Upside Down Man/Great Evil Beast revisions

[Deagonx]

There’s no reason to assume it would be either.

It's DC canon. This argument is moot one way or the other, but assuming that something from DOTNG isn't connected to FC is a false assumption as demonstrated above.

Whether you think Mandrakks origin was retconned or not is irrelevant.

It was, this isn't a matter of opinion.

The point is that your argument is literally the equivalent of saying Mandrakk couldn’t have explored the multiverse because of the Source wall.

No, it isn't.

One potentially inconsistent point in a plot for a single story doesn’t retcon the entire cosmology.

Okay? That is not the situation as it pertains to the Source Wall and the Dark Multiverse. The "entire cosmology" does not revolve around the notion that the DM is outside the Source Wall. It was never stated that the Otherkind could destroy the Source Wall, and it was never said that the DM was outside of it.

It actually proves the opposite as the Dark Multiverse is much larger than what’s on the front side of the map.

Size is irrelevant, the Source Wall is infinite.

I already did give a scan. You just didn’t read it.

You seriously edited the scan into one of your older comments just to wisecrack? Good grief. Likewise, your scan does not say "greater mystery" or "Source Wall" so by what virtue are you providing this scan, in response to the question: "Where is your evidence that the Dark Gods were a 'greater mystery' outside the Source Wall?" I'm asking for actual evidence here.

 

[Xearsay]

It was, this isn't a matter of opinion.

I don't care if you think it was. Stop trying to change the topic.

No, it isn't.

Not a counter argument.

Okay? That is not the situation as it pertains to the Source Wall and the Dark Multiverse. The "entire cosmology" does not revolve around the notion that the DM is outside the Source Wall. It was never stated that the Otherkind could destroy the Source Wall, and it was never said that the DM was outside of it.

The entire cosmology doesn't have to revolve around the notion. You're still cherry picking.

Size is irrelevant, the Source Wall is infinite.

Literally doesn't matter. The Source Wall is never shown around the Dark Multiverse when they flipped it. Matter of fact it's the exact opposite. It's just a giant thing of darkness with no source wall whatsoever.

You seriously edited the scan into one of your older comments just to wisecrack? Good grief. Likewise, your scan does not say "greater mystery" or "Source Wall" so by what virtue are you providing this scan, in response to the question: "Where is your evidence that the Dark Gods were a 'greater mystery' outside the Source Wall?" I'm asking for actual evidence here.

I edited it in before you even started writing your reply to the comment. It just took me a while to find the scan so you ended up replying before I could finish editing the scan in. It's implied the scan and I'm not going to read the scan to you. However if you don't feel like reading you can go to the wiki which simplifies it there as well.

.

 

[Xearsay]

Also just to add more evidence. Mandrakk literally fell off Nil, through the Overvoid and landed into the Dark Multiverse. Proving my point once again.

 

[Deagonx]

I don't care if you think it was.

That's fine, it isn't a matter of think or not think, it's demonstrated in the comic.

Stop trying to change the topic.

You are the one that challenged me on it in the first place. If you don't want to discuss it, don't respond to it.

Not a counter argument.

I don't need a counter argument for the notion that "your argument is like this argument, and this argument is wrong, therefore your argument is wrong!" It's literally just strawmanning. I don't need to deconstruct your false analogy, you need to actually address the argument at hand.

The entire cosmology doesn't have to revolve around the notion. You're still cherry picking.

This isn't an argument. You attempted to paint an image of the cosmology in which your interpretation is all-encompassing aside from "one potentially inconsistent point" when the truth is your interpretation is never indicated in any direct way and contradicts what we know to be true about the cosmology or not. You're trying to induce the image of "cherry-picking" to make it seem like nit-picking is responsible for the counterargument rather than the simple fact that the evidence provided against your theory is greater in both quantity and quality than the evidence in favor of it.

The Source Wall is never shown around the Dark Multiverse when they flipped it. Matter of fact it's the exact opposite. It's just a giant thing of darkness with no source wall whatsoever.

Because she was demonstrating an analogy to explain the concept of the Dark Multiverse. That isn't literally a map of the Dark Multiverse, they only recently found out that it existed and don't have it mapped out at all.

It's implied the scan and I'm not going to read the scan to you.

