Does literally everyone go to Stardestroyer.net?

[User1405]

Kor_Dahar_Master sounds like a whiner who got banned for breaking the rules.

Please post a link to any thread where Darth Wong assumes:

1. Assumes he is correct and his understanding of everything is flawless.
2. Assumes that because of rule 1 that everybody else must be wrong.
3. Assumes because of this difference of opinion, his opponent must be using "wrong logic".

Since this apparently happens all the time, it should be an easy thing to find. Your banning thread should provide ample enough evidence.

Mike DiCenso -> All the points raised are true, however it's hard to see how one of those factors could account for such a large gap in rankings.

BTW, I'm not here to put this site down. I'm just making the point that Stardestroyer.net appears to be doing relatively fine.

[Kor_Dahar_Master]

Kor_Dahar_Master sounds like a whiner who got banned for breaking the rules.

That is a pretty good description of the events.......if you are a rabid warsie.

Please post a link to any thread where Darth Wong assumes:

1. Assumes he is correct and his understanding of everything is flawless.
2. Assumes that because of rule 1 that everybody else must be wrong.
3. Assumes because of this difference of opinion, his opponent must be using "wrong logic".

http://bbs.stardestroyer.net/viewforum.php?f=2

Read any debate on that forum you wish and you will see what i mean, well that is unless you are as biased as they are obviously.

Here is my personal favorite argument:

Look, it's really quite simple:

There is absolutely nothing the Alpha Quadrant (or rather, the whole ST-galaxy) can do to hold off anyone from the SW-galaxy.

Private businessmen would have enough ships to conquer the whole AQ - they don't need many, since their ships are millions of times faster and have millions of times the firepower and shielding of ST-ships.

A bountyhunters ship would have enough firepower to take out the entire Federation-fleet - at once.

Conquest would literary be a joke - it's like a confrontation between all of modern earth and ancient egypt.

After that was said the debate on anything was considered OVER, to even entertain discussing parts of it or proof of the claim or anything else was considered a absurdity and refused or rebuffed with disgusting insults. They stopped debating a long time ago on that forum and now all you get are comments like the one i posted above or "that has been refuted dozens of times" comments with no links or posts to back up the claim just a influx of abuse.

Now depending on your bias you may agree with the comment above but the fact is that a so called "debate forum" that accepts comments like that is not one worthy of the name.

[Who is like God arbour]

To add my two cents, I refer to the thread ZOMG the E-D can drill a 3000km hole in 19 seconds!!!!!!!!!!.

The OP is as follows:

Marakor100 trying to convince me that in "inheritance" the Enterprise D drilled a 3000km hole in 19 seconds, because all the "Magma Pockets" were supposedly near the planet's core.

After reading that, I didn't assumed to get a decent debate about this topic. But I hoped to get a few arguments at least.

But as they are saying: "Always expect the worst and you will never be disappointed."

• The whole concept of that situation was stupid. Essentially what it sounds like they're talking about is plate tectonics shutting down, which would take many millions of years if just starting. In essence they would have nothing to worry about, of course ignoring the fact they are a space faring civilization and all that that entails.
  
  Per the OP, if I remember from the episode, you could see daylight and sky clearly when they were at the bottom of the shaft.

  • Yeah... if that's a few km near the planets core they wouldn't be able to walk around in there.
    
    Nevermind the fact that we all know phasers are using that NDF technobabbel chain reaction to make the hole in the first place.
    
    So he's probably trying to say that's somehow more impressive than imperial weapons.
    
    It doesn't help tha that idiot marakor100 is a mindless scooter cockgoblin.

    • Per the OP, if I remember from the episode, you could see daylight and sky clearly when they were at the bottom of the shaft.

      He claims the shaft was a cone shape hence why daylight and sky was clearly visible

      • Per the OP, if I remember from the episode, you could see daylight and sky clearly when they were at the bottom of the shaft.

        Yeah, very clearly in fact...
        
        http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z1o5jGOT ... re=related watch at 1:55.

        • Per the OP, if I remember from the episode, you could see daylight and sky clearly when they were at the bottom of the shaft.

          He claims the shaft was a cone shape hence why daylight and sky was clearly visible

          That would have to be one hell of a wide cone.
          
