Starfleet Jedi

Khas wrote:If by "bully members", you mean "tell a trouble-maker to quit insulting the rest of the board, start using evidence, and stop ignoring evidence he doesn't like", then yes, Mike D and Praeothmin are bullies.

>FLUSH<

If that's the way you feel, you can leave at any time KSW, no one will stop you...

KSW wrote:demands for spoonfeeding and convincing the ignorant

According to you, and only you.
Others call it "debating", and "offering arguments and proof"... :)

Get a load of this then:
http://www.starfleetjedi.net/forum/view ... 6&start=45

Third post on Page 4. It only goes downhill from there.

SpaceWizard wrote:To qualify: I'm referring strictly to the vs. debate, wherein pro-warsies will claim that the EU is canon, solely so that they can use all that in order to exagggerate the numbers even more than they already do.

It's just the "Bazillion Kontillion" cliche, over and over again.

You know, the EU also has enough material to tone down the wank. It's just that they cherry pick from any source;
Of course, at times, the EU does snap. The worst of all probably be the grand Ewank.
At some point I even wondered if I shouldn't make a versus thread about the Ewoks at full going on a crusade across the stars with giant space wood logs animated by magic and landing on cities by crushing them and letting the logs grow roots and establish new colonies that way.

Praeothmin wrote:If that's the way you feel, you can leave at any time KSW, no one will stop you...

KSW wrote:demands for spoonfeeding and convincing the ignorant

According to you, and only you.

No, according to the proper rules of logic and order.

Others call it "debating", and "offering arguments and proof"... :)

ONLY intellectually dishonest. pseudo-intellectual morons who want to make up their own rules-- but I'm not obligated to submit to them: i know a brick wall when I see one, there's plenty on SDN. They can "call" a frog a Prince, but that don't make him rule a country OR sing.

And coming from one who defends Mike Wrong's arguments for EU completism, despite their twisted nature, your credibility ireally sn't that good.

And coming from one who defends Mike Wrong's arguments for EU completism, despite their twisted nature, your credibility ireally sn't that good.

You should be the last one to be talking about credibility.

On a pure side note: Turns out if you want people to listen to you in the debate (credibility) it's often important to present oneself as a reasonable individual willing to listen to both sides.

Near as I can tell, that's all he did, and it's something you should try.