If Thrawn won Bilbringi

[Ghost Rider]

It's canon as long as it doesn't violate HIGHER offical or canon itself.

Just because it's not violating does not give some all impermable barrier that demonstrates every piece of offical is on the same scale. Literally if some novel decides to contradict DESB...then it's on a lower scale.

Also nowhere did Necron say he was disavowing that it's ability as evidence, just expressing his dislike of said book, so stop try to shove rules of offical and canon down someone's opinion.

[Illuminatus Primus]

It's canon as long as it doesn't violate HIGHER offical or canon itself.

Yeah, exactly what I said.

I think that this Dark Side Sourcebook is yet another fucked up RPG thing that is barely worth the paper it's printed on as evidence.

He said it wasn't worth the paper it was printed on as evidence, that's a judgement call about its evidential worth, and he's wrong.

[FTeik]

I wonder, why i mentioned WEGs TLC-Sourcebook at all.

Because there we see how Rhuk learns about the empires betrayal of the Noghri. He is told by another member of his species.

IIRC, the decleration of the NR in the DESB has a Noghri signing the piece of paper and it also claims, that Palpatine had still his hands available AND the killers from Honoghor.

So much for the quality of the DESB.

[Alyeska]

To me the bits on Joruus seem to be contradicting the Thrawn Triology books. Joruus killed the guardian, yet the RPG book has him as the guardian.

[Illuminatus Primus]

Because he's insane, C'boath forgot that he was the guardian in the first place.

How would it make any sense for Palpatine to drop a Dark Jedi and C'boath on Wayland? How else would he get there?

The Guardian was C'boath. He claims he killed him, but this man is totally insane. He didn't know he was a clone even though he's damn name was intentionally mispronounced in the designated manner for a clone.

[Illuminatus Primus]

I wonder, why i mentioned WEGs TLC-Sourcebook at all.

Because there we see how Rhuk learns about the empires betrayal of the Noghri. He is told by another member of his species.

Right, and Rukh was specifically isolated from his kinsman. Palpatine's agents must have arranged for Rukh to meet with the Death Commandos such that he would betray Thrawn. We're talking about a man who has clairvoyance now.

IIRC, the decleration of the NR in the DESB has a Noghri signing the piece of paper and it also claims, that Palpatine had still his hands available AND the killers from Honoghor.

Most of Noghri sided with the New Republic, but apparently some of the Death Commandos remained loyal to Palpatine; they are depicted defending the Sith ruins on Drommund Kaas as depicted in the Mysteries of the Sith expansion pack to Dark Forces II: Jedi Knight which takes place during Palpatine's return.

So much for the quality of the DESB.

So much for someone desperate to throw the evidence out the window.

[Alyeska]

Because he's insane, C'boath forgot that he was the guardian in the first place.

How would it make any sense for Palpatine to drop a Dark Jedi and C'boath on Wayland? How else would he get there?

The Guardian was C'boath. He claims he killed him, but this man is totally insane. He didn't know he was a clone even though he's damn name was intentionally mispronounced in the designated manner for a clone.

The way things are written it heavily hints that Joruus did infact kill the Guardian. Thrawn never believed Joruus was the Guardian and Joruus has thoughts about how hard it is to remember things and how he was loosing his memory of heaving defeated the Guardian in a glorious battle that lit up the sky. I was always under the impression the Guardian cloned Joruus in the first place for some reason and it backfired.

[Illuminatus Primus]

"Heavily hints" isn't grounds to outright dismiss more than one source. And besides, you yourself just remarked on how he has trouble remembering things, and how he is obviously delusional.

[Alyeska]

"Heavily hints" isn't grounds to outright dismiss more than one source. And besides, you yourself just remarked on how he has trouble remembering things, and how he is obviously delusional.

He has delusions of grandeur. I saw nothing to indicate he has delusions about the past. Afterall, he rembered Mara correctly.

[The Kernel]

The way things are written it heavily hints that Joruus did infact kill the Guardian. Thrawn never believed Joruus was the Guardian and Joruus has thoughts about how hard it is to remember things and how he was loosing his memory of heaving defeated the Guardian in a glorious battle that lit up the sky. I was always under the impression the Guardian cloned Joruus in the first place for some reason and it backfired.

Thrawn actually did call C'Boath the new Guardian of Mt. Tantiss after he learned that C'Boath had supposedly killed the original Guardian. The passage actually sounds like Thrawn is skeptical of C'Boath not being the Emperor's Guardian in the first place.

[Crown]

Before whining and throwing rotten tomatoes, you should do your homework.

Jorus C'boath was a Jedi Master (not a Dark Jedi, in other words) who served as a Jedi consultant to Palpatine earlier in his Senatorial career, and later died aboard the Outbound Flight Project by Palpatine's direction.

Woooowww! ... And the point of that was? Did I imply any confusion as to who I was refering to with my last posts? Or do you believe that I haven't read any of Tim Zahn's books? Or perhaps another opportunity for you to act like one giant ass whenever your precious DE is trashed?

I don't even know if this is a strawman, a red herring, or just a waste of bandwidth...

Joruus, however...

Joruus protected the Wayland facility known as Mount Tantiss, a secret Imperial facility used for cloning purposes and weapons storage. (emphasis mine)

With his memories clouded, this C'boath did not even remember his original mission, nor his service to the Emperor Palpatine. (emphasis mine)

Oh, so The Dark Empire Sourcebook is correct, and it is you who should mind your "little details."

So when I say that the Dark Empire Sourcebook contradicts the Heir to the Empire trilogy, your rebuttle consists of quoting not the Heir to the Empire trilogy, but The Essential Guide to Characters. Right. Gottcha.

So if I was to say that Darksabre got the lenght of an Executor class ship wrong (by contradicting what we see on screen), then it would be perfectly acceptable for you to go; 'Nah - ah!' and quote me The Essential Guide to Vehicles and Vessels? ...

Glad we cleared that up there Primy.

Or we can actually quote the novels themselves;

For a handful of heartbeats he [C'boath] and Thrawn locked eyes. Thrawn broke the silence first. "I am Grand Admiral Thrawn, Warlord of the Empire, servant of the Emperor. I seek the Guardian of the mountain."

The old man bowed his heand slightly. "I will take you to him."

<snip>


Into a crypt.

There was no doubt as to what it was. Aside from the flickering candles, there was nothing else in the room but a large rectangular block of dark stone in the centre.

"I see, " Thrawn said quietly. "So he is dead."

"He is dead, " the old man confirmed from behind them. "Do you see all the candles, Grand Admiral Thrawn?"

"I see them, " Thrawn nodded. "The people must have honored him greatly."

"Honored him?" The old man snorted gently. "Hardly. Those candles mark the graves of offworlders who have come here since his death."

Pellaeon twisted to face him, instinctively drawing his blaster as he did so. Thrawn waited another few heartbeats before slowly turning around himself. "How did they die?" he asked.

The old man smiled faintly. "I killed them, of course. Just as I killed the Guardian."

<snip>


"Hold, " Thrawn said clamly into the silence. "However, as you can see, Guardian, we are not ordinary offworlders."

