How to deal with the Newbie problem

IceHawk-151 · Post by **IceHawk-151** » 2003-01-05 10:45am

Darth I think our definitions of a troll differ slightly. The idea of an "unsubstantiated" claim is based on this boards devotion to Mr. WOng's numbers and Saxton's new numbers.
Actually that was the reason I came here to debate. I figured that this is the one place online I could find where I would get a good deal of oposition if I challenged the ICS numbers. I was right to, because in the thread where I'm talking about the ICS numbers I'm getting alot of good arguments. Arguments that are forcing me to refine my arguments so that they are harder to challange. All in all I'm heading towards a decent post count based on valid, if slighly vague, arguments. If I was simply a troll I would have never entered a serious debate with the locals here.

Oh, and all claims are unsubstantiated until you get another person to believe them Darth Pounder.

(The smiles here quite cool)

Post by **Ghost Rider** » 2003-01-05 10:57am

A debate requires an argument on both sides to which each side has proof on the table...

Saxton which HDS quoted here http://bbs.stardestroyer.net/viewtopic. ... c&start=60 showed how he came to the conclusion of 200GT...please show how that the was making some irrational choice upon labeling them as such.

So unless you show otherwise, you are trolling and nitpicking without any validation.

Plus the whole ICS being a cop-out is your own fallacious reasoning, and comparing it to the TM is even worse given the difference in policies of Lucasfilm and Paramount.

IceHawk-151 · Post by **IceHawk-151** » 2003-01-05 12:01pm

Actually Ghost Rider, HDS quoted a few ways in which Saxton derived numbers. He said nothing about the actual work involved in finding the 200 GT number. That requires us to know which way Saxton did his calculations, and what he based those calcs on.

Post by **Ghost Rider** » 2003-01-05 12:03pm

Did you read the part...SAXTON CANNOT REVEAL HOW.

He did not as a part of fan basis but as hired work persay and perhaps had a contractual aggrement, but all you have done is go how could he...when HDS posted some ways that actually make sense to how he did.

Saxton didn't just go up and one day think...200GT...there's a good number.

IceHawk-151 · Post by **IceHawk-151** » 2003-01-05 12:07pm

Ghost Rider wrote:Did you read the part...SAXTON CANNOT REVEAL HOW.

He did not as a part of fan basis but as hired work persay and perhaps had a contractual aggrement, but all you have done is go how could he...when HDS posted some ways that actually make sense to how he did.

Saxton didn't just go up and one day think...200GT...there's a good number.

The problem is you don't know that for sure.
I think there is a possibility that Saxton had usable numbers to derive his figures from. However until we know exactly how he did it, all theories about it will be just that. Theories.

Post by **Ghost Rider** » 2003-01-05 12:20pm

Ask the man himself...Mike Wong and a variety of others who know this man personally have said he cannot reveal how he got them, I say contractual agreement, because it's enough of rational because what the ICS is, perhaps they are other reasons...I'm not speculating because I don't know him well enough to come to any conclusions as such.

What do you want him to tell you that he cannot do reveal how, why?

Will it justify that the reason HDS outlined from Saxton are actually how one would come up with the power ratings given that that's how one examines a situation?

Basically the crux of your argument is because Saxton won't reveal, he must be hiding something, because it's a conspiracy to end all ST vs SW debates...let alone all the other information that is CANON that shows that firepower alone is not why the Empire would snuff the Federation out of existence.

Jeebus man what the hell are you thinkng, that a man who does this for fun, wrote some books which are elevated to Official, did this just to end some petty debates?

IceHawk-151 · Post by **IceHawk-151** » 2003-01-05 12:31pm

If Saxton won't tell his friends how he came up with the numbers I doubt he'll fill me in with the info if I ask.

I acknowledge that the theories HDS put forward are plausible ways to find yields and other numbers. However with the limited onscreen evidence we have for the Acclamator's I can't agree with theories until some hard numbers are shown.

The crux of my argument is this.
Depending on what set of data you use you can find low end and high end numbers, and then rationalize away inconsistances. I don't agree with the high end numbers, and doubt that Saxton can prove his numbers. The reason I wanted to know how Saxton himself got the numbers was so I could anayzle his thought process.

IceHawk-151 · Post by **IceHawk-151** » 2003-01-05 12:35pm

Oh, and Darth Pounder.
To classify me as a troll you would have to show that the majority of my arguments have no bearing on facts at all. However if you look at the Debates I've taken part in you can see I've been relying on direct quotes and books from the EU literature.

