Korra isn't canon.
Quote from: Snow Digger on December 01, 2014, 04:41:54 PMQuote from: challengerX on December 01, 2014, 04:41:27 PMQuote from: Snow Digger on December 01, 2014, 04:40:51 PMQuote from: challengerX on December 01, 2014, 04:40:31 PMQuote from: Snow Digger on December 01, 2014, 04:39:56 PMQuote from: challengerX on December 01, 2014, 04:39:25 PMQuote from: Snow Digger on December 01, 2014, 04:38:47 PMQuote from: challengerX on December 01, 2014, 04:37:29 PMQuote from: Snow Digger on December 01, 2014, 04:35:52 PMQuote from: challengerX on December 01, 2014, 04:35:21 PMQuote from: Snow Digger on December 01, 2014, 04:34:32 PMQuote from: challengerX on December 01, 2014, 04:34:11 PMQuote from: Snow Digger on December 01, 2014, 04:32:52 PMQuote from: challengerX on December 01, 2014, 04:32:23 PMActually if they draw from the original thread it can be considered canon, but it's not a "concrete rule" so to speak.This post isn't canon.Actually explaining if something is or isn't canon is always canon.That rule isn't canon.It was declared canon 30 years ago so it's canon for all of us under 30 years old.You can't declare something canon, that makes it non-canon.I didn't declare it. It was declared, and I'm exposing that it was declared canon so my post is canon because it pertains to the fact that I'm providing an explanation of what is and isn't canon.That isn't canon though, you can't make non-canon into canon. It cannot be changed. But that isn't canon either.It was already canon.It never was canon. This is canon.It always has been canon.No, it never was canon.Yes it was.No, it wasn't.Yes, it was.
Quote from: challengerX on December 01, 2014, 04:41:27 PMQuote from: Snow Digger on December 01, 2014, 04:40:51 PMQuote from: challengerX on December 01, 2014, 04:40:31 PMQuote from: Snow Digger on December 01, 2014, 04:39:56 PMQuote from: challengerX on December 01, 2014, 04:39:25 PMQuote from: Snow Digger on December 01, 2014, 04:38:47 PMQuote from: challengerX on December 01, 2014, 04:37:29 PMQuote from: Snow Digger on December 01, 2014, 04:35:52 PMQuote from: challengerX on December 01, 2014, 04:35:21 PMQuote from: Snow Digger on December 01, 2014, 04:34:32 PMQuote from: challengerX on December 01, 2014, 04:34:11 PMQuote from: Snow Digger on December 01, 2014, 04:32:52 PMQuote from: challengerX on December 01, 2014, 04:32:23 PMActually if they draw from the original thread it can be considered canon, but it's not a "concrete rule" so to speak.This post isn't canon.Actually explaining if something is or isn't canon is always canon.That rule isn't canon.It was declared canon 30 years ago so it's canon for all of us under 30 years old.You can't declare something canon, that makes it non-canon.I didn't declare it. It was declared, and I'm exposing that it was declared canon so my post is canon because it pertains to the fact that I'm providing an explanation of what is and isn't canon.That isn't canon though, you can't make non-canon into canon. It cannot be changed. But that isn't canon either.It was already canon.It never was canon. This is canon.It always has been canon.No, it never was canon.Yes it was.No, it wasn't.
Quote from: Snow Digger on December 01, 2014, 04:40:51 PMQuote from: challengerX on December 01, 2014, 04:40:31 PMQuote from: Snow Digger on December 01, 2014, 04:39:56 PMQuote from: challengerX on December 01, 2014, 04:39:25 PMQuote from: Snow Digger on December 01, 2014, 04:38:47 PMQuote from: challengerX on December 01, 2014, 04:37:29 PMQuote from: Snow Digger on December 01, 2014, 04:35:52 PMQuote from: challengerX on December 01, 2014, 04:35:21 PMQuote from: Snow Digger on December 01, 2014, 04:34:32 PMQuote from: challengerX on December 01, 2014, 04:34:11 PMQuote from: Snow Digger on December 01, 2014, 04:32:52 PMQuote from: challengerX on December 01, 2014, 04:32:23 PMActually if they draw from the original thread it can be considered canon, but it's not a "concrete rule" so to speak.This post isn't canon.Actually explaining if something is or isn't canon is always canon.That rule isn't canon.It was declared canon 30 years ago so it's canon for all of us under 30 years old.You can't declare something canon, that makes it non-canon.I didn't declare it. It was declared, and I'm exposing that it was declared canon so my post is canon because it pertains to the fact that I'm providing an explanation of what is and isn't canon.That isn't canon though, you can't make non-canon into canon. It cannot be changed. But that isn't canon either.It was already canon.It never was canon. This is canon.It always has been canon.No, it never was canon.Yes it was.
