Most retarded "Talifan" criticism ever

Bryan Lambert · Post by **Bryan Lambert** » 2006-05-30 07:38pm

See you keep saying "Lolz read the next article, i'm not being mean!" but you have yet to actually say what was IN this article. Surely it cant be that hard to simply state your case outright instead of constantly pressing that "Dont worry the next article will explain it!"

Oh, no, that's not what I'm saying at all. I may have been imprecise.

You're not going to like part two either. But that's OK, you're not meant to.

I'm not here to get you to like me, or to be OK with the article. I'm just curious if it's possible to bring you to a point where you hate me for the right reasons, and not some freakish projection of me based upon your own insecurities.

The reason I resort to snide remarks and sarcasm is that snide remarks and sarcasm are what the site is about. They're the medium I choose to work with, because it entertains me and it entertains the readership. I do change it up from time to time, for variety's sake, but sarcasm is the meat and snide is the potatoes in the wonderful meal that is You Are Dumb Dot Net.

Jim Raynor · Post by **Jim Raynor** » 2006-05-30 07:39pm

Bryan Lambert wrote:I don't admit the number is bullshit or not bullshit.

So now you're admitting that you're a dumbfuck who doesn't know blatant bullshit when he sees it?

Of course I would think the basketball score is ridiculous. But I'd still mock someone who spent eight months trying to get the filmmakers to change it for the DVD release or reference a different score in the sequel. Because that would be crazy.

MORON. As others have pointed out, the issue is NOT entirely about this one little number. Ms. Traviss is not the first, or even one of the few SW writers to use retardedly small numbers. If Traviss just used the 3 million number and left it at that, this topic would have died quickly. But she actually went on the internet to insult people who criticized her numbers, and then she used later stories to "explain" the pathetic number, rewriting key parts of the SW saga. This is like the basketball movie not only having a ridiculous 300-275 score, but pissing on sports history by acting like it happened before, or coming out with stupid contrived "reasons" in an attempt to make it seem plausible (the score is that high because both teams practiced hard

). And then the script writer goes on his blog to bash his critics, and later writes an even more retarded sequel story.

I can, but I'll have to break it down. The purpose of the Star Wars Insider sentence was what we call a "joke". Jokes are made by people who produce "comedy". Comedy is material written with the express purpose of making the reader laugh.

I'm not buying this pathetic EXCUSE. Even "comedy" is often used to make a point, and anybody can read between the lines of your idiotic column and see that you think you're cooler for supposedly not being as knowledgable or interested in scifi.

Bryan Lambert · Post by **Bryan Lambert** » 2006-05-30 07:43pm

What was the point of putting it up if it didn't even address the topic? I would have thought it better to have actually completed the article so as to make explicitly clear what your views are and what they are based upon (you know, quotes, links, and such).

Because the column wasn't written for you. You are not the target audience, you are the TARGET. That's an important difference.

My audience includes people from all walks of life. I don't always have the luxury of leaping headlong into the point, because the point requires context and backstory and buildup. There are issues of pacing and flow. In this particular case, and this doesn't happen often, the buildup and the context and the backstory and the narrative required more than one day's worth of column. So I split it up.

The people who read the column for entertainment don't mind this, because they know they'll get to read the rest tomorrow. I don't mind this, because I can spend the evening arguing with you lot instead of coming up with something new for tomorrow. You mind this, because you are hurt and angry and impatient. This is not my problem.

nightmare · Post by **nightmare** » 2006-05-30 07:45pm

Bryan Lambert wrote:And my columns are about the ridiculous offense put up in opposition to that number which has gone way into personal attacks and deeply disturbing behavior. So we're even on that score.

We're not even by far. The "ridiculous offense" is for starters actually defence since we're been "counter-attacked" (if you actually want to call justified criticism an attack) way past any sane proportions. We, and I, have just been responding in kind, and might I add, as far as I have seen in a vastly nicer way than the continued opposition justify. You might want to take up the problem with those blowing the thing up in the first place.

