The "Impossible" Challenge
View Single Post
) [ ]
03-10-2009, 03:41 PM
Studied Zelda Lore: 2002-2009 [Sealed Forever]
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: The Archives of Zelda Theorizing
Re: The "Impossible" Challenge
Originally Posted by
Hombre de Mundo
Here's the thing: Newbies will always come here without reading the rules and without reading guidelines or the newbie's guide. They'll just do what they came to do. Are you suggesting that everytime someone violates these guidelines we're supposed to reffer them to these guidelines or talk like we would today? Because if it's the latter, I don't see any need for it. And should we reffer them to the guidelines, we'd just be smashing a tl;dr thing in their face that they most likely don't care to read or the person doesn't quite understand and fails to apply it even though the person has read it.
It's not quite the latter. Erimgard once had a personal Zelda Theorizing board, and there were stages from Beginner to Experienced Theorists. "Experienced theorist" take things a few steps further with how they choose to analyze elements they use to support a theory. To me, when newbie theorists make that transition to becoming more versed in their canon (be it by research or influence by other senior members), they need to be subject to the guidelines.
From my experience, I don't believe any newbie theorist should tackle proving a timeline belief until they have accumulated a good set of theories (non-overall-chronology-specific) under there belt. Since I have no serious chronological bias, I find for myself this gives one time to rethink things, become versed in canon in different areas, and explore other options on the table.
Impossible is an experienced theorist, and he has been challenging how senior theorists here have been going about deciphering canon. This is an issue that effects the guidelines by those whom type it up. If these issues can be resolved, then it should be less chaos on the newbies when senior theorists start pounding away why something is or isn't correct, but rather being a guide instead.
In fact if I may be so bold to propose, we could have a "Newbie's Guide" and "Experienced Guide". And it doesn't need to be seen as elitist, just a higher level of debating and deciphering standards. How the latter guide is constructed does however reflect on the Newbies guide... but not as heavily of course.
The reason I am targeting Impossible is because he is the embodiment of what I feel is
's spirit in general. He has the the balls to come and stand behind the minority beliefs here, challenging the majority way of thinking on these boards. I respect that. So let's give him the stage he deserves.
'The Historian Conscious'
Originally Posted by
You can have a timeline, or you can have canon, but not both . If one strictly follows the strictest form of canon, the timeline is ultimately destroyed. On the other hand, if one strives to create the most coherent timeline, the canon must be broken by corollary. It is the unfortunate world in which Nintendo has placed us, and now it is up to decide which road we shall follow: the road of truth where nothing can be created, or the road of imagination where nothing can be destroyed.
[The History of the UWM]
[Exposing the Sheikah]
View Public Profile
Find all posts by LOZ Historian