What does LFL keep straight between canons?

For all your discussion of canon policies, evidentiary standards, and other meta-debate issues.

Discussion is to remain cordial at all times.
Post Reply
The Dude
Jedi Knight
Posts: 546
Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 8:28 pm

Re: What does LFL keep straight between canons?

Post by The Dude » Sun Dec 26, 2010 12:27 am

Your friends with Rob Dalton off the board right? Your probably best to ask him as I'm on sabbatical right now I can't check the old Senate records and such.

User avatar
Trinoya
Security Officer
Posts: 658
Joined: Sat Aug 19, 2006 6:35 am

Re: What does LFL keep straight between canons?

Post by Trinoya » Sun Dec 26, 2010 6:10 am

Please, no one could believe what he says about the innocence and good intentions of the SDN mods of Wong, Saxton and Poe, the three stooges of Warsies.

And I can't believe I missed this. I'm gonna add this as additional evidence that you are not reading my posts correctly. *adds*

Thanks you and happy holidays.
Your friends with Rob Dalton off the board right? Your probably best to ask him as I'm on sabbatical right now I can't check the old Senate records and such.
I looked through the senate, do you know around when this occurred?

The Dude
Jedi Knight
Posts: 546
Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 8:28 pm

Re: What does LFL keep straight between canons?

Post by The Dude » Sun Dec 26, 2010 1:15 pm

Bought this time last year IIRC. It may not even have made it to the Senate but theres a bunch new mods and quite a few of the old ones got demoted. I know that much. Thanas for example never used to be mod of N&P.

Mike DiCenso
Security Officer
Posts: 5836
Joined: Fri Aug 18, 2006 8:49 pm

Re: What does LFL keep straight between canons?

Post by Mike DiCenso » Sun Dec 26, 2010 4:46 pm

UniveralNetguru wrote:TROLL! TRINNOYA IS A TROLL FOR SDN!!
*Sigh* I come back from a nice X-mas holiday to this?

UnversalNetguru is getting a warning since this is an entirely uncalled for insult to Trinoya, who has done nothing but point out that there are some reasonable folks at SDN, which is true. Also, the pattern of behavior I'm seeing throughout this and other threads stinks high to hell of KSW, so even though the IP addresses don't match up, the choice of words and more do. So my advice to UNTG is to tone it down.
-Mike

User avatar
Praeothmin
Jedi Master
Posts: 3920
Joined: Mon Oct 23, 2006 10:24 pm
Location: Quebec City

Re: What does LFL keep straight between canons?

Post by Praeothmin » Mon Dec 27, 2010 2:11 pm

UniveralNetguru wrote:If SW isn't a cult film, what is?
Cult Films are usually:
strange, quirky, offbeat, eccentric, oddball, or surreal, with outrageous, weird, unique and cartoony characters or plots, and garish sets. They are often considered controversial because they step outside standard narrative and technical conventions. They can be very stylized, and they are often flawed or unusual in some striking way.
Also
just because a segment of devoted viewers (pre-teen girls) repeatedly watch a film - such as Pirates of the Caribbean: The Curse of the Black Pearl (2003) - to view its star Johnny Depp, or Titanic (1997) (to see Leonardo Di Caprio), or to view the latest George Lucas Star Wars film, doesn't make a film a cult film.
So the SW movies are not Cult Films...
Last edited by Praeothmin on Thu Dec 30, 2010 2:46 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Praeothmin
Jedi Master
Posts: 3920
Joined: Mon Oct 23, 2006 10:24 pm
Location: Quebec City

Re: What does LFL keep straight between canons?

Post by Praeothmin » Mon Dec 27, 2010 2:13 pm

UniveralNetguru wrote: I base my accusations of cult-exremism and trolling on behavior too--
It's obvious to anyone here that you don't, since you accused Trinoya of trolling for SDN, when he's the last person here to defend them when we accuse them of something truthful...
There's healthy skepticism, and then there's self-delusion.
And it's clear to us you espouse the latter... :)

User avatar
mojo
Starship Captain
Posts: 1159
Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2007 11:47 am

Re: What does LFL keep straight between canons?

