in the next book ".

All of which have been refused and/or ignored. Burden of proof was met an entire page ago, you just caused things to be "more difficult than they needed to be" by ignoring all of it. And had you not ignored all of them, we wouldn't be here talking about this in the first place.

 

[Cyberblader90]

I think we are done here. Let's just move on to a different topic

 

[RitsuØ1]

I think we are done here. Let's just move on to a different topic

What’s exactly done here? What’s the conclusion so far?

 

[Kaantantr]

What’s exactly done here? What’s the conclusion so far?

Now, if the thread could manage to refocus itself, we still need discourse over DMUA's new thing. If none is had, I will take it as no particularly compelling arguments can be made by those favoring an upgrade (or removal of the downgrade, however you see it) and the downgrade will be kept in effect. Thanks, lads.

Either you make arguments, or the downgrade stays.

 

[RitsuØ1]

Either you make arguments, or the downgrade stays.

I am busy atm but will eventually get to it…

 

[ProfessorKukui4Life]

It is VS"Wiki"s problem if they are trying to retain the "Wiki" in their title that is, allowing such far fetched headcanon onto their articles by not doing sufficient reviews, and then have their members go out of their way to harass others all over the internet based on said misinformation that they act like is the irrefutable Bible and then when refuted,

You can make all of the long-sized college essay like comments you want to, my answer from before still doesn't change.

I said its not MY problem on how this verse is rated here, and frankly, I don't care about how people perceive or choose to use this site outside the forums (because anyone who thinks a forum is an irrefutable Bible is just as stupid and shouldnt be thinking that in the first place).

they go ahead and try to regularly defame a user by DMing mods about previous instances while hiding their own involvement in said instances as they otherwise cannot play victim.

Have 0 clue what this is about or what this has literally anything to do with this topic, so again, not my problem.

What I find "problematic" is not necessarily whether you have false information or not, I could not care any less. The problem is the entire collective mess that stems from it.

Then again, either take an active attempt to change what you find problematic with this site or go join another wiki or forum that is more suitable to your tastes.

Do not care either way as that has hardly anything to do with this discussion, much less my purpose on why I'm here.

Feel free to go back and retroactively fix the mess that this has caused then way before my arrival. There are plenty of old threads that have been approved by plenty of mods like our downgrade despite not being made according to your "standards" that are the source of this issue in the first place. Either all of it is okay, or none of it is.

Dunno what this speaks of.

In 2 months, I have already seen countless instances where the standards have failed to apply, because the standards assume certain things that not always reflect the reality of the situation.

Join the club then. This isn't the first nor last time this forums rules have not met the gold standard without causing double standards pertaining to particular verses out of the norm. It's basic VsBattles101

This issue with social media evidence most certainly isn't a unique variant of on going issues the site has.

Your "prove Reki's twitter is legit" argument while there being literally 0 ways of actually proving it is legit set by "the standards™" is one of those showcases.

It's simple. Give a confirmation or some kind of basis that he uses twitter as a platform to give fans consistent and officialized info.

Granted, DMUA might have done that recently, but it should be been done much earlier in before this discussion became what it is now.

Why did you allow the CRT to go through back then? Why did all the participating reviewers approve it without an issue? Surely, if the twitter arguments were so integral, someone would have realized there was an issue...

Probably because I didn't even know those tweets were just twitter responses until...literally now? And others probably didn't either.

I barely read anything in the actual downgrade thread (since I didn't really take part in it) and only when now seeing the responses in this discussion thread did I notice this. So I asked, and was given an answer. Hence why I'm here now.

Anyway, you missed the actual point. My point was that if the tweets largely did not matter at all for the downgrade, and you had other evidence to make it pass, then you could be just revised the arguments to use them, so we wouldn't go through the trouble of having this discussion about Reikis Twitter.

But they didn't. Because the two tweets were not the argument at all.

So, again, instead of just revising the argument for the downgrade to use the most relevant evidence to make your case without them tweets, you made things more difficult by having this debate on evidence that, according to you, isn't relevant.

Thanks for admitting my point.