Quote from: challengerX on December 01, 2014, 04:40:31 PMQuote from: Snow Digger on December 01, 2014, 04:39:56 PMQuote from: challengerX on December 01, 2014, 04:39:25 PMQuote from: Snow Digger on December 01, 2014, 04:38:47 PMQuote from: challengerX on December 01, 2014, 04:37:29 PMQuote from: Snow Digger on December 01, 2014, 04:35:52 PMQuote from: challengerX on December 01, 2014, 04:35:21 PMQuote from: Snow Digger on December 01, 2014, 04:34:32 PMQuote from: challengerX on December 01, 2014, 04:34:11 PMQuote from: Snow Digger on December 01, 2014, 04:32:52 PMQuote from: challengerX on December 01, 2014, 04:32:23 PMActually if they draw from the original thread it can be considered canon, but it's not a "concrete rule" so to speak.This post isn't canon.Actually explaining if something is or isn't canon is always canon.That rule isn't canon.It was declared canon 30 years ago so it's canon for all of us under 30 years old.You can't declare something canon, that makes it non-canon.I didn't declare it. It was declared, and I'm exposing that it was declared canon so my post is canon because it pertains to the fact that I'm providing an explanation of what is and isn't canon.That isn't canon though, you can't make non-canon into canon. It cannot be changed. But that isn't canon either.It was already canon.It never was canon. This is canon.It always has been canon.No, it never was canon.
Quote from: Snow Digger on December 01, 2014, 04:39:56 PMQuote from: challengerX on December 01, 2014, 04:39:25 PMQuote from: Snow Digger on December 01, 2014, 04:38:47 PMQuote from: challengerX on December 01, 2014, 04:37:29 PMQuote from: Snow Digger on December 01, 2014, 04:35:52 PMQuote from: challengerX on December 01, 2014, 04:35:21 PMQuote from: Snow Digger on December 01, 2014, 04:34:32 PMQuote from: challengerX on December 01, 2014, 04:34:11 PMQuote from: Snow Digger on December 01, 2014, 04:32:52 PMQuote from: challengerX on December 01, 2014, 04:32:23 PMActually if they draw from the original thread it can be considered canon, but it's not a "concrete rule" so to speak.This post isn't canon.Actually explaining if something is or isn't canon is always canon.That rule isn't canon.It was declared canon 30 years ago so it's canon for all of us under 30 years old.You can't declare something canon, that makes it non-canon.I didn't declare it. It was declared, and I'm exposing that it was declared canon so my post is canon because it pertains to the fact that I'm providing an explanation of what is and isn't canon.That isn't canon though, you can't make non-canon into canon. It cannot be changed. But that isn't canon either.It was already canon.It never was canon. This is canon.It always has been canon.
Quote from: challengerX on December 01, 2014, 04:39:25 PMQuote from: Snow Digger on December 01, 2014, 04:38:47 PMQuote from: challengerX on December 01, 2014, 04:37:29 PMQuote from: Snow Digger on December 01, 2014, 04:35:52 PMQuote from: challengerX on December 01, 2014, 04:35:21 PMQuote from: Snow Digger on December 01, 2014, 04:34:32 PMQuote from: challengerX on December 01, 2014, 04:34:11 PMQuote from: Snow Digger on December 01, 2014, 04:32:52 PMQuote from: challengerX on December 01, 2014, 04:32:23 PMActually if they draw from the original thread it can be considered canon, but it's not a "concrete rule" so to speak.This post isn't canon.Actually explaining if something is or isn't canon is always canon.That rule isn't canon.It was declared canon 30 years ago so it's canon for all of us under 30 years old.You can't declare something canon, that makes it non-canon.I didn't declare it. It was declared, and I'm exposing that it was declared canon so my post is canon because it pertains to the fact that I'm providing an explanation of what is and isn't canon.That isn't canon though, you can't make non-canon into canon. It cannot be changed. But that isn't canon either.It was already canon.It never was canon. This is canon.
