The Meerkat Musings Forum
Posted: Tue Oct 05, 2021 9:05 pm
At the risk of being a bit naughty, and seeing how this board is overrun with spambots, I invite any interested parties to www.meerkatmusings.co.uk/forum.
Starfleet Jedi Forum
http://www.starfleetjedi.net/forum/
http://www.starfleetjedi.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=46918
Had a passing interest, I certainly could use a place to chat and rekindle my interest in an old past time of my youth. But checking out your site, I don't think I'd be very welcome. So its probably best to take your advice and "shrug and move along".Sothis wrote: ↑Tue Oct 05, 2021 9:05 pmAt the risk of being a bit naughty, and seeing how this board is overrun with spambots, I invite any interested parties to www.meerkatmusings.co.uk/forum.
I said nothing about being banned or blocked or that I would *do* anything. I said I wouldn't be welcome there which, giving your articles a second look, I would conclude is very much true. I don't think I'd be a good fit for your board culture. For instance here and here. Where you not only wish to force upon everyone else your opinion on what is and isn't Trek but you post someone else's conversation with you simply to degenerate and mock them in your own mini- hall of shame.
To quote from the very page I linked you " It is anathema to what Star Trek is all about. It is not for me, or anyone else, to decide what is ‘true Trek’". You aren't saying "This" is Trek in my opinion. You are saying "This" is Trek period. Anyone who voices an alternative view, say that JJ Trek misses what Trek is supposed to be, is just a derisive, subjective opinion that is, in your eyes, problematic by its mere existence. That it "pains" you because them expressing their view " override everyone else’s".Sothis wrote: ↑Tue Nov 16, 2021 10:53 am*shrug* I'm no more forcing my opinions than I am responding to people doing the very same, and I tend to treat fire with fire, to a certain degree. I don't declare my opinions to be facts, unlike others, but I'll stand by my opinions on what Trek is, because no one gets to define it for me.
Its not a rhetoric. You are literally dehumanizing them in your reply right now. Is a little human empathy so hard?As for anti-vaxxers... I don't fall for their rhetoric that they're being dehumanised, and they're the ones placing lives in danger, in a blithe, arrogant fashion. Some of them are going as far as to compare themselves as Jews during the Holocaust, a truly ignorant comparison.
I merely read back what you've written. That no one else but you can define what "Trek" is. That if someone has a counter-viewpoint they are "wrong" and shouldn't voice it. That they instead should validate your opinion of what Trek actually is. Something you double down on in this very post in fact. Dismissing your opponents' views as being merely subjective opinion compared to your objective truth.Sothis wrote:I don't quite know how you have mangled what I have written in regards to the 'true Trek' rhetoric
I never claimed you were under an "obligation". I just felt it was kind of mean. Again a hall of shame to mock people for daring to hold opposing views. Kind of goes against the "everyone is welcome" spiel you offered me.I'm also in no obligation to hide the Twitter handles of the people I discuss things with. It's already a public forum (Twitter that is), and I accept the same can and will happen to me. I wouldn't place opinions and thoughts onto Twitter (or indeed online at all) if I wasn't prepared for people to dissect, critique and mock what I have to say.
That is certainly possible. Classic Trek and NuTrek are fairly different beasts. Whether that is a good or bad thing is another matter entirely. If you like JJ Trek it is far from a forgone conclusion that you'll like, say, TNG. Nor is this anything new to fandom or Trek in particular.The further implication is that if you're a fan of this 'untrue' Trek, you're not really a fan.
Actually placing other "lives at risk" is a matter of dispute. They don't believe so, unless I'm mistaken. Their view is the risk, such as it is, is only theirs. Which again brings us back to the point that rather than trying to understand the other side, even if you disagree with them, you reduce them to cartoonish villains. Which was the point you tried to refute by...calling them cartoonish villains.As for anti-vaxxers - they are placing lives at risk are they not? Their complaint is that they're being treated as though they're placing others lives at risk. Do you believe it is unreasonable to point out their ignorance and flaunting of the rules places others lives in danger?
You are of course free to do as you wish, Sothis. Personally I see this merely as evidence we would not get along well and I would not do well on your forum. Either you would have to compromise or I would.I leave this thread to you. I have not got the time to indulge in what looks suspiciously like a conversation you were prodding for early on.