WoG statements from loaded questions

[Maverick_Zero_X]

Is there an explicit rule banning the use of writer statements made in response to loaded questions obviously asked to upgrade/downgrade characters? Examples:

https://media.**********.net/attachments/734033417838002216/915231417074589736/unknown-20.png
https://media.**********.net/attachments/734033417838002216/915231417280114748/unknown-19.png
https://media.**********.net/attachments/676122674430345216/946894962266611742/IMG_3435.png

Since author statements are usually dismissed I presume the rule exists somewhere. Can’t find it though.

 

[Confluctor]

Surprised I can't find a page for the word of God related stuff... I remember seeing it once before tho.

But in any case, I think we need to have a strict rule about WoG in general, especially if it comes from twitter or other social medias. They are being led to this sort of answer and are often answered in a somewhat of a humourous manner.

 

[LIFE_OF_KING]

Is there an explicit rule banning the use of writer statements made in response to loaded questions obviously asked to upgrade/downgrade characters? Examples:

https://media.**********.net/attachments/734033417838002216/915231417074589736/unknown-20.png
https://media.**********.net/attachments/734033417838002216/915231417280114748/unknown-19.png
https://media.**********.net/attachments/676122674430345216/946894962266611742/IMG_3435.png

Since author statements are usually dismissed I presume the rule exists somewhere. Can’t find it though.

The last one actually seems quite honest

 

[Quantu]

W.o.G should only ever be used as supporting evidence for better supporting evidence.

It should also come with a respectable level of detail and coherence, rather than am I guess/maybe/I wouldn't say no level of half-assedness

Finally, It needs to not contradict the story itself and make sense in terms of the verse. Then maybe it can be used. Or else you end up with stuff like in the OP. Common sense and heavy, heavy precaution is all that's needed tbh.

 

[The_Axiom_of_Virgo]

WoG overall is awful and just asking to be abused with a handful of exceptions.

 

[Maskofthedragon]

WoG from social media 100% shouldn't be used.
Even without loaded questions, people can just fish for the answer they want.

 

[Arceus0x]

Either way there are cases when WoG can be usable, an example would be the Kirby twitter page which randomly drops uncontradicted lore in their tweets (practically always supported by something in the series) such as this

and this


they are intended to be from random perspectives, most often Dedede's, though their lore, as i said, is uncontradicted and i'd say it is supported by pretty much everything in the games.

Another example is official Author interviews, like the ones in Pokemon which helped clarify a few things which people were fighting about (specifically how canon each bit of content is to another).

Basically, while some random user on the internet asking "can X beat Y" or "Can X destroy Z" is invalid, there are many cases where WoG can very heavily clarify some things which were unclear to some users. One example of WoG that is specific and is allowed is when a guy asked the authors of MLP whether the sun is the same distance away from equestria as it is from earth? To which he got an affirmative reply. This seemingly solved a few problems.
Overall: random or leading questions with unclear answers aren't allowed but official interviews and maybe rare cases like the kirby twitter are.

 

[The_Impress]

Can you move your Bible Study discussion off the thread? It's irrelevant nitpicks on a commonly used term, or your own opinions on a topic beyond the scope of this thread.

 

[QuasiYuri]

Can you move your Bible Study discussion off the thread? It's irrelevant nitpicks on a commonly used term, or your own opinions on a topic beyond the scope of this thread.

I'm pretty sure about half of what you deleted isn't Bible-related though.

 

[mal]

well iirc there wog about harry potter stronger than scp

 

[Arceus0x]

well iirc there wog about harry potter stronger than scp

that's when we stop believing the WoG. Saying that X is better than Y when Y isn't part of the same verse isn't acceptable WoG. Most stretched example of WoG is when Mob got 6-C (and even low 6-B) cause One said he is comparable to Tatsumaki. This has also been removed

 

[mal]

that's when we stop believing the WoG. Saying that X is better than Y when Y isn't part of the same verse isn't acceptable WoG. Most stretched example of WoG is when Mob got 6-C (and even low 6-B) cause One said he is comparable to Tatsumaki. This has also been removed

ya i remember that but iirc that was long before we saw full power tatsumaki n only 100% mob

 

[QuasiYuri]

WoG only really matters for their own verse(s), since they know everything 'bout them.

Also unlike what a certain someone thinks, if author intention didn't matter then anything which isn't a fact explained by a character wouldn't matter to the story. Their words are facts unless they contradict their story in a blatant way.

 

[The_Impress]

I'm pretty sure about half of what you deleted isn't Bible-related though.

Yes, it's stuff beyond the scope of the thread because OP in question only asks if certain types of WoG are wrong, not attempting to debunk WoG as a concept itself.