Post by mojo » Thu Dec 30, 2010 4:22 am

careful, mike. you're going to ruin ALL the fun.

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

Re: What does LFL keep straight between canons?

Post by Mr. Oragahn » Thu Dec 30, 2010 6:51 pm

Trinoya wrote:I used to tell people, "If you're really interested in unbiased debate then ask yourself if you'd save your opposition from falling off a cliff and see if you like the answer."
And miss a great opportunity for a scientific experiment?

User avatar
Trinoya
Security Officer
Posts: 658
Joined: Sat Aug 19, 2006 6:35 am

Re: What does LFL keep straight between canons?

Post by Trinoya » Thu Dec 30, 2010 9:22 pm

Damn you and your counter arguments.. damn you.

User1462
Bridge Officer
Posts: 126
Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 8:28 pm

Re: What does LFL keep straight between canons?

Post by User1462 » Sat Jan 01, 2011 6:13 pm

But they've already gone off a cliff. From SDN:
Important note: for you people who ask why I don't take the moral high ground and adopt a firm, restrained, mature tone when dealing with these people, I would like to remind you that we are talking about whether the Empire would kick the Federation's ass! What the hell does maturity have to do with this? To most of its participants, this debate is a vacation from maturity. Those of us who have done this for a long time judge each others' efforts on skill and knowledge, as well as scientific accuracy and logical consistency. Maturity is simply a red herring, and as far as I'm concerned, the very idea of a "mature" Star Wars vs Star Trek debate is outlandish. In my experience, people start whining about "maturity" when they're trying to distract the audience from the fact that they're getting their asses kicked.
So they think that their pychotic rants are a show of victory-- no wonder they think they're undefeated. Couple this with the obsessive cyber-stalking on the hate-mail page, and you'll see that they've gone off the deep end-- as in the cliffs of Acapulco.

There's no question that SDN is at war with all things Trek, it's the entire purpose of the site. And they've made clear that they follow a policy that "all's fair in war," including cyber-terrorism, as well as ignoring plain logic and fact in favor of weaving their own twisted canon.

And as a cult, they think that they speak for God-- and that anyone who doesn't obey is an infidel who must be driven out and killed, unless they swear alliegance to the creed:
When challenged by certain agenda-driven individuals who claimed that they studied George Lucas' public interviews and therefore knew his intentions better than people who worked with him professionally, Mr. Chee further clarified with this:
"All contradictions are dealt with case-by-case ... Does LucasFilm Ltd. itself actually have a Canon Policy? No.
...
The quote you provide makes it sound like the EU is separate from George's vision of the Star Wars universe. It is not."


So in summary, the policy of Lucasfilm is that the books count, although not as highly as the movies. The policy of Paramount is that the books don't count at all, and amazingly enough, some of the TV shows and movies don't count either. The two companies have taken different approaches; Lucasfilm has gone the route of inclusiveness in order to weld things into a single continuity, while Paramount went the route of minimizing that which is canon so that authors would have more freedom to work independently of one another.
1. Who were these "agenda driven individuals," and when did they "challenge" Chee? Nobody knows-- Chee's statements certainly don't indicate any.

2. Note the arrogant presumption behind Wong's statement of "agenda-driven individuals who claimed that they studied George Lucas' public interviews and therefore knew his intentions better than people who worked with him professionally"; isn't Wong studying Chee's statements, and claiming to know what they mean?
So while these "agenda-driven individuals" are reading Lucas's statements directly, Wong cherry-picks an ambiguously-worded phrase from someone who simply works with Lucas at best, and divines the meaning that Wong wants; and then calls them "certain agenda-driven individuals who claimed that they studied George Lucas' public interviews and therefore knew his intentions better than people who worked with him professionally."

