Jump to content
News Ticker
  • IPB version 4.2 installed!

Questor

Inquisitorius
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content Count

    1,708

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Questor

  4. Posted

    Thank you. That's precisely the difference. It's expanding on the Star Trek franchise, not replacing something.

     

     

     

    Reboots reboot the entire franchise, and all the little subcontinuities? You sure you want to make that arguement, because Mr. DC and Mr. Marvel (The Right Honorable Lords of Reboots and Resets) would like to point out that exactly how you define "Franchise" is important if you want to split hairs this precisely.

     

     

     

    And we'll see how long the Trek Prime franchise (or the Trek franchise entirely) remains viable. I remember what the nineties were like, and that's what drove the brand.

     

     

     

    Remember, Trek becoming the size of World of Warcraft is a contraction that is almost painful to contemplate - and that's probably the best Trek Prime can hope for without a tentpole in the mainstream media.

  5. Posted

    I have severe doubts as to the viability of another Prime series in near to medium term, at least in the form we knew.

     

     

     

    Modern TV consumption might support another DS9 style series, but grimdark is just too popular right now to make the themes of mainstream Star Trek profitable without the fans. And of course Berman poisoned that well so thoroughly and Coto didn't get the chance he needed.

     

     

     

    As for the reboot/alternate timeline stuff? Really, were going to have a fight about that?

     

     

     

    Functionally, it's a reboot - whatever the story excuses are. Those story excuses do continue a long ST tradition though.

  10. Posted

    Mix anti matter with matter having to explode on contact is not fusion. Spock used term wrong fusion have atoms get push together. As for shield technology the UFP shield technology much more advance anything Empire has inch per inch. Star destroyer after all lot bigger UFP starship. How UFP starship same size as Star destroyer a astiriod hit bridge UFP starship shield weaken little bit if the same astiriod hit Star destroyer same bridge destroyed. After the Dominion war enough form All good thing and End games. UFP has armor can protect against energy weapon system with stand many Borg tractor beams. UFP Nova class starship more then match for a star destroyer form End Games. Galaxy Class X starship could make quick work eat Star destroyer up easily. UFP Defiant class mothball suggest UFP has more powerful starship replace class it.

     

     

     

    What does that have to do with what I said?

  12. Posted

    I haven't seen much of TCW, but of course it's going to be a continuity nightmare, it's an open ended tv series. It has all of the constraints that ST, or in fact any TV Series does. The only show that I've seen able to maintain continuity over long periods was Babylon 5, and JMS wrote virtually every single significant episode himself.

  13. Posted

    To each their own, but I find that Miss Manners debates generally devolve into talking past each other. Especially without an active, and impartial mod staff that is empowered to close topics and declare winners if people don't obey rules.

     

     

     

    Of course, I've never really thought that moderation is that great an idea, hence my preference for USENET. I've always thought the relatively unique "style" of ASVS came about as a way to deal with the heavy use of killfilters. The more outrageous or insulting a statement, the more likely it was to be quoted.

  15. Posted

    I should point out that the same can be done in reverse.

     

     

     

    As an SDN poster with ASVS links, it's obviously only a matter of time before I flame out, curse the mods families and get myself banned. Either that or I get bored and start politics arguments on Facebook rofl.gif

     

     

     

    I went into the forum that had the most horrific title, the canon one, but yeah, for the most part they were pretty old, but then again, that's when my opinions were formed.

     

     

     

    Here's a question for you, how long would I last, if - using my normal style - I showed up on SFJ? I doubt they'd tolerate my descriptions of my opponents.

     

     

     

    They may be old threads, but they were on the front page of their respective forums.

  16. Posted

    And now, you're the one who talks about things he doesn't know jack shit about...

     

    Way to go... thumbsup.gif

     

     

     

    For your information, StarWarsStarTrek at SFJ (Sci-Fi Fan at SB.com) lies, ignores evidence and moves goalposts, and everybody is pissed off at him for doing so...

     

     

     

    Maybe they've cleaned things up since I was last there, but when I was active, SFJ was essentially the Trek version of SDN.

     

     

     

    Hrmm....

     

     

     

    *enters StarfleetJedi.net into address bar*

     

     

     

    "OHMYGOD MY EYES! MY EYES!"

     

     

     

    OH DEAR GOD!!!! THEY HAVE A WHOLE FORUM FOR THE DISCUSSION OF CANON RULES!?!?!?!?!? WHY??!?!?! - BTW, this is going to make me assume that they are either super-net-nanny types or just completely insane. Canon discussion NEVER end well.

     

     

     

    Aaron posts here? Really?

