Rules & debating discussion thread.

Text-only Version: Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.



Badabing

Badabing
Originally posted by Mindship
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.

http://www.killermovies.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=493588&highlight=userid%3A89307

King Kandy
In my opinion one of the most taxing issues is the thin line between "fighting to the fullest potential" and "fighting in-character", as well as what constitutes CIS. There should be some language that makes the differences and distinctions between the three more clear.

Cavalier
The rules need a complete rehaul- this much is clear.

I think both rules on how we treat feats and on how we debate. There needs to be no grey areas, no fine lines and no doubt in our rules. That should be first and foremost. Clear up exactly what constitutes PIS, and that no appearance should be ignored or made noncanon based on the opinion of the user, without any actual evidence.

Characters should only be given a speedblitz win (or any similar End All tactic) if it's shown to be in character for them, and something that they regularly do.

That's just for starters, I'll have more in a bit.

DigiMark007
I don't know that they need a full rehaul.

Also, as it pertains to Smurph's point, we can't tell people how to debate comics. Part of the fun of it, even though it leads to disagreement, is that there isn't a set way to gauge them. For example, regardless of what teh rules state, "in character vs. in their power set" will always exist.

I think goober's clarifications are a good start. They leave a lot less gray area about rule interpretation.

Endrict Nuul
Goobers post is good.

DigiMark007
Originally posted by Endrict Nuul
Goobers post is good.

Not universally, but it's on the right path. I'm too tired to fully critique it at the moment, but will offer my comments sometime soon

Cavalier
Originally posted by DigiMark007
I don't know that they need a full rehaul. The original rules have been raped by the age of scans and just age in general...

Originally posted by DigiMark007
Also, as it pertains to Smurph's point, we can't tell people how to debate comics. Part of the fun of it, even though it leads to disagreement, is that there isn't a set way to gauge them. For example, regardless of what teh rules state, "in character vs. in their power set" will always exist. And yet we tell people how to debate every day. Bada's started cracking down on ignorance and so forth, and it's time to step forward and start pointing out some of the flaws in how debaters are approaching vs. threads now.

DigiMark007
Originally posted by Cavalier
The original rules have been raped by the age of scans and just age in general...

And yet we tell people how to debate every day. Bada's started cracking down on ignorance and so forth, and it's time to step forward and start pointing out some of the flaws in how debaters are approaching vs. threads now.

For the former, I meant they don't need a full rehaul because scans only apply to a select number of areas in the rules. Most remain completely valid...not just the etiquette rules and such, but also things like standard equipment and prep.

As for the latter, I honestly think that clarifying the expanding on the current rules would be enough. The problem often doesn't even lie in the rules themselves but with people ignoring them. If people followed them, even the current ones, we wouldn't be discussing this.

But it's been a while (I last updated them toward the beginning of my mod-dom), and you're right that some changes need made. It can't hurt, but also don't expect it to have drastic affects.

Badabing
Originally posted by DigiMark007
I don't know that they need a full rehaul.

Also, as it pertains to Smurph's point, we can't tell people how to debate comics. Part of the fun of it, even though it leads to disagreement, is that there isn't a set way to gauge them. For example, regardless of what teh rules state, "in character vs. in their power set" will always exist.

I think goober's clarifications are a good start. They leave a lot less gray area about rule interpretation. Originally posted by DigiMark007
Not universally, but it's on the right path. I'm too tired to fully critique it at the moment, but will offer my comments sometime soon I agree and your help will be appreciated very much.

Now for some specifics.

These are from Batman: Hush. Batman tells us that Superman won't go all out because of his greatest weakness, he's a good person. CIS???
http://i82.photobucket.com/albums/j241/Badabing_2006/DC/DC%20Scans/Untitled-Scanned-02-1.jpg
http://i82.photobucket.com/albums/j241/Badabing_2006/DC/DC%20Scans/Untitled-Scanned-03.jpg

Trinity. Here Superman goes full out and embarrasses Ultraman and Superwoman, who have given Clark problems in the past and are his peers.
http://i82.photobucket.com/albums/j241/Badabing_2006/DC/DC%20Scans/Untitled-Scanned-01-6.jpg
http://i82.photobucket.com/albums/j241/Badabing_2006/DC/DC%20Scans/Untitled-Scanned-03-29.jpg
http://i82.photobucket.com/albums/j241/Badabing_2006/DC/DC%20Scans/Untitled-Scanned-02-8.jpg
http://i82.photobucket.com/albums/j241/Badabing_2006/DC/DC%20Scans/Untitled-Scanned-04-23.jpg
http://i82.photobucket.com/albums/j241/Badabing_2006/DC/DC%20Scans/Untitled-Scanned-05-22.jpg

Now, do we say Superman won't do what he did to UM and SW every time? Aren't we making the assumption that Supes is at his best with bloodlust? How do we factor in the boyscout weakness Batman spoke of?

Badabing
Here we have WWHulk fighting Sentry, who many say is Superman's equal. It's my opinion that Sentry did use speed against WWHulk in these scans and I believe WWHulk reacted.
http://i82.photobucket.com/albums/j241/Badabing_2006/Marvel/Untitled-Scanned-11.jpg
http://i82.photobucket.com/albums/j241/Badabing_2006/Marvel/Untitled-Scanned-12.jpg
Are we to think that all of WWHulk is PIS and Sentry wasn't going full on?

Badabing
Guys, this isn't a knock on Digi at all. He's done as much or more for the comic forums as anyone else. I'm glad he's posting in this thread because I value his opinion. I've been modding here alone for the most part for the past few months and am looking to keep the bickering and flaming to a minimum. I don't like warning people.....unless it's Quan. biscuits stick out tongue

So this isn't a blame game or a gotcha game. Things change and evolve which is why I think that the general rules need TWEAKED.

Cavalier
Meh. I think what we should be doing is adding a whole new section to break down every PIS/CIS/feat related rule.

I mean, the purely mechanical ones are fine. But it's each that requires an element of subjectivity that we need to be defining and adding to.

DigiMark007
Don't worry bada. I'm not offended. When I did it, I was creating rules that were needed, or heavily modifying ones that were ill-conceived. No forum input, I just did it out of necessity. I'm actually shocked they've held up for as long as they have.

Badabing
Originally posted by DigiMark007
Don't worry bada. I'm not offended. When I did it, I was creating rules that were needed, or heavily modifying ones that were ill-conceived. No forum input, I just did it out of necessity. I'm actually shocked they've held up for as long as they have. Cool. Maybe if Smurph would stop all his rabble rousing. uhuh


stick out tongue

Cavalier
As for the Superman feats-

Meh. Really, all we see Clark do in Trinity is KO some people that are physically on his level, and that he can go all out against.

In Hush, Clark doesn't smush Batman, and hesitates for the second that Bats needs his kryptonite ring to work. It still barely works, but he needed that second of hesitation. However, I wouldn't say that Bruce could have relied on that 10/10 times. Perhaps the next time, Clarks puts on a little more speed, dodges the punch and KO's/kills him with a tap? He may be more inclined to go easy than the next guy, but we was still mind controlled and still Superman... so it's really more just a low showing for Clark vs. prepped human being than anything else.

CIS? Yes, to Hush. But because he was against a human opponent, not Ultraman and Super Woman. It also helps that he was actively fighting mind control in Hush... eh.

Badabing
Originally posted by Cavalier
As for the Superman feats-

Meh. Really, all we see Clark do in Trinity is KO some people that are physically on his level, and that he can go all out against.Yes, that's what I was going for when I posted the scans.
Originally posted by Cavalier

In Hush, Clark doesn't smush Batman, and hesitates for the second that Bats needs his kryptonite ring to work. It still barely works, but he needed that second of hesitation. However, I wouldn't say that Bruce could have relied on that 10/10 times. Perhaps the next time, Clarks puts on a little more speed, dodges the punch and KO's/kills him with a tap? He may be more inclined to go easy than the next guy, but we was still mind controlled and still Superman... so it's really more just a low showing for Clark vs. prepped human being than anything else.

CIS? Yes, to Hush. But because he was against a human opponent, not Ultraman and Super Woman. It also helps that he was actively fighting mind control in Hush... eh. Mind control or not is a moot point. Batman knows Superman very well and he stated that Clark being a good person is the main reason he's not a blood smear.

My entire point was to show what Clark can do going full on and what Clark typically does. Letting Konvikt hit him and such. Some people argue the former while some argue the latter. I want to bridge that gap so I don't have to sift through reports every time I log on and to make the forum better.

Cavalier
As for WWH, Sentry was undoubtedly operating at an extremely high power level. I don't see how PIS ish it can be when a guy took a WWH punch straight to the face while flying and didn't bat an eye. How many times did we see that happen in WWH?

I don't think he was using his full speed. He was obviously using some measure- you can tell by how rapidly he approaches- but he wasn't about to go full speed, as he was surrounded by people. Who knows if he can even fight at any speed higher than, say, Mach 2?

He was obviously going fast though, but probably just under Mach 1, if physics are to be believed. And that's not at all an inappropriate speed for WWH to react at, IMO.

