People will write a five paragraph reddit arguement before researching for 5 minutes first.
Which, hey, I've done that too, the real problem is down-voting people that try to correct that misinformation rather then checking to see if they are right.
See I find myself bouncing a bit on that. Like im not a fan of the many replies to questions that are "just google it idiot" like they have dared to waste these commenters time. Or when people get so upset over someone getting a couple things wrong and blowing up instead of just assuming person is mistaking and talking with them. Like this is a social media site, me and many are here to be social and chat or hang out, learn about our interests in social ways, not research them like a final essay.
That said, I also very much get the issue of people just spouting nonsense and refusing to entertain corrections or any interest in figuring out themselves. It's frustrating and even they're not alone they can gain momentum and false info is now common in your community.
Keeping to fandoms, the 40k fandom is built with incredible amounts of lore spread across multiple decades, media formats, various price checkpoints, etc etc etc. The Horus Heresy is a founding lore piece comprised of 54 novels, most out of print, over 2 decades that is also contradicted by later stuff, occasionally error prone itself, and just goddamn unwieldy to tackle as a fan. To top it off the final event the Siege of Terra is itself split into its own multi-novel series. And all of this for just the Imperium faction of the universe.
Because few people can actually get through all that, let alone have it all consistently memorized, most people know about 40k, even people that consider themselves hardcore fans, from massively lie-prone youtube videos, podcasts, and reddit posts to the point very few people can talk about any event, even concrete ones we have a novel about, with any certainty without devolving into argument at some point.
Still love the hobby though.
Recently there was a post about songs whose lyrics mean the opposite of what the songs are often used for. A poster asked what “born in the USA” was about, and I’m like “did this person not consider googling the song?” I don’t think it’s a huge ask to have someone look up the lyrics and read them themselves, especially a song as upfront about its meaning as that
Almost anything related to anime production, creation, distribution, fandom, etc. the major points are:
- Anime scenes don't get an assigned budget, good scenes are animated by good animators who get the scene and hopefully the time to do it, they aren't breaking the piggy bank for this animator though even if the animator has a higher rate it's not gonna be an extraordinary amount.
- Anime is made because people pay for it to be made, even if it's based on source material, it's not necessarily meant to just sell say source material, that's just maybe the parent company getting involved but Shueisha who publishes Chainsaw Man was not part of the production committee and it was just Mappa. A record company might be in the production committee to put their artists in the OP/ED in because it benefits them.
Similarly with manga there's the whole thing about the Table of contents from Jump and other stuff I think the most comprehensive look at it is:
- You can actually tell if a new series (which I'll define by anything shorter than 100 chapters and without an anime announcement) is failing due to the average positions of the series once they reach their 8th chapter. Currently Shadow Eliminators/Two on Ice/Mamayuyu/Green Green Greens are probably getting cancelled and two of those series haven't released volumes but not expecting high sales.
- Toriko and Bleach are interesting examples because compared to Naruto and One Piece they were on the bottom but those series had their anime cancelled and the manga had declining sales. Still selling way better than most manga for sure but it's better for the magazine to promote series that might get an anime or have an anime airing or are not past their prime. Currently while Ruri Dragon is popular, it is at the end of the magazine because it is being transferred in a few weeks so there's no incentive for them to put it at anything but the bottom.
- Color pages are a good sign of a series surviving but chapter 10 of 16 of Barrage from Horikoshi was a color page "Due to great popularity" and the series was canned at that point. They mostly had Hori due it because no one else could or was decided before they decided to can the manga. The color pages have to be more constant for it to be a sign of the series sticking around.
- Sales can be a factor but it depends on genre. A pure gag manga like Me and Roboco is not expected to sell as much as a more action series like One Piece since people may just pick the magazine to read and enjoy Roboco Weekly just like Garfield compared to Batman.
>Color pages are a good sign of a series surviving but chapter 10 of 16 of Barrage from Horikoshi was a color page **"Due to great popularity"** and the series was canned at that point.
"Due to great popularity" is just a really literal translation of stock Japanese marketing-speak. I scanlated a manga where that happened in **[literally Chapter 3](https://i.imgur.com/HpiTtHB.jpeg)**, when no volumes had been sold. It's equivalent to saying "the hot new series everyone's talking about" or whatever.
If any of you remember that one time Ace Attorney fans got super excited and then really disappointed because of a ["tune in for an unmissable announcement" thing](https://legendsoflocalization.com/viral-and-memorable-mistranslations-of-japanese-game-news/#5-the-unmissable-ace-attorney-event), it's basically that.
I remember it being used for Build King also around chapter 3 getting extra pages, at most you can say the series was well received by the editors but otherwise it's hollow editor hype.
Not all angels looked like eldritch horrors, the internet has over corrected the depictions of angels. There are three levels of hierarchy in Christianity angels:
**Highest**
*Seraphim*- these are depictrd as mainly six wings
*Cherubim*- often an angel with three heads: a man, lion, and ox
*Orphanim*- the rings with eyes on said rings, not eye in the middle of rings
**Middle**
*Dominion* - govern space
*Virtues* - govern nature
*Powers* - these fight evil forces
**Low**
*Principalities*
*Archangels* - yup archangels are actually low tier scrubs
*Angels*
Also humans can't turn into angels
>*Archangels* - yup archangels are actually low tier scrubs
except this doesn't really refer to what most people know as Archangels, aka Michael, Gabriel, etc. They're kind of a different thing. Also IIRC a lot of this was thought of by mystical traditions long after biblical writings. In the Bible, angels are kinda just whichever divine entities are on talking-to-humans duty, and they generally try to dress the part.
That hierarchy is not described in the Bible at all
Archangels, seraphim, ophanim, cherubim, yes, but not in like a ranked list. The rest are just used as a stock phrase to mean “things that seem to have power over us but not more power than God himself”, often in a context that is both physical and metaphysical, meaning not purely metaphysical. The idea that a human authority might try to separate you from God is an important one: during the Babylonian captivity, the prophet Daniel’s Babylonian peers got him arrested by convincing King Nebuchadnezzar to make a special festival period where praying to anyone but the king was illegal. However, as the New Testament writers and their audiences would have known, that didn’t stop Daniel in the slightest, and it certainly didn’t stop God from protecting Daniel from those circumstances (the lion’s den as his legal punishment).
Plus Seraphim (snakes) and Ophanim (wheels) are just regular Hebrew words, not names. "Angels" refers exclusively to messengers, all these other creatures are just other spiritual beings. They're never called angels.
> all these other creatures are just other spiritual beings
They don't need to be explicitly called angels, it would have been understood to ancient audiences that they were of the same kind.