"The Guardian is dead!" <snip>

"Yes, the old Guardian is dead, " Thrawn agreed, shouting to be heard over the crackling thunder. "You are the Guardian now. It is you who protects the Emperor's mountain."

"I serve no Emperor!" the old man retorted, unleashing a third useless salvo. "My power is for myself alone."

He winced at the thought. It was hard, this help that the Grand Admiral Thrawn wanted. He had to concentrate hard to do what they wanted; to hold his thoughts and feelings closely in line, and for long periods at a time. On Wayland he hadn't had to do anything like that, not since he'd fought against the Emperor's Guardian.

He smiled. It had been a grand battle, that fight against the Guardian. --

Yah...

I think that this Dark Side Sourcebook is yet another fucked up RPG thing that is barely worth the paper it's printed on as evidence.

Canon refers to an authoritative list of books that the Lucas Licensing editors consider an authentic part of the official Star Wars history. Our goal is to present a continuous and unified history of the Star Wars galaxy, insofar as that history does not conflict with, or undermine the meaning of Mr. Lucas's Star Wars saga of films and screenplays. Things that Lucas Licensing does not consider official parts of the continuous Star Wars history show an Infinities logo or are contained in Star Wars Tales. Everything else is considered canon. (emphasis mine)

Congrats, your opinion is quite frankly irrelevent. The DESB is canonical insofar that it does not contradict or undermine GL's saga of films and screenplays, and is thus an official part of the continuous Star Wars history.

The point you dumb ass, is that the Dark Empire Sourcebook contradicts the Heir to the Empire trilogy when it wants to. Not to mention the fact that you take one throw away sentence (his death wasn't an accident), and imediatly start going on about Palpy organising Thrawn's death!

If we are to take Thrawn at face value (where he tells C'boath that he is the Guardian), then we must also accept that Thrawn is still the loyal servant of Palpantine just as he told C'boath. So fucking choose would you!

[Crown]

Thrawn actually did call C'Boath the new Guardian of Mt. Tantiss after he learned that C'Boath had supposedly killed the original Guardian. The passage actually sounds like Thrawn is skeptical of C'Boath not being the Emperor's Guardian in the first place.

Thrawn also tells C'boath that he (Thrawn) is still the loyal servant of Emperor Palpatine and that he wishes to restore his Emperor's new order, which DE sourcebook plainly contradicts. We can either say that the sourcebook is full of shit, or that Thrawn was lying.

Either way they still contradict all over the place!

[FTeik]

I wonder, why i mentioned WEGs TLC-Sourcebook at all.

Because there we see how Rhuk learns about the empires betrayal of the Noghri. He is told by another member of his species.

Right, and Rukh was specifically isolated from his kinsman. Palpatine's agents must have arranged for Rukh to meet with the Death Commandos such that he would betray Thrawn. We're talking about a man who has clairvoyance now.

Bullshit. According to the scene described in the TLC-Sourcebook Rukh was neither isolated nor were the members of the command-team some isolated group of Noghri.

IIRC, the decleration of the NR in the DESB has a Noghri signing the piece of paper and it also claims, that Palpatine had still his hands available AND the killers from Honoghor.

Most of Noghri sided with the New Republic,

Right after the battle of Endor? You´re really getting desperate.

but apparently some of the Death Commandos remained loyal to Palpatine; they are depicted defending the Sith ruins on Drommund Kaas as depicted in the Mysteries of the Sith expansion pack to Dark Forces II: Jedi Knight which takes place during Palpatine's return.

So much for the quality of the DESB.

So much for someone desperate to throw the evidence out the window.

So just because i didn´t knew about that part from DarkForcesII: JediKnight i´m desperate.

What you discribe sounds more, as if those Noghri defending the Sith ruins are isolated from their kind and not Rukh aboard the Chimera.

Can you imagine, what they´re gonna do the moment, they also learn, what the empire did to their species?

[Illuminatus Primus]

Woooowww! ... And the point of that was? Did I imply any confusion as to who I was refering to with my last posts? Or do you believe that I haven't read any of Tim Zahn's books? Or perhaps another opportunity for you to act like one giant ass whenever your precious DE is trashed?

I don't even know if this is a strawman, a red herring, or just a waste of bandwidth...

A rebuttal, actually.

So when I say that the Dark Empire Sourcebook contradicts the Heir to the Empire trilogy, your rebuttle consists of quoting not the Heir to the Empire trilogy, but The Essential Guide to Characters. Right. Gottcha.

You said this.

Jeez, for those of us who read the book, C'boath was actually a insane clone, not the actual Dark Jedi who served Palpatine, but hey why quarrel over minor details?

Therefore, I am no way in the wrong to cite other parts of the continuity when you finger the DESB for singlehandedly contradicting the evidence, something which, is, in fact, cited elsewhere.

Besides, in Heir to the Empire, Thrawn persists in refering to C'boath as the Guardian even after he is taken into the crypt, only modifying that after C'boath continues to scream and shoot lightning. Additionally, C'boath knew of the Noghri Death Commandos and their allegiance to Vader and the Emperor. Now, if the Guardian, who would be stuck on Mount Tantiss, created C'boath for his jollies since he was bored, how would the memory-imprint (assuming they made one of the original C'boath somehow without his knowledge which sat in storage for decades) and just decided to educate him about some of the obscure alien assassins Palpatine and Vader knew as their own? Furthermore, why the implied association between Palpatine and C'baoth--the original? This was Palpatine's mountain, after all.

Anyway, I'm with Kernel. The man was obviously delusional, and taken in terms with the overall evidence, obviously was marooned out on Wayland where he'd simultaneously keep the Mountain protected while simultaneously being inherently contained by means of isolation.

So if I was to say that Darksabre got the lenght of an Executor class ship wrong (by contradicting what we see on screen), then it would be perfectly acceptable for you to go; 'Nah - ah!' and quote me The Essential Guide to Vehicles and Vessels? ...

Glad we cleared that up there Primy.

No, but to imply that it was the source of the error and holds the blame for it is something else entirely. What escapes you is the DESB was written years later, and probably was required to accept various retcons previously instituted.

The point you dumb ass, is that the Dark Empire Sourcebook contradicts the Heir to the Empire trilogy when it wants to. Not to mention the fact that you take one throw away sentence (his death wasn't an accident), and imediatly start going on about Palpy organising Thrawn's death!

The text says that Thrawn was being used to distract from Palpatine's return. How else do you explain that? If you have a better theory, by all means, offer it.

Besides, the central point stands. Palpatine was sitting on a preverbial royal flush and even if Thrawn won Bilbringi it wouldn't matter because Palpatine would just return and end Thrawn's ascendance. What's hard to grasp about that?

If we are to take Thrawn at face value (where he tells C'boath that he is the Guardian), then we must also accept that Thrawn is still the loyal servant of Palpantine just as he told C'boath. So fucking choose would you!

It doesn't fucking matter what Thrawn thinks; he did not know about Palpatine's return, nor did he know that he was being used as a diversion, nor am I sure that he was aware that his downfall was "no accident."