All the over-a-dozen citations straight from the book were sufficient enough for there to be a complete agreement. Because as I said before, for a place that is so reliant on context for conclusions, the lack of context that is running rampant is baffling. The fact that you can ignore 10+ citations with extensive explanations, just because 2 tweets (that are legitimate with no reasonable ways to prove they are legitimate) exist on the side is baffling and showcases a severe lack of understanding of the case... Which surprisingly explains how so much headcanon snuck in over the years.

See above.

Go advocate for that yourself.

Why adovcate for something I don't take issue with enough to try changing? Your the one whos opposed to the standards. So if anyone's to try changing said standards, its you.

I am here to ensure the damage done is minimal, both to outside communities from this place, and from me to this place in the form of corrections rather than destruction. The lack of common sense shown time and time again is making me regret my decision.

Then, again, try changing what you don't agree with. Complaining without doing that is meaningless.

DMUA should have needed to done all of this. The fact that the previous CRT was approved by a dozen mods & reviewers with the entire existing context should have been enough. The following reversion CRT being rejected with the exact same arguments straight from the book with the involvement of even more reviewers should have further sealed it.

My issues that came up in this thread have absolutely nothing to do with Problems attempt to reverse the downgrades.

Again, my arguments here have nothing to do with SAO specifically. Stop glossing over this.

And if it didn't because you care so much about standards to ignore context, then I strongly recommend you "advocate" for a look into the mod & reviewer team too.

But that has been done. Not even by DMUA, but by me. Countless times in this thread it has been stated how what he is saying is perfectly in line with the in-universe explanations.

The issue wasnt if it fell in line with in-universe lore. Again. The issue was about the credibility of the answer when being given to a leading question.

Heck, this was explained by me in the original downgrade thread, as I was actively linking between arguments solely to showcase this, which Bambu deemed to be "using tweets as a core argument".

Because an answer given here, when asked, specified that the tweets had a huge role in the downgrade.

Don't get pissed at because you didn't take the opportunity to correct the person who answered us.

I have thoroughly talked about the language Reki uses between vague answers and serious/specific answers. I have talked about how he is tasked with offering clarifications for the Anime's portrayal of things to give all events background information (straight from his books or tying into his old material for new, anime original scenes).

I have talked about how Reki's twitter is his main source of communication that is not run "by an intern", how he has manuscripts for all of these in the first place, how he even puts his legitimacy to the test with things like "This is the general answer, you'll have a more specific one in the next book ".

Have yet to see any of that. That is until DMUA seemingly provided it.

Either way, beside the point.

All of which have been refused and/or ignored. Burden of proof was met an entire page ago, you just caused things to be "more difficult than they needed to be" by ignoring all of it. And had you not ignored all of them, we wouldn't be here talking about this in the first place.

And see above.

 

[ProfessorKukui4Life]

Anywho, I'm done with this talk.

 

[Mr. Bambu]

I'll also leave the Weeb Den for greener pastures. Do feel free to call on me if you find the need to use Twitter for your argument again.

 

[RitsuØ1]

Wait. So make arguments with Twitter or without Twitter?

 

[Kaantantr]

Anywho, I'm done with this talk.

Should have been done with it a page ago rather than making things more difficult than they needed to be.

Then again, either take an active attempt to change what you find problematic with this site or go join another wiki or forum that is more suitable to your tastes.

My taste is correct information. When false information is festering so hard that it is creeping into so many places to misinform so many people because the standards™ don't seem to be cutting it, then I gotta correct it... Then be harassed for correcting it... Then be recommended to talk with the admins here by our own Wiki admin before following any other action.

Probably because I didn't even know those tweets were just twitter responses until...literally now? And others probably didn't either.

I barely read anything in the actual downgrade thread (since I didn't really take part in it) and only when now seeing the responses in this discussion thread did I notice this. So I asked, and was given an answer. Hence why I'm here now.

Anyway, you missed the actual point. My point was that if the tweets largely did not matter at all for the downgrade, and you had other evidence to make it pass, then you could be just revised the arguments to use them, so we wouldn't go through the trouble of having this discussion about Reikis Twitter.

So, again, instead of just revising the argument for the downgrade to use the most relevant evidence to make your case without them tweets, you made things more difficult by having this debate on evidence that, according to you, isn't relevant.

[...]

Why adovcate for something I don't take issue with enough to try changing? Your the one whos opposed to the standards. So if anyone's to try changing said standards, its you.

Then, again, try changing what you don't agree with. Complaining without doing that is meaningless.