We know that Sentry can access more power without having to spend it- see when he caused Absorbing Man to overload. That doesn't mean that he has to go full speed though.

Cavalier
Originally posted by Badabing
Mind control or not is a moot point. Batman knows Superman very well and he stated that Clark being a good person is the main reason he's not a blood smear. I just said it helps.

If Ivy's telling him to dodge the punch, and he perhaps WANTS to be taken out, because he's a good person, wants to be stopped before Ivy could do serious damage... maybe he took it on purpose?

Just supposition.

Point is, I don't think either scenarios were PIS, just CIS in one, and an irregular state where he wasn't CIS inhibited in the other.

darthgoober
Originally posted by Badabing
I agree and your help will be appreciated very much.

Now for some specifics.

These are from Batman: Hush. Batman tells us that Superman won't go all out because of his greatest weakness, he's a good person. CIS???
http://i82.photobucket.com/albums/j241/Badabing_2006/DC/DC%20Scans/Untitled-Scanned-02-1.jpg
http://i82.photobucket.com/albums/j241/Badabing_2006/DC/DC%20Scans/Untitled-Scanned-03.jpg

Trinity. Here Superman goes full out and embarrasses Ultraman and Superwoman, who have given Clark problems in the past and are his peers.
http://i82.photobucket.com/albums/j241/Badabing_2006/DC/DC%20Scans/Untitled-Scanned-01-6.jpg
http://i82.photobucket.com/albums/j241/Badabing_2006/DC/DC%20Scans/Untitled-Scanned-03-29.jpg
http://i82.photobucket.com/albums/j241/Badabing_2006/DC/DC%20Scans/Untitled-Scanned-02-8.jpg
http://i82.photobucket.com/albums/j241/Badabing_2006/DC/DC%20Scans/Untitled-Scanned-04-23.jpg
http://i82.photobucket.com/albums/j241/Badabing_2006/DC/DC%20Scans/Untitled-Scanned-05-22.jpg

Now, do we say Superman won't do what he did to UM and SW every time? Aren't we making the assumption that Supes is at his best with bloodlust? How do we factor in the boyscout weakness Batman spoke of?
From what I understand, Supes's mind/personality was altered in that instance from merging with WW and Batmans(or something to that effect) so I'd say no because it's not "in character" for Supes himself. We can speculate all day about what might happen when a character "really goes all out" but in most cases one person's guess is as good as another's because not every hero has enough appearances to warrant a "kill mode" scenario and that puts them at a MASSIVE disadvantage because there's no proof to support their "all out" abilities.

I think that the word "Bloodlusted" should be removed from the rules all together unless we're going to take up a CBR style of debating because it's meaning is entirely too subjective. Let the trem "Fighting to the best of their ability" incorporate the fact that for whatever reason the characters ARE enemies and HAVE to take each other down(like in Civil War) but they shouldn't actually be vicious unless that personality type regularly shows through on panel.

Cavalier
Meh. I don't particularly like "Fighting to the best of their abilities" either, because that all too often undermines CIS.

Spider-Man fighting to the best of his ability against Captain America >> CIS-infliced Spidey vs. Cap

As demonstrated on panel.

The Great Galen
Or SS agaisnt Thanos, since SS is CIS most of the time.

ultimatethor
Ok, this thread is God sent. Some issues badly need to be clarified . First of all i want to ask about the viability of people arguing tactics that a character has never shown on panel. In numerous threads i have actively argued against people trying to use inference over on panel showings. This is because i believe that the actual comics we are arguing should be the supreme evidence in our debates. So the questions is

" Can we infer powers for a character even if they have consistently failed to do such on panel?"

Badabing
Originally posted by darthgoober
From what I understand, Supes's mind/personality was altered in that instance from merging with WW and Batmans(or something to that effect) so I'd say no because it's not "in character" for Supes himself. We can speculate all day about what might happen when a character "really goes all out" but in most cases one person's guess is as good as another's because not every hero has enough appearances to warrant a "kill mode" scenario and that puts them at a MASSIVE disadvantage because there's no proof to support their "all out" abilities.

I think that the word "Bloodlusted" should be removed from the rules all together unless we're going to take up a CBR style of debating because it's meaning is entirely too subjective. Let the trem "Fighting to the best of their ability" incorporate the fact that for whatever reason the characters ARE enemies and HAVE to take each other down(like in Civil War) but they shouldn't actually be vicious unless that personality type regularly shows through on panel. The scans were to demonstrate a given character shown going all out vs what a character is typically shown as in comics. The "Trinity" aspect isn't important. The differences of what's shown is my point. You can substitute any character you'd like. Heck, Thor vs Rulk works. Round 1 Thor basically pulls his punches and ends up on the Moon. Round 2 Rulk states that Thor has him on the ropes and Hulk probably saved his life. I'm trying to reconcile CIS with fighting all out. For this thread, the context isn't the issue.

Badabing
Originally posted by ultimatethor
Ok, this thread is God sent. Some issues badly need to be clarified . First of all i want to ask about the viability of people arguing tactics that a character has never shown on panel. In numerous threads i have actively argued against people trying to use inference over on panel showings. This is because i believe that the actual comics we are arguing should be the supreme evidence in our debates. So the questions is

" Can we infer powers for a character even if they have consistently failed to do such on panel?" I'm thinking that inferring what "you'd" do with a given power set isn't viable. That's what is done in tournies. But we need to get some more opinions.

ultimatethor
Originally posted by Badabing
I'm thinking that inferring what "you'd" do with a given power set isn't viable. That's what is done in tournies. But we need to get some more opinions.

Thats my opinion as well but more opinions are definitely needed so a consensus can be reached.

darthgoober
Originally posted by Badabing
The scans were to demonstrate a given character shown going all out vs what a character is typically shown as in comics. The "Trinity" aspect isn't important. The differences of what's shown is my point. You can substitute any character you'd like. Heck, Thor vs Rulk works. Round 1 Thor basically pulls his punches and ends up on the Moon. Round 2 Rulk states that Thor has him on the ropes and Hulk probably saved his life. I'm trying to reconcile CIS with fighting all out. For this thread, the context isn't the issue.
The Boyscout factor should definitely fall into the CIS category and most of the time it should take precedence over the instance of going all out IMO.

iceman24567
Personally I see enough problems in the forums people usually leave out context when debating sometimes its just people trolling but Bada has been quick to close down threads that have gone sour for whatever reason the rules do need to be looked over and edited so people dont get so frustrated with horrible threads.

psycho gundam
^ yes, context is crucial

Starscream M
2 points:

1) Good rules are rules that are simple and clear. If you make rules that are too complex and convoluted, then people won't understand or follow them.

2) Guys, debating comics isn't a science. We shouldn't reduce it to such. Part of the fun of debating comics is approaching it from different perspectives and reaching different outcomes. We don't have to enforce some kind of group think...that would result in completely mechanical debates with monotonous results.

I agree with Digi that we shouldn't tell people how they should debate. Sure we can set some general guidelines, but everyone should be allowed their freedom to voice their opinions (as long as its not blatant flame or trolling). Nobody is forcing anyone to read other's opinions, if you don't like it, just ignore it.

Starscream M
also, this is a question for Bada:

What is the purpose of closing threads?

Edit.

Phantom Zone
Originally posted by Starscream M
also, this is a question for Bada:

What is the purpose of closing threads?

I mean good threads, not spite threads. For example, if there is a Superman vs Thor thread...it's obviously going to draw a lot of attention. Now some people get out of hand and may flame or bash. So why not warn (or temp ban) those people who are ruining the thread? When you close a thread, it punishes everyone, including those who have done nothing wrong and would've liked to genuinely participate in discussion. It just seems to me lately that a lot of threads have been closed just because a few people get out of hand, and rather then those people getting punished, the thread just gets closed...which ends discussion on some popular topics.

Agreed, but sometimes im glad they get closed.

Starscream M
Originally posted by Phantom Zone
but sometimes im glad they get closed. Edit

Endrict Nuul
Originally posted by Starscream M
Why?

Is anyone on KMC forced to visit a thread?

If anyone is offended by what's going on in a thread, could they just not ignore it?

No, because sometimes what some people say is just BS....and than those threads need to get locked.

Phantom Zone
Originally posted by Starscream M
Why?

Is anyone on KMC forced to visit a thread?

If anyone is offended by what's going on in a thread, could they just not ignore it?

Its just a pain to get into certain debates because they don't go anywhere it just degenerates into insults but I just don't like how other people get punished.

fangirl101
I dont' like people assuming a character can do something because they think it's in the characters power set. And I don't like people requiring someone prove a negative when they haven't proven the opposite. For instance, people who are asking us to prove that surfer loses his speed while off the board. That is ridiculous. Why wont' they just prove that he keeps it?

psycho gundam
^how ironic

anyway, anyone who makes a claim regarding powersets being used in uncommon fashions should prove it with a scan or something.

for instance, the silver surfer stated that he could create point singularities within his opponents on a whim, though he hasn't done so, it is elementary for him thus his casual statement of it. of coarse he refrains from it cause it's an instakill and he tries his best not to take sentient lives but the ability is still there.

