Forum:Total Known Bounty


 * -From the first ▲ to the last ▲ indicates that the conversation comes directly from the talk page of the Bonney Pirates. -

▲

Total bounty
Since we don't know if Bonney is the only member in the crew who has bounty the correct variant is the second ("at least 140,000,000"). Ruxax 12:52, March 5, 2011 (UTC)


 * I'm in agreement. We know they have at least that amount because of the captain, that is a correct amount. One-Winged Hawk 13:20, March 5, 2011 (UTC)

The same situation is, of course, with Heart Pirates, Hawkins Pirates, On Air Pirates, Fallen Monk Pirates, Firetank Pirates, Drake Pirates. Ruxax 15:33, March 5, 2011 (UTC)

Wrong. It is speculation to assume somebody else has a bounty. Until it is confirmed you are wrong to put at least in. SeaTerror 16:41, March 5, 2011 (UTC)

"Total bounty: 140,000,000" assumes that nobody except Bonney has bounty.

"Total bounty is at least 140,000,000" doesn't assume anything. It is true in both cases.

So, the first variant is a speculation. The second is not. Ruxax 16:48, March 5, 2011 (UTC)

I agree. It's best to leave it open and add "at least" to Bonney, the rest of the supernovas, and all pirate crews with known bounties for that matter. 16:54, March 5, 2011 (UTC)

Yes it "Somebody else in the crew has bounty" Prove it. That is pure speculation. Nice try. SeaTerror 17:01, March 5, 2011 (UTC)

Prove they don't have a bounty. "At least" leaves it open-ended, allowing for the possibility that at least one other crew member has a bounty. We'd be speculating if we ruled it out as a possibility by saying that only Bonney has a bounty. 17:13, March 5, 2011 (UTC)

Buren of proof is on the people speculating, Oda. Its speculation saying there might be another bounty. SeaTerror 17:16, March 5, 2011 (UTC)


 * You have to prove that Bonney is the only person that has bounty! Learn to read and to use logic. Ruxax 17:53, March 5, 2011 (UTC)

No that would be you. You are using speculation that other crew members have bounties. Prove it. They do not have bounties until said so by Oda. Or I guess you want to claim to be Oda. SeaTerror 18:01, March 5, 2011 (UTC)


 * I repeat once again: when you don't use "at least" you have to prove that other members don't have bounties. We don't know if they have bounties or not. So you are wrong.
 * When one uses "at least" there is no need to prove anything. The phrase "Total bounty is at least 140,000,000." is true either if other members have bounties or not, it is true in both cases! Ruxax 18:08, March 5, 2011 (UTC)

It is speculation to assume they have bounties. It isn't true until confirmed in the manga. SeaTerror 18:25, March 5, 2011 (UTC)

Man, this is seriously endless!!! Here:

Quick Poll

''Please sign your name under the topic you vote for. Only registered users with at least 150 edits may vote.''

1.) Use "at least"


 * 17:26, March 5, 2011 (UTC)
 * 17:28, March 5, 2011 (UTC)
 * Pandawarrior 17:42, March 5, 2011 (UTC)
 * Ruxax 17:53, March 5, 2011 (UTC)
 * or Total Bounty, either one.
 * leviathan_ 89  21:42, March 6, 2011 (UTC) or something similar like "min".
 * 05:49, March 8, 2011 (UTC)

2.) Don't use "at least"


 * SeaTerror 17:27, March 5, 2011 (UTC)
 * Yatanogarasu 18:31, March 5, 2011 (UTC)

3.) Change "Total Bounty" in infobox to "Total Bounty Known"
 * 18:35, March 5, 2011 (UTC)
 * Make it Total Known Bounty (sounds better). 18:37, March 5, 2011 (UTC)
 * This is awesome 18:52, March 5, 2011 (UTC)
 * "Total known bounty" is properly safer. One-Winged Hawk 21:07, March 5, 2011 (UTC)
 * Kaizoku-Hime 21:37, March 5, 2011 (UTC)
 * Yatanogarasu 04:22, March 6, 2011 (UTC)
 * Whiskey 13:17, March 9, 2011 (UTC)

17:26, March 5, 2011 (UTC)

Poll Talk

 * When someone is being a jackass over a simple matter and refuses to see reason, polls aren't really needed. At most, the reasons for using "At least" are more convincing than what's been replied against.203.177.74.140 17:34, March 5, 2011 (UTC)

Apparently saying something is speculation is being a jackass. I guess most editors on this wikia were jackasses at some point. 17:35, March 5, 2011 (UTC)

Woah, chill guys, 203.177.74.140 I know you don't enjoy ST much but he is useful at times too, and ST, don't get too hot over this guy, he/she's just getting used to stuff. 17:39, March 5, 2011 (UTC)


 * @SeaTerror Saying something is speculation doesn't make a person a jackass. Refusing to see reason in an otherwise simple situation and creating constant edit wars however does.