          From the video, I'd guess the hole is only a kilometer or two deep at most.

          • If that. And curious how that shat looks decidedly cylindrical. OR how the CAVES they're running around in are actually NOTHING like what you would find 3000km deep into a planet but totally compatible with a depth of less than a few kilometres.

            • LOL does he actually think he's the first trektard to bring this up?
              
              Where is this debate taking place?

              • Kor is just parroting crap he saw on SFJ

                • Kor is just parroting crap he saw on SFJ

                  Not surprised at all.

There is not one single sound argument.

Most resembling an argument, if at all, is the comment of

• Temujin, that the daylight and sky was clearly visible from the bottom of the shaft. But that is only an observation. What is his conclusion from that observation?
• BLACKSUN2000, that, if the magma pockets were a few km near the planets core, they wouldn't be able to walk around in there. But there is no explanation, why they shouldn't be able to walk around in these magma pockets, if they were a few kilometers away from the core of the planet. What conditions are to be expected down there that are supposed to prevent them from walking around?
• Temujin, that on the video it appears to him, that the hole is only a kilometer or two deep at most. That argument, if you could term it as such at all, is silly. On a video or picture the moon too seems to be only a few centimeters in diameter. If he wants to argue that point, he should have provided a perspectivistic analyse. The same goes for the comment of Batman, that the shaft looks decidedly cylindrical. Looking from Earth, the moon looks like a disc. Without consideration of perspective, such observations are worthless.
• Batman, that the caves they're running around in are actually nothing like what you would find 3000km deep into a planet. But that's only a unsubstantiated claim. Because he does not say, what you would find in a magma pocket, which is a few kilometers away from a cooling and solidifying core of a planet.

That is not a debate of intelligent persons. Hell, that is not even a debate at all.

It is like watching politicians from which you know that they are not saying all they know and that they are not saying what they know because it would contradict their political view and agenda.

That is the same here. It can't be that the TNG episode Inheritance displays huge firepower. Thus the episode is ignored, is ridiculed and its plot distorted.
They refuse to really deal with it.

And in the end, they attack not the argument but the SFJ, from which they assume that it is originating. That shows what exactly one can expect from StarDestroyer.net.

And now try to prognosticate what would happen, if someone dares to contradict them. History shows that such one can not expect to find someone willing to debate. The only thing one can expect are insults. And who is not ready to concede, gets banned.

[Kor_Dahar_Master]

Well as i pointed out im banned from SDN so i could hardly have debated him on their about this, i did discuss the drilling on here in a thread about phasers not so long ago so with a dude called Stargazer maybe he is Azron_Stoma on SDN and if not sorry stargazer as you were quite reasonable to talk to compared to what i see of Azron_Stoma posts on SDN.

I do find it odd that they complain about how wide the hole is considering that even today we have mines that are miles wide, the Bingham Canyon Mine is 2.5 miles (4 km) wide. And they are trying to save a planet so a large hole is hardly going to stop the project is it?.

Now i have no idea how wide the shaft would need to be at the top to see light from 3000km down OR if the light is actually daylight and not artificial, but saying that the depth is not 3000km or close to that depth when the dialog and visuals clearly say so is just stupid.

[Who is like God arbour]

... saying that the depth is not 3000km or close to that depth when the dialog [...] clearly say so is just stupid.

At least it is stupid to claim it without providing convincing arguments which are able to contradict the dialogue. Or to show that the dialogue and plot has to be interpreted in another way. To ignore the dialogue and plot, which are both canon, is no accepted method of analysing movies.

[Kor_Dahar_Master]

... saying that the depth is not 3000km or close to that depth when the dialog [...] clearly say so is just stupid.

At least it is stupid to claim it without providing convincing arguments which are able to contradict the dialogue. Or to show that the dialogue and plot has to be interpreted in another way. To ignore the dialogue and plot, which are both canon, is no accepted method of analysing movies.

I agree.

They are actually breaking their own cardinal rules regarding suspension of disbelief by doing so.

Fact, the pockets are stated to be a few km from the molten core, they also point out the depth on a cross section during the episode.

Fact, they drill to the pocket in 19 seconds.

A debater CANNOT disregard those to canon facts and state a opinion based purely on speculation and personal bias.

But then that is SDN and the rules only apply when they support rabid warsie opinions.