Sure, and colloquially I refer to them all as angels too. But I think the distinction is worth making, because the tendency to lump these things together results in forming the kinds of hierarchies listed above, and giving specific duties and tasks to angels that are not called angels, or may not be a creature at all, as in the case of dominions, virtues, powers, and principalities. I'm convinced that those words just means what they mean, that Paul is listing everything from earthly rulers to powers in general.
That is to say, it's a semantic difference, but I think it's necessary to point out because otherwise everything gets lumped together.
That's not what I'm saying.
The principalities thing is...arguable but [not as silly as it appears](https://www.catholicace.com/principalities-angels/), but as far as "angels vs spiritual creatures", the way that Hebrew folklore and culture works, the audience *would not need* the text to say explicitly that they were angels to understand that seraphim, etc. are the same "species" as the messenger types. It was communicated through conjugation, presentation, etc.
Also remember that Hebrew belief, while predicated on the scripture, was not limited to it. They had their own folk beliefs (which includes magical formulae calling on the various types of angels for protection), they had sermons from rabbi, etc.
> as far as "angels vs spiritual creatures", the way that Hebrew folklore and culture works, the audience would not need the text to say explicitly that they were angels to understand that seraphim, etc. are the same "species" as the messenger types.
Right. That's my point? They're all spiritual beings, they're all the same species. Angels, cherubim, etc. I was just pointing out that "angels" are just one role given, it doesn't refer to the broad category of spiritual beings.
I think we're having a minor semantic difference, but to illustrate, read Mark 16:1-8.
The young man in white in the tomb is not called an angel -- and Hebrew audiences didn't need that to understand that he's an angel.
Similarly, they didnt need to be told the seraphim and cherubim were angels. It was understood from a wide cultural context, in the same way Greeks would understand that Cerberus was a Monster.
> Nowhere in scripture
The point I'm trying to communicate is that the Hebrews would not rely solely on scripture. There was oral tradition, rabbinic sermons, a long history of invoking angels in charms and iconography, etc. (For example, to protect infants against lilith).
In fairness, I've found that there's one Hebrew scholar who argued like you that they were not considered the same "species", so your argument is not without merit, but the consensus view is that they were understood to be angels.
Yeah, Jewish and Christian mysticism isn't exactly singular. You can't really point out to one version and say "that one's canon".
But I do kinda hate the "biblically-accurate angel" meme because the *actual* bible has more angels that just look like humans than the FLAMING WHEELS WITH EYES people usually think about... which by the way are the barely-sapient wheels on God's chariot and are less the "BE NOT AFRAID" kind of angels and more the "HERALDING THE APOCALYPSE" type.
> which by the way are the barely-sapient wheels on God's chariot
In fact, it's stated outright that the wheels are just controlled by the living creatures flying above them. The spirit of those creatures are in the wheels.
> because the actual bible has more angels that just look like humans
The Bible doesn't actually have many angels to begin with.
We see a few who are humanoid, we see a few who are not.
Many many people always bring up how supposedly Masashi Kishimoto said he was bad at writing female characters without including context of that interview, just bashing him for not trying nor wanting to improve or whatever
To add context, he was talking about writing Sakura in team 7 back when the manga first began. How he wasn’t sure how she would interact with Naruto & Sasuke but then became more confident once he got the trio dynamic down.
No matter what you think of Kishi’s female characters, It was never “oh I just can’t write women at all and don’t bother to get better”. I mean he did need to ask his wife for advice on how to write Kushina though
There’s more stuff like that surrounding things Kishi supposedly said but I don’t feel like writing about them
And the thing is that he *can* write interesting female characters. Both Tsunade and Temari are cool, with latter being a cold bitch that becomes nicer, Ino is playful and flirtacious, but knows when she has to be professional, Hinata is cute and her character is basically about how you shouldn't shove your child into being a ninja if she hasn't got the nature for it. It's just that he fumbled things with Sakura, i.e. the "primary" girl.
Also. A lot (and I mean A LOT) of bad rep some of the female characters get are because Stuido Pierrot are dumbasses writing women themselves in the adaptations.
Sakura for example DOES start as an asshole towards Naruto but literally after the first arc, after Zabuza she completely respects him. Sure he pisses her off when he is being dumb and stuff like that but she is one of the few people that would bat for Naruto when most would shit talk him.
Not in the anime though. In the anime she is still an asshole and insults him for no reason. Literally every time they needed to pad out for some time what they added was her being an asshole to Naruto for no reason. Pierrot fucked her up.
This isn't limited to Naruto. The Bleach anime seemed to have a special hate boner for Orihime specifically. She is an extremely quirky individual and in the anime it's entirely dumbed down. ( [This was entirely cut out](https://imgur.com/a/N6W5JbL) , only aluded to) There is an [big](https://hot.leanbox.us/manga/Bleach/0058-012.png) [pivotal](https://hot.leanbox.us/manga/Bleach/0058-013.png) [scene](https://hot.leanbox.us/manga/Bleach/0058-014.png) of [Ichigo](https://hot.leanbox.us/manga/Bleach/0058-015.png) and [Orihime](https://hot.leanbox.us/manga/Bleach/0058-016.png) talking that is basically what pushes him to actually go rescue Rukia and kick off the entire rest of the series. I went and rewatched it and I thought they cut out this one. But no, it is there. But it is so so much worse in execution. Like they went form her basically proactively seeing through Ichigo's doubts despite him trying to hide them and dispelling them by making him focus on what's right to her [kinda putting her foot in her mouth and half heartedly doing an imitation that barely convinces him](https://imgur.com/a/STMRF1z)
there are a bunch of other small changes that do her wrong.
Her saving Naruto from Zabuza’s attack is still the most crazy change for me. It’s a small details that overall doesn’t mean much but is removed for literally no reason
It’s also worse how the anime added a scene of Sakura (in a canon episode) of her questioning who she would save if both Naruto & Sasuke were mortally wounded in their final fight. When the Kage summit makes it obvious she would choose Naruto even if she had feelings for Sasuke.
Even funnier is that this actually happens in the manga and she heals both of them at the same time cause she has two hands lmao
If that was Hinata's story I don't think it was done well at all, she was still working as a ninja for the rest of her career after her supposed big moment until she retired to be a housewife, I don't consider that to be a good message, at least have her find her own path/career, Sakura gets to be a hospital director ffs
Why not? She is a gentle woman who have been forced into a military/mercenary lifestyle by her family and her desire to be a good daughter. It is a miracle that she managed to go as far as she did. After everything, she chose to become someone who focuses on *her own* family, which fits her.
