@Derpy Whooves  
Fair enough. Transperency is important.
 
@Ryodraco  
True enough. Although to be fair, it’s not like the writers have ever cared about letting us know about Twilight’s motivations in a clear fashion. Her motivations caught between her feelings for her friends and Celestia’s expectations for her vary wildly between episodes.

@Ryodraco  
Well it’s not like that detail was important to the plot anyway.

@genervt  
Indeed, which is why I think its understandable she believed they could be guilty. But if her motivation for not giving them a chance to prove their innocence was that strong I kind of wish the writers had made that a point rather than relying on us to infer it.

@Ryodraco  
The problem is that it is incomprehensible for Twily that somepony would fail a test on purpose.

@genervt  
I’d say she at worst overreacted by not giving the CMC any options for proving their innocence. She had plenty of reasons to believe they were guilty, but also plenty of reasons to believe they wouldn’t be so cruel. So it did seem a bit off to me that she opted to believe the worst without question, but Twily’s not perfect.

@Derpy Whooves  
Probably.

@Background Pony #366B  
I don´t see how Twily “messed up”.

@Derpyfan  
They’re actually currently banned for this so I’m pretty sure they know now.

@Derpy Whooves  
I believe he said he was going to unsubscribe from this image so chances are he’s not even aware you’re telling him this.

@CronoM  
@Background Pony #366B  
@Background Pony #366B  
@Background Pony #366B  
@Background Pony #366B  
@Background Pony #366B  
@CronoM
 
In any image comment thread, or forum thread, post as yourself or as BP - stop switching back and forth.

@CronoM  
You were doing exactly what I got a duck badge for.

@CronoM  
So in other words, you have no valid way to counter that and instead opt to call him a duck.

@CronoM
 
Oh no you don’t. You wrote this:
 

 
liar.

@Ihhh  
So? I really don’t care. I just did it as anonymous on a whim. Every mod knows it’s me, and nothing is gained or lost knowing it.

@Background Pony #366B  
Word of advice, commenters without an account can’t edit. I know you’re actually a registered user.

@Cryosite  
Not literal numerical numbers genius. Literally anyone else could see I was talking in general. Pulling a completely out of nowhere and arbitrary set of numbers and equations is truly off the rails.
 
Again, are you seriously saying that there is no existing motivation to force Starlight into the limelight? Including Mirror Magic? Is that really your line of thinking? Jeezus…
 
Oh well, see ya never.

@Background Pony #366B  
Hey, I’m just pointing out what you’re doing. You can call it what you like, but you’ve already established you’re really bad at that.

@Background Pony #366B  

 
So wait, arbitrarily declaring value assignments with zero justification is OK when you do it, but not when I do it?
 

 
1st paragraph:  
Destination = exactly the same (it isn’t).  
“different bad method” is you asserting your conclusion, which is just an arbitrary value assignment of “bad.”
 
2nd paragraph:  
Here, you describe something vaguely resembling math. “one could dock points” So lets do so and point out what you’re doing. Let’s declare that positive points are “good points” negative points are “bad points” and zero is neutral. It could be made more complex, but this simple model works to get the proof of concept across.
 
You are comparing “stars freaking align” vs “what the show did. You are assigning both of these a low, negative score. Let’s say -5 and -10. They might be more extremely different, substantially worse, or less bad than that. You’re not very clear, and I’ll be repeating this with some different values. You also claim that the “the original balance point of the … destination” has a poor starting position. Let’s say -100. That seems to match your overall intent.
 
So if we compare the two options, one results at -110, the other at -105. Both still “really bad.”
 
Now, I could say that the destination is +100. One option is -10, while the other is +50. One result is at +90, while the other is at +150. Both really good, just one is super good. Completely different outcome using your math.
 
Maybe we can try some less extreme numbers. Starting point is 0 (netrual to remove it from the consideration, and strictly compare the two options). One option is -1, the other is +1. This gives us a result of -1 and of +1. One is good, the other is bad.
 
As we see, your unsupported and arbitrary value assignments are entirely your post. Your attempt as “logic” with psuedomath doesn’t render your point any more sensible, fair, or agreeable. It really is just your opinion. You think the outcome itself is bad no matter how it is arrived at, and consider both the options bad. You can interchangeably use different adjectives to describe the “bad” and hint that it is “shitty writing” or whatever, but overall your assessment simply reeks of personal bias.
 
As pointed out earlier, Twilight has flaws. This episode played those flaws true to character. Starlight has her own strengths and flaws, and those were true to character. The plot didn’t arbitrarily favor the characters behaving the way they did in order to push some stupid agenda, the plot simply wouldn’t make sense to do things differently. Twilight Sparkle operated the best way she could with the information she had. Her flaws blinded her to seeing other possible outcomes. The camera/audience/we had access to more information than she did. We think differently than she thinks.
 
The OP (and you in agreeing with him/her/it) are claiming the writers have an agenda. Starlight is a “bad character” that you dislike (an opinion you’re welcome to), but the ridiculous part is when you start saying episodes are poorly written simply because they allow a character you dislike to have a “good” position in a story, resolve a conflict, or so on. Your opinion is, essentially, that if Starlight Glimmer does anything good, succeeds in anything, or otherwise comes across as a protagonist, then it is “shitty writing.”
 
Sorry, not buying it. All that tells me is that you don’t know how to write.

@Background Pony #366B  

 
😒

@Cryosite  
Oh well if you say it’s wrong, it must be wrong. /s
 
Srsly, do you even listen to yourself? In what realm did you think that would of worked as a good argument, Mr. “I’m kind of a big deal is my user tag”?
 
Don’t get me wrong, the former method used in this one IS certainly preferable to the latter used in many Starlight episodes, but it’s simply the lesser of two evils to reach an evil destination. (Just replace the word ‘evil’ with ‘shit writing’ in the last sentence). At the very least, that’s not a praiseworthy achievement by any stretch.

@Background Pony #366B  

 
Yes.
 
Your quality labels are wrong.

@genervt  
@Scrounge  
If the destination is exactly the same, ‘Starlight handing Twilight the resolution after Twilight messes up’, is it really that much better with just a different bad method?
 
One could dock points for how easy and convenient they are giving this to Starlight to come deliver the resolution to Twilight, but one could add points back slightly for not creating a “stars freakin align” happenstance like the many in Mirror Magic style that makes Starlight look like a heroic savant over basically nothing.
 
Sure it balances it out more or less, but the original balance point of the shared and badly written destination is still shit territory.
 
I don’t see the upside in this defense.