Starscream M
Originally posted by Endrict Nuul
No, because sometimes what some people say is just BS....and than those threads need to get locked. Edit

Endrict Nuul
Originally posted by Starscream M
but why not warn or temp ban those people who say bs?

why close a thread...which punishes those people who are debating in good faith?

Yeah a ban should work, I am doing 20 things at once so I used the wrong word before.

Phantom Zone
Originally posted by Starscream M
but why not warn or temp ban those people who say bs?

You should be careful you could end up getting banned! You might also know some posters try to annoy others posters unpurpose so they get banned.

I don't think mods are always able to distingush who the trouble makers are or always care, sometimes if they get alot of reports it just irritates them.

Badabing
Originally posted by Starscream M
2 points:

1) Good rules are rules that are simple and clear. If you make rules that are too complex and convoluted, then people won't understand or follow them.

2) Guys, debating comics isn't a science. We shouldn't reduce it to such. Part of the fun of debating comics is approaching it from different perspectives and reaching different outcomes. We don't have to enforce some kind of group think...that would result in completely mechanical debates with monotonous results.

I agree with Digi that we shouldn't tell people how they should debate. Sure we can set some general guidelines, but everyone should be allowed their freedom to voice their opinions (as long as its not blatant flame or trolling). Nobody is forcing anyone to read other's opinions, if you don't like it, just ignore it.

As a mod, I'm bombarded with PMs and reports. I have a better idea of the problems. Who said complex rules? If you read the first page of the thread then you would have seen the word tweaked in bold.

Debating isn't the problem. It's the fact that there are people arguing on panel feats versus full potential due to power set. The first page explaines this.

Digi agrees that the rules need to be tweaked. Originally posted by Starscream M
also, this is a question for Bada:

What is the purpose of closing threads?

I mean good threads, not spite threads. For example, if there is a Superman vs Thor thread...it's obviously going to draw a lot of attention. Now some people get out of hand and may flame or bash. So why not warn (or temp ban) those people who are ruining the thread? When you close a thread, it punishes everyone, including those who have done nothing wrong and would've liked to genuinely participate in discussion. It just seems to me lately that a lot of threads have been closed just because a few people get out of hand, and rather then those people getting punished, the thread just gets closed...which ends discussion on some popular topics. Threads are closed for a variety of reasons. Too much trouble is the main reason.Originally posted by Starscream M
Why?

Is anyone on KMC forced to visit a thread?

If anyone is offended by what's going on in a thread, could they just not ignore it? Originally posted by Starscream M
but why not warn or temp ban those people who say bs?

why close a thread...which punishes those people who are debating in good faith? Starscream, you're not adding anything to the topic at hand and using this thread as a platform to raise questions of points which have been addressed before. If you can't discuss the topic then don't post in this thread. Thanks.Originally posted by darthgoober
The Boyscout factor should definitely fall into the CIS category and most of the time it should take precedence over the instance of going all out IMO. Originally posted by iceman24567
Personally I see enough problems in the forums people usually leave out context when debating sometimes its just people trolling but Bada has been quick to close down threads that have gone sour for whatever reason the rules do need to be looked over and edited so people dont get so frustrated with horrible threads. Originally posted by fangirl101
I dont' like people assuming a character can do something because they think it's in the characters power set. And I don't like people requiring someone prove a negative when they haven't proven the opposite. For instance, people who are asking us to prove that surfer loses his speed while off the board. That is ridiculous. Why wont' they just prove that he keeps it? Originally posted by psycho gundam

anyway, anyone who makes a claim regarding powersets being used in uncommon fashions should prove it with a scan or something.

for instance, the silver surfer stated that he could create point singularities within his opponents on a whim, though he hasn't done so, it is elementary for him thus his casual statement of it. of coarse he refrains from it cause it's an instakill and he tries his best not to take sentient lives but the ability is still there. Well guys, I hope that we all can make some progress in these areas.

ultimatethor
Originally posted by psycho gundam
^how ironic

anyway, anyone who makes a claim regarding powersets being used in uncommon fashions should prove it with a scan or something.

for instance, the silver surfer stated that he could create point singularities within his opponents on a whim, though he hasn't done so, it is elementary for him thus his casual statement of it. of coarse he refrains from it cause it's an instakill and he tries his best not to take sentient lives but the ability is still there.

Exactly. The comics we are debating should be the supreme evidence used barring PIS instances. No form of inference can replace that. This especially occurs when we see people( i wont name anyone but the culprits are obvious) trying to argue tactics for a character which they should technically be able to do but have never actually shown it to be within their abilities in that particular context. Speed especially is an issue which i think should definitely be based on their shoings in comics and not inference.

Like in the recent wonderwomanvs Ss h2h thread. There were many claims that Wondy is so fast that SS wont be able to land a hit on her. Meanwhile nobody even came close to providng a credible scan showing her displaying this sort of speed in a context similar to how she would be fighting SS. HOw then can it be claimed that she will be capable of something which she has been incapable of in comics? At best would it not be highly out of character?

Note the difference between this and arguments that request for exact replications of the situation. For instance, if i want to determine whther thanos can withstand a ram from superman, I dont need to receive a scan of thanos resisting the exact same type of ram. What i do need however is thanos resisting a physical attack that generates equal or more force than supermans ram.

Also the whole "CIS" and "fight to the best of their ability" part of the rule needs to be clearly defined. Because they directly contradict each other. For instance alot of people use the superman speedblitz tactic alot for an instant win, and though it is within his abilities his CIS would cause him NOT to use it as an opening tactic.

On the other hand though, I agree with those ho say that u cant actually tell people how to debate. The different perspectives that people bring in are what makes the forum interesting. But there are definitely some issues that i think need to be definitvely addressed

Starscream M
Originally posted by Badabing
As a mod, I'm bombarded with PMs and reports. I have a better idea of the problems. Who said complex rules? If you read the first page of the thread then you would have seen the word tweaked in bold.

Debating isn't the problem. It's the fact that there are people arguing on panel feats versus full potential due to power set. The first page explaines this.

Digi agrees that the rules need to be tweaked. Threads are closed for a variety of reasons. Too much trouble is the main reason. Starscream, you're not adding anything to the topic at hand and using this thread as a platform to raise questions of points which have been addressed before. If you can't discuss the topic then don't post in this thread. Thanks. Well guys, I hope that we all can make some progress in these areas.

1. In regards to the full-potential vs on panel: I thought it was understood that unless stated otherwise (ie bloodlust), characters don't fight in 'full-potential' but rather in character. At least that was my understanding.

2. Bada, don't be so defensive. I wasn't criticizing you, merely asking about your thread closing policy. I understand if it was off-topic, and I will not comment on it any further.

3. And the rules are complex...maybe not for you and me (or others who have been on KMC for so long). but they are for many newcomers to KMC, who the rules are mainly written for anyways.

Starscream M
Originally posted by ultimatethor


Also the whole "CIS" and "fight to the best of their ability" part of the rule needs to be clearly defined.

Agreed.

I think that CIS must be clearly defined as it presents more inconsistency than PIS often does.

On KMC battles, is the default that characters fight 'in character' or they fight 'to the full extent of their abilities'?

Because in comics, rarely do characters EVER fight to the full extent of their abilities.

Endrict Nuul
Originally posted by Starscream M
Agreed.

I think that CIS must be clearly defined as it presents more inconsistency than PIS often does.

On KMC battles, is the default that characters fight 'in character' or they fight 'to the full extent of their abilities'?

Because in comics, rarely do characters EVER fight to the full extent of their abilities.


On KMC the characters fight at their best. Unless stated other wise by OP. But some people always ignore this rule. They will use them as jobbing and low balling feats.

Starscream M
Originally posted by Endrict Nuul
On KMC the characters fight at their best. ok, but do they fight in character? ie..will a guy who never kills use a killing attack?

Endrict Nuul
Originally posted by Starscream M
ok, but do they fight in character? ie..will a guy who never kills use a killing attack?

Both....


Full Capacity
It is assumed that each contestant will fight to his/her best ability, but still within the character's personality, unless specified otherwise. That means they will use any powers at their disposal. For example, even though The Flash doesn't clock each of his own opponents in the first millisecond in his own comic, it is assumed that is a viable tactic on this board since it is a proven fact that he possesses that level of speed.
It is also assumed that the characters fight at their optimum levels of ability - not explicitly weakened or unusually powered up for those who have variable power levels.

fangirl101
Originally posted by Endrict Nuul
Both....


