[6.0 - 6.4 Spoilers] An interesting video detailing Venat's polarizing reception

[thegreatonemal]

I'm not moving the goalpost. You are just wrong. You're the one that said almost two. I said that's wrong. "I forgot" was all you had to say but you took two post denying it. Why? It's a pretty small thing chief. Also it matters quite a bit when you bring it up to say "I've haven't been here in forever! You were here pretty recently chief, talking about this same thing. You're also using your gifted sub to jump right back into the circlejerk."

I've told you where to find it in this thread, three times in fact. The second page, the only other thing I've said about the video is that it's tone is not neutral the person clearly has a bias. Did you want me to copy and paste it here from the second page? Having problems with your mouse? You're an adult you can do that much for yourself.

Your tally is at 8 now. I'm about to go enjoy the rest of my Sunday so I might post again today or it might not be till tomorrow, if I remember. Should I go ahead and bump your tally up to 10 or 12. Just to get on top of your reply to this post? I'd not recommend trying to make a tally, you've already shown that you don't know that 2022 to 2023 is only one and you tend to forget so we can't really trust any tally you count.

To your side note. The mods here supply the safe space, not you. I really don't think anyone has been harassed like what you're describing here. Hell you can't even give me an example of what I specified here. But you think people here are in danger from far worse. Taking pretty big leaps there chief.

[Vyrerus]

The actual subject mater? That was disproven with the quote on the the second page from Venat.

No, it wasn't. Those quotes were taken and reframed with information not given or referred to within them. They also ignore in game things that refute them. They were also given not in response to the video, which the poster admitted to not having watched a few posts later, but to someone else's post.

They were also rebutted on that same page, Chief. And by a couple of people at that. Try again, Oats.

[thegreatonemal]

No, it wasn't. Those quotes were taken and reframed with information not given or referred to within them. They also ignore in game things that refute them. They were also given not in response to the video, which the poster admitted to not having watched a few posts later, but to someone else's post.

They were also rebutted on that same page, Chief. And by a couple of people at that. Try again, Oats.

Them making some stuff up on the spot is not in fact refuting what was said in the quote. That falls under something like an opinion. "I don't like that, they should of done X." What I'm asking you for is in game proof refuting what Veant said and her reasons for not telling the convocation. Or you need to show that she was lying or never did the things she said. Which you cannot do.

Maybe read what was said and what was being asked of you. Do we need to start a tally for you too? Also who is oats?

[KizuyaKatogami]

Them making some stuff up on the spot is not in fact refuting what was said in the quote. That falls under something like an opinion. "I don't like that, they should of done X." What I'm asking you for is in game proof refuting what Veant said and her reasons for not telling the convocation. Or you need to show that she was lying or never did the things she said. Which you cannot do.

Maybe read what was said and what was being asked of you. Do we need to start a tally for you too? Also who is oats?

So much for probably not posting lmao. Like i said, addiction. I’ll pray for you.

[thegreatonemal]

So much for probably not posting lmao. Like i said, addiction. I’ll pray for you.

You really have an issue with only reading parts of what people say. The tally is nine. I'll pick up with you tomorrow. I was talking to the other guy, a conversation between two people and you aren't one of the two you see. Hope you understand

[jameseoakes]

I don't count Pandaemonium because it doesn't link into the main Ancient storyline in the MSQ and has nothing at all to do with the characters that everyone argues about. It's not the main Ancient storyline, it's a tangent that doesn't even really tell us much we didn't know lore-wise beyond character growth and set dressing isolated to just the raid. Because we have access to a zone with living Ancients in it, it's an excuse to go back and give us further insight into Lahabrea, who otherwise has been dead for 8 years. And I guess to have Elidibus with his mask off. Of all the 8-man raids, it probably has the least relevancy in the actual main plot after Alexander.

It doesn't add any relevant information to people for or against Venat or her role in the story except that it triple-downs on Ancients being flawed, just like Sundered people. And just like the Greek gods many of them are named after, many of them are extremely prideful and sure of their own authority to make drastic changes to the world and its people as well as that might makes right, which is something the writers have already told us about both Emet-Selch and Venat.

That's still part of the ancients story so seems odd to discount it. Also wasn't part of the problem with the ancients that they were 'too perfect' but they seem to be depicting them as very humanly flawed as where did you get might makes right in ancient society?

