Master of Ossus wrote:And now the consensus on SB.com is that Alyeska is "only a moderator because he's not a thread." Next thing you know, they'll accuse him of being an Uncle Tom or something.
Actually CaptainSheridan was probably being sarcastic and just forgot the smiley face.
CaptainSheridan wrote:
Yup! Alyeska is only a MODERATOR because he's not a threat! One foot out of line and poof! Off to the gulag!
In fact, Alyeska is just our puppet Trekkie! We needed to keep the illusion Trekkies like Mike Wong! So we, err..."convinced" him at our "interviewing" faccilities in Siberia!
Notice how he seems to be poking fun at conspiracy theorist, like Darkstar and his theory of a warsie conspiracy against him.
Can somebody please rebuke the laughable red herrings and nitpicks that have been unleashed on my rebuttal on SB.com?
And try to pull the discussion away from whether or not DarkStar's website is "good" or "interesting" and back towards, "Is MoO's rebuttal valid? Why or why not?"
I would be eternally grateful.
"Sometimes I think you WANT us to fail." "Shut up, just shut up!" -Two Guys from Kabul
Latinum Star Recipient; Hacker's Cross Award Winner
"one soler flar can vapririze the planit or malt the nickl in lass than millasacit" -Bagara1000
Master of Ossus wrote:Can somebody please rebuke the laughable red herrings and nitpicks that have been unleashed on my rebuttal on SB.com?
And try to pull the discussion away from whether or not DarkStar's website is "good" or "interesting" and back towards, "Is MoO's rebuttal valid? Why or why not?"
I would be eternally grateful.
That would actually make you look "worse". Its a damned shame you can't register there either. I got a secondary account you could borrow to post with if you desire to counter their points.
"If the facts are on your side, pound on the facts. If the law is on your side, pound on the law. If neither is on your side, pound on the table."
"The captain claimed our people violated a 4,000 year old treaty forbidding us to develop hyperspace technology. Extermination of our planet was the consequence. The subject did not survive interrogation."
"Brian, if I parked a supertanker in Central Park, painted it neon orange, and set it on fire, it would be less obvious than your stupidity." --RedImperator
What's the point? I'm sure that anyone there who reads Darkstar's site and does not find himself laughing his ass off at it is so irretrievably stupid that nothing short of a brain transplant could possibly solve the problem. The most logical rebuttal in the world has no effect on someone like this. Look at creationists; for 150 years we've been beating them over the head with evidence and logic, and for 150 years they've been insisting that they are right. Even when you point out that some guy is such an idiot that he doesn't understand the concept of the zoom lens, there will still be morons that defend him.
"It's not evil for God to do it. Or for someone to do it at God's command."- Jonathan Boyd on baby-killing
"you guys are fascinated with the use of those "rules of logic" to the extent that you don't really want to discussus anything."- GC
"I do not believe Russian Roulette is a stupid act" - Embracer of Darkness
"Viagra commercials appear to save lives" - tharkûn on US health care.
Alyeska has very kindly loaned me a secondary account of his, for the purposes of this thread. I would, of course, like to thank him for giving me the opportunity to present my own case in this matter.
"Sometimes I think you WANT us to fail." "Shut up, just shut up!" -Two Guys from Kabul
Latinum Star Recipient; Hacker's Cross Award Winner
"one soler flar can vapririze the planit or malt the nickl in lass than millasacit" -Bagara1000
Darth Wong wrote:What's the point? I'm sure that anyone there who reads Darkstar's site and does not find himself laughing his ass off at it is so irretrievably stupid that nothing short of a brain transplant could possibly solve the problem. The most logical rebuttal in the world has no effect on someone like this. Look at creationists; for 150 years we've been beating them over the head with evidence and logic, and for 150 years they've been insisting that they are right. Even when you point out that some guy is such an idiot that he doesn't understand the concept of the zoom lens, there will still be morons that defend him.
It seems pretty clear that the members of SB.com haven't really been able to find any serious flaws in my analysis. If no one at ASVS is able to find any errors, I think it is fairly safe to assume that only Mr. Anderson himself is left.
"Sometimes I think you WANT us to fail." "Shut up, just shut up!" -Two Guys from Kabul
Latinum Star Recipient; Hacker's Cross Award Winner
"one soler flar can vapririze the planit or malt the nickl in lass than millasacit" -Bagara1000
Master of Ossus wrote:It seems pretty clear that the members of SB.com haven't really been able to find any serious flaws in my analysis. If no one at ASVS is able to find any errors, I think it is fairly safe to assume that only Mr. Anderson himself is left.
The problem with SB debators, especially the Trekkies, is apathy. Most of them do not get involved in debates anymore. After the ICS saga it drove a lot of debators off the forum; most people, myself included, no longer wanted to be involved in constant flaming matches in every debate. It is alarming that in recent months every major Vs debate at SB has turned into a flame-thread.