He can believe genuinely that he is a loyal servant, if Palpatine disagrees--and he apparently did--it doesn't matter, does it? Especially if Thrawn has no idea.

[Illuminatus Primus]

Thrawn also tells C'boath that he (Thrawn) is still the loyal servant of Emperor Palpatine and that he wishes to restore his Emperor's new order, which DE sourcebook plainly contradicts. We can either say that the sourcebook is full of shit, or that Thrawn was lying.

Either way they still contradict all over the place!

Or Thrawn was unaware that Palpatine disagreed. Oh, oops.

Discrepencies...tend to favor the more recent source...Most recently published (or in some cases, yet-to-be-published.) We definitely wouldn't want to ignore outright anything said previously and we try to reconcilliate any apparent discrepancies whenever possible.

So, when two sources are on the same level; in this case, both sources are official, more recent ones are preferred. So it is still not grounds to dismiss the DESB as evidence even if you do feel it is full of contradictions, and even so, by LFL policy, the DESB would be preferred.

[Crown]

A rebuttal, actually.

A rebuttal to an arguement that was never put forward is either a strawman, or an advanced sign of dementia.

You said this.

Jeez, for those of us who read the book, C'boath was actually a insane clone, not the actual Dark Jedi who served Palpatine, but hey why quarrel over minor details?

Therefore, I am no way in the wrong to cite other parts of the continuity when you finger the DESB for singlehandedly contradicting the evidence, something which, is, in fact, cited elsewhere.

Bullshit. All this means is that another non essential 'guide' contradicts the trilogy. It doesn't disprove my claim of the DESB contradicting it. By the way, loved how you slipped 'singlehandedly' in there.

Besides, in Heir to the Empire, Thrawn persists in refering to C'boath as the Guardian even after he is taken into the crypt, only modifying that after C'boath continues to scream and shoot lightning. Additionally, C'boath knew of the Noghri Death Commandos and their allegiance to Vader and the Emperor. Now, if the Guardian, who would be stuck on Mount Tantiss, created C'boath for his jollies since he was bored, how would the memory-imprint (assuming they made one of the original C'boath somehow without his knowledge which sat in storage for decades) and just decided to educate him about some of the obscure alien assassins Palpatine and Vader knew as their own? Furthermore, why the implied association between Palpatine and C'baoth--the original? This was Palpatine's mountain, after all.

"That, and collecting endless mementos of his glorious conquests." C'baoth snorted. "There are rooms and rooms of that sort of crackling self-congratulations."

Pellaeon sat up a bit straighter. "You've been inside the mountain?" he asked. Somehow, he'd expected the storehouse to be sealed with all sorts of locks and barriers.

C'baoth sent him a scornfully patient look. "Of course I've been inside. I killed the Guardian, remember?" He looked back at Thrawn. "So. You want the Emperor's little toys; and now you know you can just walk into the mountain, with or without my help. Why are you still here?"

Again, I wish you would read the fucking book. C'baoth killed the Guardian, he tells Thrawn that the mountain in essence is wide open for him to walk into, since C'baoth can't stop him. Your assertation of any association between Jorus C'baoth is still that, you have yet to site any kind of evidence for it, other than perhaps a vague reference to the Outbound Flight, with which I will remind you that based on that evidence C'baoth has a greater link to Bail Organa than Palpatine.

Anyway, I'm with Kernel. The man was obviously delusional, and taken in terms with the overall evidence, obviously was marooned out on Wayland where he'd simultaneously keep the Mountain protected while simultaneously being inherently contained by means of isolation.

Then you would have a problem there sparky;

...The Psadan's answer went on for several minutes, and Han's ears were starting to hurt by the time he was done.

"Well," Threepio said, tilting his head and settling into the professor mode Han had always hated. "There are many details -- but I will pass those for now," he added hastily, probably at a look from one of the Noghri. "The humans who came as colonists were teh first invaders. They drove the native peoples from some of their lands, and were stopped only when their lightning bows and metal birds -- those are their terms, of course -- began to fail. Much later came the Empire, who as we know built into the forbidden mountain. They enslaved many of the native peoples to help on the project and drove others from their lands. After the builders left came someone who called himself the Guardian, and he, too, sought control over the native peoples. Finally, the one who called himself the Jedi Master came, and in a battle that lit up the sky he defeated the Guardian. For a time the native peoples thought they might be freed, but the Jedi Master brought humans and native peoples to himself and forced them to live together beneath the shadow of the forbidden mountain. Finally, the Empire has returned." Threepio tilted his head back again. "As you can see, Master Luke, we are merely the last in a long line of invaders."

Thrawn speculated that Joruus C'baoth was created early on in the Clone Wars, prior to the Empire, but the Psadan's account of details clearly shows that C'baoth didn't turn up until well after the Clone Wars. Perhaps the Guardian made him for company, or because he wanted to rebel against the Emperor. Who knows? What we do know is that C'baoth isn't, nor has he ever been the Guardian contrary to what the DESB tells us. Right there in black and white for all to see.

No, but to imply that it was the source of the error and holds the blame for it is something else entirely. What escapes you is the DESB was written years later, and probably was required to accept various retcons previously instituted.

So do you conceed that the DESB flat out contradicts what is written in the trilogy or not? Yes or no will do.

The text says that Thrawn was being used to distract from Palpatine's return. How else do you explain that? If you have a better theory, by all means, offer it.

That Rukh didn't 'accidently' trip and stab Thrawn. He killed him because of Leia's evidence that the Noghri people were being inslaved by him, as FTeik said earlier. Once again showing what a bunch of sour grapes the entire DE saga is made of.

Besides, the central point stands. Palpatine was sitting on a preverbial royal flush and even if Thrawn won Bilbringi it wouldn't matter because Palpatine would just return and end Thrawn's ascendance. What's hard to grasp about that?

Show me where I was arguing about that you moron.

It doesn't fucking matter what Thrawn thinks; he did not know about Palpatine's return, nor did he know that he was being used as a diversion, nor am I sure that he was aware that his downfall was "no accident."

He can believe genuinely that he is a loyal servant, if Palpatine disagrees--and he apparently did--it doesn't matter, does it? Especially if Thrawn has no idea.

And that is another contradiction in the DESB. In the DESB we are told two contradicting fucking things, in the same chapther no less!

Five years had passed since Endor, and the strains were threatening to tear the Empire apart, when from the outlying regions of the galaxy came a series of ident codes. Unquestionably authentic, they accompanied a holo message from the last surviving Grand Admiral, named Thrawn. The squabbling ministers knew just how important a Grand Admiral could be to reverse the tide of defeat. Even the most myopic of them knew how empty rule would be without an Empire to rule over.

Putting aside their differences for the time being, they managed to arrive at a consensus: a war hero such as Thrawn might be exactly what they needed. As a non-Human, he was a complete outsider with no power base save his own competence. He could rely on no support other than what they chose to give him. Such a situation could prove advantageous, if he could accomplish all he claimed. If he could destroy the New Republic, they might make him their figurehead Emperor, with their power behind him. And if he eventually proved too independent for them, he could always be eliminated.

