Board Thread:Theories and Speculation/@comment-45510280-20200416210937/@comment-26636534-20200421214340

@Legion

I admire your persistence, yet it seems you are trying to show what my "intent" is supposed to be according to you @Legion. Despite me telling you what my intent was actually. So, good luck and here's round 2.

________________________________________________________________________

Ninja: ''Lol, I find it hilarious that you still feel the need to address me. Thanks for your concern.''

Legion: ''I find it hilarious you still feel the need to address me. Acting like you are much better.''


 * I find it even more hilarious that you copied my sentence, and no I don't think I'm much better.

Legion: ''So after this long you admit to not telling the OP that they should do their own research and decide for themselves? You posted something like 18 times at it wasnt until about the 16th post that you mentioned the OP having the option to look at things differently.''

Ninja: I can agree with the canon policy of the wiki, you can disagree.


 * As my much earlier response than what you claim shows, I posted many times that I was stating my opinion, and that means the OP is free to do their own research. Furthermore, If the OP asked me why I took that particular stance, I would have said the same thing. Not that the OP was dependent on me in the first place. So, you saying otherwise is incorrect.

Legion: Lets take a look at the times you said what is or should be canon:

Ninja: So all I see is you @Legion having a misplaced sense of authority on what I should mean, instead of actually taking my clarified stance.

________________________________________________________________________
 * Pretty self explanatory.

At this point you quoted my posts. Strangely, you left out your questions/posts that I was responding to, does context not help you lol?. Unsurprisingly, you seemed to forget that I actually mostly explained what I meant in each of these posts in the first scorecard, with your posts included. So I'll post it again, to "refresh" your memory.

Ninja Of War wrote:

Legion: ''"Not usre what you mean by "lowest form of canon". Ever since the New Era Project started the anime/manga have been pulling directly from them. No reason to discount what it said about Tsukuyomi's dilation" ''

Ninja: ''"Check the wiki's canon policy, canon is tiered" ''
 * The canon policy includes the change between the original series and the new era project and the mention of Boruto running alongside the Boruto manga, as of January 1st 2017. So no disagreement, although you misunderstood my point about Tsukuyomi usage. (L:0 | N:0)

Legion: ''"Wiki doesnt get to decide what is and isnt canon."..."IIRC an official timeline was put out and explicitly includes the novels". ''

Ninja: "The wiki doesn't decide that, it tiers canon based on association relative to the author."

' Legion: "Who decided this was the case for Naruto/Boruto? The wiki cant do that. The fans cant do that. The series is in the hands of a different writer now and most if not all of these things are overseen by Kishimoto....Kodachi(Boruto writer) wrote the Gaara Hiden novel and supervises the anime.''
 * Pretty self explanatory, I paraphrased the canon policy. '''(L:0 | N:0)

Ninja: ''"Clearly there is a separation between Naruto series and Boruto: Next generations. Being that Kishimoto was in charge of Naruto and later, as you said, Kodachi is in charge of Boruto." ''
 * Once again, the canon policy addresses all this and no it doesn't "decide" what is canon, it only tiers it. Which I tried to explain in a different manner, so I see still a misunderstanding at this point. (L:0 | N:0)

The novel cherry-pick statement was in reference to another user(s), who did just that. I can call out other peoples arguments just fine lol.

Legion: You can stop pretending that you havent been trying to tell people what is or should be canon.


 * The record agrees with me though. So, no pretending, on my part at least.

Legion: ''It is a double standard to give the definition of canon and to explain what is usually canon? Apparently you dont understand the word usually, but its used to describe what is typical of something but is subject to variation.''


 * Did I say that? No. The strawman counter #1 lol.

Legion: ''It's a double standard to point out when Kishimoto explicitly stated that a nom-manga work was canon to his manga? ''


 * Did I say that? No. Strawman counter #2.

Legion: "It's double standard to point out how Kishimoto (the sole author at that time) disregarded disregarded anime events in his story?"


 * Did I say that? No. Strawman counter #3.

Legion: It's a double standard to say that the NEP has blurred the lines of authorship and canon?


 * Did I say that? No. strawman counter #4.

Legion: You are stretching harder than Mr. Fantastic


 * I'm more a Superman, because I'm a Man Of Steel. And so are my arguments lol.

In your last response, you doubled posted which is not allowed. Secondly, you seemed to not understand my point of how you @Legion, can't give me @Ninja Of War the benefit of the doubt with regards to your criticism, on "using the canon policy and related definitions for canon, explaining my point of view with examples". Yet, give yourself tonnes of benefit of the doubt on the same thing. Which itself is a Double standard yes.

The funny thing is I actually made mentions before, to the NEP, anime only content, non-manga work made canon, and canon definitions. But alas, you are not looking for a discussion.

Sorry again @EveryoneElse for the wallpost.