The Goddess of the Manifold is not a real character, and should be deleted at once

[Agnaa]

And you know what we say about in-universe speculation?

If you want, I don't think anyone would disagree with a note being added to the goddess' profile saying that the profile's based on speculation and experiences of characters in-verse, and is never directly shown.

 

[ZacharyGrossman273]

1) Read the thread

2) Hence why we agreed in the thread for it to be worthy of a possibly rating

 

[Malomtek]

I'm not gonna lie, that regurgitation of the "muh claiming figurative language is bad" quote like its authoritative truth is bordering on outright stonewalling, and annoying. I'm going to get a staff to deal with it if you keep it up.

 

[Agnaa]

We're not just spouting off a short line. DarkGrath gave two paragraphs of argument to why this sort of thing is legit, to which your response was attacking him:

Now I'm supposed to presume that DarkGrath is a psychic who can telepathically divine the contents of the minds of most authors, of course. Please don't insult my intelligence with that.

Please do call in more staff so we can get this sorted out.

 

[Malomtek]

And you know what we say about in-universe speculation?

If you want, I don't think anyone would disagree with a note being added to the goddess' profile saying that the profile's based on speculation and experiences of characters in-verse, and is never directly shown.

Again:

Now I'm supposed to presume that DarkGrath is a psychic who can telepathically divine the contents of the minds of most authors, of course.

Please don't insult my intelligence with that.

>1) Read the thread

So it has nothing to do with if the Goddess exists as a character. Got it.

>2) Hence why we agreed in the thread for it to be worthy of a possibly rating

I wasn't talking about the Goddess's rating, I was talking about whether the Goddess actually existed as a character.

 

[Malomtek]

We're not just spouting off a short line. DarkGrath gave two paragraphs of argument to why this sort of thing is legit, to which your response was attacking him:

I'm not "attacking" DarkGrath, I'm refuting his argument.

You guys are clearly too emotionally invested in this Goddess character you've built up.

 

[Agnaa]

Still repeating the insult, and not even considering the compromise I offered...

Yep, bring staff in, I'm sure they'll side with you.

You guys are clearly too emotionally invested in this Goddess character you've built up.

I know absolutely nothing about the verse. I can just follow the logic behind the arguments here.

 

[Malomtek]

Still repeating the insult, and not even considering the compromise I offered...

Yep, bring staff in, I'm sure they'll side with you.

You guys are clearly too emotionally invested in this Goddess character you've built up.

I know absolutely nothing about the verse. I can just follow the logic behind the arguments here.

What "insult" have I just repeated? That I mocked the notion that DarkGrath can just know what goes on in author's heads?

 

[Agnaa]

Yeah, instead of explaining why it was wrong you just mocked him.

I think we can figure out the intentions of authors, and we use that idea all over the site. Creation feats usually aren't calculated with E=MC^2 because we think that most authors don't intend for them to work that way. Along with a bunch of our other regulations on calcs/outliers/statements/etc.

 

[Malomtek]

Yeah, instead of explaining why it was wrong you just mocked him.

I think we can figure out the intentions of authors, and we use that idea all over the site. Creation feats usually aren't calculated with E=MC^2 because we think that most authors don't intend for them to work that way. Along with a bunch of our other regulations on calcs/outliers/statements/etc.

I wasn't mocking DarkGrath, I was mocking the basis of his argument, that he just knows what's in the minds of most authors. You took it personally, and got offended on his behalf.

Creation feats aren't E=MC^2 because they generally aren't portrayed as such. It similarly goes for the other regulations.

 

[Agnaa]

And as DarkGrath said, in-verse speculation is usually meant to actually be true.

 

[Malomtek]

And as DarkGrath said, in-verse speculation is usually meant to actually be true.

Yet again you regurgitate his arguments uncritically.

On what basis, other than purely anecdotal and subjective interpretations, does DarkGrath say that argument?

 

[Malomtek]

I'm going to take a 24 hour break from this thread. Don't close it until I've come back and had my say.

 

[DarkGrath]

> Me, waking up in the morning

> Me, going to check this thread for any further developments

Wat in the gosh diddly darn happened here

 

[Threemagi]

> Me, waking up in the morning

> Me, going to check this thread for any further developments

Wat in the gosh diddly darn happened here

Err, please don't get offended. @Malomtek was just pointing flaws in your opinion/argument.

