Am I biased?

So when it comes to debating, accusing your opponent of being biased is a fallacious argument of course, but it is a fallacious argument that tends to work since the idea infects the minds of neutral bystanders into doubting your credibility. This is why even if I think someone is biased, I would never actually say that because it's an unfair debating tactic.

I think it's somewhat obvious that no one can objectively assess their own objectivity. However I don't believe I am particular biased and I think the evidence shows this quite clearly as I will endevor to demonstrate. You are always free to think I'm wrong of course, however I would hope and ask that you do not claim that I am simply being biased. We should attack one another's arguments, not their character.

How can one give evidence against one being biased? The best I can presume is by showing evidence where if they were biased they would act one way, but instead act another way. In my blog about my favorite verses and vs battles wiki I argued that numerous high tiers of my favorite verses were considered too STRONG including Sailor Moon, Puella Magi Madoka Magicka, Saint Seiya and DC all of which I put within my top 10 favorite series. Bear in mind that I very much dislike having unpopular opinions and yet stating that some of these characters are not as strong as people say they are, are currently VERY unpopular opinions in the vs community. You have to either doubt that I am a fan of them or doubt that I am biased. I can converse what I like about these series just fine and I certainly doubt anyone thinks I am not actually a fan of Sailor Moon when I talk about it so often. Yet I still try and deunk the multiversal claim for SM, the godly regen for all sailor senshi pre-lamda, the power nullification for Galaxia and Animamates. If I was biased for SM, I would most likely just leave those be and allow people to think the verse was stronger then I had evidence for.

In my own death predictions let me breakdown which character I preferred (most of the time I like the two about the same) and who won in the case I liked one signifigantly more (obvious spoilers):

Guardian Senshi Battle Royale (Like Makoto and Minako about the same, one of them won)
Mami Tomoe vs Panty Anarchy (Like about the same)
Black Lady vs Mistress 9 (Like about the same)
Sailor Moon vs Cardcaptor Sakura (Two of my favorite characters in fiction, one I preferred slightly won)
Hikaru Shidou vs Sayaka Miki (prefer one of them slightly, the other one won)
Flowey vs Narrator (My preferred lost)
Magicka Wizards vs Castle Crashers (My preferred lost)
Rorschach vs V (My preferred lost)
Jedah Dohma vs Lucemon (Like about the same)
Grimnir vs Abigail (My preferred won)
Dracula vs Sauron (Like about the same)
Chaos-Spawn Battle Royale (My preferred lost)
Synnar vs Protege (Like about the same)
Umi Ryuuzaki vs Weiss Schnee (My preferred won)
Baldur vs Siegfried (My preferred lost)
Yuuko Ichihara vs Sailor Pluto (Like about the same)
Vilgax vs Ridley (Like about the same)
Onaga vs Takofanes (Like about the same)
Papillion Myu vs Heavy Metal Papillion (Like about the same)
Yogsquest Battle Royale (My preferred lost)

Put aside whether you agree with any of these. In all the ones I had a clear non-slight preference, my preferred won twice, and my preferred lost 6 times. This does not seem to be the ratio of someone biased, or I would put characters I greatly prefer against matchups I knew they would win.

Sailor Moon is my favorite character in fiction and I recently made a blog listing people who I think would beat her in a close fight so I can show where exactly I felt her limit was. I made an initially 32 part blog series called vs strategy guides where I analyzed all my favorite verses and said what their weaknesses are and gave characters that I thought would be OP in them. If I was biased for these verses, why would I try to specifically nail down what their limits were and say who would be able to beat them? What would be the incentive?

I got this accusation when I said I really hate the Lex Luthor vs Iron Man Death Battle and consider it bottom tier and that I only think that because my preferred lost. Beyond the fact that this is clearly not true, I can go through the episode and explain why I dislike every line in it, why I think the fight scene is boring and not true to their characters etc but it's also inconsistent with how I rate every other Death Battle.

If you look at the Power Rangers Death Battles for instance, I got really annoyed that people were massively downplaying PR and would not even write a verdict for the ep because of it. I also don't care about the Power Rangers verse in particular. I have not watched a season of it, I never bring it up in casual conversation or in any of my blogs except for very occasionally for vs debating purposes (like as a good matchup for instance). That's because I'm not a PR fan. I don't care about the verse, but I still get angry when I think it's being downplayed.

I prefer Jak and Daxter to Ratchet and Clank yet I still consider their fight to be the best episode of DB's season 3. I prefer Hiei to Sasuke but still think that episode was really bad and ill-informed. If you said I only care about whether I think the episode is right I would still think the conclusion is wrong but at least I would think it's an understandable conclusion since I rarely like an ep I think is wrong (though I do all the time dislike an ep I think is right). But me disliking Lex vs Iron Man because I prefer Lex is so incongruent with how I act and rate other episodes all the time.






Am I biased? Again I can't objectively assess that obviously but the evidence seems pretty clear and strong that I am at best not biased and at worst not particularly biased and pretty normal compared to most debaters. You are free to disagree with me about something but do me the courtesy of just assuming my logic is flawed and not that my perception is flawed due to my liking or disliking of something.