Starfleet Jedi

Based on the ever increasing mounting evidence against their outrageous claims is it safe to say that SDN has become irrelevant as a website?

They sure are not the 1000lbs Gorilla they used to be, especially when it comes to credibility. One has to wonder what will the future be for such a type of website. My guess is as the evidence mounts more and more people will move to either SB or even this board and they will be left with no one but with the original cult of Wong members who will surely see to have their membership reduced to just 20 people or so meaning themselves alone as the greatest achievement of their lives. Anybody going there will probably see them making post after post of how great things are on their website by then. Off course after a while they will too get bored and move on to other things and the website will most likely quietly dissapear. Wong may decide to lock the boards to prevent spammers from polluting it to the day it meets it's demise when the account expires and is not renewed for good. Wll my theory anyway, what about yours?

I doubt very much that SDN is in any peril of closing.
SDN has many varied and very much active forums, and just because the vs debate is dying, the other forums are very much alive.

Plus, there's also the fact that some people never accept any argument or conclusion, no matter how valid, that goes against their own.

A lot of people seem to like what SDN represents, because they have a lot of members.
So, I don't believe SDN is likely to "die out" anytime soon, and good for them.

PunkMaister wrote:Based on the ever increasing mounting evidence against their outrageous claims is it safe to say that SDN has become irrelevant as a website?

They sure are not the 1000lbs Gorilla they used to be, especially when it comes to credibility. One has to wonder what will the future be for such a type of website. My guess is as the evidence mounts more and more people will move to either SB or even this board and they will be left with no one but with the original cult of Wong members who will surely see to have their membership reduced to just 20 people or so meaning themselves alone as the greatest achievement of their lives. Anybody going there will probably see them making post after post of how great things are on their website by then. Off course after a while they will too get bored and move on to other things and the website will most likely quietly dissapear. Wong may decide to lock the boards to prevent spammers from polluting it to the day it meets it's demise when the account expires and is not renewed for good. Wll my theory anyway, what about yours?

One can only hope.

Tyralak wrote:One can only hope.

Amen to that! :D

Praeothmin wrote:I doubt very much that SDN is in any peril of closing.
SDN has many varied and very much active forums, and just because the vs debate is dying, the other forums are very much alive.

Plus, there's also the fact that some people never accept any argument or conclusion, no matter how valid, that goes against their own.

A lot of people seem to like what SDN represents, because they have a lot of members.
So, I don't believe SDN is likely to "die out" anytime soon, and good for them.

May I ask then, just curious, what do they talk about on SDN then?

ILikeDeathNote wrote:May I ask then, just curious, what do they talk about on SDN then?

Right now?

Most of the "debate" being done in SD.net is actually political commentary, mostly about the moral bankruptcy of the right in general and the GOP in particular, the evils of organized religion and such. There is also the Off Topic stuff, a moderately active artwork subforum and I think that there is a STGOD underway.

The original debate forums, however, have been reduced to places to review sci-fi TV series, comics and that kind of thing, plus the occasional question asked by a newb.

But versus debating is pretty much dead and buried, as far as SD.net is concerned.

Hell, even the new History subforum demands that Alternate History scenarios present a clear argument and that the thread creator be able to participate in an indepth discussion. Otherwise, it is lock time.

Estrecca wrote:

ILikeDeathNote wrote:May I ask then, just curious, what do they talk about on SDN then?

Right now?

Most of the "debate" being done in SD.net is actually political commentary, mostly about the moral bankruptcy of the right in general and the GOP in particular, the evils of organized religion and such. There is also the Off Topic stuff, a moderately active artwork subforum and I think that there is a STGOD underway.

The original debate forums, however, have been reduced to places to review sci-fi TV series, comics and that kind of thing, plus the occasional question asked by a newb.

But versus debating is pretty much dead and buried, as far as SD.net is concerned.

Hell, even the new History subforum demands that Alternate History scenarios present a clear argument and that the thread creator be able to participate in an indepth discussion. Otherwise, it is lock time.

SDN talking about morals is the same as Iran and North Korea together speaking about human rights but then again it is that kind of crowd anyway...

PunkMaister wrote: SDN talking about morals is the same as Iran and North Korea together speaking about human rights but then again it is that kind of crowd anyway...

I don't recall Iran invading any country recently. Contrary to some superpower... so just try to avoid saying such things.

Let us please return to the topic at hand.

Estrecca wrote:a moderately active artwork subforum and I think that there is a STGOD underway.

Hell, even the new History subforum demands that Alternate History scenarios present a clear argument and that the thread creator be able to participate in an indepth discussion. Otherwise, it is lock time.

I would like to know more about these activities, please. You may be interested in these threads:

ASVS/SDN Fanfiction

Fanfiction/Roleplay/Etc. Story Review/Critique Thread

Based on what I have been told about these so-called "STGODs" I would classify them as ultimately a form of fanfiction, along with alternative history.