Quote from: Snow Digger on December 01, 2014, 04:38:47 PMQuote from: challengerX on December 01, 2014, 04:37:29 PMQuote from: Snow Digger on December 01, 2014, 04:35:52 PMQuote from: challengerX on December 01, 2014, 04:35:21 PMQuote from: Snow Digger on December 01, 2014, 04:34:32 PMQuote from: challengerX on December 01, 2014, 04:34:11 PMQuote from: Snow Digger on December 01, 2014, 04:32:52 PMQuote from: challengerX on December 01, 2014, 04:32:23 PMActually if they draw from the original thread it can be considered canon, but it's not a "concrete rule" so to speak.This post isn't canon.Actually explaining if something is or isn't canon is always canon.That rule isn't canon.It was declared canon 30 years ago so it's canon for all of us under 30 years old.You can't declare something canon, that makes it non-canon.I didn't declare it. It was declared, and I'm exposing that it was declared canon so my post is canon because it pertains to the fact that I'm providing an explanation of what is and isn't canon.That isn't canon though, you can't make non-canon into canon. It cannot be changed. But that isn't canon either.It was already canon.
Quote from: challengerX on December 01, 2014, 04:37:29 PMQuote from: Snow Digger on December 01, 2014, 04:35:52 PMQuote from: challengerX on December 01, 2014, 04:35:21 PMQuote from: Snow Digger on December 01, 2014, 04:34:32 PMQuote from: challengerX on December 01, 2014, 04:34:11 PMQuote from: Snow Digger on December 01, 2014, 04:32:52 PMQuote from: challengerX on December 01, 2014, 04:32:23 PMActually if they draw from the original thread it can be considered canon, but it's not a "concrete rule" so to speak.This post isn't canon.Actually explaining if something is or isn't canon is always canon.That rule isn't canon.It was declared canon 30 years ago so it's canon for all of us under 30 years old.You can't declare something canon, that makes it non-canon.I didn't declare it. It was declared, and I'm exposing that it was declared canon so my post is canon because it pertains to the fact that I'm providing an explanation of what is and isn't canon.That isn't canon though, you can't make non-canon into canon. It cannot be changed. But that isn't canon either.
Quote from: Snow Digger on December 01, 2014, 04:35:52 PMQuote from: challengerX on December 01, 2014, 04:35:21 PMQuote from: Snow Digger on December 01, 2014, 04:34:32 PMQuote from: challengerX on December 01, 2014, 04:34:11 PMQuote from: Snow Digger on December 01, 2014, 04:32:52 PMQuote from: challengerX on December 01, 2014, 04:32:23 PMActually if they draw from the original thread it can be considered canon, but it's not a "concrete rule" so to speak.This post isn't canon.Actually explaining if something is or isn't canon is always canon.That rule isn't canon.It was declared canon 30 years ago so it's canon for all of us under 30 years old.You can't declare something canon, that makes it non-canon.I didn't declare it. It was declared, and I'm exposing that it was declared canon so my post is canon because it pertains to the fact that I'm providing an explanation of what is and isn't canon.
Quote from: challengerX on December 01, 2014, 04:35:21 PMQuote from: Snow Digger on December 01, 2014, 04:34:32 PMQuote from: challengerX on December 01, 2014, 04:34:11 PMQuote from: Snow Digger on December 01, 2014, 04:32:52 PMQuote from: challengerX on December 01, 2014, 04:32:23 PMActually if they draw from the original thread it can be considered canon, but it's not a "concrete rule" so to speak.This post isn't canon.Actually explaining if something is or isn't canon is always canon.That rule isn't canon.It was declared canon 30 years ago so it's canon for all of us under 30 years old.You can't declare something canon, that makes it non-canon.