[...]

The issue wasnt if it fell in line with in-universe lore. Again. The issue was about the credibility of the answer when being given to a leading question.

Because an answer given here, when asked, specified that the tweets had a huge role in the downgrade.

[...]

Have yet to see any of that. That is until DMUA seemingly provided it.

It isn't my fault, if you are oblivious to the answers provided to you. As you said, this should have been over a page ago if you had just read things properly.

Answer #1

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.

And I recommend reading your own rules: <Rules be here that did not in fact explicitly ban twitter statement and was only said to be so by the mods. I recommend rephrasing your rules if that truly is the stance>

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.

Answer #2, where I continue to not argue your standards, but explain why Reki's twitter fits with the standards, talking about the vagueness aspect.

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.

The tweets I have used are explicit and direct statements with 0 vagueness in them, 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...

Answer #3, specifically saying that the CRT was focusing on the citations. But I guess listening to people who have been relentlessly advocating a reversion while making it clear they are just frustrated their favorite fictional character is no longer that powerful on this website was easier. Also extensively talking about how Reki uses his twitter to clarify official information in official ways that also fit in with previously published material, as well as candidly talking about future published material.

Everything is explained in the books. Whether you interpret the rules correctly or not to disallow twitter statements, the entire citations from the books remain just the same which is the basis of all the downgrades.

[...]

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.

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".

Answer #4, summary due to frustration regarding what I can only imagine willfully being ignorant to answers provided in the previous page, I mean, you even answered these completely rejecting the idea even still, only to accept the exact same things said by DMUA almost an entire page later while going "I wish these were said before", not realizing DMUA has just been kind enough to summarize everything, while also being someone you guys trust already on the website, which just showcases I was being argued to for the sake of being argued to. Nothing different was said.

What other proof do you need than the author literally making 20+ tweet statements explaining Anime episodes on a weekly basis and how the events are actually explained within the lore and inner workings of Underworld, the author using the platform as his main form of official communication with fans, whether it is something as basic as sharing the Romaji for weird names all the way to extensively talking about the world they have created and details they could not fit into their books, and even talk about why they could not fit certain things into certain books etc?

I do not know how other authors utilize twitter, but Reki Kawahara uses twitter to share everything he cannot fit into the constraints of individual books on a regular basis.

Answer #5, this time to Bambu, addressing his concerns about Twitter, because his statement was whether the statements align with canon or not, at which point, the goalpost was (wrongfully in my opinion) shifted to "then just provide book info" as if Reki's twitter was unreliable, despite multiple information was provided to showcase he was reliable.

If I'm honest, I already mentioned it in this thread. They do appear in canon. That is my entire basis of the argument. The tweets are just supporting material and just say the exact same thing the books state. I cite pages upon pages of content, adding Reki's own personal statements as well because some of these Kirito wankers really do not want to have their character downgraded. I have talked about this. DMUA further talked about this. I am not sure where your take is coming from regarding the matters to assume they do not appear in canon, when in this thread alone, we repeated over and over that they do.

Some of these people just try to hang onto the hope that they may get the downgrade reverted, just because 3 tweets were included as supportive material for accessibility purposes, in an argument with countless direct citations from the book are provided as the main argument.

In that same response, I even asked what else I could do to legitimize his twitter, because discarding one of the major main sources of SAO information just because some other authors are not as responsible or do not have the authority on their own twitter mainly in the western world, to which there seemingly was 0 ways of doing so, otherwise Bambu here to help surely would respond to the question.

And do let me know what I need to do to have Reki's twitter statements on a "trusted twitter" list or whatever you want to call it. It is honestly mindboggling that you can write off direct author statements, just because some authors don't put as much care and are more casual on social media.

I can of course continue with plenty of other responses I have given you that you seem to have responded but apparently did not read somehow, but I guess the main topic being "could have been over a page ago", the earliest responses should suffice.