This shows us that Thrawn was given command of the remaining Imperial fleet in the Outer Rim by the ministers there who put aside their differences and allowed him to take charge of what largely remained as the most cohesive Imperial territory left.

However;

He knew there would be war among his servants since none of them had the knowledge or power he held. But he wasn't in a position to act just yet. Years of rest and recovery lay ahead. Perhaps it was better this way. His forces had failed him, and the price for failure was what it had always been, death.

As years passed and he grew stronger, he began to concentrate more on his Dark Side studies. Still, he did grow occasionally concerned when one leader or another would come close to silencing the others and claiming the throne. Such ones were dealt with easily. He could let any of his Dark Side Adepts or other loyal servants handle the matter. After all, he still had his Hands and his Noghri.

When his servant, Thrawn, made his claim, Palpatine could only watch in sadness. He had hoped Thrawn would know better. It was heartening to see how effectively Thrawn dealt with the cruel hand fate had dealt him. A lesser person would have despaired. But a lesser person would have never been chosen as a Grand Admiral by Palpatine in the first place.

Still, no contender could ever be allowed to become too powerful. It was no accident when Thrawn fell. Palpatine never knew if Thrawn guessed that he was being used to divert attention from his own return.

Isn't that lovely. I particularly liked the bolded section, don't you? The source book clearly tells us that none of Palpatine's servants were aware of what he could accomplish with his clones. In the earlier quote it painfully tells us that Thrawn was acting on a mandate from the 'ministers', and yet in this it tells us he was 'pressing his claim'.

What a load of tripe. How can someone be pressing their claim against someone who everyone considers dead? To say Thrawn is a traitor that needed to be 'dealt' with is ridiculous. Palpy turns up, and Thrawn would have bent his knee, but because the DESB is written by such incompatant morons, we get not only contradictions with the novels, but contradictions with its self.

Lovely.

[Crown]

Or Thrawn was unaware that Palpatine disagreed. Oh, oops.

Which is only reasonable since none of Palpy's servants knew of his little clone trick. But how this makes Thrawn a traitor is beyond me.

Discrepencies...tend to favor the more recent source...Most recently published (or in some cases, yet-to-be-published.) We definitely wouldn't want to ignore outright anything said previously and we try to reconcilliate any apparent discrepancies whenever possible.

So, when two sources are on the same level; in this case, both sources are official, more recent ones are preferred. So it is still not grounds to dismiss the DESB as evidence even if you do feel it is full of contradictions, and even so, by LFL policy, the DESB would be preferred.

Well since when has a sourcebook of another series been on the same level as the actual novels themselves? And does this mean, that you conceed that yes the DESB flatly contradicts the novels, yes or no?

EDIT :: Bwahahahaha!

I just thought of something, since Zahn's duology were written well after both the DESB and the Essential Guide, and Mara quite clearly thinks Luke is loony when he says that what he faced on Byss was the Emperor in a clone body (and the Source book says that Mara would have been aware of that trick), does that mean that it wasn't Emperor Palpy at all, because newer > older?

Bwahahahahaha!

[Illuminatus Primus]

A rebuttal to an arguement that was never put forward is either a strawman, or an advanced sign of dementia.

Whatever, I always thought C'boath was the Guardian, but if you want to run around and scream, that's fine by me.

The DESB is evidence, it does count, and the answer to this thread remains the same.

Bullshit. All this means is that another non essential 'guide' contradicts the trilogy. It doesn't disprove my claim of the DESB contradicting it. By the way, loved how you slipped 'singlehandedly' in there.

Your argument is predicated on the assumption that the DESB was horribly researched and shoddily made, which is obviously undermined if certain facts of continuity had been previously retconned and the DESB was held to that standard.

Get it?

It's not exactly a shot against the DESB, its author, or its publishers if they did know about that HttE said but because it'd already been changed they had to live with it. And its LFL policy to run with later sources, even if they contradict the original one.

Again, I wish you would read the fucking book. C'baoth killed the Guardian, he tells Thrawn that the mountain in essence is wide open for him to walk into, since C'baoth can't stop him. Your assertation of any association between Jorus C'baoth is still that, you have yet to site any kind of evidence for it, other than perhaps a vague reference to the Outbound Flight, with which I will remind you that based on that evidence C'baoth has a greater link to Bail Organa than Palpatine.

What are you talking about? Jorus C'boath was Palpatine's personal Jedi consultant. The first time Luke looks up his name he get very curious about this.

Then you would have a problem there sparky;
[snip]Thrawn speculated that Joruus C'baoth was created early on in the Clone Wars, prior to the Empire, but the Psadan's account of details clearly shows that C'baoth didn't turn up until well after the Clone Wars. Perhaps the Guardian made him for company, or because he wanted to rebel against the Emperor. Who knows? What we do know is that C'baoth isn't, nor has he ever been the Guardian contrary to what the DESB tells us. Right there in black and white for all to see.

Except the inhabitants of Mount Tantiss were the thralls of C'boath (remember all the babbling about "personal power" he possessed?), just like all the rest. They were literally extentions of his own mind, so treating them like independent, reliable, and objective witnesses doesn't work very well. That's an continuity fix of sorts, and take it as you will.

But as you know, it is fucked up. But again, how do you know that this is a result of the DESB's poor research, and not following a previous retcon; something which is LFL own policy toward continuity.

So do you conceed that the DESB flat out contradicts what is written in the trilogy or not? Yes or no will do.

Yeah, I do, or I wouldn't have made that argument. Yes.

That Rukh didn't 'accidently' trip and stab Thrawn. He killed him because of Leia's evidence that the Noghri people were being inslaved by him, as FTeik said earlier. Once again showing what a bunch of sour grapes the entire DE saga is made of.

I know that, for Christ's sake. I read the fucking trilogy. It says that Palpatine was using Thrawn as a distraction for his return, and that Thrawn's fall was no mistake.

Now I don't know what that means, and I speculate that whatever Palpatine's hand was in Thrawn's downfall, probably had to do with seeing to it that Ruhk caught wind of Thrawn's shit from his fellow Noghri before his most vital battle.

If Palpatine had enough agents manipulating to make large segments of the Imperial Navy vanish without anyone figuring out where they went, and the fact that Palpatine is a fucking Sith Lord with clairvoyant powers, its not a stretch for me to see how he could drop the right pins in the right places and minutely engineer Thrawn's fall at the right time.

Daniel Wallace even has speculated that Palpatine manipulated the post-Thrawn's death Imperial factions through his Sidious persona and was able to make them all cooperate to retake Coruscant while still not realizing what he'd been doing or that he was alive yet.

Anyway, again, the central point stands.

