Message to StarWarsStarTrek

For technical issues, problems, bugs, suggestions on improving these forums, discussion of the rules, etc.
Praeothmin
Jedi Master
Posts: 3888
Joined: Mon Oct 23, 2006 10:24 pm
Location: Quebec City

Message to StarWarsStarTrek

Post by Praeothmin » Fri Jan 07, 2011 3:36 pm

Why do I put this here?
Because this concerns something we've noticed in all threads concerning him, and because I did not want the message to be lost amid a lot of posts and threads.

SWST, as you are a new member here, and as you have probably not read the rules (as most new members), you probably ignore this rule here:
• Act in good faith. Trolling, dishonesty, and other forms of insincere behavior may be penalized at our discretion.
It is trolling, and dishonest, when debating someone, you ignore the evidence presented to you, and come back with a point that was countered with said evidence, while ignoring the evidence.
This, you do repeatedly do, and when asked to provide evidence for your claims, you change the subject, or come up with this:
You seriously are trolling if you actually need evidence
This is bad debating.
When you want to convey a point across, and have people take you seriously, you need evidence, or else your post is simply a baseless opinion…

As this behavior has been noticed in basically all your threads, I will now request that you stop this behavior, and start either providing evidence for your claims, such as actual numbers and calculations and where they come from, or even simply episode names would help.
If you fail to do this, the next warning will not be public, it will be private, and will be tallied.

Everyone else:
Please stop the "concession accepted" dance when no concession was given.
It is accepted to ask if the absence of response is a concession though...
And lastly, it is acceptable for you all to do what WILGA did, that is ignore SWST when he ignores your evidence and doesn't provide any even though you keep requesting some...

I leave this thread unlocked so that people may discuss/criticize the decision.
Thank you.

StarWarsStarTrek
Starship Captain
Posts: 881
Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 8:28 pm

Re: Message to StarWarsStarTrek

Post by StarWarsStarTrek » Fri Jan 07, 2011 9:04 pm

Ok, agreed. However, FYI please refrain from taking my posts out of context. For your quote of me accusing someone of trolling, you intentionally cut out my sentence and added in only the first few words to make it look worse than it actually is.

Of course some things need evidence, but there are some axioms that are a given. For example, would it be fair to ask for evidence that I am really reading this and not dreaming? Or that you aren't using some mind control device on me? Or that you guys are all aligned in a conspiracy against me?

Similarly, albeit less extremely, it's quite common sense that a first world planet/nation would have larger habitants than third world planets/nations. To actually argue against this is being stupid, either intentionally or unintentionally. Presumably the former is true. For example, there are rules. What if I argue that there is no rule to say follow the rules? And no rules to say follow the rule that says follow the rule? Some things are just so plain obvious that arguing against them is like a way of being intentionally dense.

That being said, I do need to calm down a bit. As unimportant as such a fantasy debate is, things can be frustrating when people do things (such as using the number of bolts that haven't exploded yet in the air as a measuring stick for the explosions that have already been caused; such stupid is so bad it can make my brain), but it's still good to take the moral high ground, right?

sonofccn
Starship Captain
Posts: 1640
Joined: Mon Aug 28, 2006 4:23 pm
Location: Sol system, Earth,USA

Re: Message to StarWarsStarTrek

Post by sonofccn » Sat Jan 08, 2011 12:21 am

StarwarsStarTrek is trolling once again.here he's repeating the fanmade clip once again after we have explained to him quite plainly its a fanmade clip and composed heavily of clips taken from other movies. I would recomend he should be banned for this behavior, he's adding nothing constructive to the enviroment.

Kor_Dahar_Master
Starship Captain
Posts: 1246
Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 8:28 pm

Re: Message to StarWarsStarTrek

Post by Kor_Dahar_Master » Sat Jan 08, 2011 12:52 am

Any chance of getting him to check his material as well, the latest shite is a link to youtube where some fanboi or other has made a movie from some trek material along with material from other sci-fi series along and disaster movies.

Most of the explosions he is using as examples are not from trek and never were.

Mike DiCenso
Security Officer
Posts: 5768
Joined: Fri Aug 18, 2006 8:49 pm

Re: Message to StarWarsStarTrek

Post by Mike DiCenso » Sat Jan 08, 2011 6:35 am

I'm well aware of this, though I don't know for certain if Praeothimin is. What it boils down to is that if we were to ban SWST, it would be unlike any other in this forum's history. In the past we've issued warnings and banned those who have slung insults.

