Talk:Enryu/@comment-28805348-20160705184138/@comment-26484417-20160707121229

@Red Shinsoo: However weak it may be at this point, it is supported and I did include explanation of that in my previous comment. The support will not dissipate simply because you deny it or try to promote something that isn't supported at all.

As for the analogy of people setting goals and rules for themselves, yes, I agree with that. And like those goals and rules, they are entirely in hands of the person. Therefore, if the person decides to break the rule and abandon the goal, they are going to be broken and abandoned. If this is your analogy, does it mean that you agree that Guardian's contract cannot constrain the Guardian in question?

Also, you seem to be making some existential distinction between High Ranker non-Irregulars and (Low) Ranker non-Irregulars, but the only difference between them is what makes up the ranking (e.g., power, influence, achievements, etc.). In fact, since one only needs to be a part of the top 1% in ranking, there are Rankers who could become High Rankers simply by waiting for more lower ranking Rankers to appear. And since the only difference between them is in things that make up the ranking, then what could possibly be your argument that comparison between lower and higher ranking non-Irregulars isn't similar--or that it isn't exactly the same--to the comparison between lower and higher ranking Irregulars?

Moreover, we know that even the 10GW and Zahard have some power-based order among them. Zahard is decisively above Arie, and Arie is among the strongest or the strongest among the remaining 10GW.

As for Hendo, you're right, it might have been his own fault. However, there is really nothing to indicate whether it was or wasn't his fault. So to use different situation, do you think that none of the other Family heads would be interested in the same contract as Zahard? It's extremely unlikely that all of them would settle for "ordinary" immortality (i.e., the one without ageing) if "true" immortality was on the table. Are you going to say that it might have been their fault as well? Because I wouldn't argue about that, BUT it would suggest exactly my point. In other words, it appears that Guardian can decide how much it's willing to give--with the upper limit being what it can give--, and that's what the potential contractor is stuck with; take it or leave it.

As for the side-note, that is indeed crazy. Since you're the one who came up with that notion and immediately realised that it's crazy, why would you write that in the first place? I cannot see your point.