[Who is like God arbour]

Now we have gained the attention of SDN:

• Look we're famous, and not intelligent persons

Guess what happens now: Either they continue to ignore us or they begin with attacks on us (argumentum ad hominem).

Maybe - and if, then only to prove us wrong - they really start to analyse that episode.

But I wouldn't hope for that.

And the best they would do anyway is a half-hearted attempt of an analyse in which they will ignore each argument they can not refute.

And it is not as if they do not know already a few of these arguments.

After all, there are at least already two threads dealing with that topic:

• B5Tech: Thoughts on Treknology - Effect of Phaser...
• Gigaton-level phasers?

[Kor_Dahar_Master]

orders of magnituded less powerfull than Star Wars in sheer firepower.

It has been decided already on that forum what the firepower stats are as well as shielding ect ect ect and ANY debate that disagrees with them is a banable offence for not having a "good argument".

We are not banning members for simply disagreeing - you can often find numerous disgressing oppinions. As long as you are putting up a good argument, you are welcome

TRANSLATION:-

We are not banning members for simply disagreeing with us unless they do so in regards to what WE have decided the truth is regarding stats and OUR version of what happened in certain episodes/movies for both sides.............. if they accept that (and can find anything left to frigging debate...LOL) then debate they will not be banned (mostly because we have stacked the deck so much in our favor debate is pointless).

The idiot does not even see what she is actually saying, now THAT is what i call a blinkered rabid warsie.

It is a bit like saying they are willing to play a game of football but if the opposition dares to kick the ball and actually try to score goals and try to tackle us then they will be sent off and get a penalty against them.

Personally i have seen nothing in regards to SW ships including the ISD's and SSD's that was much past the kiloton range in regards to firepower, and now we have T as well as the existing G canon hammering and debunking saxons rubbish denying debates on stats is going to be expected from them.

[Jedi Master Spock]

A more accurate comparison would be between the VS portion of SDN and SFJ, since SDN has more numerous forums on things outside of the VS debate.
How has SDN's VS portion grown, or stagnated, compared to SFJ, over the last 2 or 3 years?

That's the real question.

If I'm not greatly mistaken on the numbers, SDN's Star Trek vs Star Wars has similar levels of posting activity to our Trek/Wars section. We also generally have active Star Trek vs Star Wars related threads elsewhere (e.g., in this section and in the Reviews/Critiques section), so you could say that with respect specifically to ST/SW, we have more posting activity. We might have a little more VS posting activity.

On the other hand, SDN logs quite a few more views per post. They do a much better job of promoting their website externally, and would appear to have many more lurkers as a result.

Another good point. Plus if traffic monitoring is simply a measure of the number of hits on the site, then it changes everything. I note that on Alexa.com's entry for RSA's st-vs-sw.net website is listed as well. Since that site has not had an offical forum for over 3 years now, I think we can safely assume that Alexa is not a measure strictly of posting activity, but all forms of traffic, which more likely is a measure of people viewing the pages.

I can't locate an entry for Tyralak's ASVS forum. It would be interesting to compare that site's traffic rating to both SDN and SFJN's.
-Mike

Alexa is spotty. They have some data scraped from search engines and have toolbar data. I would be surprised if there wasn't at some point a small push among SDN members to install the toolbar. The most recent version of Windows lists Alexa as malware, and usage of the toolbar - never high - is in decline.

If you do a quick Google search, you'll find hundreds of websites offering advice on how to manipulate your Alexa rankings. That aside, it's pretty clear SDN gets a lot more traffic than we do. What Alexa tells us is that visitors on SDN typically come and view about 10 pages on a visit, and that 99.7% of all traffic is to the BBS. About 98% of our traffic is to the forum and/or wiki (with almost all of that to the forum) and about 2% to the "main" website.

Our traffic numbers have been very slowly climbing over the existence of the website. 800 unique visitors have shown up in about the last week. When I launched the forum, it was about 200 a week.

[Mike DiCenso]

All the points raised are true, however it's hard to see how one of those factors could account for such a large gap in rankings.