The Dark Empire Sourcebook is of equal canonical standing as The Thrawn Trilogy; both are official publications. LFL policy favours the more recent source in smoothing contradictions. So one bends TTT before DESB. Sorry if you don't like that, but unless you think Leeland Chee's opinion as keeper of the fucking canon Holocron is irrelevent or DESB is of a complete lower tier than TTT (hint, hint: saying, "It's a sourcebook!!!11!" is not sufficient, as currently their only exists two levels of canon, and one distinct level of official. And besides, if that was the case, there'd be no point in releasing secondary reference materials to smooth the continuity screwups in SW because the original sources with the screw-ups would override their own retcons).

Show me where I was arguing about that you moron.

Well you and NecronLord attacked the DESB's quality as evidence, which implies that it is somehow untrue. Why else quibble over the "Palpatine had a hand in Thrawn's downfall" bit? Or any of the rest? I've supplied all of the remarks regarding even LFL policy regarding these contradictions, as well as some of my own intrinsic continuity fixes. Moreover, you implied the DESB is a piece of shit, which you cannot qualify because you don't know whether they did their research but had to go with a continuity fix previously made, thus making it neither the publisher's nor the author's fault. So what is your position, then?

This shows us that Thrawn was given command of the remaining Imperial fleet in the Outer Rim by the ministers there who put aside their differences and allowed him to take charge of what largely remained as the most cohesive Imperial territory left.

The Emperor's Ruling Circle did not know Palpatine was alive, and thus did not speak for him. They gave Thrawn control.

However;

Isn't that lovely. I particularly liked the bolded section, don't you? The source book clearly tells us that none of Palpatine's servants were aware of what he could accomplish with his clones. In the earlier quote it painfully tells us that Thrawn was acting on a mandate from the 'ministers', and yet in this it tells us he was 'pressing his claim'.

What a load of tripe. How can someone be pressing their claim against someone who everyone considers dead? To say Thrawn is a traitor that needed to be 'dealt' with is ridiculous. Palpy turns up, and Thrawn would have bent his knee, but because the DESB is written by such incompatant morons, we get not only contradictions with the novels, but contradictions with its self.

And Palpatine apparently felt differently. Don't you get it? Palpatine could read his mind, and Thrawn's New Order, in the trilogy, is not the same animal as Palpatine foresaw for the galaxy. He probably saw any single charismatic and powerful leader with significant power as a potential threat and therefore helped get a rid of him. Besides, it also says that Thrawn was being used a diversion. So, Palpatine decided that Thrawn with lots of power was something he wasn't comfortable with, and that he'd make a good sideshow while he put his own plans together. Whether Thrawn would've bent the knee to Palpatine and returned to him the Empire-without-the-Deep-Core-and-the-warlords is anyone's guess. Point was, apparently Palpatine saw him as expendable and didn't even want to risk it, and was willing to sacrifice him either way as a diversion.

Besides, every tin-pot warlord in the ex-Empire was pushing a claim to rule it themselves, whether or not they were aware that their Emperor was still alive is irrelevent. How is it impossible to run a claim for the Empire proper on the Rim because Palpatine is alive and they don't know? How is that relevent at all? They don't know and they try to rule the components of the Empire that Palpatine set loose and hadn't withdrawn to the Deep Core.

Anyway, we know what Palpatine really did with Thrawn and felt about him, so regardless of Thrawn surviving and winning at Bilbringi, I very much doubt that Palpatine wouldn't just adjust his plans accordingly and still execute everything much the same.

[Illuminatus Primus]

Or Thrawn was unaware that Palpatine disagreed. Oh, oops.

Which is only reasonable since none of Palpy's servants knew of his little clone trick. But how this makes Thrawn a traitor is beyond me.

One can be viewed as a potential threat or liability with or without knowledge, how is that difficult to grasp?

Well since when has a sourcebook of another series been on the same level as the actual novels themselves? And does this mean, that you conceed that yes the DESB flatly contradicts the novels, yes or no?

Yes, and, since a Sourcebook is official, and a novel is official, yeah, they're on the same level.

And don't try and BS through that Cerasi quote, either. It simply says that there are the movie (let's call that, "A-level Canon"), the companion materials to the films such as the VD's, ICS's, scripts, comic depictions, radio dramas, and novelisations ("B-level Canon"), and then there's everything else (Official). After that its "point of view" and "foggy window" analogies for why the material must be treated not so much as a rigid history, but more vague and fluidic. The idea is to get people not to take comic panels 100% literal, cuz, well, artists are all different. Now if you have definitive evidence that somehow secondary materials are official less than novels, I'd like to see it.

I just thought of something, since Zahn's duology were written well after both the DESB and the Essential Guide, and Mara quite clearly thinks Luke is loony when he says that what he faced on Byss was the Emperor in a clone body (and the Source book says that Mara would have been aware of that trick), does that mean that it wasn't Emperor Palpy at all, because newer > older?

Mara's opinion cannot contradict other third-person perspectives, because we must assume under SoD that they're impartial historians from a later date.

Besides, Gamer #5 explicitly states Palpatine's cloning and survivial (as Palpatine's spirit) in a direct line of transfer from Endor to Luke meeting him again on Byss.

And Gamer #5 is post-VotF, and so is the NEGTC.

[Crown]

Whatever, I always thought C'boath was the Guardian, but if you want to run around and scream, that's fine by me.

Oh piss off, this wasn't even in relation to whether or not C'baoth was the guardian or not, it was you telling us about 'the two Jorus and Joruus C'baoth's' like it was some big fucking relevation.

The DESB is evidence, it does count, and the answer to this thread remains the same.

The DESB is inherently wrong and contradictory evidence, and it cannot be used to superceed the novels themselves dumb ass.

Your argument is predicated on the assumption that the DESB was horribly researched and shoddily made, which is obviously undermined if certain facts of continuity had been previously retconned and the DESB was held to that standard.

No my arguement is that the DESB is WRONG on many issues cosidering the HttE trilogy.

Get it?

Do you?

It's not exactly a shot against the DESB, its author, or its publishers if they did know about that HttE said but because it'd already been changed they had to live with it. And its LFL policy to run with later sources, even if they contradict the original one.

That still doesn't change the fact that THE DESB CONTRADICTS THE NOVELS. Do you understand that? How many times to I have to repeat it?

What are you talking about? Jorus C'boath was Palpatine's personal Jedi consultant. The first time Luke looks up his name he get very curious about this.

Yes, sorry I just found the reference, Dark Force Rising paperback page 53, although what this had to do with the arguement at hand (Joruus C'baoth being the Guardian) I have no fucking idea.

Except the inhabitants of Mount Tantiss were the thralls of C'boath (remember all the babbling about "personal power" he possessed?), just like all the rest. They were literally extentions of his own mind, so treating them like independent, reliable, and objective witnesses doesn't work very well. That's an continuity fix of sorts, and take it as you will.

Bullshit. First, they didn't seem too 'enthralled' by C'baoth when they were telling Luke and the others about him, putting him into the same catagory as the Empire and the Guardian. Second they helped Luke on the condition that he would get rid of C'baoth and the Empire. In thrall my ass

But as you know, it is fucked up. But again, how do you know that this is a result of the DESB's poor research, and not following a previous retcon; something which is LFL own policy toward continuity.

