---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "DarkStar" Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2002 10:02:18 GMT Subject: Oh, boys . . . Message-ID: -------- You guys should be ashamed of yourselves. :-) http://www.stardestroyer.net/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=1183 Guardian 2000 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Stuart Mackey" Date: Tue, 13 Aug 2002 00:13:14 +1200 Subject: Re: Oh, boys . . . Message-ID: -------- "DarkStar" wrote in message news:KIL59.149234$yc3.6416711@bin4.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com... > You guys should be ashamed of yourselves. :-) > > http://www.stardestroyer.net/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=1183 > > Guardian 2000 > Good ruse, And I must really congratulate you on it. However we will now proceed to rip you a new asshole troll boy http://www.galactec.com/timothy/index.php3 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: mikewongisgod@hotmail.com (RayCav) Date: 12 Aug 2002 17:42:51 -0700 Subject: Re: Oh, boys . . . Message-ID: -------- "Stuart Mackey" wrote in message news:... > "DarkStar" wrote in message > news:KIL59.149234$yc3.6416711@bin4.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com... > > You guys should be ashamed of yourselves. :-) > > > > http://www.stardestroyer.net/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=1183 > > > > Guardian 2000 > > > > Good ruse, And I must really congratulate you on it. However we will now > proceed to rip you a new asshole troll boy > > http://www.galactec.com/timothy/index.php3 We need a DarkStar FAQ now ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: nitramtahalshia@aol.comAntiSpam (Sir Nitram) Date: 13 Aug 2002 00:58:36 GMT Subject: Re: Oh, boys . . . Message-ID: <20020812205836.11741.00005058@mb-cu.aol.com> -------- >"Stuart Mackey" wrote in message >news:... >> "DarkStar" wrote in message >> news:KIL59.149234$yc3.6416711@bin4.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com... >> > You guys should be ashamed of yourselves. :-) >> > >> > http://www.stardestroyer.net/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=1183 >> > >> > Guardian 2000 >> > >> >> Good ruse, And I must really congratulate you on it. However we will now >> proceed to rip you a new asshole troll boy >> >> http://www.galactec.com/timothy/index.php3 > >We need a DarkStar FAQ now > A true master uses the FAQ for defense and enlightenment, never for attack. -- SirNitram ASVS Small Gods Keeper and Amateur Genius Uptight Christians pray for God to save themselves. Upright Christians pray for God to save others in need. "And they say that a hero can save us, I'm not gonna stand here to wait..." -Hero ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Dalton Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2002 21:26:19 -0400 Subject: Re: Oh, boys . . . Message-ID: <3D58603B.ED9B1605@daltonator.net> -------- Sir Nitram wrote: > > >"Stuart Mackey" wrote in message > >news:... > >> "DarkStar" wrote in message > >> news:KIL59.149234$yc3.6416711@bin4.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com... > >> > You guys should be ashamed of yourselves. :-) > >> > > >> > http://www.stardestroyer.net/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=1183 > >> > > >> > Guardian 2000 > >> > > >> > >> Good ruse, And I must really congratulate you on it. However we will now > >> proceed to rip you a new asshole troll boy > >> > >> http://www.galactec.com/timothy/index.php3 > > > >We need a DarkStar FAQ now > > > > A true master uses the FAQ for defense and enlightenment, never for attack. Besides, we already have one. Kynes made it. -- Rob "Roby" Dalton http://daltonator.net "...we never burned and tortured and ripped one another apart and called it morality." --Guards! Guards!, Terry Pratchett ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: nitramtahalshia@aol.comAntiSpam (Sir Nitram) Date: 13 Aug 2002 01:28:41 GMT Subject: Re: Oh, boys . . . Message-ID: <20020812212841.11741.00005061@mb-cu.aol.com> -------- >Sir Nitram wrote: >> >> >"Stuart Mackey" wrote in message >> >news:... >> >> "DarkStar" wrote in message >> >> news:KIL59.149234$yc3.6416711@bin4.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com... >> >> > You guys should be ashamed of yourselves. :-) >> >> > >> >> > http://www.stardestroyer.net/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=1183 >> >> > >> >> > Guardian 2000 >> >> > >> >> >> >> Good ruse, And I must really congratulate you on it. However we will now >> >> proceed to rip you a new asshole troll boy >> >> >> >> http://www.galactec.com/timothy/index.php3 >> > >> >We need a DarkStar FAQ now >> > >> >> A true master uses the FAQ for defense and enlightenment, never for attack. > >Besides, we already have one. Kynes made it. > Yes, but I couldn't think of a Yoda-esque way to say that. -- SirNitram ASVS Small Gods Keeper and Amateur Genius Uptight Christians pray for God to save themselves. Upright Christians pray for God to save others in need. "And they say that a hero can save us, I'm not gonna stand here to wait..." -Hero ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Dalton Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2002 22:05:33 -0400 Subject: Re: Oh, boys . . . Message-ID: <3D58696D.1CE7A380@daltonator.net> -------- Sir Nitram wrote: > > >Sir Nitram wrote: > >> > >> >"Stuart Mackey" wrote in message > >> >news:... > >> >> "DarkStar" wrote in message > >> >> news:KIL59.149234$yc3.6416711@bin4.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com... > >> >> > You guys should be ashamed of yourselves. :-) > >> >> > > >> >> > http://www.stardestroyer.net/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=1183 > >> >> > > >> >> > Guardian 2000 > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> Good ruse, And I must really congratulate you on it. However we will now > >> >> proceed to rip you a new asshole troll boy > >> >> > >> >> http://www.galactec.com/timothy/index.php3 > >> > > >> >We need a DarkStar FAQ now > >> > > >> > >> A true master uses the FAQ for defense and enlightenment, never for attack. > > > >Besides, we already have one. Kynes made it. > > > > Yes, but I couldn't think of a Yoda-esque way to say that. Allrighty. -- Rob "Roby" Dalton http://daltonator.net "...we never burned and tortured and ripped one another apart and called it morality." --Guards! Guards!, Terry Pratchett ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Chuck, Modulating Moderator" Date: Tue, 13 Aug 2002 03:30:27 GMT Subject: Re: Oh, boys . . . Message-ID: -------- "Sir Nitram" wrote in message news:20020812212841.11741.00005061@mb-cu.aol.com... > >Sir Nitram wrote: > >> > >> >"Stuart Mackey" wrote in message > >> >news:... > >> >> "DarkStar" wrote in message > >> >> news:KIL59.149234$yc3.6416711@bin4.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com... > >> >> > You guys should be ashamed of yourselves. :-) > >> >> > > >> >> > http://www.stardestroyer.net/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=1183 > >> >> > > >> >> > Guardian 2000 > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> Good ruse, And I must really congratulate you on it. However we will now > >> >> proceed to rip you a new asshole troll boy > >> >> > >> >> http://www.galactec.com/timothy/index.php3 > >> > > >> >We need a DarkStar FAQ now > >> > > >> > >> A true master uses the FAQ for defense and enlightenment, never for attack. > > > >Besides, we already have one. Kynes made it. > > > > Yes, but I couldn't think of a Yoda-esque way to say that. Already you have that which you need. -- Chuck "Try to explain to people that writing is something you do because it's impossible not to, and you get blank stares." - Peter David ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Dalton Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2002 23:37:46 -0400 Subject: Re: Oh, boys . . . Message-ID: <3D587F0A.DF1EE5CE@daltonator.net> -------- "Chuck, Modulating Moderator" wrote: > > "Sir Nitram" wrote in message > news:20020812212841.11741.00005061@mb-cu.aol.com... > > >Sir Nitram wrote: > > >> > > >> >"Stuart Mackey" wrote in message > > >> >news:... > > >> >> "DarkStar" wrote in message > > >> >> news:KIL59.149234$yc3.6416711@bin4.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com... > > >> >> > You guys should be ashamed of yourselves. :-) > > >> >> > > > >> >> > http://www.stardestroyer.net/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=1183 > > >> >> > > > >> >> > Guardian 2000 > > >> >> > > > >> >> > > >> >> Good ruse, And I must really congratulate you on it. However we will > now > > >> >> proceed to rip you a new asshole troll boy > > >> >> > > >> >> http://www.galactec.com/timothy/index.php3 > > >> > > > >> >We need a DarkStar FAQ now > > >> > > > >> > > >> A true master uses the FAQ for defense and enlightenment, never for > attack. > > > > > >Besides, we already have one. Kynes made it. > > > > > > > Yes, but I couldn't think of a Yoda-esque way to say that. > > Already you have that which you need. > And Chuck wins the cookies. -- Rob "Roby" Dalton http://daltonator.net "...we never burned and tortured and ripped one another apart and called it morality." --Guards! Guards!, Terry Pratchett ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Chuck, Modulating Moderator" Date: Tue, 13 Aug 2002 03:44:25 GMT Subject: Re: Oh, boys . . . Message-ID: -------- "Dalton" wrote in message news:3D587F0A.DF1EE5CE@daltonator.net... > "Chuck, Modulating Moderator" wrote: > > > > "Sir Nitram" wrote in message > > news:20020812212841.11741.00005061@mb-cu.aol.com... > > > >Sir Nitram wrote: > > > >> > > > >> >"Stuart Mackey" wrote in message > > > >> >news:... > > > >> >> "DarkStar" wrote in message > > > >> >> news:KIL59.149234$yc3.6416711@bin4.