[002]
gs
Current Version
Changed line(s) 5 from:
n
\
to:
\\\"Friendly Neighborhood Rainbow Dash\\\" is not ambiguous, its direct use of a catchphrase from one of the most popular superheroes in a superhero episode.
The crossed double horseshoes in this episode are another, a designer brand when Rarity is out buying designer material is no with ambiguity a stand in for Coco Chanel\\\'s famous crossed Cs.
Putting different ponies that did not appear together together and are only connected with a common cutie with selective shots of their supposed inspirations does not compare to the connection showed by this and numerous other incidences within the show. As I said it smacks of the Sharpshooter Fallacy, taking the random result then carefully painting the bullseye in to make it look genius. A good example of showing intent would be say having 11 ponies with an hourglass walking by in order with appropriate appearances. Or having one with a certain notable scarf or horrific coat.
Without there being obvious intent it isn\\\'t a ShoutOut, because that isn\\\'t for chance resemblances. HERE and here only is where corroborating evidence comes into play, because if we know it was intentional then it solves it.
And the Windfish one... checked it and it doesn\\\'t cut it either. So I\\\'ll delete the both.
The crossed double horseshoes in this episode are another, a designer brand when Rarity is out buying designer material is no with ambiguity a stand in for Coco Chanel\\\'s famous crossed Cs.
Putting different ponies that did not appear together together and are only connected with a common cutie with selective shots of their supposed inspirations does not compare to the connection showed by this and numerous other incidences within the show. As I said it smacks of the Sharpshooter Fallacy, taking the random result then carefully painting the bullseye in to make it look genius. A good example of showing intent would be say having 11 ponies with an hourglass walking by in order with appropriate appearances. Or having one with a certain notable scarf or horrific coat.
Without there being obvious intent it isn\\\'t a ShoutOut, because that isn\\\'t for chance resemblances. HERE and here only is where corroborating evidence comes into play, because if we know it was intentional then it solves it.
And the Windfish one... checked it and it doesn\\\'t cut it either. So I\\\'ll delete the both.
Changed line(s) 5 from:
n
\
to:
\\\"Friendly Neighborhood Rainbow Dash\\\" is not ambiguous, its direct use of a catchphrase from one of the most popular superheroes in a superhero episode.
The crossed double horseshoes in this episode are another, a designer brand when Rarity is out buying designer material is no with ambiguity a stand in for Coco Chanel\\\'s famous crossed Cs.
Putting different ponies that did not appear together together and are only connected with a common cutie with selective shots of their supposed inspirations does not compare to the connection showed by this and numerous other incidences within the show. As I said it smacks of the Sharpshooter Fallacy, taking the random result then carefully painting the bullseye in to make it look genius. A good example of showing intent would be say having 11 ponies with an hourglass walking by in order with appropriate appearances. Or having one with a certain notable scarf or horrific coat.
Without there being obvious intent it isn\\\'t a ShoutOut, because that isn\\\'t for chance resemblances. HERE and here only is where corroborating evidence comes into play, because if we know it was intentional then it solves it.
And the Windfish one... check it and it doesn\\\'t cut it either. So I\\\'ll delete the both.
The crossed double horseshoes in this episode are another, a designer brand when Rarity is out buying designer material is no with ambiguity a stand in for Coco Chanel\\\'s famous crossed Cs.
Putting different ponies that did not appear together together and are only connected with a common cutie with selective shots of their supposed inspirations does not compare to the connection showed by this and numerous other incidences within the show. As I said it smacks of the Sharpshooter Fallacy, taking the random result then carefully painting the bullseye in to make it look genius. A good example of showing intent would be say having 11 ponies with an hourglass walking by in order with appropriate appearances. Or having one with a certain notable scarf or horrific coat.
Without there being obvious intent it isn\\\'t a ShoutOut, because that isn\\\'t for chance resemblances. HERE and here only is where corroborating evidence comes into play, because if we know it was intentional then it solves it.
And the Windfish one... check it and it doesn\\\'t cut it either. So I\\\'ll delete the both.