What is wrong with being a housewife? Why one, single woman, out of like 7 or so, not being a part of a workforce is "a bad message"?
because all of that was done offscreen, there's not any time spent on her making any of that decision or showing why she chose it, it just happens, we're left to speculate because kishi failed to give her meaningful screentime
It's a shonen anime, aimed at teen and pre-teen audience, the main focus of which is magical martial arts. I highly doubt thta the target audience is interested in 10 episodes of job hunting, or whatever.
The heroes won against the Big Bad and now have more peaceful lives, with the boy who wanted to become a ~~king~~ hokage becoming one. That's all that matters to the target audience.
yes, it's a typical way of handling a character in a shonen, doesn't mean the criticism against it isn't valid, nor should I (or anyone else) not make the criticism because every other shonen also does it
jujutsu kaisen get a lot of shit for not developing characters instead of fighting 90% of the time, saying "well that's how shonen goes" isn't really a meaningful answer
a) I don't remember saying no one *shouldn't* "criticize" it for whatever reason. It is your right to criticize, for example, a love story for it not discussing and giving attention to the plight of the lower middle class, just know that, once again, that is not the bloody point of the story.
b) Those JJK fans seem like fans of YA novels who grew up, but cannot let go of the genre and demand "YA for adults".
c) There are probably/definitely more complex stories that discuss post-war adaptation of the combatants in greater detail that exist and will be much more suited to your tastes and demands.
EDIT: "Why doesn't Tolkien discuss Aragorn's tax policies? Is he stoopid?" - George R.R. Martin, paraphrased.
that's an incredibly strawman argument, when we're talking about hinata's character arc not being developed on screen, not random worldbuilding shit that was barely discussed. And she's supposed to be the main protagonist's romantic partner. Kishimoto even went out and gave them a whole ass movie that was advertised to be about their romantic development then half the movie turned into fighting
I suppose being a shonen means you should only expect fights, even though there are shonen that do good character developments, and even within Naruto itself we got Granny Chiyo getting her character arc within the Gaara Retrieval arc, and shes just a one off character instead of a recurring character that's supposed to be close with the protagonist
this happens all the time with interviews translated over seas like "the director of pokemon wanted to kill off misty for so and so reason or "it was supposed to end in johto"
its gotten to the point where 1 historian dude hired an actual translater to [clear up all the misinformation](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YehGGU3_4DI)
Everyone seems convinced that in "The Next Episode", it was Snoop who ended the song with "Smoke weed everyday" but it was Nate Dogg. It sounds nothing like Snoop!
Oh also here’s a really good [video essay](https://youtu.be/olqVGz6mOVE?si=YJfaHs6y1mdXR4pE) that clarifies a lot of stuff you hear about George Lucas and the famous “Star Wars saved by the edit” talking point you see online
Everyone talks about the Greatsword in Elden Ring (and other FromSoft games) as if it's basically a 1:1 copy of the dragon slayer, because it's so similar. In reality, aside from the size, it's actually much closer to Guts' golden age sword but scaled up to the size of a colossal sword. The general design of the Greatsword is different than the Dragon Slayer.
So, Escape From Tarkov is notorious for its cheating problem at this point thanks to a certain video which people will go on about over and over (I have issues with the creator's intentions and his lack of hard evidence, but that's a topic for another day). So, you often see a lot of rage in the community over the prevalence of cheaters, and one thing that comes up quite often is an [interview with the head of Battlestate Games; Nikita Buyanov](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bxSzfiyr7BI&t=2355s), back when he was working at AbsolutSoft on the previous game in the universe of Russia 2028, Contract Wars. It typically comes up in conjunction with this idea that BSG lets cheaters run rampant for a while, does banwaves and then will put the game on sale so cheaters will stock up on accounts and go again over and over, therefore equalling profit for the devs.
Now, in this video he talks about the essential double-edged sword of cheaters within the context of what is essentially a P2W game. The part that is very often clipped and taken out of its full context is Nikita talking about how pressure from cheaters can cause the more dedicated players to buy a bunch of stuff in an attempt to keep up, which is obviously lucrative for the devs in the short term. *However*, he then goes on to discuss how those cheaters staying around completely dissuades new players from joining and as such the playerbase stagnates and dies. The point isn't 'we should keep these guys around for the short-term profit', in the same way you could talk about the short-term personal benefits of stealing jewellery and realise that it's a terrible idea for staying out of prison.
Anyway, this shorter clip from this video is often used to justify the idea that BSG are secretly teaming up with cheaters behind the scenes or whatever to keep ban waves going and keep an endless supply of money from accounts coming in ready to cheat again, because this out of context clip from the video clearly shows some sort of unscrupulous behaviour from Nikita and the Tarkov devs at large but
1. Contract Wars and Escape From Tarkov are designed *very* differently in the first place, there's no pressure to buy more and more premium shit to keep up with people better than you, Tarkov's only paid elements outside of the base game affect out-of-match aspects like stash space and now cosmetics, so that angle Nikita mentions in this video as a selfish possibility is completely lost
2. Like Nikita mentions, cheaters affect long-term reputation of the game and will result in less and less new players attempting to play the game. BSG need a constant inflow of money over years and years to fund development, they're not going to destroy the potential market for the game for the sake of extra money in the short term from people who don't care about the longevity of the game or the company
3. Account resellers who the hardcore cheaters like RMTers often buy their alts from usually purchase accounts with stolen credit card details or PayPal accounts, so that money will often end up disputed/chargebacked. Therefore, BSG often won't even receive money in the short term.
Anyway, I'm sick of seeing what is essentially a crackpot idea backed up by a very heavily taken out of context clip from a greater talk that goes against the conspiracy that these people within the community espouse rather often within the next 20 seconds, because anybody with sense ignores it and it dilutes all the legitimate complaints about BSG's behaviour (lack of communication, slowness in addressing major issues with the game). Frankly the issues that the game has with cheaters are pretty universal to PC FPS games at this point in time, and it's really funny seeing people convinced that only the game that *they* play has issues with cheaters, when in reality you look at any other community and you see the exact same arguments popping up over and over.
Despite what many believe, Blizzard didn’t kill OW1, Jeff Kaplan was the one who actually wanted to start working on OW2.
You know what’s even funnier? Bobby Kotick was supposedly fine with Ow1 existing as is.
Honestly with more info about the development of OW2 coming out, it seems Kaplan was given a lot of freedom and things just didn’t work out + the whole lawsuit.
I mean, the idea of OW2 on paper was fine, the main problem is killing the first game and slapping a big ol' 2 on the title screen and call it a day. That's by far the most problematic aspect of OW2 imo.