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com... > > > >> >> > You guys should be ashamed of yourselves. :-) > > > >> >> > > > > >> >> > http://www.stardestroyer.net/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=1183 > > > >> >> > > > > >> >> > Guardian 2000 > > > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > >> >> Good ruse, And I must really congratulate you on it. However we will > > now > > > >> >> proceed to rip you a new asshole troll boy > > > >> >> > > > >> >> http://www.galactec.com/timothy/index.php3 > > > >> > > > > >> >We need a DarkStar FAQ now > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> A true master uses the FAQ for defense and enlightenment, never for > > attack. > > > > > > > >Besides, we already have one. Kynes made it. > > > > > > > > > > Yes, but I couldn't think of a Yoda-esque way to say that. > > > > Already you have that which you need. > > > > And Chuck wins the cookies. > Mmm! Milk I do need... -- Chuck "Try to explain to people that writing is something you do because it's impossible not to, and you get blank stares." - Peter David ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Dalton Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2002 23:48:22 -0400 Subject: Re: Oh, boys . . . Message-ID: <3D588186.C4706498@daltonator.net> -------- "Chuck, Modulating Moderator" wrote: [snip] > > > > Yes, but I couldn't think of a Yoda-esque way to say that. > > > > > > Already you have that which you need. > > > > > > > And Chuck wins the cookies. > > > Mmm! Milk I do need... Milk, got? They have to have done an ad with Yoda... -- Rob "Roby" Dalton http://daltonator.net "...we never burned and tortured and ripped one another apart and called it morality." --Guards! Guards!, Terry Pratchett ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Chuck, Modulating Moderator" Date: Tue, 13 Aug 2002 03:50:21 GMT Subject: Re: Oh, boys . . . Message-ID: <1m%59.3535$aU3.583407@typhoon.kc.rr.com> -------- "Dalton" wrote in message news:3D588186.C4706498@daltonator.net... > "Chuck, Modulating Moderator" wrote: > > [snip] > > > > > > Yes, but I couldn't think of a Yoda-esque way to say that. > > > > > > > > Already you have that which you need. > > > > > > > > > > And Chuck wins the cookies. > > > > > Mmm! Milk I do need... > > Milk, got? > > They have to have done an ad with Yoda... > My co-worker's wallpaper is an Apple Logo and Yoda with the words "Different, Think" written next to it. -- Chuck "Try to explain to people that writing is something you do because it's impossible not to, and you get blank stares." - Peter David ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Graeme Dice Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2002 22:13:53 -0600 Subject: Re: Oh, boys . . . Message-ID: <3D588781.80305B4@sk.sympatico.ca> -------- "Chuck, Modulating Moderator" wrote: > > "Dalton" wrote in message > news:3D588186.C4706498@daltonator.net... > > "Chuck, Modulating Moderator" wrote: > > They have to have done an ad with Yoda... > > > My co-worker's wallpaper is an Apple Logo and Yoda with the words > "Different, Think" written next to it. Think Different: http://homepage.usask.ca/~gdd851/ohthehumanity.jpg -- "You do what I do, " said Miro. "What's that ?" "You take a breath. You let it out. Then you take another." Ender thought about it for a moment. "I can do that. I've been doing that since I was little." -- Xenocide / Orson Scott Card ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Dalton Date: Tue, 13 Aug 2002 17:33:10 -0400 Subject: Re: Oh, boys . . . Message-ID: <3D597B16.D37EEEB6@daltonator.net> -------- "Chuck, Modulating Moderator" wrote: > > "Dalton" wrote in message > news:3D588186.C4706498@daltonator.net... > > "Chuck, Modulating Moderator" wrote: > > > > [snip] > > > > > > > > Yes, but I couldn't think of a Yoda-esque way to say that. > > > > > > > > > > Already you have that which you need. > > > > > > > > > > > > > And Chuck wins the cookies. > > > > > > > Mmm! Milk I do need... > > > > Milk, got? > > > > They have to have done an ad with Yoda... > > > My co-worker's wallpaper is an Apple Logo and Yoda with the words > "Different, Think" written next to it. > I want it! -- Rob "Roby" Dalton http://daltonator.net "...we never burned and tortured and ripped one another apart and called it morality." --Guards! Guards!, Terry Pratchett ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: austin@sweevo.cjb.net (Austin Sweevo) Date: Tue, 13 Aug 2002 17:27:38 GMT Subject: Re: Oh, boys . . . Message-ID: <3d593f4e.1774722@news.freeserve.net> -------- On Mon, 12 Aug 2002 23:48:22 -0400, Dalton wrote: >"Chuck, Modulating Moderator" wrote: > >[snip] > >> > > > Yes, but I couldn't think of a Yoda-esque way to say that. >> > > >> > > Already you have that which you need. >> > > >> > >> > And Chuck wins the cookies. >> > >> Mmm! Milk I do need... > >Milk, got? > >They have to have done an ad with Yoda... > On Classic Gold... Following the example of Samuel L Jackson, other members of the Star Wars cast have gone into advertising for banks: Plain speaking, there will not be. Once into the red you go, forever will it dominate your destiny! At risk your Death Star is, if mortgage repayments you do not keep. ...damn my memory, they did loads! ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: nitramtahalshia@aol.comAntiSpam (Sir Nitram) Date: 13 Aug 2002 03:40:12 GMT Subject: Re: Oh, boys . . . Message-ID: <20020812234012.03039.00004107@mb-fo.aol.com> -------- >"Sir Nitram" wrote in message >news:20020812212841.11741.00005061@mb-cu.aol.com... >> >Sir Nitram wrote: >> >> >> >> >"Stuart Mackey" wrote in message >> >> >news:... >> >> >> "DarkStar" wrote in message >> >> >> news:KIL59.149234$yc3.6416711@bin4.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com... >> >> >> > You guys should be ashamed of yourselves. :-) >> >> >> > >> >> >> > http://www.stardestroyer.net/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=1183 >> >> >> > >> >> >> > Guardian 2000 >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> >> >> Good ruse, And I must really congratulate you on it. However we will >now >> >> >> proceed to rip you a new asshole troll boy >> >> >> >> >> >> http://www.galactec.com/timothy/index.php3 >> >> > >> >> >We need a DarkStar FAQ now >> >> > >> >> >> >> A true master uses the FAQ for defense and enlightenment, never for >attack. >> > >> >Besides, we already have one. Kynes made it. >> > >> >> Yes, but I couldn't think of a Yoda-esque way to say that. > >Already you have that which you need. > FAQ's do not make one great. -- SirNitram ASVS Small Gods Keeper and Amateur Genius Uptight Christians pray for God to save themselves. Upright Christians pray for God to save others in need. "And they say that a hero can save us, I'm not gonna stand here to wait..." -Hero ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Chuck, Modulating Moderator" Date: Tue, 13 Aug 2002 03:48:56 GMT Subject: Re: Oh, boys . . . Message-ID: -------- "Sir Nitram" wrote in message news:20020812234012.03039.00004107@mb-fo.aol.com... > >"Sir Nitram" wrote in message > >news:20020812212841.11741.00005061@mb-cu.aol.com... > >> >Sir Nitram wrote: > >> >> > >> >> >"Stuart Mackey" wrote in message > >> >> >news:... > >> >> >> "DarkStar" wrote in message > >> >> >> news:KIL59.149234$yc3.6416711@bin4.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com... > >> >> >> > You guys should be ashamed of yourselves. :-) > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > http://www.stardestroyer.net/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=1183 > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > Guardian 2000 > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > >> >> >> Good ruse, And I must really congratulate you on it. However we will > >now > >> >> >> proceed to rip you a new asshole troll boy > >> >> >> > >> >> >> http://www.galactec.com/timothy/index.php3 > >> >> > > >> >> >We need a DarkStar FAQ now > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> A true master uses the FAQ for defense and enlightenment, never for > >attack. > >> > > >> >Besides, we already have one. Kynes made it. > >> > > >> > >> Yes, but I couldn't think of a Yoda-esque way to say that. > > > >Already you have that which you need. > > > > FAQ's do not make one great. A dweebish one the boy may be. Nevertheless, great fear do I take at his FAQing. -- Chuck "Try to explain to people that writing is something you do because it's impossible not to, and you get blank stares." - Peter David ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: nitramtahalshia@aol.comAntiSpam (Sir Nitram) Date: 13 Aug 2002 04:02:28 GMT Subject: Re: Oh, boys . . . Message-ID: <20020813000228.03039.00004115@mb-fo.aol.com> -------- >"Sir Nitram" wrote in message >news:20020812234012.03039.00004107@mb-fo.aol.com... >> >"Sir Nitram" wrote in message >> >news:20020812212841.11741.00005061@mb-cu.aol.com... >> >> >Sir Nitram wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >> >"Stuart Mackey" wrote in message >> >> >> >news:... >> >> >> >> "DarkStar" wrote in message >> >> >> >> news:KIL59.149234$yc3.6416711@bin4.