canon vs non-canon

Originally posted by leonidas
that scan i posted referencing the 2099 universe as "the 616 circa 2099" says that not every future is an alternate reality in marvel. 2099 IS the 616--as was specifically stated.

@goob: i'm not sure what 'circular arguments' you think will come about from the relaxing or abolishment of this rule. there are dozens of circular arguments already. we've seen darkseid perform greater feats than those of gds anyway, so what difference does it make? avengers/jla--if it's ruled arguable, i'm not sure how it would bungle up anymore threads than if it is disallowed. it's simply more feats. neither arc would be close to the be-all-end-all in any thread debating the involved characters. no one uses just one source as support for an argument. well, no one with any brains. so if someone is doing so, i'd suggest placing them on ignore. i've discovered the forum seems a lot more intelligent once you drop 8 or 10 names into your ignore list. /shrug

to my understanding aoa would def not be canon. characters were depicted with vast differences and even powers didn't seem to remain wholly the same.

https://marvel.com/universe/Marvel_2099_(Earth-928)

One character saying it is the future of 616 means very little when the laws of time travel are clearly defined in marvel.

Originally posted by darthgoober
And here is a prime example of the types double standards I was talking about creeping up. Note what abhi's true point is here...

It should always be allowed for DC, but never for Marvel. And why? Because Marvel goes to the trouble of assigning a number for every "alternate universe" in handbooks so that the events are regonized as still happening somwhere in the multiverse no matter what rather than being an ambiguous "potential future".

This is not a double standard. It's simply what it is. Trying to apply the laws of time travel from marvel to DC is disingenuous at best and lying at worst.

Like I said bring me a single example of a DC future story happening in an alternate reality and then talk.

In marvel if you time travel and change the past you just create an alternate reality. In DC doing so will change present and if you undo the changes that reality would be erased from existence.

Legion of supervillains change the past and raise Superman and Batman as their sons. Superman goes to the future Darkseid to return to past. He becomes Superman of main timeline and the reality gets erased from existence where he was the son of LOSV.

Guess what, present day Darkseid has memories of the deal future Superman made with future Darkseid.

That's simply not possible in marvel until a future character gives the information to a past character.

Originally posted by darthgoober
And here is a prime example of the types double standards I was talking about creeping up. Note what abhi's true point is here...

It should always be allowed for DC, but never for Marvel. And why? Because Marvel goes to the trouble of assigning a number for every "alternate universe" in handbooks so that the events are regonized as still happening somwhere in the multiverse no matter what rather than being an ambiguous "potential future".

far be it from me to defend abhi, but in this case it seems less a double standard and more the way the universes are set up, no? tbh i think both set ups have their disadvantages. with marvel there is still a great deal of ambiguity in regards to timelines for instance, and what should or shouldn't be admissible. dc seems to have taken the stance that...pretty well EVERYTHING is free game. in that case, it falls to us to judge i suppose. i'd think anyone deciding to use something most consider 'alternate' would then bare the burden of proof to show WHY it should be considered acceptable. if there are no major discrepancies in portrayals of characters, or their abilities, seem like common sense that it should be fine to use in a debate. if someone is arguing against it's use, they should have a good (and supported) reason for saying so. but the alternates, again, shouldn't be the end of any debate so i guess i don't see why their inclusion causes so much consternation in your eyes.

I'm using it as an example of the fact that on KMC there exists a precident for excluding things that are potentially valid so that debates can move forward. [/B]

but excluding potentially valid feats so they can "move forward" seems to favor one side over another. if a feat is valid, and there is proof of its validity, it should be fair game. catering to idiots seems like the wrong thing to do imo and actually prevents what might be some pretty interesting discussion.

