Thread:Nausiated/@comment-32978104-20171031220110/@comment-4651179-20171105022614

1) Determining a retcon's validity by how many times the events it overwrites have been reinforced makes sense. However, it should only make sense if the reinforcing instances happen after the retcon. If said reinforcing instances ocurred only before the retcon, that logic is flawed at best.

2) The age of the story is completely irrelevant. I would also say it shouldn't be ignored that there haven't been Fantastic Four stories since 2015. Even then, the retcon was referenced in a second instance. In, to be precise. You'll probably say it's not valid because the scene where it happened was being seen from the POV of the Quiet Man, but I already made it clear I find that logic unsound.

You're giving the possibility that Marvel might flip-flop on this retcon too much credit, really. If the retcon is abandoned or if its validity is reasonably put into question, it would take less than 2 minutes to rewrite the note on Reed and Sue's first meeting.

And finally, a regular user might not be able to defy your word when you unjustifiably close a discussion using your admin powers. But you an me are in the same shade of green.