Full Capacity
It is assumed that each contestant will fight to his/her best ability, but still within the character's personality, unless specified otherwise. That means they will use any powers at their disposal. For example, even though The Flash doesn't clock each of his own opponents in the first millisecond in his own comic, it is assumed that is a viable tactic on this board since it is a proven fact that he possesses that level of speed.
It is also assumed that the characters fight at their optimum levels of ability - not explicitly weakened or unusually powered up for those who have variable power levels.
So how do you address the problem of someone like say, Gladiator who's shown that he can actually fight two top tiers on different sides of a planet at the same time becuz he's so fast and powerful and yet get pwned by WWH? Or Wonder Woman who clearly has FTL hands but becuz of her warrior spirit choses not to use her uber speed or powers? Or Silver Surfer who is ridiculously powerful and gets pwned without a shield, evading the slower oppoent, etc?

id369

Charlotte DeBel

fangirl101
Originally posted by Charlotte DeBel
Cassandra Nova you meant? Not Cassandra Cain.

As for Ion...different Ions. Kyle Rayner was teh best, Sodam Yat...well, what do you expect from the noob having his very 1st big fight?
Current Ion dragged the title in the shit.
He really did. He's a daxamite with a GL ring and the ION power and he's done nothing but get pwned. It should take a squad of GLs, Superman and the Krypto girls, and some lead to take this guy out.

id369
Originally posted by Charlotte DeBel
Cassandra Nova you meant? Not Cassandra Cain.

As for Ion...different Ions. Kyle Rayner was teh best, Sodam Yat...well, what do you expect from the noob having his very 1st big fight?
Current Ion dragged the title in the shit.


Meant to say Nova, I always get those two confused. embarrasment

Charlotte DeBel
Originally posted by id369
Meant to say Nova, I always get those two confused. embarrasment
No prob.

Originally posted by fangirl101
He really did. He's a daxamite with a GL ring and the ION power and he's done nothing but get pwned. It should take a squad of GLs, Superman and the Krypto girls, and some lead to take this guy out.
That's why Sodam Yat should be processed into dog food for Krypto... he's up there with Sentry.

id369

Badabing
PIS and context are so muddled. I've seen scans posted way out of context too many times as "proof".

PIS seems to be a subjective term thrown around a lot. The best we can do is most of us coming to a consensus on what is PIS and ignoring any trolls or fanboys who say otherwise.

fangirl101
Originally posted by Badabing
PIS and context are so muddled. I've seen scans posted way out of context too many times as "proof".

PIS seems to be a subjective term thrown around a lot. The best we can do is most of us coming to a consensus on what is PIS and ignoring any trolls or fanboys who say otherwise.
What we need is a thread of acceptable feats, acceptable inference of powers, and such.

Rulk smashing in the Watchers lip and beating Odin power Thor are UNacceptable. Given the fact that Dead Galaxies clashed in Odin's face, and the Watcher has witnessed exploding Universes, it is silly to think Rulk could hurt either.

Inference of powers would be like superman being able to xray someone to death given the doses of radiation that go into xrays. If that is in fact what his vision uses, even tho he clearly has never done so.

DigiMark007
Here's a potential solution for one of the problems: just like prep, where it is assumed "no prep" unless the thread-starter specifies, we could have one way be the default unless specified.

Example: Superman vs. Anyone. We could make it that Supes fights to the full extent of his abilities, CIS turned off, as the default. Then the thread starter could specify that character traits, not just power sets, are to be counted, which would override the default setting.

Or the reverse, if we think the majority should include CIS factors like "boyscout mode" and such, and should only be "power sets only" or "bloodlust" when specified by the thread-starter.

Of course, this could easily lead to things like CBR Surfer (if you know about it, you know), but would also make an objective criteria for debating.

....

As for Inferred ability vs. on-panel ability, I'm still thinking about it.

darthgoober
Originally posted by DigiMark007
Here's a potential solution for one of the problems: just like prep, where it is assumed "no prep" unless the thread-starter specifies, we could have one way be the default unless specified.

Example: Superman vs. Anyone. We could make it that Supes fights to the full extent of his abilities, CIS turned off, as the default. Then the thread starter could specify that character traits, not just power sets, are to be counted, which would override the default setting.

Or the reverse, if we think the majority should include CIS factors like "boyscout mode" and such, and should only be "power sets only" or "bloodlust" when specified by the thread-starter.

Of course, this could easily lead to things like CBR Surfer (if you know about it, you know), but would also make an objective criteria for debating.

....

As for Inferred ability vs. on-panel ability, I'm still thinking about it.
I think that CIS should be the standard since THAT's the version we actually see from issue to issue, and the "going all out killmode" should be stipulated by the thread starter. But maybe that's just me...

Starscream M
Originally posted by DigiMark007


As for Inferred ability vs. on-panel ability, I'm still thinking about it.

there's 2 types of inferred ability:

1) the obvious.

For example, someone asks 'Can Silver Surfer survive being hit by an oil truck'. Now, this may never have happened in comics. But we can all see that Surfer, because he survived things far worse, would easily survive that. So that's an example of inferring something that should be allowed without debate.

2) the not so obvious

Someone says Silver Surfer can defend against a speedblitz. Even though Surfer has never done so, the reasoning is that since he can travel at FTL speed throughout the universe, he must have FTL reflexes, and hence should be able to defend against a speedblitz. This type of inference is a lot more problematic.

I'm not sure what the solution/brightline rule should be.

DigiMark007
That's not quite the issue mb, though you've got the starting point there. Few, if any, have a problem with your first type. For the second type (and I won't use examples, for fear of starting a Surfer scan war), the problem isn't so much whether it should be allowed or not, but whether his power set actually infers it. Everyone's ok with inferring when they agree on the inference, but not when it becomes harder to logically deduce without possible doubt.

We can't say "yes, that's allowed" or "no it isn't" because we don't have a definitive stance on the point, nor can we draw a clear line as to what is and isn't acceptable. Thus the problem. It's not really rule-able, and is possibly something we shouldn't be trying to standardize in the first place.

...

Anyway, see my post above for a suggestion on CIS vs. power sets only. It's probably the one thing I'll have a clear opinion on here.

This also relates to it:
Originally posted by darthgoober
I think that CIS should be the standard since THAT's the version we actually see from issue to issue, and the "going all out killmode" should be stipulated by the thread starter. But maybe that's just me...

Agreed.

Starscream M
Originally posted by DigiMark007


Agreed.

Digi, I kinda agree with Goober as well that CIS should be prob the default...or else we're not really debating characters, but rather mere powersets.

Although there are some characters who imo are almost always CIS...ie Flash. Flash basically rarely fights to the level hes capable of because if he did, his rogue gallery wouldn't stand a chance. So do we treat him like Rhino (ie someone who vastly underfights their powerlevel) or do we go the other extreme and treat him like a highherald that his powerset is capable of achieving?

DigiMark007
Flash's bad showings are more PIS than anything. Ending things in picoseconds would make for tough writing. So even with CIS, he can usually be argued at top speeds.

Starscream M
So here's a hypo, would Thor use godblast in a forum fight against someone of the same tier? (even though if in character, he prob wouldn't)

DigiMark007
Originally posted by Starscream M
So here's a hypo, would Thor use godblast in a forum fight against someone of the same tier? (even though if in character, he prob wouldn't)

With CIS on, no, of course not. With it turned off, by default we have to assume it will be used.

Starscream M
Originally posted by DigiMark007
With CIS on, no, of course not. With it turned off, by default we have to assume it will be used. ok cool thats what I figured

DigiMark007
thumb up

Heh. A convo where we haven't fought. Should I throw a party?

haermm

ultimatethor
What of Blackbolt screaming in a fight?

darthgoober
You know what might help? Scrapping terms like PIS and CIS in favor of new ones. The terms PIS and CIS both originated at CBR if I'm not mistaken and they're actually meant to apply to that kind of debating. This of course leads to all kinds of confusion(especially to visitors from other boards) because the terms aren't really applied correctly even in those rare instances in which most of us agree on them.

fangirl101
So let's talk about comics and the sense of time and how they are portrayed. Take for instance Gladiator destroying a planet or planetoid with three punches. was it really three? Or were the panels limited in the fact that it's a comic and they usually draw in panels for motion effect. Was it a planet? How big was it? If someone is fighting at Superspeed and you dont' see the action, are we to assume they didnt' throw any punches becuz it's not expliticly shown? I keep hearing about the Silver Surfer's infinite Amp abiblity but I've never seen it. Should that even be allowed to be mentioned in a forum debate?

Badabing
Guys, we're not using this thread to decide which attacks are in character and which aren't. Save your specific questions until we progress the discussion to that point. Thanks.

fangirl101
Ok. So we gotta look at some things in general about comics.

They aren't cameras. It's panel. Which means we really don't see all of the action.

Hyperbole on panel statements without collaborative evidence in said comic or in previous comics may need to be outlawed. For instance transmangor and the omnipotent votronix destroyed countless moons in thier fight. And yet after the fight we see the moons all in tact with no explaination for how they got put back that way.

darthgoober
Originally posted by fangirl101
So let's talk about comics and the sense of time and how they are portrayed. Take for instance Gladiator destroying a planet or planetoid with three punches. was it really three? Or were the panels limited in the fact that it's a comic and they usually draw in panels for motion effect. Was it a planet? How big was it? If someone is fighting at Superspeed and you dont' see the action, are we to assume they didnt' throw any punches becuz it's not expliticly shown? I keep hearing about the Silver Surfer's infinite Amp abiblity but I've never seen it. Should that even be allowed to be mentioned in a forum debate?
There needs to be definite indication in my book. We shouldn't assume things happen between sequential panels unless it's specifically mentioned IMO.