For reference below you can find DMUA's summary of re-iterating the points provided regarding Reki's twitter being trustworthy as some people have proven to be a little too lazy to scroll or click things to validate things for themselves, though for citations within the citation, please refer to the original post as I am too lazy to add them in manually. Considering being too lazy to click and check things is too much for some, I don't think it'll be a biggie if I am a bit lazy on a slightly harder task:

Why Reki's twitter is a valid source​

This isn't something we should be making a whole new sitewide CRT on, as our standards already don't prevent it from being utilized. Allow me to quote the Editing Rules

• Regarding direct information from the author/creator of a character: We do not use statements from them that are phrased in an uncertain, uncaring, and/or unspecific manner, such as "Could be", "Maybe", "Probably", "Possibly" etcetera. 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.
• When a statement from a character, guidebook, or even word of god contradicts what occurs in the series, they won't be used. For example, if an author says that a character from his work is incapable of shattering planets, even though it has destroyed galaxies on-screen, we will always go with the latter, rather than the former. The statement need to be consistent with what has been revealed within the fictional franchise itself. Otherwise, it will be considered invalid.
• Author statements will only be accepted when they clarify what has been shown or implied in the series itself, and will be rejected when they contradict what has been shown to the audience. Statements that technically do not contradict anything shown in the series will still be rejected if there is no evidence that they are accurate.

So, let's go in order.

Are the statements from Reki Kawahara phrased in an uncertain, uncaring, or unspecific manner?​

The answer to this, is actually yes, but only on one account where it's him not entirely being sure if he wants to commit on saying "yes, this is what happened.". This statement being one of the answers he gave to start this whole conversation, to quote him:

However, in the other statements made in that very same series of answers, he was quite clear and to the point about what he was saying.

There is no uncertainty here, he says as a solid statement "Right now, all of the stars are spherically projected images", which adds on to the statement, also quite certain, of him describing the underworld's night sky like this:

And even on the topic of the shaking, he was at least certain in giving an answer on how they worked in the underworld in general

He clearly states how the underworld doesn't have gas molecules, and so the explosion won't generate a conventional shockwave, but space (which isn't applicable for AP) could shake, and by extension, it might be possible that Kirito's fights with Gabriel and the Abyssal Horror did cause it to shake, but he's not certain about that part so he leaves it ambiguous.

Are the statements from Reki Kawahara contradictory of what happens in the series?​

No, they are not. I'll admit, most of the statements I just quoted run into the problem of the fact I can't prove a negative (We never see them go up to the stars and indeed confirm "These are just fancy lights far off into the distance", for example), but, on the point of the Underworld not having air particles, this is something I can actually go into.

Here's a statement from Unital Ring on the topic. It quite clearly states that dust and dirt are just visual effects instead of actual matter, and air by proxy would behave in a similar fashion. This is shown when, even after 200 years spent outside the Underworld by Alice and no preparation before the fact, she has no trouble breathing far outside the atmosphere.

There's not much I can say without encroaching upon the next section, so

Are Reki Kawahara's statements never shown or implied within the work itself?​

This, is also, no. Again, this already overlaps with the above, but, let's go into that skybox bit I brought up earlier.

The Underworld is founded on something known as the Cardinal System, the same sort of "engine" that SAO and every VRMMO runs off of. The Cardinal System works via procedural Generation. If new content is needed due to someone stepping out of the bounds of the previous content, more will be generated in the process. If everyone stays within a, let's say, 100 Kilometer radius, nothing outside of that radius will be generated in a great deal of detail, it will just fill out the background.

But, if they go into space, like in the Underworld's case, the sun and an entirely different planet will be generated to accommodate.

All of this is perfectly in line with the statement that the stars haven't been generated in detail yet.

In short, by our standards and by judgement of Reki Kawahara's statements specifically, indiscriminately of other authors who do not put any of the same care in their WoG, we can say with certainty that Reki Kawahara's twitter is in fact, a reliable source of WoG. Denying them on the basis of other authors that he has no control over is not a sensible action.

And therein lies the biggest problem that I have observed here. The place runs on trust, when it should be running on context. Standards don't matter, what a trusted person says about the standards do. Context of a scene doesn't matter, what a trusted member brings as citation and personal interpretation (read: headcanon) counts.

I am not going to try changing your standards. I am here to play by your rules, as I am solely here to fix the information present, not change how you do things. I am not part of the VS Culture and am not interested how you pit characters against each other.

I do however care when one thing is denied with the reason "the standards™" solely because it came from me, while the exact same thing was perfectly fine according to "the standards™" solely because it came from a trusted member you knew for a while instead. If you are achieving two separate results from the exact same information, that is not a standard.

