Club ASVS is up

[Tyralak]

Could be. Isn't there a way to dump that thing by ticking some box?

Oh, besides, I tried to obtain the login for my account (can't remember what I entered, assuming it wasn't something given automatically like 3sd35sdf5). I tried the two options but I keep getting an error 2053 or something like that. Puzzling.

I'll fix it and give you a temporary password. As far as the loading thing, that will take some editing. It's one of the things Paul has on his list. It's part of the shoutbox. You can get rid of the shoutbox by clicking the button at the top right of it. It will say "hide shoutbox" when you roll your cursor over it. I sent you a PM here with your temporary PW.

[Mr. Oragahn]

Could be. Isn't there a way to dump that thing by ticking some box?

Oh, besides, I tried to obtain the login for my account (can't remember what I entered, assuming it wasn't something given automatically like 3sd35sdf5). I tried the two options but I keep getting an error 2053 or something like that. Puzzling.

I'll fix it and give you a temporary password. As far as the loading thing, that will take some editing. It's one of the things Paul has on his list. It's part of the shoutbox. You can get rid of the shoutbox by clicking the button at the top right of it. It will say "hide shoutbox" when you roll your cursor over it. I sent you a PM here with your temporary PW.

OK, thanks.

[Mith]

Could be. Isn't there a way to dump that thing by ticking some box?

Oh, besides, I tried to obtain the login for my account (can't remember what I entered, assuming it wasn't something given automatically like 3sd35sdf5). I tried the two options but I keep getting an error 2053 or something like that. Puzzling.

I'll fix it and give you a temporary password. As far as the loading thing, that will take some editing. It's one of the things Paul has on his list. It's part of the shoutbox. You can get rid of the shoutbox by clicking the button at the top right of it. It will say "hide shoutbox" when you roll your cursor over it. I sent you a PM here with your temporary PW.

OK, thanks.

Oh? You're joining over there? It might be worth my time to pay another visit.

[Tyralak]

At the urging of virtually everyone on the board, I added some rules of debate. I wasn't thrilled with doing it, but I feel I kept them in line with the vision I had laid out for the place initially. http://www.asvs.us/forum-93/announcemen ... e-posting/

[Mith]

At the urging of virtually everyone on the board, I added some rules of debate. I wasn't thrilled with doing it, but I feel I kept them in line with the vision I had laid out for the place initially. http://www.asvs.us/forum-93/announcemen ... e-posting/

*Takes note of the Path to 2409 and reads it--begins to vomit uncontrollably*

Who the fuck was paid to write that load of shit? How does a planet need supplies of food? It's a fucking planet. And the stupid Romulan politics was just bad; political instability found its way what, three times? Shinzon's fall shouldn't have caused that sort of rift; according to him, new governments coming to power is fairly common in the Empire (every couple of decades apparently)

I mean Jesus, the concentrated load of horseshit. Chakotay as head of Starfleet Secutiy? And then decides to reveal the 8472 problem and indicate to the potential spies that they know they're there--making their work harder? Jesus Christ it's nothing more than a collection of horrible fanfiction.

God I feel absolutely disgusted. They'll out 99.9% of TAS, but they'll accept that concentrated bullcrap? Get some fucking standards guys.

Ugh. Alright, getting that out of my system (I don't hold you guys responsible for that...), I'll address a few other things:

14. DO NOT ABUSE THE EDIT BUTTON, or moderators will use theirs. Editing is provided as a courtesy for correcting spelling and grammar errors, along with embedding issues. Edit time is limited to 5 minutes. Please make use of the preview button. If you have a valid reason for needing a post edited after the edit time has expired, please contact a moderator. Remember: Measure twice, cut once.

What's up with this? I make a great deal of edits, sometimes because I forgot something in a post and wish to make a correction. Is there some sort of major edit war that I've missed or something?

8. "Visuals over Dialogue" We believe this to be a well meaning, but ultimately misguided approach to debating. Thus, it is not used here. We find this to be a dishonest and lazy form of "gotcha" debating, which often leads to people essentially watching the show with the sound off and measuring screen shots while ignoring the overall context. Instead, we use the above rule regarding Preponderance of Evidence. This preserves the context, and allows for a more complete picture.