Basically, The God has too many 'perhaps' for her description. So there's a fear she doesn't actually exist.

Don't close it until I've come back and had my say.

Well, no staff would actually bother to close a thread unless asked, if I remember correctly. So you can rest assured.


Are you a former staff? (You seem to be able to make good arguments and have good confidence) I'm just curious btw, not that I'm trying to inisuate anything.

 

[DarkGrath]

Don't worry, I'm not offended. Just making a joke.

And no, Malmomtek doesn't appear to be former staff. Though if there is still discussion to be had, it wouldn't be acceptable to close it just yet.

 

[The_King_of_Prudence]

On what basis, other than purely anecdotal and subjective interpretations, does DarkGrath say that argument?

He did give reasons.

 

[ZacharyGrossman273]

Look, I'm not claiming the goddess is a character in the sense she's someone who directly appears and does things. I'm saying she's a character in the sense that multiple people in verse who know what they're talking about talk about her. To say that the people claiming her profile should stay are "making up" her character is false.

 

[Malomtek]

He did give reasons.
Which are entirely predicated on DarkGrath being able to know author intent at any given moment, instead of just the in-narrative context of a given book passage.

I'd even say that it's trivially easy to find cases where in-universe speculation and conclusions based on them led to nothing meaningful or positive at all.

 

[ZacharyGrossman273]

Manifold is inherently an esoteric verse, and all statements about her existence come from people who know what they're talking about. Going by your logic the elder scrolls god tiers should be deleted or downgraded.

If manifold was a verse where everything supernatural was fake, or if the people claiming her existence were villains/cultists you'd have a point, but it isn't.

 

[Antvasima]

If you want, I don't think anyone would disagree with a note being added to the goddess' profile saying that the profile's based on speculation and experiences of characters in-verse, and is never directly shown.

Would this be an acceptable solution to this argument?

 

[ZacharyGrossman273]

That's not necessary tho, there are other characters based on this stuff that don't have notes like that.

 

[Malomtek]

>Look, I'm not claiming the goddess is a character in the sense she's someone who directly appears and does things. I'm saying she's a character in the sense that multiple people in verse who know what they're talking about talk about her. To say that the people claiming her profile should stay are "making up" her character is false.

Or, rather statements of "God" are metaphorical/poetic/figurative descriptors used by those characters for higher realities, in a similar way to how some people refer to the universe as "God", or figuratively anthropomorphize the universe into something of a pantheistic deity.

>Manifold is inherently an esoteric verse, and all statements about her existence come from people who know what they're talking about.

They aren't statements, they are hypotheses, guesses, about the nature of the highest reality, and they aren't definitive by themselves.

If we had a statement about how the highest reality contains consciousness within it, or something to that effect, without any mitigating "maybes" or "perhaps", then you'd have a point.

>Going by your logic the elder scrolls god tiers should be deleted or downgraded.

I don't know much about TES, but I have a feeling that comparison doesn't work. I already see more clear evidence for the Amaranth's existence from the quote on its profile page alone than for the Goddess.

>If manifold was a verse where everything supernatural was fake, or if the people claiming her existence were villains/cultists you'd have a point, but it isn't.

Isn't Manifold a relatively hard sci-fi, where nothing is supernatural and anything mystical is just an application of esoteric scientific and mathematical theories? Either way, even if it did have supernatural elements, and the people hypothesizing (not claiming) the existence of the Goddess were morally perfect with infinitely stable minds, what does that have to do with the Goddess' existence in particular?

 

[Malomtek]

Would this be an acceptable solution to this argument?

For right now, this is an acceptable compromise.

 

[ZacharyGrossman273]

Okay, fine, how's this

"Note: The Goddess of The Manifold never directly appears and is only referenced/talked about by characters in verse, which means it is possible she doesn't actually exist."

 

[ZacharyGrossman273]

Also manifold is hard sci fi in the same sense that isaac asimov's books are hard sci fi

 

[Antvasima]

@Zachary

That seems fine. Should I add the footnote and close this thread again?

 

[ZacharyGrossman273]

Yes

 

[Antvasima]

Okay.