Timeless Voids Standards Issues (Staff only)

[Bobsican]

Okay, removed previous reply per Ploz's request.

Basically he showed it to everyone already apparently, and thinks that the way the discussion is going now is good to go, repectively.

 

[DarkDragonMedeus]

We are not equating fiction to RL. Yes, out standards are very math based, but it's not like where's just going to say "Superhumans and hax don't exist" and all that jazz.

It's just that moving outside of time is not Infinite speed. Crossing Infinite distances within a finite amount of time or "Moving faster than the flow of time" is Infinite speed.

 

[Antvasima]

I think that we seem to have enough support for that we at least need some sort of confirmation that infinite speed is required to move in a timeless void for the occasion in question to count.

I would appreciate if Sera is willing to apply this change to the Timeless Voids Standards page.

We can then continue to discuss whether or not more than that is necessary.

 

[Sera_EX]

You don't need infinite speed to move in a timeless void. We simply cannot know the speed of such characters. It's undefinable. Using them seems to be fundamentally wrong.

 

[The_King_of_Prudence]

They're moving without using time. As they haven't shown moving through temporal dimensions, we just assume that they can do the same thing in a world with time.

 

[Antvasima]

Okay. I just meant that we will likely migrate to a new forum quite soon, and it would be very useful if we get something constructive done here before that, so starting with at least applying what most staff agree should be an absolute minimum seems appropriate.

 

[Sera_EX]

Considering what's been discussed, I believe there are two options available:

A. A "timeless void" section should be implemented into the Speed page discussing why the speed equation doesn't apply to a timeless void. (Ignoring timeless voids altogether).

B. Timeless voids grant immeasurable speed as was discussed earlier, assuming all other requirements such as consistency are fulfilled and that there is some other form of evidence for it outside the void stuff. (Changing some timeless voids to immeasurable speed).

Option A is the most accurate whereas Option B leaves room for some more fluid interpretation of certain feats, since it was said by two users very knowledgeable in math (Aeyu offsite and Pritti on-site) that it could possibly be immeasurable albeit mostly undefined.

Regardless of which option we choose characters will be downgraded (albeit Option B means a few will be upgraded) or placed at Unknown.

 

[Antvasima]

I much prefer option A in that case. Immeasurable speed seems unreliable and exaggerated.

 

[DarkDragonMedeus]

I also agree with Option A. I'm iffy about Timeless Voids being a basis for '''Immeasurable''' unless it's really that elaborate.

 

[Udlmaster]

I will say, a Timeless voids should for all intents and purposes posses "0" as their value for their value of time.
Simply put, Time is merely the way we measure change in space, if there is no time (timeless) then there is "0" change, there isn't regressive change/change in reverse (1 Aspect of Immeasurable speed) and it's not simply progressing either.

Because of this, this still means that "Time" (The change in space) is 0, this means that the equation isn't broken when it comes to Timeless Void (In retrospect, I find the change aspect of Time particularly ironic when Voids are by nature timeless as they are a void meaning no change can occur anyway)

Immeasurable speed is when you appear before you moved, negative time value. If Timeless Voids had no time value then it would be superior to Immeasurable speed.

Just food for thought.

 

[Sera_EX]

I disagree. '''How we measure time''' is based on change within space because we otherwise cannot measure or even perceive time at its fullest. We can't see the past or the future due to our limited perspective.

 

[AKM sama]

I agree with Option A.

 

[Antvasima]

@Sera

Would it be acceptable to rewrite our Timeless Voids Standards page instead, to explain why we do not use them to scale speed, instead? It seems inappropriate with a long section in an official statistics page.

 

[Sera_EX]

I'm fine with that.

 

[Antvasima]

Okay. Thanks. Are you willing to handle it?

 

[Agnaa]

Predates/transcends/etc.

Simple "outside of time" or "devoid of time" doesn't apply without additional context.

I strongly strongly disagree with giving immeasurable for predating time. Transcendence (when done properly) implies that the character can access/act at any point in time that they want, which is immeasurable speed. Predating doesn't imply that at all. Transcending is not predating and the two should not be conflated, as they were in this post.

 

[LSirLancelotDuLacl]

Gotta have to agree with Agnaa on this, unless due context shows that, in the verse, predating time is enough for the character to indeed traverse or act upon any point of it at his own discretion.

