Darkstar Poll

[Master of Ossus]

No one dares actually read what I say, and no one dares agree with me, lest the threat (as expressed by Ossus) of having "Village Idiot" stamped under their name come to pass.

That's not what I said, DarkStar. Go back and read what I actually wrote, and then come back once you figure it out. Imbecile.

[TheDarkling]

He does seem to have an inability to admit defeat however on the flip side I dont think a pro wars guy has ever admitted defeat to him (they have conceded points however which I dont believe he has).

Has he even once demonstrated that the pro-Wars side was wrong on an entire issue? He's won a few points, but they tend to be fairly irrelevent ones. I don't think that the fact that the pro-Wars side has never admitted defeat to him is more or less irrelevent because I don't think we should unless he proves us wrong. I don't think he's ever done any better than a draw on any thread, and even those are debateably Wars victories (though some actually do become draws).

You do realise of course what you just said is almost exactly what he would say (accept he wuold never admit a draw but he has said that people have raised interesting points against him),

[Master of Ossus]

He's certainly better than those who don't even bother to counter his arguments and just make colorful insults from his handle. When debated civilly, he replies are civil. He doesn't make threads dedicated solely to why others are the stupidest SOBs alive.

This is, essentially, the most straight forward rendition of "I'm falling for the style over substance fallacy," that I have ever seen.

[TheDarkling]

He's certainly better than those who don't even bother to counter his arguments and just make colorful insults from his handle. When debated civilly, he replies are civil. He doesn't make threads dedicated solely to why others are the stupidest SOBs alive.

This is, essentially, the most straight forward rendition of "I'm falling for the style over substance fallacy," that I have ever seen.

Thats not what he said at all, he said other dont rebut they just snipe - ko so far.

Also hes civil when treated in kind and that he also posts topics of relevance, he didnt say Darkstars a better debater and that his arguments are far better because they are worded in a nice manner.

I fear you zeal to attack Darkstar and anyone who gives his theories is clouding your judgement, take a step back, relax and have a cup of tea (its a British drink ) Im going to get some shut eye anyway - I dread to think what I will find upon waking.

[Eframepilot]

Degan displays an extreme lack of knowledge of scientific principles above. First he claims that "gasses" possess solidity.

I said no such thing, as even a casual perusal of the thread in question reveals. I've already made a fool of DS for persisting in his lie about my words.

What exactly did you say, then? You claimed that gases have solidity at microscopic levels. But - there is no such thing as "solidity" at microscopic (i.e. atomic) scales. It is an entirely macroscopic property.

Then he clarifies that he is refering to the properties of atmospheric pressure and friction, which of course have nothing to do with solidity.

An irrelevant argument since I was not saying that atmospheric gasses are solid. However, even you will concede that they are material, I trust.

Material, yes. Solid, no. The two terms are entirely separate. But solidity is not a property of gases at any level, and a poor choice of phrase. The property you should have refered to is density. As it happens, the density of air at STP is about 1.3 kg/m^3. In comparison, the density of water at STP is 1000 kg/m^3! The density of solid matter is even greater. Thus the interaction of the superlaser with the air of the upper atmosphere, which would be significantly less dense, will be less than a thousandth of the strength of the interaction with solid matter, assuming mass is the only important quantity.

Becase despite whatever DS believes in his BS, as well as yourself, there is a distinct difference between fermions and atoms in a fermionic state which operates only in the conditions existing in quantum degenerate gasses. You might actually try reading the pages cited before offering a commentary.

You stated that "fermionic atoms are entities which only exist in Bose-Einstein degenerate matter condensates which are formed only under conditions of exceptional compression and at absolute zero". This is dead wrong. A fermionic atom is an atom that is a fermion! Go to http://physicsweb.org/article/world/15/4/7 for a very good explanation of what DarkStar was talking about. The gist of it is, the collision properties of atoms are not at all similar to the collision properties of solids; there is nothing "solid" about gases at any level.

[Master of Ossus]

He's certainly better than those who don't even bother to counter his arguments and just make colorful insults from his handle. When debated civilly, he replies are civil. He doesn't make threads dedicated solely to why others are the stupidest SOBs alive.

This is, essentially, the most straight forward rendition of "I'm falling for the style over substance fallacy," that I have ever seen.

Thats not what he said at all, he said other dont rebut they just snipe - ko so far.

Also hes civil when treated in kind and that he also posts topics of relevance, he didnt say Darkstars a better debater and that his arguments are far better because they are worded in a nice manner.

I fear you zeal to attack Darkstar and anyone who gives his theories is clouding your judgement, take a step back, relax and have a cup of tea (its a British drink ) Im going to get some shut eye anyway - I dread to think what I will find upon waking.

