I am curious as to why this is; perhaps, if you would be so kind, could you elaborate on this sentiment? For instance, this notion was not asserted or illuminated in the original post of the thread and I might suggest that you include that provision if it is indeed against the rules. Most (actually, all of them unless they are specifically not leaking characters) leaks directly pertain to character discussion (or more specifically roster discussion) as if the leak is deemed accurate beyond a reasonable doubt, that entails that the character is ON the roster. If not; at the very least, it is a reason to speculate in favor of a character. Some characters, such as Chorus Men, did not have anything relevant regarding their chances, thus the only discussion that could exist prior to e3 HAD to include "discussing the validity of leaks." If a leak supports a characters inclusion without yet being proved incorrect, that would indicate evidence in favor of the character, therefore the discussion seems as though it would be within the confines of the rules. However, if one disagrees, the only logical way to refute that proclamation would have to be through discrediting the leak (thereby influencing our collectively perceived roster). I do not wish for this post to be misconstrued as "arguing," I am genuinely curious as leak discussion seems material to roster discussion as there is an overt established correlation. Of course, if one discusses a leak without relating it to character discussion, that is blatantly against the rules. But that is not usually the case.
TumblrFamous
stated. Although I have a hard time seeing how he'd set himself apart from the rest of the roster, moveset- and gameplay-wise.
