Dark Star blog

Did a related website in the community go down? Come back up? Relocate to a new address? Install pop-up advertisements?

This forum is for discussion of these sorts of issues.
Alyeska
Bridge Officer
Posts: 87
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:00 am

Dark Star blog

Post by Alyeska » Sat Mar 15, 2008 2:19 am

Nice little Blog you got going. Pitty you got some facts wrong.
One SDN/SB border-hopper was SpaceBattles mod "H.B.M.C."
That statement is grossly inaccurate. HBMC has posted a total of 52 posts on SD.net. His last post was in 2004. Over a period of 2 years he made 52 posts. No, HBMC is not a member of SD.net. He looked on occasion, but was never a member, nor a "border-hopper". Truth be told, HBMC doesn't particularly like SD.net.
Alyeska's choice to abandon reason in favor of community was, as undoubtedly expected, lauded and rewarded by the opposition, who soon made him a mod at SDN until a later falling out.
That statement is completely false. I was made the moderator of the ST:Nemesis forum in late 2002, early 2003.

Example link

Was my first thread lock. I had already been a mod for a little while by that point.

I didn't post my concession until May of 2003.
Link

Care to retract your statement Darkstar?

You use false statements to back up your claims. This makes your entire blog suspect given your willingness to fabricate evidence.

User avatar
Who is like God arbour
Starship Captain
Posts: 1155
Joined: Fri Feb 02, 2007 3:00 pm
Location: Germany

Re: Dark Star blog

Post by Who is like God arbour » Sat Mar 15, 2008 5:39 am

Alyeska wrote:
One SDN/SB border-hopper was SpaceBattles mod "H.B.M.C."
That statement is grossly inaccurate. HBMC has posted a total of 52 posts on SD.net. His last post was in 2004. Over a period of 2 years he made 52 posts. No, HBMC is not a member of SD.net. He looked on occasion, but was never a member, nor a "border-hopper". Truth be told, HBMC doesn't particularly like SD.net.
How do you define member?

I have thought, everyone, who can post only one single post at SDN is a member [apart from the testing forum] - unless he or she was banned.

Is it not the case, that SDN has 4502 members, from which 1453 have never made only one single post and 2305 members have made less than 10 posts and 3259 members have made less than 100 posts and 4052 members less than 1000 posts - although many of them are members since 2002?

Could it be, that you don't mean, that he is not a member from SDN but that he is not part of the fanatical core of SDN?

Alyeska
Bridge Officer
Posts: 87
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:00 am

Re: Dark Star blog

Post by Alyeska » Sat Mar 15, 2008 4:03 pm

Who is like God arbour wrote:
Alyeska wrote:
One SDN/SB border-hopper was SpaceBattles mod "H.B.M.C."
That statement is grossly inaccurate. HBMC has posted a total of 52 posts on SD.net. His last post was in 2004. Over a period of 2 years he made 52 posts. No, HBMC is not a member of SD.net. He looked on occasion, but was never a member, nor a "border-hopper". Truth be told, HBMC doesn't particularly like SD.net.
How do you define member?

I have thought, everyone, who can post only one single post at SDN is a member [apart from the testing forum] - unless he or she was banned.

Is it not the case, that SDN has 4502 members, from which 1453 have never made only one single post and 2305 members have made less than 10 posts and 3259 members have made less than 100 posts and 4052 members less than 1000 posts - although many of them are members since 2002?

Could it be, that you don't mean, that he is not a member from SDN but that he is not part of the fanatical core of SDN?
He has an account. A member implies someone who is active in the forum on a regular or semi-regular basis. Someone with 52 posts over a period of 2 years a then a continued absence for more then 3 years does not imply membership.

Of course this is nothing more then an argument of semantics. Darkstar implied that HBMC is a SD.net regular, this is clearly not the case.

User avatar
Mr. Oragahn
Admiral
Posts: 6865
Joined: Sun Dec 03, 2006 11:58 am
Location: Paradise Mountain

Re: Dark Star blog

Post by Mr. Oragahn » Sat Mar 15, 2008 9:20 pm

Alyeska wrote:
Who is like God arbour wrote:
Alyeska wrote: That statement is grossly inaccurate. HBMC has posted a total of 52 posts on SD.net. His last post was in 2004. Over a period of 2 years he made 52 posts. No, HBMC is not a member of SD.net. He looked on occasion, but was never a member, nor a "border-hopper". Truth be told, HBMC doesn't particularly like SD.net.
How do you define member?

