---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Cmdrwilkens" Date: Sun, 23 Jun 2002 17:33:44 -0400 Subject: The Basis of "DarkStar's" argument Message-ID: -------- 1) No where does Lucasfilm state that the EU is "official" 2) The SW Insider quote does not state that the EU has a standing 3) The SW.com article read in context does not say that the EU is included in the SW reality. Now I'm going to disprove these points one by one. 1) They don't have to. Such a category exists but its name is often referred to as "quasi-canon." The SW Encyclopedia clearly states this and you seem to not understand the import of this book. 2) The SW Insider quote states that the EU materials are part of the "history" of Star Wars. If they are part of it this means that the events, characters, vehicles, vessels, etc that appear within them are part of the SW universe. 3) The SW.com article specifically states that the EU is part of the continuity of SW. This means, again, that the EU material is part of the larger history of SW and that the events, characters, vehicles, vessels, etc that appear within them must be coherent with and part of the SW universe described elsewhere. The use of the specific terms "continuity" and "history" explain the position of the EU universe along with the SW Encycliopedia's terminology gives us all the evidence we need that there are two distinct tiers of authority...the canon works which are immutable truths and the EU which is part of SW but less tuthful than the canon material. -- Lcpl Burnett, G.R. USMCR BridgeCo B 6th EngSptBN 4th FSSG "Weapons do not penetrate armour based on force and pressure" - IXJac(taken from SB.com and SD.net) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "DarkStar" Date: Mon, 24 Jun 2002 00:20:55 GMT Subject: Re: The Basis of "DarkStar's" argument Message-ID: -------- Nice straw man. I'll argue my own points next time, if you don't mind. Also, for clarity, I'd like to suggest the following: In order to make certain terms with multiple meanings in this debate more clear, I am going to start capitalizing things, such as: Canon Policy - the statements of Lucas or his authorized agents explaining what is and is not the Canon Canon - the declared contents of the Canon Policy Continuity - the term used to refer to the Expanded Universe internal consistency, as opposed to a more general sense like "EU maintaining continuity with Canon" or "Star Trek novels have continuity with Star Trek canon" Quasi-Canon - Official Official - those ideas which are not Canon, but are nevertheless accepted truths of the official history Hopefully that will make things more clear. "Cmdrwilkens" wrote in message news:af5et5$bgs22$1@ID-97732.news.dfncis.de... > 1) No where does Lucasfilm state that the EU is "official" > 2) The SW Insider quote does not state that the EU has a standing > 3) The SW.com article read in context does not say that the EU is included > in the SW reality. > > > Now I'm going to disprove these points one by one. > > 1) They don't have to. Such a category exists but its name is often referred > to as "quasi-canon." The SW Encyclopedia clearly states this and you seem to > not understand the import of this book. A non-Canonical work calling itself Quasi-Canonical doesn't hold any more sway than the self-proclaimed official status of the Star Trek TNG Technical Manual. Nowhere in the Canon Policy of Star Wars is the term "Quasi-Canon". Simple legal licensing of a product does not imply that the product is part of the official Star Wars history. We know what is part of the official Star Wars history, and it is called Canon. > 2) The SW Insider quote states that the EU materials are part of the > "history" of Star Wars. If they are part of it this means that the events, > characters, vehicles, vessels, etc that appear within them are part of the > SW universe. No, they don't say it is part of the history of Star Wars. They say that the "catalog of published works comprises a vast history -- with many off-shoots, variations and tangents -- like any other well-developed mythology." Notice that he says A vast history, not THE vast history, and not THE vast history of Star Wars. Well, that sounds to me like the status of the Christian Bible and the Apocrypha. The books of the Bible were decided on about 1700 years ago, and the books that were selected were specific versions of those books. Even the older versions, like the Dead Sea Scrolls, are not considered a true part of the Bible, and all those books of the Apocrypha, like the stories of the childhood of Jesus, are not considered true accounts. Oh, they comprise "a vast history -- with many off-shoots, variations, and tangents -- like any other well-developed mythology", but they are not considered factual. > 3) The SW.com article specifically states that the EU is part of the > continuity of SW. This means, again, that the EU material is part of the > larger history of SW and that the events, characters, vehicles, vessels, etc > that appear within them must be coherent with and part of the SW universe > described elsewhere. At no point is the Continuity of Star Wars claimed to have any basis in official Star Wars fact. The closest you can come to that is to point to the "window... nugget of truth" paragraph, but you are putting the cart before the horse. It is equally valid, and even more valid, given other quotes, to say that quote means that where the Expanded Universe directly includes known Canon fact, it is historically accurate, so long as interpretation and speculation do not play any role. However, Cerasi says that the further you get away from the films, the more interpretation and speculation come into play. Speculation does not make fact. > The use of the specific terms "continuity" and "history" explain the > position of the EU universe along with the SW Encycliopedia's terminology > gives us all the evidence we need that there are two distinct tiers of > authority...the canon works which are immutable truths and the EU which is > part of SW but less tuthful than the canon material. There's Continuity, as referred to by Expanded Universe and LucasBooks personnel, and then there's a more general continuity. However, even a more general continuity doesn't immediately offer you the grounds to claim that the Expanded Universe is official Star Wars fact. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Cmdrwilkens" Date: Mon, 24 Jun 2002 00:31:56 -0400 Subject: Re: The Basis of "DarkStar's" argument Message-ID: -------- "DarkStar" wrote in message news:HBtR8.365722$Gs.28002859@bin5.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com... > Nice straw man. I'll argue my own points next time, if you don't mind. > > Also, for clarity, I'd like to suggest the following: > > In order to make certain terms with multiple meanings in this debate more > clear, I am going to start capitalizing things, such as: > > Canon Policy - the statements of Lucas or his authorized agents explaining > what is and is not the Canon > Canon - the declared contents of the Canon Policy > Continuity - the term used to refer to the Expanded Universe internal > consistency, as opposed to a more general sense like "EU maintaining > continuity with Canon" or "Star Trek novels have continuity with Star Trek > canon" Here is your problem...you have made a HUGE assumption about what "continuity" refers to without a shred of evidence. > Quasi-Canon - Official > Official - those ideas which are not Canon, but are nevertheless accepted > truths of the official history > > Hopefully that will make things more clear. > > > > "Cmdrwilkens" wrote in message > news:af5et5$bgs22$1@ID-97732.news.dfncis.de... > > 1) No where does Lucasfilm state that the EU is "official" > > 2) The SW Insider quote does not state that the EU has a standing > > 3) The SW.com article read in context does not say that the EU is included > > in the SW reality. > > > > > > Now I'm going to disprove these points one by one. > > > > 1) They don't have to. Such a category exists but its name is often > referred > > to as "quasi-canon." The SW Encyclopedia clearly states this and you seem > to > > not understand the import of this book. > > A non-Canonical work calling itself Quasi-Canonical doesn't hold any more > sway than the self-proclaimed official status of the Star Trek TNG Technical > Manual. Nowhere in the Canon Policy of Star Wars is the term "Quasi-Canon". Incorrect, the SW Encyclopedia specifically references the term "Quasi-canon" when referencing works and their degree of authenticity. The passage in particular is by the same Steven Sansweet who answered continuity questions for SW.com. Sansweet was not referencing his own work but was rather showing us the degree of authenticity of other works utilizing the term "Quasio-canon." Get your facts straigh ass pipe. > Simple legal licensing of a product does not imply that the product is part > of the official Star Wars history. We know what is part of the official > Star Wars history, and it is called Canon. We know what is part of the ""Gospel" or canon as we refer to it" history of SW and we ALSO know that the rest of the work comprises the rest of the authorized SW history. > > 2) The SW Insider quote states that the EU materials are part of the > > "history" of Star Wars. If they are part of it this means that the events, > > characters, vehicles, vessels, etc that appear within them are part of the > > SW universe. > > No, they don't say it is part of the history of Star Wars. They say that > the "catalog of published works comprises a vast history -- with many > off-shoots, variations and tangents -- like any other well-developed > mythology." History, as a term, comprises the events, characters, vehicles, and vessels of a given time and place. I'm a fuckin history major knwo so trust me when they say history of SW includes them I know what history invovles and the written works of SW are part of the official continuation of the SW line. > Notice that he says A vast history, not THE vast history, and not THE vast > history of Star Wars. Because "A' indicates SINGULAR just like "the." Now while "the" is exclusive and "a' allows other such events you would have to show that there IS another history. Beyond this I refer you to the RoE regarding semantics debates, policies this large don't spin on words like 'a" and "the" unlike Presidential impeachment. > > 3) The SW.com article specifically states that the EU is part of the > > continuity of SW. This means, again, that the EU material is part of the > > larger history of SW and that the events, characters, vehicles, vessels, > etc > > that appear within them must be coherent with and part of the SW universe > > described elsewhere. > > At no point is the Continuity of Star Wars claimed to have any basis in > official Star Wars fact. Again this is your biggest, and most unfounded, assumption. the literal definition of the word and its use in context allows the singular interpretation that the SW EU is part of the larger continuity. Since you are so fond of "a" and "the" statements I'll point out that Sansweet (not Cerasi like you call him for some reason) say "THE continuity" which indicates there is a singular exculsive continuity to SW which the EU works are part of. Finally I will state this much...we have a solid theory, if you will, about the interpretaiton of these quotes backed by logical evidence. You have supplied NO competing interpretaiton of the canon policy of SW as it relates to the EU work WITH support. Once more provide a specific alternative with proof of its existence or go back to the dark shed in the woods you call your room. -- Lcpl Burnett, G.R. USMCR BridgeCo B 6th EngSptBN 4th FSSG "Weapons do not penetrate armour based on force and pressure" - IXJac(taken from SB.com and SD.net) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "DarkStar" Date: Mon, 24 Jun 2002 06:28:35 GMT Subject: Re: The Basis of "DarkStar's" argument Message-ID: -------- "Cmdrwilkens" wrote in message news:af67i3$btiht$1@ID-97732.news.dfncis.de... > "DarkStar" wrote in message > news:HBtR8.365722$Gs.28002859@bin5.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com... > > Nice straw man. I'll argue my own points next time, if you don't mind. > > > > Also, for clarity, I'd like to suggest the following: > > > > In order to make certain terms with multiple meanings in this debate more > > clear, I am going to start capitalizing things, such as: > > > > Canon Policy - the statements of Lucas or his authorized agents explaining > > what is and is not the Canon > > Canon - the declared contents of the Canon Policy > > Continuity - the term used to refer to the Expanded Universe internal > > consistency, as opposed to a more general sense like "EU maintaining > > continuity with Canon" or "Star Trek novels have continuity with Star Trek > > canon" > > Here is your problem...you have made a HUGE assumption about what > "continuity" refers to without a shred of evidence. Provided by Graeme Dice from Star Wars Insider: "The idea [licensing deal with Bantam] was passed to George Lucas, who agreed that Licensing could expand upon his films with original fiction set after /Return of the Jedi/." "In the early days of the publishing department, Wilson worked closely with her administrative assistant, Sue Rostoni (now managing editor of the department as well as editor of all adult fiction) on the editorial projects. The two of them decided that to maintain quality, it would be crucial to monitor the storylines of all projects and ensure that none of their books contradicted one another. This continuity decision became one of the department's biggest challenges--and greatest successes." So, it was decided that the Expanded Universe would have internal Continuity. Cerasi (EU guy): "There's been some confusion of late regarding the 'Infinities' symbol, and Star Wars Expanded Universe continuity in general. Terms like "canon" and "continuity" tend to get thrown around casually, which doesn't help at all." Then, later: "Returning to the question at hand. Yes, Star Wars Gamer is part of continuity, though as game material, there is room for interpretation. Only specific articles marked with the 'Infinities' logo within the magazine should be considered out of continuity. Fans of the old monthly Marvel Star Wars comic will be heartened to know that LucasBooks does