Viewing last 25 versions of comment by BackgroundLoL on image #1656515

"[@Dustcan":](/1656515#comment_6899236
)  
Well, seeing it'a a very blatant inconsistency, _*visible allready in the books summary_*, and Rsising Star was **quite** visible multiple times during Friendship Games, including the Group Shot of Shadowbolts:
 
>>927849t
 
>>927845t


 
And in a _*second_* one:
 
>>1020628t


 
So yes, as it's a quite visible inconsistency. And really, the writer shown visible lack of doing research, or delibaterely ignored of previous continuity, in the name of seemingly quite cliche plot, that allready has people begining to flanderize Sci-Twi into a stereotypical hormone driven teen (ie like in this pic and comments). And the writers ignorance is allready visible in the book's _*summary_*.


 
Will you _*really_* defend this books canonicty?


 
And maybe you mean I come of as arrogant proclaiming this....

"@Dustcan":/1656515#comment_6899236
Well, seeing it'a a very blatant inconsistency, _visible allready in the books summary_, and Rsising Star was *quite* visible multiple times during Friendship Games, including the Group Shot of Shadowbolts:
>>927849t
>>927845t

And in a _second_ one:
>>1020628t

So yes, as it's a quite visible inconsistency. And really, the writer shown visible lack of doing research, or delibaterely ignored of previous continuity, in the name of seemingly quite cliche plot, that allready has people begining to flanderize Sci-Twi into a stereotypical hormone driven teen (ie like in this pic and comments). And the writers ignorance is allready visible in the books _summary_.

Will you _really_ defend this books canonicty?

And maybe you mean I come of as arrogant proclaiming this....

"@Dustcan":/1656515#comment_6899236
Well, seeing it'a a very blatant inconsistency, _visible allready in the books summary_, and Rsising Star was "*quite* visible multiple times during Friendship Games":search?q=rising+star%2C+friendship+games , including the Group Shot of Shadowbolts:
>>927849t
>>927845t

And in a _second_ one:
>>1020628t

So yes, as it's a quite visible inconsistency. And really, the writer shown visible lack of doing research, or delibaterely ignored of previous continuity, in the name of seemingly quite cliche plot, that allready has people begining to flanderize Sci-Twi into stereotypical hormone driven teen (ie like in this pic and comments). And the writers ignorance is allready visible in the books _summary_.

Will you _really_ defend this books canonicty?

And maybe you mean I come of as arrogant proclaiming this....

"@Dustcan":/1656515#comment_6899236
Well, seeing it'a a very blatant inconsistency, _visible allready in the books summary_, and Rsising Star was "*quite* visible multiple times during Friendship Games":search?q=rising+star%2C+friendship+games , including the Group Shot of Shadowbolts:
>>927849t
>>927845t

And in a _second_ one:
>>91027062845t

So yes, as it's a quite visible inconsistency. And really, the writer shown visible lack of doing research, or delibaterely ignored of previous continuity, in the name of seemingly quite cliche plot, that allready has people begining to flanderize Sci-Twi into stereotypical hormone driven teen (ie like in this pic and comments). And the writers ignorance is allready visible in the books _summary_.

Will you _really_ defend this books canonicty?

And maybe you mean I come of as arrogant proclaiming this....

"@Dustcan":/1656515#comment_6899236
Well, seeing it'a a very blatant inconsistency, _visible allready in the books summary_, and Rsising Star was "*quite* visible multiple times during Friendship Games":search?q=rising+star%2C+friendship+games , including the Group Shot of Shadowbolts:
>>927849t
>>927845t

And in a _second_ one:
>>927845t

So yes, as it's a quite visible inconsistency. And really, the writer shown visible lack of doing research, or delibaterely ignored of previous continuity, in the name of seemingly quite cliche plot, that allready has people begining to flanderize Sci-Twi into stereotypical hormone driven teen (ie like in this pic and comments). And the writers ignorance is allready visible in the books _summary_.

Will you _really_ defend this books canonicty?

And maybe you mean I come of as arrogant proclaiming this....