Originally posted by abhilegend
Marvel 2099 is officially an alternate reality.

https://marvel.com/universe/Marvel_2099_(Earth-928)

One character saying it is the future of 616 means very little when the laws of time travel are clearly defined in marvel.

you stick to your handbook definition, i'll stick to the extremely specific on-panel reference. and it really wasn't just one character--that entire arc, which was long and multiversal in scope, shared and reflected the sentiment. 👆

Originally posted by leonidas
you stick to your handbook definition, i'll stick to the extremely specific on-panel reference. and it really wasn't just one character--that entire arc, which was long and multiversal in scope, shared and reflected the sentiment. 👆

There are innumerable on panel depictions of this.

Booster Gold specifically tried to change history (Batgirl etc), and couldn't.

He didn't create and alt reality, he couldn't do anything.

When Barry tried to change history, everything got phucked up.

Originally posted by leonidas
far be it from me to defend abhi, but in this case it seems less a double standard and more the way the universes are set up, no? tbh i think both set ups have their disadvantages. with marvel there is still a great deal of ambiguity in regards to timelines for instance, and what should or shouldn't be admissible. dc seems to have taken the stance that...pretty well EVERYTHING is free game. in that case, it falls to us to judge i suppose. i'd think anyone deciding to use something most consider 'alternate' would then bare the burden of proof to show WHY it should be considered acceptable. if there are no major discrepancies in portrayals of characters, or their abilities, seem like common sense that it should be fine to use in a debate. if someone is arguing against it's use, they should have a good (and supported) reason for saying so. but the alternates, again, shouldn't be the end of any debate so i guess i don't see why their inclusion causes so much consternation in your eyes.

You and I have both been around the block enough to know that the way the companies and their greater cosmic layout is set up are in constant flux because of the sheer number of writers at work. You're speaking from a place of idealism. Yes we SHOULD be able to approach every single debate in a well reasoned and logical manner and have a good discussion about it. And people like you and I CAN do that at any time. We could debate about virtually anything via PM with no rules governing us and still have a productive discussion. The rules aren't actually there because of people like us have to be kept in check, they're there to keep 14 year olds, morons, and trolls in check. As for why I'm so staunch about the rules, I have to be. I literally have to be and can't risk stepping out of bounds at all even if the other guy's doing it so I stick to them rigidly.

Originally posted by leonidas
but excluding potentially valid feats so they can "move forward" seems to favor one side over another. if a feat is valid, and there is proof of its validity, it should be fair game. catering to idiots seems like the wrong thing to do imo and actually prevents what might be some pretty interesting discussion.

Originally posted by abhilegend
It's not just handbook. Doom 2099 traveled back to the past and found out his future is just an alternate one from innumerable futures of 616 reality.

There are innumerable on panel depictions of this.

The same laws apply to D.C.

Originally posted by abhilegend
This is not a double standard. It's simply what it is. Trying to apply the laws of time travel from marvel to DC is disingenuous at best and lying at worst.

Like I said bring me a single example of a DC future story happening in an alternate reality and then talk.

In marvel if you time travel and change the past you just create an alternate reality. In DC doing so will change present and if you undo the changes that reality would be erased from existence.

Legion of supervillains change the past and raise Superman and Batman as their sons. Superman goes to the future Darkseid to return to past. He becomes Superman of main timeline and the reality gets erased from existence where he was the son of LOSV.

Guess what, present day Darkseid has memories of the deal future Superman made with future Darkseid.

That's simply not possible in marvel until a future character gives the information to a past character.

There are literally dozens of examples in marvel where changing the past affects the future reality and doesn't create a divergent reality. There is also an FF issue which explains that a divergent reality is only created if the change (to the past) isn't significant. But even that has been ignored by many writers who had characters alter the past significantly and thereby changing the future.

Originally posted by operator616
There are literally dozens of examples in marvel where changing the past affects the future reality and doesn't create a divergent reality. There is also an FF issue which explains that a divergent reality is only created if the change (to the past) isn't significant. But even that has been ignored by many writers who had characters alter the past significantly and thereby changing the future.

DC does not has any rules like that.

