• This forum is strictly intended to be used by members of the VS Battles wiki. Please only register if you have an autoconfirmed account there, as otherwise your registration will be rejected. If you have already registered once, do not do so again, and contact Antvasima if you encounter any problems.

    For instructions regarding the exact procedure to sign up to this forum, please click here.
  • We need Patreon donations for this forum to have all of its running costs financially secured.

    Community members who help us out will receive badges that give them several different benefits, including the removal of all advertisements in this forum, but donations from non-members are also extremely appreciated.

    Please click here for further information, or here to directly visit our Patreon donations page.
  • Please click here for information about a large petition to help children in need.

Regarding the existence of Composite human: Part 2

Status
Not open for further replies.
Ok. I don't know why the first thought is to move them to a place even less appropriate where they're not wanted, instead of putting it as a blog that's linked on the real life verse page as a reference in case someone wants to use its feats.
 
Hence why I'm low key upset that everyone resorted to moving it in places it doesn't belong and making Prom and whoever else have to deal with shit we made. Please do consider blogs as options, everyone.
 
I want CH to stay because I think it's awesome Humanity RL's best to offer, fighting against fiction characters.
 
It is. Otherwise, we can just nuke the wiki. People seem to not understand that making exceptions to rules doesn't mean there are no rules. It's like being a pacifist except when someone is trying to kill you is breaking your pacifism to some of these guys.

But whatever. Just put it on a blog and keep it moving.
 
And where would the feats of the strongest humans go? What's more, saying that we can't break the rules because "it's fun" is just as subjective as what is or isn't fun. You're basically appealing to the rules because they're the rules and nothing more, knowing damn well that the reason they exist is to prevent problems from arousing. If there are no problems, we don't have any reason to be against breaking a rule. It's arbitrary as hell, because at best, you presupppose every rule should be followed without contradiction whilst the other end of the spectrum means any time a rule can be broken with no consequences, the disregard of that rule is by definition inconsequential.

But who cares. We shouldn't wait around for people to come in and debate this shit when we can just make a blog and move on.
 
The feats for the strongest humans could very well just go to a blog or be moved somewhere else, there's really no reason to keep a page that isn't allowed just because of them.

Yeah, pretty much, rules are rules. Exceptions can be made sometimes, but CH isn't one of those cases, since a bunch of other pages exactly like him were deleted because of these same rules, and the only reason he was kept was due to popularity, which was agreed not to be a valid reason (meaning that, yes, there is a problem with the page, since the only reason it was kept around is invalid); no other reason to make an exception has been given, except for the fact that some people just don't want the page deleted, so keeping CH around would just be going "**** the rules because we say so".
 
No. That's a slippery slope fallacy. It doesn't ****** matter. Unfollowing. Just remember to advocate for the blog option instead of just throwing it to some other wiki because you don't like it.
 
Slippery slope is a logical fallacy in which a party asserts that a relatively small first step leads to a chain of related events culminating in some significant effect.

That really doesn't have anything to do with what I'm saying, slippery slope would be if I said "doing this exception once would result in it being done all the time", something I never said. I don't think making an exception for CH would start a slippery slope, and if there was a good reason to make an exception for him, then it could be made just fine, but the thing is: there isn't one. There's no reason to make an exception for CH, people just don't want the page to be deleted even when they know it breaks the rules.
 
XSOULOFCINDERX said:
A blog sounds fine I guess.
Click to expand...
I made a page on Joke-Battle Wiki. I hope with my heart that he doesn't become a joke character.
 
I want Composite Human to stay, but I feel like there's a stronger argument to remove him than to keep him as a profile. Haven't read through the whole of the first thread yet, but I'm siding towards agree.
 
Sucks considering the fact I just got a win against them with a character I enjoy. But still don't see any strong arguments to keep it that isn't just popularity.
 
Even it up with a disagreement from me then. It's literally exactly a slippery slope fallacy to imply that breaking the rules for this will set a problematic precedent, when there's no reason it should. Exactly as Paulo explained, and yet he's supporting the removal based on the rules all the same, along with appealing to "rules are rules" instead of explaining WHY we should follow this rule at this time. He just keeps on replying to the question "What's the harm in not following this rule ONCE?" with "Breaking the rules is bad because it's bad." No affects. No real consequences.