That is why the forum [Vs] had declined so much; who wants to take part in something that is supposed to be 'fun' when it leaves such a bitter taste?
As for this debate, both sides raise valid points on most issues. On some, however, I do not think that a clear answer can be given due to the conflicting evidence avaliable [isn't writer stupidity annoying?]
Master of Ossus wrote:It seems pretty clear that the members of SB.com haven't really been able to find any serious flaws in my analysis. If no one at ASVS is able to find any errors, I think it is fairly safe to assume that only Mr. Anderson himself is left.
The problem with SB debators, especially the Trekkies, is apathy. Most of them do not get involved in debates anymore. After the ICS saga it drove a lot of debators off the forum; most people, myself included, no longer wanted to be involved in constant flaming matches in every debate. It is alarming that in recent months every major Vs debate at SB has turned into a flame-thread.
That is why the forum [Vs] had declined so much; who wants to take part in something that is supposed to be 'fun' when it leaves such a bitter taste?
As for this debate, both sides raise valid points on most issues. On some, however, I do not think that a clear answer can be given due to the conflicting evidence avaliable [isn't writer stupidity annoying?]
Do you have anything to say regarding my rebuttal, or are you merely trying to hijack this thread? PLEASE limit the discussion to the rebuttal that I made of Mr. Anderson's website. Why is this so difficult for everyone?
"Sometimes I think you WANT us to fail." "Shut up, just shut up!" -Two Guys from Kabul
Latinum Star Recipient; Hacker's Cross Award Winner
"one soler flar can vapririze the planit or malt the nickl in lass than millasacit" -Bagara1000
Seems pretty good. Though the AT-ST is far better compared to something like the original Stormer 30, BRM, or United Defense Lynx as opposed to the Hummer.
"This cult of special forces is as sensible as to form a Royal Corps of Tree Climbers and say that no soldier who does not wear its green hat with a bunch of oak leaves stuck in it should be expected to climb a tree"
— Field Marshal William Slim 1956
Master of Ossus wrote:That really shouldn't give them free reign to talk about whatever the hell they want to talk about. The thread was started for a reason.
Do they not object to thread hijacking over there?
"It's not evil for God to do it. Or for someone to do it at God's command."- Jonathan Boyd on baby-killing
"you guys are fascinated with the use of those "rules of logic" to the extent that you don't really want to discussus anything."- GC
"I do not believe Russian Roulette is a stupid act" - Embracer of Darkness
"Viagra commercials appear to save lives" - tharkûn on US health care.
Master of Ossus wrote:That really shouldn't give them free reign to talk about whatever the hell they want to talk about. The thread was started for a reason.
Do they not object to thread hijacking over there?
Well, I'm sure if you asked them they would say they objected to it strongly, but the efforts of numerous other posters over there to hijack the thread that discussed my rebuttal were never stopped by moderators. Additionally, the problem got so severe that one poster could not follow what was going on, and needed to be updated on the problem that was being discussed. In all this time there were no moderators interfering, or even mentioning that there was a problem, even though several posters (most notably myself) had asked them to keep the debate on topic.
"Sometimes I think you WANT us to fail." "Shut up, just shut up!" -Two Guys from Kabul
Latinum Star Recipient; Hacker's Cross Award Winner
"one soler flar can vapririze the planit or malt the nickl in lass than millasacit" -Bagara1000
Judging from how riled he was on his site and how his fellow rabid trekkies have rallied around him on SB, I'd say the Wall of Ignorance has been dealt a serious blow.
The question is: how long will it take him to come up with a "rebuttal" that's just merely the same points in an even more tiresome and long-winded fashion? I give it two or three days at best.
DarkStar should have had my screen name, it would suit him better.
I can't see MoO's essay changing a single thing that RSA believes to be true about ST and SW. However, I think it served a very important purpose: if someone didn't address his wild claims, other people new to the debate would come along and say "hey, this RSA guy must have something here if no one's ever come up with a reply to his site." It saves us from having to combat every single Troll who comes on here posting "information" from RSA's site.
Whiel reading through the overview, I noticed another example that rebuts one of Anderson's assertions:
RSA wrote:Starfleet ships are capable of precision attacks to disable enemy ship systems ("Shockwave"[ENT], "The Defector"[TNG], "The Wounded"[TNG], etc.), the Empire seems capable of just firing and hoping for the best (ANH).
I noticed that you provided an example from the Rebel Alliance, but remember the Tantive IV scene from A New Hope? Where an ISD-I precisely strikes the dorsal fin of the corvette, making the crew shut the main reactor down?
What else do you call that? A lucky shot? Obviously Anderson would.
No don't, use his stupidity against himself, be the most cordial person there ever was while DarkStar is fanning the fire under his own feet.
Thats what the public wants to see, if you're the nice guy, they'd bemore inclinde to go with you and others cannot whine about how SD net people flame the poor trekkies, like DarkStar.
Those who beat their swords into plowshares will plow for those who did not.