Because it isn't a policy you dumb ass. Your own quote spells it out as a 'rule of thumb'. It says things like 'in general' and 'tend to favour' bullshit ambiguity IS NOT A POLICY. It is an attempt to not throw the baby out with the bath water, and it most certainly doesn't mean that the DESB bullshit (as well as the Essential guides bullshit) about C'baoth actually being the Guardian would take preceedance over the trilogies stating it IN 3 OF THE FUCKING BOOKS, emphatically that he wasn't.

It is an error, that we can rationalise as being shoddy research. YOU CAN'T JUST CHANGE THE ENTIRE C'BAOTH STORY ARC IN THE TRILOGY JUST BECAUSE OF SHITTY SOURCEBOOK FUCK UPS!

Yeah, I do, or I wouldn't have made that argument. Yes.

Fuck, now that wasn't so hard was it?

I know that, for Christ's sake. I read the fucking trilogy. It says that Palpatine was using Thrawn as a distraction for his return, and that Thrawn's fall was no mistake.

Now I don't know what that means, and I speculate that whatever Palpatine's hand was in Thrawn's downfall, probably had to do with seeing to it that Ruhk caught wind of Thrawn's shit from his fellow Noghri before his most vital battle.

If Palpatine had enough agents manipulating to make large segments of the Imperial Navy vanish without anyone figuring out where they went, and the fact that Palpatine is a fucking Sith Lord with clairvoyant powers, its not a stretch for me to see how he could drop the right pins in the right places and minutely engineer Thrawn's fall at the right time.

Daniel Wallace even has speculated that Palpatine manipulated the post-Thrawn's death Imperial factions through his Sidious persona and was able to make them all cooperate to retake Coruscant while still not realizing what he'd been doing or that he was alive yet.

That's a nice appeal to ignorance fallacy there Primy. How about this; Palpy (being a Sith Lord) already knew that Thrawn was doomed to failure? To be betrayed by his body guard?

Anyway, again, the central point stands.

The Dark Empire Sourcebook is of equal canonical standing as The Thrawn Trilogy; both are official publications. LFL policy favours the more recent source in smoothing contradictions. So one bends TTT before DESB. Sorry if you don't like that, but unless you think Leeland Chee's opinion as keeper of the fucking canon Holocron is irrelevent or DESB is of a complete lower tier than TTT (hint, hint: saying, "It's a sourcebook!!!11!" is not sufficient, as currently their only exists two levels of canon, and one distinct level of official. And besides, if that was the case, there'd be no point in releasing secondary reference materials to smooth the continuity screwups in SW because the original sources with the screw-ups would override their own retcons).

ONE FUCKING LINE IN A SOURCEBOOK CANNOT CHANGE THE WHOLE FUCKIGN STORY ARC OF A CENTRAL CHARACTER IN THE NOVEL TRILOGY. WE RECONCILE IT AS BEING SHODDY RESEARCH OR A DELIBERATE MISTAKE AND MOVE ON.

What is the problem here?

Well you and NecronLord attacked the DESB's quality as evidence, which implies that it is somehow untrue. Why else quibble over the "Palpatine had a hand in Thrawn's downfall" bit? Or any of the rest? I've supplied all of the remarks regarding even LFL policy regarding these contradictions, as well as some of my own intrinsic continuity fixes. Moreover, you implied the DESB is a piece of shit, which you cannot qualify because you don't know whether they did their research but had to go with a continuity fix previously made, thus making it neither the publisher's nor the author's fault. So what is your position, then?

My position is that 1 line in the DESB is not enough to throw out the entie story arc of the character Joruus C'baoth as presented in the HttE trilogy. To assume it is, is fucking stupid. Furthermore Leland Chee's quote doesn't give any kind of green light to do so arbitarily and only a moron with a hardon for their own private Idaho would try and make out that it does. Clear for you?

The Emperor's Ruling Circle did not know Palpatine was alive, and thus did not speak for him. They gave Thrawn control.

However;

<snip my own post>

And Palpatine apparently felt differently. Don't you get it? Palpatine could read his mind, and Thrawn's New Order, in the trilogy, is not the same animal as Palpatine foresaw for the galaxy. He probably saw any single charismatic and powerful leader with significant power as a potential threat and therefore helped get a rid of him. Besides, it also says that Thrawn was being used a diversion. So, Palpatine decided that Thrawn with lots of power was something he wasn't comfortable with, and that he'd make a good sideshow while he put his own plans together. Whether Thrawn would've bent the knee to Palpatine and returned to him the Empire-without-the-Deep-Core-and-the-warlords is anyone's guess. Point was, apparently Palpatine saw him as expendable and didn't even want to risk it, and was willing to sacrifice him either way as a diversion.

Besides, every tin-pot warlord in the ex-Empire was pushing a claim to rule it themselves, whether or not they were aware that their Emperor was still alive is irrelevent. How is it impossible to run a claim for the Empire proper on the Rim because Palpatine is alive and they don't know? How is that relevent at all? They don't know and they try to rule the components of the Empire that Palpatine set loose and hadn't withdrawn to the Deep Core.

Anyway, we know what Palpatine really did with Thrawn and felt about him, so regardless of Thrawn surviving and winning at Bilbringi, I very much doubt that Palpatine wouldn't just adjust his plans accordingly and still execute everything much the same.

Which as I pointed out was another contradiction in the DESB with its self no less. Thrawn was given control because he lacked a powerbase so that he can be controled by the council. If he was no threat to them, how could he be a threat to Palpatine? He COULDN'T.

The fucking piece of shit sourcebook contradicts its self for crying out loud. Why anyone takes it as 'gospel' is beyond me. It was a mistake, we move on, but you seem to be holding onto this one piece of fucking blatant erroneous bullshit with an almost zealot kind of zeal. LET. IT. GO.

[Crown]

Fuck it. Here's my theory;

The Guardian was Joruus C'baoth. He cloned himself, and his clone (the clone of a clone of the original Jorus C'baoth, i.e. the one Luke met) killed him. Because he was a clone of a clone, he was highly unstable and thus when Thrawn met him, he was confused because he matched the files he unearthed of what the Guardian was meant to look like. Thus explaining his reason for being there, his background being so murky. The discrepancy between the evidence in the HttE trilogy and the DESB.

There.

[Illuminatus Primus]

The DESB is inherently wrong and contradictory evidence, and it cannot be used to superceed the novels themselves dumb ass.

Yes it can, imbecile.

Its an equal-value source, and also it follows the novels, and therefore it is more correct.

The Sourcebook is official. So is the TTT. The DESB was published later, therefore, the DESB is prefered in resolving contradictions.

I gave you the fucking quotes. You have yet to show why the DESB is lower-tier official (BY LFL's POLICY) besides screaming that it is a sourcebook. Sorry, but secondary source materials are official, just like the original stories.

No my arguement is that the DESB is WRONG on many issues cosidering the HttE trilogy.

Sure, they're contradictory, but you cannot throw-out the DESB. And "it's a Sourcebook!!111!" is not grounds for dismissing sources, get it, dipshit?

