Here Ye, Hear Me

[Nowhereman10]

I don't disagree that Mike's post's technical comments are accurate. I simply understand Brian's blocking of him based on the way they were presented. But I can see your point how it seems like censorship. The best way to write that would have been to separate the technical and personal aspects at least into two separate posts, but with them interwoven it just allows for, in my opinion, valid blocking for containing insults.

And I do agree Brian does not always cover all of the relevant evidence, and does not use evidence entirely in context. I am just saying, given the method through which the complaint was presented made that an understandable decision to block him. Not that I would choose to myself, but understandable.

Sure and I don't dispute that, but I saw the video where Mr. Young said basically "Ignore Mike Wong being mean, listen to his arguments." If Mr. Young was fair, he'd have given Mike DiCenso a chance there. But I think Mr. Young will not apply that to Mike DiCenso. Its a double-standard no matter how you look at it. If he blocks Mike DiCenso for mean words, then needs to openly condemn Mike Wong at some point along with his past associates. That's the only way I see things moving forward from here.

I'm not talking about the cherry picker calling, that is a valid method of criticism as you said. What I am talking about are instances where people have referred to him as stupid, unintelligent, and criticizing his voice. These do exist at an unfortunate concentration. And even the first time I read them made me slightly uncomfortable given the normal insult-less environment normally found here in other threads and on other topics. And again, I cited an instance just above in my previous post.

I see where you're coming from, and maybe you should've said something at the time. BTW, which insults are you talking about? I know Mr. Oragahn said things like "perhaps he's just been pulled out of the cryotube. Someone tell him we're in 2013 for crying out loud, not '93!." in regards to how out of date Mr. Young's Death Star Semantics argument was. But is that a real insult? I don't think anyone has called Mr. Young "stupid" or "unintelligent" outright that I can find. I do recall Lucky saying Mr. Young's voice reminded him of a used car salesman. Is that what you meant?

Also I would like to add that as of this post Brian has posted a Q&A response video to Mike's assertions here. So far I can tell this is not going to get a good response from here, including myself. And I've only watched the first three minutes, and don't really want to spent the time on it right now.

I should say so, since Mr. Young has actively silenced his opposition (by blocking them from responding in any way that he can see) it is directed at. In other words, he can claim "I won!" by not having anyone critique that video response it's commentary section. There is no open dialog here, just a guy sitting in his proverbial self-built castle claiming victory.

Hell, 359, I don't even know if I've been blocked by Mr. Young. Or even if you have for that matter. How will we know for sure?

[359]

Sure and I don't dispute that, but I saw the video where Mr. Young said basically "Ignore Mike Wong being mean, listen to his arguments." If Mr. Young was fair, he'd have given Mike DiCenso a chance there. But I think Mr. Young will not apply that to Mike DiCenso. Its a double-standard no matter how you look at it. If he blocks Mike DiCenso for mean words, then needs to openly condemn Mike Wong at some point along with his past associates. That's the only way I see things moving forward from here.

I had forgotten about that video, and I see more what you are getting at now. Although I'm not sure a retrospective on debate criticism is particularly necessary, but that may be just me, to each their own... or something like that.

I see where you're coming from, and maybe you should've said something at the time. BTW, which insults are you talking about? I know Mr. Oragahn said things like "perhaps he's just been pulled out of the cryotube. Someone tell him we're in 2013 for crying out loud, not '93!." in regards to how out of date Mr. Young's Death Star Semantics argument was. But is that a real insult? I don't think anyone has called Mr. Young "stupid" or "unintelligent" outright that I can find. I do recall Lucky saying Mr. Young's voice reminded him of a used car salesman. Is that what you meant?

I had thought about saying something, but for some reason I decided not to. I definitely wouldn't call the cryotube comment an insult (if anything it is an amusing way to point out that he's starting up a long dead argument) , there is a statement "Sorry to ask but is Brian even intelligent?" from Other Websites » Brian Young’s Death Star Semantics Video. I remember a few others existing but I don't really want to try and track those down.