Fairly straight forward stuff.

But SWST is trolling in a different kind of way, or at least appears to. No outright insults, and so we have tolerated him/her/it, especially in the begining as he did seem to be interesting and reasonable. But as time has gone by, he has demonstatedly become less rational, and more dishonest. The YouTube incident is the most serious of the lot. It clearly is a fan-edited piece, and people have taken great pains to educate SWST in which movies and TV series the explosions on Earth were taken from (Stargate, Armageddon, Starship Troopers, ect). Thus SWST can no longer claim honest ignorance, and so we have no choice as mods but to add this to his/her/it's growing list of rules violations. So for now a "friendly" unoffical/offical warning. But at this rate I'm afraid offical warnings will soon be in order, and probably a temp ban.
-Mike

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

Re: Message to StarWarsStarTrek

Post by mojo » Sat Jan 08, 2011 6:48 am

i'm not the guy's biggest fan, but i don't think he IS trolling. trolling implies intent, and i think he is simply debating in the way he's been taught. i think banning is a huge overreaction, and i think it would set a terrible precedent. just my 2 cents.

Mike DiCenso
Security Officer
Posts: 5768
Joined: Fri Aug 18, 2006 8:49 pm

Re: Message to StarWarsStarTrek

Post by Mike DiCenso » Sat Jan 08, 2011 6:57 am

Apparently deliberate use of fanmade material as evidence is not intentional trolling? How do you figure that?
-Mike

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

Re: Message to StarWarsStarTrek

Post by Who is like God arbour » Sat Jan 08, 2011 9:12 am

I have already said it and I will say it again: Simply stop to debate with him/her/it at all.

If you think, he/she/it is dishonest - why are you continuing to debate him/her/it?

What do you think you will gain by debating him/her/it?
  • A concession?
  • His/her/its understanding?
  • A clarification for outsiders that his arguments are stupid or that you have not conceded?
  • Amusement?
To me, your continuing of that debate and simultaneously complaining about him/her/it looks immature - like a child that is unable to turn down even the most stupid challenge.

If he /she/it is such a bother and his arguments are so stupid, simply leave him/her/it alone.

It also has something to do with self-worth. Such a troll simply isn't worth my time. I have better things to do than to continue a pointless debate with him/her/it.
        • - Don't feed the troll! -

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

Re: Message to StarWarsStarTrek

Post by mojo » Sat Jan 08, 2011 10:29 am

thank you as always, wilga.

Kor_Dahar_Master
Starship Captain
Posts: 1246
Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 8:28 pm

Re: Message to StarWarsStarTrek

Post by Kor_Dahar_Master » Sat Jan 08, 2011 1:21 pm

Mike DiCenso wrote:I'm well aware of this, though I don't know for certain if Praeothimin is. What it boils down to is that if we were to ban SWST, it would be unlike any other in this forum's history. In the past we've issued warnings and banned those who have slung insults.

Fairly straight forward stuff.

But SWST is trolling in a different kind of way, or at least appears to. No outright insults, and so we have tolerated him/her/it, especially in the begining as he did seem to be interesting and reasonable. But as time has gone by, he has demonstatedly become less rational, and more dishonest. The YouTube incident is the most serious of the lot. It clearly is a fan-edited piece, and people have taken great pains to educate SWST in which movies and TV series the explosions on Earth were taken from (Stargate, Armageddon, Starship Troopers, ect). Thus SWST can no longer claim honest ignorance, and so we have no choice as mods but to add this to his/her/it's growing list of rules violations. So for now a "friendly" unoffical/offical warning. But at this rate I'm afraid offical warnings will soon be in order, and probably a temp ban.
-Mike

I suppose i should be pleased somebody sucks at this more than me but he seems to be doing it deliberately.

User avatar
2046
Starship Captain
Posts: 1891
Joined: Sat Sep 02, 2006 9:14 pm
Contact:

Re: Message to StarWarsStarTrek

Post by 2046 » Sat Jan 08, 2011 4:58 pm

In fairness, he does get multiple replies to his single posts, so there is a bit of a workload issue there. However, he also posts a lot in multiple threads, and I get the sense that he might not be reading all the responses in his haste, which is a problem in its own right.

