[Darknemo2000]

The greatest problem with this is that both statements (positive and negative) about Kitamura's character depth are subjective.

The core of this would be as I understand two different original positions regarding of how we treat character's depth:

Chibby: Any information, that was not given before, provided about character creates a character depth.

Me: Information about the character does not necessarily create character depth.

In Kitamura's case I commented that the situation that was created is artificial, thus making the build up attempts artificial build ups.

Chibby believes that there is nothing artificial in this, thus the info really lead to deepening the character.

Both of the opinions are opinions and what is worse, both are based on difference stances of the starting position (A: Info necessarily creates character depth, B: Info does not necessarily create character depth) and both are valid and invalid at the same time.

Which means that the the collision, and most likely fruitless, is unavoidable.

Kaisos just started emphasizing my part of being subjective (which I never argued it to be) yet did not mention that the opposing opinion is just as subjective, which I believe to be intentional.

P.S. If we were to go bit into philosophy, then even what Kaisos listed as objective is not objective at all, in a sense that seeing of color is not enough, it still has to be recorded and interpretative by our brains, which makes even the information that we get from our sensors ultimately is subjective as well. So even the statement 'Kitamura has dyed his hair blond' becomes subjective. Of course this leads to the eternal cycle of solipsism, thus probably it is better to avoid such theme since we would never be able to break it, unless we, like Descartes, would use demiurg (god) to break it.