I should say so, since Mr. Young has actively silenced his opposition (by blocking them from responding in any way that he can see) it is directed at. In other words, he can claim "I won!" by not having anyone critique that video response it's commentary section. There is no open dialog here, just a guy sitting in his proverbial self-built castle claiming victory.

Hell, 359, I don't even know if I've been blocked by Mr. Young. Or even if you have for that matter. How will we know for sure?

I don't know a way other than posting something. I don't think you've been blocked from what it sounds like. And I doubt I have, as I just created my youtube account two days ago. And Brian and I are actually on decent terms at the moment considering our opposing positions. For the most part I think he blocked Mike solely for the highly impolite method through which his objections were presented. I highly doubt we are going to see a sudden blocking frenzy.

[Praeothmin]

I've seen comments that seemed mean to me, but I'm not Brian and didn't really care at that point...

I tried to argue against the Power figures in the ICS with him over at ASVS, but his replies sometimes brodered on the insulting as well when you disagreed with him, so he's not really in any position to point fingers at anyone... :)

But yeah, I believe there are more than enough issues with his arguments alone for people here to lay off the insults, don't you?

[Nowhereman10]

Also I would like to add that as of this post Brian has posted a Q&A response video to Mike's assertions here. So far I can tell this is not going to get a good response from here, including myself. And I've only watched the first three minutes, and don't really want to spent the time on it right now.

I got further than you did (6 minutes), but you're right. I didn't care much for what I did hear. Basically my interpretation of Mr. Young's response on the warp drive examples was this:

* Mike DiCenso provided 5 or more examples and ignored my stated methodology which is a use a single-source fall-back "offical", but non-canon book over the canon, but inconsistent warp drive examples that are all over the place.

My response to that is there are a lot of problems wth this. Namely that TOS is not that inconsistent with high warp drive examples. I believe Mike DiCenso stated that those examples are only a handful of a larger body of such. Furthermore, Mr. Young handicaps Star Trek by a default to what I personally consider a cherry picked piece of evidence, since it is placing a flawed and non-canon (by Mr. Young's own admittance) evidence over and above canon. Furthermore, what is Mr. Young, who claims to wanting to be fair to both sides, doing in a similar manner for Babylon 5, which, according to his own Case Study video, is also equally inconsistent. Should Mr. Young not also do the same, have a fall back "official" technical manual for B5 as well? That is fair.

*Mr. Young poses the question "what would you have me use?"

I would reply that you should compare fairly like examples with like. In his Case Study video, Mr. Young used the high-end B5 speeds, so why is it unfair to compare them with the high-end Star Trek TOS speeds? Same with the middle-range, and lowest-end? Is that not more fair to do, and does not rely on Appeal to Authority or Circular Reasoning fallacies as Mr. Young wants us to do.

[Lucky]

When Brian comes here he sees a lot of personal insults directed at him throughout several threads. From that he decided that people over here only know to use venom. And I tend to agree that several specific, and yet to be named, individuals over here have not been respecting Brian as a individual and person on a consistent basis. There have been numerous bouts of insults to his intelligence, personality, and even his voice. Just earlier in this thread there was this regarding a minor typo he made in one of the comments on his youtube video.:

1) Brian specifically states a wiki pissed him off. In the context he is seemingly talking about the SFJ wiki.

Looking at this I fail to see anything insulting.
http://starfleetjedi.net/wiki/index.php ... rian_Young

http://starfleetjedi.net/wiki/index.php ... mmentaries

http://starfleetjedi.net/wiki/index.php ... on_the_Net

+++++

2) When I said Brian had insulted Mike, i was talking about the use of the word rant. To call Mike's comment a rant is to state it is all emotion with little or no substance. There is noting unreasonable about the substance of Mike post.
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/rant

+++++

By making videos of himself, Brian is inviting criticism of how he looks and speaks. If he speaks in manner that makes him hard to understand then he is doing a poor job. If he speaks in a manner that makes him seem untrustworthy then he is doing a poor job.

