Zamasu

No, I wouldn't. It is nothing but a distraction.

7/10. Would be 4/10 without Starlight.

I like some of them, and i hate some of them. I actually dislike bronies (some of them, not all) more than I dislike anti-bronies, so its good to have them sometimes.

Twilight would destroy me if she really tried.

From what I've seen, most of the people that dislike Starlight tend to have a very low IQ. I guess the only thing they can do to "fix" that is to make her one-dimensional and boring like Sunset, but then it would make the more intelligent people lose interest. You can't please everyone.

Show I don't care about fanmade stuff

Lets see... - S1 is overrated. - Luna is overrated. - Sunset is massively overrated. - Starlight is an amazing character. - Alicorn Twilight is better than unicorn Twilight (and the best character in the show). - RAINBOW ROCKS - one of the worst movies I have ever seen. nothing special was done with sunset, the music is forgettable, the plot is simple, the villians are terrible and cringeworthy.. its just painful to watch. - I don't like what they did with fluttershy in S6 (being all smug and sassy), it doesn't feel like a natural character development - its just a random,forced change.

Great news! No Second Prances was the masterpiece of S6 for me, so It would be great to see more Trixie X Starlight.

5% Flutters 15% Twilight 80% Starlight

nice.. one good episode without her when we are almost halfway through the season (and even then, it could be WAY better with Starlight). Starlight was brilliant in every single episode she had in in S5 and S6... without her (or some kind of change/addition to the main cast) this show can maybe make 2-3 good episodes per season from now on... its way past its prime (S2 - S4).

Its still this day aria, even though some songs came really close to it.

Lyra i guess... best character design.

Twilight. Right now its either Twiilight or Starlight... too close to call.

She joined the main cast because it would be hard to continue the show without her and still keep it interesting. If they get rid of her at the end of the season, they should just end the show.

Well she is my 2nd favorite from the mane 6, and one of the only characters that remain interesting after so long, so i dont mind (as long as If it doesnt come at the expense of Starlight/Twilight screen time, which doesnt seem to be the case).

That was a joke to rile up insecure Starlight haters, not an actual plot that i want to see. I actually dont care what kind of episode they will make with her, since almost anything will work well.

Starlight winning RD in a race > it hurts RD pride > she trains and challenge Starlight for another race > Starlight is holding back and letting RD win > RD finds out later that Starlight wasnt serious > RD need to get over her inferiority complex or lose a friend > getting over her inferiority complex, RD hopefully wont feel the need to act like a narcissist/elitist anymore. It would fix RD most annoying trait, and the angry comments that would follow an episode like this would be halirious.

I guess that from the mane 6 it would be Twilight (OCD, less emotional & more logical), but in general? definitely Starlight.

Yep, that makes more sense.

There is obviously very good reasons for these standards, as i already said several times. I just fixed him since he considerd it as a standard of "objective quality", and such a thing obviously doesnt exist.

you mean "Standards", not "Objective standards". and the are being used to appeal to most ppl in the target audience. They are not cosidered as "facts" by definition, but many ppl to consider them as facts to make themselves feel more confident about their claims. Also, i dont have personal standard of objective quality, since there is no such thing as objective quality. The only standard i accept is the standard that proved itself the most - the scientific method.

A scientific theory isnt the same as a scientific model - its based on the scietific model which defines what is considered "sufficient" to count as "objectively true" and what isnt, and "what is considered sufficient" changed quite a bit throughout history. Im not saying the standards for "good" story are useless - they have a point and thats to create stories that are considered "good" (NOT factually good, since there is no such a thing) by the target audience. Im just saying its not considered objective by definition - thats a FACT, thats not my opinion. If you want, there are several posts someone else made about this topic (In newbie dash episode discussion - page 14). I dont really have time to continue and I also think that if you are not conviced by now, it will just be a waste of time.

The model is definitely subjective by definition, and any good scientist will tell you that. In fact, this is currently the best model in terms of results, which is why its used to define what is considered "subjective" and what is considered "objective" (because without it, everything is subjective by definition, something that can create problems). The model has changed considerably throughout history, and STILL changes today to make it even more accurate and useful. since there is no scientific proof for "storytelling standards", its not considered a fact and therefore not objective. Ignoring the standards cant produce "crap stories", since there is no such a thing as factually "crap story". in the worst case scenario, ignoring them would result in negative opinions about them from most ppl.

these standards constantly change, depending on time,culture and other variables. whether you agree with them or not is irrelevant - they are still based on opinions and not on facts by definition. As i said, look up what the term "objective" actually means... it doesnt fit no matter how hard you want it to.

Standards that arent factual, and therefore not objective. Learn what the term "objective" means before using it.