Knowing what the response will be, most certainly somewhere along the lines of "But you didn't actually provide the examples from the books", I did. Not in this thread, but in all the CRTs that has been the case where tons of mods and reviewers existed to validate these. And you are going to have to excuse me for not putting in the effort to be so extensive towards people who have 0 context on the issue because "they didn't read what happened" or the nth person of authority who arrived who is understandably not aware of the existing context regarding the series (although I find it weird that they weren't even involved in related topics while trying to decide stuff on the topic).

I should not need to prove my arguments a dozen separate times, when I have proven them a dozen - 1 times already to the people that approved things. At which point, I recommend just assigning specific mods to specific topics, rather than outsourcing a topic to someone with 0 knowledge on the topic or the recent discussions regarding the topic.

Now I am just waiting Problem say the exact same things he has said in previous threads as an argument, without a care about the fact that those have been debunked numerous times already.

 

[Agnaa]

Just stumbled across this thread and I am blown away that Bambu and Kukui took such a hardline stance against WoG from Twitter.

The questions weren't leading, it seemed to be a personal account, it wasn't going against stuff in the text, but clarifying stuff that wasn't mentioned in the text, and was assumed by people on the wiki because of its absence in the text.

I have never seen WoG of that quality be rejected before, or have the exceedingly high burden of proof of "You have to prove that the account is run by only him, even though there's no evidence that someone else can tweet from it. You have to prove that he uses it to give consistent information, even though there's no evidence that the information from it is inconsistent. And you have to prove that the evidence from it is official, even though there's no evidence that the information from it is unofficial." I have never seen our standards phrased in such a draconian way, and I don't really have an idea how any WoG's meant to meet that. How do you prove that no-one else is secretly writing tweets for it? Or that it isn't secretly inconsistent/unofficial?

I agree with Kaantantr here that the burden of proof should really go the other way. And like DMUA said, we have rules on this, and the sorts of things y'all asked to be proven aren't included.

 

[ProfessorKukui4Life]

Just stumbled across this thread and I am blown away that Bambu and Kukui took such a hardline stance against WoG from Twitter.

The questions weren't leading, it seemed to be a personal account, it wasn't going against stuff in the text, but clarifying stuff that wasn't mentioned in the text, and was assumed by people on the wiki because of its absence in the text.

I have never seen WoG of that quality be rejected before, or have the exceedingly high burden of proof of "You have to prove that the account is run by only him, even though there's no evidence that someone else can tweet from it. You have to prove that he uses it to give consistent information, even though there's no evidence that the information from it is inconsistent. And you have to prove that the evidence from it is official, even though there's no evidence that the information from it is unofficial." I have never seen our standards phrased in such a draconian way, and I don't really have an idea how any WoG's meant to meet that. How do you prove that no-one else is secretly writing tweets for it? Or that it isn't secretly inconsistent/unofficial?

I agree with Kaantantr here that the burden of proof should really go the other way. And like DMUA said, we have rules on this, and the sorts of things y'all asked to be proven aren't included.

Yeah no.

First of all, don't try and play this off as if it's just me and Bambu going by this stance when it absolutely isn't. And we have a whole staff thread on this topic with many (staff and non staff alike) feeling the same way. Hence our editing rules reflecting this.

Second, you should know by now that "doesn't go against this" by itself is absolutely meaningless here and still isn't acceptable.

But more importantly, if you have yet to see this happen (which probably just means you aren't as active here as you think), again, check pretty much any Ben 10 or Alien X thread as a perfect example of why we typically don't allow evidence like this. The questions asked by fans first are in fact leading, as they on most occasions are formed to extract specific information from the author, details that they won't care about at all, and will just give answers to feed into fan desires that are more than likely not legitimate. Especially if the questions are vs debating like, asking if a character created or destroyed X.

Or a more specific example, like asking Akira Toriyama if Goku can Destroy a universe and Akira saying "yes probably if using full power". And I name this example as this in fact is a real example.

And finally, absolute no to the burden of proof being the other way around, as that's practically on the level of saying we don't need evidence of a source of evidence being credible, which of course, is silly. Your the one who wants to use a public social media outlet as a form of evidence, so you are the one that needs to prove the source as credible. Especially for something like social media.

