TFN-Challenge for Saxton-debate

[Kazuaki Shimazaki]

I have yet to check my ship email, but I think Cooper's response makes 2 things very clear:

1) He's a little bitch

To be fair, he is a EU author. He has to defend his company a little. Can't say all EU writers are all blind and dumb.

2) He picked someone less openly supportive, meaning that they are likely less skilled.

We'd be lucky if he picks someone like Lord Hydronium or Captain Ardiff.

[Ender]

I have yet to check my ship email, but I think Cooper's response makes 2 things very clear:

1) He's a little bitch

To be fair, he is a EU author. He has to defend his company a little. Can't say all EU writers are all blind and dumb.

Which one? And that doesn't change the fact that his commetns paint him to be a little bitch.

2) He picked someone less openly supportive, meaning that they are likely less skilled.

We'd be lucky if he picks someone like Lord Hydronium or Captain Ardiff.

Not familiar with either of those. I take it that was sarcasm and they suck?

[Mange]

While it seems the "debate" is nothing but Saxton bashing, I hope Ender will continue. The Saxton haters need a good ol' smackdown.

I have yet to check my ship email, but I think Cooper's response makes 2 things very clear:

1) He's a little bitch
2) He picked someone less openly supportive, meaning that they are likely less skilled.

Skewed playing field.

I guessed this to be true in both cases. It's great that you continue, Ender!

[Darth Wong]

Here's a question for you to pose to the next rabid anti-Saxton person you meet: just for the sake of argument, consider a hypothetical scenario: suppose that Curtis, myself, Wayne Poe, or some other person vehemently disliked by those people had somehow gotten in George Lucas' good graces and talked him into altering the content of one of the prequels. Would these people consider the prequel non-canon for that reason?

Because the reasoning I'm hearing here is that some people are considering certain sources to be invalid because Curtis is associated with them. Leaving aside their obvious ulterior motives (it contradicts their pet notions, or they dislike genuine scientists being involved because it makes them feel inferior so they lash out at the "elitists", etc), I am curious how they defend their logic. If the influence of a person they don't like or disagree with renders a canon source non-canon or an official source non-official, then what exact standard are they using? Could they explain what this standard is?

[apocolypse]

I barely ever go to TFN, so what's the deal with the anti-Saxtonism they have? I got a little bit of the background from some of the posts in this thread, but I'm guessing there's more to it.

[Lord Poe]

Can someone give more insight on just who CooperTFN is? He's an EU author? Does he own TFN?