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com... >> >> >> >> > You guys should be ashamed of yourselves. :-) >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> > http://www.stardestroyer.net/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=1183 >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> > Guardian 2000 >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Good ruse, And I must really congratulate you on it. However we >will >> >now >> >> >> >> proceed to rip you a new asshole troll boy >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> http://www.galactec.com/timothy/index.php3 >> >> >> > >> >> >> >We need a DarkStar FAQ now >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> >> >> A true master uses the FAQ for defense and enlightenment, never for >> >attack. >> >> > >> >> >Besides, we already have one. Kynes made it. >> >> > >> >> >> >> Yes, but I couldn't think of a Yoda-esque way to say that. >> > >> >Already you have that which you need. >> > >> >> FAQ's do not make one great. > >A dweebish one the boy may be. Nevertheless, great fear do I take at his >FAQing. > Too trite. Yes, too trite, too obvious, to begin the FAQing. -- SirNitram ASVS Small Gods Keeper and Amateur Genius Uptight Christians pray for God to save themselves. Upright Christians pray for God to save others in need. "And they say that a hero can save us, I'm not gonna stand here to wait..." -Hero ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Graeme Dice Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2002 20:12:41 -0600 Subject: Re: Oh, boys . . . Message-ID: <3D586B19.A235CB03@sk.sympatico.ca> -------- Sir Nitram wrote: > > >"Stuart Mackey" wrote in message > >news:... > >> "DarkStar" wrote in message > >> news:KIL59.149234$yc3.6416711@bin4.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com... > >> > You guys should be ashamed of yourselves. :-) > >> > > >> > http://www.stardestroyer.net/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=1183 > >> > > >> > Guardian 2000 > >> > > >> > >> Good ruse, And I must really congratulate you on it. However we will now > >> proceed to rip you a new asshole troll boy > >> > >> http://www.galactec.com/timothy/index.php3 > > > >We need a DarkStar FAQ now > > > > A true master uses the FAQ for defense and enlightenment, never for attack. Always in motion the FAQ is. Graeme Dice -- "You do what I do, " said Miro. "What's that ?" "You take a breath. You let it out. Then you take another." Ender thought about it for a moment. "I can do that. I've been doing that since I was little." -- Xenocide / Orson Scott Card ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Chuck, Modulating Moderator" Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2002 13:02:19 GMT Subject: Re: Oh, boys . . . Message-ID: -------- "DarkStar" wrote in message news:KIL59.149234$yc3.6416711@bin4.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com... > You guys should be ashamed of yourselves. :-) > > http://www.stardestroyer.net/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=1183 > > Guardian 2000 > I've been suspicious of this from the moment you showed you were an idiot. -- Chuck "Try to explain to people that writing is something you do because it's impossible not to, and you get blank stares." - Peter David ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: nitramtahalshia@aol.comAntiSpam (Sir Nitram) Date: 12 Aug 2002 14:06:02 GMT Subject: Re: Oh, boys . . . Message-ID: <20020812100602.03023.00004782@mb-mu.aol.com> -------- >You guys should be ashamed of yourselves. :-) > >http://www.stardestroyer.net/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=1183 > >Guardian 2000 > Oh, look, it's the pathetic little Trekkie who already conceeded all his arguments months ago. And, like clockwork, he came back to try and stir shit. How very predictably stupid. -- SirNitram ASVS Small Gods Keeper and Amateur Genius Uptight Christians pray for God to save themselves. Upright Christians pray for God to save others in need. "And they say that a hero can save us, I'm not gonna stand here to wait..." -Hero ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Dalton Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2002 10:21:07 -0400 Subject: Re: Oh, boys . . . Message-ID: <3D57C453.88674AC5@daltonator.net> -------- DarkStar wrote: > > You guys should be ashamed of yourselves. :-) > > http://www.stardestroyer.net/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=1183 > > Guardian 2000 Ah, confirmed to be an impostor, a liar and a deceitful scumbag. I am never speaking to you again. I despise impostors. -- Rob "Roby" Dalton http://daltonator.net "...we never burned and tortured and ripped one another apart and called it morality." --Guards! Guards!, Terry Pratchett ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Chuck, Modulating Moderator" Date: Tue, 13 Aug 2002 00:48:32 GMT Subject: Re: Oh, boys . . . Message-ID: -------- "Dalton" wrote in message news:3D57C453.88674AC5@daltonator.net... > DarkStar wrote: > > > > You guys should be ashamed of yourselves. :-) > > > > http://www.stardestroyer.net/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=1183 > > > > Guardian 2000 > > Ah, confirmed to be an impostor, a liar and a deceitful scumbag. > > I am never speaking to you again. > > I despise impostors. > You know you've hit a new low when you resort to recycling Weyoun's tactics. -- Chuck "Try to explain to people that writing is something you do because it's impossible not to, and you get blank stares." - Peter David ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Dalton Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2002 21:25:58 -0400 Subject: Re: Oh, boys . . . Message-ID: <3D586026.BC57ED01@daltonator.net> -------- "Chuck, Modulating Moderator" wrote: > > "Dalton" wrote in message > news:3D57C453.88674AC5@daltonator.net... > > DarkStar wrote: > > > > > > You guys should be ashamed of yourselves. :-) > > > > > > http://www.stardestroyer.net/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=1183 > > > > > > Guardian 2000 > > > > Ah, confirmed to be an impostor, a liar and a deceitful scumbag. > > > > I am never speaking to you again. > > > > I despise impostors. > > > You know you've hit a new low when you resort to recycling Weyoun's tactics. > Sorry, who? -- Rob "Roby" Dalton http://daltonator.net "...we never burned and tortured and ripped one another apart and called it morality." --Guards! Guards!, Terry Pratchett ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "DarkStar" Date: Tue, 13 Aug 2002 14:14:32 GMT Subject: Re: Oh, boys . . . Message-ID: -------- "Dalton" wrote in message news:3D57C453.88674AC5@daltonator.net... > DarkStar wrote: > > > > You guys should be ashamed of yourselves. :-) > > > > http://www.stardestroyer.net/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=1183 > > > > Guardian 2000 > > Ah, confirmed to be an impostor, a liar and a deceitful scumbag. > > I am never speaking to you again. > > I despise impostors. Impostor? What, was someone else DarkStar before me? Liar? I never said I wasn't Guardian. Deceitful? A bit, perhaps. However, it was necessary to prevent you idiots from ignoring rational arguments out of spite, since you care more about your own beliefs on people's personalities than facts. Or, as I put it here: http://www.stardestroyer.net/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=1183&start=0 ________ Yes, long ago I graced ASVS as Guardian 2000, encountering the same sort of resistance to logic and reason I have found to still exist there, and which also exists in spades here. I finally departed when Ian Samuels, one of the debaters there, wanted to see injury come to myself and those I care about, and took steps toward that goal, with the support of most of the Rabid Warsie ASVS denizens. However, with the threat eliminated and the topic still of interest, I decided to re-enter the fray, simultaneously updating my page. Knowing of the loathing I had garnered at ASVS (due to my stalwart refusal to buy into Rabid Warsie bullshit), I chose to adopt a new name, and at first I tried to adopt a revised style which might keep my identity a secret. (Of course, I wasn't trying too hard, since my website was already known . . . had anyone dared take a peek, they'd have noticed the many changes.) I knew that if true identity were discovered, the Rabid Warsies would automatically ignore any relevant points or rational arguments, in favor of their peculiar beliefs about how rational argumentation works, as I outlined to Dalton: "You call me a liar, because you have no other options. You call me a poor debater, because I don't share your opinions and I'm not swayed by insults. You ignore the fact that you lie... to yourselves, and each other... by continuing to spout bias as fact and sophistries as evidence. You ignore the fact that you're poor debaters, hoping to throw smokescreens around the weak arguments you work from by poisoning the well of discourse. I think most warsie debaters are part of a sad little group, living in the shared delusion of overwhelming superiority. If anyone disagrees or dares to paint Star Wars as less powerful or Star Trek as more powerful, you believe that their arguments are instantly wrong, and consider any counterargument, no matter how stupid, as proof. You're willing to ignore any evidence which doesn't fit within your biases, twisting it to suit theories instead of changing theories to suit facts. You allow your rationality to be clouded with the belief that insults and labels make arguments, and that ten voices, no matter what they say, are always going to be stronger than one voice using evidence and reason." Of course, being who I am, I rapidly dispensed with the attempted style modifications, instead doing things the way I had always done . . . if my arguments appeared to be true and correct according to reason and evidence, I would vigorously stand by my arguments and conclusions, unless someone could demonstrate error. Bitching, moaning, and arguments contrary to reason or the evidence would not sway me. Entertainingly, though I was generally arguing about different topics than I had before, my insistence on rational arguments based on logic and evidence garnered the same disapproval from the Rabid Warsies . . . hence their efforts to poison the well with such nuggets as "Village Idiot." One aspect which entertained me was Poe's rapid and bitter hatred. It made me wonder whether it was some sort of subconscious revulsion due to the stylistic similarities . . . I guess unyielding resolve against his stupidity really, really bothers him. Of course, not all the fools were old . . . Ossus, to my knowledge, is a new star in the Rabid Warsie constellation of idiots, though he fits in splendidly, as does DasBastard. The only remaining stylistic difference between DarkStar and Guardian 2000 involved the use of ellipses. You'll note that as DarkStar, ellipses were performed one way... but as Guardian 2000, they were performed in a different way . . . Evidently, this was enough to throw fools like Poe, SirNitram, and other old ASVS regulars off the scent. Poe did seem to suspect at one point that I might've been on ASVS before, but he seemed to think I was someone who had changed names on more than one prior occasion, instead of this, my first time. (http://kier.3dfrontier.