Dishonest Trektard Tactic: Changing the Rules Midstream

[Iceberg]

Trektard: "It's not fair of you to disallow "one-episode wonder" McGuffin technologies that have been seen in a single episode of Star Trek and never seen again, even though the limited exposure from those episodes is seldom enough to establish limits and requirements for those technologies - but you can't use all of the SW resources (usual exclusions being canon ICS or EU novels)!"

[Darth Servo]

So, what else is new? Hypocracy has never been a problem for dishonest debaters regardless of the subject. Examples:

When sci-fi franchise 'A' misses a lot, its because their targeting systems suck, but when sci-fi franchise 'B' misses a lot its because thier ships are so maneuverable.

When sci-fi franchise 'A' blows up a ship in one hit, its proof that the ship is weak, but when sci-fi franchise 'B' blows up a ship in one shot, its proof of how powerful the weapons are.

[TheDarkling]

Disregarding sources (mainly the ICS and/or the EU) and disallowing "lost" tech aren't exactly the same thing so it isn't hypocrisy although what is going on over at SB.com is immature and being executed by the lowest of the trekies there (although completely off topic posts by others hardly cast them in a good light either).

[Darth Wong]

Disregarding sources (mainly the ICS and/or the EU) and disallowing "lost" tech aren't exactly the same thing so it isn't hypocrisy although what is going on over at SB.com is immature and being executed by the lowest of the trekies there (although completely off topic posts by others hardly cast them in a good light either).

What's going on at SB? Or should I even ask?

It is my experience that a debater's use of dishonest tactics is directly related to the weakness of his position. That's why smart Trekkies long ago stopped trying to claim that the Feds can actually defeat the Empire, while the rabid Trektards have become progressively more and more outlandish in their behaviour (particularly since AOTC came out, since both the film and the ICS confirmed what we've been saying for years while destroying many of their claims).

[TheDarkling]

A slew of (Some ST) Vs (Some SW) No ICS/TM threads have sprung up.

Warsies charge in and complain that the ICS is valid as a debate source (which is true but not really relevant to the thread), the Trekies (at least the low brow trollish ones) run around in circles screaming about Treks Uber TT level weapons (in which case why even discount the ICS???, it would be their friend) and then Warsies respond that 500 Imp ships have the power of the DS1.

General idiocy basically.

[Ghost Rider]

What's going on at SB? Or should I even ask?

Ever since AoTC:ICS is claimed to be higher then usual official some of the more rabid Trekkies have gone ape shit and basically making up scenarios where they don't want warsies to use the ICS.

You should see it some time...it's not good comedy but it truly is the ultimate in denial.

And also Darkstar has gained a new butt troll to back him up...course this one has the brain of a defunct nut, but doesn't make it any less annoying.

[SirNitram]

It'll fade in time. Same happened when the ICS came out, and eventually died. Darkstar, of course, will cling to it as a chance at acceptance.. But then again, with the crowd he's with, it's not gonna last.

[phongn]

Disregarding sources (mainly the ICS and/or the EU) and disallowing "lost" tech aren't exactly the same thing so it isn't hypocrisy although what is going on over at SB.com is immature and being executed by the lowest of the trekies there (although completely off topic posts by others hardly cast them in a good light either).

What's going on at SB? Or should I even ask?

Certain rabid Trekkies have launched a campaign against the ICS. DarkStar and his protege, Kallian have been doing the usual Wall of Ignorance tactics. There are a very few who do not like the ICS there and they're very vocal about it.

OTOH, most of the community there is on the pro-ICS side, for whatever reason (pro-Wars support, simply because its canon, etc).

[Illuminatus Primus]

Actually, before ICS, we had a rough parity established here, even with the rest of the EU involved.

Which just proves how loony and delusional they are.

[Alyeska]

Actually, before ICS, we had a rough parity established here, even with the rest of the EU involved.

Which just proves how loony and delusional they are.

Thanks for the fucking insult.

[consequences]

Do you take everything this personally Alyeska, or is this just a bad time?

[Illuminatus Primus]

Actually, before ICS, we had a rough parity established here, even with the rest of the EU involved.

Which just proves how loony and delusional they are.

Thanks for the fucking insult.

Not YOU.

The "anti-ICS" loonies who want to throw it out simply because of the recent canon developments. Even by pure-canon estimates, SW wins. The fact that the thread gets such a colorfully ignorant generalization as E1701 preaches

I do not refer to you, you're obviously on the side of reason in that thread, and have shown such. I am not refering to SBers or SB Trekkies collectively, rather anti-ICS reactionaries and those who think that versus pre-ICS was a parity, which is not true.