 * @JapaneseOPfan It is hard not to get angry at this guy based on his insulting comments and actions. His reply to my comment in fact not only insults me but also, unintentional or not, every other contributor. This includes you my friend.203.177.74.140 17:47, March 5, 2011 (UTC)

And this is why people need to get sarcasm. SeaTerror 17:59, March 5, 2011 (UTC)

It's hard to get written sarcasm. Sarcasm is meant to be portrayed through verbal queues, meaning it's auditory, not typing. 18:05, March 5, 2011 (UTC)

I can usually tell when somebody is being sarcastic on the internet. Though there's also a forum of sarcasm where people make it sound like they aren't being sarcastic but they are. SeaTerror 18:07, March 5, 2011 (UTC)

I somehow fail to spot insults? Maybe I'm just to thick-skinned, but this isn't really something to get mad over...

Anyway, I don't like these options... both are speculative. The first implies that there is more, the second implies it is a set amount. I wouldn't use words at all, but this sign here: ≤ ( = or < ). Best solution imho 18:13, March 5, 2011 (UTC)

That would be the same thing as saying at least, only using symbols, and then we'd be back to square one. 18:17, March 5, 2011 (UTC)

We're getting off topic. The point of this quick poll is to make sure what the community wants. So far, I see the first option winning, and so SeaTerror, please do not undo Ruxax's edits unless the votes suddenly get overturned. 18:21, March 5, 2011 (UTC)

Ehm, what is offtopic about my suggestion? Anyway, "at least" sounds more suggestive tho. It's like I would say: The Bonney pirates have a bounty of 140.000.000, at least!

On the other hand, the symbol is neutral, it is "sterile". 140.000.000 ≤ (point.)

Just a suggestion. 18:27, March 5, 2011 (UTC)

It is a quick poll. Nobody said the poll was official. SeaTerror 18:29, March 5, 2011 (UTC)

(Editing conflict) Here's a new suggestion: changing the "Total Bounty" in the infobox to "Total Known Bounties" or something like that. Yatanogarasu 18:31, March 5, 2011 (UTC)

Lol Yatan, I was just about to say that!! 18:33, March 5, 2011 (UTC)

This should have been put in the forums instead. SeaTerror 18:37, March 5, 2011 (UTC)

Then move it! I don't know how to... 18:39, March 5, 2011 (UTC)

Anyway, seems like now that I've added it, option 3 is starting to gain popularity. The problem is:


 * 1) Will there be 2 separate Charbox templates; one with "Total known" and 1 with just "Total" or
 * 2) Just 1 Charbox is fine, it's a pain to make 2.

Option 1 is like, since we know for sure some total bounties, but for some crews we don't so... and Option 2 is self explanitory. Which is better??

18:59, March 5, 2011 (UTC)

@ Jinbe: ≤ just means "at least". Ruxax 19:27, March 5, 2011 (UTC)

This is ridiculous. I don't understand why we can't just keep using "At least". It's direct, to the point, and most of the Pirate crews have been using it. Here, if it's really so hard to understand I'll just link to the damn dictionary. http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/at%20least And for those who are too lazy to click a link I'm copy and pasting from The Merriam-Webster Dictionary:

2 Least noun Definition of LEAST
 * one that is least

— at least


 * 1: at the minimum
 * 2: in any case 

As in, The Bonney Pirates have at least a total bounty of 140,000,000. Why is this so difficult to understand?

Haha YD don't worry we're holding a vote right now to determine this stuff. I'll just tell you that the newest topic on this page is the voting. Sorry for the confusing order. Anyway, can you vote above as well? thanks. 03:36, March 6, 2011 (UTC)

I have to agree with Yazzy here. This is getting retardedly out of hand. There never was a problem with using at least to begin with, yet here we are, knee-deep in shit. The definition stands. At least is ok to use. Now, let's stop going round and round in this crapstorm and continue doing things as we've always done them. 03:57, March 6, 2011 (UTC)

For those of you who have no idea what happened to start this crap:

