EmbracerOfDarkness whines about Q(Split from PSW)

[Perseid]

Another line that speaks how you like Q having powers and crying it's unfair.

Yet again, I don't have a hard-on for the Q. Whichever spin you put on it, they're insanely powerful, but what bothers me is when people say that certain races can be powerful (in a magic sense) "because they are" or "because they deserve it," but they will say that the Q are "cheating with technology." To me, it's fan-wank in reverse.

So really all this bull is really you not liking the fact that a good amount of people agree with the tech theory than thinking Q are powerful beings.

I don't recall anybody saying that the Q are not powerful, just that they cheat with technology. Like I said, it's fan-wank in reverse, playing down the entire (out of universe) core reason for the species being there in the first place, just to say "the Q are t3h lame!"

The reason the people of this board "GRANT", as you put it, certain races Supernatural powers is because there is plenty of in universe evidence to prove it, like the Jedi. Whereas with a race like the Q there is no in universe explanation as to how their powers work so people come up with theories.

Now stop your fucking whineing and start thinking about what you post before you post it so you don't hijack another thread.

[General Zod]

I don't recall anybody saying that the Q are not powerful, just that they cheat with technology. Like I said, it's fan-wank in reverse, playing down the entire (out of universe) core reason for the species being there in the first place, just to say "the Q are t3h lame!"

The reason the people of this board "GRANT", as you put it, certain races Supernatural powers is because there is plenty of in universe evidence to prove it, like the Jedi. Whereas with a race like the Q there is no in universe explanation as to how their powers work so people come up with theories.

There doesn't necessarily have to be an in-universe explanation per se. However, when there is precedence for godlike beings deriving their powers from ultra-advanced technology, such as numersou beings in TOS, then logically it follows that a similar being who passes themselves off as uber powerful would be similarly technologically derived, as opposed to some form of magic.

[General Zod]

Ghetto edit: fuck, could a passing mod fix my quote tags? Thanks.

[Darth Cronos the Proud]

What's that I hear? It must be the sound of a fucking newbie working hard to earn brownie points! It sounds almost like a kid jumping up and down, and shouting "Me too! Me too!"

Don't attack me because I've pointed out the fact that you are being a trolling dumbfuck instead of just not having a certain type of intellectual training.

I simply wanted to point out that the definition of "unrealistic" is definitely franchise-dependant for a lot of people around here, which it is.

You find me one instance where someone (who isn't a trolling fucktard and can use SoD properly) says that what Q does is "unrealistic."

Oh, guess what, you won't. All the people here have said is that there is room to question how Q gets and uses his powers because there isn't conclusive canon proof anywhere in ST, but in SW we have so much canon and official literature proof of how Jedi get and use their powers that there just isn't any room to question it. Now if you can understand this simple difference, some of the people here might not be so inclined to use every synonym for "idiot" to describe you.

[Soontir C'boath]

I take back the word omnipotent, it wasn't the right word.
You just don't like the fact that your beloved beings are being downplayed by others who agrees with the tech theory. The fact of the matter is, you obviously don't like the tech theory as you make a broad attack on those who agree with it by saying some "bang" to it. The fact that you even refer to Q as having "mystique" only opens up your thought that you like to think of them as having powers beyond us mortal beings.

My beloved beings? This "with us or against us" mentality would be hillarious, if it wasn't sad. I don't give a rats arse about the Q, I even just corrected you when you said the Q were omnipotent, didn't I? All I am saying is that there's a certain amount of bias, on the topic of the Q in particular.

*cough* So um, yea. That's it?

Another line that speaks how you like Q having powers and crying it's unfair.

Yet again, I don't have a hard-on for the Q. Whichever spin you put on it, they're insanely powerful, but what bothers me is when people say that certain races can be powerful (in a magic sense) "because they are" or "because they deserve it," but they will say that the Q are "cheating with technology." To me, it's fan-wank in reverse.

In which you still yet have shown who actually did.

So really all this bull is really you not liking the fact that a good amount of people agree with the tech theory than thinking Q are powerful beings.