I applaude you on this desicion. It's becoming a growing concern of mine that people use visuals to try and cheap shot SG, ST, and yes...even SW occasionally. I'm personally happy to see that ASVS will not be cowtowing to SDNs and SBCs flawed debate standards.

[Tyralak]

*Takes note of the Path to 2409 and reads it--begins to vomit uncontrollably*

Who the fuck was paid to write that load of shit? How does a planet need supplies of food? It's a fucking planet. And the stupid Romulan politics was just bad; political instability found its way what, three times? Shinzon's fall shouldn't have caused that sort of rift; according to him, new governments coming to power is fairly common in the Empire (every couple of decades apparently)

I mean Jesus, the concentrated load of horseshit. Chakotay as head of Starfleet Secutiy? And then decides to reveal the 8472 problem and indicate to the potential spies that they know they're there--making their work harder? Jesus Christ it's nothing more than a collection of horrible fanfiction.

God I feel absolutely disgusted. They'll out 99.9% of TAS, but they'll accept that concentrated bullcrap? Get some fucking standards guys.

Ugh. Alright, getting that out of my system (I don't hold you guys responsible for that...), I'll address a few other things:

Yep. :) We for sure didn't write any of it. In fact, Paul actually found a canon inconsistency regarding personal force fields, and pointed it out to the writers there. (He works with Cryptic) Their response was "Um, yep we fucked up on that one."

14. DO NOT ABUSE THE EDIT BUTTON, or moderators will use theirs. Editing is provided as a courtesy for correcting spelling and grammar errors, along with embedding issues. Edit time is limited to 5 minutes. Please make use of the preview button. If you have a valid reason for needing a post edited after the edit time has expired, please contact a moderator. Remember: Measure twice, cut once.

What's up with this? I make a great deal of edits, sometimes because I forgot something in a post and wish to make a correction. Is there some sort of major edit war that I've missed or something?

You know, that's an excellent question. It was suggested by Questor in the discussion thread we had on it here: http://www.asvs.us/topic/1613-debating- ... ople-here/ It sounded like a good idea, but honestly, I haven't seen people abuse it in debating. There was some abuse from Enigma (why does everything seem to come back to that guy?) of the edit feature a while back, but it wasn't in the debate. It was going back and sanitizing weeks old posts in another part of the board. What would you suggest as far as edit time?

8. "Visuals over Dialogue" We believe this to be a well meaning, but ultimately misguided approach to debating. Thus, it is not used here. We find this to be a dishonest and lazy form of "gotcha" debating, which often leads to people essentially watching the show with the sound off and measuring screen shots while ignoring the overall context. Instead, we use the above rule regarding Preponderance of Evidence. This preserves the context, and allows for a more complete picture.

I applaude you on this desicion. It's becoming a growing concern of mine that people use visuals to try and cheap shot SG, ST, and yes...even SW occasionally. I'm personally happy to see that ASVS will not be cowtowing to SDNs and SBCs flawed debate standards.

Thanks. I have no intention of ASVS becoming anything like those two places. I refuse to have rules that slant the debate one way or the other. The problem SBC and SDN have is they get so lost in the numbers and calculations they lose all context and perspective. They end up being devoid of all common sense.

[Mith]

Yep. :) We for sure didn't write any of it. In fact, Paul actually found a canon inconsistency regarding personal force fields, and pointed it out to the writers there. (He works with Cryptic) Their response was "Um, yep we fucked up on that one."

Oh yeah, I saw that one too. Don't even get me started. They did better than most people would, I'd say that, but they should have checked Memory Alpha. What they should have done was gone for less--which would be more here.

You know, that's an excellent question. It was suggested by Questor in the discussion thread we had on it here: http://www.asvs.us/topic/1613-debating- ... ople-here/ It sounded like a good idea, but honestly, I haven't seen people abuse it in debating. There was some abuse from Enigma (why does everything seem to come back to that guy?) of the edit feature a while back, but it wasn't in the debate. It was going back and sanitizing weeks old posts in another part of the board. What would you suggest as far as edit time?

Sanitizing?

And if it's that sort of problem, then you should just put a limit on how far you go back. Ie, give a window of a week or something.

Thanks. I have no intention of ASVS becoming anything like those two places. I refuse to have rules that slant the debate one way or the other. The problem SBC and SDN have is they get so lost in the numbers and calculations they lose all context and perspective. They end up being devoid of all common sense.

