I have many years of experience with the Tier system, and I do not understand why you are saying all of this now, as if just saying that means I am lying or that you want me to say I do not know. In any case, that does not matter at all.
Because you don't have experience with it. You're new here, you've been asking questions which on its own is a good thing, but these questions aren't the mark of someone who's "experienced" with this stuff and your insufficient understanding of why this wouldn't work also proves that you have no experience here
First, why do you not understand what I am saying? I already told you that the Strange Lights Whirlpool dimension is a five-dimensional realm, and this is something everyone agrees on.
No, literally no one agrees with this and even if some people do, it's not currently accepted on the site. Do you even know the difference between 5D and Low 1-C? They're not the same, do you know why? Let's see if you're really experienced.
The issue is that some moderators and staff members only asked me to prove that the size of this dimension is at least cosmic in order for the tier to be accepted. However, this request is a fallacy.
It's not a fallacy this is literally a standard that has been in place for years. This is how I know you have no experience; I don't know why you claim that you do when you're expressing outright incredulity at a standard that has existed for years and is otherwise known to everyone else here and agreed upon to. Seriously, please stop and think about this. Who's right here? Dozens of people who've been here far longer than you saying one thing, or you who is clearly new and inexperienced talking about the exact opposite? Who do you think is correct here?
I went to staff members who have more experience with tiering than those who commented on my thread, and they told me clearly that we do not require proof of a dimension’s size as long as the work does not state that it is small or less than cosmic.
No, that is NOT what they said. Go ahead and quote them or call them here, I guarantee they didn't say what you're saying they did and instead you're misinterpreting them BECAUSE you're inexperienced with the standards and didn't know what they were talking about.
Otherwise, it is treated as cosmic by default. This is exactly what I am telling you now.
No, no it's not. By that logic, every random "dimension" in any verse would be cosmic by default and thus at least Low 2-C by default too but that's clearly not the case and we always require strong evidence to prove that it is cosmic sized. What makes you think this is an exception?
So when some moderators and staff asked me to prove its size, that was a fallacy, because the work never stated that the dimension is non-cosmic or smaller than cosmic.
It was not a fallacy, they were asking you to prove a claim and satisfy a very key standard that applies universally. You failed to do that and that's why it got rejected but you still didn't learn. You're placing the burden of proof on them, that is a classic fallacy right there. They're not required to prove that it's non-cosmic or compact, you're supposed to prove that it non-compact or cosmic.
Therefore, it is directly considered cosmic in size, and that request has no meaning at all. As such, the dimension is cosmic in size because the work never said otherwise.
No, not how it works. Already explained everything above. Go ahead and quote whatever those staff told you, we'll see right here what they said and what you're claiming they said.
I also know that many people have tried to do this before, but not like me.
Ah there it is! The classical "everyone is wrong but me!" nonsense. Seriously dude, stop this.
I reviewed those threads, and they were all incomplete and incorrect.
No, most of them were exactly the same as yours (I'd argue some were even better) because we only have a limited amount of information to work with and EVERYONE has seen that movie anyway, it's not some hidden obscure thing nor is it possible to just "twist" existing, non-qualifying information into suddenly, magically qualifying for it. That's not how this site works and you're just gonna mess everything up for other supporters and develop a bad reputation for it too.
This does not depend on “people” in general, but on the individual and their experience.
Of which you clearly have none, but no, it does depend on people. The entire idea behind this site is a bunch of people coming together to scale and index their favorite verses, no individual person or their expertise alone is ever enough and massive CRTs like these are almost always a joint effort between everyone. You really don't understand how this site works. Every sentence you type; your sheer inexperience keeps becoming more and more obvious.
Not everyone who opens a thread about something will perform the same as someone else; it depends on the person’s expertise.
Not the point. It's not about you, it's about the information that's available.
I mentioned this here first to discuss the matter before opening the thread directly.
And we're telling you that it's not gonna work and actively discouraging you from it. You got your answer, so will you finally listen?
As for the report that was filed against me, that was just a problem and a misunderstanding, and it has already been resolved.
That's not how reports work. If you keep up similar behavior and spam low quality threads, you can get an actual formal warning, and if you continue after that even an actual topic ban or worse a discussion rule for the verse. You really do not know anything do you dude?
Right now, I am simply clarifying the issue regarding the dimension’s size and the request for proof that was made.
You're not clarifying anything, you're misinterpreting whatever you were told by staff (again, post whatever you were told, quote them, and then we can discuss that) and blatantly ignoring a very obvious and easy-to-understand standard.