Several factors: Age of the two groups accounts for some portion of the difference. SFJN is only about 3.5 years old, while Stardestroyer.net is at least 8 years old. The latter being obviously more well-established in the minds of most people who intitially went there for the Versus debating of ST versus SW, then as time went on and certain Warsies felt the debate was won in their favor, the site was expanded out to include other topics of interest well outside the original Versus debate, while SFJN is still largely focused on the original ST versus SW debate. Also there seems to be a better propganada/advertisement effort of SDN's part with regards to the site.

Also of note, the similarly aged and more broadly focused Versus site SB.com is very close in ranking behind SDN.

Another issue; now much of that ranking goes strictly to people simply lurking on the site without ever making an account? In that sense SDN is doing better, because while many people will go there to look, especially if they hear about the place from the rabid proponents of the site.

BTW, I'm not here to put this site down. I'm just making the point that Stardestroyer.net appears to be doing relatively fine.

The validly of such a point seems almost like a red herring or staw man arguement to me to distract from Tyralak's earlier posting that there was a hemorraging of members and that there is at least a gradual decline in posting compared to previous years gone by.
-Mike

[Mike DiCenso]

orders of magnituded less powerfull than Star Wars in sheer firepower.

It has been decided already on that forum what the firepower stats are as well as shielding ect ect ect and ANY debate that disagrees with them is a banable offence for not having a "good argument".

We are not banning members for simply disagreeing - you can often find numerous disgressing oppinions. As long as you are putting up a good argument, you are welcome

TRANSLATION:-

We are not banning members for simply disagreeing with us unless they do so in regards to what WE have decided the truth is regarding stats and OUR version of what happened in certain episodes/movies for both sides.............. if they accept that (and can find anything left to frigging debate...LOL) then debate they will not be banned (mostly because we have stacked the deck so much in our favor debate is pointless).

The idiot does not even see what she is actually saying, now THAT is what i call a blinkered rabid warsie.

It is a bit like saying they are willing to play a game of football but if the opposition dares to kick the ball and actually try to score goals and try to tackle us then they will be sent off and get a penalty against them.

Personally i have seen nothing in regards to SW ships including the ISD's and SSD's that was much past the kiloton range in regards to firepower, and now we have T as well as the existing G canon hammering and debunking saxons rubbish denying debates on stats is going to be expected from them.

It's been known for a long time that those numbers never really existed outside the Saxton authored ICS books. But note the distinct lack of any real discussion on the CGI TCW series, except on the off chance that it can be spun towards high firepower or power generation, and even then the rabid warsies have to go to some pretty convoluted twisting of the facts to get that, just like they had to way back in the pre-ICS days to get low single digit gigaton firepower for an entire ISD or SSD.


But all they can do is keep dismissiing the TCW series as whole by claiming it's a "kiddie show". If the live-action series really does go through, it'll be very interesting to see how they react when that series fails to show the uber-petatons of firepower (assuming there is enough in the way of large-scale space battles).
-Mike

[Mike DiCenso]

Thanks for the info, JMS. The article found here is one of the many that goes into the Alexa ranking issue.
-Mike

[Kor_Dahar_Master]

It's been known for a long time that those numbers never really existed outside the Saxton authored ICS books. But note the distinct lack of any real discussion on the CGI TCW series, except on the off chance that it can be spun towards high firepower or power generation, and even then the rabid warsies have to go to some pretty convoluted twisting of the facts to get that, just like they had to way back in the pre-ICS days to get low single digit gigaton firepower for an entire ISD or SSD.


But all they can do is keep dismissiing the TCW series as whole by claiming it's a "kiddie show". If the live-action series really does go through, it'll be very interesting to see how they react when that series fails to show the uber-petatons of firepower (assuming there is enough in the way of large-scale space battles).
-Mike

The only thing i have sbeen told they try and use is a comment about "the heat of a nuke focused in a small area, causing a fireball". I got the impression that they are using that comment from god knows where to somehow claim that petaton weaponry in SW somehow only sends up a spurt of dirt a bit of smoke and a flash of flame..lol.

Anyway the joke is that a nuke hits about what 10 to 11 million C ish at its hottest and while that will keep you toasty we can already focus our lasers at the NIF so that at a single point we get temperatures of around 100-115 million C (ten times hotter than SW turbo lasers lol.).

[Kor_Dahar_Master]

We already decided which side has greater firepower - based on the majority of consistent evidence.