Originally posted by "Id"
The same laws apply to D.C.

In DC there is one constant timeline and other branches. Hence why Legion resides in the same main timeline.

Originally posted by leonidas
you stick to your handbook definition, i'll stick to the extremely specific on-panel reference. and it really wasn't just one character--that entire arc, which was long and multiversal in scope, shared and reflected the sentiment. 👆

👆

Rape those cum-stinking dctards. Show no mercy.

Originally posted by operator616
the confusion regarding alternate timelines and universes actually comes from Marvel, mostly. Take Reigning-universe for example:

http://imgur.com/a/JCHv3

Reigning was the future of 616 Earth while at the same time it is designated as Earth-3515.

so is it a future reality or an alternate universe? It's actually both at the same time

But is it usable to Earth-616 characters?

Yes, because affecting Earth-616 directly affecting that reality, so they're linked. That's what Philosophia was trying to say i think, and i agree.

However, sometimes, like in Legion's case and GOTG the case isn't very clear. Because there is evidence for both: It being an alternate reality as well as the future of mainstream earth.

I already provided some examples for Legion in the other thread, but regarding GOTG:

In GOTG #7 starhawk finds out that it's impossible to change the GOTG timeline (3oth century) via changing the mainstream 20th century Earth (earth-616). He tried many times and only ended up creating divergent realities. Later on, however, in #44 the exact opposite happens. The GOTG travel to the past (earth-616) and inadvertently (i won't bother with the details) change their 30th century timeline (earth-691). so there is evidence for both and thus the question of whether that timeline is the future of 616 or an alternate comes down to personal preference.

to answer your questions Leo:

GDS: Debatable (evidence for both)
Reigning thor: Yes (evidence solely suggests that it's the future and doesn't contradict it)
Unilord surfer: No, from what i remember. At the beginning and end of the story it's highly implied that the unilord universe contains an alternate surfer.

Adult Franklin's actions in the past with his younger self directly affected his own future, and vice versa. Moreover, Franklin and Val(heck, you can throw Nathaniel in the mix as well) were also able to foretell past events and give their counterparts a 'heads up' because, well, they'd already lived those events... For example, Frank and Val foretold the Revision Wave, the Mad Celestials, and most importantly, the "everything dies"/incursion fiasco LONG before any of that started happening on panel.

So once again, in *that* specific instance, pasts/futures were definitely NOT considered alternate universes... It was all 616.

Your new avi makes me hard 😍

Ty, Galan inlove

Originally posted by abhilegend
It's not just handbook. Doom 2099 traveled back to the past and found out his future is just an alternate one from innumerable futures of 616 reality.

There are innumerable on panel depictions of this.

in this case, which is far more current than yours--it would seem marvel disagrees. it's one of the few times (outside of an x-book with cap britain in it...) 616 is mentioned by actual name and the only time to my knowledge it is categorically associated with a future. so maybe thoughts have changed. /shrug

now regardless, it doesn't change your overall point in that marvel has historically linked futures to different realities. but that shouldn't in and of itself be sufficient cause to simply ignore futures that DO link directly to the 616, or that diverge directly from the present continuity. not sure if you're saying that or not, but wanted it clear since that it sort of the backbone of the discussion.

opr and galan both brought up cases where those "alt realities" bear directly on the 616, and have cause and consequence tied specifically to the present. i think it's those types of ties that should reflect the 'debatable-ness' of a feat or character in question. burden of proof is on the person proclaiming the feat--show the ties to 616 and they should be good to go if it's substantial enough. the standard of throwing away alt timelines makes no sense to me and certainly favors one company over the other. /shrug

AS THE KING OF CANON I MAKE THE DECISIONS ON CANONICITY !!!