How do you interpret the post as meaning anything other than "Because he's civil, he's certainly better than all those people who flame him?"

[SPOOFE]

He's certainly better than those who don't even bother to counter his arguments and just make colorful insults from his handle.

Ask yourself WHY people don't bother trying to counter his arguments and just make colorful insults. Is it because they CAN'T counter, or is it because trying to argue with Darkstar is futile?

You do realize that DarkStar cannot respond to any of this without being immediately accused of hijacking the thread back to his pet peeves?

Please explain why. For that matter, I see no reason why he SHOULD respond... he should learn the difference between an "attack" and "constructive criticism".

Darkstar doesn't know how to debate. Period. He has proved it time and time again. He also has an unhealthily distorted view of not only himself and his intellect, but also of people who have a differing viewpoint from his own. He also seems to have one hell of a persecution complex. Frankly, the fact that he can suffer from so many mental problems perplexes me to no end, and in my opinion, his continued obsession with the subject of Vs. debates is probably unhealthy for him.

[Eframepilot]

How do you interpret the post as meaning anything other than "Because he's civil, he's certainly better than all those people who flame him?"

Isn't that true? Or do you consider explanations of why "DarkAss" is not a racist slur better than on-topic arguments? I was taking a swipe at all of the posts dedicated solely to flaming.

[Master of Ossus]

How do you interpret the post as meaning anything other than "Because he's civil, he's certainly better than all those people who flame him?"

Isn't that true? Or do you consider explanations of why "DarkAss" is not a racist slur better than on-topic arguments? I was taking a swipe at all of the posts dedicated solely to flaming.

What the FUCK? I DEFENDED him on that point. Go back and read that thread. I clearly stepped in to stop Spanky from going after him on that point. That does not, however, make him better than Spanky. Just because one person was flaming does not make the other person better. That is the style over substance fallacy. I did not think that what Spanky did was appropriate, but what he did does not suddenly transform DarkStar into a pillar of morality on the board.

Fact is, DarkStar provokes everybody into flaming him. When they do flame him, he is at least as responsible for it as they are. Even if his behavior on one particular thread is not bad enough to warrant flames, his repeated behavior on previous threads has shown that he makes no attempt to avoid flames or provoking people into flaming him. In fact, he appears to enjoy it! Just because he is civil does not make him good, or his points accurate.

[jegs2]

Have any of you who so intently dislike DarkStar thought of ignoring him? Perhaps the man feeds on the flames you all send his way and actually looks forward to getting them...

[Eframepilot]

How do you interpret the post as meaning anything other than "Because he's civil, he's certainly better than all those people who flame him?"

Isn't that true? Or do you consider explanations of why "DarkAss" is not a racist slur better than on-topic arguments? I was taking a swipe at all of the posts dedicated solely to flaming.

What the FUCK? I DEFENDED him on that point. Go back and read that thread. I clearly stepped in to stop Spanky from going after him on that point. That does not, however, make him better than Spanky. Just because one person was flaming does not make the other person better. That is the style over substance fallacy. I did not think that what Spanky did was appropriate, but what he did does not suddenly transform DarkStar into a pillar of morality on the board.

Chill! I didn't attack you. But the style over substance fallacy deals wholly with judging logical arguments. I wasn't talking about arguments at all. If one person says pointless insulting remarks and nothing else in a thread, then they are certainly worse than anyone staying on topic.
[/i]

[Master of Ossus]

Have any of you who so intently dislike DarkStar thought of ignoring him? Perhaps the man feeds on the flames you all send his way and actually looks forward to getting them...

Impossible. Eframepilot is telling us that because DarkStar doesn't flame first, he is good. How can anyone like that thrive on flames? After all, he's doing nothing to provoke us.

And to answer your question, yes of course we have. We eventually decided not to FS him... yet.

[SPOOFE]

Or do you consider explanations of why "DarkAss" is not a racist slur better than on-topic arguments? I was taking a swipe at all of the posts dedicated solely to flaming.

And I consider purely-flaming posts to be quite obnoxious, as well, when there's a good debate coming. When a thread has already spiraled down into the depths of repetitious and ear-plugging ("Lalala, I can't hear you!") despair, that's usually when I pack my bags and skedaddle... although I can completely understand if someone wants to tell off someone who's acting like an ass.

Think about it. People don't get flamed for no reason. There ARE a few Trekkies on this Board, and they don't get consistently flamed. Either Darkstar simply exudes an aura as the World's Scapegoat, or he's doing something to provoke people. It's as simple as that.

