StarDestroyer.Net BBS

If someone makes a general concept about a TOPIC, or a CONCEPT, fine. But Karen Traviss is not attacking PEOPLE, she is commenting on a concept. One person has already been banned by an admin over this. Folks need to reel it in, and fast.

Because someone says something about a generality does NOT mean they are talking about YOU in particular. However, it's so easy to bring the fight back not to the generality, but to the person when it comes to us fans. George might say "I don't like milk". Does that mean that every milk producer should come to his doorstep and say "I think you're insulting me, and everyone I know." No. It's an opinion.

Two more folks have been banned, and comments deleted, for angry attacks on a poster. And this is no offense and not meant to belittle Karen's work, but it matters not one wit in this case that she is a VIP. You folks are breaking rules, you are attacking people and their livelyhoods, and we won't stand for it any further. I'd dare just one more person to get up in a poster's face like that, but there is no reason for dares here. Do it, and you're gone. I'm cleaning house.

Learn the subtlties of discussing concepts, not people. Otherwise, you're in the path of a motivated and exceedingly single-minded moose.

Also, on behalf of fans not so eager to be so confrontational, and more interested in having real-time access to the thoughts of VIP authors and game developers, please accept our apology, Karen.

If I were the common fan out there who enjoys seeing this kind of access to the makers of EU and other LFL licensed folks, I'd be a little pissed about now. We get an unprecedented chance to talk to people that help shape Star Wars, and we try to drive them off the site with personal attacks.

As Obi-Wan would say, "Good Job." or not.

Surlethe wrote:So, instead of, "Ms Traviss is a retard for proposing a pissant Grand Army of the Republic, and a stuck-up bitch for retconning the EU to conform to her mistake", we should post something like, "I think the idea of a Grand Army of the Republic with only three million clones is incredibly foolish, given the enormous scope of the Republic, and I really think some of its most outspoken defenders need to simply admit their mistakes and move on with life"?

Noble Ire wrote:

Surlethe wrote:So, instead of, "Ms Traviss is a retard for proposing a pissant Grand Army of the Republic, and a stuck-up bitch for retconning the EU to conform to her mistake", we should post something like, "I think the idea of a Grand Army of the Republic with only three million clones is incredibly foolish, given the enormous scope of the Republic, and I really think some of its most outspoken defenders need to simply admit their mistakes and move on with life"?

Even that might be pushing it. You are implying that a "VIP" might be wrong, something Dark Moose evidently cannot tolerate even an intenation of (unless, of course, that VIP is named Curtis Saxton).

For further reading on the TOS's own little Robspierre, I direct those interested here. In short, if he beings the preperations for your termination, even on completely baseless and faulty charges, it is unlikely he will be swayed from the course.

Oh, my; is Ms Traviss really such an outspoken defender? I didn't know; I merely assumed people who defended such a ridiculous concept were rabid fanboys, not the author herself, so I'm actually dubious of such claims. In any case, I apologise for any offense I may have given to Ms Traviss ... .

How about that?