indeed consider them part of continuity. Decades of retrospect haven't been kind to all the elements of the comic series, but the characters and events still hold weight and are referenced in newer material whenever possible. In order to allow unlimited freedom of storytelling, the Infinities label has been placed on the anthology series, Star Wars Tales. This means that not only can the stories occur anywhere in the Star Wars timeline, but stories can happen outside continuity. Basically, if an event happens in Tales, it may not have necessarily happened in the rest of the expanded universe. For some stories, the distinction is largely inconsequential. For others, it's the only way they could exist (for example, there's a Darth Vader vs. Darth Maul comic coming soon)." Basically, LucasBooks has a declaration of Continuity ... they decide it. Please tell me how LucasBooks could possibly dictate Canon Policy and make Continuity Quasi-Canon? Handley (EU guy): "Lucasfilm's stance on Marvel, as I've learned in the time I've spent writing for WEG, Topps, and (soon) Dark Horse (more on that at a later date), is that they don't have a problem with fitting the Marvel tales into current continuity, so long as it's not done "in your face." In other words, you can reference the events of the Marvel run, but you can't (thank God!) do a "Return of Jaxxon" story. We were allowed to reference Marvel in the Adventure Journal, and Ann Crispin was allowed to work several Marvel references into her Han Solo books. Also, Crimson Empire and Boba Fett: Twin Engines of Destruction utilize or refer to worlds and characters from the Marvel run. In other words, writers are allowed to consider the Marvel series as part of the continuity... but more of a background continuity than a foreground continuity. I know that sounds a little screwy... and I can foresee some eyebrows raising over this post... but that's how the Marvel series currently stands." LucasFilms (read: LucasBooks) dictates Continuity. Denning interview: "Q: Can you share with readers how you prepare for writing a Star Wars book? What material do you use to research the massive volume of backstory, history, information? What does Lucasfilm and Del Rey provide in assistance? A: Del Rey provides the current Star Wars reference material. The Essential Guides and Star Wars Encyclopedia are absolute musts. The Encyclopedia was such a lifesaver that I asked Steve Sansweet to autograph it for me at last year's Gen Con. More importantly, there's the expertise of everyone who reads the manuscript in its various drafts; Shelly, Sue and her readers at Lucasfilm, the copyeditors (and others) at Del Rey. Everyone catches something, and it would be difficult to overestimate how much embarrassment they save a Star Wars author." So, Continuity must be maintained for those who are writing Expanded Universe works. This follows the previous quotes about how Wilson and Rostoni decided to keep the EU internally consistent. Unspecified individual from Star Wars Insider: "Gospel, or canon as we refer to it, includes the screenplays, the films, the radio dramas and the novelisations. These works spin out of George Lucas' original stories, the rest are written by other writers. However, between us, we've read everything, and much of it is taken into account in the overall continuity. The entire catalog of published works comprises a vast history -- with many off-shoots, variations and tangents -- like any other well-developed mythology." The Continuity is not the gospel, and is not Canon. > > > Quasi-Canon - Official > > Official - those ideas which are not Canon, but are nevertheless accepted > > truths of the official history > > > > Hopefully that will make things more clear. > > > > > > > > "Cmdrwilkens" wrote in message > > news:af5et5$bgs22$1@ID-97732.news.dfncis.de... > > > 1) No where does Lucasfilm state that the EU is "official" > > > 2) The SW Insider quote does not state that the EU has a standing > > > 3) The SW.com article read in context does not say that the EU is > included > > > in the SW reality. > > > > > > > > > Now I'm going to disprove these points one by one. > > > > > > 1) They don't have to. Such a category exists but its name is often > > referred > > > to as "quasi-canon." The SW Encyclopedia clearly states this and you > seem > > to > > > not understand the import of this book. > > > > A non-Canonical work calling itself Quasi-Canonical doesn't hold any more > > sway than the self-proclaimed official status of the Star Trek TNG > Technical > > Manual. Nowhere in the Canon Policy of Star Wars is the term > "Quasi-Canon". > > Incorrect, the SW Encyclopedia specifically references the term > "Quasi-canon" when referencing works and their degree of authenticity. The > passage in particular is by the same Steven Sansweet who answered continuity > questions for SW.com. Sansweet was not referencing his own work but was > rather showing us the degree of authenticity of other works utilizing the > term "Quasio-canon." Get your facts straigh ass pipe. > You're still wrong, "ass pipe". The SW Encyclopedia is not part of the Star Wars Canon Policy. When did the foreward to the Encyclopedia become a location for authorized statements? No book can declare itself Canon and override the Canon Policy. Okuda and Sternbach made similarly "authorized statements" in their foreward to the Star Trek TNG Technical Manual, which was never specifically excluded from the canon, but is considered by many to have no value as a source of information. Paramount has never defined a place for "official", just as Lucas/LFL has not. It's funny to see what happens when you try to get people to follow their own rules. The people who are most upset about this thread are the same ones who think the Star Trek TNG Tech Manuals should be thrown out. > > Simple legal licensing of a product does not imply that the product is > part > > of the official Star Wars history. We know what is part of the official > > Star Wars history, and it is called Canon. > > We know what is part of the ""Gospel" or canon as we refer to it" history of > SW and we ALSO know that the rest of the work comprises the rest of the > authorized SW history. No, you're adding words to the quote. He (they?) calls the published works "a vast history -- with many off-shoots, variations and tangents -- like any other well-developed mythology." No one says that the publications comprise the rest of the authorized SW history, as you claim. "Ass pipe". > > > 2) The SW Insider quote states that the EU materials are part of the > > > "history" of Star Wars. If they are part of it this means that the > events, > > > characters, vehicles, vessels, etc that appear within them are part of > the > > > SW universe. > > > > No, they don't say it is part of the history of Star Wars. They say that > > the "catalog of published works comprises a vast history -- with many > > off-shoots, variations and tangents -- like any other well-developed > > mythology." > > History, as a term, comprises the events, characters, vehicles, and vessels > of a given time and place. I'm a fuckin history major knwo so trust me when > they say history of SW includes them I know what history invovles and the > written works of SW are part of the official continuation of the SW line. Well, thank you for your definitions and personal testimony, but they are irrelevant. > > Notice that he says A vast history, not THE vast history, and not THE vast > > history of Star Wars. > > Because "A' indicates SINGULAR just like "the." Now while "the" is exclusive > and "a' allows other such events you would have to show that there IS > another history. No, I wouldn't. You're making up semantics arguments. I don't have to show that there is an alternate version of history to prove that "A history" and "THE history" are not the same thing, though I can do so if I wish. I can even use a made-up version. Take, for instance, "A history" of the universe where God farted five seconds ago and made the universe we now know. Or, take "THE history" of the universe and read about the Big Bang. The quote we are referring to says what the gospel Canon is, and we also know from Cerasi that "the real story of Star Wars" is "only the films", with lesser canon (such as the Insider's reference to scripts, novelisations, and radio dramas) being more interpretive and speculative. > Beyond this I refer you to the RoE regarding semantics > debates, policies this large don't spin on words like 'a" and "the" unlike > Presidential impeachment. You're the one mangling the meanings of words and quotes to try to make your point, so those Rules suggest that you lose. Argument invalid. > > > > > 3) The SW.com article specifically states that the EU is part of the > > > continuity of SW. This means, again, that the EU material is part of the > > > larger history of SW and that the events, characters, vehicles, vessels, > > etc > > > that appear within them must be coherent with and part of the SW > universe > > > described elsewhere. > > > > At no point is the Continuity of Star Wars claimed to have any basis in > > official Star Wars fact. > > Again this is your biggest, and most unfounded, assumption. the literal > definition of the word and its use in context allows the singular > interpretation that the SW EU is part of the larger continuity. Since you > are so fond of "a" and "the" statements I'll point out that Sansweet (not > Cerasi like you call him for some reason) say "THE continuity" which > indicates there is a singular exculsive continuity to SW which the EU works > are part of. No, not at all. THE Continuity ... Sansweet quotes Cerasi, who opens up by pointing out the fact that the term "continuity" gets thrown around casually. That's part of the reason I have chosen to create a capitalized use, because it is clear from what everyone has said that the Continuity is not the same as the general, casual use of the term you're trying to make. THE Continuity is an internal matter of LucasBooks. > Finally I will state this much...we have a solid theory, if you will, about > the interpretaiton of these quotes backed by logical evidence. You have > supplied NO competing interpretaiton of the canon policy of SW as it relates > to the EU work WITH support. Once more provide a specific alternative with > proof of its existence or go back to the dark shed in the woods you call > your room. Your interpretation is based on misquotation, attempted semantics tricks, and unfounded leaps of logic. Mine is based on direct quotation, face-value analysis, and clear lines of thinking. Bite me. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Cmdrwilkens" Date: Mon, 24 Jun 2002 02:52:12 -0400 Subject: Re: The Basis of "DarkStar's" argument Message-ID: -------- "DarkStar" wrote in message news:n_yR8.416183$Oa1.29629040@bin8.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com... > > "Cmdrwilkens" wrote in message > news:af67i3$btiht$1@ID-97732.news.dfncis.de... > > "DarkStar" wrote in message > > news:HBtR8.365722$Gs.28002859@bin5.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com... > > > Nice straw man. I'll argue my own points next time, if you don't mind. > > > > > > Also, for clarity, I'd like to suggest the following: > > > > > > In order to make certain terms with multiple meanings in this debate > more > > > clear, I am going to start capitalizing things, such as: > > > > > > Canon Policy - the statements of Lucas or his authorized agents > explaining > > > what is and is not the Canon > > > Canon - the declared contents of the Canon Policy > > > Continuity - the term used to refer to the Expanded Universe internal > > > consistency, as opposed to a more general sense like "EU maintaining > > > continuity with Canon" or "Star Trek novels have continuity with Star > Trek > > > canon" > > > > Here is your problem...you have made a HUGE assumption about what > > "continuity" refers to without a shred of evidence. > > Provided by Graeme Dice from Star Wars Insider: > > "The idea [licensing deal with Bantam] was passed to George Lucas, who > agreed that Licensing could expand upon his films with original fiction > set after /Return of the Jedi/." > > So, it was decided that the Expanded Universe would have internal > Continuity. > Yes and you will note from the quote you ignored that the continuity would be an expansion of the SW movie continuity. > "Gospel, or canon as we refer to it, includes the screenplays, the films, > the radio dramas and the novelisations. These works spin out of George > Lucas' original stories, the rest are written by other writers. However, > between us, we've read everything, and much of it is taken into account in > the overall continuity. The entire catalog of published works comprises a > vast history -- with many off-shoots, variations and tangents -- like any > other well-developed mythology." > > The Continuity is not the gospel, and is not Canon. Yup, its not gospel but it IS part of the "history" of SW. the history of SW IS Star Wars. The history of anything IS that thing, this is where your inability to understand words is screwing you up. The use of the words "history" is the key. The EU is the history for the SW universe and if it is part of the history then it is the thing. > You're still wrong, "ass pipe". The SW Encyclopedia is not part of the Star > Wars Canon Policy. > > When did the foreward to the Encyclopedia become a location for authorized > statements? No book can declare itself Canon and override the Canon Policy. > Okuda and Sternbach made similarly "authorized statements" in their foreward > to the Star Trek TNG Technical Manual, which was never specifically excluded > from the canon, but is considered by many to have no value as a source of > information. Paramount has never defined a place for "official", just as > Lucas/LFL has not. Did you even fucking read what I wrote? The author, Steven J. Sansweet, IS a LucasFilm employee, he IS one of the chief conitinuity experts and it is his statemnt regarding OTHER WORKS, nto the encyclopedia itself numbuts. Perhaps I can make this clearer. SJS (Sansweet) is a LucasFilm Employee SJS has direct knowledge of the canon/continuity policy of LucasFIlm SJS writes in the SW Encyclopedia that the EU material is considered "quasi-canon." and that the movies, novelisation, et al are considered "canon." > It's funny to see what happens when you try to get people to follow their > own rules. The people who are most upset about this thread are the same ones > who think the Star Trek TNG Tech Manuals should be thrown out. When the managing editor for Pocket Books (the guy who prints the damn things) says that they are "complete specualtion," the FAQ says "only what you see onscreen is canon," and gene's personal rule of thumb was that only what he did was canon you might understand the fdifference when direct representatives of Lucasfilm have told us the EU has official standing. > > Beyond this I refer you to the RoE regarding semantics > > debates, policies this large don't spin on words like 'a" and "the" unlike > > Presidential impeachment. > > You're the one mangling the meanings of words and quotes to try to make your > point, so those Rules suggest that you lose. Argument invalid. Incorrect YOU were the one to first argue that because it said "a history" instead of "the history" that it was invalid YOU are the one commiting the arguement of pointless semantics. Pot. Kettle. Black. > Your interpretation is based on misquotation, attempted semantics tricks, > and unfounded leaps of logic. Mine is based on direct quotation, face-value > analysis, and clear lines of thinking. Then PLEASE expound for us your theory and provide point by point proof because I have yet to see you do this. > Your interpretation is based on misquotation, attempted semantics tricks, > and unfounded leaps of logic. Mine is based on direct quotation, face-value > analysis, and clear lines of thinking. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "DarkStar" Date: Mon, 24 Jun 2002 07:40:13 GMT Subject: Re: The Basis of "DarkStar's" argument Message-ID: -------- "Cmdrwilkens" wrote in message news:af6fjq$c039r$1@ID-97732.news.dfncis.de... > "DarkStar" wrote in message > news:n_yR8.416183$Oa1.29629040@bin8.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com... > > > > "Cmdrwilkens" wrote in message > > news:af67i3$btiht$1@ID-97732.news.dfncis.de... > > > "DarkStar" wrote in message > > > news:HBtR8.365722$Gs.28002859@bin5.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com... > > > > Nice straw man. I'll argue my own points next time, if you don't > mind. > > > > > > > > Also, for clarity, I'd like to suggest the following: > > > > > > > > In order to make certain terms with multiple meanings in this debate > > more > > > > clear, I am going to start capitalizing things, such as: > > > > > > > > Canon Policy - the statements of Lucas or his authorized agents > > explaining > > > > what is and is not the Canon > > > > Canon - the declared contents of the Canon Policy > > > > Continuity - the term used to refer to the Expanded Universe internal > > > > consistency, as opposed to a more general sense like "EU maintaining > > > > continuity with Canon" or "Star Trek novels have continuity with Star > > Trek > > > > canon" > > > > > > Here is your problem...you have made a HUGE assumption about what > > > "continuity" refers to without a shred of evidence. > > > > Provided by Graeme Dice from Star Wars Insider: > > > > "The idea [licensing deal with Bantam] was passed to George Lucas, who > > agreed that Licensing could expand upon his films with original fiction > > set after /Return of the Jedi/." > > > > So, it was decided that the Expanded Universe would have internal > > Continuity. > > > > Yes and you will note from the quote you ignored that the continuity would > be an expansion of the SW movie continuity. > What "quote you ignored"? Are you saying that handling both of the Dice-provided quotes at the same time means I ignored one? Also, where do you get the idea that the first quote says the Continuity will be an expansion of the Canon's "continuity"? > > "Gospel, or canon as we refer to it, includes the screenplays, the films, > > the radio dramas and the novelisations. These works spin out of George > > Lucas' original stories, the rest are written by other writers. However, > > between us, we've read everything, and much of it is taken into account in > > the overall continuity. The entire catalog of published works comprises a > > vast history -- with many off-shoots, variations and tangents -- like any > > other well-developed mythology." > > > > The Continuity is not the gospel, and is not Canon. > > Yup, its not gospel but it IS part of the "history" of SW. the history of SW > IS Star Wars. The history of anything IS that thing, this is where your > inability to understand words is screwing you up. The use of the words > "history" is the key. The EU is the history for the SW universe and if it is > part of the history then it is the thing. No, it is not THE history of Star Wars. It is only stated to be A history of Star Wars, like a mythology. Real history does not actually have offshoots, variations, and tangents, unless you're looking at the history of history and where it was wrong. So, this isn't the real history of Star Wars, or the real story of Star Wars, since that's only the Canon. This is A history. My compliments on your stubbornness, but the game is up. You must concede. > > > > You're still wrong, "ass pipe". The SW Encyclopedia is not part of the > Star > > Wars Canon Policy. > > > > When did the foreward to the Encyclopedia become a location for authorized > > statements? No book can declare itself Canon and override the Canon > Policy. > > Okuda and Sternbach made similarly "authorized statements" in their > foreward > > to the Star Trek TNG Technical Manual, which was never specifically > excluded > > from the canon, but is considered by many to have no value as a source of > > information. Paramount has never defined a place for "official", just as > > Lucas/LFL has not. > > Did you even fucking read what I wrote? The author, Steven J. Sansweet, IS a > LucasFilm employee, he IS one of the chief conitinuity experts and it is his > statemnt regarding OTHER WORKS, nto the encyclopedia itself numbuts. Perhaps > I can make this clearer. > > SJS (Sansweet) is a LucasFilm Employee > SJS has direct knowledge of the canon/continuity policy of LucasFIlm > SJS writes in the SW Encyclopedia that the EU material is considered > "quasi-canon." and that the movies, novelisation, et al are considered > "canon." So, by your own thinking, the Star Trek TNG Technical Manual is "official" Trek fact. Funny, I've never heard you say that before. I'm also amused by your belief that the stated Canon Policy of Lucas/LFL can suddenly be overwritten in a self-proclaimed Quasi-Canon work. I'm further amused by your belief that Cerasi, who said that the real story of Star Wars is only the Canon, and who was quoted by Sansweet, should be ignored. If the "real story of Star Wars" is "only" the Canon, then the non-Canon cannot be the real story of Star Wars, can it? Oh, sure, it can be "a vast history -- with many offshoots, tangents, and variants", but it is obviously not the real history. Why is the above concept so hard for you to understand? > > It's funny to see what happens when you try to get people to follow their > > own rules. The people who are most upset about this thread are the same > ones > > who think the Star Trek TNG Tech Manuals should be thrown out. > > When the managing editor for Pocket Books (the guy who prints the damn > things) says that they are "complete specualtion," the FAQ says "only what > you see onscreen is canon," and gene's personal rule of thumb was that only > what he did was canon you might understand the fdifference when direct > representatives of Lucasfilm have told us the EU has official standing. The book calls itself official, and was written by the same guys who Paramount allowed to write the Chronology and Encyclopedia. Some guy from Pocket Books, which is not owned by Paramount (unlike LucasBooks being owned by LucasFilms and Lucas), says otherwise. But, Paramount disagrees with him, according to the FAQ, because they leave the door wide open for the Tech Manuals. As for Roddenberry's own personal canon, I'm not aware of it. I don't care whether or not you accept the Star Trek TNG Technical Manual. I only care about that as far as it reflects on your thinking. The part that amuses me is that the thinking you use to ignore the Tech Manual is the same thinking you fight against when the subject is Star Wars material. That's a double-standard I think is very entertaining. > > > > > Beyond this I refer you to the RoE regarding semantics > > > debates, policies this large don't spin on words like 'a" and "the" > unlike > > > Presidential impeachment. > > > > You're the one mangling the meanings of words and quotes to try to make > your > > point, so those Rules suggest that you lose. Argument invalid. > > Incorrect YOU were the one to first argue that because it said "a history" > instead of "the history" that it was invalid YOU are the one commiting the > arguement of pointless semantics. Pot. Kettle. Black. No, you were the one misquoting him. Correcting a misquotation does not make an argument turn into semantic squabbling. > > Your interpretation is based on misquotation, attempted semantics tricks, > > and unfounded leaps of logic. Mine is based on direct quotation, > face-value > > analysis, and clear lines of thinking. > > Then PLEASE expound for us your theory and provide point by point proof > because I have yet to see you do this. Please read this thread, the original thread on the topic, and supplement your reading with the "Star Wars Canon" thread at Spacebattles.com. You'll see it all several times, since I keep having to repeat myself against the same BS. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Stuart Mackey" Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2002 00:45:08 +1200 Subject: Re: The Basis of "DarkStar's" argument Message-ID: -------- "Cmdrwilkens" wrote in message news:af5et5$bgs22$1@ID-97732.news.dfncis.de... > 1) No where does Lucasfilm state that the EU is "official" > 2) The SW Insider quote does not state that the EU has a standing > 3) The SW.com article read in context does not say that the EU is included > in the SW reality. What thread is this in? ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Kazuaki Shimazaki" Date: Mon, 24 Jun 2002 21:49:21 +0800 Subject: Re: The Basis of "DarkStar's" argument Message-ID: -------- "Stuart Mackey" wrote in message news:af7499$bl23l$1@ID-75806.news.dfncis.de... > > "Cmdrwilkens" wrote in message > news:af5et5$bgs22$1@ID-97732.news.dfncis.de... > > 1) No where does Lucasfilm state that the EU is "official" > > 2) The SW Insider quote does not state that the EU has a standing > > 3) The SW.com article read in context does not say that the EU is included > > in the SW reality. > > What thread is this in? The "official" thread. Really, it is named "official"! ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "DarkStar" Date: Mon, 24 Jun 2002 22:34:19 GMT Subject: Re: The Basis of "DarkStar's" argument Message-ID: -------- (Posted by Watchdog on Spacebattles) :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: As a last word on the subject, here's what George Lucas has to say: From Cinescape magazine, July 2002 quote: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- And while rumors persist that an outline for a third trilogy exists (a joke Lucas made in passing to Rolling Stone, which then printed it as a fact), the director insists that the only continuation to the saga will be in the form of licensed properties. "There are two worlds here," explains Lucas. "There's my world, which is the movies, and there's this other world that has been created, which I say is the parallel universe-the licensing world of books, games and comic books. They don't intrude on my world, which is a select period of time, [but] they do intrude in between the movies. I dont get to involved in the parallel universe." ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Kamakazie Sith" Date: Mon, 24 Jun 2002 23:35:51 GMT Subject: Re: The Basis of "DarkStar's" argument Message-ID: -------- "DarkStar" wrote in message news:L7NR8.375100$%y.28507901@bin4.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com... > (Posted by Watchdog on Spacebattles) > > :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: > ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: > As a last word on the subject, here's what George Lucas has to say: > From Cinescape magazine, July 2002 > > > > quote: > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > ---- > And while rumors persist that an outline for a third trilogy exists (a joke > Lucas made in passing to Rolling Stone, which then printed it as a fact), > the director insists that the only continuation to the saga will be in the > form of licensed properties. > > "There are two worlds here," explains Lucas. "There's my world, which is the > movies, and there's this other world that has been created, which I say is > the parallel universe-the licensing world of books, games and comic books. > They don't intrude on my world, which is a select period of time, [but] they > do intrude in between the movies. I dont get to involved in the parallel > universe." > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- Sounds like he is saying that they do count. This sentence here basically says that "They don't intrude on my world, which is a select period of time(he is probably talking about the movies), [but] they do intrude in between the movies." ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Iceberg Date: Mon, 24 Jun 2002 18:48:44 -0500 Subject: Re: The Basis of "DarkStar's" argument Message-ID: -------- On Mon, 24 Jun 2002 23:35:51 GMT, "Kamakazie Sith" wrote: >"DarkStar" wrote in message >news:L7NR8.375100$%y.28507901@bin4.