IMPORTANT: Ha, suck it PT Brigade.

Originally posted by The Ellimist

Of course you did, supa. You were so good, you were even able to ignore entire posts and arguments and still win by your sheer reputation and Kenyan royalty. 😆

Spoiler:
The point that supa hot ant has literally refused to even respond to for the last several pages is that he's trying to masturbate to himself discrediting his own quote!

Do you even not rap, m8?

Originally posted by DarthAnt66
@Sasukedc: It's really just my opinion versus your own at this stage. You haven't presented legitimate facts to support a lack of distinction either.

Burden of proof lies on you to establish one, kek. You're getting sloppy.

I claim I won because the Darth Bane quote is now null.

Which would be break even since it just returns to the status quo before you championed the quote, .ie like Revan beating Malak. The real question is whether you can contain the fallout of conceding that Plagueis > Vitiate, to which your tactic has been to label it an "opinion" of yours that he isn't. 👆

Originally posted by DarthAnt66
@Sasukedc: It's really just my opinion versus your own at this stage. You haven't presented legitimate facts to support a lack of distinction.

I believe I have. Your argument against the back cover of the Plagueis novel was that the author may not have had a say in what was written. The author of the fact files also may not have anything to do with the publishing company's twitter page, but you claim that it should be taken seriously. Essentially, it's a textbook double standard; there's no question about that, which is all I've said about that matter thus far.

So in response, your argument (the positive claim in this discussion) is that the case is different because it's a clarification rather than an addition. You have yet to support what the difference is, other than the convenience to you personally. I don't have to prove a lack of distinction because that's a negative claim, learn to deb8 m8.

*Kenjan.

Do you even not rap, m8?

rap should an hero imo

I'm pretty sure DeAgostini is both the publisher and writer of the Fact Files (as in, people within DeAgostini also write the Fact Files).

So, no. 👆

supa ant has also yet to respond to the fact that the Twitter page made a wrong declaration about SW canon policy, .ie, it's possible that the handler just decided to answer based on his/her own incorrect information rather than consulting the author or some other authority.

That seems to be pretty likely, because what would the point of delegating a Twitter account be if you had to answer every question yourself anyway?

Originally posted by DarthAnt66
I'm pretty sure DeAgostini is both the publisher and writer of the Fact Files (as in, people within DeAgostini also write the Fact Files).

So, no. 👆

Oh, so what you're saying is that it doesn't matter whether or not the author himself made the claim? Alright, that's fine.

In that case, Del Rey, the publisher of Darth Plagueis, also had a contract with Lucas Licensing; their work is official. Why do they have less authority than the publishers of the fact files?

Again:

Your argument against the back cover of the Plagueis novel was that the author may not have had a say in what was written. The author of the fact files also may not have anything to do with the publishing company's twitter page, but you claim that it should be taken seriously. Essentially, it's a textbook double standard; there's no question about that, which is all I've said about that matter thus far.

So in response, your argument (the positive claim in this discussion) is that the case is different because it's a clarification rather than an addition. You have yet to support what the difference is, other than the convenience to you personally. I don't have to prove a lack of distinction because that's a negative claim, learn to deb8 m8.

I don't have to prove that there is no distinction because that's a negative claim. Nothing I've argued so far has any basis in opinion. What I'm asking is that you clarify a legitimate distinction.

Aren't the publishers also the writers for the Fact Files?

If you can prove that the people who replied to you (or whoever that was who asked) are the same people who were credited with writing the fact files, then the claim will indeed be 100% consistent. 👆

Originally posted by NewGuy01
If you can prove...

Originally posted by DarthAnt66
I stated that I found a massive difference between the publisher clarifying content and creating content.

Whatever response to that claim you might have had got lost in a fifteen-thousand character long rambling session.

Seeing as this debate has merely gone round in circles in my absence, I'll leave them here for those able to comprehend 250+ words of text. 🙂

Originally posted by Beniboybling
Dude you realise that the publishers didn't "make" the quote, all they did was publish it. 😂

Publishers =/= authors, and only Lucas Liscening has the authority to vet material, and determine the facts of continuity. What this guy thinks is irrelevant, as it is wrong, and his opinions could of in no way informed the wording of the text.

It's really not, but treating the word of this publisher as accurate, you have conceded that the publisher, through whatever means, can make informed and accurate statements regarding canon. Therefore you must assume them informed on continuity when writing the blurbs you've previously dismissed as the opposite, uninformed. 👆

Of course its since been proven the man is not accurate, but that wasn't the contexts in which you made the claim. So the double-standard stands.

The publisher would have no business consulting the author anyway, the only people who are an authority on canon are Lucas Licensing, who vet the authors work and inform them on matters of continuity.

Now ironically enough Lucas Liscening has a publishing division, so for all we know this "guy in marketing" could well be a Lucas Books employee, far more an authority on canon than Drew. 😂

Yet even if this was instead written by say, Del Rey, the fact remains that we should assume that just as the author's work is vetted and approve by Lucas Licensing, so is the blurb. Which would make it just as canon as the content, regardless of who wrote it. 👆

Originally posted by DarthAnt66
Do you also readily accept Revan being the most powerful Sith Lord in history, sans Solo and Palpatine, as of like pre-2010?

No source material contradicts it and it fits thematically with Revan's position as the poster-boy of the pre-TPM EU.

Originally posted by NewGuy01
Yeah, honestly sounds like Ant is making up his standards as he goes along on the basis of personal convenience.

An accolade is an accolade, and Ant doesn't really have to accept one just because he accepts the other because he isn't arguing for the former and is for the latter.

An accolade he passes off as legit in his respect thread, yet denounces similiar accolades as false elsewhere. mmm

I mean I'd at least expect an "is said to be." 😬

It's your job to argue against or for accolades, not his. That's why it's called a debate and not self-mutilation.

Originally posted by FreshestSlice
It's your job amusing pastime to argue against or for accolades, not his. point out Ant's double standards. That's why it's called a debate and not self-mutilation. jokes lmao.

>internets
>not the same thing

kys, Beni

Originally posted by Fated Xtasy
Anticus, did ye find le emails?

Tbh

Lmao Freshest, so you don't think the criteria for evaluating evidence should be consistent, or that calling someone out on a contradiction is a legitimate rebuttal?

Sounds convenient for you. 👆

Originally posted by Beniboybling
Taken from your own respect thread...

😂

For example, despite not personally accepting blurbs into the loop of canonical material, I will have them on my Solo respect thread.

The viewers can then decide whether or not they want to accept blurb quotes, Wizards of the Coast quotes, etc.

I make the calls for myself, not everyone else. Take your bitching some place else.

Has your Caedus respect thread come out yet?