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=30862&perpage= 25&highlight=canon%20DarkStar&pagenumber=2) Really, though, the old-school ASVS regulars I was used to dealing with should be ashamed of themselves . . . I wasn't even trying to hide the fact that I had already dealt with their bullshit before. Or, as a 'lurker' friend put it, "How can they not realize it!?!?" ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Dalton Date: Tue, 13 Aug 2002 15:20:34 -0400 Subject: Re: Oh, boys . . . Message-ID: <3D595C02.80E4B8E@daltonator.net> -------- DarkStar wrote: > > "Dalton" wrote in message > news:3D57C453.88674AC5@daltonator.net... > > DarkStar wrote: > > > > > > You guys should be ashamed of yourselves. :-) > > > > > > http://www.stardestroyer.net/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=1183 > > > > > > Guardian 2000 > > > > Ah, confirmed to be an impostor, a liar and a deceitful scumbag. > > > > I am never speaking to you again. I'm relaxing this rule just once, since you're so hell-bent on the whole "Last Bastion of Trek" illusion. > > I despise impostors. > > Impostor? What, was someone else DarkStar before me? No, but you changed your persona to fool us. That is the very basis of being an impostor. > Liar? I never said I wasn't Guardian. Being an impostor is, by definition, a lie. > Deceitful? A bit, perhaps. However, it was necessary to prevent you > idiots from ignoring rational arguments out of spite, What rational arguments would these be? The nitpicks or the bent canon? > since you care more > about your own beliefs on people's personalities than facts. Well, when a debater is known to lie, bullshit and post yellow canary stories in general, then we tend to take a dim view towards said debater. You are so full of shit even the Trekkies got sick of you. Better go start crossing your name off in the phone directories, don't want the big bad stalker to get ya. -- Rob "Roby" Dalton http://daltonator.net ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Wayne Poe" Date: Tue, 13 Aug 2002 18:08:21 -0700 Subject: Re: Oh, boys . . . Message-ID: -------- "Dalton" > You are so full of shit even the Trekkies got sick of you. > > Better go start crossing your name off in the phone directories, don't > want the big bad stalker to get ya. How sad is it that Scooter spent an entire year making cut-and-paste arguments for his return? He's actually been obsessing on us for a whole YEAR...while we simply forgot about him! Lol!! "Oh Boys...." Can you just HEAR this lisping Tube Steak Tarzan saying that? What's even funnier-- who does the most damage to Trekkie credibility? "Rabid Warsies", or fucktards like this? Its very telling that we simply thought, "Oh, yet another Trekkie retard" instead of "Hmm...must be a RETURNING Trektard...." -- "Morons like Darkstar make up imaginary observations, mutilate science, nitpick unrelentingly, commit all manner of ad hominem fallacies, etc. They are only "successful" to the extent that people who are just as stupid as they are might be amenable to their arguments." Darth Wong http://h4h.com/louis/vsfaq.html ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Dalton Date: Tue, 13 Aug 2002 23:17:45 -0400 Subject: Re: Oh, boys . . . Message-ID: <3D59CBD9.3880A856@daltonator.net> -------- Wayne Poe wrote: > > "Dalton" > > > You are so full of shit even the Trekkies got sick of you. > > > > Better go start crossing your name off in the phone directories, don't > > want the big bad stalker to get ya. > > How sad is it that Scooter spent an entire year making cut-and-paste > arguments for his return? He's actually been obsessing on us for a whole > YEAR...while we simply forgot about him! Lol!! > > "Oh Boys...." Can you just HEAR this lisping Tube Steak Tarzan saying that? ROFL!!! > What's even funnier-- who does the most damage to Trekkie credibility? > "Rabid Warsies", or fucktards like this? Its very telling that we simply > thought, "Oh, yet another Trekkie retard" instead of "Hmm...must be a > RETURNING Trektard...." Hah, morons are instantly identifiable the world over. -- Rob "Roby" Dalton http://daltonator.net "...we never burned and tortured and ripped one another apart and called it morality." --Guards! Guards!, Terry Pratchett ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "DarkStar" Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2002 08:27:49 GMT Subject: Re: Oh, boys . . . Message-ID: <9wo69.237351$nm.9929544@bin5.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com> -------- "Wayne Poe" wrote in message news:uljbl2l2516c12@corp.supernews.com... > "Dalton" > > > You are so full of shit even the Trekkies got sick of you. > > > > Better go start crossing your name off in the phone directories, don't > > want the big bad stalker to get ya. > > How sad is it that Scooter spent an entire year making cut-and-paste > arguments for his return? He's actually been obsessing on us for a whole > YEAR...while we simply forgot about him! Lol!! Uh, dude . . . the website updates occurred over the course of a couple of weeks. How long have you been maintaining your anti-Trek website? Years, is it? Uh-huh . . . > Its very telling that we simply thought, "Oh, yet another Trekkie retard" You think that of anyone who makes a remotely pro-Trek point, Wayne. Stephen Hawking (or any other appropriate genius) could come in here and start laying down the law, and you'd pull some of your stupid arguments out of your ass, sniff 'em to make sure they still reek, and then start spraying them, proclaiming your own superiority in the process. You're the idiot, Wayne. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Wayne Poe" Date: Tue, 13 Aug 2002 18:13:00 -0700 Subject: Re: Oh, boys . . . Message-ID: -------- "Dalton" > You are so full of shit even the Trekkies got sick of you. > > Better go start crossing your name off in the phone directories, don't > want the big bad stalker to get ya. How sad is it that Scooter spent an entire year making cut-and-paste arguments for his return? He's actually been obsessing on us for a whole YEAR...while we simply forgot about him! Lol!! "Oh Boys...." Can you just HEAR this lisping Tube Steak Tarzan saying that? What's even funnier-- who does the most damage to Trekkie credibility? "Rabid Warsies", or fucktards like this? Its very telling that we simply thought, "Oh, yet another Trekkie retard" instead of "Hmm...must be a RETURNING Trektard...." -- "Morons like Darkstar make up imaginary observations, mutilate science, nitpick unrelentingly, commit all manner of ad hominem fallacies, etc. They are only "successful" to the extent that people who are just as stupid as they are might be amenable to their arguments." Darth Wong http://h4h.com/louis/vsfaq.html ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "DarkStar" Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2002 08:22:08 GMT Subject: Re: Oh, boys . . . Message-ID: -------- "Dalton" wrote in message news:3D595C02.80E4B8E@daltonator.net... > DarkStar wrote: > > > > "Dalton" wrote in message > > news:3D57C453.88674AC5@daltonator.net... > > > DarkStar wrote: > > > > > > > > You guys should be ashamed of yourselves. :-) > > > > > > > > http://www.stardestroyer.net/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=1183 > > > > > > > > Guardian 2000 > > > > > > Ah, confirmed to be an impostor, a liar and a deceitful scumbag. > > > > > > I am never speaking to you again. > > I'm relaxing this rule just once, since you're so hell-bent on the whole > "Last Bastion of Trek" illusion. Big surprise. > > > > I despise impostors. > > > > Impostor? What, was someone else DarkStar before me? > > No, but you changed your persona to fool us. That is the very basis of > being an impostor. > I changed identities to prevent your stupid ad hominems from clouding the issues I presented. Remember, I don't expect to change Rabid Warsie minds . . . I just bounce ideas off of them to see how my arguments hold up rationally in the face of the Rabid Warsie onslaught. > > Liar? I never said I wasn't Guardian. > > Being an impostor is, by definition, a lie. Loosely, perhaps. However, given the intellectual dishonesty by which you gentlemen convince yourselves that insults and slander are valuable as tools in a rational debate, and given the hatred inspired by the name Guardian, my ruse was hardly the horrendous breach of conduct you want to think of it as. I presented the same and similar arguments, never painted myself as anything but pro-Trek, and used the same thought processes and argument styles. Had my intent been to engage in evil or trolling, I would have been far craftier about it, and