SDN and bias: Explain this

Did a related website in the community go down? Come back up? Relocate to a new address? Install pop-up advertisements?

This forum is for discussion of these sorts of issues.
Post Reply
Alyeska
Bridge Officer
Posts: 87
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:00 am

Post by Alyeska » Fri Jan 18, 2008 8:51 pm

Some friendly information for you to consider.

I am no longer a member of SD.net. My last post was 4:46pm Jan 21st 2007. I resigned my moderator position that same evening. My reason has a name. I have personal conflicts with Mike Wong and I felt I could no longer remain a member of SD.net under his current rules and attitude. He treated me with zero respect, he had open contempt for me.

Since I have left, Mike has compared my beliefs in Trek to be of a similar level to Creationism. Other members have condemned my Trekkie status. Ted C has commented that I am not welcome on the Imperial Wiki "The Trekkies can also build their own wiki."

Dislike me all you want, but don't use false information to justify it.

User avatar
l33telboi
Starship Captain
Posts: 910
Joined: Fri Sep 29, 2006 7:15 am
Location: Finland

Post by l33telboi » Fri Jan 18, 2008 9:11 pm

Alyeska wrote:Since I have left, Mike has compared my beliefs in Trek to be of a similar level to Creationism.
Don't take it too hard. He compares everything he doesn't like to creationism and religion in general. I swear, if i see another "This is much like what the creationists argue..." or "Creationist are very much like this..." statements again, my head will explode.
Ted C has commented that I am not welcome on the Imperial Wiki "The Trekkies can also build their own wiki."
This is one of the stranger attitudes I've come across. I mean, at some point someone should start realizing that a wiki written completly by 'warsies' is going to be quite biased. By itself, that's ok I guess, but you should also realize that others will kinda notice it too. A site written completly by one side of the debate? It's not going to convince people it's absolutely correct.

It's right up there with that SD thread that pondered writing down the history of vs. debating and someone asked if they should contact Darkstar to get his side of the story, the answer being 'Why should we? He's a pissant.' or something like that. Things that completly dismiss one side of the debate isn't exactly going to make for a convincing argument.

For what it's worth though, Aly. I'm sorry for whatever happened between you and the other over there. I know we tend to get in rather heated debates at times. But you've grown on me and I've come to quite like you. As such, I promise to feed you beer and wrestle with you if ever our paths should meet.

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

Post by Jedi Master Spock » Fri Jan 18, 2008 10:55 pm

Alyeska wrote:Some friendly information for you to consider.

I am no longer a member of SD.net. My last post was 4:46pm Jan 21st 2007. I resigned my moderator position that same evening. My reason has a name. I have personal conflicts with Mike Wong and I felt I could no longer remain a member of SD.net under his current rules and attitude. He treated me with zero respect, he had open contempt for me.

Since I have left, Mike has compared my beliefs in Trek to be of a similar level to Creationism. Other members have condemned my Trekkie status. Ted C has commented that I am not welcome on the Imperial Wiki "The Trekkies can also build their own wiki."

Dislike me all you want, but don't use false information to justify it.
Did I mention that I don't stalk people and rarely find SDN worth reading? I think those two might help explain my ignorance.

You are, of course, welcome to contribute to the Open Database any information you would have wanted to contribute to ImperialWiki, but seeing as that's currently open to all regardless of affiliation (as is subsequently editing such contributions), I would not take that as anything special in your shoes.

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

Post by Mike DiCenso » Fri Jan 18, 2008 11:59 pm

Mike DiCenso wrote: Well, I suppose we could use "snarling attack dogs" as a colorfully descriptive metaphor instead of "shock troopers".... ;-)
-Mike
Not really any better. "Shock troop" at least is a role, which can be reasonably ascribed [accurately or not] to debaters through the metaphor of debate as war; "snarling attack dogs" is a rather more provocative choice of description.
Okay, okay... Howabout "the Brute Squad"? (Yes, I am just kidding around here!) ;-)
-Mike
Last edited by Mike DiCenso on Sat Jan 19, 2008 12:31 am, edited 1 time in total.

GStone
Starship Captain
Posts: 1016
Joined: Wed Aug 16, 2006 10:16 am
Location: Undercover in Culture space

Post by GStone » Sat Jan 19, 2008 12:02 am

Alyeska wrote:Ted C has commented that I am not welcome on the Imperial Wiki "The Trekkies can also build their own wiki.
Please, don't tell me he hasn't heard of Memory Alpha.

GStone
Starship Captain
Posts: 1016
Joined: Wed Aug 16, 2006 10:16 am
Location: Undercover in Culture space

Post by GStone » Sat Jan 19, 2008 12:08 am

l33telboi wrote:
Alyeska wrote:Since I have left, Mike has compared my beliefs in Trek to be of a similar level to Creationism.
Don't take it too hard. He compares everything he doesn't like to creationism and religion in general. I swear, if i see another "This is much like what the creationists argue..." or "Creationist are very much like this..." statements again, my head will explode.
Lift off in 5...4...3...2...1...ignition.

[l33telboi's head explodes]

10 bucks he says it in his sleep.

watchdog
Jedi Knight
Posts: 342
Joined: Sun Dec 31, 2006 12:26 am
Location: Not at home

Post by watchdog » Mon Jan 28, 2008 1:39 am

Alyeska wrote: Ted C has commented that I am not welcome on the Imperial Wiki "The Trekkies can also build their own wiki."
The imperial wiki? Was Wookiepedia not good enough for them?

watchdog
Jedi Knight
Posts: 342
Joined: Sun Dec 31, 2006 12:26 am
Location: Not at home

Post by watchdog » Mon Jan 28, 2008 2:14 am

OK I looked at their wiki, just another place for them to rant their views and dislikes, kinda sad and a bit pathetic.

