Board Thread:General Discussion/@comment-27997069-20160317174518/@comment-27620479-20160410041953

So, if you don't think you are arguing for something that has intrinsic value for others, and only point out its merits in a relative way (that is, compared to something else), why do you think it is important that we accept it, and also go with your wording of plot hole, metaness, and probably something else I missed?

I interpret Chara in a way that doesn't assume them to be evil. It is important for me because the fact that by naming them they sort of became my responsibility, because the name I chose and the reasons for it, and because I feel better for trying to guide a child towards good, instead of mistreating them, no matter how messed up they are. Also, narrator Chara is already widely accepted, and plausible through in-game evidence regardless of personal beliefs or wording.

I'm here to examine the theory that we are supposed to examine, because someone actually took the effort to create a page for it, and the risk of exposing it for criticism. I came here to learn from that, and not something that I'm not sure has anything to do with it.

Also, why don't you just tell what are the relevant questions, because they seem to be different from what they are for me?