This is clear delusions of grandeur; how the hell does Wong think he has the right to interpret Chee's statements, more than others have the right to interpret those of Lucas himself? Clearly, the Wong believes that The Prophet Chee speaks to him directly as a messenger for Lucas, just like the Prophet Mohammed speaks to Osama bin Laden as a messenger for Allah.

3. From the following: "The quote you provide makes it sound like the EU is separate from George's vision of the Star Wars universe. It is not." Wong derives the conclusion that:
"the policy of Lucasfilm is that the books count, although not as highly as the movies."
This is about as non-sequitur as on can get; Lucas expressly stated that there IS no one Star Wars universe, but rather TWO of them-- the movies and the EU.
Note the following:
LUCAS: I don't read that stuff. I haven't read any of the novels. I don't know anything about that world. That's a different world than my world. But I do try to keep it consistent. The way I do it now is they have a Star Wars Encyclopedia. So if I come up with a name or something else, I look it up and see if it has already been used. When I said [other people] could make their own Star Wars stories, we decided that, like Star Trek, we would have two universes: My universe and then this other one. They try to make their universe as consistent with mine as possible, but obviously they get enthusiastic and want to go off in other directions."
- George Lucas, Flannelled One, Aug. 2005 - "New Hopes" interview in Starlog #337
Leland Chee, 2006 at StarWars.Com:
"The only relevant official continuities are the current versions of the films alone, and the combined current version of the films along with whatever else we've got in the Holocron. You're never going to know what George's view of the universe beyond the films at any given time because it is constantly evolving. It remains elastic until it gets committed to film or another official source. Even then, we know there's always room for change.
[...] Anything not in the current version of the films is irrelevant to Film only continuity."

- Sue Rostoni, Lucas Licensing (LLP Managing Editor), Sept. 2005 - StarWars.com forum post:

"Within the issue of Starlog magazine with the War of the Worlds cover is an interview article with George Lucas. He stated something which he had said before, which is that he doesn't follow the SW EU, he doesn't read the books or comics. He also said that when they started doing all this (which is allowing other storytellers to tell their own SW tales), he had decreed that the Star Wars Universe would be split into two just like Star Trek (I don't know nuts about Star Trek, so don't ask me about that), one would be his own universe (the six episode movie saga), the other would be a whole other universe (the Expanded Universe). He continued to say that the EU tries as much as possible to tie in to his own universe, but sometimes they move into a whole other line of their own.”
Ah, but that's where the Prophet Chee speaks to Osamike-Wong Laden, and tells him Lucas's divine will, and what it "really" means-- and so all "agenda driven infidels" (i.e. NORMAL, SANE PEOPLE who can read NORMAL, PLAIN ENGLISH) are branded as liars and vermin.

That's not going just off a cliff, like your brakes failed and you dropped into a 3-foot gulch: that's a perfect swan-dive into the Grand Canyon.

The Dude
Jedi Knight
Posts: 546
Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 8:28 pm

Re: What does LFL keep straight between canons?

Post by The Dude » Sun Jan 02, 2011 2:42 am

Christ, not this shit again.

User1462
Bridge Officer
Posts: 126
Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 8:28 pm

Re: What does LFL keep straight between canons?

Post by User1462 » Sun Jan 02, 2011 3:14 am

The Dude wrote:Christ, not this shit again.
Yeah, that's EXACTLY what they say at SDN if you ask about canon.
Dude, you can't have a discussion without rules about what's allowed!
At st-v-sw.net, DS discusses the canonicity of the TMP novel, and why it isn't canon-- including the fact that "Tulkas" (that's me) derived some outrageous figures from the novel regarding starship power-generation if combined with the movie.

But SDN wants to say that ST novels aren't canon, but that SW novels ARE canon-- using the same twisted logic.

So when someone comes in here saying that that SDN isn't at war with anyone who differs with them, I say they're smoking something illegal.

