@Locks:

Well you could be right idk. But those rings also has meaning for other people so that might be wrong. Just because it might mean the same thing to the public it could mean something different to the strawhats. But the tattoo is also something of a "out of no where-ness" type of thing. And we're not 100% if he did declare a new age for pirates. And if he did i think Rayleigh gave him the idea of doing it that way. Since luffy wouldn't know of it.

Why does Rayleigh care about declaring the new age of pirates?

Answer: he doesn't. Not his intention.

@NibooSmik:

It was something only the StrawHats could understand and the out-of-nowhere-ness of the 16 rings seems to be that something. Otherwise, do you think Luffy would choose for himself, or Rayleigh would choose for him, to declare the New Age of pirates.

Neigh.

I just don't believe that Luffy knew about the significance of how many times you ring the bell, so Rayleigh admitting that he coerced Luffy into doing something that is not within his character, again, points towards the bell ringing.

@Locks:

Well by that logic everyone int he world would also see the going around the marine base or w/e and the ringing of the bell and the praying… So i mean there could possibly be a message in both

It was something only the StrawHats could understand and the out-of-nowhere-ness of the 16 rings seems to be that something. Otherwise, do you think Luffy would choose for himself, or Rayleigh would choose for him, to declare the New Age of pirates.

Neigh.

@Double-Dudes:

Those suction cups in the floating thingy kinda look like islands to me. There's forest ontop of each of em!

Is it too grand for me to ask folks to start including links to what they're referencing? I.e. "Suction cup things".

As a last attempt to crush this "3D2Y" theory: the tattoo would not be the message, as everybody in the world could see it. The message was seen to be something nobody besides the StrawHats understood.

WORD.

@Zik:

There is no evidence of Hancock and Luffy getting married and it being public for the world to see.

It's unfortunate what possibilities you're currently concerned with.

I think it could boils down to:
1. Will Luffy not care about the idea of marriage to the point that he will marry Hancock to please her as a friend
2. The idea of marriage being restricting being enough for him to absolutely reject the idea.

@baby-boo:

I don't understand Nami's reaction. Could someone explain? what does she think Luffy is doing, or does she not understand?

Nami is one of the most intelligent characters; she understands. If everybody else in the crew understands, one of the last possible options is that Nami does not.

Obviously, we will not fully understand Nami's reaction until we know what Luffy's message was. We can only be here, speculating

Does Luffy seem like the kind of guy who would wait for 2 years to see his nakama? Furthermore: why would they wait 2 years? That doesn't make sense. Training I particularly do not believe, especially with Luffy's high value friendship/family over all other things and then there was Sanji or Zoro's quote about how they had simply become stronger over time without noticing, together.

All of you "SA2Y", or however it goes, folks:

Rayleigh says "they should get it if they read the article… The key is that it's something quite unlike you. Although, there were two... dull-looking men with you... Eh, I'm sure they should get the jist of it it."

So, he seems to specifically point out that the point of attention for Luffy's little scene was the 16 bells. If not, then why ring the bells in the first place at all?

Granted, this argument could be turned around to argue for the tattoo argument.

I read somewhere that it was the same as Ace's tattoo, though it doesn't look much like it.