I don't recall anybody saying that the Q are not powerful, just that they cheat with technology. Like I said, it's fan-wank in reverse, playing down the entire (out of universe) core reason for the species being there in the first place, just to say "the Q are t3h lame!"

*cough*(damn I'm coming down fast!) Nitpicking and excuses and excuses. You still haven't provided who actually done this.

Plus, if you really didn't like that some people "bang" to it, you should be able to name who the fuck they are. Bitch.

I already named one, Mr. Wong. And before a certain moron says "oh look, he's striking out against Wong," I'm not. I am simply naming Wong because he is at the forefront of my mind as the owner of the board, and I remember him having a lengthy debate about it (Q vs. Chewbacca & Han Solo thread, I think.)

Name dropping without what he actually said? Why don't you say it was Jesus. That's a little bit more believable.

You've provided only one person out of the "some people" and you didn't even provide quotes of the matter.

Back up your claims. If you're too lazy then as I said before, shut the fuck up.

[Embracer Of Darkness]

If you are asked for evidence to support a claim you've made, you should either produce this evidence or concede the point until such time as you can produce this evidence. People who consistently ignore requests for evidence to support their claims (particularly contentious claims) are not looked upon kindly here.

Well, I did say that you have been here a lot longer than me, SirNitram, and that you must've seen exactly what I'm talking about. If not, then I guess you have selective memory.

I also said that Mr. Wong (respectfully) was one of the board members who I believed preferred to "downplay" the Q, and provided the name of a thread for your benefit. The "Q Vs. Chewie & Han Solo" thread in PSW was an extremely long thread in which Mr. Wong spent pages and pages talking about how the Q being in any way supernatural was absurd, and I'm sure he'd agree too.)

But, since you're ignoring this, I guess I'm breaking DR 6 by proxy.

If you have a complaint about the whole board, you are obviously unhappy here, so leave. Complaints like "so this is the way you do things at SD.Net" and "the prevailing attitude here seems to be" etc clearly indicate that you dislike something about our entire board culture and you should leave. If you persist on staying and acting like this, we will make you leave.

So go on. Support your bullshit claims. Or get the fuck out. That is how it works here.

Yeah, I've actually been considering the rule AR 4 myself for a while now, and you've helped me to finally decide where I stand on it.

It seems I am one of these people, since I now believe beyond all reasonable doubt that some of you (a minority in the more prominent members) are egotistical keyboard warriors, who no doubt use this forum to compensate for shortcomings and inadequacies in the real world.

Now, don't get me wrong, I used to appreciate the atmosphere here for a long time, and the attitude too. Sometimes it's better to be cruel than to be kind, and I'll be the last person to deny that I often make comments that deserve a negative response, but the more and more I've visited here over the last few years, the less and less I seem to have posted. It's finally hit me that most of you don't act this way to educate idiots, but you act this way because you can in an anonymous environment where you can't possibly suffer any consequences of such.

So, I guess I've broken AR 4 today by questioning the motives and attitudes of the more prominent board members, which means I do not belong here. Don't worry, the door won't hit me in the ass on the way out, I won't give you the satisfaction of stroking your egos and complexes any longer at my expense.

*Bows gracefully and bids you all adeux.*

[LadyTevar]

Goodbye, and Good riddance.

[SirNitram]

If you are asked for evidence to support a claim you've made, you should either produce this evidence or concede the point until such time as you can produce this evidence. People who consistently ignore requests for evidence to support their claims (particularly contentious claims) are not looked upon kindly here.

Well, I did say that you have been here a lot longer than me, SirNitram, and that you must've seen exactly what I'm talking about. If not, then I guess you have selective memory.

No, dipshit. I've been either a participant or observer of most of the Q threads. And you know my conclusion? It's that weasal fucktards like you are worthless cretins who, when you can't win a debate, screech and scream about bias. You have now proven my prediction right, by screeching and screaming instead of supporting your claims.