Indeed. :D

[Mr. Oragahn]

14. DO NOT ABUSE THE EDIT BUTTON, or moderators will use theirs. Editing is provided as a courtesy for correcting spelling and grammar errors, along with embedding issues. Edit time is limited to 5 minutes. Please make use of the preview button. If you have a valid reason for needing a post edited after the edit time has expired, please contact a moderator. Remember: Measure twice, cut once.

What's up with this? I make a great deal of edits, sometimes because I forgot something in a post and wish to make a correction. Is there some sort of major edit war that I've missed or something?

You know, that's an excellent question. It was suggested by Questor in the discussion thread we had on it here: http://www.asvs.us/topic/1613-debating- ... ople-here/ It sounded like a good idea, but honestly, I haven't seen people abuse it in debating. There was some abuse from Enigma (why does everything seem to come back to that guy?) of the edit feature a while back, but it wasn't in the debate. It was going back and sanitizing weeks old posts in another part of the board. What would you suggest as far as edit time?

Depends. I know some boards allow one day or two. Some say 12 hours is enough. Obviously, an abuser of edition would be quickly called on his/her debating tactic.
Quoting said invididual also prevents from editing post. Although the troll can pretend that the person who quoted him rewrote the post, it's generally harder for the troll to pass as a saint when there's a strong suspicion that it's the troll who edits his posts.
Eventually one may even save an entire page if there's really a intense activity and quite lots of incisive members involved in a thread, with bold claims made left and right.

8. "Visuals over Dialogue" We believe this to be a well meaning, but ultimately misguided approach to debating. Thus, it is not used here. We find this to be a dishonest and lazy form of "gotcha" debating, which often leads to people essentially watching the show with the sound off and measuring screen shots while ignoring the overall context. Instead, we use the above rule regarding Preponderance of Evidence. This preserves the context, and allows for a more complete picture.

I applaude you on this desicion. It's becoming a growing concern of mine that people use visuals to try and cheap shot SG, ST, and yes...even SW occasionally. I'm personally happy to see that ASVS will not be cowtowing to SDNs and SBCs flawed debate standards.

Thanks. I have no intention of ASVS becoming anything like those two places. I refuse to have rules that slant the debate one way or the other. The problem SBC and SDN have is they get so lost in the numbers and calculations they lose all context and perspective. They end up being devoid of all common sense.

Seriously, I don't even know where this visuals over everything came from.
Now, I do prefer using visuals first - as long as you ignore certain problem such as explosions or hot and nice smoke trails in space - but there are times it just makes no sense at all.
Or completely f***ed up scales or different models, or some props returning from one episode to another, but with completely different function. You just can't explain those most of the time.
Now, with dialogue, there's two approaches.
First, the characters are wrong. It requires weighing the value of their claims. Are they're wrong because they don't know something they could have good reasons to ignore, or are they just wrong, in light of science for example, because they're only speaking the words of the writers who are not necessarily much knowledgeable about science (although advisors and now wikis help a great deal about that, we see more and more accurate "details" in SF franchises, that's the power of a layman's knowledge over Internet, it's quite fantastic really).

I do prefer visuals, but when some evidence is just completely absurd, I wouldn't hesitate once to suggest treating the episode as if it never made it to the screen but unless got released under the form of a radio drama or just a book.

The example I know best is my own take on Stargate Atlantis' "Echoes". Either you used all visual evidence, not like Kane did, and then you had to accept some weird values and odd phenomena which still put shields up in the gigaton range (with ZPM backing them up though, but that's quite a lot of tolerance), or you went with the book approach, which actually delivered similar figures as low ends, since the event was supposed to bring levels of energy to the planet that would trigger a extinction level event.

[Mr. Oragahn]

Tyr, I'd above all suggest limiting signature sizes. It's really the sheyeet to read posts which take the whole screen, of which only 10% are of new content.

[Tyralak]

Tyr, I'd above all suggest limiting signature sizes. It's really the sheyeet to read posts which take the whole screen, of which only 10% are of new content.

Yeah, that is probably a good idea. I know a couple of people have gigantic sigs. We're also going to be changing to Vbulletin in the next month (basically as soon as I get the money) we have a test board here to get feedback: http://tb1.asvs.org

[Mith]

Seriously, I don't even know where this visuals over everything came from.