DigiMark007
Bada's right. Anyway, see the last page for my suggestion. Like most things I say, I really like it.

no expression

Badabing
Originally posted by Starscream M

2. Bada, don't be so defensive. I wasn't criticizing you, merely asking about your thread closing policy. I understand if it was off-topic, and I will not comment on it any further.
I wasn't defensive or regarding your post as anything but what I stated. You have a bad habit of derailing threads with your personal questions. Stop now or be warned or worse. Thanks.

Cavalier
Originally posted by darthgoober
You know what might help? Scrapping terms like PIS and CIS in favor of new ones. The terms PIS and CIS both originated at CBR if I'm not mistaken and they're actually meant to apply to that kind of debating. This of course leads to all kinds of confusion(especially to visitors from other boards) because the terms aren't really applied correctly even in those rare instances in which most of us agree on them. We could try, but it'd be quite a feat to attempt, considering how often we use the terms PIS and CIS.

As for Flash, I'd actually title it under CIS... I think that he's only going to use top speed against characters that can match it, and otherwise will still go fast, but perhaps not super fast... it's really not representative of the characters to assume that they'll do something which we know would never be written.

Looking at it like this also circumvents "speedblitz" arguments.

darthgoober
Common Knowledge. What is it?

quanchi112
Originally posted by Starscream M
2 points:

1) Good rules are rules that are simple and clear. If you make rules that are too complex and convoluted, then people won't understand or follow them.

2) Guys, debating comics isn't a science. We shouldn't reduce it to such. Part of the fun of debating comics is approaching it from different perspectives and reaching different outcomes. We don't have to enforce some kind of group think...that would result in completely mechanical debates with monotonous results.

I agree with Digi that we shouldn't tell people how they should debate. Sure we can set some general guidelines, but everyone should be allowed their freedom to voice their opinions (as long as its not blatant flame or trolling). Nobody is forcing anyone to read other's opinions, if you don't like it, just ignore it. Agreed. I just looked through some of these posts and I agree with this post. Goober has some good points as well. Ill look through this later more and actually weigh in later but I just wanted to state something now thats on my mind.

Ill give you a link here to a cbr thread. Now I went there after my battlezone with nver and just recently have returned. This is what cannot happen imo. Take a look see and read for yourself.

http://forums.comicbookresources.com/showthread.php?t=239606

Now, Id like anyone who is interested in this to take a quick read through this. Basically,Gladiator wins due to his speed and their minds are already made up. They use pis and such to pretty much favor certain characters and argue powerset vs powerset which is pretty boring to say the least. I like herochat's approach because we argue whats in character. Gladiator can use his superspeed sure,but saying he beats anyone without it 10 of 10 is completely and utterly ridiculous especially when Gladiator has never defeated him inside a comic book. Kmc can never turn into cbr.

Here is a pm I received shortly after the mod closed this down for further review. Its from come cbrer who I dont even know. Ill leave his name out of it,but Id like you to see what he wrote.

You can't win with them. They just compare powersets and nothing else. The term "PIS" will be the bane of your existance. If I were you I'd just let it go. The rest of the boards on this site rock, but the rumbles boards...eh.. people outside of that board have a bad opinion about it for a reason.

Im just throwing this in there so we dont become more like cbr.

leonidas
this attempt to quantify subjectivity is interesting. i'm not entirely sure it's necessary though. i think the bulk of threads work just fine and tend to be debated fairly (though i'm no mod so perhaps i'm wrong in that assumption). i think trying to define things like pis and cis is for the most part fruitless though. digi's idea is the simplest. if you don't want something to be factored into the debate, specify it in your thread. declare a thread scan-only if you feel you must. there has ALWAYS been the issue of "forum characters". does anyone really think that if sentry fought surfer in a comic that ss would simply encase him in adamantium, or manipulate his dna in such a way as to shut off his powers? of course not. common sense should tell any reasonably intelligent reader that a battle betwen these 2 would likely be a great battle. does that mean ss couldn't do those things? probably not, and i think "inferred power" CAN be used in a debate, but it shouldn't be the ONLY thing, and it shouldn't be allowed to be 'proof' that one character would win.

imho, it's all right to posit unsupported abilities and tactics, but only IF your position is a LOGICAL extension of on-panel feats and remains in-character. as i said, inferred abilities rarely end any debate as far as i'm concerned, but they should certainly be given credence if they are logical extensions of the character's abilities.

i've always been one who tends to look at the MODE of a character in a debate, as opposed to the mean. i personally feel that is the best way to gauge a character. i guess if i were to suggest any change, it would simply be to remove any idea of "blood lust" or "fighting to their fullest abilities", because both of those descriptions describe instances of the character that are OUTSIDE the mode. the notion of having people debate while demanding they 'keep characters IN character' while simultaneously allowing them the lee-way of saying the characters can be "blood-lusted" and are supposed to be "fighting to their fullest potential" is paradoxical. would thor use a godblast against superman? maybe, but not likely. would superman blitz thor and hit him 500 times in the first second without thor being able to react? extremely unlikely, but perhaps possible. more than likley, they would slug it out until one fell and it would be a great battle. too few people imagine what a battle would look like IN A COMIC BOOK. the irony of that of course is that that is exactly what we are debating.

the whole issue can be compounded at times because certain well-debated characters have SOOOOOO many more appearances than others and have a far greater feat-base to draw from, which invariably leads to more cases of pis/cis. i personally refrain from calling pis OR cis unless it is a VERY blatant case. most of the time, these "cases" can be explained away in some sort of logical manner. even the spidey v FL example can be explained away to some degree--FL was surprised and tired, he was holding back, he never expected spidey to attack, yada-yada. i think pis/cis are declared with far too much frequency, often by people whose 'favourite' was trashed and they need it to be pis to sleep at night.

the vast majority of these 'issues' can be resolved with more specific thread direction, and a little common sense.

shiv

Starscream M
Originally posted by leonidas
too few people imagine what a battle would look like IN A COMIC BOOK. the irony of that of course is that that is exactly what we are debating.


Leo...I had exactly the same thought.

However, you have to realize that if we argued battles as they would happen in comics...the result is not pretty.

Often, in comics, battles happen the way they do to GARNER SALES period. That's why in a comic, if Superman fought Hulk, Superman would barely fly or use flight to his advantage and would instead trade blows with Hulk. Comics do this because that is the only way a Hulk Superman fight could last more than a page...but on KMC Superman would def use flight in a big way in a fight against someone who couldn't.

So I don't think we could argue fights as they would happen in comics for that reason.

Starscream M
Originally posted by shiv


=IC default setting for all Vs Fights. By IC I mean In character .

I personally like this. We should debate how characters would act, not just their pure powersets alone.

One example of a fight that would be changed imo is: Surfer vs Superman

with CIS, its a much closer fight, both herald level fighters trading blows and attacks

without CIS, people argue that Surfer could just create kryptonite or red sunlight to exploit the weaknesses of Superman, when in comics Surfer rarely if ever utilizes his power cosmic in such a fashion

ultimatethor
Originally posted by Starscream M
I personally like this. We should debate how characters would act, not just their pure powersets alone.

One example of a fight that would be changed imo is: Surfer vs Superman

with CIS, its a much closer fight, both herald level fighters trading blows and attacks

without CIS, people argue that Surfer could just create kryptonite or red sunlight to exploit the weaknesses of Superman, when in comics Surfer rarely if ever utilizes his power cosmic in such a fashion

Actually it is within surfers personality to end the fight quickly by exploiting supermans weakness or absorbing his solar energy.

Starscream M
.

Philosophía
Stop.

ultimatethor
Originally posted by Starscream M
i've seen a lot of surfer's fights...and he rarely uses his matter/energy manipulation powers (or else he could turn his enemies to harmless gingerbread everytime)

Surfer turning his opponents into harmless ginger bread is a ruthless move that was not within his character( current surfer is much different). But surfer incapacitating or disabling his opponents as quickly as possible to avoid prolonged fights that could end in death is within his character. Like when he simply trapped the shiar ships in energy spheres, or Encased spiderman and DD in ethel energy, or absorbed the energy from hulk turning him into banner, when he manipulated wondermans ionic energy in order to incapacitate him, when he threw out of phase visions electrical frequencies,molecularly bonded legacy with his board, Disabled the obliterators machines through matter manip,encased carnage in an ethel energy shell instead of vaporizing him etc. Surfer does make use of his molecular/energy manip powers in fights when he wants to end them quickly.

But i think this is getting off topic so lets drop it for now.

Badabing
Okay. So we're trying to sift through total power potential, CIS, panel showings, in character and bloodlust.

I'd like everyone (except Star Scream crackers) to post their final thoughts.

