Board Thread:Theories and Speculation/@comment-45510280-20200416210937/@comment-26636534-20200422144409

LegionZero wrote: In your first post you were telling the OP what they should use as canon. 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.

LegionZero wrote:

On multiple occasions after that you cite wiki policy to back your POV 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.

LegionZero wrote:

Its not a strawman if you quote yourself responding to my comment with the claim of double standards. 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.

LegionZero wrote: There is no need to give you benefit of the doubt because you made yourself clear from the beginning, then you justified and double, even tripled down on your stance. Why should anyone believe that you might mean anything other than what you said multiple times?

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.

LegionZero wrote: The only thing that has agreed with you here is you.

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.

@Jason

Did Obito admit to the Izumi instance specifically?