Talk:Breed: Difference between revisions

Line 25:

:: Flora: Your opinion may be that making practical sense for ETs is irrelevant, but the people who agreed to use the term "breed" for ETs had the opposite opinion: that that the numbers making practical sense for ETs ''did'' matter, and that this was the entire point of making any distinction. For the difference you mention, we already have "tuning map" vs "(temperament) map". --[[User:Cmloegcmluin|Cmloegcmluin]] ([[User talk:Cmloegcmluin|talk]]) 16:07, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

::: That was … crazy. Do you have source to back up what you said? I briefly mentioned the point to make sure I ruled out the other ways "how {{val| 1 0 -4 }} isn't a val that represents an equal temp", never to expect you'd point to exactly there for the difference between breeds and vals! Now I was saying practicality was irrelevant becuz practicality was supposed to be subjective. If the difference between breeds and vals is as you said, it implies breeds should be used subjectively. Yet in your earlier responses you were saying {{val| 1 0 -4 }} wasn't a breed like an objective fact, and I was thinking there must be something technical about it, like maybe becuz of the negative number? maybe becuz it was taken out of a rank-2 temp? To me any integer val represents an equal temp, and whether it makes practical sense or not is another issue.

::: Another understanding in terminology that I hold but you might differ is that a tuning map is a val becuz (1) a val is a synonym of a map, as you proposed, and (2) a tuning map is a map. Following that, a val doesn't need to represent an equal temp, but a breed always does. So that is a greater distinction between a val and a breed and so practicality isn't the entire point of making the distinction. I'm very interested in what you think of this point here. Thanks in advance. [[User:FloraC|FloraC]] ([[User talk:FloraC|talk]]) 17:19, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

@@ Line 25: / Line 25: @@
 :: Flora: Your opinion may be that making practical sense for ETs is irrelevant, but the people who agreed to use the term "breed" for ETs had the opposite opinion: that that the numbers making practical sense for ETs ''did'' matter, and that this was the entire point of making any distinction. For the difference you mention, we already have "tuning map" vs "(temperament) map". --[[User:Cmloegcmluin|Cmloegcmluin]] ([[User talk:Cmloegcmluin|talk]]) 16:07, 12 November 2024 (UTC)
+::: That was … crazy. Do you have source to back up what you said? I briefly mentioned the point to make sure I ruled out the other ways "how {{val| 1 0 -4 }} isn't a val that represents an equal temp", never to expect you'd point to exactly there for the difference between breeds and vals! Now I was saying practicality was irrelevant becuz practicality was supposed to be subjective. If the difference between breeds and vals is as you said, it implies breeds should be used subjectively. Yet in your earlier responses you were saying {{val| 1 0 -4 }} wasn't a breed like an objective fact, and I was thinking there must be something technical about it, like maybe becuz of the negative number? maybe becuz it was taken out of a rank-2 temp? To me any integer val represents an equal temp, and whether it makes practical sense or not is another issue.
+::: Another understanding in terminology that I hold but you might differ is that a tuning map is a val becuz (1) a val is a synonym of a map, as you proposed, and (2) a tuning map is a map. Following that, a val doesn't need to represent an equal temp, but a breed always does. So that is a greater distinction between a val and a breed and so practicality isn't the entire point of making the distinction. I'm very interested in what you think of this point here. Thanks in advance. [[User:FloraC|FloraC]] ([[User talk:FloraC|talk]]) 17:19, 12 November 2024 (UTC)