So you can't demonstrate how your evidence -- a scan which mentions neither the term 'greater mystery' nor the Source wall -- indicates that the Dark Gods were a greater mystery outside the Source Wall? You're basically saying you don't have an argument. Which is fine by me.

However if you don't feel like reading you can go to the wiki which simplifies it there as well.

The DC Fandom wiki is not a source.

Also just to add more evidence. Mandrakk literally fell off Nil, through the Overvoid and landed into the Dark Multiverse. Proving my point once again.

That does not support the notion that the Dark Multiverse is outside the Source Wall. As explained, Mandrakk's fall into the Overvoid came after a tie-in comic which destroyed the Source Wall, and was written before the Dark Multiverse even existed in DC. Likewise, there's no reason that you can't fall from one part of a superstructure into another.

 

[Xearsay]

Once again. I don’t care if you think it’s demonstrated in the comic...

Challenge you? Lol all I that I don’t care if you think he did.

Another meaningless summary of your opinion. Zzzz..

Whether she’s making an analogy or not doesn’t change my point. It being beneath the multiverse map still doesn’t prove there’s a source wall around it.

This is semantics. You’re focusing on whether a specific word is mentioned rather than the overall meaning that’s expressed from the scan. And I’m not going to argue semantics. Also it’s not my job to read you the comic panel. The wiki was just a recommendation for you since you don’t feel like reading the scan.

Whether the dark multiverse was implemented into the comics at the time of final crisis is literally irrelevant to the example.

 

[Antvasima]

Xearsay, you still need to make an effort to maintain a more polite and reasonable attitude if you are going to be a part of this community.

 

[Xearsay]

Xearsay, you still need to make an effort to maintain a more polite and reasonable attitude if you are going to be a part of this community.

But he's not being reasonable at all. He just thinks he's right about everything and will argue with me over literally anything.

Some of his responses are literally "no it's not." He's being completely dogmatic and I don't understand how you expect me to maintain a non aggressive and reasonable attitude with someone like that.

Is there a way I could block him? If so that would be very much appreciated as he's going to follow me around and argue with me about everything. And when I say everything I meant literally everything. He follows me around and does this on other sites as well.

 

[Xearsay]

Xearsay, you still need to make an effort to maintain a more polite and reasonable attitude if you are going to be a part of this community.

Also I have another request. Can you close this thread? I've realized that we're never gonna come to an answer until we get the cosmology is sorted out so I'd rather have it closed until then.

 

[Deagonx]

Once again. I don’t care if you think it’s demonstrated in the comic...

I never asked you to. None of this is about what I think. I don't "think" Superman fought Doomsday. You're trying to boil down objective facts to a difference in opinion, when the fact is that certain things can be proven incontrovertibly. Mandrakk's retcon is such a case.

Whether she’s making an analogy or not doesn’t change my point. It being beneath the multiverse map still doesn’t prove there’s a source wall around it.

I never once said that "it being beneath the Multiverse map" is evidence of the Source Wall being around it. You, however, tried to say that the flipside of the map being blank proves there isn't. The fact that it was an analogy proves this point wrong.

You’re focusing on whether a specific word is mentioned rather than the overall meaning that’s expressed from the scan. And I’m not going to argue semantics. Also it’s not my job to read you the comic panel.

"Not my job to read you the comic panel" is simply you saying "I refuse to make an argument in defense of my position." If you can't form a coherent argument for why the scan supports your theory, then you have no argument at all.

Whether the dark multiverse was implemented into the comics at the time of final crisis is literally irrelevant to the example.

It's very relevant, you're connecting an event from pre-Dark Multiverse to try and dictate matters concerning the Dark Multiverse. Likewise, you failed to address the other issues I pointed out in your example.

But he's not being reasonable at all. He just thinks he's right about everything and will argue with me over literally anything.

If you're right, and can prove it, this is literally never an issue. I'm not forcing you to respond to me.

Some of his responses are literally "no it's not."

This is a false representation of what I have said. The only points I don't expand upon are the ones that are irrelevant to the topic at hand. I don't need to provide a painstaking breakdown of why "X argument isn't similar to Y argument" because relying on the problems of Y argument to prove X argument wrong is just a strawman.

