Board Thread:Theories and Speculation/@comment-45510280-20200416210937/@comment-6769189-20200423003841

Ninja Of War wrote:

No, I was telling them my opinion. Using the word "lowest" might have not been the best word to use, but I clarified my stance later. Which for some reason you cannot accept. You werent just telling your opinion. You literally told the OP what metrics to use to quantify information

Ninja Of War wrote:

I paraphrased the wiki policy because you were specifically saying that the wiki can't decide what's canon. Which then I responded that the wiki doesn't do that and only tiers canon, and then I tried to explain why it does that. The wiki doesnt have the authority to do that either so it is irrelevent how the policy determines canon or whether or not you agree, which is what i have been saying from the beginning.

Ninja Of War wrote:

The double standard you used was in regards to your criticism with a lack of "benefit of the doubt" for me. And I didn't make any of the strawman arguments you manufactured. Ninja Of War wrote:

You admit to not giving me the benefit of the doubt? Then those strawman arguments you made really make you look bad. Anyways, in your first post to me, you said, Not usre what you mean by "lowest form of canon". So, you apparently were not clear on what I meant from the beginning, and instead of trying to find out, jumped to conclusions without a proper understanding. Plus you are wrong on yet another part of the record. You had it maybe the first your first 2 posts but when you repeatedly said that canon works a certain way when i say neither you nor the wiki has authority to do so, what benefit of the doubt is there to be had? Even when i quoted posts you basically respond with "yea and?" And "Manufactured". You had multiple occasions to clarify your stance but instead you deflected

You can call the arguments staw-man and manufactured but they are direct quotes of your words. You opened with claims of how canon works and i when i replied "im not sure what you mean by that" i meant im not sure where you got the idea from. I know what tiered canon is

And from that point you just replied with how wiki policy agrees with you or you agree with it, as if that negated the fact that neither you nor the wiki have the authority to tell others how to view or interpret canon

As i mentioned earlier it wasnt until your 16th or so post that you acknowledged that the workings of canon are not necessarily what you told the OP

Ninja Of War wrote:

Nope, the record does agree with me. And thanks @Babyfriend1 for understanding. I think if one user can, all can. So back to you @Legion. Baby addressed 1 of the 4 points imade. I will concede that you werent using the wiki to back your POV but for the longest you claimed that the canon should be tiered without making clear that is simply your opinion

On the flip side, if one user can understand what i have been saying, so can all

Ninja Of War wrote:

Telling one lie doesnt make all other statements untrue
 * That seems the most likely, however the lie of the Kyuubi attack on the leaf being a "natural occurrence" portion, would again negate Obito's credibility at this point. Due to Naruto knowing the truth at that point from Minato that the "masked man" caused the Kyuubi attack.

Itachi was one of the greatest decievers in Naruto but his final monologue to Sasuke is taken as the truth. Later on down the line it could be revealed he was a gigantic sociopath and manipulated the Leaf and Uchiha into a situation where he could commit genocide and hiding behind a facade of love and inner conflict.