Board Thread:General Discussion/@comment-25539649-20150510212536/@comment-26812261-20150526165233

"Actually, I have countered all of them. You just didn't read it carefully and acknowledge the rest of the points I made."

No, I definitely read it, and it's just your theory against mine. Yours has literally no more validation.

"Here's the most obvious problem with your claim. You gloss over the fact the statue itself looks nothing like Blue Diamond, right down to different builds, faces, and hair styles."

Here's the most obvious problem with this: We have no idea if there is a Blue Diamond at all, let alone what she looks like. You're attempting to disprove my theory with information nobody has.

"Why don't you read my post again and try countering each of my misconception debunkings."

In other words, put more effort into my responses to you than you put into your response to me, which is hilarious because, again, you're speaking on this subject with authority and expertise you don't actually have.

"Also, I think it would be a cop-out if the Crystal Gems only had to fight one diamond instead of all three. I think it would be more satisfying, exciting and would keep things unpredictable if Steven manages to defeat the entire trio."

And that's the problem with your blog post, you're taking your personal preferences and desires and trying to pass them off as the objectively-best direction for the story to go.

Why would one villain instead of three be a cop-out? Why would it be bad story-telling if the other two Diamonds had been defeated on Earth during the rebellion and were never reclaimed? Why would it be bad if not all three of these hypothetical diamonds were villains?

Your answer doesn't actually matter in the context of the point I'm making, because no matter what, it's going to be your own subjective assessment. So no, your blog hasn't refuted a single thing I've said, let alone all of it. It's just your theories and personal story preferences against mine.