The Dude
Jedi Knight
Posts: 546
Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 8:28 pm

Re: What does LFL keep straight between canons?

Post by The Dude » Sun Jan 02, 2011 3:45 am

Yeah, yeah, SDN members are all crack smoking retards. Look man, I don't give a crap about what is and what is not canon, or the policy behind it. 5+ years of having the exact same conversation has made me apathetic.

What bothers me is that you come off as an obsessed wackjob. This site gets little enough respect as it is and even though I don't necessarily agree with the conclusions of the majority here, having a guy make an ass of himself just gives folks the oppurtunity to point and go "look, look! This guys a nutter, they all are!"

In short, tone it down.

User1462
Bridge Officer
Posts: 126
Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 8:28 pm

Re: What does LFL keep straight between canons?

Post by User1462 » Sun Jan 02, 2011 3:59 am

The Dude wrote:Yeah, yeah, SDN members are all crack smoking retards. Look man, I don't give a crap about what is and what is not canon, or the policy behind it. 5+ years of having the exact same conversation has made me apathetic.

What bothers me is that you come off as an obsessed wackjob. This site gets little enough respect as it is and even though I don't necessarily agree with the conclusions of the majority here, having a guy make an ass of himself just gives folks the oppurtunity to point and go "look, look! This guys a nutter, they all are!"

In short, tone it down.
Hey I'm cool, not trying to start trouble, but just to PREVENT it.

This is the irrational way that they think, and we've already got at least one troll throwing the EU around as canon, with their Al Queda-like double-standards of how "SW books count, but ST-books don't" (which is indeed convenient for SW, since ST books claim that thousands of starships would have enough power to stop the sun from rotating!) Meanwhile they deny that the Federation has trilithium warheads, time-travel etc.

As long as they operate in this irrational and ruthless underhanded manner (which is the only way that such a minset CAN operate), there's no debating with them-- StarWarsVsStarTrek is a prime example of such "trolling through deliberate intellectual dishonesty." And it's the worst form of trolling there is, since it's the hardest to spot-- one can always plausibly deny it, and claim that they honestly believe what they're saying; but it causes the most trouble, since they're deliberately provoking emotional responses by "pushing buttons" and stepping on toes, frustrating people with insipid arguments etc.

Look at the facts: he came on here using the EU as canon, and then bashes "Trekkies" for "falling on the 'EU isn't canon' argument;" and so far it's really been mucking up the board.

And that's just one user-name (though it could be more than one person, as prolific as the arguments are); just imagine what a few of them could do, and you have to know your enemy even if you don't want trouble-- especially if you don't want trouble, in fact.

And again, they can always claim that they "honestly believe their arguments," since it's impossible to tell whether someone's being an idiot on purpose; and if you say "NOBODY could be that stupid!" then they've got your goat.
So my point is that we just have to be on our guard about this-- like Q said about the Borg, "they are RELENTLESS."

User avatar
Praeothmin
Jedi Master
Posts: 3920
Joined: Mon Oct 23, 2006 10:24 pm
Location: Quebec City

Re: What does LFL keep straight between canons?

Post by Praeothmin » Thu Jan 06, 2011 6:19 pm

Paramount's ST Canon policy specifically states that the only thing Canon in ST are the movies and shows, with the exception being certain events in two novels (and Lately STO being declared "soft-Canon", whatwever the hell that is)...

LucasFilmLicensing, you know, GL's company that takes care of the licensing of GL-owned brands, created a Canon policy, which essentially goes like this( as has been repeated many, many, many times here):
Highest Canon is G-Canon (movies), T-Canon (TCW) and C-Canon (all the rest).
When lowest Canon contradicts highest, lowest is wrong...
All other times, lowest is ok...

So yeah, books are not canon in ST, as per the parent company's decision, but books in SW are (as long as the information presented does not contradict higher Canon), as per the licensing company's decision...
UNG wrote:THEY ARE RELENTLESS...
They aren't the only ones... :)

Post Reply