- 3,196
- 7,852
Usually, staff overreaching happens if a thread gets too heated and controversial to prevent toxicity. This CRT however, does not yet have any heated arguments so conveying this to the staff discussions isn't entirely necessary.
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.
We shouldn't discuss who scales right now, we need to actually get this accepted first.Ok, which characters would be affected by this? I suppose Heroes's?
We shouldn't discuss who scales right now, we need to actually get this accepted first.
The thread is just for the cosmology.I think it's needed, I mean, after all the OP explanation needs a pruporse and to reveal with detail what he wants to reach exactly... either upgrading the cosomology or characters themselves.
Ok thanksThe thread is just for the cosmology.
No. Threads involving controversial verses and Tier 1 almost never go well by default, adding scaling on top just makes things worse. Much, much worse.I think it's needed, I mean, after all the OP explanation needs a pruporse and to reveal with detail what he wants to reach exactly... either upgrading the cosomology or characters themselves.
No. Threads involving controversial verses and Tier 1 almost never go well by default, adding scaling on top just makes things worse. Much, much worse.
You should 100% focus on cosmology first and then iron out the scaling later. That's the only way you get to keep a successful track record on CRTs like these (Just ask the Marvel Revisions and GoW Revisions).
"It's been 5,000 years..."
Thank you, my friend, for finally achieving the dream me and so many DB fans on this site have been chasing for years.
I agree.
I don’t think any staff have given a stance though, and those are the votes you really need to get this acceptedA vote count would be nice I see a lot of agrees and little disagrees.
I'm assuming regular users need permission to comment further, correct?I'm going to be removing unneeded comments. Remember that this is not a general discussion thread. If you've already given your agreement and you aren't participating in a discussion, please refrain from making this thread longer than it needs to be.
This isn’t a staff discussion thread atm so no, just make sure the comments aren’t derailingI'm assuming regular users need permission to comment further, correct?
Ah, thank you.This isn’t a staff discussion thread atm so no, just make sure the comments aren’t derailing
I don’t see the problem with bringing up the standards, it helps to bring everyone onto the same page.I am being completely frank, 3/4 of the entire thread is made of
- Standards
I don’t see the problem with this, for reasons above.
- Ultima Quotes
I don’t see the problem with this either, FRA.
- DT quotes
I thought I deleted all of that? If there’s anything left in the OP, please point it out to me.
Whataboutism arguments
Are you just going to ignore my explanation about the recent standards change, and the two CRT’s I cited in which it was accepted? That was the main point of this post, and I highlighted a disclaimer regarding that.
I feel like you’re being a little disingenuous. You’re not really criticizing the arguments themselves. You’re also hugely misrepresenting this post’s subject matter. I explained why I believe Dragon Ball qualifies for Low 1-C, and went out of my way to emphasize the new evidence. I feel uneasy when you ignore something like that.Like, are you trying to explain the standards or suggest that the cosmology is low 1-C and someone scale to it? Is there any other scans because reading through, this is the single relevant-cosmology-verse-related scan?
he explains how the standards apply to the argument. thats literally the main point of the CRTI am being completely frank, 3/4 of the entire thread is made of
Like, are you trying to explain the standards or suggest that the cosmology is low 1-C and someone scale to it? Is there any other scans because reading through, this is the single relevant-cosmology-verse-related scan?
- Standards
- Ultima Quotes
- DT quotes
- More Standards
- Executor_N0 comments
Whataboutism arguments- And one relevant scan
I was not even trying to ignore. Likewise, I am trying to understand, the evidence of low 1-C you are basing it off.Are you just going to ignore my explanation about the recent standards change, and the two CRT’s I cited in which it was accepted? That was the main point of this post, and I highlighted a disclaimer regarding that.
How am I being disingenuous when I am asking which shreds of evidence you are using to suggest low 1-CI feel like you’re being a little disingenuous. You’re not really criticizing the arguments themselves. You’re also hugely misrepresenting this post’s subject matter. I explained why I believe Dragon Ball qualifies for Low 1-C, and went out of my way to emphasize the new evidence. I feel uneasy when you ignore something like that.
It would be highly advisable to clearly specify the scans you are using as the basis for the low 1-C. This practice aligns with constitutional principles and ensures transparency in the justification process, regardless of whether the proposal is approved or not.
The basis is the two minor CRT’s I linked here, which were approved already within the past couple weeks.What is the new evidence that allows Dragon Ball to qualify for Low 1-C?
This is the part most of you were waiting to see. As I've been explaining, an overarching timeline is only Low 1-C if you can confirm that the lesser space-times it services harbor their own time dimensions on top of being spatiotemporally separate: only then can you say the cosmology consists of two temporal dimensions. As for the evidence, we won't be providing it for acceptance in this CRT as it's been approved already. Through these two recent minor CRT's that aimed to increase the tier 2 justifications, it was accepted that the Low 2-C space-times of Dragon Ball are serviced by their own time dimensions. Beyond that, you have the overarching timeline we all know and love. This means technically speaking, the cosmology is already approved for Low 1-C. Our cosmology now has the exact same justificationsas the hypertimelines which have been accepted already.
Just to clarify, your blog appears to be gone and there is nothing there anymore.The basis is the two minor CRT’s I linked here, which were approved already within the past couple weeks.
You can find it on db toeiverse cosmology page on wikiJust to clarify, your blog appears to be gone and there is nothing there anymore.
Before I choose my stance here.Like, are you trying to explain the standards or suggest that the cosmology is low 1-C and someone scale to it? Is there any other scans because reading through, this is the single relevant-cosmology-verse-related scan?
Both of the CRT’s are for increasing tier 2 justifications that would allow tier 1.I don't understand.
You are linking two CRTs. One is for tier 2 and has nothing to do with tier 1 (low 1-C) and the other one is for suggesting abilities.
Lastly, you linked the exact scan I mentioned before. So I am right to assume, this is the single scan you are basing off your low 1-C proposal?
So my question still remains:
Before I choose my stance here.