TRANSLATION:

"We took a small sampling of highly speculative material regarding asteroids (ignoring the fact they explode very easily from light collisions) and made up silly stats from them. We then ignored all the contradictory evidence in the movies and also used a book written by a fanboi using comic book material and misinterpreted comments regarding BDZ. He also put stats in it that actually contradicted his own sites figures at the time but lets not dwell on these inconsistances as the reply will be on a forum where i cannot ban ppl for pointing it out."

My argument boils down to:
-We have already established numbers for both sides, backed up by a wealth of evidence.
-Therefore, we can see that a fight between the two sides is hopelessly outlandish.
-Therefore, a rational debate based on actual warfare is fruitless, since the outcome is obvious.

TRANSLATION:

"Her argument boils down to:
-We have already established numbers for both sides, backed up by pure speculation on a highly dubious asteroid scene and a debunked book on one side. And by ignoring canon material on the other along with using arguments based solely on our opinion of the politics of ST (because M.A.D. and or at least mass genocide on a galactic level as a solution to every conflict makes sense to me).
-Therefore, we need a good excuse to deal with anybody pointing this out, adding the contradictory material or showing me that my silly idea on politics (M.A.D and mass genocide) are about as far from canon in regards to trek politics as you can get.
-Therefore, we claim anybody doing so is a troll and using noncanon, unscientific methods and poor locic and ban them ASAP."

I do not actually know why he compares a debate to a sport. A debabe is not supposed to be a competition - rather, it should be rational people investigating evidence and arriving at a conclusion based upon that evidence. Of course, taht is utterl impossible if one side disagrees about the evidence itself without presenting a consistent alternative.

TRANSLATION:

I claim it is not a competition/sport but we ban anybody who does not agree with our interpretation of the evidence, does not ignore contradictory evidence like we do, or dares to add new canon evidence that over rides or contradicts our own (even though new canon material is being made all the time)..........and yet we claim to be a debate forum.

The DeathStar alone easily contradicts this. The ability to blow up a planet is clearly canonical and does not rely on any kind of chain reaction, since such a thing can by definition not be instantaneous. Yet we see that the explosion cleary behaved in such fashion.

TRANSLATION:

The DS chain reaction effect is a real thorn in my side, the explosion obviously NOT being instant when seen in frame by frame quite simply is a chain reaction effect of some sort and it really bites me in the ass when it is pointed out. Still a dude called darkstar mentioned it along with other things so if i bring it up and it is supported in this discussion i can wave him around like a flag in the hopes of deflecting the need to address the actual facts.

You see, he simply fails to grasp the concept of temperature.

TRANSLATION:

"I just made the comment "the heat of a nuke focused in a small area, causing a fireball" look not only stupid and rather pointless but i also made my rabid warsie bro who was using it to try and show that turbo laser bolts could transfer 200 gigatons into a huge variety of materials in or out of a atmosphere with little more than a puff of smoke and flash of light look like a complete moron.......i suppose il need to dig myself (and him) out of this one in my next post."

I dunno if this is a good time to mention it Serafina but im told the guy seems to think that turbo laser bolts act like that cos of treks "Heisenberg compensators" .........i own a landscaping company so do you want to borrow my 3 Ton Excavator?, personally i think you are gonna need the 45 ton one for this dude.

[Kor_Dahar_Master]

Well - why should Asteroids be "speculative"?
We know what kind of asteroids we have in real life. We know how they look. We can scale them easily, based on the movies.
Why is it so unreasonable to use them for scaling firepower?
Oh, and i would love it if you would actually name the "contradictory evidence".

TRANSLATION:

Il ignore the fact the asteroids in the scene i mentioned explode after very light collisions with each other (and the fact you pointed it out, even though i accuse you of ignoring parts of my posts) and try to force the useage of nonexploding terestrial asteroid calculations into the debate.

One scene? Well - there are at least five (ANH Alderaan remnants, TESB Tie-fighter collision, Star Destroyer firepower, AotC laser firepower, seismic bomb firepower).

TRANSLATION:

I will fall back on the infamous logic loop.

We assume firepower is X (say 200 gigatons), thus shields must be Y, and armour must be Z because we see shields and armour getting hit and can see how much dmg or hits they can take and scale from that. And the great thing is that i can start at any point in the loop depending on what is being argued IE: for armour arguments i can start with Z and justify with X and Y, and for shields i start with Y i can justify with Z and X.