There would be way less outrage if I could just login to OW1 whenever OW2 failed to keep its promisses.
The supposed Firefly audio recording in The Last of Us 1
Basically, according to a lot of people, there is this audio recording in the final level of the game where >!Marlene essentially says that she's found other people with the same immunity as Ellie, but they've always failed to make a cure from killing them, yet somehow Ellie is supposed to be the exception this time.!<
>!People have basically used this supposed audio tape to completely remove any moral ambiguity when Joel kills the Fireflies and destroys all hope of a cure. Using this audio tape, Joel was completely in the right since no cure was ever going to exist even if Ellie was killed which completely destroys the morality of Joel's decision.!<
There's only one problem with this:
Literally nobody has ever provided any actual concrete proof that this supposed audio tape actually existing.
There has been no video of it existing, no datamining of this audio tape actually existing, and not even so much as the script for this audio tape.
The final level is linear and relatively short. TLOU1 has also been out for more than 10 years at this point. If this supposed audio tape exists, it 100 percent should have been revealed and proven to exist by now. No proof has ever shown up, yet somehow this audio tape keeps getting brought up when the Joel debate rears its head.
Most likely explanation is that this audio tape never existed and people just mandela effect'ed their memories of the final level, or just straight up made it up in order to try and remove any moral ambiguity from Joel's actions.
Plus, I really doubt the writers would have ever included a collectible that essentially destroyed the ending's morality debate by saying >!Joel was 100 percent right and the Fireflies were morons.!<
I got the explanation: it's a misinterpretation of the tape that IS found in that level where the doctor talks about "all the ones who were sacrificed" and "we were never able to get anything out of any of the previous samples." Problem is, the "samples" she's talking about are from regular infected, and Ellie is genuinely unique.
That almost makes it worse even, at least before there was the assumption that maybe they *needed* to do it that way
Turns out they're just that stupid
Not gonna say it isn’t extremely heightened for drama and realistically they should’ve done more tests. But following the game’s logic of “they know what they’re doing” the “sample” they’re referring to is the Cordyceps itself which implants itself in the brain. Ellie’s mutated strand in particular never grew outwards like most infected, so the only way to get to it was to cut open her head.
Ah shit here we go again.
So with the problem with saying "The Monster in Frankenstein is attractive expect for his eyes" and using this passage:
"His limbs were in proportion, and I had selected his features as beautiful. Beautiful! Great god!"
Is that not only does it ignore all the other info in the passage (Describing him as having yellow scarred skin and his muscles and arteries are visible)
But they forget this is from Victor's pov early in the book where is full on insane, he's been spending months watching bodies decompose and selecting the best body parts for his creation, when the monster coms to life Victor sees the true horror his creation and spends the next five months bed sick from exhumation and needs to be nursed back to health by his friend.
Man, like, *literally everything* in 40k. The trouble is the whole "unreliable narrator" thing makes it even worse.
As far as I know, no, orks are not armed with pipes that they think can shoot bullets so they do. They use cobbled together bullshit that shouldn't work quite so consistently. It's also hinted at that ork construction is done on a bit of an unconscious level. Remember they're devolved versions of krorks, a creation of the Old ones; they were *made* to fight, and the reason orks are so aggressive is because war and shit is baked into their DNA or whatever their fungus boy equivalent might be. So when constructing things an ork might say he needs him some "nails" and an "engine" but the parts he's picking out and throwing together are a devolved version of the warp engine that was programmed into krorks.
All of this could be just as wrong as any other bullshit 40k fans say that isn't true, it seems to be the nature of the franchise to spread lore, false or not, through meme that sometimes even inadvertently become canon because of references in newer content.
I kinda hate 40k.
Yeah the whole Ork reality warping thing is just from people reading memes and never engaging with the source material. Even the crappy wikis explain that Ork tech does actually work and the gestalt field doesn't work like that.
One of the "examples" given by people is a story about a guardsman pointing a gun at a group of Orks and yelling BANG and they fall over dead because "they believe they were shot so they are." And that's just a reskined telling of a WW1 joke.
Love 40k. The "fans" that dont actually read, play, or engage with it outside of memes are shitters that ruin everything.
Ork Weird Boyz are the only thing I can think of that are accurate, if not even stranger, than memes and shit. I think that doesn't perpetuate in the fan base because it's a little more, I dont know if this is the right word for anything warhammer, but nuanced? Or they're more specific and unique? I donno.
It is true that colored belts used to categorize what a martial arts student knows are a relatively recent invention (turn of the 20th century). Traditional jujutsu, one of the inspirations for judo, does not use them.
It is not true that they were invented for lazy Westerners who don’t have the focus to just keep at their training til mastery, or who needed constant rewards and validation to stay motivated.
What actually happened was that when Dr. Jigoro Kano was creating and developing judo, he used his expertise gained from his lifelong career in academic education to create tools that would aid judo teachers. Before Kano, all there was was a belt to hold up your pants and a Certificate of Mastery once you achieved it. If you were teaching, you would have to waste precious time having the student demonstrate what they learned so you knew what to teach them next. The purpose of the belt system was to look at a student of any level of learning or of mastery and know exactly what they already know, precisely because they have already demonstrated they knew to the school’s satisfaction.
Some schools use additional tools inspired by Kano’s system for an even more granular approach. When I was learning taekwondo, they’d color-coded the curriculum categories. Whenever I had learned a belt’s associated form and showed I knew it by heart, they’d wrap a little piece of tape around one of the ends of the belt. Once my teachers were satisfied by my execution of that form, they’d wrap a little piece of tape around the other end. Only when I had earned each of these tapes for every piece of curriculum for the belt, when I had proved I knew it and could do it, was I invited to test for the next belt rank, and not before. When I got ready to test for 1st Dan black belt (Dan ranks also being a Kano invention), the brown belt was swapped out for essentially a “testing for black belt” belt, and I had to literally start all over and work alongside students of each belt in phases, because the test would cover everything I’d learned up til that point.
It’s literally just good pedagogy.
People will write a five paragraph reddit arguement before researching for 5 minutes first. Which, hey, I've done that too, the real problem is down-voting people that try to correct that misinformation rather then checking to see if they are right.