I don't understand how you expect me to maintain a non aggressive and reasonable attitude with someone like that.

Any mature individual can remain non-aggressive and reasonable. Don't blame me for your temper tantrums.

argue with me about everything. And when I say everything I meant literally everything

This is a debating website. If you don't want to debate, you're welcome not to participate. Again, I've never forced you to reply to me.

 

[Antvasima]

Xearsay:

Well, I do not know anything about him following you around in other sites, but in this forum he just seems to be interested in superhero comics discussions, just like you are.

All:

So what should we do here? I do not mind if we try to figure out proper scaling for Hecate and TUDM, but we need to do so in a constructive manner without bickering.

 

[Xearsay]

Well as Amakasu pointed it out. Hecate made an archetypal realm above the Godpshere. I don't know what tier that would account for though. I’m assuming we’d have to take into account the nature of the collective unconscious to figure that out.

 

[Antvasima]

Okay. Thank you. Now we seem to start getting somewhere.

 

[Xearsay]

There’s also the Source Wall feat, warping the Otherplace to pieces and everything else from my post.

 

[Deagonx]

No, there is not a Source Wall feat. That's been debunked several times and there is far more evidence that contradicts that notion than support it (of which is purely by means of interpretation)

 

[Xearsay]

Yeah no. One inconsistency in the plot of a story is not going to overrule a notion that’s been established since Dark Nights Metal.

 

[Deagonx]

One inconsistency in the plot of a story is not going to overrule a notion that’s been established since Dark Nights Metal.

Good thing that's not the situation. Your scan doesn't say the Source Wall, the notion you're peddling has never been established, and there's far more than one inconsistency.

 

[Amakasu]

Okay. Thank you. Now we seem to start getting somewhere.

So I'll be posting some feats for both udm and hecate, you all can decide then which tier would be fine for them. I'll also be explaining the collective Unconsciousness. Thank you.

 

[Xearsay]

You do know the Source Wall can be considered a barrier right? Lol how do you not know that????????

 

[Antvasima]

So I'll be posting some feats for both udm and hecate, you all can decide then which tier would be fine for them. I'll also be explaining the collective Unconsciousness. Thank you.

That seems like a good idea, thank you.

 

[Deagonx]

You do know the Source Wall can be considered a barrier right?

Of course. That said, do you have any evidence that the "barrier" referred to in your scans is in fact the Source Wall? Because there's ample evidence to prove that it isn't.

 

[Antvasima]

Well, it is likely best if we scrap scaling from The Source Wall, and use the other feats then.

 

[Xearsay]

Well, it is likely best if we scrap scaling from The Source Wall, and use the other feats then.

Why? It’s directly said in the story that the Source Wall separates the Otherkind. So if the Otherkind are tearing down the barriers that separate them this would include The Source Wall.

If The Source Wall didn’t separate them they would have never been given a way into the Multiverse.

 

[Deagonx]

It’s directly said in the story that the Source Wall separates the Otherkind.

No, it isn't. Your scan does not say the Source Wall is separating them, and there's more direct evidence that it doesn't.

 

[Antvasima]

Well, even if that is accurate, and I am not certain, as it requires interpretation/speculation, The Source Wall is recurrently not treated as being of an anywhere near 1-A level, and is usually just portrayed as an enormous physical barrier.

 

[Xearsay]

Well, even if that is accurate, and I am not certain, as it requires interpretation/speculation, The Source Wall is recurrently not treated as being of an anywhere near 1-A level, and is usually just portrayed as an enormous physical barrier.

Oh. I thought I was saw a thread where you guys put it at 1-A. Either way I guess the feat wouldn’t warrant a new tier. However what Amakasu said about Hecate should with her own archetypal realm in the collective unconscious. She’s also the symbol of humanitiecollective unconscious.

Also just out of curiosity. Why do we treat the entire Sphere as 1-C if it contains the
1-A dreaming?

 

[Deagonx]

She’s also the symbol of humanitiecollective unconscious.

That isn't what the scan says. It says "Her symbol was the full moon, the symbol of mankind's collective unconscious." If the moon is the symbol of Hecate, and Hecate is mankind's collective unconscious, then most accurately that phrasing is using both descriptions for the moon. Not "Hecate is the symbol" which isn't implied in that phrasing.

