This is a split board - You can return to the Split List for other boards.

New Evveeoultion Hinted..

#31PkmTrainerAbramPosted 4/5/2013 6:54:50 AM
RX02Banshee posted...
Going by the colour of that second symbol I'm going to place my bets on two combunations. Every new set of Eeveelutions past gen 1 came in duo's, and one was super effective against the other. So, given that I am placing my bets on it being one of two combinations.

Normal and Fighting since Slyveon is pink, pink has been shown to be a colour frequently used for Normal types, and it spammed normal moves in the trailer including one or two Eevee cannot learn.

Or Flying and Rock. Rock is super effective against flying, and that second symbol being similar to the color of rock rather than Fighting which is a very deep red/brown.

It could also be Flying and Fighting though, but I'm placing my bets on rock for now.


...
So we're just going to ignore everything I just posted? Cool. I'm outta this. Have fun with your delusions from ignorance guys.
---
Currently playing: Pokemon LeafGreen(JPN) (blitz living Dex run COMPLETE), Pokemon HeartGold(JPN) run 470/493
#32LexifoxPosted 4/5/2013 6:55:51 AM
What I just read is that we can now speculate and dream without PTA around to insult us.

Hooray!
---
"Murder of the living is tragic, but murder of the idea is unforgivable." - Janus, speaker of the synod
#33Kovalchuk_Posted 4/5/2013 6:57:06 AM
Light type confirmed.
---
Gamefaqs:
http://thechive.files.wordpress.com/2013/01/too-true-g1.gif
#34PkmTrainerAbramPosted 4/5/2013 6:59:14 AM
I'd appreciate if you didn't call me illiterate. I can read just fine, thank you, just not in Japanese.

If you can't read/understand something, then you're illiterate. That's what it means. It's not condensending, it's the truth.

TC claimed the image hinted at a new Eeveelution. I never agreed with or refuted his claim; I was simply making discussion and conversation. The way you simply shot down the discussion was quite rude. You could've made a comment about the real meaning of the image without being condescending. I'm sure we would've appreciated the input of someone with the ability to read Japanese.

If you took it as an insult, then toughen up. The only reason I even responded why I did afterwards was because of your snotty attitude about it. I'm more pissed about the TC posting about something he couldn't even take the time to back up than anything else.
---
Currently playing: Pokemon LeafGreen(JPN) (blitz living Dex run COMPLETE), Pokemon HeartGold(JPN) run 470/493
#35xyzlacticPosted 4/5/2013 7:11:37 AM
Light and sound types confirmed!
---
Homosexual Hipster of Smash Bros and Pokemon X and Y boards. G.A.Y = Good At Yugioh
#36Perfect SierraPosted 4/5/2013 7:22:56 AM
Lesson to take away here, then, would be to make sure one has one's facts straight!


PkmTrainerAbram posted...
I'd appreciate if you didn't call me illiterate. I can read just fine, thank you, just not in Japanese.

If you can't read/understand something, then you're illiterate. That's what it means. It's not condensending, it's the truth.

That goes for you, too. That's not even remotely what literacy is about. Literacy refers to the ability to use language, not specific languages. The term you're looking for is fluency.

Everyone's learning things! Hooray! :D
---
You're a lollipop, no second prize,
An apple somewhere, in somebody's eyes
#37dwdwdw6Posted 4/5/2013 7:31:37 AM
PkmTrainerAbram posted...
I'd appreciate if you didn't call me illiterate. I can read just fine, thank you, just not in Japanese.

If you can't read/understand something, then you're illiterate. That's what it means. It's not condensending, it's the truth.

TC claimed the image hinted at a new Eeveelution. I never agreed with or refuted his claim; I was simply making discussion and conversation. The way you simply shot down the discussion was quite rude. You could've made a comment about the real meaning of the image without being condescending. I'm sure we would've appreciated the input of someone with the ability to read Japanese.

If you took it as an insult, then toughen up. The only reason I even responded why I did afterwards was because of your snotty attitude about it. I'm more pissed about the TC posting about something he couldn't even take the time to back up than anything else.