Gniops
Padawan
Posts: 44
Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2007 12:14 pm

Post by Gniops » Tue Jan 29, 2008 10:56 am

watchdog wrote:OK I looked at their wiki, just another place for them to rant their views and dislikes, kinda sad and a bit pathetic.
What on earth do you think this place is ?

GStone
Starship Captain
Posts: 1016
Joined: Wed Aug 16, 2006 10:16 am
Location: Undercover in Culture space

Post by GStone » Tue Jan 29, 2008 1:50 pm

Do you see us making threads like 'More Wartardism'? And we are more exacting with what people say. We don't leave stuff out. Also, we don't have a title, like 'Get your fill of sci-fi, science, and mockery of stupid people'. You brought that up with me recently as justification of why people at SDN believed they should ridicule what I said. The SDN wiki is more of the same.

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

Post by Praeothmin » Tue Jan 29, 2008 2:56 pm

Gniops wrote:What on earth do you think this place is ?
The difference being, here they don't make fun of people, they only gripe about the unfairness of certain sites, and the hypocrisy and lies vehiculed by certain people.

But like GStone said, there is no thread about "More Wartardism", and yet there is what could be called Wartardism out there.
A lot of it even.

But I still prefer the "debate the arguments" tactic, which is more profitable and enleightening, IMO...

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

Post by Mr. Oragahn » Tue Jan 29, 2008 5:33 pm

Their wiki is indeed absurd.
I skimmed over what they say about this board, and incidentally me, on the occasion, and it was a funny reading made by a misinformed person who seems to have non genuine but certainly cowardish attacks to make against people, notably me, for *some* reason (maybe because I like to point out their BS and they don't stand it?), but the authors don't really wish to defend their "offending" claims more than that. :p

Really, when a board in lack of syrupous adoration feels it needs a wiki to propagate their hatred and bile, it does nothing to make their place be seen as reasonnable and better. I can understand the point of calling a cat a cat, but they're clearly overdoing it, and it hurts them.
That said, I'd happily talk in private to the author who said this about me:

"An unremarkable idiot inhabiting the StarfleetJedi forums. He insists he isn't a trekkie in spite of his mindless copying many of the idiotic ideas spouted by Darkstar, JMSpock, Mike DiCenso and tjhairball. In all fairness, he does appear to be more of a Stargate wanker rather than a true trektard."

Nevermind if I was opposed to several claims made on this site as well (in threads such as Stargate vs Star Trek and others in the ST/Sw section, on topics such as Pegasus, TDiC and Masks - I even tried to bring a moderate view on the escalation of yields derived from that nonsensical isoton term, and was rather convinced by vivftp's calcs, while acknowledging that there's a lot of room in torpedoes to cram more M/AM - yet, that "meaning of... ISOTON" thread is still requiring some updating imho).
Nevermind that even if I did point to some of Darkstar's material because it actually does make sense, I certainly didn't agree with everything. I even had a debate with 2046/Darkstar/Guardian/Scooter/RSA about some issue on Mos Eisley's size - which just served in the end to point out the inconsistency of locales - and this got so heated that I was accused of being Mange the Swede, a member which I was in severe disagreement with back at Strek. This Mange is a member of Stardestroyer.net btw. Funny eh?
Or... nevermind if I'm called a Stargate nerfer with an agenda, or a Stargate wanker, depending on where I talk, and who doesn't like what I say based on canon. I'm not responsible of the fact that authors decided that, for example, a small missile could approach the level of devastation of a hundredth of the K-T incident level, just because some naqahdria is tossed inside. What can I do? It's in the show, you don't even need to twiddle around big numbers and convoluted argumentations, if there is any to make! :)
For the record, I was the first insisting on the 812 GT yield interpretation, and I still don't see a need to go above this figure, although I recognize it's the absolute low end.

I suppose I just have so many faces, I even don't know them all.

All in all, their heavy use of insults and complete resorting to hatred speeches is just a glaring demonstration of their wish to silence certain opinions, but being powerless to do so, they need to vent, a lot.
Well, let them vent then. Who gives?
I probably gave that wiki way too much attention!
^_^
Last edited by Mr. Oragahn on Tue Jan 29, 2008 7:06 pm, edited 1 time in total.

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

Post by Praeothmin » Tue Jan 29, 2008 5:40 pm

Mr. Oragahn wrote:Nevermind that even if I did point to some of Darkstar's material because it actually does make sense,
Ah, but you see, this is your most glaring mistake.
It is well known that nothing Darkstar/2046 wrote makes sense, 'cause, you know, they said so... :)

But I always knew you were a wanker, I just never knew about what.
Pfft, Stargate... Couldn't you have picked a better show? ;)

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

Post by Mr. Oragahn » Tue Jan 29, 2008 7:04 pm

Praeothmin wrote:
Mr. Oragahn wrote:Nevermind that even if I did point to some of Darkstar's material because it actually does make sense,
Ah, but you see, this is your most glaring mistake.
It is well known that nothing Darkstar/2046 wrote makes sense, 'cause, you know, they said so... :)

But I always knew you were a wanker, I just never knew about what.
Pfft, Stargate... Couldn't you have picked a better show? ;)
No one gave a damn about Total Recall 2070 and Farscape's DVDs are too expensive. :)
Maybe I should try toying around with BSG?

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

Post by Mike DiCenso » Tue Jan 29, 2008 11:43 pm

So what's the URL for this SDN wiki you guys are talking about? I'd like to see it, if for no other reason than to provide a good laugh every now and then. ;-)
-Mike

Post Reply