I'm no more a troll than you are a newbie.

Master of Ossus · Post by **Master of Ossus** » 2003-01-05 04:46pm

IceHawk-151 wrote:If Saxton won't tell his friends how he came up with the numbers I doubt he'll fill me in with the info if I ask.

I acknowledge that the theories HDS put forward are plausible ways to find yields and other numbers. However with the limited onscreen evidence we have for the Acclamator's I can't agree with theories until some hard numbers are shown.

The crux of my argument is this.
Depending on what set of data you use you can find low end and high end numbers, and then rationalize away inconsistances. I don't agree with the high end numbers, and doubt that Saxton can prove his numbers. The reason I wanted to know how Saxton himself got the numbers was so I could anayzle his thought process.

All of his "friends" who were interested enough to inquire were able to confirm that the methods he used were reasonable, from the information that HDS quoted and, in my case at least, to show that the methods he used did indeed result in firepower such that he claimed.

Kurgan · Post by **Kurgan** » 2003-01-05 07:50pm

A troll is anyone who posts with the pure intention of getting a "rise" out of people: ie: posting "God is dead" on a religious forum or "Atheists burn in hell" on an atheist forum.

The trouble here, is that, sure, somebody could post "Star Trek beats Star Wars every time" but they'd need to bring in some serious stuff to back it up, since the whole site is weighed heavily on the other side of the argument.

I think some people might confuse "Newbie" (ie: somebody who hasn't been posting for a long time) with "Troll."

Despite what others have said (I have a right to my own opinion) I think that the people who are quickest to flame are the ones who have run out of ideas. But trolling just isn't polite, wherever you are, period.

I'll still give most people the benefit of the doubt, all things considered.

pezcollectorguy · Post by **pezcollectorguy** » 2003-01-10 11:47am

I get slapped around from time to time but I rather enjoy the debate. This site in all of it's glory was explained to me and I entered knowing I would be assaulted shortly there after. I don't mind being an antagonist, but I did know what I was getting into. Newbies should be screened, warned, and at the very least have read Mike’s site. I would have to agree. Anyway, just thought I’d share. Have a good day all.

Dave

Lord Pounder · Post by **Lord Pounder** » 2003-01-10 02:47pm

Listen sonny, U ARE THE VERY DEFINATION OF A TROLL. you come in here you say Wong is wrong, you say Saxon is wrong and that none of these numbers add up to your own numbers with out stating what you numbers are and how you come up with them. Mike Wong is a Engineer and Mr. Saxon is a consultant for Star Wars who do you think us better qualified to do the calculations them or you?

jegs2 · Post by **jegs2** » 2003-01-10 03:15pm

Alyeska wrote:You could always create a "Newbie" ST vs SW forum and prevent new members from entering the main ST vs SW forum until they get a certain number of posts. That way in the Newbie area they can ask questions or be informed of how things work before they can come in here for the normal debates.

Now that's not a bad idea at all -- sort of a probationary forum...

Crayz9000 · Post by **Crayz9000** » 2003-01-10 04:51pm

Let's see... nothing to do with STvsSW... check.

Thank you for flying nonstop to the Off-Topic Forum.

Post by **Dalton** » 2003-01-10 05:05pm

Thanks for foisting this on me Crayz

Crayz9000 · Post by **Crayz9000** » 2003-01-10 05:59pm

Dalton wrote:Thanks for foisting this on me Crayz

No problem, I'm just trying to help

Kurgan · Post by **Kurgan** » 2003-01-10 06:28pm

Listen sonny, U ARE THE VERY DEFINATION OF A TROLL. you come in here you say Wong is wrong, you say Saxon is wrong and that none of these numbers add up to your own numbers with out stating what you numbers are and how you come up with them. Mike Wong is a Engineer and Mr. Saxon is a consultant for Star Wars who do you think us better qualified to do the calculations them or you?

Of course, there is no rule saying somebody can't come on here and disagree or contradict Mr. Wong or Mr. Saxon, regardless of how much authority they might pull here or how well respected and liked, or the fact that this is Wong's site.

For debate purposes, we hope he provides evidence, but I think some people are still too quick to assume that anything that disagrees with the sight is automatically a "troll" rather than (the I think more likely) idea that they're a newbie.

But, of course, as we all know, people can be rude bastards here, because of the "mockery of stupid people" motto. ; )

Still, just because somebody is mocked or labelled a stupid person, doesn't necessarily mean they deserved it either.

StarDestroyer.Net BBS

How to deal with the Newbie problem

newbies