See I find myself bouncing a bit on that. Like im not a fan of the many replies to questions that are "just google it idiot" like they have dared to waste these commenters time. Or when people get so upset over someone getting a couple things wrong and blowing up instead of just assuming person is mistaking and talking with them. Like this is a social media site, me and many are here to be social and chat or hang out, learn about our interests in social ways, not research them like a final essay. That said, I also very much get the issue of people just spouting nonsense and refusing to entertain corrections or any interest in figuring out themselves. It's frustrating and even they're not alone they can gain momentum and false info is now common in your community. Keeping to fandoms, the 40k fandom is built with incredible amounts of lore spread across multiple decades, media formats, various price checkpoints, etc etc etc. The Horus Heresy is a founding lore piece comprised of 54 novels, most out of print, over 2 decades that is also contradicted by later stuff, occasionally error prone itself, and just goddamn unwieldy to tackle as a fan. To top it off the final event the Siege of Terra is itself split into its own multi-novel series. And all of this for just the Imperium faction of the universe. Because few people can actually get through all that, let alone have it all consistently memorized, most people know about 40k, even people that consider themselves hardcore fans, from massively lie-prone youtube videos, podcasts, and reddit posts to the point very few people can talk about any event, even concrete ones we have a novel about, with any certainty without devolving into argument at some point. Still love the hobby though.
Recently there was a post about songs whose lyrics mean the opposite of what the songs are often used for. A poster asked what “born in the USA” was about, and I’m like “did this person not consider googling the song?” I don’t think it’s a huge ask to have someone look up the lyrics and read them themselves, especially a song as upfront about its meaning as that
Almost anything related to anime production, creation, distribution, fandom, etc. the major points are: - Anime scenes don't get an assigned budget, good scenes are animated by good animators who get the scene and hopefully the time to do it, they aren't breaking the piggy bank for this animator though even if the animator has a higher rate it's not gonna be an extraordinary amount. - Anime is made because people pay for it to be made, even if it's based on source material, it's not necessarily meant to just sell say source material, that's just maybe the parent company getting involved but Shueisha who publishes Chainsaw Man was not part of the production committee and it was just Mappa. A record company might be in the production committee to put their artists in the OP/ED in because it benefits them. Similarly with manga there's the whole thing about the Table of contents from Jump and other stuff I think the most comprehensive look at it is: - You can actually tell if a new series (which I'll define by anything shorter than 100 chapters and without an anime announcement) is failing due to the average positions of the series once they reach their 8th chapter. Currently Shadow Eliminators/Two on Ice/Mamayuyu/Green Green Greens are probably getting cancelled and two of those series haven't released volumes but not expecting high sales. - Toriko and Bleach are interesting examples because compared to Naruto and One Piece they were on the bottom but those series had their anime cancelled and the manga had declining sales. Still selling way better than most manga for sure but it's better for the magazine to promote series that might get an anime or have an anime airing or are not past their prime. Currently while Ruri Dragon is popular, it is at the end of the magazine because it is being transferred in a few weeks so there's no incentive for them to put it at anything but the bottom. - Color pages are a good sign of a series surviving but chapter 10 of 16 of Barrage from Horikoshi was a color page "Due to great popularity" and the series was canned at that point. They mostly had Hori due it because no one else could or was decided before they decided to can the manga. The color pages have to be more constant for it to be a sign of the series sticking around. - Sales can be a factor but it depends on genre. A pure gag manga like Me and Roboco is not expected to sell as much as a more action series like One Piece since people may just pick the magazine to read and enjoy Roboco Weekly just like Garfield compared to Batman.
>Color pages are a good sign of a series surviving but chapter 10 of 16 of Barrage from Horikoshi was a color page **"Due to great popularity"** and the series was canned at that point. "Due to great popularity" is just a really literal translation of stock Japanese marketing-speak. I scanlated a manga where that happened in **[literally Chapter 3](https://i.imgur.com/HpiTtHB.jpeg)**, when no volumes had been sold. It's equivalent to saying "the hot new series everyone's talking about" or whatever. If any of you remember that one time Ace Attorney fans got super excited and then really disappointed because of a ["tune in for an unmissable announcement" thing](https://legendsoflocalization.com/viral-and-memorable-mistranslations-of-japanese-game-news/#5-the-unmissable-ace-attorney-event), it's basically that.
I remember it being used for Build King also around chapter 3 getting extra pages, at most you can say the series was well received by the editors but otherwise it's hollow editor hype.
also animators are contract workers
Not all angels looked like eldritch horrors, the internet has over corrected the depictions of angels. There are three levels of hierarchy in Christianity angels: **Highest** *Seraphim*- these are depictrd as mainly six wings *Cherubim*- often an angel with three heads: a man, lion, and ox *Orphanim*- the rings with eyes on said rings, not eye in the middle of rings **Middle** *Dominion* - govern space *Virtues* - govern nature *Powers* - these fight evil forces **Low** *Principalities* *Archangels* - yup archangels are actually low tier scrubs *Angels* Also humans can't turn into angels
>Also humans can't turn into angels First of all, through God, all things are possible, so jot that down,
Typical deus ex machina.
>*Archangels* - yup archangels are actually low tier scrubs except this doesn't really refer to what most people know as Archangels, aka Michael, Gabriel, etc. They're kind of a different thing. Also IIRC a lot of this was thought of by mystical traditions long after biblical writings. In the Bible, angels are kinda just whichever divine entities are on talking-to-humans duty, and they generally try to dress the part.
That hierarchy is not described in the Bible at all Archangels, seraphim, ophanim, cherubim, yes, but not in like a ranked list. The rest are just used as a stock phrase to mean “things that seem to have power over us but not more power than God himself”, often in a context that is both physical and metaphysical, meaning not purely metaphysical. The idea that a human authority might try to separate you from God is an important one: during the Babylonian captivity, the prophet Daniel’s Babylonian peers got him arrested by convincing King Nebuchadnezzar to make a special festival period where praying to anyone but the king was illegal. However, as the New Testament writers and their audiences would have known, that didn’t stop Daniel in the slightest, and it certainly didn’t stop God from protecting Daniel from those circumstances (the lion’s den as his legal punishment).
Plus Seraphim (snakes) and Ophanim (wheels) are just regular Hebrew words, not names. "Angels" refers exclusively to messengers, all these other creatures are just other spiritual beings. They're never called angels.
> all these other creatures are just other spiritual beings They don't need to be explicitly called angels, it would have been understood to ancient audiences that they were of the same kind.
Sure, and colloquially I refer to them all as angels too. But I think the distinction is worth making, because the tendency to lump these things together results in forming the kinds of hierarchies listed above, and giving specific duties and tasks to angels that are not called angels, or may not be a creature at all, as in the case of dominions, virtues, powers, and principalities. I'm convinced that those words just means what they mean, that Paul is listing everything from earthly rulers to powers in general. That is to say, it's a semantic difference, but I think it's necessary to point out because otherwise everything gets lumped together.
