Starfleet Jedi

JMSpock, if you're going to reply to something posted on another site, you might as well just do it over there.

It doesn't stop those that are members here from taking what we say here and going somewhere else to talk about it. Since they wish to go offboard to discuss it, does it really matter in the end?

The people I'm quoting aren't really my main target audience in speaking, and those two will probably read this here anyway. Especially given that they're largely reacting to what they see here.

By the way, I meant to also open the topic of integrative complexity. Opinions?

Opecoiler wrote:JMSpock, if you're going to reply to something posted on another site, you might as well just do it over there.

You mean like they do here:
http://bbs.stardestroyer.net/viewtopic. ... start=1625

You see, a lot of the people there replied to things that were said here, but they replied over at that website.
So why should JMS do it differently?

Praeothmin wrote: So why should JMS do it differently?

Maybe because he wants his site to actually be noticed rather than relying on the bored sd.net denizens that register here to stir up crap, along with the one random walk-in from the internet every week or so.

Maybe because he feels the desire to air his views in full rather than letting us cherry pick the most stunning examples of perceived silliness and inconsistency.

Maybe because Sd.net is still better known, better populated, and more active if he actually wants his voice to be heard.

Maybe because he'd like to score points among the manner>all set when he inevitably gets cursed out repeatedly.

Maybe he'd like to be perceived as having more intestinal fortitude than the countless mee-tooers over there who don't bother to register here(kudos on how easy and quick it was when I finally got off my lazy butt by the way).

Of course, considering he already does so at ST.com against the B-list Sd.net debaters, it's a somewhat moot point regardless.

consequences wrote:Maybe because he wants his site to actually be noticed rather than relying on the bored sd.net denizens that register here to stir up crap, along with the one random walk-in from the internet every week or so.

Well, I don't feel like they're stirring much "crap" up as you say, some have good points and convey them clearly (Cpl Rendall comes to mind).

I can't speak for JMS, but from what I gathered by reading his posts, his replies and his sentiments on many matters, I'm sure likes being insulted for no reason at all just as much as me.

And from all the posts I've read at SDN, I really don't think that JMS posting over there would get him anything but insults, derogatory commentaries and disrecpect from most (if not all) the members.
When have you seen anyone at SDN be polite with Pro-Trek debaters that have the exact opposite view in this debate?
The only "Trekkies" that received what could be perceived as "respect" by anyone seem to be the ones who invariably agreed that SW beats the crap out of ST in every aspect.

Of course, I haven't read all the threads posted on the SW vs ST subject, so I could be wrong, but I won't keep my hopes up...

I hope you don't that this the wrong way, I am simply commenting on what I've witnessed.

Of course, considering he already does so at ST.com against the B-list Sd.net debaters, it's a somewhat moot point regardless.

I'm sure they'd be ecstatic knowing you consider them the B-List of SDN debaters... :)

Praeothmin wrote:

consequences wrote:Maybe because he wants his site to actually be noticed rather than relying on the bored sd.net denizens that register here to stir up crap, along with the one random walk-in from the internet every week or so.

Well, I don't feel like they're stirring much "crap" up as you say, some have good points and convey them clearly (Cpl Rendall comes to mind).

I'm not particularly optimistic in regards to human nature. I know I came over because there was a specific point that I felt needed to be addressed, but the temptation to post seventy-three obnoxious curbstomp threads is still there.

I can't speak for JMS, but from what I gathered by reading his posts, his replies and his sentiments on many matters, I'm sure likes being insulted for no reason at all just as much as me.

And from all the posts I've read at SDN, I really don't think that JMS posting over there would get him anything but insults, derogatory commentaries and disrecpect from most (if not all) the members.
When have you seen anyone at SDN be polite with Pro-Trek debaters that have the exact opposite view in this debate?

See possibility four.

The only "Trekkies" that received what could be perceived as "respect" by anyone seem to be the ones who invariably agreed that SW beats the crap out of ST in every aspect.

That would be because the majority of pro-trek debaters that arrive over there come across as immature, uneducated, uninformed, downright divorced from reality, and/or unable or unwilling to check to see what's been brought up previously before posting. Retreading the same ground repeatedly gets old, and wears away at what patience some people have for those they consider to be fools.

Of course, I haven't read all the threads posted on the SW vs ST subject, so I could be wrong, but I won't keep my hopes up...

No you'd be basically correct, because after five and a half years, the basic perception is that only an utter fool wouldn't accept what is considered to be blindingly obvious over there. As such, unless your argument is impeccable in every respect, it's going to get torn to shreds, and you will be belittled.

I hope you don't that this the wrong way, I am simply commenting on what I've witnessed.

It's a not unreasonable assessment, I just don't see it as automatically being a bad thing.