He says judge him by his videos, but that is what I've done, and I don't see someone I can trust. He is either lazy and clumsy when gathering evidence or he is lying if it suits his purposes. I gave him the benefit of the doubt and he blew it as I have pointed out many times that Brian can do very good work when he tries.

Brian's Babylon 5 work is some of the best i've seen so i know he can be objective when he wants to be, but when it comes to Star Wars, Star Trek, and Star Gate he seems to have some agenda that gets in the way. The only thing I disagree with him is the assumption that first one weapons like Shadow Slicer beams can necessarily quantified in Watts and Joules

And there have been many more instances spread across many threads, especially in this Other Websites section.

Because of this I totally understand his decision to avoid Starfleet Jedi entirely. While it is an exaggeration that there are only trolls here who only know how to insult and provide no technical discussion, it has its basis in fact.

And all of this is quite surprising to me, I never personally went through 'Ye ol' days' of the debate. But this is beginning to sound a bit to similar to what I have heard about some of its more negative aspects.
Additionally isn't the main rule of this board supposed to be

But, Brian never stated he was bothered by the SFJ forum. He specifies Wiki, and that means there is something on the SFJ wiki he is really bothered by. I bought Brian has an irrational hated of wikis, and to dislike the SFJ which tries not to be insulting but never state anything about the Stardestroyer.net wiki is rather hypocritical..

I doubt Brian was just typing random words even if he was clearly angered by Mike's post.

+++++

I agree that the teasing should stop.

Keep in mind that when critiquing a video, presentation is almost as relevant as what is said.


Brian seems to have been caught in what appears to be a lie in that he omitted important details to misrepresent events in episodes his Starfleet VS Minbari video.

[Lucky]

Hey, Lucky, where did you see that Mr. Young had blocked Mike DiCenso? I just checked the Cherry Pick video and Mr. Young's page as well, too. Not a sign.

It was written in the comments section of the "Picking Cherries" video.

I agree with you on the 2nd comment, Lucky, and I think Mike is right in that Mr. Young is censoring his critics, rather than go over point by point the evidence. There is no way that Mr. Young could possibly have missed that whole dialog about the Lazarus' ship being a universe-connecting timeship. Nor could he have missed that bit about Spock giving orders to Kyle about the M rays, which required using full ship's power to punch the holes in the hand thingy. I also don't believe that Mr. Young for a second could miss all the many Classic Trek references to gallivanting about the galaxy at hundreds of thousands of times the speed of light!

I just don't get what Mr. Young is so scared of. :/

I doubt it is fear that keeps Brian from admitting or fixing his mistakes.

[Lucky]

I truly do feel sorry for him, given what he said as I don't think there are very many "nerds" who've not suffered some form of censure or bullying over their hobby. But the fact that he has to censor all who disagree with him. I know, I went through something similar, though not with family, but you don't see me using it to deflect issues.

Then don't feel sorry for him since he is the bully and censoring others in this case. If he can't deal with being called out on a rather stupid mistake he shouldn't be doing what he is. He goes on about integrity, and yet acts as if he has none.

I hate to psychoanalysis the guy, but we know now why Brian cannot and will not give up his ICS work: it was his key to acceptance and stardom in a sub-culture of the Geek/Nerd community. Acceptance that he so desperately was craving since he apparently could not get it from his father, family or immediate peers while growing up.

I wouldn't get too sympathetic given Brian strikes me as a person who is a possibly has untreated NPD or APD. Any sob story could easily be a lie, or if true, irrelevant to his true motives.

http://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-cond ... n-20025568

http://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-cond ... N-20027920

I understand what you mean, Lucky, and I do apologize. But I was pretty pissed off at Brian. He's not a child. Brian is a grown man now and for him to use this... cheap and obvious manipulation to side-step the issues really got me.


