Message to StarWarsStarTrek

For technical issues, problems, bugs, suggestions on improving these forums, discussion of the rules, etc.
User avatar
mojo
Starship Captain
Posts: 1159
Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2007 11:47 am

Re: Message to StarWarsStarTrek

Post by mojo » Sun Jan 09, 2011 4:51 am

yeah, that was me. not airlocke. it was me following you around and harassing you for never ever admitting that any argument you can't rebut (which is just about all of them) exists.

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

Re: Message to StarWarsStarTrek

Post by Mr. Oragahn » Mon Jan 10, 2011 3:58 pm

WILGA wrote: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?
Because there is good in him. I can feel it.

There are some good points he makes. He just needs to let go those which have been debunked. It's a small community here, so it's relatively easy to remember such things.

Praeothmin
Jedi Master
Posts: 3888
Joined: Mon Oct 23, 2006 10:24 pm
Location: Quebec City

Re: Message to StarWarsStarTrek

Post by Praeothmin » Mon Jan 10, 2011 5:44 pm

StarWarsStarTrek wrote: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.
If you want to use real world examples, and common sense, as you mention, then you would realize that all around the world, no matter the country, capital cities usually have millions of inhabitants, the exception being small countries like Monaco and Licheinstein, and when discussing small towns, while US small towns will be bigger then Nigeria's, they will still not be big by Canada's standards, or Mexico's standards (even though Mexico is much less develloped then both the US and Canada).
China and India were both considered 3rd world countries a few years back, yet boasted the highest populations on this planet even then, so no, a 3rd world country will not necessarilly have minuscule small towns and minuscule capitals...

And no matter where you are around the world, if you mention a small town to anyone, even a chinese who knows of Shangai and its 20 or so million people, no one will think of Chengdu as a small town (450 000 people)...

And on a planet-wide city, where there are no towns, there can thus be no small towns, and you need to consider the entire SW universe to find your small towns, which includes all the locations that were previously mentioned by many, including Tattoine, Naboo, Geonosis, etc...

Praeothmin
Jedi Master
Posts: 3888
Joined: Mon Oct 23, 2006 10:24 pm
Location: Quebec City

Re: Message to StarWarsStarTrek

Post by Praeothmin » Mon Jan 10, 2011 5:49 pm

2046 wrote: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.
Well, had you been here from the start, you might have noticed that people started dogpiling after a couple of his posts where he failed to provide evidence avery single time he was asked to.
The people who debat ehim and who actually get replies from him even reposted much of the evidence brought forth by others, with SWST still ignoring it and not replying with any evidence, so no, I do not believe the number of posters has anything to do with it...

Praeothmin
Jedi Master
Posts: 3888
Joined: Mon Oct 23, 2006 10:24 pm
Location: Quebec City

Re: Message to StarWarsStarTrek

Post by Praeothmin » Mon Jan 10, 2011 5:52 pm

Mr. Oragahn wrote: There are some good points he makes. He just needs to let go those which have been debunked. It's a small community here, so it's relatively easy to remember such things.
Yes, there are, but I fear we have a different version of KSW, where admission of "defeat", or conceeding, cannot be envisioned by him, no matter if his arguments have been shot to hell or not...

User avatar
Trinoya
Security Officer
Posts: 651
Joined: Sat Aug 19, 2006 6:35 am

Re: Message to StarWarsStarTrek

Post by Trinoya » Mon Jan 10, 2011 7:29 pm

Such is the tragic reality of the internet.

Hippies and your sci-fi and world webs... <_<

Jedi Master Spock
Site Admin
Posts: 2161
Joined: Mon Aug 14, 2006 8:26 pm
Contact:

Re: Message to StarWarsStarTrek

Post by Jedi Master Spock » Mon Jan 10, 2011 8:44 pm

Praeothmin wrote:
Mr. Oragahn wrote: There are some good points he makes. He just needs to let go those which have been debunked. It's a small community here, so it's relatively easy to remember such things.
Yes, there are, but I fear we have a different version of KSW, where admission of "defeat", or conceeding, cannot be envisioned by him, no matter if his arguments have been shot to hell or not...
I can state unequivocally that I am possession of evidence that SWST can and does concede at least some points he believes to be wrong. We've been having a little debate via e-mail.