Of course, considering he already does so at ST.com against the B-list Sd.net debaters, it's a somewhat moot point regardless.

I'm sure they'd be ecstatic knowing you consider them the B-List of SDN debaters... :)[/quote]

I consider myself a C-list debater at best, and I've been asked for advice a couple of times. They can cope.

consequences wrote:See possibility four.

So, you suggest that he should become a masochist, if he isn't already one.

and/or unable or unwilling to check to see what's been brought up previously before posting. Retreading the same ground repeatedly gets old, and wears away at what patience some people have for those they consider to be fools.

Give me a fucking break. How late after Cpl Kendall said he fucked up in making the accusation of ignoring the inverse square law for phasers in the Stafleet v US military thread were people still saying those of us here said we were ignoring it? 'Ignoring the inverse square law' was never the issue.

Kendall= "Your right, I cocked that up."

http://www.starfleetjedi.net/forum/view ... ight=#8990

How many times have people from SDN said 'it's your position, you should be very easily explain it to me here; I don't want to read the thread', despite the fact that they whine and bitch and moan about the thread even being 8 or just 5 pages long?

I have yet to see that stop.

As such, unless your argument is impeccable in every respect, it's going to get torn to shreds, and you will be belittled.

'If you don't believe in what we say, we will brand you with the scarlet letter.'

This is some of that same 'small town folk' reasoning that Wong complains about on his site. Besides, it doesn't matter if your argument is impeccable or not. I don't see them giving a damn.

So, if they aren't willing to put in the effort, why should JMS give a fuck about signing up at SDN?

consequences wrote:Retreading the same ground repeatedly gets old, and wears away at what patience some people have for those they consider to be fools.

Perhaps, but sometimes that same old ground might be new for others, or it might be that people don't agree with the way "that old ground" was threated over, and always being insulted by people unwilling to re-examine what was said or shown, even in light of new evidence, or better arguments, is IMO not an appealing reason to go over to another board with such habits.

That would be because the majority of pro-trek debaters that arrive over there come across as immature, uneducated, uninformed, downright divorced from reality

I have to agree I've seen a few of them too... :)
Just as there are the same kind of debaters for the Wars side over there too.
The problem being when a majority of such type of people usually gang up on the Pro-Trek debaters with nothing but insults, even when they have no clue on how to respond intelligently to the posts of the Pro-Trek debaters (I've read through a few HOS threads, and have witnessed it).

As such, unless your argument is impeccable in every respect, it's going to get torn to shreds, and you will be belittled.

The problem is, what can be considered "impeccable" when the point in contention isn't the calculations that were made, but how a piece of visual information is perceived (for example, Alderaan's destruction at the hands of the DS, Greedo's death, etc...).
You see the difficulty in building such an argument... :)

It's a not unreasonable assessment, I just don't see it as automatically being a bad thing.

OK...



And, GStone, consequences was not being aggressive in his posts, IMO, but yours do come off as such.

Give me a fucking break... despite the fact that they whine and bitch and moan... why should JMS give a fuck about signing up...

I think it would be more in line with this site's way of thinking if you could try to be more civil.
Just asking... :)

*Edit: I meant "not being aggressive"... sorry*

You know, you could just have the whole board go over to SDN and debate en masse.

Let me tell you something: It isn't pointless to go over to SDN and debate. A lot of unregistered "Lurkers" browse it, probably going over from the main site. If you all came over at once and made a good, polite, logical argument, you might be able to win them over.

Going over in a large group will mean that you have the following advantages in a debate:

Safety in numbers. Besides the fact that an view is often more convincing when it's shared by many people, you don't feel as much pressure when you have plenty of others on your side.

More targets to deal with for the SDN crowd. Their strategy of ganging up on a single pro-Trek debater wandering in won't be as effective if there are many pro-Trek debaters.

Why not give it a shot?

What you're advocating there, Opecoiler, sounds an awful like a "nice" board invasion there. One of the very tactics that some of us depise greatly.
-Mike

Opecoiler wrote:You know, you could just have the whole board go over to SDN and debate en masse.

Let me tell you something: It isn't pointless to go over to SDN and debate. A lot of unregistered "Lurkers" browse it, probably going over from the main site. If you all came over at once and made a good, polite, logical argument, you might be able to win them over.

Going over in a large group will mean that you have the following advantages in a debate:

Safety in numbers. Besides the fact that an view is often more convincing when it's shared by many people, you don't feel as much pressure when you have plenty of others on your side.

More targets to deal with for the SDN crowd. Their strategy of ganging up on a single pro-Trek debater wandering in won't be as effective if there are many pro-Trek debaters.

Why not give it a shot?