[Magikazam]

The thing about it is this subject isn't really about discussion or debate; the people who bring this subject up time and again are just looking for validation of their opinions. As a public discussion space people are free to bring up whatever topics they want, but should have the wisdom to recognize when irreconcilable differences of opinion exist and the maturity to not go around kicking hornet's nests.

Some people like and enjoy the game in spite of criticism; that doesn't make them lesser, but said critics often espouse this idea when their criticism is rebuffed or not validated. People are passionate about the game, on both sides of the fence; I don't think that's a bad thing, but there has to be a point where you recognize you aren't convincing anyone of anything (preaching to the choir doesn't count) and discussion is unproductive. 1.5 years in should be well past that point.

I mean, yea some people bring it up just for validation, but other people who talk about it in the thread may just be interested in discussing it or god forbid, they are new players who just finished the 6.0 MSQ. A topic being 1,5 years old doesn't matter as it is the lore forum..the point to talk about lore. If you tired of the discussion or people bringing it up, just don't join the thread, If people bring it up in an unrelated topic, bring it up and tell them this is not what the conversation is about.

I just don't get why you decide to ''time gate'' thing about Venat. Should we spam people who talking in the Miqo'te naming convention to stop talking about the subject cause most information about the subject date from 1.0 and 2.0?

[Iscah]

I mean, yea some people bring it up just for validation, but other people who talk about it in the thread may just be interested in discussing it or god forbid, they are new players who just finished the 6.0 MSQ.

Theoretically yes. And we do have one new person who has come in to discuss, which is a rare sight.

For the most part it is the same group of people having the same argument they've been having across multiple threads for a year and a half, with nothing new to add on either side.

[MikkoAkure]

That's still part of the ancients story so seems odd to discount it. Also wasn't part of the problem with the ancients that they were 'too perfect' but they seem to be depicting them as very humanly flawed as where did you get might makes right in ancient society?

It has naught to do with the whole Ancient story in the MSQ and the morality around the Sundering that is being discussed ad nauseam. It's an Ancient story, not the Ancient story. It's like bringing up the dietary habits of the Redbelly bandits when discussing whether or not is was OK for the Hyur and the Elezen to join the Elementals and leave Gelmorra. There was never a problem with them being "too perfect", not sure where that comes from.

And as for my comment on "might makes right", it was mentioned in an interview that Hermes (I thought it was Venat, but she does the same exact thing) and Emet-Selch make objective judgements against an entire people and have the power to make it happen whether the people want it or not. All 3 wield comparatively unstoppable power to have their will made manifest against an entire people whether that be out-of-context magic the Ancients have no defense against - Hermes, being a near-literal god with the power to split souls, the very world, and another near-literal god into 14 pieces - Venat/Hydaelyn, or being an omnipotent ghost who kills millions upon millions of people and shatters whole worlds to bring back the people who were sacrificed - Emet-Selch.

I just don't get why you decide to ''time gate'' thing about Venat. Should we spam people who talking in the Miqo'te naming convention to stop talking about the subject cause most information about the subject date from 1.0 and 2.0?

It's one thing to discuss new, fresh topics on decade-old lore like again, the dietary habits of the Redbelly bandits. But it's another to constantly bring up a dead horse topic that's been gone over repeatedly again and again with no end in sight and no new information at all provided in a year and a half and call it "relevant" just because the climax happened in the same expansion we're currently in despite the story having long moved on. None of the arguments change, there's no new critical insight, and no one is convinced of anything at all and just digs harder.

It may become relevant again in December when we have a new lore book, but so far every single time a new tidbit is added it always shines a light on Venat and doesn't make anyone from the "pro-Zodiark camp" happy anyway.

[Cilia]

I just don't get why you decide to ''time gate'' thing about Venat. Should we spam people who talking in the Miqo'te naming convention to stop talking about the subject cause most information about the subject date from 1.0 and 2.0?

I'm not trying to or even suggesting anything be time gated. New faces with new ideas are always welcome, as are questions about older lore bits.

That's not what happened here, though. What happened here is someone posted a negatively critical YouTube video, positive critics argued against it, and negative critics came out of the woodwork to argue against them and have their negative opinions of the Endwalker story validated, leading to an echo chamber and personal attacks. The issue is interminably contentious, and when the same familiar faces show out and make the same familiar moves...

There's a reason I call it dancing.