Quote from: Snow Digger on December 01, 2014, 04:34:32 PMQuote from: challengerX on December 01, 2014, 04:34:11 PMQuote from: Snow Digger on December 01, 2014, 04:32:52 PMQuote from: challengerX on December 01, 2014, 04:32:23 PMActually if they draw from the original thread it can be considered canon, but it's not a "concrete rule" so to speak.This post isn't canon.Actually explaining if something is or isn't canon is always canon.That rule isn't canon.It was declared canon 30 years ago so it's canon for all of us under 30 years old.
Quote from: challengerX on December 01, 2014, 04:34:11 PMQuote from: Snow Digger on December 01, 2014, 04:32:52 PMQuote from: challengerX on December 01, 2014, 04:32:23 PMActually if they draw from the original thread it can be considered canon, but it's not a "concrete rule" so to speak.This post isn't canon.Actually explaining if something is or isn't canon is always canon.That rule isn't canon.
Quote from: Snow Digger on December 01, 2014, 04:32:52 PMQuote from: challengerX on December 01, 2014, 04:32:23 PMActually if they draw from the original thread it can be considered canon, but it's not a "concrete rule" so to speak.This post isn't canon.Actually explaining if something is or isn't canon is always canon.
Quote from: challengerX on December 01, 2014, 04:32:23 PMActually if they draw from the original thread it can be considered canon, but it's not a "concrete rule" so to speak.This post isn't canon.
Actually if they draw from the original thread it can be considered canon, but it's not a "concrete rule" so to speak.
Elliptical galaxies are the only canon galaxies.
the one true God is Doctor Doom and we should all be worshiping him.
Quote from: Korra on December 01, 2014, 04:43:25 PMQuote from: ねこ on December 01, 2014, 04:42:33 PMKorra being a Whorra is super canon the avatar told meieat a dick niqqaDo I look like Korra to you •~• hue
Quote from: ねこ on December 01, 2014, 04:42:33 PMKorra being a Whorra is super canon the avatar told meieat a dick niqqa
Korra being a Whorra is super canon the avatar told mei
Quote from: Snow Digger on December 01, 2014, 04:38:04 PMElliptical galaxies are the only canon galaxies.Nah, spirals are better.
What about Triangulum?
I'll fucking wreck Zimbabwe.1V1 ME FUCKFAGGOTS
I'm not a dinosaur.
the lack of replies shows that your statement is not canon
Quote from: Korra on December 01, 2014, 04:45:38 PMQuote from: ねこ on December 01, 2014, 04:45:10 PMQuote from: Korra on December 01, 2014, 04:43:25 PMQuote from: ねこ on December 01, 2014, 04:42:33 PMKorra being a Whorra is super canon the avatar told meieat a dick niqqaDo I look like Korra to you •~• huespeak american you piece of shitYou stop speaking Beaner first fig >:c
Quote from: ねこ on December 01, 2014, 04:45:10 PMQuote from: Korra on December 01, 2014, 04:43:25 PMQuote from: ねこ on December 01, 2014, 04:42:33 PMKorra being a Whorra is super canon the avatar told meieat a dick niqqaDo I look like Korra to you •~• huespeak american you piece of shit
Quote from: Sento on December 01, 2014, 04:46:30 PMI'll fucking wreck Zimbabwe.1V1 ME FUCKFAGGOTS
Actually it is.
Quote from: Korra on December 01, 2014, 04:47:58 PMQuote from: Sento on December 01, 2014, 04:46:30 PMI'll fucking wreck Zimbabwe.1V1 ME FUCKFAGGOTSOn second thought, I don't want Ebolaids.
Quote from: Vien on December 01, 2014, 04:48:20 PMI'm not a dinosaur.Sure you are.
Quote from: Ryle on December 01, 2014, 04:46:09 PMthe lack of replies shows that your statement is not canonnigga this was reconfirmed by tblacks so go yiff heckle
halo 5 isn't cannon