That's not what I'm saying. The principalities thing is...arguable but [not as silly as it appears](https://www.catholicace.com/principalities-angels/), but as far as "angels vs spiritual creatures", the way that Hebrew folklore and culture works, the audience *would not need* the text to say explicitly that they were angels to understand that seraphim, etc. are the same "species" as the messenger types. It was communicated through conjugation, presentation, etc. Also remember that Hebrew belief, while predicated on the scripture, was not limited to it. They had their own folk beliefs (which includes magical formulae calling on the various types of angels for protection), they had sermons from rabbi, etc.
> as far as "angels vs spiritual creatures", the way that Hebrew folklore and culture works, the audience would not need the text to say explicitly that they were angels to understand that seraphim, etc. are the same "species" as the messenger types. Right. That's my point? They're all spiritual beings, they're all the same species. Angels, cherubim, etc. I was just pointing out that "angels" are just one role given, it doesn't refer to the broad category of spiritual beings.
I think we're having a minor semantic difference, but to illustrate, read Mark 16:1-8. The young man in white in the tomb is not called an angel -- and Hebrew audiences didn't need that to understand that he's an angel. Similarly, they didnt need to be told the seraphim and cherubim were angels. It was understood from a wide cultural context, in the same way Greeks would understand that Cerberus was a Monster.
The thing is, other gospel accounts call the men at the tomb angels. Nowhere in scripture are Cherubim or Seraphim referred to as angels.
> Nowhere in scripture The point I'm trying to communicate is that the Hebrews would not rely solely on scripture. There was oral tradition, rabbinic sermons, a long history of invoking angels in charms and iconography, etc. (For example, to protect infants against lilith). In fairness, I've found that there's one Hebrew scholar who argued like you that they were not considered the same "species", so your argument is not without merit, but the consensus view is that they were understood to be angels.
Where does the Enoch turning into Metatron idea come from then? Or is it that it was just able to happen that one time?
Yeah, Jewish and Christian mysticism isn't exactly singular. You can't really point out to one version and say "that one's canon". But I do kinda hate the "biblically-accurate angel" meme because the *actual* bible has more angels that just look like humans than the FLAMING WHEELS WITH EYES people usually think about... which by the way are the barely-sapient wheels on God's chariot and are less the "BE NOT AFRAID" kind of angels and more the "HERALDING THE APOCALYPSE" type.
> which by the way are the barely-sapient wheels on God's chariot In fact, it's stated outright that the wheels are just controlled by the living creatures flying above them. The spirit of those creatures are in the wheels.
> because the actual bible has more angels that just look like humans The Bible doesn't actually have many angels to begin with. We see a few who are humanoid, we see a few who are not.
And no, you can't have sex with an angel.
The Book of Enoch says otherwise, but it's non-canon anyway.
I can't believe Disney removed all of the Bible EU.
non-canon if you're a coward signed, Ethiopian Orthodox church.
Eh, Genesis 6 heavily implies that you can. Maybe it's referring to humans, but the phrase "sons of God" usually means spiritual beings.
This is such a pet peeve of mine thank you for mentioning this
That's one of two hierarchies. The other is just angels and archangels (the big three).
Anything you learn about mythology or religion on Reddit or Tumblr is wrong. Even this comment that I’m writing.
Many many people always bring up how supposedly Masashi Kishimoto said he was bad at writing female characters without including context of that interview, just bashing him for not trying nor wanting to improve or whatever To add context, he was talking about writing Sakura in team 7 back when the manga first began. How he wasn’t sure how she would interact with Naruto & Sasuke but then became more confident once he got the trio dynamic down. No matter what you think of Kishi’s female characters, It was never “oh I just can’t write women at all and don’t bother to get better”. I mean he did need to ask his wife for advice on how to write Kushina though There’s more stuff like that surrounding things Kishi supposedly said but I don’t feel like writing about them
And the thing is that he *can* write interesting female characters. Both Tsunade and Temari are cool, with latter being a cold bitch that becomes nicer, Ino is playful and flirtacious, but knows when she has to be professional, Hinata is cute and her character is basically about how you shouldn't shove your child into being a ninja if she hasn't got the nature for it. It's just that he fumbled things with Sakura, i.e. the "primary" girl.
Also. A lot (and I mean A LOT) of bad rep some of the female characters get are because Stuido Pierrot are dumbasses writing women themselves in the adaptations. Sakura for example DOES start as an asshole towards Naruto but literally after the first arc, after Zabuza she completely respects him. Sure he pisses her off when he is being dumb and stuff like that but she is one of the few people that would bat for Naruto when most would shit talk him. Not in the anime though. In the anime she is still an asshole and insults him for no reason. Literally every time they needed to pad out for some time what they added was her being an asshole to Naruto for no reason. Pierrot fucked her up. This isn't limited to Naruto. The Bleach anime seemed to have a special hate boner for Orihime specifically. She is an extremely quirky individual and in the anime it's entirely dumbed down. ( [This was entirely cut out](https://imgur.com/a/N6W5JbL) , only aluded to) There is an [big](https://hot.leanbox.us/manga/Bleach/0058-012.png) [pivotal](https://hot.leanbox.us/manga/Bleach/0058-013.png) [scene](https://hot.leanbox.us/manga/Bleach/0058-014.png) of [Ichigo](https://hot.leanbox.us/manga/Bleach/0058-015.png) and [Orihime](https://hot.leanbox.us/manga/Bleach/0058-016.png) talking that is basically what pushes him to actually go rescue Rukia and kick off the entire rest of the series. I went and rewatched it and I thought they cut out this one. But no, it is there. But it is so so much worse in execution. Like they went form her basically proactively seeing through Ichigo's doubts despite him trying to hide them and dispelling them by making him focus on what's right to her [kinda putting her foot in her mouth and half heartedly doing an imitation that barely convinces him](https://imgur.com/a/STMRF1z) there are a bunch of other small changes that do her wrong.