 

[Sera_EX]

I mean, I don't think we should use voids at all for reasons Pritti already outlined. You're responding to a relatively older comment of mine, which was part of a compromise I was trying to get pushed. Now though, I've dropped that in favor of the most accurate and realistic approach.

 

[Agnaa]

I mean, I don't think we should use voids at all for reasons Pritti already outlined. You're responding to a relatively older comment of mine, which was part of a compromise I was trying to get pushed. Now though, I've dropped that in favor of the most accurate and realistic approach.

Oh I'm sorry, Ogbunabali KingPin0422 told me that this thread concluded that characters would be given immeasurable for predating time, and your comment was the most clear example of that I found with a quick search.

EDIT: After reading through the thread more thoroughly, with Sera's options, I'd prefer option A and I strongly disagree with option B. If timeless voids remain as feats they should be infinite not immeasurable as the former is more accurate, even though unknown is the most accurate.

And as an aside, keeping that explanation on the Timeless Voids Standards page instead of the speed page is a fine way to implement Option A

 

[Ogbunabali]

Oh I'm sorry, Ogbunabali told me that this thread concluded that characters would be given immeasurable for predating time, and your comment was the most clear example of that I found with a quick search.

Agnaa I quite literally never said this, nor was it ever directed at you, please don't take things I said out of context.

 

[Agnaa]

Sorry my bad, it was KingPin0422 who said that. You commented about things being true for voids and those being the standards, but it seems like you were talking about Low 1-C rather than the immeasurable speed part.

 

[Hykuu]

Remember when the thread was staff only?

Also, Option A seems good

 

[Antvasima]

Option A seems to have been accepted. Would you be willing to rewrite our Timeless Voids Standards page accordingly Sera, or is somebody else here experienced and willing enough to do so?

 

[Sera_EX]

And as an aside, keeping that explanation on the Timeless Voids Standards page instead of the speed page is a fine way to implement Option A

That's fine, although it's not the most lengthy explanation (it's actually like 2-3 sentences long) so it could go anywhere.

Option A seems to have been accepted. Would you be willing to rewrite our Timeless Voids Standards page accordingly Sera, or is somebody else here experienced and willing enough to do so?

I can, sometime later.

 

[Antvasima]

Thank you. Should the Timeless Voids Standards page keep some sort of explanation regarding what a timeless void is as well?

 

[Antvasima]

Also, please tell us here when you are done.

 

[Pritti]

A thorough explanation is unneeded, but if necessary I can ask Aeyu about the most appropriate way to explain it and post it here. It can then be transferred to either page as you see fit. I don't think we should pile more on Sera than she already has.

 

[Antvasima]

Okay. Feel free to help out if you wish.

 

[Antvasima]

Bump.

It is important that we get this revision done.

 

[The_King_of_Prudence]

I should have commented this last time, stop bumping a clearly dead thread.

 

[Crabwhale]

Alright, this is a staff only thread, and you're not only being extremely rude but useless as well.

 

[Bobsican]

I should have commented this last time, stop bumping a clearly dead thread.

This is an extremely important wiki-wide revision in standards, do you have a better idea? The forum move is coming close and stuff has to be concluded soon.

 

[Antoniofer]

Techincally the revision is concluded, we just wait for Sera to make the changes and make it official. Then, guess all verses affected will be revised in their respective threads. Unless I'm missing something.

 

[Antvasima]

If Sera is unable to handle this, somebody else in the staff can do so if they know what they are doing.

 

[Sera_EX]

This is my mistake, apologies there. I got caught up in some motherly shenanigans and forgot all about this.

 

[Antvasima]

No problem. Thank you for the help.

 

[DarkDragonMedeus]

It's alright Sera, your kids are far more important the Timeless voids revisions.

 

[Shubham_Sonsurkar]

And Just when DBH met the standards ;(

 

[Antvasima]

@Sera

I would appreciate if you tell us here when you are done.

 

[DarkDragonMedeus]

Sera said she will be unavailable, so someone else is going to have to take over with rewriting the timeless void standards without her. I do notice Pritti and/or Yumi-Tan might be knowledgeable on the topic which Sera said she could message Pritti. Though I was informed that Pritti might be in an even worse case given she's a student. But I could update the page if someone else is willing to write a proper explanation.