     

     

     

    Who the heck is this idiot? GStone? Sample:

     

     

     

    I'm not at liberty to go into the specifics, but it wasn't as any kind of rebel/freedom fighter/terrorist. I'm not presently in the field and don't expect to be in the near future, as well as the partial anonymity the internet and a made up screen name (but even that is limited with things, such as electronic surveillance, both legal and not), so there is just a tad bit of leeway with just mentioning it in a general sense. But, it would be inappropriate for me to go into specifics though there is still the opening of deniability left even though the entity of 'GStone' can be thought of just some kook that was trying to make himself sound more knowledgable than he really was.

     

     

     

    Well, this is an interesting thread. I find the lack of Coyote's commentary's interesting, as it seems they've been completely deleted.

     

     

     

    Well, it seems that by clicking on the link in WILGA's post, the post in question is in the Hall of Shame, where SDN puts flamefests and general bad behavior (even by their standards.)

     

     

     

    Another thread, and this one you're in.

     

     

     

    OOHH!!! This GStone guy is fun!

     

     

     

     

     

    Hrmm... this looks interesting, Picard vs. StarWarsStarTrek

     

     

     

    - As an aside, who represents the mainstream? Picard or StarWarsStarTrek? -

     

     

     

    OOHHH!!!! I FOUND MITH!!!!!

     

     

     

    1) Visuals are not always accurate.

     

     

     

    I never said you can't use visuals. That's a complete and utter red herring. My argument is that we should argue for what the story is telling us, not any individual source within the story. It would be akin to a religious zealot screaming that the part of the dogma must be followed, but ignoring the rest because it's inconvenient. Focusing primarily on the VFX effects as if they're incapable of making mistakes is in and of itself, a form of nitpicking, just with flimsy justification.

     

     

     

     

    Commentary - If visuals are not always accurate, then there is no objective way to do anything and the debate is pointless. Attempting to argue technology from a story point of view is a twitch inducingly bad idea. Heck, one of the reasons why I hate EU debates (even though I do think it is canon) is that 99.999999999999% of authors are incapable of describing anythin in a way that would allow measurement. The only author that I would even begin to consider bringing into a debate for anything other than lulz would be someone along the lines of David Weber, simply because as long as we're not asking him to give us the volume of his ships, he's going to be VERY consistent and use correct units. The only way to bring in story (and dialog) into a tech debate is to do it from a "what does this society/story tell us about available technology" standpoint, and that's a very broad brush, not detail.

     

     

     

    StarWarsStarTrek:

     

    1. How do you determine when VFX is dominant over dialogue and when it isn't? You seem to take dialogue over visuals in ST whenever it suites ST, and with SW you nitpick the VFX of TCW to support ST. But if you are to claim that you're fair and balanced, what's is your method?

     

     

    Mith:

     

    The method is case by case, and whichever supports the story. I've told you this. I will not repeat myself again. Either you're capable of understanding it or not.

     

     

     

    Ahh, heck, I'm just going to link the post

     

     

     

    Ahh, here are you... with a pretty good point - that's why I like you.

     

     

     

    Here's Picard with a Non-sequiter:

     

     

     

    Except that CIS and OR fleets were using age-of-sail era tactics and equipment (fixed broadside batteries) suited for those engagements.

     

     

     

     

    Evidence of either masachism or something else: I challenge Darkstar to a debate

     

     

     

    By the way, there's an unhealthy obsession with Wong on that site? Did he do something unspeakable to JMS?

     

     

     

    I note that you're not defending Darkstar...

     

     

     

    Look, I'm not saying everyone over there is a bad poster, but I am saying that if you lie down with dogs, you shouldn't complain when people say you have fleas.

  19. Posted

    You are aware that behavior like that is the height of fashion on most vs. websites, right?

     

     

     

    That's probably why I don't visit most Vs. websites, and stay out of vs topics on the vs website I do visit other than this one.

     

     

     

    Mod abuse is also de rigueur on vs. websites, but Tyr and Paul have made it clear that it's not allowed here - so I can't squish him like the bug he is.

  20. Posted

    How about just admitting that you have no idea what you're talking about and shut up?

     

     

     

    OF COURSE THERE ARE INCONSISTENCIES! Do you think that any medium that runs over that long has no inconsistencies?

     

     

     

    Hell, Anne McCaffrey's been unable to keep inconsistencies from slipping into Pern, and at least that's just her and her son (and they try and iron them out when they don't work).

     

     

     

    How many authors have been involved in the SW EU?

     

     

     

    Now, on another topic, people who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones. The ST live action serieses couldn't even maintain continuity episode to episode.

     

     

     

    Of course, I have no doubt that you'll continue moving the goalposts, lying, and generally acting like a particularly undisciplined and uneducated child, just like you did in the other thread. Why don't you go back to SFJ and RSA's haunts, where behavior like yours is considered the height of fashion?

  21. Posted

    Really? So, you REALLY think that MOVIES, MOVIE NOVELIZATIONS, TCW, and RADIO PLAYS are part of EU? Beacouse it is ALL material I used, and NOTHING ELSE. You are either liar, or so unfamiliar with actual Star Wars canon that you don't know what is canon and what EU. Or you never saw/read anything outside of EU, which seems best explanation.