[Alyeska]

Which just proves how loony and delusional they are.

Thanks for the fucking insult.

Not YOU.

The "anti-ICS" loonies who want to throw it out simply because of the recent canon developments. Even by pure-canon estimates, SW wins. The fact that the thread gets such a colorfully ignorant generalization as E1701 preaches

I do not refer to you, you're obviously on the side of reason in that thread, and have shown such. I am not refering to SBers or SB Trekkies collectively, rather anti-ICS reactionaries and those who think that versus pre-ICS was a parity, which is not true.

And WTF did your statement have to do with E1701 even? He was merely stating how things were different prior to ICS and I happen to agree with his opinion.

[Illuminatus Primus]

And WTF did your statement have to do with E1701 even? He was merely stating how things were different prior to ICS and I happen to agree with his opinion.

Demonstrating the typical level of "well in the good old pre-ICS days..." vein. Disregarding the ICS2 (which is all the thread specifies and what's he's talking about), Star Wars still wins. In other words, E1701 is wrong. You even argue this point in the thread being cited.

[Alyeska]

And WTF did your statement have to do with E1701 even? He was merely stating how things were different prior to ICS and I happen to agree with his opinion.

Demonstrating the typical level of "well in the good old pre-ICS days..." vein. Disregarding the ICS2 (which is all the thread specifies and what's he's talking about), Star Wars still wins. In other words, E1701 is wrong. You even argue this point in the thread being cited.

In the good old days I flatly disagree. The fact that people acknowledge that ICS renders the debates pointless is very important proof that ICS is the single deciding factor that ended the debates.

[Darth Wong]

E1701 is arguing that things have changed substantially because of the ICS. He is implying (not-so-subtly) that there is no support whatsoever for the ICS figures in the pre-AOTC films.

In reality, there was a huge range between canon lower limits and upper limits for SW weaponry, and we really had no idea where the true figures were, so we tried to be conservative. But official BDZ figures ALWAYS called for the kind of numbers found in the AOTC ICS; the only problem was that people were too scientifically ignorant and/or dogmatic to accept that. All the ICS did was take the figures that are naturally derived from the description of a BDZ and make them unambiguous, even for the people who couldn't understand the BDZ arguments themselves.

In other words, nothing really changed; the only thing the ICS did was remove the semantic bullshit wiggle-room in which people like Lord Edam made their home.

[consequences]

No, the ICS is the single thing that couldn't be argued against or misinterpreted that ended the debates.

[Alyeska]

No, the ICS is the single thing that couldn't be argued against or misinterpreted that ended the debates.

Because it was the first canon level piece of evidence without questionable assumptions that could be used. Prior to ICS there was enough wiggle room with the various EU material that there was still a debate and many warsies believed that a single ISD would be utterly smashed by the Federation. Just read the old debates. ICS changed everything. Shit, I remember when 17-22 GT was considered absurd.

[Darth Wong]

Because it was the first canon level piece of evidence without questionable assumptions that could be used. Prior to ICS there was enough wiggle room with the various EU material that there was still a debate and many warsies believed that a single ISD would be utterly smashed by the Federation. Just read the old debates. ICS changed everything. Shit, I remember when 17-22 GT was considered absurd.

It was never beyond the upper limit, but it was not considered a conservative estimate because a lot of people were reluctant to give much credence to the official material. To say that it was "absurd" is a gross overstatement. Contrary to certain peoples' opinions, the SW side has always been quite conservative in its estimates; this should not be misinterpeted as some kind of concession.

[Alyeska]

Because it was the first canon level piece of evidence without questionable assumptions that could be used. Prior to ICS there was enough wiggle room with the various EU material that there was still a debate and many warsies believed that a single ISD would be utterly smashed by the Federation. Just read the old debates. ICS changed everything. Shit, I remember when 17-22 GT was considered absurd.

It was never beyond the upper limit, but it was not considered a conservative estimate because a lot of people were reluctant to give much credence to the official material. To say that it was "absurd" is a gross overstatement. Contrary to certain peoples' opinions, the SW side has always been quite conservative in its estimates; this should not be misinterpeted as some kind of concession.

Asside for the minor fact that only ONE person ever defended the 17-22 GT figure at SB prior to ICS and the most rabid warsie ever to show up called that range absurd. I am including every single ASVS member who even showed up a half dozen times in this. Not a single person said their estimates were ever conservative and they went so far as to call anything above 2 GT as ultra high end.

