Board Thread:Wiki management/@comment-7091122-20170207035621/@comment-24024415-20170210010233

YammaYamer21 wrote: Legofan9o5 wrote: YammaYamer21 wrote: Camwood777 wrote:


 * Except, there's zero indication that they do, indeed, have differing genders. They're basically treated as a bunch of individuals with the same gender. Kinda like conjoined twins, if you would.

After a rule was hastily added to prevent so much as voting on it for 6 months due to how much bias against it there was, it really does become a concern that there's biased votes being made blindly when it comes to this topic.

Well, why aren't there people going around replying to every support with why they think they're wrong? And why is there a list of reasons that can't be used to oppose but no list for invalid supporting reasons, and users disqualifying "invalidly reasoned" opposes yet not supports like SuperGaming's? This thread as a whole is really damned biased, IMO, yet from what I can tell, Oppose still takes up the majority against the wave of Disqualifications.
 * Twin Sunflower's old Almanac entry said that one of them might be an evil twin, hinting that it is possible for multiple-headed plants to have different personalities. For confirmation, tell me how it's Threepeater's middle head that cheats, and not all of them.

Maybe there just isn't any opposers who are dedicated enough to their side that they don't try to refute the other side's opinions as much? Isn't the list there because we've already ruled those reasons out based on logical discussion, and that supports simply were not as obvious on infringing on logical basis than opposition? And if you truly think that some votes are false, then why don't you contest them yourself rather than complain that others are not? There's no in-game evidence of constant gender either, yet there is of changing gender from multiple sources (comics, Heroes, GW(Old Citrus Cactus)), and But is there any evidence within the main series that plants have changed gender?
 * Still does not indicate a change in gender, and that assumption is just that, a massive assumption without any actual example in the game.

I think this is the main problem with plant genders at the moment: we have too much conflicting evidence on PvZ's overall stance on plant genders between main and spinoff titles. In context to the main titles, it can be assumed that almenac entries are to embody all the plants in the game, all as the same character. Other titles like to mess things up, making changes either out of misguidedness, change in developers, to sacrifice consistance for spread appeal or any other reason one can come up with, but I still believe that should not refute the all-encompasing nature the almenac offers for plant gender.

Yes, plants in the whole scheme of PvZ lore looks to have multiple genders. But in the context of the main series, especially since the concerned pages refer to content exclusive to the main series, the plants are monotonous in gender and have no evidence within the confines of the title to prove that plants are not monotonous. And Sun-shroom's situation is simple: the mis-matched genders only occurs once and the implementation of the constume was obviously an after-thought and an error in comparison to the numerous occurances with in-Dave discussions using the majorital gender, which were located closest to the time of release and when the gender would have been fresh in the mind of the developers.