Originally posted by darthgoober
You and I have both been around the block enough to know that the way the companies and their greater cosmic layout is set up are in constant flux because of the sheer number of writers at work. You're speaking from a place of idealism. Yes we SHOULD be able to approach every single debate in a well reasoned and logical manner and have a good discussion about it. And people like you and I CAN do that at any time. We could debate about virtually anything via PM with no rules governing us and still have a productive discussion. The rules aren't actually there because of people like us have to be kept in check, they're there to keep 14 year olds, morons, and trolls in check. As for why I'm so staunch about the rules, I have to be. I literally have to be and can't risk stepping out of bounds at all even if the other guy's doing it so I stick to them rigidly.

i dunno man, feels like capitulating to the low brow and the trolls to me. and the well reasoned stuff IS there in most cases if you ignore the nonsense that throws things off track.

It's not catering to idiots, it's shutting idiots down.

i'd disagree with this because, well, (looks at ignore list) i don't see too many idiots being shut down by the rule. /shrug

I'd be all for a complete overhaul of the current system to get rid of all the double standards, spell out the proper way to debate, and clarify all the rules but I don't really see that kind of thing happening. The mods now are... well I won't go so far as to say lazy, but they're not as pro-active as guys like Tron and Digi were back in the day. The old guard were always willing to step in and point out if someone weren't conducting themselves properly, but the new guard has a "live and let live, if they're dumb just ignore them" approach so the few rules that are spelled out are pretty important. [/B]

i have no issues at all with the mods. they WILL step in if asked. and honestly, they really shouldn't be asked to babysit. there are very clear ways to not see the dummies who clutter up threads. there have been bans and any report (the extremely rare time i ACTUALLY report) i've made has been handled quickly and mod rulings are made if well reasoned and asked. shouldn't be up to the mods to patrol everything though. we can do a lot on our own by using ignore, or simply not feeding trolls. that's not idealism, that is my daily life in this forum. there are only, what, a dozen people at best who people really like to see respond to threads? the rest? who cares? it's the dozen (maybe a little more than that) or so who keep me here and i've had some great discussion both recently and in the past. we should be catering to the people whose opinions matter. not the tools.

Originally posted by StiltmanFTW
Your new avi makes me hard 😍

Ty, Galan inlove

Originally posted by leonidas
i dunno man, feels like capitulating to the low brow and the trolls to me. and the well reasoned stuff IS there in most cases if you ignore the nonsense that throws things off track.

Originally posted by leonidas
i'd disagree with this because, well, (looks at ignore list) i don't see too many idiots being shut down by the rule. /shrug

Originally posted by leonidas
i have no issues at all with the mods. they WILL step in if asked. and honestly, they really shouldn't be asked to babysit. there are very clear ways to not see the dummies who clutter up threads. there have been bans and any report (the extremely rare time i ACTUALLY report) i've made has been handled quickly and mod rulings are made if well reasoned and asked. shouldn't be up to the mods to patrol everything though. we can do a lot on our own by using ignore, or simply not feeding trolls. that's not idealism, that is my daily life in this forum. there are only, what, a dozen people at best who people really like to see respond to threads? the rest? who cares? it's the dozen (maybe a little more than that) or so who keep me here and i've had some great discussion both recently and in the past. we should be catering to the people whose opinions matter. not the tools.

Originally posted by Galan007
Another that comes to mind is Hickman's run on F4.

Adult Franklin's actions in the past with his younger self directly affected his own future, and vice versa. Moreover, Franklin and Val(heck, you can throw Nathaniel in the mix as well) were also able to foretell past events and give their counterparts a 'heads up' because, well, they'd already lived those events... For example, Frank and Val foretold the Revision Wave, the Mad Celestials, and most importantly, the "everything dies"/incursion fiasco LONG before any of that started happening on panel.

So once again, in *that* specific instance, pasts/futures were definitely NOT considered alternate universes... It was all 616.

That's why it should be on a case to case basis, especially as far as Marvel is concerned - DC and time travel tends to be more consistently 'it's the same Universe', while Marvel had a tendency to chalk it up to an alternate Universe.