Stubborn, SWST is; but so are most of us.

User avatar
Mith
Starship Captain
Posts: 759
Joined: Wed Jun 04, 2008 1:17 am

Re: Message to StarWarsStarTrek

Post by Mith » Tue Jan 11, 2011 3:33 pm

And though it makes my stomach twist itself around in disgust, I would also like to point out that he does have an account on SB.com and also answers lengthy replies there (a few to me). And he has at least, taken up most of my points (even if he can't for the life of him get them right). So I would agree with 2046 that some, some of it might be from the workload and desperation. It is entirely possible that he was so desperate and is so inexperienced at this that he might not have known the thing was fan made.

We might also want to take his age into account. For all we know, this kid could be 15-18 and has yet to learn the finer points of debating. Nor is he another ricrery1, who wouldn't have the balls to even step over here, let alone try and engage us in anything that resembles an honest debate.

I'd think it be best if someone sat him down and gave him a crash course through debating...but I don't paticularly care to do it.

He does however, need to learn to follow the rules. They are binding and while mistakes are understood, accepting them in one thread and then turning around to do it in another thread is just not acceptable. Even a teen knows better than to do that.

EDIT: SWST does know that admitting a concession in a single debate doesn't mean that he can't bring the subject up later if he feels that new evidence has come to light, right? Admitting a concession because you've failed to either prepare an adequate debate or evidence doesn't mean you're wrong on your stance. It just means that you can't win it in a debate.

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

Re: Message to StarWarsStarTrek

Post by Mike DiCenso » Tue Jan 11, 2011 5:29 pm

Look, while it is possible that SWST is young and inexperianced with debate matters, he/she brought this on themself simply because instead of backing off, thinking the matter clearly, they continued to argue, and even created several new threads when SWST could even handle debating in the already existing threads.

So the ultimate responsibility for what is going on rests with SWST, not anyone else. And yes, Mith, you are correct, there is no shame in conceeding a point that you cannot argue with because you did not at the time have any evidence, but which you later can revisit with new evidence. We have given him/her that option on several occasions, but so far SWST has not taken them up, so my sympathy level for him/her is not that high right now.

Another issue is the honesty one. Using a low-canon source to try and push through an agenda when the higher level source is saying something different is dishonesty, whether SWST realizes this or not. The hypermatter issue is the most prominent one, where SWST is trying to use circular logic to attempt to validate the Saxton-authored ICS books, claiming, for example, that the ICS is validated in the Death Star novel when it is not, and even contradicted within said novel as well as other, higher-canon sources, such as the ANH novelization. So he/she is not even paying any attention to the canon hierarchy, just kind of treating it all as the same.

Also, while it is possible that SWST made a genuine mistake on the Dominion War fan made video, it was all too apparent that it was fan-made, and you could read in the commentary numerous subscribers discussiing the cut footage from all the non-Star Trek movies and TV shows. In other words he/she did not fact check, and when it was brought up in the thread, hastily tried to defend it as genuine. While you could say that was an honest mistake in and of itself, it would become apparent that over time SWST was simply ignoring people's assertions, links to sources and so on that proved the video was fan made. In addtion to that, prior to the posting of the fan video, he/she also posted an obvious photoshopped image, and claimed it was geninue image from an episode, and again ignored people pointing that out and their evidence. So that's two times now.

So at what point do you stop cutting slack, call BS, and start to apply discipline?
-Mike

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

Re: Message to StarWarsStarTrek

Post by Mike DiCenso » Tue Jan 11, 2011 5:34 pm

Jedi Master Spock wrote:
Praeothmin wrote:
Mr. Oragahn wrote: There are some good points he makes. He just needs to let go those which have been debunked. It's a small community here, so it's relatively easy to remember such things.
Yes, there are, but I fear we have a different version of KSW, where admission of "defeat", or conceeding, cannot be envisioned by him, no matter if his arguments have been shot to hell or not...
I can state unequivocally that I am possession of evidence that SWST can and does concede at least some points he believes to be wrong. We've been having a little debate via e-mail.

