On-Panel Ability vs Inferred Ability
This thread was inspired by recent, as well as past, debates involving what a given character is capable of.
In debates, on-panel feats are of obvious value in pointing out what a character can do. The only real drawback is the posting of PIS moments, which can be a tough call.
On the other hand: there are some characters -- generally those with open powersets -- where inferring abilities never actually shown (or rarely shown) makes sense when logically reasoned from other (more-consistent) on-panel feats.
Should inferred abilities be allowed in debates? Should feats be restricted to those purely on-panel? And if so, what is the criteria for judging whether something is PIS or not? Doesn't this imply a certain amount of inferential reasoning to weed out PIS (ie, is it not a subjective call)? And if this type of inferential reasoning is allowed, then why not such reasoning for inferring unseen/rarely seen abilities, as long as they are logically deduced?
I'm curious where most members stand.