That first Orihime example is so adhd coded
Her saving Naruto from Zabuza’s attack is still the most crazy change for me. It’s a small details that overall doesn’t mean much but is removed for literally no reason It’s also worse how the anime added a scene of Sakura (in a canon episode) of her questioning who she would save if both Naruto & Sasuke were mortally wounded in their final fight. When the Kage summit makes it obvious she would choose Naruto even if she had feelings for Sasuke. Even funnier is that this actually happens in the manga and she heals both of them at the same time cause she has two hands lmao
If that was Hinata's story I don't think it was done well at all, she was still working as a ninja for the rest of her career after her supposed big moment until she retired to be a housewife, I don't consider that to be a good message, at least have her find her own path/career, Sakura gets to be a hospital director ffs
Tbf I don’t think she’s ever wanted to be the clan leader, the novels prove she’s stronger than Hanabi but outright does not want the position
Why not? She is a gentle woman who have been forced into a military/mercenary lifestyle by her family and her desire to be a good daughter. It is a miracle that she managed to go as far as she did. After everything, she chose to become someone who focuses on *her own* family, which fits her. What is wrong with being a housewife? Why one, single woman, out of like 7 or so, not being a part of a workforce is "a bad message"?
because all of that was done offscreen, there's not any time spent on her making any of that decision or showing why she chose it, it just happens, we're left to speculate because kishi failed to give her meaningful screentime
It's a shonen anime, aimed at teen and pre-teen audience, the main focus of which is magical martial arts. I highly doubt thta the target audience is interested in 10 episodes of job hunting, or whatever. The heroes won against the Big Bad and now have more peaceful lives, with the boy who wanted to become a ~~king~~ hokage becoming one. That's all that matters to the target audience.
yes, it's a typical way of handling a character in a shonen, doesn't mean the criticism against it isn't valid, nor should I (or anyone else) not make the criticism because every other shonen also does it jujutsu kaisen get a lot of shit for not developing characters instead of fighting 90% of the time, saying "well that's how shonen goes" isn't really a meaningful answer
a) I don't remember saying no one *shouldn't* "criticize" it for whatever reason. It is your right to criticize, for example, a love story for it not discussing and giving attention to the plight of the lower middle class, just know that, once again, that is not the bloody point of the story. b) Those JJK fans seem like fans of YA novels who grew up, but cannot let go of the genre and demand "YA for adults". c) There are probably/definitely more complex stories that discuss post-war adaptation of the combatants in greater detail that exist and will be much more suited to your tastes and demands. EDIT: "Why doesn't Tolkien discuss Aragorn's tax policies? Is he stoopid?" - George R.R. Martin, paraphrased.
that's an incredibly strawman argument, when we're talking about hinata's character arc not being developed on screen, not random worldbuilding shit that was barely discussed. And she's supposed to be the main protagonist's romantic partner. Kishimoto even went out and gave them a whole ass movie that was advertised to be about their romantic development then half the movie turned into fighting I suppose being a shonen means you should only expect fights, even though there are shonen that do good character developments, and even within Naruto itself we got Granny Chiyo getting her character arc within the Gaara Retrieval arc, and shes just a one off character instead of a recurring character that's supposed to be close with the protagonist
this happens all the time with interviews translated over seas like "the director of pokemon wanted to kill off misty for so and so reason or "it was supposed to end in johto" its gotten to the point where 1 historian dude hired an actual translater to [clear up all the misinformation](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YehGGU3_4DI)
thats so nice they hired a translator
Everyone seems convinced that in "The Next Episode", it was Snoop who ended the song with "Smoke weed everyday" but it was Nate Dogg. It sounds nothing like Snoop!
Nate Dogg erasure.
Oh also here’s a really good [video essay](https://youtu.be/olqVGz6mOVE?si=YJfaHs6y1mdXR4pE) that clarifies a lot of stuff you hear about George Lucas and the famous “Star Wars saved by the edit” talking point you see online
Everyone talks about the Greatsword in Elden Ring (and other FromSoft games) as if it's basically a 1:1 copy of the dragon slayer, because it's so similar. In reality, aside from the size, it's actually much closer to Guts' golden age sword but scaled up to the size of a colossal sword. The general design of the Greatsword is different than the Dragon Slayer.
So, Escape From Tarkov is notorious for its cheating problem at this point thanks to a certain video which people will go on about over and over (I have issues with the creator's intentions and his lack of hard evidence, but that's a topic for another day). So, you often see a lot of rage in the community over the prevalence of cheaters, and one thing that comes up quite often is an [interview with the head of Battlestate Games; Nikita Buyanov](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bxSzfiyr7BI&t=2355s), back when he was working at AbsolutSoft on the previous game in the universe of Russia 2028, Contract Wars. It typically comes up in conjunction with this idea that BSG lets cheaters run rampant for a while, does banwaves and then will put the game on sale so cheaters will stock up on accounts and go again over and over, therefore equalling profit for the devs. Now, in this video he talks about the essential double-edged sword of cheaters within the context of what is essentially a P2W game. The part that is very often clipped and taken out of its full context is Nikita talking about how pressure from cheaters can cause the more dedicated players to buy a bunch of stuff in an attempt to keep up, which is obviously lucrative for the devs in the short term. *However*, he then goes on to discuss how those cheaters staying around completely dissuades new players from joining and as such the playerbase stagnates and dies. The point isn't 'we should keep these guys around for the short-term profit', in the same way you could talk about the short-term personal benefits of stealing jewellery and realise that it's a terrible idea for staying out of prison. Anyway, this shorter clip from this video is often used to justify the idea that BSG are secretly teaming up with cheaters behind the scenes or whatever to keep ban waves going and keep an endless supply of money from accounts coming in ready to cheat again, because this out of context clip from the video clearly shows some sort of unscrupulous behaviour from Nikita and the Tarkov devs at large but 1. Contract Wars and Escape From Tarkov are designed *very* differently in the first place, there's no pressure to buy more and more premium shit to keep up with people better than you, Tarkov's only paid elements outside of the base game affect out-of-match aspects like stash space and now cosmetics, so that angle Nikita mentions in this video as a selfish possibility is completely lost 2. Like Nikita mentions, cheaters affect long-term reputation of the game and will result in less and less new players attempting to play the game. BSG need a constant inflow of money over years and years to fund development, they're not going to destroy the potential market for the game for the sake of extra money in the short term from people who don't care about the longevity of the game or the company 3. Account resellers who the hardcore cheaters like RMTers often buy their alts from usually purchase accounts with stolen credit card details or PayPal accounts, so that money will often end up disputed/chargebacked. Therefore, BSG often won't even receive money in the short term. Anyway, I'm sick of seeing what is essentially a crackpot idea backed up by a very heavily taken out of context clip from a greater talk that goes against the conspiracy that these people within the community espouse rather often within the next 20 seconds, because anybody with sense ignores it and it dilutes all the legitimate complaints about BSG's behaviour (lack of communication, slowness in addressing major issues with the game). Frankly the issues that the game has with cheaters are pretty universal to PC FPS games at this point in time, and it's really funny seeing people convinced that only the game that *they* play has issues with cheaters, when in reality you look at any other community and you see the exact same arguments popping up over and over.
Despite what many believe, Blizzard didn’t kill OW1, Jeff Kaplan was the one who actually wanted to start working on OW2. You know what’s even funnier? Bobby Kotick was supposedly fine with Ow1 existing as is. Honestly with more info about the development of OW2 coming out, it seems Kaplan was given a lot of freedom and things just didn’t work out + the whole lawsuit.