PunkMaister wrote:Wll my theory anyway, what about yours?

That you've developed a slightly unhealthy obsession with SDN ever since you've been unceremoniously booted out of the place?
SDN has 338,000 posts in Star Trek, Star Wars and STvSW forums combined compared to 433,000 posts in "News and Politics" alone and over 1.6 million posts in non fiction section total.
10 most prolific posters on SDN account for 11.08% of total post count while 5 most prolific posters on SFJ account for over 44%.
The most active forum on SDN is "Off Topic" which accounts for about 22% of the total forum posts while the most active SFJ forum "Trek/Wars" accounts for 46% of the posts. It's obvious that SDN is far less dependent on individual members or individual topics.

Estrecca wrote:Hell, even the new History subforum demands that Alternate History scenarios present a clear argument and that the thread creator be able to participate in an indepth discussion. Otherwise, it is lock time.

History subforum is actually intended to be especially serious and have high standards. Thus any alt history theme must be well thought out and plausible so no far fetched "what if top of the line US aircraft carrier went back in time to WW2" are allowed.

PunkMaister wrote:You being an irredeemable leftist you will probably blame the US military without even taking a glance at the horrendous violence perpetrated by Jihadists not only in Iraq but all over the world just as your Ilk have always done. This is by the way the current number of casualties worlwide brought on by your beloved jihadists.

And who was it that financed Jihadists in Afghanistan during the 70s to fight the evil communists? Who was it that crushed Saddam's ruthless but secular rule and opened the space for Jihadists? Oh that's right good ole USA.

Kane Starkiller wrote:
History subforum is actually intended to be especially serious and have high standards. Thus any alt history theme must be well thought out and plausible so no far fetched "what if top of the line US aircraft carrier went back in time to WW2" are allowed.

Because that's an entirely original premise, I'm sure


And along those lines, I have been told that at one point threads involving B-52s carpet bombing the Ork army at Helm's deep, Iowa-class battleships lending fire support at Helm's Deep, and even Sovereign class starships and ISDs lending orbital bombardment against the Orks at Helm's Deep have been popular, is there any truth to this?

ILikeDeathNote wrote: And along those lines, I have been told that at one point threads involving B-52s carpet bombing the Ork army at Helm's deep, Iowa-class battleships lending fire support at Helm's Deep, and even Sovereign class starships and ISDs lending orbital bombardment against the Orks at Helm's Deep have been popular, is there any truth to this?

There's nothing wrong rewriting history. :p

ILikeDeathNote wrote:Because that's an entirely original premise, I'm sure

Did I say it was original? That was just an example of what isn't allowed in History forum.

ILikeDeathNote wrote:And along those lines, I have been told that at one point threads involving B-52s carpet bombing the Ork army at Helm's deep, Iowa-class battleships lending fire support at Helm's Deep, and even Sovereign class starships and ISDs lending orbital bombardment against the Orks at Helm's Deep have been popular, is there any truth to this?

This is not alt-history and certainly wouldn't be allowed inside History subforum. Threads like these would be found under Fantasy subforum however I'm not familiar with either of these particular subjects. They sound quite silly and uninteresting so I wouldn't read them.

Kane Starkiller wrote:

ILikeDeathNote wrote:Because that's an entirely original premise, I'm sure

Did I say it was original? That was just an example of what isn't allowed in History forum.

I didn't mean to imply that, just pointing out that it would seem the type of person who would find that thread to be relevant to that subforum would probably (and ignorantly) find it to be original.

First, everybody please take a deep breath, refrain from flaming, and wait while I split the posts that have nothing to do with SDN into a new thread.

Kane Starkiller wrote:That you've developed a slightly unhealthy obsession with SDN ever since you've been unceremoniously booted out of the place?
SDN has 338,000 posts in Star Trek, Star Wars and STvSW forums combined compared to 433,000 posts in "News and Politics" alone and over 1.6 million posts in non fiction section total.
10 most prolific posters on SDN account for 11.08% of total post count while 5 most prolific posters on SFJ account for over 44%.
The most active forum on SDN is "Off Topic" which accounts for about 22% of the total forum posts while the most active SFJ forum "Trek/Wars" accounts for 46% of the posts. It's obvious that SDN is far less dependent on individual members or individual topics.

It's obviously more dependent on individual members here because it's a much smaller community. We have about 1/30th as many registered and activated member accounts. It's also much more tightly focused, as we have mentioned before.

Contrast: Those top 5 posters on SFJ also represent about 5% of the total posters that have made posts on SFJ. As SDN, IIRC, regularly purges 0 post members, may I ask this question of you:

What percentage of total posts are made by the 180 most active members on SDN? More or less than 46%?



Addressing directly the thesis, I think that we have seen a steady drain of respect for SDN on other forums, e.g., SB.com. Perhaps it is a case of familiarity breeding contempt.