And btw, we scrutinize social media in ways of saying "an intern could be using it" because this is something that is fact entirely possible and does happen with authors, and pretty much every typical celebrity with social media. Stan Lee is one such example.

 

[Cyberblader90]

just make a thread on this or something. sao discussion doesnt need to be clogged further by this

 

[Kaantantr]

Creates an issue with partner in crime

Misinforms people trying to familiarize themselves with the issue

Issue blows up

just make a thread on this or something. sao discussion doesnt need to be clogged further by this

 

[Cyberblader90]

partner in crime

?

and ive stated prior in this thread to move this to a question thread or crt

 

[Antvasima]

Can somebody summarise the author statements, the circumstances/nature of them, what you want to do, and the issues of conflict here please?

 

[RitsuØ1]

Can somebody summarise the author statements, the circumstances/nature of them, and the issues of conflict here please?

So Reki Kawahara tweeted again answering a fan's question. Then ProfessorKukui4Life claimed a statement that Twitter is not allowed unless it's a serious interview or something like that. The thing is that the tweets played a pretty huge role in the downgrade thread. Now, we are sorta having a war whether or not if Reki Kawahara's tweets are reliable or not.

 

[Antvasima]

It seems to be seriously intended elaborate answers from what I can see. If we need them as supporting evidence, it is probably fine, but @Mr._Bambu also has a say in this of course.

 

[Kaantantr]

The thing is that the tweets played a pretty huge role in the downgrade thread.

Can we just stop lying at this point? The tweets barely played a part in disproving previous claims as there were over 10 dozen direct citations from the books for the actual content. Which have already been re-written by DMUA to not feature the tweets, as well as a summary of all the reasons why Reki's twitter is elaborate.

Spoiler: This is all there is to it as things stand.

I'm going to do you a few better.

There is no reason to assume, and in fact, there are reasons to assume quite against Kirito shaking the world or the universe.​

Let's start by grabbing the excerpts from the novel, translated by Stephen Paul, who has an immense amount of experience in both fan and official translations of works like this. Starting with the supposed Low 6-B feat.

They indeed describe that giant flashes and explosions shake the world itself (The explosion part will be relevant later), but, here's the issue.

This excerpt is heavily based in building up intensity and emotion to juxtapose Kirito getting his arm cut off just as he's about to deal what seems like the finishing blow, using descriptions such as "Swords brimming with starlight", "cracking off in search of eqilibrium as bolts of lightning" (I bold as, as that emphasizes the fact this is a simile, a figure of speech very similar to a metaphor to compare something to something else in an abstract sense), "The endless strength of countless prayers", and so on.

Unless we want to double down and say High 3-A off of "endless strength", it's clear that this might not be literally making a statement on the fact that the entire planet is in fact shaking. But, that's not solid, so to that end, allow me to present the anime displaying that excerpt...

As Kirito sending a bunch of shockwaves around, shaking the camera as the ground is shattered, but nowhere near physically shaking the entire planet.

Reki, as the owner of SAO, does have a strong say in how the anime adapts things, and if he intended there to be literal shaking, there's no real reason for him to not emphasize the point with a pan out to see everything quaking from this clash. But, such isn't the case.

But even then, the anime is supplementary, so, remember when I said the explosion part will be relevant later?

Well, an explosion (or series of, in this case) that cause the world to shake would generate massive craters. Specifically, massive as in 400 Kilometers.

Despite this, the immense landmark generated by this chain of events is never mentioned or addressed in any capacity, which strongly suggests the chain of events was simply an exaggeration meant to generate hype, and not in fact a statement of AP.

Now, for shaking the universe... Or, by Stephen Paul's official translation, shaking space:

"Space" does not suggest the universe actually shakes inofitself, as if they meant something significantly larger in radius than just the local area (hence, space is shaking), they would likely just say universe.

But, Stica says universe... But, here's the kicker, and this is actually in the fan translation too. She very specifically says it is "As though", the entire universe is shaking. A strange thing to say if the universe was literally, physically quaking, and that was the intent of Reki in this scene.

But, it even goes beyond how the scene inofitself is described. In unital ring, we also get this, which I don't have a fancy image for, but


"Top secret" is a bizarre way to describe an event where everything, throughout the entire universe, shook, and it would be a logistical nightmare to keep the actual source of said fight a secret when the entire planet quaked.