Stubborn, SWST is; but so are most of us.
I've had a few private email converstations with Wayne Poe, Mike Wong and others that were nice and reasonable way back in the early days of the debate. But the behavior of someone in email and their behavior in public are two different things. We're not judging SWST on how nice and reasoned they are in private, but how he/she has chosen to present themselves in this forum.
-Mike

User avatar
Mith
Starship Captain
Posts: 759
Joined: Wed Jun 04, 2008 1:17 am

Re: Message to StarWarsStarTrek

Post by Mith » Tue Jan 11, 2011 5:57 pm

Mike DiCenso wrote:Look, while it is possible that SWST is young and inexperianced with debate matters, he/she brought this on themself simply because instead of backing off, thinking the matter clearly, they continued to argue, and even created several new threads when SWST could even handle debating in the already existing threads.
I don't really wish to make excuses for him, I'm simply pointing out that it isn't simple trolling. He has made multiple infractions against the board and has refused many times to even consider them or he tries to handwave it away with some excuse. That isn't acceptable and should be met out.

I would also like to point out that more than one of us have let our ego's slip into the debate a few times, so there is that to consider as well. Again, not an excuse, given the history he has of doing it.
So the ultimate responsibility for what is going on rests with SWST, not anyone else.


No doubt about it. But to quote Picard, we must measure our responses appropriately.

And by we, I mean the staff with actual authority. Half of us in this thread really don't have a say in the matter either way. :p
And yes, Mith, you are correct, there is no shame in conceeding a point that you cannot argue with because you did not at the time have any evidence, but which you later can revisit with new evidence. We have given him/her that option on several occasions, but so far SWST has not taken them up, so my sympathy level for him/her is not that high right now.
I agree and I haven't even seen half of the threads he's responded to. Perhaps we should look at what sort of punishment should be met out and see what a reasonable response is to the infraction, instead of if he is deserving. I don't think that's too much in doubt.
Another issue is the honesty one. Using a low-canon source to try and push through an agenda when the higher level source is saying something different is dishonesty, whether SWST realizes this or not. The hypermatter issue is the most prominent one, where SWST is trying to use circular logic to attempt to validate the Saxton-authored ICS books, claiming, for example, that the ICS is validated in the Death Star novel when it is not, and even contradicted within said novel as well as other, higher-canon sources, such as the ANH novelization. So he/she is not even paying any attention to the canon hierarchy, just kind of treating it all as the same.
I don't really recall those threads too much, but the Death Star incident sounds more like a case of immense stupidity than anything else. Then again, I suppose one is desperate enough...

I'll take your word on it though. At some point he must have realized the problem with his claims.
Also, while it is possible that SWST made a genuine mistake on the Dominion War fan made video, it was all too apparent that it was fan-made, and you could read in the commentary numerous subscribers discussiing the cut footage from all the non-Star Trek movies and TV shows. In other words he/she did not fact check, and when it was brought up in the thread, hastily tried to defend it as genuine. While you could say that was an honest mistake in and of itself, it would become apparent that over time SWST was simply ignoring people's assertions, links to sources and so on that proved the video was fan made. In addtion to that, prior to the posting of the fan video, he/she also posted an obvious photoshopped image, and claimed it was geninue image from an episode, and again ignored people pointing that out and their evidence. So that's two times now.


That is problematic, though I find the image more so. What was the image and the source? Or is it something that you believe that he actually photoshopped himself? If it's the later, then that is clearly worth a nice ban. I don't think I've really ever encountered someone who provided something as blagarently false data as that.
So at what point do you stop cutting slack, call BS, and start to apply discipline?
-Mike
I wouldn't know, that's not my job.:P

But if it were, then I'll be honest and say that he does deserve a ban and I'd probably have handed out a ban long before now. He's constantly ignored our rules (which he is required to read before joining and is held to their standard, even if he didn't), he's constantly ignored basic debating standards, he's provided false data and when this was pointed out to him he continued to ignore it, and he's constantly referred to anyone who disagrees with him as 'anti-star wars wanking' or 'trek wankers' or some other demeaning term that doesn't help facilitate, but rather stifle it. He's been giving multiple chances, multiple warnings, and every time he tries to downplay his offenses and then tries to act like he's the one who we should be apologizing to.

And then he does it again and again because we're too wary of becoming like the people we critic in regards to holding polorazing stances that they disagree with (SB.com and SD.net). In this case, he's abused our generosity.

