You are incorrect. Finality is definitely implicit in both - a status consigned to the past. One is just overstated for the sake of being argumentative. My original statement stands. Your caveat was pointless.

zmog

 

Few days too late  

 

Yeah I'm aware of the Optimus ploy. $6, you say? Nice! $8 is the lowest I've ever spotted any of them at.

 

As others have said - Yokai Watch.
Hasbro botched the North American release when it was huge in Japan. The toys didn't debut at the same time as the show here.
My son found it on netflix and fell in love several years ago. Fortunately many of the toys were showing up here remaindered at Dollarama. Those transforming figures, PVC figurines, plush, bag hangers, the Yokai Watch itself and the "medals" (discs) that go in it and make noises. I've grabbed some stuff from overseas (a gashapon machine), and there are tons of KOs of Yokai stuff from china - fake watches, medals, etc.

 

I'd say it's hard to tell without a lab and a reference sample   (chemical composition of plastics, paints etc.). But from my "feel" these seem to be genuine Hasbro/Takara figures (at least CW/TR/PotP) - I got quite a few from all around the world (literally - Amazon, BBTS, local retail stores, eBay sellers from China (HK) and Taiwan) and most suspicious one was CW Blackjack bought at Amazon (though not directly from Amazon) - he had his forearm painted with nail polish (!) and someone left his/her fingerprint on that nail polish.
I got PotP Dreadwind from local retail store, Blackwing from eBay seller from Hong Kong and set of these two from "Official Hasbro Store" at AliE - if any of these are counterfeit, it's impossible to tell the difference using only human senses  .


I got that BPF OS KO of Siege Megatron and I'm a bit disappointed. Peg holes on forearms are too loose, fusion cannon doesn't plug securely into any of these. This leads to flawed vehicle mode - turret barely holds together (barrel keeps falling down, sword part is held in place just by that 5mm peg). The transformation joints on knees are way too loose (fortunately not floppy loose), outward hip joints can't support the weight of the leg. Other joints are "acceptable" at best. Wheels on treads do not roll at all, turret rotation is sort of 45* left/right (360* turret rotation is prevented by Meg's crotch). Feet lock very securely in robot mode but when angled for tank mode these become floppy loose. The sword blade parts do not line up correctly in sword mode, but mine Siege Megs had his sword bent out of the box, so I'm considering this one to be Hasbro's fault.
What I like? Fillers on forearms (woo-hoo), ankle tilt - it is pretty tight unlike on Hasbro's (on which once unlocked becomes floppy loose). He seems to be free of Prime's issue - it seems there are no parts prone to snap or develop stress marks.
All in all, it's not really bad, but BPF again made few errors and missed opportunity to make their figure the best incarnation of this mold.

 

Thanks for the review. Sorry to hear that it's on the weaker side. I'm hoping that the QC is hit-and-miss, and mine will be a bit tighter when it arrives. Oh well.

zmog

 

But do they TASTE like counterfeits?  

 

Well, yes. One is generally considered innocent until proven guilty in contemporary society.

 

Not really. If the verb was an active one, then the action would be fixed in the past. However, "was" (the past simple form of "be") is "stative" verb:

-

(Source: - 7. Stative/state verbs )

Thus, using "was" may lead to time signifiers being used for additional clarification, such as "but not anymore" or "and still is today".

 

Oh my gooooooooooosh -_-

 

No wonder I stopped popping in here.

 

Why? Does our academic banter make you blush? If it makes you feel any better, I posted a pic of a giant robot dinosaur crushing a beer can not one or two pages before this one.

 

Academic? You're on a ****ing toy forum arguing about grammar.

 

Indeed, and I feel no shame in that.

 

Except none of the examples you provide are used in the same context as "was" - nor is "was" addressed as a typical example of a stative verb.

Remember that grammar and language taxonomies aren not primeval or even prescriptive, but rather follow usage, something any true grammarian understands. "Was" has an utterly unambiguous connotative use which is clear to everyone in this context. There was no ambiguity or double meaning whatsoever.

This isn't banter. You persist in being argumentative and pointlessly pedantic (unsuccessfully) only to save face for being inane and pointlessly pedantic in first place... which keeps digging you further and further in. You passed the point of diminishing returns as soon as you engaged. You win when you accept it and move on. We all win.  

zmog

The flip side of that is that "guilt" is generally proven and demonstrated, not manufactured. It necessarily precedes due process as a state of principle, even before it is identified.

ie: you can still be a murderer, even if nobody's found the bodies yet  

zmog

 

Not at all. I simply added to your original comment for clarification. As for the use of "was", it is as I stated and still stands.

Regarding the tone of this discussion, either we are both guilty as charged, or not at all. Your involvement, however erroneous, is just as befitting of the same critique you postulated. You've even seen fit to add to the "innocent until proven guilty" statement above, which although I am not against, suggests you are simply engaged in the same practice.

 

Hardly. I am pedantic about a great many things, but grammar is not really one of them.

My argument here is rather the opposite of pedantry, and is in response to direct provocation. Trying to muddy the waters to suggest otherwise is a transparent act of desperation, just as citing verb classifications is no substitute for actually knowing how to communicate with people.

If you truly wished only to "clarify" to others what has been blindingly obvious from the outset (that Yokai Watch is no longer big in Japan), then you should have just apologized for being obtuse, rather than trying to defend an indefensible position.

zmog

 

Not saying you should feel shame but I think you meant pedantic instead of academic.

 

See, that's why I ignore that individual. I finally read far too much nonsense in the Unicron thread.

 

Not at all. As someone living in Japan, I simply added some extra info. To those outside Japan, I've found there is often confusion as to what is the current state of of things, such as popular media, political climate, etc. To that end, I added some extra information, for clarity.

You, in defense, brought up the grammatical use of the past simple, which I debunked, citing evidence. Your own, personal interpretations of language, are irrelevant to me.

Thus, I will give no apology for this.

No, I meant academic, as in the study of a term, often used in academic study. In this case, grammar.