Maybe you'd like to say that we should just turn the other cheek and ignore it for the idiocy, insults and censorship that it is. I say no. It's no different from your column, which is verbally attacking broad groups of people in highly insulting manners. I can choose to be the bigger man and ignore it, but that's entirely my choice to make, and I call you on your bullshit just like I called them on theirs.

Bryan Lambert wrote:The rest of your post consists of Latent Swirlie Issues and don't relate to what I'm saying or writing.

No, I'm addressing your column which indirectly claims I need to get a life. I have no "Latent Swirlie Issues" of any kind. Want me to quote it just in case you forgot what you said in it?

Bryan Lambert wrote:"Memo to "The Talifan": BE BETTER... WAIT, YOU'RE HOPELESS."

Bryan Lambert wrote:"At what point are exile, euthanasia, or chemical castration the only alternatives to a lifetime of sad nerditry?"

Bryan Lambert wrote:"And every bit of creative mathsturbation nerds use to fill in the gaps is one more step down the road to Irrevocable Madness, and the aforementioned euthanasia."

Just a few of your golden nuggets. But I'm sure you'll soon claim that I've quoted you out of context, or misunderstood the whole thing. So why don't you explain your incredibly sophisticated column so that we may understand what's in plain daylight for us already, hm? I'll say it again; you're an asshole, but apparently you can't be man enough to stand for it. It's so much easier to insult people when they don't talk back at you, isn't it.

Bryan Lambert · Post by **Bryan Lambert** » 2006-05-30 07:47pm

As others have pointed out, the issue is NOT entirely about this one little number. Ms. Traviss is not the first, or even one of the few SW writers to use retardedly small numbers. If Traviss just used the 3 million number and left it at that, this topic would have died quickly. But she actually went on the internet to insult people who criticized her numbers, and then she used later stories to "explain" the pathetic number, rewriting key parts of the SW saga.

It's interesting that you cite this as a mitigating circumstance. Not everyone would agree.

I'm not buying this pathetic EXCUSE. Even "comedy" is often used to make a point, and anybody can read between the lines of your idiotic column and see that you think you're cooler for supposedly not being as knowledgable or interested in scifi.

I cannot make you believe me. I cannot make you stop seeing things that aren't there. These things are outside my jurisdiction.

18-Till-I-Die · Post by **18-Till-I-Die** » 2006-05-30 07:48pm

So allow me to try and capsulate your argument...

You...think that we're 'sick' or 'insane' because we enjoy something you find tedious and silly.

You then asume that because YOU consider it tedious and silly, that it must have no merit whatsoever to discuss, and anyone interested in scifi debating must have something 'wrong' with them.

By this logic you then assume that you, having no direct 'problems' of your own to speak of, are allowed to mock people who enjoy things that, in your opinion, are stupid.

To achieve this you employ a series of stale jokes, snide comments, and poorly executed attempts at humor.

Am i close?

Jim Raynor · Post by **Jim Raynor** » 2006-05-30 07:49pm

nightmare wrote:Just a few of your golden nuggets. But I'm sure you'll soon claim that I've quoted you out of context, or misunderstood the whole thing.

Nah, the stupid fucker will just claim that he's writing a piece of comedy, and that we should get a life because we're taking his comedic article too seriously. And he'll probably put a comedy disclaimer on that post as well, because he's too much of a chickenshit to stand by what he says.

Jim Raynor · Post by **Jim Raynor** » 2006-05-30 07:51pm

Bryan Lambert wrote:It's interesting that you cite this as a mitigating circumstance. Not everyone would agree.

And those people are what I would call "fucking pussies," for standing by and turning the other cheek while others publicly insult them and continually shit on a franchise they like.

I cannot make you believe me. I cannot make you stop seeing things that aren't there. These things are outside my jurisdiction.

I cannot make you grow a dick. I cannot make you own up to what you say. These things are outside of my jurisdiction.

