Talk:Metapotence/@comment-30165589-20171003142429/@comment-29564364-20171102142336

@Nekron1 Define your terms first, then we can talk. Using different definitions for the same terms will inevitably lead to misunderstandings and I already defined mine over the course of this debate (including the first part over in Author Authority's comment section), but in case you missed it, here's a compilation of my definitions: -verse: "denoting a fictional world associated with a particular character, television series, video game series, writer, etc." Omniverse: "collection of all universes, dimensions, timelines, etc. within a given fiction." Author: "user of Author Authority." writer: "transfictional person who writes a fiction." author avatar: "fictional character used by a writer as a representation of themselves within their work of fiction." Omnilock: "the power to exist outside of everything except fiction." (note the difference between "a fiction/fictions," which is synonymous with verse, and "fiction," the collection of all fictions.)

Your turn now.

«As I have stated below too perfect [Omnilock] have Totallity connection thus being unbound to the entire verse itself you are by default immune to author authority which is the power to have absolute control over the verse .Thus,perfect users of omnilock a are immune to the power of author authority due to the power of Totallity connection» That's good and all, but here's the problem. If you scroll down to the comment section, SageM, the creator of Totality Connection's page, defined verse and omniverse as synonymous, which they are not under my definitions, therefore that argument cannot be used to refute mine since both are based on different definitions.

«If you want the proof as such when a user of omnilock or Totallity connection has been shown to move out of the verse then visit the Totallity connection page there in the comments page SageM has literally posted the image of God Swamp thing going out of the DC verse.» Why do you make it sound like I was denying it when it's the very event I was referring to. I didn't need proof, only correction because I wrongly recalled it. Now you only need to apply that correction to my previous reply by replacing "omniverse" with "totality" in the part regarding God-Thing's feat.

«You have been mistaking verse as the whole fiction» That would be true under your definitions, but according to the ones I use, they are synonymous, so using them interchangeably doesn't qualify as a mistake.

«Actually,omnipotence is the power to control the entire fiction and not author authority.» Actually, only the writer can control the entire fiction is the writer and the second paragraph of Author Authority's capabilities states that "Users [of Author Authority] are fully transcendent existences, both "characters" and "storytellers" of reality, controlling it like an author controls a work of fiction, with the same absolute power and overwhelming authority." You literally just described Author Authority and called it Omnipotence. Then you accuse me of getting the two confused?

«that is the reason you are not able to understand the difference between author authority and omnipotence.» How could I have an opinion about which is greater if I couldn't distinguish between the two, hm?