Cavalier
The effort should be to debate how the characters would be depicted, instead of how we think they should be depicted.

ultimatethor
I think we need to create a balance between how they debate on hero chat and how they debate on CBR. Hence, i think that a character fighting "in character" should maintain his the mindset he has in the comics unless stated by the threadstarter. However we shouldnt just take on panel showings without analyzing them and the context which they occurred.(i.e Hulk beat thor so he can beat superman etc)

leonidas
Originally posted by Cavalier
The effort should be to debate how the characters would be depicted, instead of how we think they should be depicted.

that's what i said. big grin

Endrict Nuul
Fighting at their best makes some ease fights, like SS beating Supes in 1 move. But having SS act in character than the fight would be more even and longer. I will vote for acting in character unless stated by the thread starter. I think there should be a no Jobbing rule.....people just love to pick on Glads because of some panels having him loosing so easily to people way under his level.

fangirl101
In character should be the rule. Some Characters like Superman, Wondy, Thor, and Surfer Won't pull out the big powers unless they feel they have no choice. This often leads to them looking silly in the first few rounds of a fight. But it's how they act.

quanchi112
I personally think we should leave this up to the posters. To create rules to limit one's argument no matter how radical it is will kill the fun on kmc. Posters will always get pissed and overheated at one another(just like Rulk) no matter what the rules are.

I agree if we are going to change it then we have to find something in the middle of herochat and cbr although I personally love herochat's way of debating. Its all up to the poster and you cant hide behind pis or use it at your convenience like some seem to do here. Thats how they argue things on cbr and use pis all the time. Most psoters complain about how unfair it is over there as I pointed out earlier.

I think pis and cis should be eliminated altogether. If someone wants to be a dope and argue spiderman beats firelord then school the shit out of them. But rarely in comics does something this awful happen. Granted it does and will continue but how often does a wolverine defeat the juggernaut straight up without a plot device.

Rely on your own unique arguing skills and prove your points however you will. Lets not restrict or try to restrict someone's creativity based on the rules. This is meant to have fun and lets start having fun again.

Endrict Nuul
Oh man.....Who let Quan in here? Must have been Bada, Bada....YOUR FIRED!!!

The Great Galen
The sad thing it doesn't matter, posters will just run down a "relentless"debate wanking there fav characters.

darthgoober
I think we should make a rule that specifically covers misrepresenting a scans or taking them out of context. Accidents happen from time to time(I've made them myself), but if someone KNOWS they're passing off bogus info I think it should at least rate a warning.

ultimatethor
Originally posted by darthgoober
I think we should make a rule that specifically covers misrepresenting a scans or taking them out of context. Accidents happen from time to time(I've made them myself), but if someone KNOWS they're passing off bogus info I think it should at least rate a warning.

Absolutely true. It is getting ridiculous

fangirl101
Originally posted by darthgoober
I think we should make a rule that specifically covers misrepresenting a scans or taking them out of context. Accidents happen from time to time(I've made them myself), but if someone KNOWS they're passing off bogus info I think it should at least rate a warning. all scans are taken out of context when applied to individual bias and without knowlege of a characters history as welll as the story thus far. What the hell is debating for if someone gets a warning for taking something out of context. How then do you pwn someone, as I have today with scans, if they can't say what they want that they know to be true. If someone post something out of context, then do your job as a debator and debate them.

leonidas
Originally posted by darthgoober
I think we should make a rule that specifically covers misrepresenting a scans or taking them out of context. Accidents happen from time to time(I've made them myself), but if someone KNOWS they're passing off bogus info I think it should at least rate a warning.

many respect threads are LITTERED with out of context scans though, and that is where many of these illegitimate scans originate. erm

ultimatethor
Originally posted by leonidas
many respect threads are LITTERED with out of context scans though, and that is where many of these illegitimate scans originate. erm

True but people that are KNOWINGLY passing off these illegitimate scans as evidence need to be checked.

leonidas
Originally posted by ultimatethor
True but people that are KNOWINGLY passing off these illegitimate scans as evidence need to be checked.

i'll agree if you can find a way to be sure someone really is KNOWINGLY doing so. most see respect threads and simply trust them. not ALL respect threads are like that, obviously. goob does a good, honest job of his, and mungi as well. but slip-ups happen and other respect thread-makers are NOT so thorough as those 2.

DigiMark007
Originally posted by leonidas
i'll agree if you can find a way to be sure someone really is KNOWINGLY doing so. most see respect threads and simply trust them. not ALL respect threads are like that, obviously. goob does a good, honest job of his, and mungi as well. but slip-ups happen and other respect thread-makers are NOT so thorough as those 2.

I'd like to think most are. I once used a faulty scan or two in a tournament, but didn't realize it until well after the tourney. So yeah, it happens, but it's in the minority. Especially with the level of knowledge pervading the internet, and KMC, passing off false scans are difficult to do for any length of time for all but the most obscure characters.

The Great Galen
I agree, so as an example....lets say we have a character with no experience or training in MA and he is caught a hold from a elite level MA character. Does it make sense to call this PIS only because the character who was rendered in the hold is physically more stronger.

darthgoober
Originally posted by leonidas
many respect threads are LITTERED with out of context scans though, and that is where many of these illegitimate scans originate. erm
I'm well aware of that. And in instances like that I think the person who posts them in the respect thread and misrepresents them should get a warning. And I'm not talking about first(or even second) offenses except in extreme circumstances, but some people have REALLY taken to misrepresenting scans when they're backed into a corner during a debate.

One such instance that springs to mind is the fight between Superman and Zod's fight was posted as proof that the shockwaves from Supes's punches could destroy planets without mentioning the fact that Supes and Zod were spiritually tied to the planet in question and THAT'S why it was being destroyed as the fight progressed. Every Supes fan that actually read the issue in question knew better, but the scans circulated for weeks(at least) before the info was brought to light by someone debating against them.

DigiMark007
Originally posted by darthgoober
I'm well aware of that. And in instances like that I think the person who posts them in the respect thread and misrepresents them should get a warning. And I'm not talking about first(or even second) offenses except in extreme circumstances, but some people have REALLY taken to misrepresenting scans when they're backed into a corner during a debate.

One such instance that springs to mind is the fight between Superman and Zod's fight was posted as proof that the shockwaves from Supes's punches could destroy planets without mentioning the fact that Supes and Zod were spiritually tied to the planet in question and THAT'S why it was being destroyed as the fight progressed. Every Supes fan that actually read the issue in question knew better, but the scans circulated for weeks(at least) before the info was brought to light by someone debating against them.

Eh. We can't regulate scan context all the time though. Like you said, it was eventually caught, called out, and corrected. People who try to pull that crap end up worse off for doing it...it's only a matter of time.

Though I actually regret calling the respect forum the "respect" forum. Sets the wrong precedent. "Show us everything good a character has done, and nothing bad." Bleh. Some forums use "capability" threads, which are far better. Let's shows the good, the bad, the upper limits, the weaknesses, etc. etc. It gets to the heart of a character, instead of simply trying to play him/her up for the sake of a fan-crush.

leonidas
my point was simply that people take respect threads on good faith, so judging who is and is not deliberately using misleading scans is a tough call. it's gonna happen. all we can do in that case is hope someone knows the true context of it. erm

ultimatethor
Originally posted by darthgoober
I'm well aware of that. And in instances like that I think the person who posts them in the respect thread and misrepresents them should get a warning. And I'm not talking about first(or even second) offenses except in extreme circumstances, but some people have REALLY taken to misrepresenting scans when they're backed into a corner during a debate.

One such instance that springs to mind is the fight between Superman and Zod's fight was posted as proof that the shockwaves from Supes's punches could destroy planets without mentioning the fact that Supes and Zod were spiritually tied to the planet in question and THAT'S why it was being destroyed as the fight progressed. Every Supes fan that actually read the issue in question knew better, but the scans circulated for weeks(at least) before the info was brought to light by someone debating against them.

last week or the one before it, a very knowledgeable superman supporter was still trying to pass that feat off as evidence. sad

darthgoober
Originally posted by DigiMark007
Eh. We can't regulate scan context all the time though. Like you said, it was eventually caught, called out, and corrected. People who try to pull that crap end up worse off for doing it...it's only a matter of time.

Though I actually regret calling the respect forum the "respect" forum. Sets the wrong precedent. "Show us everything good a character has done, and nothing bad." Bleh. Some forums use "capability" threads, which are far better. Let's shows the good, the bad, the upper limits, the weaknesses, etc. etc. It gets to the heart of a character, instead of simply trying to play him/her up for the sake of a fan-crush.
Originally posted by leonidas
my point was simply that people take respect threads on good faith, so judging who is and is not deliberately using misleading scans is a tough call. it's gonna happen. all we can do in that case is hope someone knows the true context of it. erm
I understand and like I said I'm not talking about everyone that slips up. I'm talking about those rare instances in which the person was OBVIOUSLY trying to mislead others. It's pretty obvious that if a feat is repeatedly brought up by someone(that admits to reading the issue in question) and is then debunked and is followed by excuses or counter accusations rather than acknowledgement and/or apology for inadvertently misleading others that the offense was intentional. Or if the scan is debunked to the poster one week but he/she is STILL posting the scan or incident out of context a week later in a debate with someone else who wasn't there for the original debunking.