Or, to put it more succinctly, yeah he's not reading stuff, but pay attention to how much dogpiling might be afoot.

Now the Youtube thing is really crappy, yes. It shows both a very basic ignorance of the subject matter and a lack of reading replies, which aren't really forgivable in context. I mean, I've read all his posts to me in the threads directed at me, but he's gotta read all of it because he's the driving force of the thread. But that makes it even more his responsibility to be careful not to just ignore things before spouting off at the mouth.

But I'd be willing to wager . . . well, no, not really. But let me just postulate that there is a chance that SWST might, if removed from the heat of battle with multiple foes and the peculiar sense we all have that posts should be quickly replied to, do a far better job at discussing things and reading and understanding replies.

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

Re: Message to StarWarsStarTrek

Post by Who is like God arbour » Sat Jan 08, 2011 6:57 pm

2046 wrote:But I'd be willing to wager . . . well, no, not really. But let me just postulate that there is a chance that SWST might, if removed from the heat of battle with multiple foes and the peculiar sense we all have that posts should be quickly replied to, do a far better job at discussing things and reading and understanding replies.
That sounds like a challenge. A fight to the death, mano a mano, man to man, just you and him ... and all the bystanders who are unable to keep out of such a duel!

I agree that this is a good way of testing what is hidden behind StarwarsStarTreks apparent (?) incompetence - and if there is anything at all or if the demonstrated incompetence is unfeigned.

Are you interested?

User avatar
Airlocke_Jedi_Knight
Jedi Knight
Posts: 325
Joined: Sat Nov 15, 2008 4:55 pm
Location: Camby
Contact:

Re: Message to StarWarsStarTrek

Post by Airlocke_Jedi_Knight » Sun Jan 09, 2011 2:55 am

WILGA wrote:
2046 wrote:But I'd be willing to wager . . . well, no, not really. But let me just postulate that there is a chance that SWST might, if removed from the heat of battle with multiple foes and the peculiar sense we all have that posts should be quickly replied to, do a far better job at discussing things and reading and understanding replies.
That sounds like a challenge. A fight to the death, mano a mano, man to man, just you and him ... and all the bystanders who are unable to keep out of such a duel!

I agree that this is a good way of testing what is hidden behind StarwarsStarTreks apparent (?) incompetence - and if there is anything at all or if the demonstrated incompetence is unfeigned.

Are you interested?
I'M INTERESTED.




























Not.

StarWarsStarTrek
Starship Captain
Posts: 881
Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 8:28 pm

Re: Message to StarWarsStarTrek

Post by StarWarsStarTrek » Sun Jan 09, 2011 2:58 am

Airlocke_Jedi_Knight wrote:
WILGA wrote:
2046 wrote:But I'd be willing to wager . . . well, no, not really. But let me just postulate that there is a chance that SWST might, if removed from the heat of battle with multiple foes and the peculiar sense we all have that posts should be quickly replied to, do a far better job at discussing things and reading and understanding replies.
That sounds like a challenge. A fight to the death, mano a mano, man to man, just you and him ... and all the bystanders who are unable to keep out of such a duel!

I agree that this is a good way of testing what is hidden behind StarwarsStarTreks apparent (?) incompetence - and if there is anything at all or if the demonstrated incompetence is unfeigned.

Are you interested?
I'M INTERESTED.




























Not.
I'm tempted to report you for trolling. Do you have some sort of grudge against me? You've followed me around to threads and bashed me for not responding to every last post.

As I stated in another thread, I apologize for misintrepreting what was a fanmade video. However, don't go on lying that you guys tried to tell me multiple times; many of you guys also fell for the fanmade video.

User avatar
Airlocke_Jedi_Knight
Jedi Knight
Posts: 325
Joined: Sat Nov 15, 2008 4:55 pm
Location: Camby
Contact:

Re: Message to StarWarsStarTrek

Post by Airlocke_Jedi_Knight » Sun Jan 09, 2011 3:09 am

Ummmmmmmmmmm........


No?


I don't think I'm who you think I am.........

But, incidentally, the fact that someone may have failed to notice that a video was fan made means nothing. It was still fan made, and thus inadmissible.

Post Reply