And of course, in this case as well, the anime only shows the local area shaking as a result of their clash, as opposed to the entire universe.

In short: the statements for these feats are not literal, and such can be demonstrated through simple logic.

Why Reki's twitter is a valid source​

This isn't something we should be making a whole new sitewide CRT on, as our standards already don't prevent it from being utilized. Allow me to quote the Editing Rules

• Regarding direct information from the author/creator of a character: We do not use statements from them that are phrased in an uncertain, uncaring, and/or unspecific manner, such as "Could be", "Maybe", "Probably", "Possibly" etcetera. 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.
• When a statement from a character, guidebook, or even word of god contradicts what occurs in the series, they won't be used. For example, if an author says that a character from his work is incapable of shattering planets, even though it has destroyed galaxies on-screen, we will always go with the latter, rather than the former. The statement need to be consistent with what has been revealed within the fictional franchise itself. Otherwise, it will be considered invalid.
• Author statements will only be accepted when they clarify what has been shown or implied in the series itself, and will be rejected when they contradict what has been shown to the audience. Statements that technically do not contradict anything shown in the series will still be rejected if there is no evidence that they are accurate.

So, let's go in order.

Are the statements from Reki Kawahara phrased in an uncertain, uncaring, or unspecific manner?​

The answer to this, is actually yes, but only on one account where it's him not entirely being sure if he wants to commit on saying "yes, this is what happened.". This statement being one of the answers he gave to start this whole conversation, to quote him:

However, in the other statements made in that very same series of answers, he was quite clear and to the point about what he was saying.

There is no uncertainty here, he says as a solid statement "Right now, all of the stars are spherically projected images", which adds on to the statement, also quite certain, of him describing the underworld's night sky like this:

And even on the topic of the shaking, he was at least certain in giving an answer on how they worked in the underworld in general

He clearly states how the underworld doesn't have gas molecules, and so the explosion won't generate a conventional shockwave, but space (which isn't applicable for AP) could shake, and by extension, it might be possible that Kirito's fights with Gabriel and the Abyssal Horror did cause it to shake, but he's not certain about that part so he leaves it ambiguous.

Are the statements from Reki Kawahara contradictory of what happens in the series?​

No, they are not. I'll admit, most of the statements I just quoted run into the problem of the fact I can't prove a negative (We never see them go up to the stars and indeed confirm "These are just fancy lights far off into the distance", for example), but, on the point of the Underworld not having air particles, this is something I can actually go into.

Here's a statement from Unital Ring on the topic. It quite clearly states that dust and dirt are just visual effects instead of actual matter, and air by proxy would behave in a similar fashion. This is shown when, even after 200 years spent outside the Underworld by Alice and no preparation before the fact, she has no trouble breathing far outside the atmosphere.

There's not much I can say without encroaching upon the next section, so

Are Reki Kawahara's statements never shown or implied within the work itself?​

This, is also, no. Again, this already overlaps with the above, but, let's go into that skybox bit I brought up earlier.

The Underworld is founded on something known as the Cardinal System, the same sort of "engine" that SAO and every VRMMO runs off of. The Cardinal System works via procedural Generation. If new content is needed due to someone stepping out of the bounds of the previous content, more will be generated in the process. If everyone stays within a, let's say, 100 Kilometer radius, nothing outside of that radius will be generated in a great deal of detail, it will just fill out the background.

But, if they go into space, like in the Underworld's case, the sun and an entirely different planet will be generated to accommodate.

All of this is perfectly in line with the statement that the stars haven't been generated in detail yet.

In short, by our standards and by judgement of Reki Kawahara's statements specifically, indiscriminately of other authors who do not put any of the same care in their WoG, we can say with certainty that Reki Kawahara's twitter is in fact, a reliable source of WoG. Denying them on the basis of other authors that he has no control over is not a sensible action.

Why, exactly, I was not calm about this in any capacity.​

Now, this is not the first time the downgrades have been questioned under rationales I disagree with severely. The initial downgrades experienced some resistance, even if they were swiftly dispelled by the same counterarguments I have just restated.

What has escalated this situation is the insistence on overturning it after it's been accepted under poor reasoning, in a way best summarized in this report.