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com... >> (Posted by Watchdog on Spacebattles) >> >> >:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: >> ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: >> As a last word on the subject, here's what George Lucas has to say: >> From Cinescape magazine, July 2002 >> >> >> >> quote: >> -------------------------------------------------------------------------- >-- >> ---- >> And while rumors persist that an outline for a third trilogy exists (a >joke >> Lucas made in passing to Rolling Stone, which then printed it as a fact), >> the director insists that the only continuation to the saga will be in the >> form of licensed properties. >> >> "There are two worlds here," explains Lucas. "There's my world, which is >the >> movies, and there's this other world that has been created, which I say is >> the parallel universe-the licensing world of books, games and comic books. >> They don't intrude on my world, which is a select period of time, [but] >they >> do intrude in between the movies. I dont get to involved in the parallel >> universe." >> -------------------------------------------------------------------------- >-- > > >Sounds like he is saying that they do count. This sentence here basically >says that "They don't intrude on my world, which is a select period of >time(he is probably talking about the movies), [but] they do intrude in >between the movies." Sounds also to me like he's saying, "This is what I personally, George Lucas, the man, not the living embodiment of filmmaking, think about the works that my vastly successful corporation has commissioned which are related to the internationally-famous story which I have created." -- Ice "This day will always be remembered! How it's remembered is up to us! Right here, right now! Let's make history!" - Vyse the Legend Skies of Arcadia: Sega Dreamcast (11/4/2000), Nintendo GameCube (Q4 2002), Sony PlayStation 2 (Q1-Q2, 2003). ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: The Ambivalent DMZ Date: Mon, 24 Jun 2002 23:48:49 GMT Subject: Re: The Basis of "DarkStar's" argument Message-ID: <923884742F67C8H10N4O2@null> -------- "Kamakazie Sith" wrote in news:r1OR8.300379$352.29036@sccrnsc02: > > "DarkStar" wrote in message > news:L7NR8.375100$%y.28507901@bin4.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com... >> (Posted by Watchdog on Spacebattles) >> >> >:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: >::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: >> ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: >> As a last word on the subject, here's what George Lucas has to say: >> From Cinescape magazine, July 2002 >> >> >> >> quote: >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> ---- > -- >> ---- >> And while rumors persist that an outline for a third trilogy exists >> (a > joke >> Lucas made in passing to Rolling Stone, which then printed it as a >> fact), the director insists that the only continuation to the saga >> will be in the form of licensed properties. >> >> "There are two worlds here," explains Lucas. "There's my world, which >> is > the >> movies, and there's this other world that has been created, which I >> say is the parallel universe-the licensing world of books, games and >> comic books. They don't intrude on my world, which is a select period >> of time, [but] > they >> do intrude in between the movies. I dont get to involved in the >> parallel universe." >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > Sounds like he is saying that they do count. This sentence here > basically says that "They don't intrude on my world, which is a select > period of time(he is probably talking about the movies), [but] they do > intrude in between the movies." You mean the "parallel universe?" *goes off to resurrect all ST material previously discredited for parallel universe/timeline reasons* -- DMZ mhm33x4 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Iceberg Date: Mon, 24 Jun 2002 18:49:45 -0500 Subject: Re: The Basis of "DarkStar's" argument Message-ID: -------- On Mon, 24 Jun 2002 23:48:49 GMT, The Ambivalent DMZ wrote: >"Kamakazie Sith" wrote in >news:r1OR8.300379$352.29036@sccrnsc02: > >> >> "DarkStar" wrote in message >> news:L7NR8.375100$%y.28507901@bin4.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com... >>> (Posted by Watchdog on Spacebattles) >>> >>> >>:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: >>::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: >>> ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: >>> As a last word on the subject, here's what George Lucas has to say: >>> From Cinescape magazine, July 2002 >>> >>> >>> >>> quote: >>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> ---- >> -- >>> ---- >>> And while rumors persist that an outline for a third trilogy exists >>> (a >> joke >>> Lucas made in passing to Rolling Stone, which then printed it as a >>> fact), the director insists that the only continuation to the saga >>> will be in the form of licensed properties. >>> >>> "There are two worlds here," explains Lucas. "There's my world, which >>> is >> the >>> movies, and there's this other world that has been created, which I >>> say is the parallel universe-the licensing world of books, games and >>> comic books. They don't intrude on my world, which is a select period >>> of time, [but] >> they >>> do intrude in between the movies. I dont get to involved in the >>> parallel universe." >>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> >> Sounds like he is saying that they do count. This sentence here >> basically says that "They don't intrude on my world, which is a select >> period of time(he is probably talking about the movies), [but] they do >> intrude in between the movies." > >You mean the "parallel universe?" > >*goes off to resurrect all ST material previously discredited for parallel >universe/timeline reasons* Shut up, Laird. -- Ice "This day will always be remembered! How it's remembered is up to us! Right here, right now! Let's make history!" - Vyse the Legend Skies of Arcadia: Sega Dreamcast (11/4/2000), Nintendo GameCube (Q4 2002), Sony PlayStation 2 (Q1-Q2, 2003). ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: The Ambivalent DMZ Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2002 00:11:26 GMT Subject: Re: The Basis of "DarkStar's" argument Message-ID: <9238C1C8632EC8H10N4O2@null> -------- Iceberg wrote in news:f0cfhuseul1h42qup4ie4aft19qsqs4a86@4ax.com: > On Mon, 24 Jun 2002 23:48:49 GMT, The Ambivalent DMZ > wrote: > >>"Kamakazie Sith" wrote in >>news:r1OR8.300379$352.29036@sccrnsc02: >> >>> >>> "DarkStar" wrote in message >>> news:L7NR8.375100$%y.28507901@bin4.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com... >>>> (Posted by Watchdog on Spacebattles) >>>> >>>> >>>:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: >>>::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: :::::: >>>> ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: >>>> As a last word on the subject, here's what George Lucas has to say: >>>> From Cinescape magazine, July 2002 >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> quote: >>>> -------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>> -- ---- >>> -- >>>> ---- >>>> And while rumors persist that an outline for a third trilogy exists >>>> (a >>> joke >>>> Lucas made in passing to Rolling Stone, which then printed it as a >>>> fact), the director insists that the only continuation to the saga >>>> will be in the form of licensed properties. >>>> >>>> "There are two worlds here," explains Lucas. "There's my world, >>>> which is >>> the >>>> movies, and there's this other world that has been created, which I >>>> say is the parallel universe-the licensing world of books, games >>>> and comic books. They don't intrude on my world, which is a select >>>> period of time, [but] >>> they >>>> do intrude in between the movies. I dont get to involved in the >>>> parallel universe." >>>> -------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>> -- >>> >>> >>> Sounds like he is saying that they do count. This sentence here >>> basically says that "They don't intrude on my world, which is a >>> select period of time(he is probably talking about the movies), >>> [but] they do intrude in between the movies." >> >>You mean the "parallel universe?" >> >>*goes off to resurrect all ST material previously discredited for >>parallel universe/timeline reasons* > > Shut up, Laird. Your cunning ploy to confuse and distract does not fool me! =) -- DMZ mhm33x4 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Iceberg Date: Mon, 24 Jun 2002 19:16:50 -0500 Subject: Re: The Basis of "DarkStar's" argument Message-ID: <2idfhu8l8k3e3kker5dme8s49sntr5of6m@4ax.com> -------- On Tue, 25 Jun 2002 00:11:26 GMT, The Ambivalent DMZ wrote: >>>> Sounds like he is saying that they do count. This sentence here >>>> basically says that "They don't intrude on my world, which is a >>>> select period of time(he is probably talking about the movies), >>>> [but] they do intrude in between the movies." >>> >>>You mean the "parallel universe?" >>> >>>*goes off to resurrect all ST material previously discredited for >>>parallel universe/timeline reasons* >> >> Shut up, Laird. > >Your cunning ploy to confuse and distract does not fool me! =) Look over there! It's a three-headed monkey! -- Ice "This day will always be remembered! How it's remembered is up to us! Right here, right now! Let's make history!" - Vyse the Legend Skies of Arcadia: Sega Dreamcast (11/4/2000), Nintendo GameCube (Q4 2002), Sony PlayStation 2 (Q1-Q2, 2003). ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: The Ambivalent DMZ Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2002 00:24:47 GMT Subject: Re: The Basis of "DarkStar's" argument Message-ID: <9238E604EDB5C8H10N4O2@null> -------- Iceberg wrote in news:2idfhu8l8k3e3kker5dme8s49sntr5of6m@ 4ax.com: > On Tue, 25 Jun 2002 00:11:26 GMT, The Ambivalent DMZ > wrote: > >>>>> Sounds like he is saying that they do count. This sentence here >>>>> basically says that "They don't intrude on my world, which is a >>>>> select period of time(he is probably talking about the movies), >>>>> [but] they do intrude in between the movies." >>>> >>>>You mean the "parallel universe?" >>>> >>>>*goes off to resurrect all ST material previously discredited for >>>>parallel universe/timeline reasons* >>> >>> Shut up, Laird. >> >>Your cunning ploy to confuse and distract does not fool me! =) > > Look over there! It's a three-headed monkey! Naah, that's just the lump club. -- DMZ mhm33x4 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Iceberg Date: Mon, 24 Jun 2002 19:26:27 -0500 Subject: Re: The Basis of "DarkStar's" argument Message-ID: -------- On Tue, 25 Jun 2002 00:24:47 GMT, The Ambivalent DMZ wrote: >Iceberg wrote in news:2idfhu8l8k3e3kker5dme8s49sntr5of6m@ >4ax.com: > >> On Tue, 25 Jun 2002 00:11:26 GMT, The Ambivalent DMZ >> wrote: >> >>>>>> Sounds like he is saying that they do count. This sentence here >>>>>> basically says that "They don't intrude on my world, which is a >>>>>> select period of time(he is probably talking about the movies), >>>>>> [but] they do intrude in between the movies." >>>>> >>>>>You mean the "parallel universe?" >>>>> >>>>>*goes off to resurrect all ST material previously discredited for >>>>>parallel universe/timeline reasons* >>>> >>>> Shut up, Laird. >>> >>>Your cunning ploy to confuse and distract does not fool me! =) >> >> Look over there! It's a three-headed monkey! > >Naah, that's just the lump club. Weeeeeeeeeeeeeeelll... now that you mention it, I *do* see the resemblance. >;) -- Ice "This day will always be remembered! How it's remembered is up to us! Right here, right now! Let's make history!" - Vyse the Legend Skies of Arcadia: Sega Dreamcast (11/4/2000), Nintendo GameCube (Q4 2002), Sony PlayStation 2 (Q1-Q2, 2003). ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Graeme Dice Date: Mon, 24 Jun 2002 19:20:42 -0600 Subject: Re: The Basis of "DarkStar's" argument Message-ID: <3D17C56A.D11EEEEF@sk.sympatico.ca> -------- Iceberg wrote: > > On Tue, 25 Jun 2002 00:11:26 GMT, The Ambivalent DMZ > wrote: > > >>>> Sounds like he is saying that they do count. This sentence here > >>>> basically says that "They don't intrude on my world, which is a > >>>> select period of time(he is probably talking about the movies), > >>>> [but] they do intrude in between the movies." > >>> > >>>You mean the "parallel universe?" > >>> > >>>*goes off to resurrect all ST material previously discredited for > >>>parallel universe/timeline reasons* > >> > >> Shut up, Laird. > > > >Your cunning ploy to confuse and distract does not fool me! =) > > Look over there! It's a three-headed monkey! Oh boy! Oh boy! This will be great.... Congratulations Mr. you drove an aspiring young entrepreneur out of business. Paraphrased, but some of you should recognize it. Graeme Dice -- I think it would be a good idea. -- Mahatma Ghandi (1869-1948), when asked what he thought of Western civilization ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Shogoki Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2002 16:08:35 -0500 Subject: Re: The Basis of "DarkStar's" argument Message-ID: -------- On Mon, 24 Jun 2002 19:20:42 -0600, Graeme Dice wrote: >Iceberg wrote: >> >> On Tue, 25 Jun 2002 00:11:26 GMT, The Ambivalent DMZ >> wrote: >> >> >>>> Sounds like he is saying that they do count. This sentence here >> >>>> basically says that "They don't intrude on my world, which is a >> >>>> select period of time(he is probably talking about the movies), >> >>>> [but] they do intrude in between the movies." >> >>> >> >>>You mean the "parallel universe?" >> >>> >> >>>*goes off to resurrect all ST material previously discredited for >> >>>parallel universe/timeline reasons* >> >> >> >> Shut up, Laird. >> > >> >Your cunning ploy to confuse and distract does not fool me! =) >> >> Look over there! It's a three-headed monkey! > >Oh boy! Oh boy! This will be great.... > >Congratulations Mr. you drove an aspiring young entrepreneur out of >business. > >Paraphrased, but some of you should recognize it. > The Curse of Monkey Island ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Graeme Dice Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2002 16:41:51 -0600 Subject: Re: The Basis of "DarkStar's" argument Message-ID: <3D18F1AF.FED65B58@sk.sympatico.ca> -------- Shogoki wrote: > > On Mon, 24 Jun 2002 19:20:42 -0600, Graeme Dice > wrote: > > >Iceberg wrote: > >> >Your cunning ploy to confuse and distract does not fool me! =) > >> > >> Look over there! It's a three-headed monkey! > > > >Oh boy! Oh boy! This will be great.... > > > >Congratulations Mr. you drove an aspiring young entrepreneur out of > >business. > > > >Paraphrased, but some of you should recognize it. > > > > The Curse of Monkey Island Congratulations. Every enemy I've met I've annihilated! ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Shogoki Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2002 21:35:13 -0500 Subject: Re: The Basis of "DarkStar's" argument Message-ID: -------- On Tue, 25 Jun 2002 16:41:51 -0600, Graeme Dice wrote: >Shogoki wrote: >> >> On Mon, 24 Jun 2002 19:20:42 -0600, Graeme Dice >> wrote: >> >> >Iceberg wrote: > > > >> >> >Your cunning ploy to confuse and distract does not fool me! =) >> >> >> >> Look over there! It's a three-headed monkey! >> > >> >Oh boy! Oh boy! This will be great.... >> > >> >Congratulations Mr. you drove an aspiring young entrepreneur out of >> >business. >> > >> >Paraphrased, but some of you should recognize it. >> > >> >> The Curse of Monkey Island > >Congratulations. > >Every enemy I've met I've annihilated! With you'r breath im sure they all suffocated! Would you like to be buried or cremated? ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Graeme Dice Date: Wed, 26 Jun 2002 00:01:57 -0600 Subject: Re: The Basis of "DarkStar's" argument Message-ID: <3D1958D5.57B63476@sk.sympatico.ca> -------- Shogoki wrote: > > On Tue, 25 Jun 2002 16:41:51 -0600, Graeme Dice > wrote: > >Congratulations. > > > >Every enemy I've met I've annihilated! > > With you'r breath im sure they all suffocated! > > Would you like to be buried or cremated? With you around, I'd prefer to be fumigated! You're as repulsive as a monkey in a negligee! Graeme Dice -- "The number you have dialed is imaginary. Rotate phone 90 degrees and try again." ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Shogoki Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2002 02:46:13 -0500 Subject: Re: The Basis of "DarkStar's" argument Message-ID: -------- On Wed, 26 Jun 2002 00:01:57 -0600, Graeme Dice wrote: >Shogoki wrote: >> >> On Tue, 25 Jun 2002 16:41:51 -0600, Graeme Dice >> wrote: > > > >> >Congratulations. >> > >> >Every enemy I've met I've annihilated! >> >> With you'r breath im sure they all suffocated! >> >> Would you like to be buried or cremated? > >With you around, I'd prefer to be fumigated! > >You're as repulsive as a monkey in a negligee! > I look THAT much like your fiancée? Coming face to face with me must leave you petrified! ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Graeme Dice Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2002 07:14:16 -0600 Subject: Re: The Basis of "DarkStar's" argument Message-ID: <3D1B0FA8.2E9795AB@sk.sympatico.ca> -------- Shogoki wrote: > > On Wed, 26 Jun 2002 00:01:57 -0600, Graeme Dice > wrote: > > >Shogoki wrote: > >> > >> On Tue, 25 Jun 2002 16:41:51 -0600, Graeme Dice > >> wrote: > > > > > > > >> >Congratulations. > >> > > >> >Every enemy I've met I've annihilated! > >> > >> With you'r breath im sure they all suffocated! > >> > >> Would you like to be buried or cremated? > > > >With you around, I'd prefer to be fumigated! > > > >You're as repulsive as a monkey in a negligee! > > > > I look THAT much like your fiancée? > > Coming face to face with me must leave you petrified! Your odor alone makes me aggravated, agitated, and infuriated! Killing you would be justifiable homicide. Graeme Dice -- Reality is merely an illusion, albeit a very persistent one. -- Albert Einstein ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Shogoki Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2002 09:33:26 -0500 Subject: Re: The Basis of "DarkStar's" argument Message-ID: <6f8mhu0kugve2h27l62ci0fij0dqr4kr4s@4ax.com> -------- On Thu, 27 Jun 2002 07:14:16 -0600, Graeme Dice wrote: >Shogoki wrote: >> >> On Wed, 26 Jun 2002 00:01:57 -0600, Graeme Dice >> wrote: >> >> >Shogoki wrote: >> >> >> >> On Tue, 25 Jun 2002 16:41:51 -0600, Graeme Dice >> >> wrote: >> > >> > >> > >> >> >Congratulations. >> >> > >> >> >Every enemy I've met I've annihilated! >> >> >> >> With you'r breath im sure they all suffocated! >> >> >> >> Would you like to be buried or cremated? >> > >> >With you around, I'd prefer to be fumigated! >> > >> >You're as repulsive as a monkey in a negligee! >> > >> >> I look THAT much like your fiancée? >> >> Coming face to face with me must leave you petrified! > >Your odor alone makes me aggravated, agitated, and infuriated! HA! Wrong counter! I can't rest until you've been exterminated! ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Graeme Dice Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2002 16:53:53 -0600 Subject: Re: The Basis of "DarkStar's" argument Message-ID: <3D1B9781.556DB816@sk.sympatico.ca> -------- Shogoki wrote: > > On Thu, 27 Jun 2002 07:14:16 -0600, Graeme Dice > wrote: > >> Coming face to face with me must leave you petrified! > > > >Your odor alone makes me aggravated, agitated, and infuriated! > > HA! Wrong counter! > > I can't rest until you've been exterminated! Then perhaps you should switch to decaffeinated. Killing you would be justifiable homicide! Graeme Dice -- Reality is merely an illusion, albeit a very persistent one. -- Albert Einstein ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Shogoki Date: Fri, 28 Jun 2002 04:54:41 -0500 Subject: Re: The Basis of "DarkStar's" argument Message-ID: -------- On Thu, 27 Jun 2002 16:53:53 -0600, Graeme Dice wrote: >Shogoki wrote: >> >> On Thu, 27 Jun 2002 07:14:16 -0600, Graeme Dice >> wrote: > > > >> >> Coming face to face with me must leave you petrified! >> > >> >Your odor alone makes me aggravated, agitated, and infuriated! >> >> HA! Wrong counter! >> >> I can't rest until you've been exterminated! > >Then perhaps you should switch to decaffeinated. > >Killing you would be justifiable homicide! Then killing you must be justifiable fungicide! I'll skewer you, like a sow at a buffet! ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Graeme Dice Date: Fri, 28 Jun 2002 07:10:10 -0600 Subject: Re: The Basis of "DarkStar's" argument Message-ID: <3D1C6032.42B41402@sk.sympatico.ca> -------- Shogoki wrote: > > On Thu, 27 Jun 2002 16:53:53 -0600, Graeme Dice > wrote: > > >Shogoki wrote: > >> > >> On Thu, 27 Jun 2002 07:14:16 -0600, Graeme Dice > >> wrote: > > > > > > > >> >> Coming face to face with me must leave you petrified! > >> > > >> >Your odor alone makes me aggravated, agitated, and infuriated! > >> > >> HA! Wrong counter! > >> > >> I can't rest until you've been exterminated! > > > >Then perhaps you should switch to decaffeinated. > > > >Killing you would be justifiable homicide! > > Then killing you must be justifiable fungicide! > > I'll skewer you, like a sow at a buffet! When I'm done with YOU, you'll be a boneless fillet! You can't match my witty repartee. Graeme Dice -- "Science is a wonderful thing if one does not have to earn one's living at it." — Albert Einstein. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Shogoki Date: Fri, 28 Jun 2002 17:52:29 -0500 Subject: Re: The Basis of "DarkStar's" argument Message-ID: -------- On Fri, 28 Jun 2002 07:10:10 -0600, Graeme Dice wrote: >Shogoki wrote: >> >> On Thu, 27 Jun 2002 16:53:53 -0600, Graeme Dice >> wrote: >> >> >Shogoki wrote: >> >> >> >> On Thu, 27 Jun 2002 07:14:16 -0600, Graeme Dice >> >> wrote: >> > >> > >> > >> >> >> Coming face to face with me must leave you petrified! >> >> > >> >> >Your odor alone makes me aggravated, agitated, and infuriated! >> >> >> >> HA! Wrong counter! >> >> >> >> I can't rest until you've been exterminated! >> > >> >Then perhaps you should switch to decaffeinated. >> > >> >Killing you would be justifiable homicide! >> >> Then killing you must be justifiable fungicide! >> >> I'll skewer you, like a sow at a buffet! > >When I'm done with YOU, you'll be a boneless fillet! > >You can't match my witty repartee. I could if you use some breath spray! I'll hound you night and day! ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Graeme Dice Date: Mon, 01 Jul 2002 23:53:22 -0600 Subject: Re: The Basis of "DarkStar's" argument Message-ID: <3D213FD2.2D73ADCE@sk.sympatico.ca> -------- Shogoki wrote: > > On Fri, 28 Jun 2002 07:10:10 -0600, Graeme Dice > wrote: > > >Shogoki wrote: > >When I'm done with YOU, you'll be a boneless fillet! > > > >You can't match my witty repartee. > > I could if you use some breath spray! > > I'll hound you night and day! Then be a good dog. Sit! Stay! When your father first saw you, he must have been mortified. Graeme Dice -- Reasons to Run Away 38-"You're the only Non-Force user in a room full of Sith." ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Shogoki Date: Tue, 02 Jul 2002 02:45:44 -0500 Subject: Re: The Basis of "DarkStar's" argument Message-ID: <0gm2iu45mimd8gmame40nvneqd0g6aciep@4ax.com> -------- On Mon, 01 Jul 2002 23:53:22 -0600, Graeme Dice wrote: >Shogoki wrote: >> >> On Fri, 28 Jun 2002 07:10:10 -0600, Graeme Dice >> wrote: >> >> >Shogoki wrote: > > > >> >When I'm done with YOU, you'll be a boneless fillet! >> > >> >You can't match my witty repartee. >> >> I could if you use some breath spray! >> >> I'll hound you night and day! > >Then be a good dog. Sit! Stay! > >When your father first saw you, he must have been mortified. At least mine can be identified! En garde! Touché! ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Graeme Dice Date: Tue, 02 Jul 2002 06:33:07 -0600 Subject: Re: The Basis of "DarkStar's" argument Message-ID: <3D219D83.76A44BF1@sk.sympatico.ca> -------- Shogoki wrote: > > On Mon, 01 Jul 2002 23:53:22 -0600, Graeme Dice > wrote: > > >Shogoki wrote: > >> > >> On Fri, 28 Jun 2002 07:10:10 -0600, Graeme Dice > >> wrote: > >> > >> >Shogoki wrote: > > > > > > > >> >When I'm done with YOU, you'll be a boneless fillet! > >> > > >> >You can't match my witty repartee. > >> > >> I could if you use some breath spray! > >> > >> I'll hound you night and day! > > > >Then be a good dog. Sit! Stay! > > > >When your father first saw you, he must have been mortified. > > At least mine can be identified! > > En garde! Touché! Oh that is so cliche. Throughout the Caribbean my great deeds are celebrated. Graeme Dice -- "There may be more than one way to skin a cat, but you only get one try per cat." ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Shogoki Date: Wed, 03 Jul 2002 08:22:28 -0500 Subject: Re: The Basis of "DarkStar's" argument Message-ID: -------- On Tue, 02 Jul 2002 06:33:07 -0600, Graeme Dice wrote: >Shogoki wrote: >> >> On Mon, 01 Jul 2002 23:53:22 -0600, Graeme Dice >> wrote: >> >> >Shogoki wrote: >> >> >> >> On Fri, 28 Jun 2002 07:10:10 -0600, Graeme Dice >> >> wrote: >> >> >> >> >Shogoki wrote: >> > >> > >> > >> >> >When I'm done with YOU, you'll be a boneless fillet! >> >> > >> >> >You can't match my witty repartee. >> >> >> >> I could if you use some breath spray! >> >> >> >> I'll hound you night and day! >> > >> >Then be a good dog. Sit! Stay! >> > >> >When your father first saw you, he must have been mortified. >> >> At least mine can be identified! >> >> En garde! Touché! > >Oh that is so cliche. > >Throughout the Caribbean my great deeds are celebrated. Too bad they're all fabricated. You're the ugliest monster ever created. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Graeme Dice Date: Wed, 03 Jul 2002 20:18:01 -0600 Subject: Re: The Basis of "DarkStar's" argument Message-ID: <3D23B059.2869EF08@sk.sympatico.ca> -------- Shogoki wrote: > > On Tue, 02 Jul 2002 06:33:07 -0600, Graeme Dice > wrote: > > >Shogoki wrote: > >> > >> On Mon, 01 Jul 2002 23:53:22 -0600, Graeme Dice > >> wrote: > >> > >> >Shogoki wrote: > >> >> > >> >> On Fri, 28 Jun 2002 07:10:10 -0600, Graeme Dice > >> >> wrote: > >> >> > >> >> >Shogoki wrote: > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> >> >When I'm done with YOU, you'll be a boneless fillet! > >> >> > > >> >> >You can't match my witty repartee. > >> >> > >> >> I could if you use some breath spray! > >> >> > >> >> I'll hound you night and day! > >> > > >> >Then be a good dog. Sit! Stay! > >> > > >> >When your father first saw you, he must have been mortified. > >> > >> At least mine can be identified! > >> > >> En garde! Touché! > > > >Oh that is so cliche. > > > >Throughout the Caribbean my great deeds are celebrated. > > Too bad they're all fabricated. > > You're the ugliest monster ever created. If you don't count all the ones you've dated. Coming face to face with me must leave you petrified. Grame Dice -- "If the facts don't fit the theory, change the facts." — Albert Einstein. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Shogoki Date: Thu, 04 Jul 2002 02:01:07 -0500 Subject: Re: The Basis of "DarkStar's" argument Message-ID: -------- On Wed, 03 Jul 2002 20:18:01 -0600, Graeme Dice wrote: >Shogoki wrote: >> >> On Tue, 02 Jul 2002 06:33:07 -0600, Graeme Dice >> wrote: >> >> >Shogoki wrote: >> >> >> >> On Mon, 01 Jul 2002 23:53:22 -0600, Graeme Dice >> >> wrote: >> >> >> >> >Shogoki wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >> On Fri, 28 Jun 2002 07:10:10 -0600, Graeme Dice >> >> >> wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >> >Shogoki wrote: >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> >> >When I'm done with YOU, you'll be a boneless fillet! >> >> >> > >> >> >> >You can't match my witty repartee. >> >> >> >> >> >> I could if you use some breath spray! >> >> >> >> >> >> I'll hound you night and day! >> >> > >> >> >Then be a good dog. Sit! Stay! >> >> > >> >> >When your father first saw you, he must have been mortified. >> >> >> >> At least mine can be identified! >> >> >> >> En garde! Touché! >> > >> >Oh that is so cliche. >> > >> >Throughout the Caribbean my great deeds are celebrated. >> >> Too bad they're all fabricated. >> >> You're the ugliest monster ever created. > >If you don't count all the ones you've dated. > >Coming face to face with me must leave you petrified. > Is that your face? I thought it was your backside! I'll leave you devastated, mutilated and perforated. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Graeme Dice Date: Sat, 06 Jul 2002 20:01:29 -0600 Subject: Re: The Basis of "DarkStar's" argument Message-ID: <3D27A0F9.A94D9922@sk.sympatico.ca> -------- Shogoki wrote: > > On Wed, 03 Jul 2002 20:18:01 -0600, Graeme Dice > wrote: > > >Shogoki wrote: > >> > >> On Tue, 02 Jul 2002 06:33:07 -0600, Graeme Dice > >> wrote: > >> > >> >Shogoki wrote: > >> >> > >> >> On Mon, 01 Jul 2002 23:53:22 -0600, Graeme Dice > >> >> wrote: > >> >> > >> >> >Shogoki wrote: > >> >> >> > >> >> >> On Fri, 28 Jun 2002 07:10:10 -0600, Graeme Dice > >> >> >> wrote: > >> >> >> > >> >> >> >Shogoki wrote: > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> >> >When I'm done with YOU, you'll be a boneless fillet! > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> >You can't match my witty repartee. > >> >> >> > >> >> >> I could if you use some breath spray! > >> >> >> > >> >> >> I'll hound you night and day! > >> >> > > >> >> >Then be a good dog. Sit! Stay! > >> >> > > >> >> >When your father first saw you, he must have been mortified. > >> >> > >> >> At least mine can be identified! > >> >> > >> >> En garde! Touché! > >> > > >> >Oh that is so cliche. > >> > > >> >Throughout the Caribbean my great deeds are celebrated. > >> > >> Too bad they're all fabricated. > >> > >> You're the ugliest monster ever created. > > > >If you don't count all the ones you've dated. > > > >Coming face to face with me must leave you petrified. > > > Is that your face? I thought it was your backside! > > I'll leave you devastated, mutilated and perforated. Your odor alone makes me aggravated, agitated, and infuriated! En garde! Touché! Graeme Dice -- "There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics." — Disraeli (1804-81), British statesman. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Shogoki Date: Tue, 09 Jul 2002 15:31:23 -0500 Subject: Re: The Basis of "DarkStar's" argument Message-ID: -------- On Sat, 06 Jul 2002 20:01:29 -0600, Graeme Dice wrote: >Shogoki wrote: >> >> On Wed, 03 Jul 2002 20:18:01 -0600, Graeme Dice >> wrote: >> >> >Shogoki wrote: >> >> >> >> On Tue, 02 Jul 2002 06:33:07 -0600, Graeme Dice >> >> wrote: >> >> >> >> >Shogoki wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >> On Mon, 01 Jul 2002 23:53:22 -0600, Graeme Dice >> >> >> wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >> >Shogoki wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> On Fri, 28 Jun 2002 07:10:10 -0600, Graeme Dice >> >> >> >> wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >Shogoki wrote: >> >> >> > >> >> >> > >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> >When I'm done with YOU, you'll be a boneless fillet! >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> >You can't match my witty repartee. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> I could if you use some breath spray! >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> I'll hound you night and day! >> >> >> > >> >> >> >Then be a good dog. Sit! Stay! >> >> >> > >> >> >> >When your father first saw you, he must have been mortified. >> >> >> >> >> >> At least mine can be identified! >> >> >> >> >> >> En garde! Touché! >> >> > >> >> >Oh that is so cliche. >> >> > >> >> >Throughout the Caribbean my great deeds are celebrated. >> >> >> >> Too bad they're all fabricated. >> >> >> >> You're the ugliest monster ever created. >> > >> >If you don't count all the ones you've dated. >> > >> >Coming face to face with me must leave you petrified. >> > >> Is that your face? I thought it was your backside! >> >> I'll leave you devastated, mutilated and perforated. > >Your odor alone makes me aggravated, agitated, and infuriated! > >En garde! Touché! Oh that is so cliche. O yeah, well, you fight like a cow! >Graeme Dice ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Graeme Dice Date: Tue, 09 Jul 2002 17:15:18 -0600 Subject: Re: The Basis of "DarkStar's" argument Message-ID: <3D2B6E86.44DCC582@sk.sympatico.ca> -------- Shogoki wrote: > > On Sat, 06 Jul 2002 20:01:29 -0600, Graeme Dice > wrote: > > >Shogoki wrote: > >> > >> On Wed, 03 Jul 2002 20:18:01 -0600, Graeme Dice > >> wrote: > >> > >> >Shogoki wrote: > >> >> > >> >> On Tue, 02 Jul 2002 06:33:07 -0600, Graeme Dice > >> >> wrote: > >> >> > >> >> >Shogoki wrote: > >> >> >> > >> >> >> On Mon, 01 Jul 2002 23:53:22 -0600, Graeme Dice > >> >> >> wrote: > >> >> >> > >> >> >> >Shogoki wrote: > >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> On Fri, 28 Jun 2002 07:10:10 -0600, Graeme Dice > >> >> >> >> wrote: > >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> >Shogoki wrote: > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> >> >When I'm done with YOU, you'll be a boneless fillet! > >> >> >> >> > > >> >> >> >> >You can't match my witty repartee. > >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> I could if you use some breath spray! > >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> I'll hound you night and day! > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> >Then be a good dog. Sit! Stay! > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> >When your father first saw you, he must have been mortified. > >> >> >> > >> >> >> At least mine can be identified! > >> >> >> > >> >> >> En garde! Touché! > >> >> > > >> >> >Oh that is so cliche. > >> >> > > >> >> >Throughout the Caribbean my great deeds are celebrated. > >> >> > >> >> Too bad they're all fabricated. > >> >> > >> >> You're the ugliest monster ever created. > >> > > >> >If you don't count all the ones you've dated. > >> > > >> >Coming face to face with me must leave you petrified. > >> > > >> Is that your face? I thought it was your backside! > >> > >> I'll leave you devastated, mutilated and perforated. > > > >Your odor alone makes me aggravated, agitated, and infuriated! > > > >En garde! Touché! > > Oh that is so cliche. > > O yeah, well, you fight like a cow! I am rubber, you are glue. I think we ran out of insults. Graeme Dice -- "Alcohol and calculus don't mix. Never drink and derive." ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Shogoki Date: Tue, 09 Jul 2002 20:09:24 -0500 Subject: Re: The Basis of "DarkStar's" argument Message-ID: -------- On Tue, 09 Jul 2002 17:15:18 -0600, Graeme Dice wrote: >Shogoki wrote: >> >> On Sat, 06 Jul 2002 20:01:29 -0600, Graeme Dice >> wrote: >> >> >Shogoki wrote: >> >> >> >> On Wed, 03 Jul 2002 20:18:01 -0600, Graeme Dice >> >> wrote: >> >> >> >> >Shogoki wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >> On Tue, 02 Jul 2002 06:33:07 -0600, Graeme Dice >> >> >> wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >> >Shogoki wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> On Mon, 01 Jul 2002 23:53:22 -0600, Graeme Dice >> >> >> >> wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >Shogoki wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> On Fri, 28 Jun 2002 07:10:10 -0600, Graeme Dice >> >> >> >> >> wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >Shogoki wrote: >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> >> >When I'm done with YOU, you'll be a boneless fillet! >> >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> >> >You can't match my witty repartee. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> I could if you use some breath spray! >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> I'll hound you night and day! >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> >Then be a good dog. Sit! Stay! >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> >When your father first saw you, he must have been mortified. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> At least mine can be identified! >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> En garde! Touché! >> >> >> > >> >> >> >Oh that is so cliche. >> >> >> > >> >> >> >Throughout the Caribbean my great deeds are celebrated. >> >> >> >> >> >> Too bad they're all fabricated. >> >> >> >> >> >> You're the ugliest monster ever created. >> >> > >> >> >If you don't count all the ones you've dated. >> >> > >> >> >Coming face to face with me must leave you petrified. >> >> > >> >> Is that your face? I thought it was your backside! >> >> >> >> I'll leave you devastated, mutilated and perforated. >> > >> >Your odor alone makes me aggravated, agitated, and infuriated! >> > >> >En garde! Touché! >> >> Oh that is so cliche. >> >> O yeah, well, you fight like a cow! > >I am rubber, you are glue. *Slashes Graeme's hand off* >I think we ran out of insults. You're a disgrace to your species, you're so undignified! >Graeme Dice ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "LT.Hit-Man" Date: Sat, 6 Jul 2002 22:09:19 -0400 Subject: Re: The Basis of "DarkStar's" argument Message-ID: -------- Shogoki wrote in message ... (snip) Looks like the honeymoon is over. " ASVS where god the devil sane people and trolls fear to tread " LT.Hit-Man ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Shogoki Date: Mon, 24 Jun 2002 19:32:58 -0500 Subject: Re: The Basis of "DarkStar's" argument Message-ID: -------- On Mon, 24 Jun 2002 22:34:19 GMT, "DarkStar" wrote: >(Posted by Watchdog on Spacebattles) > >:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: >::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: >As a last word on the subject, here's what George Lucas has to say: >From Cinescape magazine, July 2002 > > > >quote: >---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >---- >And while rumors persist that an outline for a third trilogy exists (a joke >Lucas made in passing to Rolling Stone, which then printed it as a fact), >the director insists that the only continuation to the saga will be in the >form of licensed properties. > >"There are two worlds here," explains Lucas. "There's my world, which is the >movies, and there's this other world that has been created, which I say is >the parallel universe-the licensing world of books, games and comic books. >They don't intrude on my world, which is a select period of time, [but] they >do intrude in between the movies. I dont get to involved in the parallel >universe." >---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >---- Which mean that he feels free to contradict it if he wants, not that is not part of the story. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "DarkStar" Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2002 02:01:11 GMT Subject: Re: The Basis of "DarkStar's" argument Message-ID: -------- "Shogoki" wrote in message news:cgefhu8f3prm3kpukgups0m82v1fdt2p9i@4ax.com... > On Mon, 24 Jun 2002 22:34:19 GMT, "DarkStar" > wrote: > > >(Posted by Watchdog on Spacebattles) > > > >::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: : > >::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: > >As a last word on the subject, here's what George Lucas has to say: > >From Cinescape magazine, July 2002 > > > > > > > >quote: > >--------------------------------------------------------------------------- - > >---- > >And while rumors persist that an outline for a third trilogy exists (a joke > >Lucas made in passing to Rolling Stone, which then printed it as a fact), > >the director insists that the only continuation to the saga will be in the > >form of licensed properties. > > > >"There are two worlds here," explains Lucas. "There's my world, which is the > >movies, and there's this other world that has been created, which I say is > >the parallel universe-the licensing world of books, games and comic books. > >They don't intrude on my world, which is a select period of time, [but] they > >do intrude in between the movies. I dont get to involved in the parallel > >universe." > >--------------------------------------------------------------------------- - > >---- > > Which mean that he feels free to contradict it if he wants, not that > is not part of the story. "There are two worlds ... my world is the movies ... this other world that has been created ... I say is the parallel universe ... they don't intrude on my world ... I don't get too involved ... " Funny. Sounds to me like he just said that the Expanded Universe isn't the same as his. "Parallel universe", "two worlds", "this other world" ... that sounds an awful lot like what I've been saying based on the stated Canon Policy, which is: The real story of Star Wars is the Canon, which includes the absolute Canon of the films, with the scripts, novelisations, and radio play included. There are licensed products such as books, games, and comic books, and these are not claimed to be Canon or have any canonicity, though they are required by LucasBooks to maintain internal consistency, aka Continuity. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Graeme Dice Date: Mon, 24 Jun 2002 20:41:33 -0600 Subject: Re: The Basis of "DarkStar's" argument Message-ID: <3D17D85D.6F1CF8AD@sk.sympatico.ca> -------- DarkStar wrote: > > "Shogoki" wrote in message > news:cgefhu8f3prm3kpukgups0m82v1fdt2p9i@4ax.com... > > On Mon, 24 Jun 2002 22:34:19 GMT, "DarkStar" > > wrote: > > > > >(Posted by Watchdog on Spacebattles) > > > > > > >::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: > : > > >::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: > > >As a last word on the subject, here's what George Lucas has to say: > > >From Cinescape magazine, July 2002 > > > > > > > > > > > >quote: > > > >--------------------------------------------------------------------------- > - > > >---- > > >And while rumors persist that an outline for a third trilogy exists (a > joke > > >Lucas made in passing to Rolling Stone, which then printed it as a fact), > > >the director insists that the only continuation to the saga will be in > the > > >form of licensed properties. > > > > > >"There are two worlds here," explains Lucas. "There's my world, which is > the > > >movies, and there's this other world that has been created, which I say > is > > >the parallel universe-the licensing world of books, games and comic > books. > > >They don't intrude on my world, which is a select period of time, [but] > they > > >do intrude in between the movies. I dont get to involved in the parallel > > >universe." > > > >--------------------------------------------------------------------------- > - > > >---- > > > > Which mean that he feels free to contradict it if he wants, not that > > is not part of the story. > > "There are two worlds ... my world is the movies ... this other world that > has been created ... I say is the parallel universe ... they don't intrude > on my world ... I don't get too involved ... " You know, if the media did such selective quoting people would say they are misrepresenting the facts. Much like you are. Graeme Dice -- Conclusion /nm./: the place where you got tired of thinking. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "DarkStar" Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2002 02:44:11 GMT Subject: Re: The Basis of "DarkStar's" argument Message-ID: <%NQR8.376651$Gs.28923435@bin5.