But that being said, I really actually am disappointed with him.

The man does not want to deal with critics and he only wants to surround himself with "Yes Men". I caught in his video that he may have also blocked Nowhereman, who has also been a vocal critic of his lately. In fact, from what I've been hearing, Brian has been censoring several other people who have disagreed with him.
-Mike

If Brian does not want to deal with critics he should not be making web sites and videos.

Brian seems to honestly lack the integrity he claims by engaging in bullying. Rather then fix a mistake he shoots the messenger and pretends he was never informed.

If you are going to debate him, I suggest ASVS.org.

[Mr. Oragahn]

Furthermore, something that keeps occurring here which Brian has mentioned bothers him is constantly associating him with people from the past such as Wong, Poe, etc... That's the past, now move forward.

Huh. That's what got him where he is. Besides, his arguments seem to have been scooped up from a recently unsealed time capsule previously closed in 2002.
Has the man even made any effort to distanciate himself from the other people?
Like, to be really objective?

So getting to the crux of things, is this place just becoming another SDN*, or are we ready to stop being childish and get back to this silly, pointless, and above all else: fun debate. :)

I don't know why people consider that fun must be done in a strictly stuck up fashion altogether.
Don't you do brawling?
Haven't you played Monkey Island? :)

[Mr. Oragahn]

But Mr. Young, for better or worse, I would argue, is associated with those people. He was involved with them in making the two ICS books, he was secretly emailing them as part of a group of militant pro Star Wars debaters to shape the Versus Debates. Mr. Young's belief in Star Wars superiority is shaped by that interaction. Plus I agree with Mike DiCenso that to get angry at some critics who are maybe not friendly towards him, while you look the other way on your past associates behavior which was vastly more extreme is again proof of hypocrisy.

Why isn't Mr. Young condemning his past associates, but continuing to condemn others. I mean, in one of his videos he all but says in essence is "Mike Wong may be mean, but listen to his words". But for Mike DiCenso he is saying "Don't listen to him at all, he's mean and I won't talk to him!". See the problem? That's why Mr. Young's past associations will keep haunting him. They influence him even now.

LOL, @ Spacebattles it was rather straight forward.
"RSA, nuff said."

At SDN:
"Spocktard."

No, it is far from it, unless there are secret cabal groups like SDN's Bravo Delta Zero group that have been formed without telling me, board invasions are being planned, and we actively are ridiculing anyone pro Star Wars who come here, regardless of how well the argue. But I see your point and we should be vigilant to keep group think from making us like that. :D

I'm guilty of attempting to invade Spacebattles back in 2006 all by myself.

"This man was brave but ultimately foolish."

[Mr. Oragahn]

I had thought about saying something, but for some reason I decided not to. I definitely wouldn't call the cryotube comment an insult (if anything it is an amusing way to point out that he's starting up a long dead argument) , there is a statement "Sorry to ask but is Brian even intelligent?" from Other Websites » Brian Young’s Death Star Semantics Video. I remember a few others existing but I don't really want to try and track those down.

The attack on his intelligence is mine.
I believe there are times when a claim is so pants on head retarded that you can't help but wonder if the author's got all his marbles in proper place.
For example, the ship accelerations based on video cuts.
Or perhaps the fact that his videos are such an open denial of what has been said, discussed, and often debunked, that you simply cannot take no offense at being so ignored.
There's almost something heartbreaking about him, honestly.
If he continues that way, repeating the past like if he were stuck in some time loop, he may seriously consider attending asylum.
His behaviour is particularly worrying. Even his past comrades have largely moved out, and may even ridicule him some ways for doing what he does today.
I mock him because the situation calls for it and is totally absurd, stupid, unbelievable.
Something needs to snap in his head so he just moves on.
There's like a lingering trauma in that I can't put my finger on, although I've read someone in this thread mentionning suffering from bullying because of his hobby?
No wonder why things got so personnal and precious.