[Darth Wong]

Asside for the minor fact that only ONE person ever defended the 17-22 GT figure at SB prior to ICS and the most rabid warsie ever to show up called that range absurd. I am including every single ASVS member who even showed up a half dozen times in this. Not a single person said their estimates were ever conservative and they went so far as to call anything above 2 GT as ultra high end.

I am not responsible for what somebody said on SB, and you cannot characterize the entire SW/ST debate population by such a limited sample. My website always claimed to be conservative, and I was estimating lower limits of 14GT for a broadside. To say that anything above 2GT is "ultra high end" is ridiculous; you are appealing to a limited subset of popular opinion in order to claim that the evidence wasn't there.

I had a huge debate with Lord Edam about the BDZ figures before the AOTC:ICS came out, and my BDZ page (also released at the same time) expressly declares gigaton-range as a MINIMUM for HTLs. I don't care what some anonymous "warsie" said on SB.

[Iceberg]

Because it was the first canon level piece of evidence without questionable assumptions that could be used. Prior to ICS there was enough wiggle room with the various EU material that there was still a debate and many warsies believed that a single ISD would be utterly smashed by the Federation. Just read the old debates. ICS changed everything. Shit, I remember when 17-22 GT was considered absurd.

It was never beyond the upper limit, but it was not considered a conservative estimate because a lot of people were reluctant to give much credence to the official material. To say that it was "absurd" is a gross overstatement. Contrary to certain peoples' opinions, the SW side has always been quite conservative in its estimates; this should not be misinterpeted as some kind of concession.

Asside for the minor fact that only ONE person ever defended the 17-22 GT figure at SB prior to ICS and the most rabid warsie ever to show up called that range absurd. I am including every single ASVS member who even showed up a half dozen times in this. Not a single person said their estimates were ever conservative and they went so far as to call anything above 2 GT as ultra high end.

We're talking about a remarkably anti-Wars board, though - I recall there was one point where you and E1701 were trying to sell 9 megaton heavy turbolaser "calcs" based on some REALLY shoddy assumptions and getting a fair amount of support.

[Ender]

Because it was the first canon level piece of evidence without questionable assumptions that could be used. Prior to ICS there was enough wiggle room with the various EU material that there was still a debate and many warsies believed that a single ISD would be utterly smashed by the Federation. Just read the old debates. ICS changed everything. Shit, I remember when 17-22 GT was considered absurd.

It was never beyond the upper limit, but it was not considered a conservative estimate because a lot of people were reluctant to give much credence to the official material. To say that it was "absurd" is a gross overstatement. Contrary to certain peoples' opinions, the SW side has always been quite conservative in its estimates; this should not be misinterpeted as some kind of concession.

Asside for the minor fact that only ONE person ever defended the 17-22 GT figure at SB prior to ICS and the most rabid warsie ever to show up called that range absurd. I am including every single ASVS member who even showed up a half dozen times in this. Not a single person said their estimates were ever conservative and they went so far as to call anything above 2 GT as ultra high end.

Dude, going by the very first description put forth in the Danyko incident, assuming earth sized and a 24 hour time frame you got well over 100 GT per shot for the atmospheric blow off.

[SPOOFE]

Not a single person said their estimates were ever conservative and they went so far as to call anything above 2 GT as ultra high end.

Alyeska, calling the ol', pre-ICS calcs "low-end" or "minimum estimates" was very common. 2 gigatons was a pretty good number, not because we felt it represented the highest we could go without spawning a hijack of the thread that went over, yet again, weapons calcs. Anyone who used anything higher risked the original debate being drowned out in a flurry of "That asteroid wasn't 40 meters! It was FIVE meters, at best! And it wasn't vaporized! Blah blah blah..."

Furthermore, as to E's claim that things were pretty even... I always maintained, at a minimum, that it would take at least three GCS's to consistently take on a Star Destroyer. You and I even had that argument, once. Hell, I recall times when Trekkies would say it would be the other way around, that you'd need several ISD's to take on the Enterprise.

No, Warsies were always maintaining a huge weapons superiority to Trek. They just never tried to get as far as they could've because, really, once you've won, does it make much difference if you won by 1 point or by a thousand?

[SPOOFE]

2 gigatons was a pretty good number, not because we felt it represented the highest we could go without spawning a hijack of the thread

Rather, "2 gigatons was a pretty good number, not because we felt it represented the highest we could go, but it was the highest we could go without spawning a hijack of the thread..."