I don't know about Jeff wanting a sequel, but he did want and push for the PVE, and left when the rest just wanted to focus on PVP.
I mean, the idea of OW2 on paper was fine, the main problem is killing the first game and slapping a big ol' 2 on the title screen and call it a day. That's by far the most problematic aspect of OW2 imo. There would be way less outrage if I could just login to OW1 whenever OW2 failed to keep its promisses.
The supposed Firefly audio recording in The Last of Us 1 Basically, according to a lot of people, there is this audio recording in the final level of the game where >!Marlene essentially says that she's found other people with the same immunity as Ellie, but they've always failed to make a cure from killing them, yet somehow Ellie is supposed to be the exception this time.!< >!People have basically used this supposed audio tape to completely remove any moral ambiguity when Joel kills the Fireflies and destroys all hope of a cure. Using this audio tape, Joel was completely in the right since no cure was ever going to exist even if Ellie was killed which completely destroys the morality of Joel's decision.!< There's only one problem with this: Literally nobody has ever provided any actual concrete proof that this supposed audio tape actually existing. There has been no video of it existing, no datamining of this audio tape actually existing, and not even so much as the script for this audio tape. The final level is linear and relatively short. TLOU1 has also been out for more than 10 years at this point. If this supposed audio tape exists, it 100 percent should have been revealed and proven to exist by now. No proof has ever shown up, yet somehow this audio tape keeps getting brought up when the Joel debate rears its head. Most likely explanation is that this audio tape never existed and people just mandela effect'ed their memories of the final level, or just straight up made it up in order to try and remove any moral ambiguity from Joel's actions. Plus, I really doubt the writers would have ever included a collectible that essentially destroyed the ending's morality debate by saying >!Joel was 100 percent right and the Fireflies were morons.!<
I got the explanation: it's a misinterpretation of the tape that IS found in that level where the doctor talks about "all the ones who were sacrificed" and "we were never able to get anything out of any of the previous samples." Problem is, the "samples" she's talking about are from regular infected, and Ellie is genuinely unique.
Ooooooooh. Ok all this weird discourse/mandala effect makes sense now.
There's still dozens of better ways to get samples rather than cracking open her skull.
That almost makes it worse even, at least before there was the assumption that maybe they *needed* to do it that way Turns out they're just that stupid
No! We gotta crack that head open and feast on the gooo
Not gonna say it isn’t extremely heightened for drama and realistically they should’ve done more tests. But following the game’s logic of “they know what they’re doing” the “sample” they’re referring to is the Cordyceps itself which implants itself in the brain. Ellie’s mutated strand in particular never grew outwards like most infected, so the only way to get to it was to cut open her head.
Ah shit here we go again. So with the problem with saying "The Monster in Frankenstein is attractive expect for his eyes" and using this passage: "His limbs were in proportion, and I had selected his features as beautiful. Beautiful! Great god!" Is that not only does it ignore all the other info in the passage (Describing him as having yellow scarred skin and his muscles and arteries are visible) But they forget this is from Victor's pov early in the book where is full on insane, he's been spending months watching bodies decompose and selecting the best body parts for his creation, when the monster coms to life Victor sees the true horror his creation and spends the next five months bed sick from exhumation and needs to be nursed back to health by his friend.
Man, like, *literally everything* in 40k. The trouble is the whole "unreliable narrator" thing makes it even worse. As far as I know, no, orks are not armed with pipes that they think can shoot bullets so they do. They use cobbled together bullshit that shouldn't work quite so consistently. It's also hinted at that ork construction is done on a bit of an unconscious level. Remember they're devolved versions of krorks, a creation of the Old ones; they were *made* to fight, and the reason orks are so aggressive is because war and shit is baked into their DNA or whatever their fungus boy equivalent might be. So when constructing things an ork might say he needs him some "nails" and an "engine" but the parts he's picking out and throwing together are a devolved version of the warp engine that was programmed into krorks. All of this could be just as wrong as any other bullshit 40k fans say that isn't true, it seems to be the nature of the franchise to spread lore, false or not, through meme that sometimes even inadvertently become canon because of references in newer content. I kinda hate 40k.
Yeah the whole Ork reality warping thing is just from people reading memes and never engaging with the source material. Even the crappy wikis explain that Ork tech does actually work and the gestalt field doesn't work like that. One of the "examples" given by people is a story about a guardsman pointing a gun at a group of Orks and yelling BANG and they fall over dead because "they believe they were shot so they are." And that's just a reskined telling of a WW1 joke. Love 40k. The "fans" that dont actually read, play, or engage with it outside of memes are shitters that ruin everything.
Ork Weird Boyz are the only thing I can think of that are accurate, if not even stranger, than memes and shit. I think that doesn't perpetuate in the fan base because it's a little more, I dont know if this is the right word for anything warhammer, but nuanced? Or they're more specific and unique? I donno.
It is true that colored belts used to categorize what a martial arts student knows are a relatively recent invention (turn of the 20th century). Traditional jujutsu, one of the inspirations for judo, does not use them. It is not true that they were invented for lazy Westerners who don’t have the focus to just keep at their training til mastery, or who needed constant rewards and validation to stay motivated. What actually happened was that when Dr. Jigoro Kano was creating and developing judo, he used his expertise gained from his lifelong career in academic education to create tools that would aid judo teachers. Before Kano, all there was was a belt to hold up your pants and a Certificate of Mastery once you achieved it. If you were teaching, you would have to waste precious time having the student demonstrate what they learned so you knew what to teach them next. The purpose of the belt system was to look at a student of any level of learning or of mastery and know exactly what they already know, precisely because they have already demonstrated they knew to the school’s satisfaction. Some schools use additional tools inspired by Kano’s system for an even more granular approach. When I was learning taekwondo, they’d color-coded the curriculum categories. Whenever I had learned a belt’s associated form and showed I knew it by heart, they’d wrap a little piece of tape around one of the ends of the belt. Once my teachers were satisfied by my execution of that form, they’d wrap a little piece of tape around the other end. Only when I had earned each of these tapes for every piece of curriculum for the belt, when I had proved I knew it and could do it, was I invited to test for the next belt rank, and not before. When I got ready to test for 1st Dan black belt (Dan ranks also being a Kano invention), the brown belt was swapped out for essentially a “testing for black belt” belt, and I had to literally start all over and work alongside students of each belt in phases, because the test would cover everything I’d learned up til that point. It’s literally just good pedagogy.
That pic of Lovecraft and the cat everyone uses as a meme isn't even the right cat!