I have thought, everyone, who can post only one single post at SDN is a member [apart from the testing forum] - unless he or she was banned.

Is it not the case, that SDN has 4502 members, from which 1453 have never made only one single post and 2305 members have made less than 10 posts and 3259 members have made less than 100 posts and 4052 members less than 1000 posts - although many of them are members since 2002?

Could it be, that you don't mean, that he is not a member from SDN but that he is not part of the fanatical core of SDN?
He has an account. A member implies someone who is active in the forum on a regular or semi-regular basis. Someone with 52 posts over a period of 2 years a then a continued absence for more then 3 years does not imply membership.

Of course this is nothing more then an argument of semantics. Darkstar implied that HBMC is a SD.net regular, this is clearly not the case.
Well, he claimed I was a member of SDN while I didn't even have an account over there. It takes very little to be a member of SDN, and I think it has more to do, I suppose, with people who espouse SDN's code of conduct and general stance on the versus terrain, none of which I do but, well, nevermind.

Jedi Master Spock
Site Admin
Posts: 2164
Joined: Mon Aug 14, 2006 8:26 pm
Contact:

Post by Jedi Master Spock » Sat Mar 15, 2008 10:32 pm

Perhaps I am overly literal, but to me, when I hear you say that HMBC was indeed not only a registered member, but actually posting on SDN in the time period in question (the blog post is indeed referring to the period in which HMBC made his posts), I do not find compelling cause to object to st-v-sw.net referring to him as a member.

The rest is slightly more interesting, but reveals only a limited amount. If we are to be concerned here with your positions at SDN, SB.com, etc, could we hear the full timeline of what you became a moderator of when?

Alyeska
Bridge Officer
Posts: 87
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:00 am

Post by Alyeska » Sat Mar 15, 2008 11:16 pm

Jedi Master Spock wrote:Perhaps I am overly literal, but to me, when I hear you say that HMBC was indeed not only a registered member, but actually posting on SDN in the time period in question (the blog post is indeed referring to the period in which HMBC made his posts), I do not find compelling cause to object to st-v-sw.net referring to him as a member.
Guilt by association. HBMC cares very little for SD.net as evidence by his lack of activity over there and prolonged complete absence. Darkstar was trying to slander HBMC by associating him with SD.net. By your reasoning, Darkstar also falls under the same category.
The rest is slightly more interesting, but reveals only a limited amount. If we are to be concerned here with your positions at SDN, SB.com, etc, could we hear the full timeline of what you became a moderator of when?
I was made the moderator of the ST:Nemesis forum. When it was turned into the PST forum, I was retained as moderator. The Nemesis forum was created on December 5th, 2002. My concession was posted in May 2003. Darkstar says my modship was a reward for my concession. The problem is the dates are opposite of each other. I received my reward before I made my concession and when I was still quite publicly in opposition with Mike.

Alyeska
Bridge Officer
Posts: 87
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:00 am

Re: Dark Star blog

Post by Alyeska » Sat Mar 15, 2008 11:18 pm

Mr. Oragahn wrote:Well, he claimed I was a member of SDN while I didn't even have an account over there. It takes very little to be a member of SDN, and I think it has more to do, I suppose, with people who espouse SDN's code of conduct and general stance on the versus terrain, none of which I do but, well, nevermind.
HBMC doesn't follow SD.nets code of conduct. Thats part of the reason he can't stand the place. If HBMC was so like minded to SD.net conduct, why has he posted so rarely on SD.net and stopped completely more then 3 years ago?

Jedi Master Spock
Site Admin
Posts: 2164
Joined: Mon Aug 14, 2006 8:26 pm
Contact:

Post by Jedi Master Spock » Sun Mar 16, 2008 6:03 am

Alyeska wrote:Guilt by association. HBMC cares very little for SD.net as evidence by his lack of activity over there and prolonged complete absence. Darkstar was trying to slander HBMC by associating him with SD.net. By your reasoning, Darkstar also falls under the same category.
He was a member. The fact that his account was banned or deleted gives us cause to identify him otherwise when we speak of the present.
I was made the moderator of the ST:Nemesis forum. When it was turned into the PST forum, I was retained as moderator. The Nemesis forum was created on December 5th, 2002. My concession was posted in May 2003. Darkstar says my modship was a reward for my concession. The problem is the dates are opposite of each other. I received my reward before I made my concession and when I was still quite publicly in opposition with Mike.
Were you ever made the moderator of any other sections?