Safety in numbers? What's that? A gang?
You need more faces to make a given set of arguments solid?
See, that's probably the difference. You as kfor some activity, for trouble, and know above all that numbers = the same point repeated on and on, eventually changing a bit from one person to another.
This is absurd.
Are you feeling lonely here? Do you think you need numbers?

Split into a new thread as the topic is definitely different.

Do stay polite here.

Opecoiler wrote:You know, you could just have the whole board go over to SDN and debate en masse.

Let me tell you something: It isn't pointless to go over to SDN and debate. A lot of unregistered "Lurkers" browse it, probably going over from the main site. If you all came over at once and made a good, polite, logical argument, you might be able to win them over.

Going over in a large group will mean that you have the following advantages in a debate:

Safety in numbers. Besides the fact that an view is often more convincing when it's shared by many people, you don't feel as much pressure when you have plenty of others on your side.

More targets to deal with for the SDN crowd. Their strategy of ganging up on a single pro-Trek debater wandering in won't be as effective if there are many pro-Trek debaters.

Why not give it a shot?

Counter ad populum with ad populum, in other words?

I'm not particularly interested in answering fallacy with fallacy, but even if I were inclined to, and others here inclined to with me, that would be unlikely to work when one side has the power to exclude people from the dialogue and remove dialogue from public view.

By the bye, would anyone care to count the number of times I have quoted or referred to a post on SDN and contrast with the number of times I have been quoted or referred to on SDN? That might put the matter into perspective.

GStone wrote:

consequences wrote:See possibility four.

So, you suggest that he should become a masochist, if he isn't already one.

What, seeing expletives on a computer screen causes physical pain? Does this make me a masochist for reading your posts as of now?

I'm suggesting that if he considers the moral high ground of being perceived to be more polite and reasonable to be important, he can go out there and stick to his guns. Undoubtedly seeing the big meanie warsie thugs get verbally abusive will earn him points among those who actually care about such distinctions.

and/or unable or unwilling to check to see what's been brought up previously before posting. Retreading the same ground repeatedly gets old, and wears away at what patience some people have for those they consider to be fools.

Give me a fucking break. How late after Cpl Kendall said he fucked up in making the accusation of ignoring the inverse square law for phasers in the Stafleet v US military thread were people still saying those of us here said we were ignoring it? 'Ignoring the inverse square law' was never the issue.

Kendall= "Your right, I cocked that up."

http://www.starfleetjedi.net/forum/view ... ight=#8990

How many times have people from SDN said 'it's your position, you should be very easily explain it to me here; I don't want to read the thread', despite the fact that they whine and bitch and moan about the thread even being 8 or just 5 pages long?

I have yet to see that stop.

Quite frankly, the SD.net population as a whole doesn't care about you, your board, or STvs.SW in general at this point. Hence the need to actually go over there if you don't want to be cherry-picked, and then have the debate on that point ignored forever more after that moment.

And I'm sorry, but do you really want to revisit the egregious examples of tactical thoughtlessness that you were espousing in that thread in a manner that would shame a cherry butter-bar? We can start with the Jem'Hadar reading the defenders' minds, so as to be prepared to charge forward and form a flawless phalynx formed of the bodies of their own first wave, slinging their rifles and reaching them instantly so as not to be wiped out in turn if you'd like.

As such, unless your argument is impeccable in every respect, it's going to get torn to shreds, and you will be belittled.

'If you don't believe in what we say, we will brand you with the scarlet letter.'

Ah, yes, the inevitable groupthink accusation. Let's see how many purposeless me-too posts it gets this time.

This is some of that same 'small town folk' reasoning that Wong complains about on his site. Besides, it doesn't matter if your argument is impeccable or not. I don't see them giving a damn.

And I don't see any arguments that achieve adequacy, much less flawlessness, what's your point?

So, if they aren't willing to put in the effort, why should JMS give a fuck about signing up at SDN?

Heck, as far as I can tell just from the names I recognize, 19% of the population here is Sd.netters in reasonably good standing, accounting for 12% of the total posts on this board. Of course, to put the absolute number in perspective, it represents a smidgen more than half a percent of the current Sd.net population, and even accounting for the relative longevity of the boards, barely a fifth of a percent of the activity there. Or to put it plainly, he can go there, or be effectively ignored apart from irregular moments where he will be noticed somewhere and made fun of for a time.

So if he actually wants to get his views out, un-editted, un-altered, and un-cherry-picked he has to leave the confines of this board. Since he already receives the same type of abuse at other forums where he makes his case, he might as well go straight to the source. If nothing else, he'll pick up points for perceived courage, and probably some small amount of support from the general underdog image that will be projected after the inevitable dogpile.



In any case, I highly recommend coping. You've had more than five years since ICS to convince the internet of the shining undeniable truth of your position. How's that worked out for you again?