Basically I don't think people should be caught red handed in the act of lying and get off easy only to do it again next week the way that nvr used to. We shouldn't HAVE to research every issue that's brought up just to make that people aren't talking out of their ass and people who get caught deserve to get some kind of recognition in regards to their being untrustworthy. Otherwise we're just making things hard for the posters who're seeking accuracy and easy for those who want to pass off faulty "evidence". With an actual rule present(even if it's barely enforced) it won't be nearly as big of an issue because NO ONE want's to get called on having to lie just to keep up in a debate.

Barring that, we need stricter policies in regards to supporting your case with evidence for those posters who have a tendency to point others to respect threads or cite feats and abilities for characters rather than scans on the grounds of the feat/ability being "common knowledge that everyone should know". All to often I've looked into "common knowledge" only to discover that's actually a common misconception brought about by a misrepresented source or outright speculation.

Starscream M
Originally posted by darthgoober

Basically I don't think people should be caught red handed in the act of lying and get off easy only to do it again next week the way that nvr used to. but nvr is gone, so we don't have to worry about people like him anymore.

fangirl101
Originally posted by darthgoober
I understand and like I said I'm not talking about everyone that slips up. I'm talking about those rare instances in which the person was OBVIOUSLY trying to mislead others. It's pretty obvious that if a feat is repeatedly brought up by someone(that admits to reading the issue in question) and is then debunked and is followed by excuses or counter accusations rather than acknowledgement and/or apology for inadvertently misleading others that the offense was intentional. Or if the scan is debunked to the poster one week but he/she is STILL posting the scan or incident out of context a week later in a debate with someone else who wasn't there for the original debunking.

Basically I don't think people should be caught red handed in the act of lying and get off easy only to do it again next week the way that nvr used to. We shouldn't HAVE to research every issue that's brought up just to make that people aren't talking out of their ass and people who get caught deserve to get some kind of recognition in regards to their being untrustworthy. Otherwise we're just making things hard for the posters who're seeking accuracy and easy for those who want to pass off faulty "evidence". With an actual rule present(even if it's barely enforced) it won't be nearly as big of an issue because NO ONE want's to get called on having to lie just to keep up in a debate.

Barring that, we need stricter policies in regards to supporting your case with evidence for those posters who have a tendency to point others to respect threads or cite feats and abilities for characters rather than scans on the grounds of the feat/ability being "common knowledge that everyone should know". All to often I've looked into "common knowledge" only to discover that's actually a common misconception brought about by a misrepresented source or outright speculation.
I've read plenty of forum debates from previous years, and I can't say that I have seen anyone doing what you say they did. As a matter of fact, some of the stuff people said that you guys luld at actually turned out to be true. For instance that guy never said that Superboy prime was a PC kryptonian and people luld. He also said that PC krypts were skyfather and people lold. But I can't see how some one like SBP could be anything less than skyfather. Can you? Or the guy xmeat who said that the Hulk could physically beat any character. I'm inclined to agree. Given time, The Hulk could in fact beat anyone that wasn't a skyfather or abstract being.

Lord S
Just thought I'd contribute to this think-tank and offer a couple of shiny (Canadian) pennies...

How strictly is the rule about not citing non-canon sources as evidence enforced on this board? There's a poster on here, (who shall go nameless, because I don't consider typing his name to be an act worthy of my time), who has, on numerous occasions, referred to feats in What-Ifs as evidence and proof to support his biased and somewhat twisted viewpoints. Ie. in an Onslaught vs. Celestial thread...when unable to prove his case and ultimately backed into a corner, he'll bring up Galactus' defeat at the hands of humanity's collective conscience as evidence of Onslaught's supposed superiority, (since he's allegedly a purely psionic being). Nevermind the fact that Galactus has absolutely nothing to do with Onslaught vs. Celestial, the events he's citing are from a What-If. When we call him on this, he'll ignored it and go completely off-topic.

fangirl101
Originally posted by Lord S
Just thought I'd contribute to this think-tank and offer a couple of shiny (Canadian) pennies...

How strictly is the rule about not citing non-canon sources as evidence enforced on this board? There's a poster on here, (who shall go nameless, because I don't consider typing his name to be an act worthy of my time), who has, on numerous occasions, referred to feats in What-Ifs as evidence and proof to support his biased and somewhat twisted viewpoints. Ie. in an Onslaught vs. Celestial thread...when unable to prove his case and ultimately backed into a corner, he'll bring up Galactus' defeat at the hands of humanity's collective conscience as evidence of Onslaught's supposed superiority, (since he's allegedly a purely psionic being). Nevermind the fact that Galactus has absolutely nothing to do with Onslaught vs. Celestial, the events he's citing are from a What-If. When we call him on this, he'll ignored it and go completely off-topic.
What if's can only be counted if it's a multiversal being like the watcher or Eternity or someone like that. Or say Darksied who actually has no alternates but actually changes with each timeline.

Badabing
Originally posted by fangirl101
I've read plenty of forum debates from previous years, and I can't say that I have seen anyone doing what you say they did. As a matter of fact, some of the stuff people said that you guys luld at actually turned out to be true. For instance that guy never said that Superboy prime was a PC kryptonian and people luld. He also said that PC krypts were skyfather and people lold. But I can't see how some one like SBP could be anything less than skyfather. Can you? Or the guy xmeat who said that the Hulk could physically beat any character. I'm inclined to agree. Given time, The Hulk could in fact beat anyone that wasn't a skyfather or abstract being. I know what Goob is talking about. I've seen it in the threads and reports. Just because you didn't see it doesn't mean it doesn't happen with regularity.

Citing Xmeat to back your opinion....no expression.....blink......crylaugh

darthgoober
Originally posted by fangirl101
I've read plenty of forum debates from previous years, and I can't say that I have seen anyone doing what you say they did. As a matter of fact, some of the stuff people said that you guys luld at actually turned out to be true. For instance that guy never said that Superboy prime was a PC kryptonian and people luld. He also said that PC krypts were skyfather and people lold. But I can't see how some one like SBP could be anything less than skyfather. Can you? Or the guy xmeat who said that the Hulk could physically beat any character. I'm inclined to agree. Given time, The Hulk could in fact beat anyone that wasn't a skyfather or abstract being.
You must have overlooked them because nvr lied all the time(if you'd been here you'd know). But my post wasn't about nvr himself but behavior that's been exhibited on the forum by some "bad apples" so I've no interest in getting involved in a debate about him. He got what was coming to him when his account was closed and I'm content to leave it at that.

Starscream M
Originally posted by darthgoober
You must have overlooked them because nvr lied all the time(if you'd been here you'd know). fangirl arrived at KMC after nvr was banned I believe, so he wouldn't know about nvr's behavior.

darthgoober
Originally posted by Starscream M
fangirl arrived at KMC after nvr was banned I believe, so he wouldn't know about nvr's behavior.
That's why I added "if you'd been here you'd know"...

fangirl101
Originally posted by Badabing
I know what Goob is talking about. I've seen it in the threads and reports. Just because you didn't see it doesn't mean it doesn't happen with regularity.

Citing Xmeat to back your opinion....no expression.....blink......crylaugh
I liked his post. Those old Threads are the best. ZOMG that other guy devil hulk was a riot. And there another poster who just absolutely pwned everyone when he posted. Spet something. He was cool too.

Badabing
Originally posted by Starscream M
fangirl arrived at KMC after nvr was banned I believe, so he wouldn't know about nvr's behavior. Please either add something substantial to the discussion or stay out of the thread. Learn to read posts before you comment.Originally posted by fangirl101
I liked his post. Those old Threads are the best. ZOMG that other guy devil hulk was a riot. And there another poster who just absolutely pwned everyone when he posted. Spet something. He was cool too. He was funny. I saved some URLs from his posts and threads. Always good for a laugh.

fangirl101
Originally posted by darthgoober
You must have overlooked them because nvr lied all the time(if you'd been here you'd know). But my post wasn't about nvr himself but behavior that's been exhibited on the forum by some "bad apples" so I've no interest in getting involved in a debate about him. He got what was coming to him when his account was closed and I'm content to leave it at that.
I can't tell whose lying. All I see is the respect threads. I see people's opinions. No one here can tell the truth about subjectivity. As for the banning of posters, I could think of many since I've been here who would and should go. But how would the site make money if everyone were banned?

Badabing
I see this has run its course....

Badabing
I got a couple of PMs after this had been closed.

darthgoober
In regards to my earlier thought and Smurph's PM to Bada...