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com> -------- "Graeme Dice" wrote in message news:3D17D85D.6F1CF8AD@sk.sympatico.ca... > DarkStar wrote: > > > > "Shogoki" wrote in message > > news:cgefhu8f3prm3kpukgups0m82v1fdt2p9i@4ax.com... > > > On Mon, 24 Jun 2002 22:34:19 GMT, "DarkStar" > > > wrote: > > > > > > >(Posted by Watchdog on Spacebattles) > > > > > > > > > >::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: > > : > > > >::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: > > > >As a last word on the subject, here's what George Lucas has to say: > > > >From Cinescape magazine, July 2002 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >quote: > > > > > >--------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > - > > > >---- > > > >And while rumors persist that an outline for a third trilogy exists (a > > joke > > > >Lucas made in passing to Rolling Stone, which then printed it as a fact), > > > >the director insists that the only continuation to the saga will be in > > the > > > >form of licensed properties. > > > > > > > >"There are two worlds here," explains Lucas. "There's my world, which is > > the > > > >movies, and there's this other world that has been created, which I say > > is > > > >the parallel universe-the licensing world of books, games and comic > > books. > > > >They don't intrude on my world, which is a select period of time, [but] > > they > > > >do intrude in between the movies. I dont get to involved in the parallel > > > >universe." > > > > > >--------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > - > > > >---- > > > > > > Which mean that he feels free to contradict it if he wants, not that > > > is not part of the story. > > > > "There are two worlds ... my world is the movies ... this other world that > > has been created ... I say is the parallel universe ... they don't intrude > > on my world ... I don't get too involved ... " > > You know, if the media did such selective quoting people would say they > are misrepresenting the facts. Much like you are. I'm not misrepresenting, I'm reminding him of the important elements most of you obviously failed to read. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Graeme Dice Date: Mon, 24 Jun 2002 20:47:12 -0600 Subject: Re: The Basis of "DarkStar's" argument Message-ID: <3D17D9B0.B0CC212@sk.sympatico.ca> -------- arkStar wrote: > > "Graeme Dice" wrote in message > news:3D17D85D.6F1CF8AD@sk.sympatico.ca... > > DarkStar wrote: > > > "There are two worlds ... my world is the movies ... this other world > that > > > has been created ... I say is the parallel universe ... they don't > intrude > > > on my world ... I don't get too involved ... " > > > > You know, if the media did such selective quoting people would say they > > are misrepresenting the facts. Much like you are. > > I'm not misrepresenting, I'm reminding him of the important elements most of > you obviously failed to read. No, what you are doing is taking the selections of those quotes out of context and thereby reducing them to meaningless snippets that do not contain any information. -- Bloody hell, you guys are idiots. I don't care if the preface to the ICS read: "I AM MAKING TURBOLASERS 200 GIGATONS BECAUSE I HATE SPACEBATTLES.COM AND WORSHIP MIKE WONG! MUAHAHA! STAR TREK SUXORZ!" As long as LucasFilm has it printed and published under their name, it's STILL OFFICIAL! -- WindupAtheist ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "DarkStar" Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2002 03:11:05 GMT Subject: Re: The Basis of "DarkStar's" argument Message-ID: -------- "Graeme Dice" wrote in message news:3D17D9B0.B0CC212@sk.sympatico.ca... > arkStar wrote: > > > > "Graeme Dice" wrote in message > > news:3D17D85D.6F1CF8AD@sk.sympatico.ca... > > > DarkStar wrote: > > > > > > > "There are two worlds ... my world is the movies ... this other world > > that > > > > has been created ... I say is the parallel universe ... they don't > > intrude > > > > on my world ... I don't get too involved ... " > > > > > > You know, if the media did such selective quoting people would say they > > > are misrepresenting the facts. Much like you are. > > > > I'm not misrepresenting, I'm reminding him of the important elements most of > > you obviously failed to read. > > No, what you are doing is taking the selections of those quotes out of > context and thereby reducing them to meaningless snippets that do not > contain any information. I've already made my argument off of the entire quote, pointing out the relevant sections. He disputed that, claiming that the quote said something which it could not possibly have said. I did not strip it of meaning, I pointed out the places where the meaning could be found, since it was being ignored by the likes of you. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: adumbledore@earthlink.net (Cromag) Date: 26 Jun 2002 09:46:55 -0700 Subject: Re: The Basis of "DarkStar's" argument Message-ID: -------- "DarkStar" wrote in message news:... > > I've already made my argument off of the entire quote, pointing out the > relevant sections. He disputed that, claiming that the quote said > something which it could not possibly have said. I did not strip it of > meaning, I pointed out the places where the meaning could be found, since it > was being ignored by the likes of you. Talk about the height of arrogance. "...claiming that the quote said something which it could not possibly have said." You claim to know that your interpretation of the quote is the only true one? Given how much of the EU has made it into canon films, and the fact that EU chars remember events unfolding exactly as they did in the films, it's pretty easy to see that these aren't parallel universes, they're the same friggin' universe. His quote was just a re-statement of how he writes his material, he doesn't allow anyone to write official material about the time period his stories occur in and he doesn't concern himself with contradicting them because he's creating canon. The current canon policy has the weight of actual evidence to support it whereas all you have is your mindless devotion to your own opinions regarding what the quotes mean. You lose. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "DarkStar" Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2002 07:22:19 GMT Subject: Re: The Basis of "DarkStar's" argument Message-ID: -------- "Cromag" wrote in message news:c3714b1.0206260846.1cc6dd89@posting.google.com... > "DarkStar" wrote in message news:... > Given how much of the EU has made it into canon films, and the fact > that EU chars remember events unfolding exactly as they did in the > films, it's pretty easy to see that these aren't parallel universes, > they're the same friggin' universe. http://boards.theforce.net/message.asp?topic=5852298 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Graeme Dice Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2002 07:10:29 -0600 Subject: Re: The Basis of "DarkStar's" argument Message-ID: <3D1B0EC5.9632D082@sk.sympatico.ca> -------- DarkStar wrote: > > "Cromag" wrote in message > news:c3714b1.0206260846.1cc6dd89@posting.google.com... > > "DarkStar" wrote in message > news:... > > > Given how much of the EU has made it into canon films, and the fact > > that EU chars remember events unfolding exactly as they did in the > > films, it's pretty easy to see that these aren't parallel universes, > > they're the same friggin' universe. > > http://boards.theforce.net/message.asp?topic=5852298 How are you expecting that some books are actually _canon_ to help your argument that they aren't even official? Graeme Dice -- Reality is merely an illusion, albeit a very persistent one. -- Albert Einstein ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Iceberg Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2002 13:00:00 -0500 Subject: Re: The Basis of "DarkStar's" argument Message-ID: <4abhhuomaugmonmabjhe4grvfma3r2l9i5@4ax.com> -------- On Mon, 24 Jun 2002 20:47:12 -0600, Graeme Dice wrote: >arkStar wrote: >> >> "Graeme Dice" wrote in message >> news:3D17D85D.6F1CF8AD@sk.sympatico.ca... >> > DarkStar wrote: > > > >> > > "There are two worlds ... my world is the movies ... this other world >> that >> > > has been created ... I say is the parallel universe ... they don't >> intrude >> > > on my world ... I don't get too involved ... " >> > >> > You know, if the media did such selective quoting people would say they >> > are misrepresenting the facts. Much like you are. >> >> I'm not misrepresenting, I'm reminding him of the important elements most of >> you obviously failed to read. > >No, what you are doing is taking the selections of those quotes out of >context and thereby reducing them to meaningless snippets that do not >contain any information. I will again remind DarkStar (even though I have lost hope of him seeing the fucking truth of the matter): (reposted and expanded from sb.com) The law recognizes a separation between a corporation (like Lucasfilm, Ltd.) and the people who own it. Lucasfilm is what we call in the business world a Limited Liability Corporation (thus the "Limited" in its name). An LLC has many duties and powers related to ownership, but the upshot of this from a financial point of view is that in the unlikely event that LFLtd. fails, George Lucas himself is not legally liable, unless it is proven that fraud was committed by George Lucas in a court of law. However, the flip side of this is that Lucasfilm, Ltd. owns Star Wars, not George Lucas personally (in the legal sense; the films are ©Lucasfilm Ltd., not ©George Lucas). It's his story, and he's the Boss, but it's legally Lucasfilm, Ltd.'s property. Hence, it is Lucasfilm, Ltd.'s stated policy, not George Lucas's personal opinion that he blurted out on the spur of the moment in an interview, that matters. If Lucasfilm thinks that the Expanded Universe "counts" (which all evidence suggests they do), then barring specific orders to the contrary from "the Boss" (read here: George and his legal department), it does. I'm not saying that Star Wars isn't Mr. Lucas's work - very obviously, it is - but that he owns it, from a legal perspective, at a one-level remove (he owns the company that owns Star Wars). Because Lucasfilm, Ltd. owns Star Wars, rather than Mr. Lucas drectly, in order for his opinion regarding Star Wars to be properly valid and admissible as evidence, it MUST be stated as a formal policy of Lucasfilm, Limited. Otherwise it has the same status as his comment that the ideal form of government would be a benevolent despot. -- Ice "This day will always be remembered! How it's remembered is up to us! Right here, right now! Let's make history!" - Vyse the Legend Skies of Arcadia: Sega Dreamcast (11/4/2000), Nintendo GameCube (Q4 2002), Sony PlayStation 2 (Q1-Q2, 2003). ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "DarkStar" Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2002 16:37:10 GMT Subject: Re: The Basis of "DarkStar's" argument Message-ID: -------- My Final Words on Canon: (Take 'em or leave 'em) In truth, it is best left up to the individual's point of view (Sansweet), but for a versus debate that isn't helpful. So, we must attempt to determine a set of hard rules based on what Lucas and his authorized agents say, and make sure that the way we determine what the rules are is the same for any other franchise's canon policy. The real story of Star Wars is the absolute Canon of the films (Cerasi, Sansweet). The remaining parts of Canon are the film scripts, film novelisations, and the 1981 radio plays (Insider #23), with a canonicity that drops off in degrees (Sansweet) based on how close they are to the movies in format and content (Cerasi). The further you get from the movies, the more interpretation and speculation come into play (Cerasi). Lucas and LFL have allowed other writers to expand upon his films with original fiction novels(Dice's 1st Insider quote), games, and comic books (StarWars.com EU intro). LucasBooks handles the editorial Continuity for these. The Continuity is an internal consistency -- ensuring the books don't contradict each other -- that LucasBooks decided to strive to maintain (Dice's 2nd Insider quote). This is known as the Expanded Universe, and authors who write for it must know not only the Canon, but also the EU Continuity (Handley, Denning). This catalog of published works comprises a vast history with offshoots, tangents, and variants (Insider #23), though this history doesn't necessarily represent the true history of the Star Wars universe (Cerasi). It may serve as a window into the real story of Star Wars, and may contain nuggets of truth (Cerasi), but it cannot write the real story (Cerasi) nor is it clear whether those nuggets of truth come from the original fiction or simply the fiction's use of Canon. In any event, Lucas is the source of Star Wars, and isn't held to any of the EU stories (Sansweet, Community page). There is much confusion among Star Wars fans as to what is true of the Star Wars universe beyond the Canon (Cerasi and others). Part of this is due to conflicting statements about what is and isn't the real story of Star Wars (see starwars.com EU intro (suggesting that Canon + EU = 'entire tale'), Rostoni in Insider ('everything's canon' except Infinities), Sansweet in the Encyclopedia ('Quasi-Canon'), the Star Wars Card Game's Rulebook that says the cards are canon, etc.). Some use only the Cerasi/Insider Canon, some think it is all canon, and some, such as Mike Wong, think there are three levels, Canon, Quasi-Canon, and Official. Recently, Lucas cleared up the messy issue by explaining that the books, games, and comic books are part of a parallel universe, another world created separately from his own (Lucas in Cinescape). By design, the settings in time of the parallel universe do not intrude on his movie time period, since LucasBooks disallows authors from playing with events and periods of time that Lucas intends to use. LucasBooks tries to use the events in the Canon universe in the parallel universe, but the fact that it is a parallel universe explains why Lucas isn't bound by it (as stated by Sansweet). In other words, events may happen similarly in parallel universes at the same time (for instance, the events of Episode IV are referenced in the Canon and the EU Continuity), but that does not mean that how the two universes ended up there is the same (for an example, see the Star Trek episode "Mirror, Mirror"... Kirk is captain in both universes, but the way he achieved the captaincy was far, far different). This also explains why Lucas does not allow the parallel universe to intrude on the time periods and events he wants to work with in his universe. If someone retold his tales, these events of another world might confuse Star Wars fans and violate the integrity of his work, and his vision for his universe. That is also why he works so closely with the authors who write the novelisations of his films (Cerasi). So, the parallel Expanded Universe has a vast history (Insider), but we now know that it is not the real story of Star Wars (as previously implied by Cerasi, et al.). Perhaps the offshoots, variants, and tangents (Insider) or any failures to maintain the internal Continuity (Dice 2nd Insider) are most easily explained away as additional parallels, but such a discussion is outside the scope of this document. This does not mean that the Expanded Universe didn't happen. It did happen, but it occurred in its own reality. If a fan prefers the parallel Expanded Universe event over a Canon event, they can do so, since it only means they are choosing one reality over another in the entire tale of the Star Wars universes (starwars.com EU intro). However, the real story of Lucas' Star Wars universe is the Canon, and that must be kept in mind by the fan or debater. References: Cerasi, Chris. Quoted by Steve Sansweet at (http://www.starwars.com/community/askjc/steve/askjc20010817.html). Denning, Troy. Interview with TheForce.net. (http://theforce.net/jedicouncil/interview/denning.shtml). Handley, Rich. Post on rec.arts.sf.starwars.misc. Text available at(http://www.h4h.com/louis/sources.html) halfway down the page. Lucas, George. Interview in Cinescape, July 2002 edition. Text available, posted by 'watchdog' at (http://kier.3dfrontier.