     

     

     

    1) Power production is fusion, beacouse it is standard in canon. Superlaser is basically technobabble weapon.

     

     

     

    I'd like to see citations, including running times, on fusion being used as "standard in canon". And I'd really love to see a source for technobabble being used to describe the superlaser. I think that you've forgotten that Star Trek and Star Wars are different.

     

     

     

    2) No, it is not from EU source. Watch Attack of the Clones (which you OBVIOUSLY never did). When Obi-Wan talks to Kaminoan chief-of-state or whatever, she says that they have "200 000 units and million more on the way". And she is civilian, so it is not clear wether she used standard or military definition of unit.

     

     

     

    Actually, she's a product manager, you idiot. She knows her product. And I have watched the movie, I just don't accept Karen Travis's retarded idea that 1,200,000 soldiers is enough to conquer a region on a single planet, much less an entire galaxy. How many people were under arms in Europe during the period 1939-1945?

     

     

     

    3) I'm not surprised.

     

     

     

    4) No, I used MOVIES. And I did my OWN scaling.

     

     

     

    Your scaling is idiotic. Please provide evidence that you are looking at an equitorial rather than longitudinal trench. And also, where are your "milimeters" coming from? Are you using a ruler on your monitor? (I wouldn't put it past you, it would be consistent with the rest of your general sloppynes.)

     

     

     

    Here's some more questions relating to my standard methods of analysis. What is the minimum size for a rocky moon to sphericalize? What is the smallest spherical object in the solar system? In order for the DS1 to be mistaken for a moon, it needs to have a radius that at least makes sense as a moon. Han Solo may not be an astrophysicist, but he's probably seen enough moons (just based on his boasting) to have an idea of exactly how big they have to be to be a sphere.

     

     

     

    Here's a hint, hydrostatic equilibrium doesn't tend to show up until 400km.

     

     

     

    5) As above. Did you even notice a link? Or you simply like lying?

     

     

     

    I did, I just think you're an idiot - and since your numbers match the incorrect numbers given on so many EU sources, the idea that you are working backwards to standard Trekkie stupidity is an acceptable hypothesis. It should be noted that ALL instances of the 120 km size are EU, out of date, or Trektard fansite.

     

     

     

    6) Everything I scaled I scaled from movies. I have no interest or knowledge in EU aside from that single book I read. And in that book, Death Star is nowhere mentioned.

     

     

     

    You did not provide a link to your scaling methodology for the Executor.

     

     

     

    I don't know if you have any interest or knowledge of the EU, but you've certainly shown that you like to peruse a number of questionable reference sources. And I believe you also have a number of problems with reading comprehensions, as is evidenced by your companion thread.

     

     

     

    Or 1 million worlds total. Maximum is 100 000 inhabited worlds.

     

     

     

     

    Wow, so now you're changing your numbers over a matter of days?

  23. Posted

    As I suspected, you're a dishonest idiot who defines no-EU to mean "Only the EU I like."

     

     

     

    1. Power Production is indeterminate, if you had a brain in your head, you'd know I meant superlaser.

     

     

     

    2. Saying a "unit" means an individual trooper is idiocy - and is an EU source, namely Karen Travis - A unit might, depending on tactical doctrine, be as small as a company, but you're most likely looking at battalion or regimental sized independant units.

     

     

     

    3. Graham Kennedy wasn't the first person to propose warp highways - he's just the favorite of the trekkie ignorancia, and you missed the highest speed demonstrated.

     

     

     

    4. EHHHH - Wrong - You used EU sources. Only one truely independant sizing has been done, guess who did it?

     

     

     

    5. EHHHH - Wrong - You used EU sources.

     

     

     

    6. You're scaling suggests you're an idiot. You picked an EU source you liked and made the evidence fit it.

     

     

     

    Reach back farther, 1 million inhabited worlds minimum. Even assuming low levels of militarization and industrialization, you're going to lose.

  24. Posted

    I was unaware that Star Wars EU maintains continuity. If it does, then it does really bad job at it, from what I saw at Wookiepedia.

     

     

     

    You're just a completely ignorant idiot who's never actually read ANY of the EU, aren't you? Plot continuity versus tech continuity.

     

     

     

    I love how all the new trekkies like to jump on the bandwagon and bash the EU when they don't even know what it is. I can respect Tyr, he disagrees with me on a lot of stuff, but he has at least read a huge portion of the material.

     

     

     

    GROW UP.

     

     

     

    As for Star Trek EU being used, most logical choice would be ones that conform best to rest of EU (that is, if we have 3 novels stating something is X, and one stating something is Y, we assume that this something is indeed X).

     

     

     

     

    Why don't you spend some time over on Memory Beta and get back to me? Try and figure out why that's stupid.

×