And I don't care if this sounds like an appeal to motive, the fact that their first reaction to this is to delete the page and force it into obscurity instead of putting it on a blog to keep it on this site somehow demonstrates that he's at least somewhat biased against the profile. He said so himself.

Answer this. And not with "Rules are rules" bs plz.

Why should we follow a rule that will cause no lasting negative effects and changes to our system if it is broken once and never again? Saying that it wasn't deleted before like all the others and it should have been is false, because the very fact of its existence here demonstrates there was something— it's popularity— that made it an exception. To argue that fun is enough is just as reasonable as saying that following the rules for the sake of rules is a good thing. You didn't even bother providing people with the simplistic solution of blogs, but instead allowed chaos surrounding its erradication and otherwise fall into obscurity to take hold, making people put it or delete it off of wikis it doesn't belong. All because it's probably true that you'd Like it to not exist at all, and disagree with its value, so what happens to it doesn't matter. It caused needless argument and worrying, just refusing to figure out how it can be preserved in value.
 
  • "It's literally exactly a slippery slope fallacy to imply that breaking the rules for this will set a problematic precedent"
    • Something I never did. Again, I don't think making an exception for CH would start a slippery slope, it's just that exceptions need a good reson to happen, and CH has none.
  • "What's the harm in not following this rule ONCE?"
    • None, if there's a good reason to do so, there is. CH has no reason.
  • "The fact that their first reaction to this is to delete the page and force it into obscurity instead of putting it on a blog to keep it on this site somehow demonstrates that he's at least somewhat biased against the profile."
    • That was so the people who like CH would still have the chance to use him in vs threads on another wiki, since blogs can't be used serious in threads. And again, a blog is fine as well; I don't care where CH goes as long as he doesn't stay as a page.
  • "He said so himself."
    • Appeal to motive.
  • "Why should we follow a rule that will cause no lasting negative effects and changes to our system if it is broken once and never again?"
    • Because there's no good reason to. You're pretty much asking me to "give a reason not to make an exception", when it is up to you to give a reason why the exception should be made. The burden of proof is always on the positive claim, and the person who makes the claim. Again, if you can give me a good reason as to why an exception should be made, then I would be fine with making it, but nobody has given any good reason.
  • "The very fact of its existence here demonstrates there was something— it's popularity— that made it an exception."
    • It was agreed by most in the last thread that popularity is not a valid reason.
  • "To argue that fun is enough is just as reasonable as saying that following the rules for the sake of rules is a good thing."
    • Yeah, because rules should be followed, unless there's a reason to make an exception. CH has no good reason, people just want an exception because they don't want him gone.
  • "You didn't even bother providing people with the simplistic solution of blogs, but instead allowed chaos surrounding its erradication and otherwise fall into obscurity to take hold, making people put it or delete it off of wikis it doesn't belong."
    • Already responded to this previously, and again, a blog is fine as well.
  • "All because it's probably true that you'd Like it to not exist at all, and disagree with its value, so what happens to it doesn't matter. It caused needless argument and worrying, just refusing to figure out how it can be preserved in value."
    • Appeal to motive.
 
Domestic Cat Should deatle or renamed that cat in the picture because we are not allow to make Domestic Dog.

I Disagreed because we need something to replace composite human.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Yobo_Blue
Regarding the existence of Composite Human
11 12 13
Replies
493
Views
9K
Yobo_Blue
Yobo_Blue
Psychomaster35
(GRACE) Gumball fights a Speaker Box because budget cuts
2
Replies
46
Views
2K
GoCommitDi
GoCommitDi
Bob8999
Velociraptors vs Ewoks
2
Replies
63
Views
1K
Bob8999
Bob8999
Bobsican
Gumball Vs. Riolu
2 3
Replies
88
Views
2K
Soupywolf5
Soupywolf5
Adem_Warlock69
  • Locked
Gumball fights The Snatcher....Again
Replies
21
Views
2K
Adem_Warlock69
Adem_Warlock69
Back
Top