Bryan Lambert · Post by **Bryan Lambert** » 2006-05-30 08:02pm

Just a few of your golden nuggets. But I'm sure you'll soon claim that I've quoted you out of context, or misunderstood the whole thing. So why don't you explain your incredibly sophisticated column so that we may understand what's in plain daylight for us already, hm? I'll say it again; you're an asshole, but apparently you can't be man enough to stand for it. It's so much easier to insult people when they don't talk back at you, isn't it.

Not at all. I stand by everything I said in the column. It's mean, it's harsh, it's insulting. What part of the domain name youaredumb.net do you think betrays a lack of self-awareness on my part?

The column is not an attack on nerds. It is an attack on bad nerds. It is an attack borne of 30 years of living as, with, and around nerds of all stripes. In real life and the Internet.

And what have I been doing for the past six hours if not spending an excessive amount of time talking with a bunch of very upset people who are talking back at me? It's not like I came here under the delusion that you people were tractable. The whole point of the exercise is that you're willing to argue your point far beyond what sane people would find reasonable. Nevertheless, I'm here, because your boss asked. He didn't even ask nicely. But he asked.

And I liked your forum rules. Almost identical to mine, if followed slightly less assiduously. At the end of the day, we'd probably agree on a lot of things, except, and this is crucial, the collective sanity of people who would escalate a flame war for eight months.

Jim Raynor · Post by **Jim Raynor** » 2006-05-30 08:05pm

So if we don't want to be insane and irredeemably nerdy, we're supposed to shut up and take the public insults, censorship, banning, etc., all while a hack author continues to shit on the SW franchise? Gotcha.

Stark · Post by **Stark** » 2006-05-30 08:07pm

Listen, it's clear that the only person on the internet who is allowed to have an opinion and discuss it is him. He's got the website, people, show some respect for the VIPs! We can't discuss the hilariously bad scaling in recent SW fiction - which, let's be honest, makes us sick, sad pathetic nerd virgins - because he thinks it's lame. Whining about DOOM and politics is a-ok... for him anyway. We might need some sort of ticketing system to determine who is able to discuss what on the internet without being branded a 'nerd' by someone who runs a naff website.

Also, we should just accept everything in movies and printed media, no matter how absurd.

Bryan Lambert · Post by **Bryan Lambert** » 2006-05-30 08:09pm

Code: Select all

You...think that we're 'sick' or 'insane' because we enjoy something you find tedious and silly.

No, I think that some of you are, to varying degrees, sick and insane for completely different reasons, which I keep saying and you keep ignoring.

You then asume that because YOU consider it tedious and silly, that it must have no merit whatsoever to discuss, and anyone interested in scifi debating must have something 'wrong' with them.

No. Silliness isn't a metric I've even alluded to. The tediousness is a side effect.

By this logic you then assume that you, having no direct 'problems' of your own to speak of, are allowed to mock people who enjoy things that, in your opinion, are stupid.

Somehow, despite having all the incorrect assumptions, you've come to the right conclusion. But that's not a surprise - your very own forum rules here say almost exactly the same thing. We just differ on what we consider "stupid".

To achieve this you employ a series of stale jokes, snide comments, and poorly executed attempts at humor.

Those, obviously, are value judgments made by each individual audience member, not something I have control over.

Bryan Lambert · Post by **Bryan Lambert** » 2006-05-30 08:12pm

So if we don't want to be insane and irredeemably nerdy, we're supposed to shut up and take the public insults, censorship, banning, etc., all while a hack author continues to shit on the SW franchise? Gotcha.

Yes! Thank you! That's it, or at least close enough to part of it. In some circles this is known as the Oakley Paradigm.

Would you be willing to help me explain it to the rest of them? I'm having a hell of a time at it.

Jim Raynor · Post by **Jim Raynor** » 2006-05-30 08:12pm

You've now made 19 posts within the span of hours, on a forum that you never took part in before today. How much longer are you going to stay here to defend your stupid column? At what point would you say that you're spending too much time in a useless argument, and that you've become an irredeemable nerd?