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=30862&perpage= 25&pagenumber=6) three-quarters of the way down the page. Rostoni, Sue. Interview in Star Wars Insider. Text available at (http://jceu.tripod.com/faq.html#4). Sansweet, Steve. The Star Wars Encylopedia. Foreward. Sansweet, Steve. "Star Wars: Community | Are we going to get more details about Boba Fett's past?" (referred to as "Sansweet, Community" in the text). ( http://www.starwars.com/community/askjc/steve/askjc20000424.html). Star Wars Collectible Card Game Rulebook. Text available at (http://www.sfdebris.com/faq5.html). "Star Wars: Expanded Universe | Beyond the Films" (referred to as StarWars.com EU intro in the text). (http://www.starwars.com/eu/). Star Wars Insider quotes, posted by Graeme Dice. Text available at (http://groups.google.com/groups?q=g:thl2975799602d&dq=&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&o e=UTF8&selm=3D162313.22ECE20F%40sk.sympatico.ca). Star Wars Insider #23, interview. Text available at http://www.theforce.net/swtc/continuity.html Wong, Mike. "Sources" - http://www.stardestroyer.net/Empire/Misc/Sources.html ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Cmdrwilkens" Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2002 18:51:25 -0400 Subject: Re: The Basis of "DarkStar's" argument Message-ID: -------- "DarkStar" wrote in message news:W_0S8.393997$%y.29112615@bin4.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com... > My Final Words on Canon: > > (Take 'em or leave 'em) I'll take 'em when you reformat that to be readable..though I might still tell you that you are wrong because frankly the way that was posted made it unreadable. -- Lcpl Burnett, G.R. USMCR BridgeCo B 6th EngSptBN 4th FSSG "Weapons do not penetrate armour based on force and pressure" - IXJac(taken from SB.com and SD.net) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Doomriser" Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2002 18:11:06 -0400 Subject: Re: The Basis of "DarkStar's" argument Message-ID: <3d1b8d7f_2@news.cybersurf.net> -------- I don't know if anyone has seen this yet, found it on SB: In general address: According to Ben Harper, of Lucasfilm, Ltd, in Star Wars Gamer #3: quote: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- Good question! We have never disavowed the existence of Marvel comics. We have, whenever feasible, included important events and characters from the Marvel comics in our other products. Some of the Marvel storylines before anyone knew what would happen in The Empire Strikes Back and Return of the Jedi. Obviously, in many places, those films contradicted what had happened in the comics. Which ones are more important? The films, of course. However, Lucasfilm recognizes the creativity and diversity within the Marvel comics, and feels that there is a place within the Star Wars universe for non-continuity events. You'll notice that books recognized as Star Wars canon are marked with Era symbols (so you'll know where they fall within the Star Wars timeline). The non-continuity books (at this point, the Dark Horse Star Wars Tales and Infinities: A New Hope comics) will soon be marked with a non-continuity symbol. Elements from Marvel which do not tread upon that which has been established in the films, novels, comics, et cetera, are being integrated into official Star Wars canon because we like them, they're cool, the aliens will be fun to use in the RPG, and, well, we were just feeling a bit nostalgic. After all, it's been over 20 years! ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- Mr Harper states that those books which are officially considered to be Star Wars canon are now being labelled with "Era symbols," and that non-continuity (which his usage suggests to be synonymous with "non-canon") are labelled with the "Infinities" symbol. Note further that Mr Harper states that elements from the Marvel Comics Group Star Wars comic series which do not contradict the established "facts" of the Expanded Universe are being "integrated into official Star Wars canon," thus implicitly stating that the "films, novels, comics, et cetera" constitute "official Star Wars canon." In summary, Mr Harper's statement does not in any way support the contention that the Expanded Universe lacks the status of being accurate, valid, and correct; in fact, it stands in direct contradiction to this contention, as Mr Harper considers the "facts" (such as it were) established by the "novels, comics, et cetera" to be on the same level as those established by the films - and for that reason, he lists the two categories together. According to Sue Rostoni, of Lucas Licensing, in Star Wars Gamer #6: quote: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- Canon refers to an authoritative list of books that the Lucas Licensing editors consider an authentic part of the official Star Wars history. Our goal is to present a continuous and unified history of the Star Wars galaxy, insofar as that history does not conflict with, or undermine the meaning of Mr. Lucas's Star Wars saga of films and screenplays. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- It is interesting to note that herein canon is defined to include those books which Lucas Licensing considers to be "factual" in Star Wars, insofar as it accurately reflects the films and screenplays of Mr Lucas. This is important, in that it demonstrates that it is the stated policy of Lucas Licensing that items are considered to be part of the official continuous and unified history of Star Wars as long as they are not overruled by the films themselves. That is to say, it is the state policy of Lucas Licensing that Star Wars literature is true, valid, accurate and correct insofar as it is not contradicted - or, more properly, does not contradict - the films themselves. According to Chris Cerasi, of LucasBooks, on starwars.com/community/askjc/steve/askjc2001817.html: quote: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- There's been some confusion of late regarding the 'Infinities' symbol, and Star Wars Expanded Universe continuity in general. Terms like "canon" and "continuity" tend to get thrown around casually, which doesn't help at all. When it comes to absolute canon, the real story of Star Wars, you must turn to the films themselves - and only the films. Even novelizations are interpretations of the film, and while they are largely true to George Lucas ' vision (he works quite closely with the novel authors), the method in which they are written does allow for some minor differences. The novelizations are written concurrently with the film's production, so variations in detail do creep in from time to time. Nonetheless, they should be regarded as very accurate depictions of the fictional Star Wars movies. The further one branches away from the movies, the more interpretation and speculation come into play. LucasBooks works diligently to keep the continuing Star Wars expanded universe cohesive and uniform, but stylistically, there is always room for variation. Not all artists draw Luke Skywalker the same way. Not all writers define the character in the same fashion. The particular attributes of individual media also come into lay. A comic book interpretation of an event will likely have less dialogue or different pacing than a novel version. A video game has to take an interactive approach that favors gameplay. So too must card and roleplaying games ascribe certain characteristics to characters and events in order to make them playable. The analogy is that every piece of published Star Wars fiction is a window into the 'real' Star Wars universe. Some windows are a bit foggier than others. Some are decidedly abstract. But each contains a nugget of truth to them. Like the great Jedi Knight Obi-Wan Kenobi said, 'many of the truths we cling to depend greatly on our point of view.' Returning to the question at hand. Yes, Star Wars Gamer is part of continuity, though as game material, there is room for interpretation. Only specific articles marked with the 'Infinities' logo within the magazine should be considered out of continuity. Fans of the old monthly Marvel Star Wars comic will be heartened to know that LucasBooks does indeed consider them part of continuity. Decades of retrospect haven't been kind to all the elements of the comic series, but the characters and events still hold weight and are referenced in newer material whenever possible. In order to allow unlimited freedom of storytelling, the Infinities label has been placed on the anthology series, Star Wars Tales. This means that not only can the stories occur anywhere in the Star Wars timeline, but stories can happen outside continuity. Basically, if an event appears in Tales, it may not have necessarily happened in the rest of the expanded universe. For some stories, the distinction is largely inconsequential. For others, it's the only way they could exist (for example, there's a Darth Vader vs. Darth Maul comic coming soon). ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- Mr Cerasi's statement is to the effect that it is the official policy of Lucasfilm, Ltd, that the films themselves constitute absolute canon, or completely correct representations of the "facts" of the Star Wars story. In addition to the films themselves are other material (designated "expanded universe" by Mr Cerasi), which are considered to be in continuity with the films, though of lesser "correctness" with regard to "facts" than the films themselves. Because Mr Cerasi consistently uses the term "continuity," it is clear that this is a specific use of the word, and not a vague generality. The term "continuity" is defined by the 1984 edition of the Funk & Wagnalls Standard Desk Dictionary as "the state or quality of being continuous"; "continuous" is therein defined as "extended or prolonged without break; uninterrupted." In effect, Mr Cerasi has stated, then, that the expanded universe constitutes a continuous, uninterrupted part of the Star Wars saga. It is fully in union with the films themselves, and is without break from them; to relegate it to the status of inadmissible evidence due to non-canon status is to violate the stated policy of LucasBooks, and thence, of Lucasfilm Ltd, and implicitly of Mr Lucas himself. According to George Lucas, in the introduction to the 1994 printing of Splinter of the Mind's Eye: quote: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- After Star Wars was released, it became apparent that my story - however many films it took to tell - was only one of thousands that could be told about the characters who inhabit its galaxy. But these were not stories I was destined to tell. Instead they would spring from the imagination of other writers, inspired by the glimpse of a galaxy that Star Wars provided. Today it is an amazing, if unexpected, legacy of Star Wars that so many gifted writers are contributing new stories to the Saga. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- Mr Lucas's statement here is interesting in that it reveals that he considers the stories of the Expanded Universe to be equal parts of the Star Wars saga with his own part, the films themselves. This establishes that it is the opinion of the creator of the franchise that the Expanded Universe constitutes a valid part of the "factual" history of the saga. These statements by persons in positions of authority with regard to the official "facts" of the Star Wars saga are consistent in upholding that the Expanded Universe is a valid part of the saga, and fail in any way to support the contention that the Expanded Universe lacks the status of being accurate, valid and correct except when in direct conflict with the films themselves. Until and unless an item within the Expanded Universe conflicts with the films, it is canonical; when a conflict occurs, the films' evidence supersedes that of the Expanded Universe item. The Ubiqtorate's opinion is (or, more properly, would be) that to attempt to claim otherwise - viz., to claim that the Expanded Universe is neither canonical nor accurate, valid and correct, and therefor inadmissible as evidence - is not only contradictory of the stated policies of LucasBooks, Lucas Licensing, Lucasfilm, Ltd, and Mr Lucas, but is also wilfully misinterpretative of the various statements regarding canon and continuity. Furthermore, the Ubiqtorate would suggest that any attempt to argue that the rules of evidence for Star Trek have any implication on the rules of evidence for Star Wars is a red herring; the rules of evidence for Star Trek are irrelevant to the rules of evidence for Star Wars. The Ubiqtorate yields the floor. [These statements seem to _increase_ the canon/official standing on the EU] -=Doomriser