[2000AD]

Hmm 6 people giving the slant of the poll that isnt bad (especially since he is supposedly so dispised), I wonder if he voted for himself?

Given that, at time of writing, 52 people think he doesn't contribute anything, and 16 think he's good for a laugh I think it is bad. He has only 8% of the votes and that should not be considered as 8% of the boards think he contributes useful stuff.

[Mr Bean]

So by the poll that six delisousnals(Hmm LeRoy, Shadow, Darkstar, Lord Edam, Walper prehaps? Number six is probably from a diffrent IP of his or another as he seems to have three accounts here(probably school and the local library)

And 54 people who think he should be gone

[TheDarkling]

I doubt edam would vote for him remember he gave him a beating on ASVS.

[2000AD]

Three accounts? which are his other 2?

[Mr Bean]

I forget them off the top of my head, ask Ossus he knows which ones

[Ender]

So by the poll that six delisousnals(Hmm LeRoy, Shadow, Darkstar, Lord Edam, Walper prehaps? Number six is probably from a diffrent IP of his or another as he seems to have three accounts here(probably school and the local library)

And 54 people who think he should be gone

I was undr the impression that Edam hates him.

Though maybe he wants DS to stay here instead of rejoining ASVS or SB

[Anarchist Bunny]

He is already back at ASVS. As DarkStar.

[Ender]

I'll have to lurk there then

[DarkStar]

You interpret the rings from the Alderaan explosion to be caused by some "reverse Genesis effect". Yet you call this interpretation "evidence".

WTF? I've never claimed the Superlaser Effect as evidence for itself.

You interpret Lucas's quote that offhandedly mentions "a parallel universe" to mean "all the EU has no standing", an you call this interpretation "evidence".

He repeatedly says it isn't his universe, and Cerasi says that for "the real story of Star Wars, you must turn to the films themselves - and only the films", with the rest of the canon being "very accurate depictions".

[2000AD]

Who's Cerasi?

[DarkStar]

Your problem with me isn't so-called thread hijackings or my 'pet peeves' about silly little things like evidence. Your problem with me is that I am not one of your fawning disciples, I don't fall for your cleverly deceitful sophistries, and can stand my ground against your ridiculous debate style quite nicely, unaffected by your charlatanism.

If that were the case, I would ban Darkling and every other Trekkie on this board. Do you really think I'm singling you out because you're such a remarkably devastating Trek debater that I should fear you, but not the rest?

Oooh, clever . . . trying to get me to piss off the other Trek debaters?

Sorry, not happening. The problems you have with me could apply to other parties, and you might not want to ban them. The difference is that I can get just as loud and obnoxious as you can, while still not falling for your cleverly deceitful sophistries, ridiculous debate style, or charlatanism.

Stop puffing up your own bloated ego, Darkstar. I'm singling you out because you're a deceitful little asshole who, despite your protests, obviously likes to debate while outnumbered (you could easily drop all of your active threads but one and focus on one debate if you wanted),

Uh, how in the name of hell do you expect me to be not-outnumbered, even in one thread? So far, the only equal-numbers debate or discussion has been between Cromag and I . . . and it was also flame-free, which undoubtedly explains the lack of Warsie interest.

because that way, you have an excuse for your sloppy, poorly researched arguments, your "accidental" errors of fact, and your habit of conveniently ignoring major rebuttal points (even when all 10 of your opponents are making the same point) for "lack of time".

Riiiight. Nice try, but the only thread which as involved me being overwhelmed by sheer numbers was the thread specifically relating to my website, where I was explicitly pages behind in responses. Your effort to assign that one episode global implications is a nice try at a clever deceit, but remains just as deceptive as the rest of your clever deceits.

I think you know perfectly well that you could not hold up your end of a pure one-on-one debate

On the contrary . . . with an honest pro-Wars debater, I only have half the work. Take a look at Cromag . . . he hasn't tried to slip lies under my radar, like you . . . hasn't tried to waylay me with bullshit personal attacks, like you . . . hasn't tried to run from the debate and go looking up my educational institutions, like you.

You wouldn't know how to be a good, decent, honest debater. You have to throw up smokescreens, attack from behind, fling insults like a monkey throwing feces, and do all sorts of other bullshit. That's your definition of one-on-one debate.

If you had ever, even once, led me to believe for a moment that you could refrain from such childish behavior in a debate against me, I'd tell you to bring it on. However, you wouldn't be able to hold your inner bastard in check for long. You have an image to maintain . . . disciples to impress . . . propaganda to peddle.

So, I post the facts, and let them speak for themselves.

[2000AD]

Mike / Darkstar why don't you just challenge Darkstar / Mike to an e-mail debate and have done with it.