And when did you become a moderator on SB.com?

User avatar
Who is like God arbour
Starship Captain
Posts: 1155
Joined: Fri Feb 02, 2007 3:00 pm
Location: Germany

Post by Who is like God arbour » Sun Mar 16, 2008 6:04 am

Alyeska wrote:
        • [...]
I created this thread to point out errors made by Darkstar and to get his response. I also was interested in seeing what other people around here would have thought about that. I didn't create this thread to discuss STvsSW or any technical aspect there of. That you and others continue to discuss completely off topic material shows your complete disrespect. You are acting like a troll when you intentionally derail a thread and refuse to stay on topic.
I'm also the opinion, that the last posts of that thread have nothing to do anymore with the OP.

But if you wanted »to point out errors made by Darkstar and to get his response«, why haven't you adressed your objections to »Darkstar« hinself in the blog? Why did you come here, where 2046 is only a irregular visitor?

Alyeska
Bridge Officer
Posts: 87
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:00 am

Post by Alyeska » Sun Mar 16, 2008 5:15 pm

Jedi Master Spock wrote:Were you ever made the moderator of any other sections?

And when did you become a moderator on SB.com?
Eventually I became a moderator of the Other SciFi forum. At some point down the road I eventually became a Super Mod on SD.net. This wasn't Mike who promoted me. In 2005 I gave up the SM position because I was doing very little. And as you know, I resigned and quit SD.net entirely in early 2007.

On SB.com I was elected moderator of the NSF in 2001 in a moderator election by popular member vote. Later that year adminship changed and I was fired. In 2005 I was hired to cover the VS forum. In 2006 I resigned from the VS forum but retained the Tech forum. In early 2007 I was laid off in a massive restructuring that lead to many other moderators also getting the boot.

I quit SD.net, and less then a month later I was laid off from SB.com. Haven't been a moderator anywhere since. Leaving behind the politics has been quite pleasant.

Alyeska
Bridge Officer
Posts: 87
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:00 am

Post by Alyeska » Sun Mar 16, 2008 5:17 pm

Who is like God arbour wrote:
Alyeska wrote:
        • [...]
I created this thread to point out errors made by Darkstar and to get his response. I also was interested in seeing what other people around here would have thought about that. I didn't create this thread to discuss STvsSW or any technical aspect there of. That you and others continue to discuss completely off topic material shows your complete disrespect. You are acting like a troll when you intentionally derail a thread and refuse to stay on topic.
I'm also the opinion, that the last posts of that thread have nothing to do anymore with the OP.

But if you wanted »to point out errors made by Darkstar and to get his response«, why haven't you adressed your objections to »Darkstar« hinself in the blog? Why did you come here, where 2046 is only a irregular visitor?
I'm already signed up here, not on his Blog. Besides, Blogs are stupid. They are supposed to be Web Logs. What a stupid name.

User avatar
2046
Starship Captain
Posts: 2040
Joined: Sat Sep 02, 2006 9:14 pm
Contact:

Re: Dark Star blog

Post by 2046 » Sun Mar 16, 2008 5:36 pm

Alyeska wrote:Nice little Blog you got going.


Thanks.
Pitty you got some facts wrong.
Really? Must've been spending too much time around the opposition, then . . . one can pick up such bad habits. You know what that's like. After all, you've been promoting their negative myths about me and making up your own just like they do, so obviously you're a better example than I am.

(e.g. your false claim "DarkStar has the unique honor of being banned from both the official Star Trek and Star Wars forums" . . . neither is true.)
One SDN/SB border-hopper was SpaceBattles mod "H.B.M.C."
That statement is grossly inaccurate. HBMC has posted a total of 52 posts on SD.net. His last post was in 2004.
Why do I care how long ago it was? He was posting at both locations, and was a 'card-carrying Disciple of Wong'-type. Hell, his first post was:

"Hello all. I'm H.B.M.C., long time supporter of Mr. Wong and his page as well as Spacebattles First One (since the begining, all those long years ago). "

Whatever his activity level, you can't pretend he was not a member and ally.
Alyeska's choice to abandon reason in favor of community was, as undoubtedly expected, lauded and rewarded by the opposition, who soon made him a mod at SDN until a later falling out.
That statement is completely false. I was made the moderator of the ST:Nemesis forum in late 2002, early 2003.
So you were. I should've checked my memory of that, but . . . forgive me . . . you were a minor point.