Admiral Breetai
Starship Captain
Posts: 1777
Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 8:28 pm

Re: Message to StarWarsStarTrek

Post by Admiral Breetai » Tue Jan 11, 2011 8:05 pm

my issue SWST is your complete and total inability to respond to a persons argument when they've either torpedoed yours or called you out

you didn't just post an obviously fanedited video as evidence..you did it and I called you on it as did another poster proth maybe? and you refused to touch on the issue beyond making a poor attempt to justify it...and when that failed? you just hauled ass and refused to even cop to it...

you don't actually answer peoples questions..and it honestly comes off like you lied, and what ever that may not be a major offense..here but online your credibility is all you got so when you do what you did..it comes off like your trolling like others have said maybe your just overworked..but you know what? thats on you brother..your gonna toss your hand in the gauntlet..and you have to meet every challenged presented to you..to the best of your abilities...take the bumps..or learn how to bow out

you can't keep doing what your doing man..this forums lenient and the community is full of seemingly nice guys..your very lucky...this happened here and not for example on Rumbles where you likely would of been banned after being chewed out by all the members

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

Re: Message to StarWarsStarTrek

Post by StarWarsStarTrek » Tue Jan 11, 2011 8:55 pm

You guys are sniping. You refer to me in 3rd person as if I'm not there, and refuse to provide any evidence to support your claims.

This is the same Mith that claimed that Star Wars turbolasers were 1 kiloton per barrel. These are the same posters that used the number of bolts in the air to determine the size of explosions that have already happened, and that have also made other numerous mistakes and errors, some of which are outright lies and blatant dishonesty.

If any of you actually have some constructive criticism, talk to me in 2nd person and provide evidence to support your claims. Otherwise, you're just ranting without any evidence. At all.

Mith, I dare you to provide one instance in this forum where I accused anyone of anti Star Wars wanking. I will then gladly provide evidence of you without provocation calling me and others idiots, retards, etc. Hypocrisy really annoys me.

Others, more blatant lying. I apologized for the fan made video incident, which was accidental. I outright apologized. So don't lie please, because that's not right.

Admiral Breetai
Starship Captain
Posts: 1777
Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 8:28 pm

Re: Message to StarWarsStarTrek

Post by Admiral Breetai » Wed Jan 12, 2011 12:11 am

StarWarsStarTrek wrote:You guys are sniping. You refer to me in 3rd person as if I'm not there, and refuse to provide any evidence to support your claims.]
because my friend none of us know if your actually going to bother to show up or not...and as for evidence..dude your entire post count is one gigantic proof..in our favor
StarWarsStarTrek wrote:This is the same Mith that claimed that Star Wars turbolasers were 1 kiloton per barrel. These are the same posters that used the number of bolts in the air to determine the size of explosions that have already happened, and that have also made other numerous mistakes and errors, some of which are outright lies and blatant dishonesty.
the problem with that is...again you aren't capable of seeing when your in over your head..and rarely provide proof that isn't parroted from SD.net a biased third party fan site

If any of you actually have some constructive criticism, talk to me in 2nd person and provide evidence to support your claims. Otherwise, you're just ranting without any evidence. At all.
StarWarsStarTrek wrote: Mith, I dare you to provide one instance in this forum where I accused anyone of anti Star Wars wanking. I will then gladly provide evidence of you without provocation calling me and others idiots, retards, etc. Hypocrisy really annoys me.
lol oh lord..dude you literally resort to arrogant "durr hurr got your evidence from dorkstar" style posting...and accusing people of parroting his stuff the moment..they push you a little too hard..so don't do this...your gonna come off looking allot less clean then mith m'kay?
StarWarsStarTrek wrote: Others, more blatant lying. I apologized for the fan made video incident, which was accidental. I outright apologized. So don't lie please, because that's not right.
uhh no..you never addressed the issue I called you out on it every other post,....you never friggen addressed the issue with me

Admiral Breetai
Starship Captain
Posts: 1777
Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 8:28 pm

Re: Message to StarWarsStarTrek

Post by Admiral Breetai » Wed Jan 12, 2011 12:33 am

oh..for the love of all things holly...

ya...posted a duel at dawn thread? are you serious?

Post Reply