I have no idea, but if I had to guess, it was something that SDN probably pushed for. Pretty much as a way to cripple the other side when it came to debating the uber yields.

Now, I do prefer using visuals first - as long as you ignore certain problem such as explosions or hot and nice smoke trails in space - but there are times it just makes no sense at all.
Or completely f***ed up scales or different models, or some props returning from one episode to another, but with completely different function. You just can't explain those most of the time.

Pretty much that. Wwe need to keep in mind the layman's limitation of physics and take the intention of what they were writing rather than the flawed visuals. The story should be the final factor. Ie, does the story agree with the character or the visuals?

Now, with dialogue, there's two approaches.
First, the characters are wrong. It requires weighing the value of their claims. Are they're wrong because they don't know something they could have good reasons to ignore, or are they just wrong, in light of science for example, because they're only speaking the words of the writers who are not necessarily much knowledgeable about science (although advisors and now wikis help a great deal about that, we see more and more accurate "details" in SF franchises, that's the power of a layman's knowledge over Internet, it's quite fantastic really).

True, we do see that. And it's good to see that, instead of a writer putting some watts on the screen because it sounds techie.

[Praeothmin]

I have no idea, but if I had to guess, it was something that SDN probably pushed for. Pretty much as a way to cripple the other side when it came to debating the uber yields.

Yet when these visuals show flack burts, they ignore it, or when it shows weak resistance of their beloved ISD vs weak kinetic impactors, they ignore it, or when it shows that the blasts that vaporized the asteroids in TESB was at an angle meaning it could only have come from the HTLs, or that the asteroids in question are nowhere near 70 meters in size, they'll ignore it as well... :)

[Mr. Oragahn]

Two other things:

1. I checked the test site and I see another problem, rather obvious: the profile in the sidebar. With the name, the avatar, the status, the points, the icons, the subtexts and all other junk, it stretches the height of a post's area on the screen even if one writes only one line. I generally dislike boards where the space between each post is vast, and this is really pushing it.

2. I tried several themes at ASVS, but they're all more or less messy. I'd suggest making available some very simple and yet clear themes, with minimal usage of complicated GIFs. I'd suggest one largely relying on white and shades of soft grey so that you don't get the impression of having a two tens inches neon shoved in your face, but which remains clear enough.

[Mike DiCenso]

I have no idea, but if I had to guess, it was something that SDN probably pushed for. Pretty much as a way to cripple the other side when it came to debating the

Actually, it's genesis is not with SDN, but with Dr. Curtis Saxton. It is how pretty much he goes about measuring most things in SW as part of his Suspension of Disbelief concept that the movies should treated as literal documentaries. People like Wong, Brian Young and others have only picked up on it, and got it codified in the original ASVS ng rules and later their followers took it to SDN and SBC since it gave them such an advantage, most for the reasons people have already mentioned above because they twisted Saxton's concept into visuals over dialog under the pretext that the dialog was unreliable, when in fact, the visuals are just as misleading and contradictory.
-Mike

[Mike DiCenso]

I have no idea, but if I had to guess, it was something that SDN probably pushed for. Pretty much as a way to cripple the other side when it came to debating the uber yields.

Yet when these visuals show flack burts, they ignore it, or when it shows weak resistance of their beloved ISD vs weak kinetic impactors, they ignore it, or when it shows that the blasts that vaporized the asteroids in TESB was at an angle meaning it could only have come from the HTLs, or that the asteroids in question are nowhere near 70 meters in size, they'll ignore it as well... :)

They were able to get away with a lot back in the middle to late 1990's when people only had VHS tape (occasionally laserdisk), and few quality screencaps (not much in the way of widely available software for that, either) to work from. In the case of Wayne Poe feeding screencaps to Brian Young for use in his Turbolaser Commentaries website, Poe told Young that some of the screencaps during the ISD Avenger's pursuit of the Falcon were of asteroids being vaporized, when later, on, in the high-quality DVD it is glaringly apparent that they are just flack bursts, with not an asteroid in sight, and Young never seriously questioned Poe about it, assuming that it was a genuine mistake in the first place.

But the damage has been done, and that is why we have to deal with these outrageous claims of 100 meter asteroids being vaporized in TESB. People just took it and ran with the errors, and compounded them with even worse distortions to suit their agendas.
-Mike