Huh, perhaps you skipped that part, but the entire discussion is based on the Rucchi flashback where Oda in an interview said (at least thats how I understood it) that he wanted to flesh it a bit out in the manga but didn´t do it.
Right, now, I'm saying what if Oda were to say 6 months from now, the events in the animation where exactly what he intended and not only that he intended them, but they actually transpired. You still wouldn't count it?
The SBS´s and Data file books weren´t added from my side and I didn´t negate them. The only thing I said about them is that what they reveal doesn´t change the storytelling which is a fact.
Exactly, they expand upon known facts. Thus, how would knowing why Lucci did what he did be any different from a Data Book giving us a name for something we already know? It's not changing what he did in the comic. We'd simply be learning the 'why'.
Maybe the real reason why I´m so anal about that is because writers often change stuff. In fact those "I originally had blah blah blah in mind" are countless in each fictional work. We only don´t get introduced to each. And even if some of them go well with the story and don´t contradict it, there´s always the possibility that they will eventually get proven wrong if the author wants to change it.
Zoro being a member of Buggy's crew and the idea of facts being contradicted down the path are a completely different issue. They're what they intended, not what they've said/drawn that has come to pass. For instance, the goggles scene has become accepted and even referrenced by Oda purely to bring us up to speed. Now as you said, should something come along later to contradict it, then surely what didn't appear is to be nixed. But this brings up the question, why would an author like Oda go against something that he clearly made a point of noting to fans and referrencing time and again unless it was from an outside force? Oda saying what he intended and what actually happened are two different things and while I totally agree that 'intended' and what 'actually happened' are two entirely different issues, if he makes a point of noting it to fans and says point blank, "It happened this way.", then who are we to go against him? Until/if he changes the story later on in some way that contradicts the story (ie. WB's sign) then that's all we have to go on.
And Oda surely must have made lots of changes respectively will make even more changes. He may not change stuff to contradict manga canon, but if he would write stuff that negates the ideas in his mind, then it wouldn´t be a manga canon contradiction but just another shapfeshifting idea.
I agree that he has/will make changes to the story by both his own and outside forces. But until he changes it we only have his words to go by and until he does change it then we can/must trust his words as said canon.
I'm not trying to be a prick, I'm just still not sure how we can't trust the author when they say X or Y transpired. I see canon coming from the author's mouth innocent until proven guilty.