Haha this man seems upset.
#38AlI_About_The_UPosted 4/5/2013 7:32:40 AM
I'm surprised no one opted for "cOld", or the simple "old".

I don't mind old things being pointed out, I am just a tad surprised.
---
http://i.imgur.com/PqS9Duf.jpg
#39PkmTrainerAbramPosted 4/5/2013 8:11:38 AM
That goes for you, too. That's not even remotely what literacy is about. Literacy refers to the ability to use language, not specific languages. The term you're looking for is fluency

Oh lord, an attempt to belittle me over me correcting someone else? I am shock.
Seriously, we're doing this? Awesome.

It's both, according to this:

****Usage Note: For most of its long history in English, literate has meant only "familiar with literature," or more generally, "well-educated, learned." Only since the late 19th century has it also come to refer to the basic ability to read and write. Its antonym illiterate has an equally broad range of meanings: an illiterate person may be incapable of reading a shopping list or unable to grasp an allusion to Shakespeare or Keats. The term functional illiterate is often used to describe a person who can read or write to some degree, but below a minimum level required to function in even a limited social situation or job setting. An aliterate person, by contrast, is one who is capable of reading and writing but who has little interest in doing so, whether out of indifference to learning in general or from a preference for seeking information and entertainment by other means. More recently, the meanings of the words literacy and illiteracy have been extended from their original connection with reading and literature to any body of knowledge. For example, "geographic illiterates" cannot identify the countries on a map, and "computer illiterates" are unable to use a word-processing system. All of these uses of literacy and illiteracy are acceptable.****

There is nothing in what I wrote in my defense that implied I excluded one from the other, and the TC blantantly proving that he couldn't use the information given in it's appropriate context does you, the ones arguing against me for actually CORRECTING the error, nor him ANY favors. It almost seems like you support me actually.

Next time you want to sound like a smartass, get your **** together first.

As for me being mad? If I was, it matters, lol? That's like, the weakest defense ever. If I was intending to troll or post in such a manner, I'd be a god right now. You people take the stupidest things and twist them into reasons to fight I swear. But hey, I got time.
---
Currently playing: Pokemon LeafGreen(JPN) (blitz living Dex run COMPLETE), Pokemon HeartGold(JPN) run 470/493
#40RaidenHero(Topic Creator)Posted 4/5/2013 8:22:38 AM
PkmTrainerAbram posted...
That goes for you, too. That's not even remotely what literacy is about. Literacy refers to the ability to use language, not specific languages. The term you're looking for is fluency

Oh lord, an attempt to belittle me over me correcting someone else? I am shock.
Seriously, we're doing this? Awesome.

It's both, according to this:

****Usage Note: For most of its long history in English, literate has meant only "familiar with literature," or more generally, "well-educated, learned." Only since the late 19th century has it also come to refer to the basic ability to read and write. Its antonym illiterate has an equally broad range of meanings: an illiterate person may be incapable of reading a shopping list or unable to grasp an allusion to Shakespeare or Keats. The term functional illiterate is often used to describe a person who can read or write to some degree, but below a minimum level required to function in even a limited social situation or job setting. An aliterate person, by contrast, is one who is capable of reading and writing but who has little interest in doing so, whether out of indifference to learning in general or from a preference for seeking information and entertainment by other means. More recently, the meanings of the words literacy and illiteracy have been extended from their original connection with reading and literature to any body of knowledge. For example, "geographic illiterates" cannot identify the countries on a map, and "computer illiterates" are unable to use a word-processing system. All of these uses of literacy and illiteracy are acceptable.****

There is nothing in what I wrote in my defense that implied I excluded one from the other, and the TC blantantly proving that he couldn't use the information given in it's appropriate context does you, the ones arguing against me for actually CORRECTING the error, nor him ANY favors. It almost seems like you support me actually.

Next time you want to sound like a smartass, get your **** together first.

As for me being mad? If I was, it matters, lol? That's like, the weakest defense ever. If I was intending to troll or post in such a manner, I'd be a god right now. You people take the stupidest things and twist them into reasons to fight I swear. But hey, I got time.


..You know what..i am going to ignore you