He was to grow up.

[359]

1) Brian specifically states a wiki pissed him off. In the context he is seemingly talking about the SFJ wiki.

He did mention something in the SFJ wiki, specifically on his page where it says "Due to the intense controversy some of his video comments created, he has since gone to Tyralak's ASVS forum to try and answer to some of them." Which he seems to have misunderstood, it is easy to do given the wording, as '...to answer for his 'crimes'.'

2) When I said Brian had insulted Mike, i was talking about the use of the word rant. To call Mike's comment a rant is to state it is all emotion with little or no substance. There is noting unreasonable about the substance of Mike post.

Rant does not necessarily imply without substance, look at this definition as from the definition you linked to:

intransitive verb

1 : to talk in a noisy, excited, or declamatory manner

2 : to scold vehemently

I would say Mike did both scold and declare his opinion in a loud and forceful manor (as much as one can through text). It's not because it's a rant that is causing issues, there's nothing wrong with a good rant. It is that some of the contents of said comment that are a cause for issue.

By making videos of himself, Brian is inviting criticism of how he looks and speaks. If he speaks in manner that makes him hard to understand then he is doing a poor job. If he speaks in a manner that makes him seem untrustworthy then he is doing a poor job.

He's not inviting it, he's opening himself up to the possibility. And that in no way requires that someone should go and take advantage of that. And it's one thing to say someone doesn't sound trustworthy, but it is a completely different thing to say their voice itself doesn't sound good.

But, Brian never stated he was bothered by the SFJ forum.

Actually he did, in the video, to quite an` exaggerated extent.

If you are going to debate him, I suggest ASVS.org.

He doesn't post there much, or anywhere anymore.

I don't know why people consider that fun must be done in a strictly stuck up fashion altogether.
Don't you do brawling?
Haven't you played Monkey Island? :)

It doesn't have to be 'stuck up' or anything like that, it is fun after all, however insults are not.

[Mr. Oragahn]

It doesn't have to be 'stuck up' or anything like that, it is fun after all, however insults are not.

Just like having the other team score against you. Or having the opponent stick an uppercut in your jaw. Or just like losing a hot argument you've poured yourself into at abandon. Not fun, but you entered the game knowing that certain excesses, if exceptionnal, were to be expected. It's part of the deal and these days I don't care about seeing an insult fly once in a while. Roughness was the dime yesteryear. I prefer to let opponents manage the debate in their own way. If they can't help cramming one insult every two sentences, so be it, it just makes them look poorly in retrospect and rather in lack of control. However, as the debate drags, incisive wit and half veiled insults thrown from time to time, as taunts, are somewhat exquisite in their own way, especially if brought at the right time. It's like a cherry ontop a marvellous cake. In the end, you're generally better up making a concise and venom-less argument, but it really does help to call a cat a cat when really due. It's also manly (which does not mean being vulgar, btw, there's a degree of subtlety there to reach).

[359]

I see what you mean. And I do have a place in my heart for appreciating the infrequent small, well crafted, and subtle jabs that are saved for the exact correct moment. Mostly what gets to me, and I would assume most other people too, are blunt statements that are not just one off, they appear multiple times within one thread or across multiple threads. That or anything that is actually really insulting. Part of it in this case is there is so much directed at Brian vs no one else (to be fair that is partly because there is no other real target.), also there is a lot of history going back.

[Lucky]

He did mention something in the SFJ wiki, specifically on his page where it says "Due to the intense controversy some of his video comments created, he has since gone to Tyralak's ASVS forum to try and answer to some of them." Which he seems to have misunderstood, it is easy to do given the wording, as '...to answer for his 'crimes'.'

And?