And all based on (ignoring) exploding roids and/or scaling the DS weapon like it uses DET when it actually uses a chain reaction.

I will ignore that the same simple formula can be used just as easily for 2 kilotons....We assume firepower is X (say 2 kilotons), thus shields must be Y, and armour must be Z because we see shields and armour getting hit and can see how much dmg or hits they can take and scale from that. And the great thing is that i can start at any point in the loop depending on what is being argued IE: for armour arguments i can start with Z and justify with X and Y, and for shields i start with Y i can justify with Z and X.

Simple, effective and very obvious.

And yes, MAD makes a lot of sense.If you are at war and try to win, you will use your means to destroy the other side. We see such moves in Star Wars, but never in Star Trek.

Well - the sheer lack of numbers or coherent arguments is more than enough to show to any neutral observer (such as me, being not terribly into neither wars nor trek) that those contradictionary numbers are on the same level as, say, creationist arguments.

Need i really comment on this, do you know what M.A.D stands for?.

Ignoring that little bit of deluded crazyness can you even begin to comprehend how little your opinion on the politics of ST means compared to the canon philosophy of the federation and Trek in general?. Not only that but also the fact that the tech and abilities of the weapons and devices are well documented and FACT within the trek verse and federation at the highest levels of canon?.

You need to play more outside your comfort zone on SDN sweete and away from your rabid worshipers because it is you who is behaving like a zealot who thinks their opinion over rides canon policies and canon evidence of the existance of these devices and the tech regarding them.

And you think there is no other way to esablish that someone uses no science, distorts canon and doesn't understand logic?
But hey, go ahead - Parting Shots is a public forum. Try to find someone (preferably relating to the debate) who got banned while using coherent logic and arguments.

TRANSLATION:

I think M.A.D is a good idea as well as galactic genocide and that because Trek do not commit genocide regularly (galactic or otherwise) i think they cannot. How i intend to explain how they can commit M.A.D more than once should be interesting....

I think that even though we see WMD weapons and technology capable of destroying planets and even suns in Trek on many occasions that because they do not use them on a regular basis and cause M.A.D or just galactic genocide and armageddon that they and the tech actually never existed and the canon/episodes with them did not happen.

Well - go ahead, demonstrate how it is a chain reaction.
Because the planetary shield is not only canon, readily explaining the slight delay - but a chain reaction is also not coherent with the visual evidence if you deny the shield.

Shield or no shield (although NO shield) the effect is still not consistant with a DET effect.

Oh, and - if it is a chain reaction, that would actually make Wars stronger! Just like the NDF-reaction is usefull - it allows you to get a lot of bang for the buck! If a fast chain reaction allows to destroy something with only a small amount of energy, it is clearly much better than having to do so via DET.

BWAHAHAHAAA!!!.

How awfully nice of you to go into such detail on WHY you stick to such absurd reasoning above (M.A.D being a good idea along with galactic genocide) about Treks well documented and total canon WMD's not existing (as most if not all are chain reaction weapons).

Absurd reasoning in regards to denying clear canon material now understood and oh.........Concession accepted.

This simply has nothing to do with...well, anything.
You apparently try to say that temperature somehow matters for detructive effect - when in fact only the energy released matters. Very low temperatures would impede that somewhat - but it doesn't matter anywhere else.
This clearly shows that you do not even know what temperature is - which makes you an uneducated idiot.

Actually i was passing on a theory a buddy gave me, it was one of your warsies that was claiming it so im glad "translating" confused you because we got the truth instead of spin if you had known you were shootng down one of your own.

So i guess the "uneducated idiot" is one of yours, in fact im told it may actually be the OP of your thread.

Aah, technobabble.
Care to explain how "Heisenberg compensators" (who propably relate to the Heisenberg Uncertainty principle) can increase/decrease the yield of something? Because quantum effects tend to, you know, be unimportant on non-quantum scales.
And how TREK technology would affect our measurements of WARS technology?

As i said im sure the OP if he is the originator will be pleased that you consider him a "uneducated idiot" maybe if he reads that thermal bit and your issues with cross over technobabble he will feel less of a idiot in future.