That still doesn't change the fact that THE DESB CONTRADICTS THE NOVELS. Do you understand that? How many times to I have to repeat it?

I said yes, but if you want to joust with windmills that's your business, not mine.

Yes, sorry I just found the reference, Dark Force Rising paperback page 53, although what this had to do with the arguement at hand (Joruus C'baoth being the Guardian) I have no fucking idea.

It doesn't. But you said Jorus C'boath had virtually no association with Palaptine despite the TTT itself emphasizing their past assocation.

Bullshit. First, they didn't seem too 'enthralled' by C'baoth when they were telling Luke and the others about him, putting him into the same catagory as the Empire and the Guardian. Second they helped Luke on the condition that he would get rid of C'baoth and the Empire. In thrall my ass

Back then, they were controlled; at that time C'boath was under the ysalamiri, and they were free to do whatever they wanted, moron.

Because it isn't a policy you dumb ass. Your own quote spells it out as a 'rule of thumb'. It says things like 'in general' and 'tend to favour' bullshit ambiguity IS NOT A POLICY. It is an attempt to not throw the baby out with the bath water, and it most certainly doesn't mean that the DESB bullshit (as well as the Essential guides bullshit) about C'baoth actually being the Guardian would take preceedance over the trilogies stating it IN 3 OF THE FUCKING BOOKS, emphatically that he wasn't.

Oh, I know, they just said that so you could turn around, do the exact opposite, and pretend that all later sources are invalidated by the original material. WHICH IS TOTAL BULLSHIT.

Hobbie dies when his snowspeeder careens into the AT-AT commanded by Veers on Hoth in the novelisation, which as a head-impact killed him too.

Yet, LFL retconned that and resurrected Hobbie AND Veers.

Think about it, fuckmook, if the original source materials ALWAYS were paramount, than there'd be no point in revision or retconning past material or contradictions among them, because those original problems would invalidate the solutions later published, idiot.

You're just bitching that it isn't hard-and-fast rules, well fine, but you cannot go and do the exact reverse because you don't like that several sources decided to retcon your baby trilogy. I don't fucking care. You don't have grounds for dismissing other sources just because you don't like them.

It is an error, that we can rationalise as being shoddy research.

No, idiot, because that's a break in SoD. And the TTT is just as much "in-universe history" (as Mike prefers to look at official under SoD) as the DESB and Essential Guide.

And LFL rules of thumb, historical precedent, and general habit, whatever the fuck you want to call it, runs with the later source, of which there are several (The Dark Empire Sourcebook, The Essential Guide to Characters, The Essential Guide to Planets and Moons, all equal in the canon heirarchy).

Sorry, by SoD too, TTT is just some story written in-universe about the events of Thrawn's returns. Three other historical sources contradict it, and historically are given more validity than the prior source (LFL rule-of-thumb), therefore, we go by the latter sources.

YOU CAN'T JUST CHANGE THE ENTIRE C'BAOTH STORY ARC IN THE TRILOGY JUST BECAUSE OF SHITTY SOURCEBOOK FUCK UPS!

Yeah you can. In fact, this is both correct under SoD and LFL historical precedent and general habit (since the word "policy" is evil bad, and according to Mr. Crown, the great authority on these matters, I should do exactly 180 degrees different than what Leeland Chee, keeper of the Holocron for Christ's sake, says LFL does, oh yes).

That's a nice appeal to ignorance fallacy there Primy. How about this; Palpy (being a Sith Lord) already knew that Thrawn was doomed to failure? To be betrayed by his body guard?

Bullshit. It isn't Appeal to Ignorance. That is assuming something is true because you haven't proved it false. We know Palpatine did something, because Thrawn's death was intentional (you yourself found the quote and cited it, and then whined about it, so I do believe it is evidence), some Noghri were still aligned with the Empire later (Mysteries of the Sith), and Palpatine was using Thrawn as a diversion.

"Palpatine knew that Thrawn was going to be stabbed by Rukh"? How does that make it no accident. Tell me, genius, if Palpatine knows through the Force that there'll be a turbolift failure in the Palace, does that make the failure of the lift "no mistake"? Give me a break; "no contender could ever be allowed to become too powerful" (emphasis mine). You're full of shit.

Still, no contender could ever be allowed to become too powerful. It was no accident when Thrawn fell. Palpatine never knew if Thrawn guessed that he was being used to divert attention from his own return.

Right. If you think your explanation satisfies the evidence, you're in need of some medication.

ONE FUCKING LINE IN A SOURCEBOOK CANNOT CHANGE THE WHOLE FUCKIGN STORY ARC OF A CENTRAL CHARACTER IN THE NOVEL TRILOGY. WE RECONCILE IT AS BEING SHODDY RESEARCH OR A DELIBERATE MISTAKE AND MOVE ON.

No we do not. More than one historical source (all following the original and thus preferable) disagrees, and more than once, too. And besides, the precise past of a character who is totally insane is not a major blight upon the plot of the entire novel, drama queen.

You have yet to provide quotes and reasons why the DESB, and the two Essential Guides are both all lower in value than the TTT besides your wanting it to be, NOR have you justified why I should take the advice of the guy who works for LFL and who's job is to coordinate and determine the overall history of the SW Universe and do the exact opposite, because poor little Crown says so.

Well, no. I followed LFL's path on issues like that (in fact, the one they took to publish two sources after being run-through by their continuity editors) and worked from there. You don't like that it works this way? I don't care. You can take your rancid guano and cram it back up your bitchy asshole.

And, since I provided the burden to continue to make your claims despite the evidence I cited and the very guidelines LFL goes by in these situations, which were in fact used to clear two additional publications after the primary one and you refused to do so, instead justifying it precisely how I said you would ("it's a Sourcebook!!11!!"), which, I may add, was fallacious and irrelevent, I accept your concession, asshole.

What is the problem here?

That you don't get that this little piece of Zahn's trilogy was altered by another source and upheld over two later publications at least, and that that is LFL's general guideline for these situations, and by SoD anyway the later and more numerous sources override anyway, yet you won't concede, its annoying.

Instead, you just bitch "it's a Sourcebook!!11!" and think you're proving something by typing on all caps like a furious crack rock-eating loon.

My position is that 1 line in the DESB is not enough to throw out the entie story arc of the character Joruus C'baoth as presented in the HttE trilogy. To assume it is, is fucking stupid. Furthermore Leland Chee's quote doesn't give any kind of green light to do so arbitarily and only a moron with a hardon for their own private Idaho would try and make out that it does. Clear for you?

Translation: "I don't like the DESB, and I like the TTT more, so even though LFL itself OK-ed the DESB and the successors which followed its lead, according to their guidelines, and that the DESB and TTT and the ECs are all equal in value, I'll do EXACTLY OPPOSITE Chee's guidelines.

Why? I don't like DE or the DESB."