If this is all you can come up with then it sounds like you are saying that the insult is all a delusion in Brian's head without outright saying that, and you are trying to argue in Brian's defense here. It sounds like Brian might be projecting.

Brian could have done something about the article if he wanted to, but never seems to have bothered. Tyralak has bent over backwards to be nice to Brian after all, even going so far as to argue in Brian's place as you well know, and is a member here. If Brian wanted the article changed he had a large number of possibilities.
http://forums.asvs.org/index.php?/topic ... n-isotons/

Rant does not necessarily imply without substance, look at this definition as from the definition you linked to:

intransitive verb

1 : to talk in a noisy, excited, or declamatory manner

2 : to scold vehemently

I would say Mike did both scold and declare his opinion in a loud and forceful manor (as much as one can through text). It's not because it's a rant that is causing issues, there's nothing wrong with a good rant. It is that some of the contents of said comment that are a cause for issue.

And the definitions you've brought forth are still rude and insulting to Mike like I said. Rant is not a polite thing to call something someone has written.

He's not inviting it, he's opening himself up to the possibility. And that in no way requires that someone should go and take advantage of that. And it's one thing to say someone doesn't sound trustworthy, but it is a completely different thing to say their voice itself doesn't sound good.

Brian makes videos for all to see and hear.

Brian makes a web site to host the videos.

Brian seems to try to advertise he is making videos.

Then things don't go the way he planned because the content of his videos is flawed in a number of ways among them his arguments. People aren't blindly expecting what he says. They are pointing out the flaws be they in his presentation or the arguments.
Making good videos is harder then Brian wants to admit, and it requires different skills then writing up a web site in text.

Brian gets his buddy Tyralak to give him a small section of ASVS.org designated to Brian's videos, but without guys like Mike Wong to back him Brian can't effectively handle the load, and seems like he is in a rush for some unknown reason.

Brian isn't making videos for his own personal use with no intent for public consumption. His entire purpose of making his videos is to take part in VS debates.

+++++

How one presents themselves is very relevant to audio/visual media. It's public speaking, and I'm basically treating Brian's videos as if I'm back in high school speech class. The teacher would hand out random topics, give us a few minutes to organize our thoughts, get up in front of the class and talk on the topics, and then the class(teacher included) would try to explain how the speaker could have done a better job giving the speech(body langue, tone of voice, speed at which they talked).



Compare the videos below to Brian's videos

Tyralak video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EkTV1EdLtk0#t=0
He speaks clearing and slowly, and he has his thoughts well organized. he isn't trying to cram as much as he can in as little time as he can.

Now look at how Firmus Piett does his videos: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ui8iePH5Pqw
Firmus Piett doesn't talk at all, or appear in person, and yet manages to get the information across a. I disagree with it, but the video does what it intends to do.

Actually he did, in the video, to quite an` exaggerated extent.

I was talking about the comment to Mike in the comment section. Brian started going on about some vague slight in a wiki that seems to be in his head now that you pointed it out. It certainly was not what he claimed glaring insult Brian painted it as.

He doesn't post there much, or anywhere anymore.

<sarcasm>Your own cruel behavior chased Brian off! How dare you question Brian Young's wisdom!</sarcasm>

If Brian won't answer questions at a site where he has number of supporters including an/the admin then I don't think his unwillingness to talk on SFJ is what he claims. Heck, most of what's said about Brian is because he is either unwilling to, or unable to debate the topics he makes his videos about. You seem to have single handedly chased him off ASVS.org.

I get the feeling that Brian just doesn't like typing, and if that is the case he may want to look into a program like Dragon Naturally Speaking. I've used an older version years ago, and it worked well enough.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dragon_NaturallySpeaking

+++++

Personally I think Brian should ask Mike DICense for help. If Brian makes the mistakes he does while honestly trying to do a good job, then Brian could use help.

If Brian is childishly prideful, or purposely omitting important information then he would not want the help.

[Mr. Oragahn]

The guy's a lot of work.