Subetenomono no Naku Koro Ni (Voting Time!)

[kwando1313]

They can be, but I Knox no longer is binding to me, since we cannot prove Knox is being followed.

[Enthalpy]

DWaM never claimed that rules besides the 4th and 8th were being followed, you know.

It's impossible to prove that ANY rule applies to ANY universe, unless something that transcends that universe says so. For instance, prove gravity. We can't, but we still believe it exists because we can't find a counterexample, no matter what test we throw at it. The same logic is being used here, as DWaM said from the beginning. We're using the rules that appear to be consistently followed to make predictions and deductions. If you deny that in an untestable manner, then you can claim literally anything through infinite "unknown trick X's". If you're asking us to prove things beyond an unreasonable doubt, then by definition, reasoning cannot do it.

[eighthbit]

Well Kwando, congratulations.

You explained all the murders... but you haven't explained all the fantasy! Explain that with small bombs!

[kwando1313]

@Thally: That's... not my argument though. I'm just using that as an argument against why I have to break Knox's 4th and 8th: Those are crutches, not necessities in detective fiction, and you've shown yourself that the AA series is not a Knoxian mystery.

[DWaM]

Welp kwando, you have a point there. There's nothing for me to do.

But then again, at the end of the day?

Spoiler : :

Has some spelling/wrong words during formulating, but I think it gets my point across quite nicely, don't you?

[DeeYo]

Spoiler : :

[DWaM]

...Alright, do you people even read what I write anymore or what?

You're right, the OP mentions nothing about this. But it's YOU that are using it as something to back up your claims (or rather, to avoid backing them up -- but this is regarding the Umineko rules, at least). Not to mention - every discussion is a debate, in a way. And you can't just godmod your way through everything and say "I win". It has rules. Basic logic.

We're discussing AA. Which means that you will have to follow by its rules. ...In fact, I'm not even sure why we ended up bringing Umineko into this, at all.

Also - this topic's main discussion isn't Ace Attorney. So I see no reason why it should be there in the first place.

Give up now, and I promise I'll give you a quick locked room death.

[DeeYo]

But if we are making up silly theories, there isn't a lot of chance we're going to find something in the original AA games that prove them, are we?
Indeed, godmodding is immoral, but face it: there isn't a lot of leeway in theorizing considering that every piece of evidence and every foreshadowing was for something else: the ingame solution.

[DWaM]

And tell me - where did you get the idea that the theories should be silly?

It's BECAUSE your theory is silly that I refuse to accept it. I admit, a little bending of the facts is alright, if your take on an off-hand line or a piece of evidence or a logic jump that makes you raise your eyebrow and come up with something actually interesting. But this? No. I won't allow it. Jumping everything because "it's small bombs, lol", refusing to accept any kind of logic to it, and trying again and again avoiding the obvious huge issue by putting a crap ton of small ones is something that I will not accept.

I direct you to the alternative solution of Umineko. It's an 8-hour video of a guy taking the ENTIRE UMINEKO, and taking what is supposed to be "obvious" foreshadowing and turning it into a theory actually worth listening to and, yes, he stretches some points. But you know what? It has less logic gaps than the actual solution.

[DeeYo]

But the small bombs theory must prevail!

[DWaM]

No.
It won't.

[DeeYo]

You don't need to accept our theory. You can come up with your own, that makes more sense and fits into the AA universe more than this.
But I'll stick with small bombs, and since there is no definitive proof that this theory did not happen in the AA universe, for me, it is perfectly valid. (I also need to practice escaping sticky situations using wordplay and never-seen-before stupidity.)

[DWaM]

I have one for you - the Ace Attorney canon.

And that "definitive proof" is your lack of proof it did happen/contradictions with the rules/what was shown to be true in the games/the evidence/the confessions/the motives. You know. That kind of stuff. You lose.

...Now then! Can someone PLEASE present a theory actually worthwile arguing on?

[DeeYo]

Hm...Kuter Exxer being Maya and Trucy, arranging every murder scene from the start?

[DWaM]

Right, except for-

NO! I am NOT doing this again.

*walks out*

....My revenge for all of this will be swift, btw.