I also said that Mr. Wong (respectfully) was one of the board members who I believed preferred to "downplay" the Q, and provided the name of a thread for your benefit. The "Q Vs. Chewie & Han Solo" thread in PSW was an extremely long thread in which Mr. Wong spent pages and pages talking about how the Q being in any way supernatural was absurd, and I'm sure he'd agree too.)

When evidence is required of you, quotes or links are required. Given your consistant dishonesty in this thread and on the topic at hand, I don't beleive this is unreasonable. But you will continue to fail to live up to your requirements, because you're a troll.

But, since you're ignoring this, I guess I'm breaking DR 6 by proxy.

Failure to show the evidence is not breaking a rule by proxy, dipshit. It's consciously breaking it.

If you have a complaint about the whole board, you are obviously unhappy here, so leave. Complaints like "so this is the way you do things at SD.Net" and "the prevailing attitude here seems to be" etc clearly indicate that you dislike something about our entire board culture and you should leave. If you persist on staying and acting like this, we will make you leave.

So go on. Support your bullshit claims. Or get the fuck out. That is how it works here.

Yeah, I've actually been considering the rule AR 4 myself for a while now, and you've helped me to finally decide where I stand on it.

Where you 'stand' is that you obey or you take the punishments meted out by the Administration. You aren't judged by the users of the Senate to be worthy of contributing your voice there, so you don't get much of a voice, unless you can convince one of them to bring this up for review.

It seems I am one of these people, since I now believe beyond all reasonable doubt that some of you (a minority in the more prominent members) are egotistical keyboard warriors, who no doubt use this forum to compensate for shortcomings and inadequacies in the real world.

Really? That would be interesting. Perhaps you could find some.

Oh, wait. That was an infantile, clumsy attempt at an insult, isn't it? You're so cute when you fail!

Now, don't get me wrong, I used to appreciate the atmosphere here for a long time, and the attitude too. Sometimes it's better to be cruel than to be kind, and I'll be the last person to deny that I often make comments that deserve a negative response, but the more and more I've visited here over the last few years, the less and less I seem to have posted. It's finally hit me that most of you don't act this way to educate idiots, but you act this way because you can in an anonymous environment where you can't possibly suffer any consequences of such.

Here's a hint, dumbshit: Not everyone is like you. Just because you revel in anonymity and use it to act like a big man by breaking rules and then declaring some kind of superiority for coming into someone's private property and being rude, does not mean others do.

Hellfire, the worst part is you're probably aiming this pathetic accusal at me, someone who lost anonymity here a while ago.

So, I guess I've broken AR 4 today by questioning the motives and attitudes of the more prominent board members, which means I do not belong here. Don't worry, the door won't hit me in the ass on the way out, I won't give you the satisfaction of stroking your egos and complexes any longer at my expense.

No, kid. You levelled a claim of bias at the whole board, and like the spineless cuntdribble you are, when challenged, you decided to pull out a soapbox.

*Bows gracefully and bids you all adeux.*

'Gracefully' would imply you actually admitted you were wrong. You did not. You're just another lying twat who wants to get in the 'last word' and pretend superiority.

Kiddo, when you grow up, you will learn coming into someone's home and disrespecting them is not tolerated in civilized societies. In the meantime, enjoy your cloistered little world in your head.

[The Wookiee]

*Bows gracefully and bids you all adeux.*

"Adieu", you stupid fucker. *punts the jerkoff out on his ass*

[SirNitram]

Three bans in 24 hours. Banathon 2006 is upon us!

[RedImperator]

God damn it, Nitram, I was waiting all day to make that exact post.

By the way, it was my idea to put his email in his location.

[Darth Wong]

Too bad I missed out on this whole thread.

It's finally hit me that most of you don't act this way to educate idiots, but you act this way because you can in an anonymous environment where you can't possibly suffer any consequences of such.

That's the funniest thing I've seen all day. He probably didn't even realize the irony of him saying this in the same anonymous environment where he can't possibly suffer any consequences of attacking other peoples' personalities rather than their points.

I'd have to concur with the people who figured he was just sore about being made to look foolish in the thread where he said it was not stupid to play Russian Roulette.