 

[Xearsay]

That isn't what the scan says. It says "Her symbol was the full moon, the symbol of mankind's collective unconscious." If the moon is the symbol of Hecate, and Hecate is mankind's collective unconscious, then most accurately that phrasing is using both descriptions for the moon. Not "Hecate is the symbol" which isn't implied in that phrasing.

You realize I’m not being literal right? Stop arguing just to argue.

 

[Deagonx]

You realize I’m not being literal right?

In a communication format without tone of voice, how am I supposed to intuit your intentions if you don't explain them?

Stop arguing just to argue.

You misinterpreted the text and presented it as evidence in a CRT. Control your emotions and simply accept that if you are going to present a certain viewpoint as evidence, you can expect it to be scrutinized. And if for some reason you're about to tell me you weren't using it as evidence, then you shouldn't have brought it up at all in a CRT.

 

[Antvasima]

I am neutral about a 1-A Hecate and UDM. I just do not think that they should be scaled from The Source Wall and GEB. That is all.

Anyway, The Dreaming as portrayed by Neil Gaiman and Mike Carey seems vastly more powerful than in the Morrison canon, as it encompasses the Lovecraftian horrors of the verse and defines the structure for all of the local multiverse. There is also further complication from that Destiny reaches to the top of the local multiverse (according to Morrison's multiverse map), and Death seems to reach to others of the DC multiverses as well (Mike Carey's Lucifer stories), if I remember correctly.

It also doesn't particularly make sense for the Judeo-Christian version of Heaven to only be on a level with regular DC Comics deities, if we go by Gaiman's and Carey's stories regarding the power of the archangels.

However, I am out of touch with much of the lore at this point.

 

[Deagonx]

However, I am out of touch with much of the lore at this point.

Don't worry. Even the authors are out of touch with much of the lore. That's why it all becomes so muddy.

 

[Xearsay]

Maybe because I didn’t even try to quote the text? Lol???????

How could I misinterpret what I didn’t even quote? If you have issues understanding other people’s intentions through text just say that. Or you could have at least asked instead of rushing to try and assume my actions.

 

[Xearsay]

Anyway, The Dreaming as portrayed by Neil Gaiman and Mike Carey seems vastly more powerful than in the Morrison canon, as it encompasses the Lovecraftian horrors of the verse and defines the structure for all of the local multiverse. There is also further complication from that Destiny reaches to the top of the local multiverse (according to Morrison's multiverse map), and Death seems to reach to other of the DC multiverses as well (Mike Carey's Lucifer stories), if I remember

Isn’t that still the same Dreaming though? When has Morrison portrayed the Dreaming itself differently from the Dreaming we’ve seen in the past.

 

[Antvasima]

I would appreciate if everybody here, including Deagonx, make an effort to collaborate towards a solution.

 

[Antvasima]

Isn’t that still the same Dreaming though? When has Morrison portrayed the Dreaming itself differently from the Dreaming we’ve seen in the past.

Not differently so much as far less powerful, given that it encompasses and defines the ENTIRE DC multiverse in the Gaiman/Carey canon.

 

[Deagonx]

Maybe because I didn’t even try to quote the text?

I never said you did, but your interpretation was wrong. I don't know what it is you're getting so worked up about.

How could I misinterpret what I didn’t even quote?

You don't need to quote something to misinterpret it.

If you have issues understanding other people’s intentions through text just say that.

Nope, not really a problem I have. There was simply no indicator that you weren't being literal.

I would appreciate if everybody here, including Deagonx, make an effort to collaborate towards a solution.

I think the current ratings are fine. They scale below Perpetua and the brothers, they have some impressive universal/multiversal feats but nothing to bring them above 1-C in my opinion.

 

[Antvasima]

Okay then. Should we add anything to the justifications in their profile pages at least?

 

[Deagonx]

Should we add anything to the justifications in their profile pages at least?

I don't think much new information has been added here that we don't already have reflected in the profiles as they stand.

 

[Antvasima]

Okay. Perhaps we should close this thread then, in lack of better options?

 

[Matthew_Schroeder]

Hecate and Upside-Down Man should be 1-A.

 

[Antvasima]

I personally would not mind, but we need proper justifications first.