Well you see, it all started with Yatano deleting the atleast. Ruxax didn't agree so he undid those edits and that was okay but.. SeaTerror got suddenly super devoted into undoing Ruxax's edits and here starts the endless edit war between Ruxax and SeaTerror that lasted for about what, an hour and a half? It got so annoying to me that I just HAD to butt in and stop these guys. There was a talk, and right when everything was about settled, SeaTerror erased all the atleasts again and I couldn't bring myself to undo those again, so I started the poll. and here we are now. So that sums it all up. Please do not hate me for making you sound evil, SeaTerror, but it's the truth. 04:19, March 6, 2011 (UTC)

Hmm! It was me who added the atleast on all the SNs' pages, well I never thought it would go this far ! I should have talked about it first, and i dont see any problem in the "atleast" stuff , let it stay ! 05:56, March 8, 2011 (UTC)

Ahem, looks like changing the template to "total known bounty" won by one vote against "at least". Before any official changes, any objections or quick voting? The voting will end tomorrow. 00:17, March 9, 2011 (UTC)

Erm... Can I point out, this need to all be transferred to the forum because thats where this belongs. Otherwise, this makes our forums reduntant amongst other issues. Like being able to find really important poles when you need them to check stuff. Can someone please put this where it should be and lets don't do this again. -_-' One-Winged Hawk 01:40, March 9, 2011 (UTC)

Yeah I think that's been mentioned earlier too. do I just make a completely new forum, or do I copy/paste this? is it possible to literally move the whol
 * C+ P, then link from here to the new forum.So long as you edit the whole page to get the C + P and link to the forum it was put in, its okay. :-) One-Winged Hawk 02:08, March 9, 2011 (UTC)
 * I'll do it, but last time I did so, all our sigs turned into code which was pretty wacky (and the reason why I quit), so don't blame me if it happens again XP I'll try. 02:10, March 9, 2011 (UTC)
 * I'll do it, but last time I did so, all our sigs turned into code which was pretty wacky (and the reason why I quit), so don't blame me if it happens again XP I'll try. 02:10, March 9, 2011 (UTC)

▲

-And Here Begins the actual forum discussion. -

Forum Discussion
Well well, now that I have finally turned this into a forum, we can start a formal conversation. 02:27, March 9, 2011 (UTC)

Voting Round II
''Please sign your name under the topic you want to re-vote for. Only registered users with at least 150 edits may vote. The vote will end on 0:00 of March 19th in terms of Wikia time. Any votes after that will be immediately erased.''

1.) Use "at least"


 * 05:01, March 9, 2011 (UTC)
 * Pandawarrior 12:43, March 9, 2011 (UTC)
 * leviathan_ 89  16:50, March 9, 2011 (UTC)
 * 06:40, March 10, 2011 (UTC)

2.) Don't use "at least"



3.) Change "Total Bounty" in infobox to "Total Bounty Known"


 * 02:28, March 9, 2011 (UTC)
 * Yatanogarasu 05:52, March 9, 2011 (UTC)
 * "Total Known Bounty" 海賊姫 06:00, March 9, 2011 (UTC)
 * "Total Known Bounty" 12:37, March 9, 2011 (UTC)
 * "Total Known Bounty" Whiskey 	 07:00, March 10, 2011 (UTC)
 * "Total Known Bounty"
 * "Total Known Bounty" 海賊姫 07:30, March 10, 2011 (UTC)

Post-Voting Opinions
Yeah, I think "Total Bounty Known" is a more accurate way of describing that section. "At least" seems too vague and borderlines on speculation. Yatanogarasu 05:52, March 9, 2011 (UTC)

The argument between "Total Bounty Known/ Total Known Bounty" and "At Least" is pure semantics, but I'd prefer at least for 3 reasons:


 * 1) I think it is much more aesthetically pleasing and easier to comprehend. Total known bounty sounds odd and, might not be as easy to understand for non-native english speakers as "at least" is. Using "at least" we get the message across in the simplest way possible without speculating too much.


 * 1) I'm just gonna give a couple of examples: "Hey how many people are coming tonight?" - "The total known number of guests so far is 5." / "At least 5 guests" ; "Pliny the younger wrote at least 5 novels" / "Pliny the younger wrote a total known number of 5 books"; "Can I you lend me 50 bucks?" - "Let me check, but I have at least 40 in my wallet" / "Let me check, but the total known amount of money in my wallet is 40$". I do realize this may be my personal preference, but I just think it looks a lot easier on the eye and on the ear.


