Talk:Enryu/@comment-26484417-20160122012037/@comment-26484417-20160122211725

@Rachellover69: Since you bring up that Hell Train isn't the obligatory route, you surely have some evidence or information that supports that Enryu didn't take the train... Naturaly, I'm aware that there is no suggestion as to whether Enryu boarded the Hell Train or not, which makes this another absence of information.

I never said someone should care about my location, I only mentioned that scenarios would be alike. As for whether GoG should mention Enryu or not if they met, you can speculate as much as you wish, but it will remain a speculation. You cannot argue or reason an unsupported speculation into a supported one. At best, you can hope that new information will support it later on, but at this time there is nothing of the kind.

I'll humour you for this bit... Argument for neither Enryu nor Phanta being mentioned? From the top of my head, both of them came after Zahard and before Urek, so neither the first nor the last references. Both of them are more powerful than either Urek or Zahard, so when Viole doesn't even compare to Urek, why bring up either one of them? I could probably think of more, but since it's impossible to determine the real reason, be it for or against mentioning Enryu, this exercise is somewhat pointless. Moreover, Phantaminum is an Axis, so not exactly like any other Irregular.

@Vaska Zark: No worries, if the objection was indeed based on substantiated logic, there would be no argument. It was just far too simple to tell that the objection wasn't based on an information but rather on an absence thereof. Just for an instance, saying simply "I don't think Enryu ever boarded the Hell Train" would be also a valid objection, saying this is supported by what GoG didn't say is what makes it unsubstantiated. Disagreement from feelings cannot be argued against with so little information, however, disagreement based on missing information "not mentioned" is the very definition of groundless. =)