evidently you'd have been none the wiser. I could have presented myself as a proud Warsie, raising little doubts here and there while pandering to the Warsie crowd. (I could have then really freaked you out by converting to Trek, which would have been totally contrary to the mutual-support-group mentality of the Warsies here.) Or, I could have presented myself as multiple strongly pro-Trek individuals of the same opinion in an effort to even the numbers a bit. Or, hell, I could have gone shopping for allies on other sites and led an invasion. Did I do these things? No. I changed names in order to sidestep the Rabid Warsie bullshit. Oooh, a sinner am I. > > since you care more > > about your own beliefs on people's personalities than facts. > > Well, when a debater is known to lie, bullshit and post yellow canary > stories in general, then we tend to take a dim view towards said > debater. A. You do not refer to me, since I did not do the things you claim. Of course, you claimed them for both DarkStar and Guardian without any proof, so I won't be surprised when you whine about this. B. You do not refer to your Rabid Warsie friends, since when they lie, bullshit, et cetera, you don't bother to correct them, nor does your view of them appear to change at all. > You are so full of shit even the Trekkies got sick of you. Actually, I'm almost proud of Edam. He's actually in a thread arguing points and sticking to his guns right now (or was in the Connie thread). This is precisely what I suggested to him long ago, when he was more than content to sit back and let Warsie lies go unchallenged. > Better go start crossing your name off in the phone directories, don't > want the big bad stalker to get ya. I see you didn't read that first StarDestroyer.Net post of mine in the thread I linked to. That threat has been neutralized. I know it must be sad for you guys, since now I cannot be threatened unless one of you wants to come die trying to do the dirty work himself. Of course, given that the ones who hate me the most are generally members of the Lump Club, all I have to do is keep some cheesecake or donuts around for a distraction. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Chuck, Modulating Moderator" Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2002 03:22:09 GMT Subject: Re: Oh, boys . . . Message-ID: -------- "DarkStar" wrote in message news:cv869.48903$Ce.2466781@bin3.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com... > Really, though, the old-school ASVS regulars I was used to dealing with > should be ashamed of themselves . . . I wasn't even trying to hide the fact > that I had already dealt with their bullshit before. Or, as a 'lurker' > friend put it, "How can they not realize it!?!?" > I'll answer this. I suspected for some time. The reason I said nothing was simple: I don't care. I know this is going to bruise your inflated ego, but you really aren't worth any effort on my part that goes beyond entertaining myself. Now when Weyoun pulled this, I put a little bit of time into it, because I really, really didn't like him. He was like nails on a chalkboard. You, you're more like professional wrestling: I find you stupid and make fun of you when I get the opportunity, but I only do it if I've got nothing better to do at the moment. There are better ways for me to spend my time. "To put it bluntly, you're not that important." -Q -- Chuck "How many legs does a dog have if you call the tail a leg? Four. Calling a tail a leg doesn't make it a leg." - Abraham Lincoln ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "DarkStar" Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2002 08:32:15 GMT Subject: Re: Oh, boys . . . Message-ID: -------- "Chuck, Modulating Moderator" wrote in message news:B1k69.3686$aU3.656022@typhoon.kc.rr.com... > > "DarkStar" wrote in message > news:cv869.48903$Ce.2466781@bin3.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com... > > Really, though, the old-school ASVS regulars I was used to dealing with > > should be ashamed of themselves . . . I wasn't even trying to hide the > fact > > that I had already dealt with their bullshit before. Or, as a 'lurker' > > friend put it, "How can they not realize it!?!?" > > > I'll answer this. I suspected for some time. I wondered how many would say "Uh, well, yeah, see, I knew all along, and stuff." Very amusing that you ended up the only one. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Chuck, Modulating Moderator" Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2002 12:34:22 GMT Subject: Re: Oh, boys . . . Message-ID: -------- "DarkStar" wrote in message news:jAo69.212308$vg.9210800@bin2.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com... > > "Chuck, Modulating Moderator" wrote in message > news:B1k69.3686$aU3.656022@typhoon.kc.rr.com... > > > > "DarkStar" wrote in message > > news:cv869.48903$Ce.2466781@bin3.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com... > > > Really, though, the old-school ASVS regulars I was used to dealing with > > > should be ashamed of themselves . . . I wasn't even trying to hide the > > fact > > > that I had already dealt with their bullshit before. Or, as a 'lurker' > > > friend put it, "How can they not realize it!?!?" > > > > > I'll answer this. I suspected for some time. > > I wondered how many would say "Uh, well, yeah, see, I knew all along, and > stuff." Very amusing that you ended up the only one. > I know this may shock you, but you're not Superman. We don't give a shit about your secret identity. The similarity made it a possibility but, since you choose to spend your time whining about why you can ignore special effects when it contradicts your interpretations instead of fighting crime, there was no need to take any interest in the matter. You could have turned out to be Rick Berman for all I care; all that would do would explain why Star Trek's gone down the tubes. -- Chuck "Try to explain to people that writing is something you do because it's impossible not to, and you get blank stares." - Peter David ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: mikewongisgod@hotmail.com (RayCav) Date: 12 Aug 2002 11:47:51 -0700 Subject: Re: Oh, boys . . . Message-ID: -------- "DarkStar" wrote in message news:... > I should be ashamed of myself. I stretched my dick so much making up this Trekkie wank fest its always limp now :-) > > http://www.stardestroyer.net/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=1183 > > Guardian 2000 I suspected as much ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: austin@sweevo.cjb.net (Austin Sweevo) Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2002 19:32:21 GMT Subject: Re: Oh, boys . . . Message-ID: <3d580d04.8933886@news.freeserve.net> -------- On Mon, 12 Aug 2002 10:02:18 GMT, "DarkStar" wrote: >You guys should be ashamed of yourselves. :-) > >http://www.stardestroyer.net/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=1183 > >Guardian 2000 Hey, can we FUQ stuff our guys say over there? "Please use punctuation. In the middle of reading that post, my brain ran out of breath." ---Durandal ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: nitramtahalshia@aol.comAntiSpam (Sir Nitram) Date: 12 Aug 2002 19:40:59 GMT Subject: Re: Oh, boys . . . Message-ID: <20020812154059.11741.00004958@mb-cu.aol.com> -------- >On Mon, 12 Aug 2002 10:02:18 GMT, "DarkStar" >wrote: > >>You guys should be ashamed of yourselves. :-) >> >>http://www.stardestroyer.net/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=1183 >> >>Guardian 2000 > > > >Hey, can we FUQ stuff our guys say over there? > I see no reason why not. -- SirNitram ASVS Small Gods Keeper and Amateur Genius Uptight Christians pray for God to save themselves. Upright Christians pray for God to save others in need. "And they say that a hero can save us, I'm not gonna stand here to wait..." -Hero ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "C.S.Strowbridge" Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2002 20:23:30 GMT Subject: Re: Oh, boys . . . Message-ID: <3D581934.4070508@shaw.ca> -------- Sir Nitram wrote: >> >> >>Hey, can we FUQ stuff our guys say over there? > > I see no reason why not. I've got stuff in the FUQ from e-mails. So I don't see why not. C.S.Strowbridge ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Paradox" Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2002 14:44:02 -0700 Subject: Re: Oh, boys . . . Message-ID: <1029188583.631653@globe.atl2.mindspring.net> -------- -- --- "What made you think this board excersized free speach?" --LordChaos, Spacebattles Moderator "C.S.Strowbridge" wrote in message news:3D581934.4070508@shaw.ca... > Sir Nitram wrote: > > >> > >> > >>Hey, can we FUQ stuff our guys say over there? > > > > I see no reason why not. > > I've got stuff in the FUQ from e-mails. So I don't see why not. how the FUQ did that happen? ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Dalton Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2002 18:15:00 -0400 Subject: Re: Oh, boys . . . Message-ID: <3D583364.909B3B36@daltonator.net> -------- Paradox wrote: > > -- > --- > "What made you think this board excersized free speach?" > --LordChaos, Spacebattles Moderator > "C.S.Strowbridge" wrote in message > news:3D581934.4070508@shaw.ca... > > Sir Nitram wrote: > > > > >> > > >> > > >>Hey, can we FUQ stuff our guys say over there? > > > > > > I see no reason why not. > > > > I've got stuff in the FUQ from e-mails. So I don't see why not. > > how the FUQ did that happen? He sent it to me. -- Rob "Roby" Dalton http://daltonator.net "...we never burned and tortured and ripped one another apart and called it morality." --Guards! Guards!, Terry Pratchett ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Colin'The Yosemite Bear'Witz" Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2002 23:15:55 -0700 Subject: Re: Oh, boys . . . Message-ID: -------- "Dalton" wrote in message news:3D583364.909B3B36@daltonator.net... > Paradox wrote: > > > > -- > > --- > > "What made you think this board excersized free speach?" > > --LordChaos, Spacebattles Moderator > > "C.S.Strowbridge" wrote in message > > news:3D581934.4070508@shaw.ca... > > > Sir Nitram wrote: > > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > >>Hey, can we FUQ stuff our guys say over there? > > > > > > > > I see no reason why not. > > > > > > I've got stuff in the FUQ from e-mails. So I don't see why not. > > > > how the FUQ did that happen? > > He sent it to me. > > -- > Rob "Roby" Dalton > http://daltonator.net > > "...we never burned and tortured and ripped one another apart > and called it morality." --Guards! Guards!, Terry Pratchett Three way ICQ conversations between Me/Ancaris/Sheppard have also made it into the FUQ. Particularly the one about Seven Eleven Employee's wanting Kevlar. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Dalton Date: Tue, 13 Aug 2002 17:34:31 -0400 Subject: Re: Oh, boys . . . Message-ID: <3D597B67.AB5B9347@daltonator.net> -------- Colin'The Yosemite Bear'Witz wrote: > > "Dalton" wrote in message > news:3D583364.909B3B36@daltonator.net... > > Paradox wrote: > > > > > > -- > > > --- > > > "What made you think this board excersized free speach?" > > > --LordChaos, Spacebattles Moderator > > > "C.S.Strowbridge" wrote in message > > > news:3D581934.4070508@shaw.ca... > > > > Sir Nitram wrote: > > > > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >>Hey, can we FUQ stuff our guys say over there? > > > > > > > > > > I see no reason why not. > > > > > > > > I've got stuff in the FUQ from e-mails. So I don't see why not. > > > > > > how the FUQ did that happen? > > > > He sent it to me. > > > > -- > > Rob "Roby" Dalton > > http://daltonator.net > > > > "...we never burned and tortured and ripped one another apart > > and called it morality." --Guards! Guards!, Terry Pratchett > > Three way ICQ conversations between Me/Ancaris/Sheppard have also made it into > the FUQ. Particularly the one about Seven Eleven Employee's wanting Kevlar. Only because I never know the source :P -- Rob "Roby" Dalton http://daltonator.net "...we never burned and tortured and ripped one another apart and called it morality." --Guards! Guards!, Terry Pratchett ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Dalton Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2002 18:14:40 -0400 Subject: Re: Oh, boys . . . Message-ID: <3D583350.7164ABC8@daltonator.net> -------- Austin Sweevo wrote: > > On Mon, 12 Aug 2002 10:02:18 GMT, "DarkStar" > wrote: > > >You guys should be ashamed of yourselves. :-) > > > >http://www.stardestroyer.net/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=1183 > > > >Guardian 2000 > > > > Hey, can we FUQ stuff our guys say over there? Mail it to me, no worries. Tell me if it's from SD.net though -- Rob "Roby" Dalton http://daltonator.net "...we never burned and tortured and ripped one another apart and called it morality." --Guards! Guards!, Terry Pratchett ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Wayne Poe" Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2002 20:34:32 -0700 Subject: Re: Oh, boys . . . Message-ID: -------- DarkStar wrote: >> How sad is it that Scooter spent an entire year making cut-and-paste >> arguments for his return? He's actually been obsessing on us for a whole >> YEAR...while we simply forgot about him! Lol!! > Uh, dude . . . the website updates occurred over the course of a couple of > weeks. Right right.... > How long have you been maintaining your anti-Trek website? Years, > is it? Uh-huh . . . See, once again, you can't even form a SIMPLE analogy. Is my website devoted to you and your stupidity? Nope. >> Its very telling that we simply thought, "Oh, yet another Trekkie retard" > You think that of anyone who makes a remotely pro-Trek point, Wayne. Wrong. I debate via argumentation with a strong vein of mockery running through it in order to keep myself conscious and entertained while responding to dumber posters, such as yourself. I think that of anyone who has a penchant for ignoring everything that's been said and done before he arrived and so allowing any debater with a sense of humor to lead him down endless roads of age-old argumentation. > Stephen Hawking (or any other appropriate genius) could come in here and > start laying down the law, and you'd pull some of your stupid arguments out > of your ass, sniff 'em to make sure they still reek, and then start spraying > them, proclaiming your own superiority in the process. You're the idiot, > Wayne. Oh, this is rich. Robbie is comparing himself to Hawking now? Listen you little retard, when I found out you were actually G2k, I couldn't believe how much LOWER my respect for you became! Can you imagine that? If all the pro-wrestling fans in the world were laid end to end in a line to the moon, they still wouldn't match your dumbness. No matter how hard you've tried, you haven't refuted ONE of my points! Not ONE! Amazing. "Oh! TOS warp doesn't exist anymore because I say it doesn't! "Oh! There IS no official Star Wars info, only canon!" Do you honestly think these sort of stupid, asinine displays of Trekkie geekdom do anything except exacerbate your position as Group Moron? No, excuse me. Of course you don't think. If you put an ounce of thought into any of the drivel you spew, the newsgroup's collective IQ would quadruple. If you were any more of a troll I'd have to pay toll to read your posts. You bring new and sadder meaning to the word "frighteningly retarded." Do you actually have to try to be an asshole, or does it just come naturally to you? 'Cause for me it takes a little effort, but you seem quite capable of just demonstrating total assholishness on command. Whether it's through hard work or just a talent, I salute your ability to be a complete and utter asshole without equal. It's almost September, so we'll see you leave yet again because Jason or Michael Myers is after you again, Mr. Bond... All hands on deck. The S.S. Boo Fucking Hoo is about to leave port, sailing on a river of Scott's tears, with the endless wind of his blowhard "arguments" in its sails. You're so full of shit I should twist your ears to flush your brain. Now be a good bitch and shut the fuck up. Thanks for picking the most atypical cases and holding them up as some sort of standard, you useless hatfucker. Let's see your picture, Scott. I've never hidden any aspect of myself from this or any other online group, because unlike you, I have no need to hide behind a shield of anonymity because my life isn't a pathetic mess and I don't have to invent lies for strangers. Jesus, you are such a little-kid moron. I can see you now: toddling around your trailer park, wrapped up in an American-flag diaper, speaking made-up Latin phrases to the local bucktoothed Down's syndrome "beauties". You can go and pretend you won, even though you convinced no one, not even the people on your side. Even the pro-Trek people weren't swayed by you pathetic arguments. Even though nothing changed I give you full permission to live your life in glorious self deception. Meanwhile I, the "defeated", will stay here with nothing but the rules, the massive support from the regular debaters and the facts to comfort me. You've been strutting around sb.com and sd.net like Big Man on Campus, but with your dickless debate tactics and now this, you've rapidly proved yourself to be nothing but a pompous, two-faced, lying, long-winded, ignorant, arrogant, irrational, weaselly little chickenshit fucktard. You think that because you've ejaculated on the pages of the Star Trek Technical Manual that you're a fucking expert in astrophysics? Piss the fuck off. I know you're wrong, and I've shown it to the obvious satisfaction of everyone watching. You fucking lose. This fact is intuitively obvious to even the most casual of observers. I've gone to painful lengths to explain these concepts to you, and you still persist in your creationist-like stance. Your confounding arrogance and ignorance served as spectacle for all those watching, but it's degenerated into little more than an annoyance. If you want attention, show the rest of your class your wee-wee during your recess period on Monday. Do the human race a fucking favor and hire someone to fucking shoot you in the fucking head. At least THAT way, you'll keep the economy going, so your death may have SOME contribution to a higher cause, which is certainly more than can be said for your life. Unfortunately, mocking you is like peeing. It's not very hard, and it's only temporary relief. Yet it still needs to be done. Not since TJ was on the group have I seen more unified revulsion for an individual. You have probably helped the pro-SW camp more than any debater since Cronan. One of your defining characteristics is believing that you are, as you call yourself, the "Last Bastion" of pro-ST debate. The fact that this is untrue does not deter you. Indeed, when you show up like a bad case of syphilis, most other pro-ST debaters just sigh and take a break from the group. Wisely. You have a penchant for ignoring everything that's been said and done before you arrived and so allowing any debater with a sense of humor to lead you down endless roads of age-old argumentation. This is amazingly fun, for us, because it completely confounds you. "What the fuck is wrong with you people?" LOL. Alas, the pleasure of torturing you is not one which can be had year-round. Inevitably, you will inform all of us that some chick you've been seeing has threatened suicide