 * 1) I admit that using "at least" does have some speculative aspects, but "Total known bounty" does too, just in the other direction. It sounds very finite. "Total known bounty of $200.000.000" sounds like we know of more than 1 bounty, which we don't in most cases and it sounds too, I don't quite know how to put this, certain. Like there is only a small chance that the bounty might be higher, it removes almost all speculative aspects, thus speculating itself. " Bounty: At least $200.000.000" Leaves both possibilites, that the bounty may or may not be bigger, open. For me, at least implies that, at our current knowledge, the bounty is $200.000.000, it may or may not be bigger, whereas "total known bounty" implies much more heavily that the bounty is in fact, not bigger.

I hope I've made myself at least somewhat clear XD Pandawarrior 10:43, March 9, 2011 (UTC)

Thanks a lot for your examples Panda, exactly what I was talking about in the other thread - sure it both means the same, but the wording is highly suggestive. That is why I would use this symbol: ≤

It is clean and sterile and has the same meaning as "at least". But if that option isn't considered, I would go for total known bounty. 11:43, March 9, 2011 (UTC)

@Jinbe: Well, the reason why the at least sign was not considered is because some people may not understand at first glance. You know, we may even have little kids looking at these sites.

@Pandawarrior: I don't know, is it just me that thinks Total Known Bounty sounds more formal? I mean think, even the Straw Hats have an unclear bounty. And we pretty much know that Franky probably got a new bounty, so we have to take that into consideration too. See what I'm getting at? 12:29, March 9, 2011 (UTC)

@JOP: "we may even have little kids looking at these sites" is exactly what I was talking about. Little kids and non-native english speakers might not understand Total Known Bounty, because it is a very awkward, unneccesarily formal way to put it. The same goes for '''≤. Pandawarrior 12:42, March 9, 2011 (UTC)'''

I voted for using "at least" because it's what I prefer the most, but in my opinion the problem seems too big than what actually it is, because I also agree that the difference between "at least" and "known bounty" is basically a semantic discussion, moreover I don't really mind to not using both of them and uploading the bounty when new information came out (it's not misleading the reader), but being this wikia an "Encyclopedia of One Piece" it's true that using "at least/known bounty" is more accurate then don't using them. In the end I prefer "at least" because "known bounty" requires a new template other than the simple "bounty" (right?) so it's an unuseful complication and for this reason I'll accept whatever expression we (all) like to put in the field "bounty", like "at least", "min.", "≤"...

By the way, there are two things I don't really understand in this discussion:
 * "Little kids and non-native english speakers might not understand Total Known Bounty, because it is a very awkward, unneccesarily formal way to put it." Why? I am a non-native English speaker myself, but the verb "to know" is pretty much a basic verb so why should one known the meaning of "at least" and not the meaning of "known"? (I'm only curious, I don't want to complain)
 * Regard using the symbol ≤, souldn't it be ≥? Because "Total bounty: ≤ 10.000.000" means that's the maximum bounty possible, instead "Total bounty: ≥ 10.000.000" means that's the minimum bounty possible. I have nothing against using symbols since I'm in the scientific field, you can use this for what I care:

B={bounty(1), bounty(2),..., bounty(n)};

K={knownbounty(1), knownbounty(2),..., knownbounty(n)};

Total Bounty = ∑knowbounty(i) + x; x = ∑bounty(i) : bounty ∈ (B\K)

leviathan_ 89  16:50, March 9, 2011 (UTC)

Well yeah, if you place it like that. How about 10.000.000 ≤ :) 17:11, March 9, 2011 (UTC)


 * Ah ok, you mean that way. But technically you must put it before (between the two things you want to compare) because it's the "Total Bounty" (Actual bounty) ≥ (bigger or equal than) "10.000.000", after the bounty number it doesn't seem right: "Total Bounty (Actual bounty): (=) 10.000.000 ≤ (of what?)" leviathan_ 89  17:31, March 9, 2011 (UTC)

About the non-native english speaker thing, it's not about the simple vocabularly of "total" and "known" (hopefully they do know "bounty but if they don't then it's pointless anyway XD) It's about the implication of the phrase overall. To someone who doesn't speak english very well Total Known Bounty might come across as Total Bounty, which would lead them to believe that the Total Known Bounty is the overall bounty of the crew. "At least" is a lot easier to understand, as there's much less room for misinterpretation. Pandawarrior 17:03, March 9, 2011 (UTC)


 * Ah, I see. Thanx. leviathan_ 89  17:31, March 9, 2011 (UTC)

Thsi reminds me of the Blackbeard boutny problem when he was a member. People kept writing "0" as his amount, that was wrong because if you put a "" in it means they do have one, its just worth "0" amount. Its trying to explain to people the concept of "0", you think it can be easy but at times people don't get it. Saying "he has no bounty" and saying "0" is not the same thing. One-Winged Hawk 17:44, March 9, 2011 (UTC)