Jim Raynor · Post by **Jim Raynor** » 2006-05-30 08:13pm

Bryan Lambert wrote:
So if we don't want to be insane and irredeemably nerdy, we're supposed to shut up and take the public insults, censorship, banning, etc., all while a hack author continues to shit on the SW franchise? Gotcha.
Yes! Thank you! That's it, or at least close enough to part of it.

There you have it folks. Cool = dickless pussy. Next time someone talks trash to you, and keeps talking trash to you, just be quiet and take it. Girls are impressed by this kind of behavior.

Stark · Post by **Stark** » 2006-05-30 08:15pm

Bryan Lambert wrote:Yes! Thank you! That's it, or at least close enough to part of it. In some circles this is known as the Oakley Paradigm.

Would you be willing to help me explain it to the rest of them? I'm having a hell of a time at it.

Who made you an authority? Why should we accept this? You obviously can't support it through debate. Or are you just using your VIP-website-blog decoder ring to declare this true?

EDIT - Oh come on Raynor! We're all sad obsessed basement living virgin nerds! What do we know about being an adult or impressing women? SOME GUY WITH A BLOG SAID WE WERE STUPID. The end, man. It's over for us.

Phil Skayhan · Post by **Phil Skayhan** » 2006-05-30 08:18pm

Bryan Lambert wrote:
What was the point of putting it up if it didn't even address the topic? I would have thought it better to have actually completed the article so as to make explicitly clear what your views are and what they are based upon (you know, quotes, links, and such).
Because the column wasn't written for you. You are not the target audience, you are the TARGET. That's an important difference.

Not when your trying to put forth an argument. Your audience, especially the target, should understand why these fans are the focus of your derision.

My audience includes people from all walks of life. I don't always have the luxury of leaping headlong into the point, because the point requires context and backstory and buildup. There are issues of pacing and flow. In this particular case, and this doesn't happen often, the buildup and the context and the backstory and the narrative required more than one day's worth of column. So I split it up.

Your targets also include people from all walks of like.

As to context, back-story, and build-up, your article contains none of these save for the source of contention between Traviss and others. Rather than require more than one column, greater thought and effort would have negated any misunderstanding about what you wrote.

The people who read the column for entertainment don't mind this, because they know they'll get to read the rest tomorrow. I don't mind this, because I can spend the evening arguing with you lot instead of coming up with something new for tomorrow. You mind this, because you are hurt and angry and impatient. This is not my problem.

Believe me, I find your article entertaining. However, it is probably not for the reasons you intended. And by now you should be able to tell that the only thing about the article that hurts me is the poor writing.

Bryan Lambert · Post by **Bryan Lambert** » 2006-05-30 08:18pm

You've now made 19 posts within the span of hours, on a forum that you never took part in before today. How much longer are you going to stay here to defend your stupid column? At what point would you say that you're spending too much time in a useless argument, and that you've become an irredeemable nerd?

I'm thinking maybe two or three more iterations of you thickies thinking you're scoring points off me by first inviting me to defend my column, then "slamming" me for not defending it to your schedule, then "slamming" me for defending it, 20 GOTO 10.

Ask a sarcastic question, get a sincere answer.

Stark · Post by **Stark** » 2006-05-30 08:20pm

Wow, that's great. Give us another sound byte! I love your little witty one-liners, Bryan, and I hope you continue to school us with your 'not defending shit' mad skillz.

The nerds... um... sincere kettle!

Nah, dammit, I can't do it. Man, you rule at style over substance!

Bryan Lambert · Post by **Bryan Lambert** » 2006-05-30 08:24pm

Who made you an authority? Why should we accept this?

1) Nobody. That's the great thing! I don't claim any authority beyond that of my own nigh-omniscience. I put it out there. People read it or don't. If more people read it today than read it yesterday, I'm doing something right. If less people read it today than yesterday, I'm still doing something right, because I enjoyed writing it. That's the sum total extent of my authority.