or something, so you dumped her to debate Trek v. Wars. Then, after staying just long enough to get your ass kicked more than a combination donkey-boot salesman, you leave, informing us that some "cute young thing" has caught your eye, and you are going to go tutor her in reading full-time. The amusing thing is, since these excuses for leaving and returning are always, always the same, one can track your many failed and probably imaginary relationships via a quick trip to Google. -- "Morons like Darkstar make up imaginary observations, mutilate science, nitpick unrelentingly, commit all manner of ad hominem fallacies, etc. They are only "successful" to the extent that people who are just as stupid as they are might be amenable to their arguments." Darth Wong http://h4h.com/louis/vsfaq.html ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: nitramtahalshia@aol.comAntiSpam (Sir Nitram) Date: 15 Aug 2002 03:43:05 GMT Subject: Re: Oh, boys . . . Message-ID: <20020814234305.17117.00000445@mb-mu.aol.com> -------- A beautiful rendition of some of the best insults from the FUQ. -- SirNitram ASVS Small Gods Keeper and Amateur Genius Uptight Christians pray for God to save themselves. Upright Christians pray for God to save others in need. "And they say that a hero can save us, I'm not gonna stand here to wait..." -Hero ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Kamakazie Sith" Date: Thu, 15 Aug 2002 06:28:11 GMT Subject: Re: Oh, boys . . . Message-ID: <%RH69.32772$Zl2.7788@sccrnsc02> -------- "Wayne Poe" wrote in message news:ulm8acco38d33e@corp.supernews.com... Darkstar reminds me of a character from the movie Kung Pow, the character is called Wimp Lo.....if you've seen the movie you will understand but to quote him. "I am bleeding which makes me the victor." ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "His Divine Shadow" Date: Thu, 15 Aug 2002 10:20:14 +0300 Subject: Re: Oh, boys . . . Message-ID: -------- "Kamakazie Sith" wrote in message news:%RH69.32772$Zl2.7788@sccrnsc02... > > "Wayne Poe" wrote in message > news:ulm8acco38d33e@corp.supernews.com... > > Darkstar reminds me of a character from the movie Kung Pow, the character is > called Wimp Lo.....if you've seen the movie you will understand but to quote > him. > > "I am bleeding which makes me the victor." Hehe, I think that would fit in his troll description on the FUQ. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Stuart Mackey" Date: Thu, 15 Aug 2002 18:53:44 +1200 Subject: Re: Oh, boys . . . Message-ID: -------- "Wayne Poe" wrote in message news:ulm8acco38d33e@corp.supernews.com... > DarkStar wrote: > snip snip Bravo!, Wayne, Bravo! Do we get a encore? ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "DarkStar" Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2002 16:57:19 GMT Subject: Re: Oh, boys . . . Message-ID: -------- Well, well, well. I go play over at StarDestroyer.Net for a few days dealing with stupid crap, and look what I find upon my return here . . . stupid crap. How surprising. "Wayne Poe" wrote in message news:ulm8acco38d33e@corp.supernews.com... > DarkStar wrote: > > >> How sad is it that Scooter spent an entire year making cut-and-paste > >> arguments for his return? He's actually been obsessing on us for a whole > >> YEAR...while we simply forgot about him! Lol!! > > > Uh, dude . . . the website updates occurred over the course of a couple of > > weeks. > > Right right.... > > > How long have you been maintaining your anti-Trek website? Years, > > is it? Uh-huh . . . > > See, once again, you can't even form a SIMPLE analogy. Is my website devoted > to you and your stupidity? Nope. Is mine devoted to you and yours? Nope. > > >> Its very telling that we simply thought, "Oh, yet another Trekkie retard" > > > You think that of anyone who makes a remotely pro-Trek point, Wayne. > > Wrong. I debate via argumentation with a strong vein of mockery running > through it in order to keep myself conscious and entertained while > responding to dumber posters You debate via distortion of canon fact, evidence, and reason (the warp turn argument, the Romulan weapon argument, the TIE out the window argument, et cetera, et cetera, ad infinitum), using "mockery" (i.e. insults, curses, slander, etc.) in an effort to cover the weakness of your argument. > I think that of anyone who has a penchant for ignoring everything that's > been said and done before he arrived and so allowing any debater with a > sense of humor to lead him down endless roads of age-old argumentation. Ooh, nice twist . . . instead of confessing to the fact that Warsies such as yourself repeat disproven arguments over and over again as if they are fresh, new, and true, you claim it is a debate tactic. How charmingly dishonest of you . . . and that works in regards to the claim of the tactic, the claim of the tactic, and the simple fact of repeating disproven arguments. > > > Stephen Hawking (or any other appropriate genius) could come in here and > > start laying down the law, and you'd pull some of your stupid arguments > out > > of your ass, sniff 'em to make sure they still reek, and then start > spraying > > them, proclaiming your own superiority in the process. You're the idiot, > > Wayne. > > Oh, this is rich. Robbie is comparing himself to Hawking now? WTF? Where, oh where, do you see a comparison of myself to Hawking? > No matter how hard you've tried, you haven't refuted ONE of my points! Not > ONE! Amazing. In your mind, of course not. Fortunately, fact is not based on the opinion of Poe. If so, the world would be a very subjective, illogical place. > "Oh! TOS warp doesn't exist anymore because I say it doesn't! What the hell are you talking about? > "Oh! There IS no official Star Wars info, only canon!" Don't bitch at me. The existing statements already made this pretty clear, and Lucas cinched the deal. > Do you honestly think these sort of > stupid, asinine displays of Trekkie geekdom do anything except exacerbate > your position as Group Moron? Of course not! If I were trying to keep company with people who based their opinions on facts, and their opinions of me on facts about me, do you really think I would be here? I have explained several times why I am here. I'm not here for the personalities or the popularity contests. I'm here to throw out my ideas, and see if, somewhere in the maelstrom of Rabid Warsie personal attacks and general stupidity, anyone might bring up a relevant point that I need to address, or a point which shatters the idea I was working with. I am not here for the flaming, nor am I particularly concerned with Rabid Warsie opinions of my views. > Do you actually have to try to be an asshole, or does it just come naturally > to you? 'Cause for me it takes a little effort, but you seem quite capable > of just demonstrating total assholishness on command. Whether it's through > hard work or just a talent, I salute your ability to be a complete and utter > asshole without equal. Thanks, Wayne. I take it as a compliment when a renowned asshole takes a moment to bask in the glow of the fact that I am one unyielding bastard when I think one of my arguments is right and no one has proven it wrong. Of course, I am probably giving you too much credit . . . you were probably just trying to insult me. But, I'll choose to take it as a compliment anyway. :-) > Thanks for picking the most atypical cases and holding them up as some sort > of standard, you useless hatfucker. What are you talking about? What cases? > Let's see your picture, Scott. I've never hidden any aspect of myself from > this or any other online group, Yes, I see that: http://www.stardestroyer.net/phpBB2/images/avatars/d197fc053d5710d821a0c.gif Nice mask. > because unlike you, I have no need to hide behind a shield of anonymity The very fact that you sick fucks try to help armed and dangerous psychotic stalkers gather data on those you disagree with is more than sufficient reason for anyone to prefer anonymity. What's amusing about it is how it ended up backfiring on you. http://www.stardestroyer.net/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=1312 anarchistbunny - "Is that legal?" Pablo Sanchez - "Anyway Poe, I happen to think that this is over the line. Scooter should be allowed his anonymity." Stravo - "I'm sorry guys but this just isn't funny, in fact in many ways its VERY creepy. This is just a message board and we're all here to have fun, share in our hobby. There is bound to be a few idiots or two, but why stoop to this when ignoring them is just as fine, and takes far less effort on anyone's part. Why debate with anyone if the response will be the posting of your home address, etc. BTW as someone who had to deal with a stalker in the past...this is NOT cool." Mr Bean - "But your right the website has to go, Just because you can in no way means you should" Asst. Asst. Lt. Cmdr. Smi - "That was very creepy. I wonder how many prank calls DarkStar received." TheDarkling - "Prank calls and such is exactly why that sick freak the ASU coward had to be banned and I cant believe anyone else would stoop to that level, for shame ." Pendragon - "That was low..." Vertigo - "Now thats low. Disagreeing with someone over a debate is one thing, but this? I wouldn't even do that to the most ignorant troll. Sure, I'd get em banned, but thats about it. If you're that obsessed to pull something like that, then you really need a life. Badly." Grand Admiral Thrawn - "That's a little too far..." Spoofe - "Eh. Posting his personal information is a tad unnecessary, in my opinion." Gil Hamilton - "Alright, that is going too far." "There is no reason to take it to real life." Some of the names above are people who would never agree with me about anything, and yet there they were. Of