My response: Too fucking bad. Besides, the continuity editors themselves approved the continuation of the DESB's retcon, which further supports my argument, and the generalisation offered by Chee. Certainly, you can't do the fucking opposite. Dismissal and disregarding is always the VERY LAST solution and certainly not to be taken in precise opposition to LFL habit, particularly when the other side offers "well C'boath was insane and self-deluding and brainfucked some of his own subjects previously" as opposed to "disregard three different sources." Now Chee says it tends do, I suppose you'll offer some objective criteria why the trilogy is cloth on the shrine and the Sourcebook is pigshit in this unique instance, but no, word count, percieved value, and "it's a Sourcebook!!11!" doesn't cut it, asshole.

And despite what you say, the novel and sourcebooks are all equal in value, AND this doesn't emasculate the entire trilogy, you whining shit.

Which as I pointed out was another contradiction in the DESB with its self no less. Thrawn was given control because he lacked a powerbase so that he can be controled by the council. If he was no threat to them, how could he be a threat to Palpatine? He COULDN'T.

You're a total idiot.

When Thrawn came back from the UR, he picked up Pelleaon on the Chimeara, and the Ruling Circle controlled the Empire.

ERGO, a single ISD, even with Thrawn, doesn't threaten the entire Empire under the Ruling Circle (they didn't know about whatever shit he found in the boonies either-they thought it was an exile; you read the duology).

So they decided he could help them.

THEN, now that Thrawn had the entire Empire-minus-Palpy's-reserves behind him, and is a strategic genius and about to crush the New Republic in short order, and has quickly began to make the Empire a competitive entity for control of the galaxy again, he's decidably in a different position, at least militarily, than he was when he just got back from the UR and had to ask the Ruling Circle for a command, get it, moron?

The fucking piece of shit sourcebook contradicts its self for crying out loud. Why anyone takes it as 'gospel' is beyond me. It was a mistake, we move on, but you seem to be holding onto this one piece of fucking blatant erroneous bullshit with an almost zealot kind of zeal. LET. IT. GO.

Right. You're just too fucking stupid to realize that Thrawn when he comes back from the UR with absolutely nothing is QUITE different from Thrawn in control of the Empire winning a war against the NR and possessing a lot-of Palpatine's secret weapons, you know, the state he was in when he died as Palpatine wished, you know in that "not allowing any contender to become too powerful" bit. Why must Thrawn's power be consistent in a war where his support changes within the very novels you cite, asshole? Did you assume it was his hand-to-hand fighting ability? The Ruling Circle fearing Thrawn's street whoopass? You're just a dogmatic and obtuse brain-damaged idiot.

Not to mention even if you attack these mistakes, how does that invalidate the entire source? Do I try to throw out everything with the five-mile Executor? Your agenda, from post one on this subject, has been to undermine and dismiss the DESB because you do not like it, and you really don't like that its take and retcons of events were carried over the trilogy and continuously published by LFL after review by its continuity editors time, and time again.

You're transparent, and pathetic.

[Crown]

<snip the most hypocritical bullshit I have ever had the pleasure reading>

Let me get this straight. Zahn changes one 10th tier characters first name, this character was only introduced in an out of print gamer and one would have to be anally retentive up to the point of being able to crush walnuts in there to even care about it.

You scream bloody murder and try and go on a crusade.

I point out that a shitty source book contradicts one of the most popular trilogies ever written and I get; too bad they are on the same level of canon and the sourcebook is newer, nya-nya.

Riiiiiiiiiiiight.

You hypocrisy is only limited by your agenda you dishonest little fuck. I am just pleased that we got it out all in the open like this. Next time you go on one of your 'Zahn rides roughshod over continuity' crusades, rest assured that I will be bringing this little gem up.

[Illuminatus Primus]

<snip the most hypocritical bullshit I have ever had the pleasure reading>

Let me get this straight. Zahn changes one 10th tier characters first name, this character was only introduced in an out of print gamer and one would have to be anally retentive up to the point of being able to crush walnuts in there to even care about it.

You scream bloody murder and try and go on a crusade.

No, moron, you completely revealed your personal colors here. I'm debating the subject. EVEN IF I AM A HYPOCRITICAL FUCK, it has ZERO grounds on my own position. It's called the Tu Quoque fallacy.

And my beef, asshole, was that they caught the mistake and pointed it out while the story was still in the editing phase.

Now, I would agree with you on this, if they caught the error on the DESB and told the author to go ahead, that's horseshit. Continuity editors should do their job, or why are they even reading the material if they're going to approve such a mistake, especially when its simple to correct?

How that changes the fact that after they published the DESB and two subsequent sources (thus implicitly thrice approving the mistake and making it official truth) you can't do shit about it and it is official I don't know.

I never argued that Survivor's Quest was wrong, I argued that if they do catch it, they should change it, because whenever we don't have to make a post hoc ugly continuity fix, the better.

Moreover, Leeland Chee's quote came from an explanation on why they were accomodating Zahn on Survivor's Quest as the reason why they approved it, which I thought was stretching since SQ hadn't been printed when Rostini caught it.

YOU are trying to argue that AFTER they published all three sources and thus OK-ed the original fuck-up AT LEAST two times (assuming the retcon wasn't approved from the outset) that the three sources are somehow not part of the official SW history. That is in NO WAY analogous to me arguing that if they catch an error they should tell Zahn to fix it while it hasn't been printed yet.

But I'll let you imagine it is, you dumb little fuck. You couldn't even be bothered to know what you were really talking about before you lashed at me, asshole.

[I point out that a shitty source book contradicts one of the most popular trilogies ever written and I get; too bad they are on the same level of canon and the sourcebook is newer, nya-nya.

Appeal to popularity. And I notice you also think ad nauseum is valid. Right.

[You hypocrisy is only limited by your agenda you dishonest little fuck. I am just pleased that we got it out all in the open like this. Next time you go on one of your 'Zahn rides roughshod over continuity' crusades, rest assured that I will be bringing this little gem up.

And I'll be sure to point out that you cannot read, and that you're a grudge holding little asshole who wants to argue the people, not the issue, even though the incident cited isn't analogous to this.

I never, ever argued that we should all throw out Survivor's Quest as evidence, and since you claimed what I said was analogous to you, prove it, asshole, or fucking concede. I'm sick of your trash talk with ZERO back-up.

[Illuminatus Primus]

Here is the aforementioned thread.

I ask everyone and anyone to find me saying that Survivor's Quest should be thrown out as evidence because prior material disagreed.

Moreover, my point was consistent. I knew that since they let it slide, and SQ did go to print with the error, the error became official and we had to deal with yet another clunky continuity "fix" to correct it. In fact, it was the same logic for why the DESB is evidence by my argument in this thread that I was angry that they let it slide, because I'd have to apply the same to SQ and it meant another error.

Now, if we found out now that Rostini caught the DESB hacking up Zahn's writing of the C'boath background, and let them slide, I would agree whole-heartedly that it is bullshit.

But after it went to print and two subsequent, equal-value sources also went to print with the same change preserved, its official and you can't throw it out, which has been my point about the DESB since the beginning.

Now regardless of my opinion of Zahn, I ask you all to search for me claiming that the Survivor's Quest novel should be ruled as weightless versus Elaine Cunningham's Red Sky, Blue Flame (the original source).