I will admit, I am generating an inordinate amount of heat over what is ultimately an even more nerdy subset of talking about popular anime, yes. And in Bambu's case, they didn't even want to be here, they were obligated to as staff.

But, to have people, entirely unfamiliarized with the context of this situation wholesale, barge in and criticize a downgrade that was already discussed and accepted by many people, including staff members, makes one feel as though nothing they've done to this point is actually relevant, as they refuse to give it the light of day over a minor thing such as twitter statements being unreliable with "most" authors.

So, yes, I do not wish to continue being antagonistic, and it was a clear mistake to do so.

But I'm still pretty damn pissed, and I'll need to take a bit to really cool myself after posting this. Allow me to link you the music I shall use, in case you're interested:



I'm probably a bit of a weirdo in the sense I use intense music to calm an intense mood, but, I find it pleasant to ride my anger like it's a tidal wave until it disperses through a banger tune.

Peace.

Problem, you really need to stop chasing an agenda so obviously. It is getting old. Things have been settled, with the only dispute remaining is what has transpired here due to lacking context on the matter, how certain people are continuing their attempt at misleading others while said others are chiming in with an incredibly lacking background on the matter or the topic that basically require all the things that has been said in a 3 page CRT that was approved by numerous mods and reviewers.

Oh, and of course the awaited "arguments" Problem is to offer us against the downgrade for a third time now, because we were forced to repeat this again.

 

[Antvasima]

Well, if there are several other pieces of evidence that supported the downgrade as well, I don't think that we have a problem here.

 

[AnonymousBlank]

Wanna just say that the only thing the tweets actually played a part in debunking was the countless stars being literal but even if you say that feat is valid, it would still be an outlier as Kaantantr proved that the other Tier 4 feats were incorrect via the novel text. The tweets honestly don’t matter at all.

 

[RitsuØ1]

Wanna just say that the only thing the tweets actually played a part in debunking was the countless stars being literal but even if you say that feat is valid, it would still be an outlier as Kaantantr proved that the other Tier 4 feats were incorrect via the novel text. The tweets honestly don’t matter at all.

Umm... No. There were tweets like the current size of the Underworld is 2 Planets + 1 Sun and that the stars are just skyboxes.

Can we just stop lying at this point? The tweets barely played a part in disproving previous claims as there were over 10 dozen direct citations from the books for the actual content. Which have already been re-written by DMUA to not feature the tweets, as well as a summary of all the reasons why Reki's twitter is elaborate.

Lying? Excuse me?!

Problem, you really need to stop chasing an agenda so obviously. It is getting old. Things have been settled, with the only dispute remaining is what has transpired here due to lacking context on the matter, how certain people are continuing their attempt at misleading others while said others are chiming in with an incredibly lacking background on the matter or the topic that basically require all the things that has been said in a 3 page CRT that was approved by numerous mods and reviewers.

Oh, and of course the awaited "arguments" Problem is to offer us against the downgrade for a third time now, because we were forced to repeat this again.

Wait. So make arguments with Twitter or without Twitter?

...
I'm going out to touch some grass as I'm feeling really uneasy right now. I'm not joking. I'm actually serious. I have epilepsy and that's a pain to deal with.

 

[Kaantantr]

Umm... No. There were tweets like the current size of the Underworld is 2 Planets + 1 Sun and that the stars are just skyboxes.

I literally extensively explained the basic knowledge of how Cardinal System operates.

Lying? Excuse me?!

You keep misleading people with your arguments. You did it 3 times already just in this incident with 3 different people. If you do it 3 times after being told twice that what you say is not the case, I can only assume you are doing it on purpose and not by mistake.

And you do have a history of trying to pass imagery as literal text numerous times in the chase for your agenda. So that's even less reason to assume it was an honest mistake.

 

[Mr. Bambu]

It seems to be seriously intended elaborate answers from what I can see. If we need them as supporting evidence, it is probably fine, but @Mr._Bambu also has a say in this of course.

I don't particularly care, in my book if the argument can be made without Twitter statements (as proven above, it can, more or less- if someone wants to debate against that, they're free to, though nobody has thus far), then it should be made without Twitter statements. I spoke to Agnaa regarding my reasoning for this on Discord after he copy/pasted his comment here, to there.

 

[Antvasima]

Okay. I don't mind if the elaborate Twitter replies are used as supporting evidence though.