Also, I'd like to note that a minor flub in the timeline does not make the statement "completely false". I had the basic narrative right but misplaced a minor detail, misplacing it in your favor.

But I digress . . .

I am revising that section thusly:

OLD:
"And the other side felt they had the upper hand at the time, as previously pro-Trek poster Alyeska, in an obvious social play, chose to publicly concede to the aforementioned children's books. This was spun as an objective repudiation of any who failed to toe the opposition's party line.

As I had never been one to try to socialize with my ever so ill-mannered opponents, I'd never had need to try to get in their good graces. (Alyeska's choice to abandon reason in favor of community was, as undoubtedly expected, lauded and rewarded by the opposition, who soon made him a mod at SDN until a later falling out.)"
NEW:
"And the other side felt they had the upper hand at the time, as previously pro-Trek poster Alyeska, in an obvious social play, chose to publicly concede to the aforementioned children's books. This was spun as an objective repudiation of any who failed to toe the opposition's party line.

As I had never been one to try to socialize with my ever so ill-mannered opponents, I'd never had need to try to get in their good graces.

Alyeska had already done so, cozying up to the opposition to the point that, as a classic "useful idiot", he was even granted a small moderation position at SDN. His final choice to abandon reason in favor of community was, as he undoubtedly expected, lauded and further rewarded by the opposition, though after his usefulness ended there was a bitter falling out."
Please let me know if there are any factual errors in the above.
Care to retract your statement Darkstar?
It is standard operating procedure for dishonest people to hold honest people to the honest's own standards of honesty, while never correcting or taking responsibility for their own dishonesty. This usually works, since the honest people actually feel guilt over their mistakes, whereas the dishonest do not feel guilt over their bald-faced lies.

I have little guilt over the silly error you're trying to use as a global attack on my post about the SB history, and as evidenced by your failure to have ever replied to my calling you out for your earlier falsehood you presumably have no guilt whatsoever about your bald-faced lies.

You may issue a public retraction of and apology for BS like your ban claim, at which point I will apologize for the minor error in the timeline which I have corrected.

User avatar
2046
Starship Captain
Posts: 2040
Joined: Sat Sep 02, 2006 9:14 pm
Contact:

Post by 2046 » Sun Mar 16, 2008 5:37 pm

Alyeska wrote:I'm already signed up here, not on his Blog.
Ridiculous . . . no sign-up is required. Don't be so transparent.

User avatar
2046
Starship Captain
Posts: 2040
Joined: Sat Sep 02, 2006 9:14 pm
Contact:

Post by 2046 » Sun Mar 16, 2008 5:45 pm

Alyeska wrote:
Jedi Master Spock wrote:Were you ever made the moderator of any other sections?

And when did you become a moderator on SB.com?
Eventually I became a moderator of the Other SciFi forum.
According to Ossus you were made moderator of the Star Trek sub-forum, when it was created from the Nemesis sub-forum which you were then moderating. This would be integral to JMS's question.

Were I to use your tactics I would now say that you are using false statements making all your statements suspect. As it stands, though, I'm simply offering a minor detail that you presumably forgot, which (last I checked) is not a cardinal sin.

User avatar
2046
Starship Captain
Posts: 2040
Joined: Sat Sep 02, 2006 9:14 pm
Contact:

Re: Dark Star blog

Post by 2046 » Sun Mar 16, 2008 6:03 pm

Mr. Oragahn wrote:Well, he claimed I was a member of SDN while I didn't even have an account over there.
I said your arguments reminded me of a rabid SDN member in style. That's a rather different thing than saying you are a member.

Being a member of SDN is not some sort of sin. It just means you have an account. Lots of people do, including many who couldn't care less about Trek and Wars.

Being one of the rabid coterie of Vs. Debaters at SDN, though, is something that does have negative connotations. "SDN member" would be an unfortunate-but-useful-in-a-pinch shorthand, and you're correct in saying that use "has more to do, I suppose, with people who espouse SDN's code of conduct and general stance on the versus terrain".

Post Reply