What about replacing the terms PIS and CIS with WIS, which would stand for "Writer induced stupidity". PIS and CIS are very subjective and a large chunk of many debates is wasting on which category something falls into. WIS would be admissible unless otherwise stipulated by the thread starter and it would encompass the "dumb" way characters are written(not BFRing, speedblitzing, etc.) as well as logical extensions of abilities that are never actually seen on panel(like Wonder Woman or Surfer blitzing at lightspeed in combat). Then we'd debate by comics for the most part but if someone wants an "all out at max power" thread all they'd have to do is tack on a "No WIS" stipulation and the thread would effectively go into CBR mode. Just a thought...

Cavalier
Meh... I just have a problem with the term "stupidity" due to the connotation. And that it's not really the writer's stupidity, but simply the nature of comics.

But that's all fine details. Same basic idea.

darthgoober
Hey Smurph(since you're the only person contributing at this point), what would you think about declaring Force Fields "standard equipment"(and therefor already activated at the outset of combat) for characters who use them consistently in battle? I'm not talking about guys like Surfer or Thor who momentarily throw one up every 5 or 6 fights, I'm talking about people like GL, Invisible Woman, or Magneto who pretty much always have one raised when the shit hits the fan.

Starscream M
Originally posted by Cavalier
Meh... I just have a problem with the term "stupidity" due to the connotation. And that it's not really the writer's stupidity, but simply the nature of comics.
100% agreed

although I think PIS is a valid term, CIS is not.

Cavalier
Originally posted by darthgoober
Hey Smurph(since you're the only person contributing at this point), what would you think about declaring Force Fields "standard equipment"(and therefor already activated at the outset of combat) for characters who use them consistently in battle? I'm not talking about guys like Surfer or Thor who momentarily throw one up every 5 or 6 fights, I'm talking about people like GL, Invisible Woman, or Magneto who pretty much always have one raised when the shit hits the fan. That would make sense.

Or just standard battle form... something along those lines. Treat it the same as we would treat Colossus' metal form- auto activated.

King Kandy
Originally posted by darthgoober
In regards to my earlier thought and Smurph's PM to Bada...

What about replacing the terms PIS and CIS with WIS, which would stand for "Writer induced stupidity". PIS and CIS are very subjective and a large chunk of many debates is wasting on which category something falls into. WIS would be admissible unless otherwise stipulated by the thread starter and it would encompass the "dumb" way characters are written(not BFRing, speedblitzing, etc.) as well as logical extensions of abilities that are never actually seen on panel(like Wonder Woman or Surfer blitzing at lightspeed in combat). Then we'd debate by comics for the most part but if someone wants an "all out at max power" thread all they'd have to do is tack on a "No WIS" stipulation and the thread would effectively go into CBR mode. Just a thought...
That sounds like a good idea. Characters would fight like they do in comics unless otherwise stated.

Bentley
I wouldn't say it makes sense for shields to be standard equipment, you can always just say "shields are on" or something of sorts. I get the idea since its stupid to have a battle without stipulations just to end up in speedblitz, because the shield its not raised, but I still think is just better just to assume shields are on, when otherwise the battle is silly, and to say you are using that in the thread.

I don't quite want to see a shielded starting Thanos, threads would just double.

Endrict Nuul
I would like to see tougher rules on fanboys, like they have to be back up their claims or else get a warning, temp ban and than a real ban. Imo fanboys get away with stuff so easily these days.

quanchi112
Originally posted by Endrict Nuul
I would like to see tougher rules on fanboys, like they have to be back up their claims or else get a warning, temp ban and than a real ban. Imo fanboys get away with stuff so easily these days. I disagree. We will only chase more away. This forum is a lot deader now than it ever was in my time on here. Fanboys always get wrecked if they lack proof. Thats the way it should be. Getting more strict is the worst thing this forum could do. Imo it would kill it completely.

I dont think we should permaban anyone except the real trolls imo. I think long temp bans would work. That way if someone is permabanned they dont come back here under another account. If say they did under a new account during a long temp ban they get more time off. Im talking months. That way they will change their ways and wont just change their ip address or find some other way back on here.

Just my opinion is all and I dont want to derail this thread. Again,like I said earlier I think pis and cis should be taken away altogether. If someone wants to say that Spiderman is greater than Firelord tear them apart. But I see too many posters hide from comic book facts and call pis everytime they cant accept something.

On a sidenote, did anyone really care about the storm fanboys? I really thought they were hilarious how they would always find a away to give Storm the win. Most enjoyed it and few ever toom them seriously. Sure,it gets frustrating but it isnt a bannable offense just because someone keeps saying that Storm beats Thor. Its hilarious.

Starscream M
Originally posted by Endrict Nuul
Imo fanboys get away with stuff so easily these days. umm no. fanboyism was much worse in the past. Most of the biggest fanboys have been banned (xmeat and many of the hulk and storm fanboys). The vs forum is pretty boring these days as it is with so many posters having been banned or leaving, if you ban any more people, there'll be virtually no one interesting left.

Endrict Nuul
Granted I do have less patience than most with trolls, socks and fanboys.

Starscream M
Originally posted by Endrict Nuul
Granted I do have less patience than most with trolls, socks and fanboys. I find them to be an amusing source of free entertainment...hence my opposition to banning them. besides, one can just ignore them.

id369

Badabing
Originally posted by Endrict Nuul
I would like to see tougher rules on fanboys, like they have to be back up their claims or else get a warning, temp ban and than a real ban. Imo fanboys get away with stuff so easily these days. We're not talking about that for the last time!Originally posted by Starscream M
umm no. fanboyism was much worse in the past. Most of the biggest fanboys have been banned (xmeat and many of the hulk and storm fanboys). The vs forum is pretty boring these days as it is with so many posters having been banned or leaving, if you ban any more people, there'll be virtually no one interesting left. Originally posted by Starscream M
I find them to be an amusing source of free entertainment...hence my opposition to banning them. besides, one can just ignore them. I consider the source with regards to these 2 posts. Either add to the topic or leave. You're close to another ban as it stands. Thanks.

Endrict Nuul
Originally posted by Badabing
We're not talking about that for the last time!

Didnt know it was talk about before, sorry B....

Starscream M
Originally posted by Badabing
We're not talking about that for the last time! I consider the source with regards to these 2 posts. Either add to the topic or leave. You're close to another ban as it stands. Thanks. Edit

Badabing
Originally posted by Starscream M
you have like some personal vendetta against me or something. I see other people posting offtopic stuff and I don't see you warning them. Quanchi basically posted exactly what I posted, so better issue him a warning as well. Anyways, ban me if you think that's what I deserve, I don't really care anymore as you have a different standard for me than other posters. so whatever. ban every member you don't like and close every thread you don't like, KMC is already a shell of its past, with more and more members leaving and less interesting topics everyday (since any thread that gets any debate gets closed) the only threads that stay open are the ones no one gives a sh1t about. No, I have a problem with derailing threads.

As you've already been told (broken record), threads get closed for many reasons including bashing, flaming and too many reports.

Now you're warned once again for posting nonsense in this thread after numerous requests to stop. Thanks.

darthgoober
Hey here's an idea, how about something like a Faq for debating. It could give a basic rundown on the ever shifting Burden of Proof in a debate and cover some of the "poor debating tactics" that's we often see employed by those who don't know any better.

Philosophía
'Poor debating tactits' is what's used in pretty much 85-90% of the discussions on this board.
The burden of proof is quite clear who it lies upon, as long as the posters have a basic amount of logic.

psycho gundam
Originally posted by darthgoober
Hey here's an idea, how about something like a Faq for debating. It could give a basic rundown on the ever shifting Burden of Proof in a debate and cover some of the "poor debating tactics" that's we often see employed by those who don't know any better.
can you make an example, just for the sake of expediency?

Newjak
Hmm... I have an easy solution how about newjak is always right and everyone else is always wrong. sounds good to me big grin

Nah I think the problem lies with 85-95 % of this forum thinking they are a lot better then what they are.

Philosophía
Originally posted by psycho gundam
an example?

Just randomly browse a thread (prefferably a relativly active one, with a few pages) and read any reply which doesn't belong to Avlon/Juntai/Galan/Bran/Smurph and a few other posters.

Or just check your posting history.

darthgoober

darthgoober
Originally posted by psycho gundam
can you make an example, just for the sake of expediency?
An example of which?

psycho gundam
the post's i made to correct your's of coarse.

Newjak

Philosophía
I was just playing with him also.

Though I'm pretty sure that the instant after reading that post he reported me.

Philosophía
Originally posted by darthgoober
I know, and that's a situation that I think needs to be remedied.

thumb up

Originally posted by darthgoober
You'd think so, but go to any thread that has more than 50 post to it and I can all but guarantee that you'll find at least one person who's making flat statements and asking others to prove him/her wrong.

Yes. But the thing is that there are many posters employing this kind of tactics, and I'm not sure if the mods have the time to read each of these discussions and make decisions/hand out warnings.

Though, if the rules are formulated nicely, it will probably do their job a lot easier.

psycho gundam
nah, my report button has dust on it.

psycho gundam
Originally posted by darthgoober
An example of which? a question or two from the possible F.A.Q., then obviously the correct way of posting.

<< THERE IS MORE FROM THIS THREAD HERE >>