2) You don't have to. You accepting it or not accepting it is not my goal. I don't know how many more times I can say it. I'm not here to convince you or convert you because that's impossible. I'm here to explain it and answer your questions, because that's what Darth Wong asked.

apocolypse · Post by **apocolypse** » 2006-05-30 08:25pm

Bryan Lambert wrote:
So if we don't want to be insane and irredeemably nerdy, we're supposed to shut up and take the public insults, censorship, banning, etc., all while a hack author continues to shit on the SW franchise? Gotcha.
Yes! Thank you! That's it, or at least close enough to part of it. In some circles this is known as the Oakley Paradigm.

Would you be willing to help me explain it to the rest of them? I'm having a hell of a time at it.

No, you know what, I understand it. And I'm pretty sure the rest do too. Here's the thing though, understand ! = accept. If I think something is wrong, then I'm probably going to mention it. And funny thing is, if you think something is wrong, then you take the time to mention it as well. Interesting, no?

Bryan Lambert · Post by **Bryan Lambert** » 2006-05-30 08:27pm

Give us another sound byte! I love your little witty one-liners, Bryan, and I hope you continue to school us with your 'not defending shit' mad skillz.

Are you denying that, over the course of this thread, I have not been criticized for both posting things here and not posting things here?

I mean, I think I've been a lot more gracious about this demonstrable contradiction than y'all have been about the ones you made up for me.

Stark · Post by **Stark** » 2006-05-30 08:28pm

Bryan Lambert wrote:1) Nobody. That's the great thing! I don't claim any authority beyond that of my own nigh-omniscience. I put it out there. People read it or don't. If more people read it today than read it yesterday, I'm doing something right. If less people read it today than yesterday, I'm still doing something right, because I enjoyed writing it. That's the sum total extent of my authority.

2) You don't have to. You accepting it or not accepting it is not my goal. I don't know how many more times I can say it. I'm not here to convince you or convert you because that's impossible. I'm here to explain it and answer your questions, because that's what Darth Wong asked.

So it's worthless chest-beating. You're making baseless, unsupportable claims, and deliberately hiding behind the 'lolz teh opinionzor' defence. That's cool - I just wanted to find out if you were ever going to back up anything you post on your site, and clearly this is not the case. Have fun being thousandth fiddle to SA.com forever! Fight the power, man!

Woo! I did a soundbyte! I'm as cool as you!

EDIT - Bryan, don't be a retard. You've been criticised for not backing your shit up (to borrow a phrase from 50 cent) and for making meaningless posts. Hmm, let's think about that.

Maybe, you could not post until you're actually going to address the points raised. You don't have to spam out your content-free posts: you can literally go away for a day, and come back with something meaningful. Don't get all up in my face (to borrow another phrase from 50 cent) just because you're posting vague evasions and getting called on it. Post content, or post nothing at all. Sorry if that standard is too high for you.

ZING! Another soundbyte!

Jim Raynor · Post by **Jim Raynor** » 2006-05-30 08:29pm

I can't believe this fucktard is actually defending an article that basically boils down to "LOLZ SW nerds!!!11!!1" and "it's cool to be a coward." STFU and leave already, you little shit. It's quite obvious that you have no point, and can't actually defend the things you say. That is unless you can't stand by while people on the internet insult you, in which case you're exactly the kind of irredeemable nerd that you criticize.

Bryan Lambert · Post by **Bryan Lambert** » 2006-05-30 08:30pm

No, you know what, I understand it. And I'm pretty sure the rest do too. Here's the thing though, understand ! = accept. If I think something is wrong, then I'm probably going to mention it. And funny thing is, if you think something is wrong, then you take the time to mention it as well. Interesting, no?

See? You get it too. Except for being pretty sure about the rest.

The question then becomes when do you -stop- mentioning it? And there's a cost-benefit analysis that some of you have an interesting take on.