course, the idiocy of your move didn't disturb everyone: Spanky the Dolphin - "I'd better pack them in ice to make sure those heads are still fresh when DarkStar gets them." His Divine Shadow - "Well things certanly can get out of hand, then again, what did DarkStar expect?" Setesh - "So don't garbage us about it being a 'threat' to your well being when you made no attempt to acctually hide your ID." Master of Ossus - "LMAO!" But, even he came around, saying "I kind of agree. Maybe the website has to go." SirNitram - "I find nothing wrong with the site itself. Frankly, every asshole who hides his identity deserves it." A request to SirNitram (whatever his real name is) to post his personal information has gone unanswered, as expected. > Jesus, you are such a little-kid moron. Uh-huh. This from the fellow who, like a child on the playground, strikes out when he can't upstage someone. Or, do you consider the posting of my data to be mature and intelligent on your part? > You can go and pretend you won, even though you convinced no one, not even > the people on your side. Even the pro-Trek people weren't swayed by you > pathetic arguments. Nope, not a one, ever. http://scn.infopop.net/0/OpenTopic?a=tpc&s=526090832&f=9440964644&m=46109768 25 > Meanwhile I, the "defeated", will stay here with nothing but the rules, the massive support from the > regular debaters and the facts to comfort me. You have the massive support from the regulars . . . but then, the vast majority are Warsies or Rabid Warsies, anyway. You have the support of the rules, but that only makes sense, since it was the numerical superiority of the Warsies that implemented them (that's like justifying apartheid in South Africa because it was codified into law). However, you do not have the facts to comfort you. You twist, rend, and tear the facts to suit your theories, instead of altering theories to suit facts. This is your great weakness . . . the pro-Wars bias you refuse to let go of is the origin of your intellectual dishonesty, lies, and general idiocy. When I consider the Star Wars vs. Star Trek question, I don't look at it from the point of view of trying to make Star Trek win, like Ian. I don't try to distort canon SW facts, like you. In spite of idiots like you, I still try to be as fair as possible when considering Star Wars, leaving plenty of room open in case there is bias hiding in my thought process. Clearly, it is your opinion that I fail miserably. Well, that's your opinion, and you've made it abundantly clear over the time I've dealt with you that your opinions do not change in order to fit facts, nor do they need to be based on facts to begin with. Do forgive me if I hold your opinion of what I do and how I do it in extremely low regard. > You've been strutting around sb.com and sd.net like Big Man on Campus, but > with your dickless debate tactics and now this, you've rapidly proved > yourself to be nothing but a pompous, two-faced, lying, long-winded, > ignorant, arrogant, irrational, weaselly little chickenshit fucktard. I wasn't aware I was strutting. I argued the same ideas there as I did here, though I did allow myself the evil pleasure of slipping Warsie-esque insults and other such Warsie stupidity into my posts. If you thought I was strutting, it only goes to show what I have said all along . . . you and those who think as you do pay more attention to the presentation than you do to the actual meal. You sit there with an almost empty stomach and bad aftertaste, yet declare the meal fabulous so long as the presentation was good. > I know you're wrong, and I've shown it to the obvious satisfaction of > everyone watching. Right, right. Push on, little man, and keep trying to convince yourself that I'm wrong. One day, you might even believe it. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: setesh@aol.com (Setesh) Date: 20 Aug 2002 19:55:16 GMT Subject: Re: Oh, boys . . . Message-ID: <20020820155516.19463.00001427@mb-fs.aol.com> -------- Darkstar subspaced: >the warp turn argument, Which we're still contesting and you have been asked again for you evidence. >the Romulan weapon argument which you still haven't proved, except by calling me an idiot for interpreting a still shot of the Romulan ship coming dead on in the view screen as just that. Rather than your 'its above the plane of the ship' argument which you still have no case and in fact stopped posting when I pointed this out to you. >using "mockery" (i.e. insults, curses, >slander, etc.) in an effort to cover the weakness of your argument. Strange I only mock you because you make it so clear you have the IQ of burnt toast. >Ooh, nice twist . . . instead of confessing to the fact that Warsies such as >yourself repeat disproven arguments over and over again as if they are >fresh, new, and true, you claim it is a debate tactic. How charmingly >dishonest of you . . . and that works in regards to the claim of the tactic, >the claim of the tactic, and the simple fact of repeating disproven >arguments. While you repeat trekkie arguments refuted so long ago most of the die hard trekkies think your an idiot. I especially liked your attempt to refute Wong's turbolaser fire power yeilds and Hull strength calcs by contradicting yourself. >> Oh, this is rich. Robbie is comparing himself to Hawking now? > >WTF? Where, oh where, do you see a comparison of myself to Hawking? right here >> > Stephen Hawking (or any other appropriate genius) could come in here and >> > start laying down the law, and you'd pull some of your stupid arguments >In your mind, of course not. Fortunately, fact is not based on the opinion >of Poe. No but he's a little more in touch with reality. > If so, the world would be a very subjective, illogical place. LOL, yet anouther gem that you won't understand why we laugh when you post it. >> "Oh! There IS no official Star Wars info, only canon!" > >Don't bitch at me. The existing statements already made this pretty clear, >and Lucas cinched the deal. And Natalie Portman is a lesbian because she likes girls as much as guys. >Of course not! If I were trying to keep company with people who based >their opinions on facts, and their opinions of me on facts about me, do you >really think I would be here? Since we are, let me think, YES. >I have explained several times why I am here. I'm not here for the >personalities or the popularity contests. I'm here to throw out my ideas, >and see if, somewhere in the maelstrom of Rabid Warsie personal attacks and >general stupidity, anyone might bring up a relevant point that I need to >address, or a point which shatters the idea I was working with. I am not >here for the flaming, nor am I particularly concerned with Rabid Warsie >opinions of my views. Since to you a 'relevent point' is to agree with you no matter how idiotic the statment your going to be waiting a loooooong time, or at least till TJ gets a new screenname:) >The very fact that you sick fucks try to help armed and dangerous psychotic >stalkers gather data on those you disagree with is more than sufficient >reason for anyone to prefer anonymity. LOL, still clinging to the delusion of web 'anonymity' Besides I've been attacked by trekkies in RL for speaking my opinion, no hiding, no safe distance. I'm still not complaining. >What's amusing about it is how it ended up backfiring on you. Not a whole lot of backfire is it? After all its Kynes site so Poe can't really be held accountable. >Uh-huh. This from the fellow who, like a child on the playground, strikes >out when he can't upstage someone. Or, do you consider the posting of my >data to be mature and intelligent on your part? Gee, I never knew Kynes and Poe were the same guy, oh wait they aren't. So quit harpin' at Poe about it, the page has been in the Google archieves for quite a while. >Nope, not a one, ever. >http://scn.infopop.net/0/OpenTopic?a=tpc&s=526090832&f=9440964644&m=46109768 >25 Lets look at your 'supporters', (though I notice they don't agree with you they just don't like Wong. >Razor posted July 31, 2002 03:58 >------------------------------------------------------------>------------ -------- >I dont know if any of you are familiar with >Mike Wong's anti-star trek site you'll >know how disgusting the website is. Im a >hardcore trek fan but I still enjoy the Star >Wars movies. However this site is nothing >more than disgusting Trek bashing and >mockery. Actually he's quite realistic about trek, I loved TOS, but NG disapointed and B&B made it go down hill from there. >Many trek fans know about this site and >Wong's arrogant attitudes. Recently >Wong added a message board to his site >http://www.stardestroyer.net/phpBB2/viewforum.php?f=2 >which is interesting insofar >as you get to see how a petulant child >would run such a thing. WTF? >Those he does not like get posts edited >and their personal information altered, >and threads which refer to anything >contrary to his views get closed, 3 lies, your out, he 'asks' that we stop threads but the thread wasn't closed (You just posted in it) the only other threads closed because no one posted in them for a month. >after he says something about not having >time to update the site. Oh, yes, very >impressive . . . especially when you take >into account how much time he spends >reading and writing in the forums. I've seen Darth Wong post 8 times total, 3 were threads he started. The rest of your suppporters basically agree with him with the usual 'We hate Wong' lines. >> Meanwhile I, the "defeated", will stay here with nothing but the rules, >the massive support from the >> regular debaters and the facts to comfort me. > >You have the massive support from the regulars . . . but then, the vast >majority are Warsies or Rabid Warsies, anyway. You have the support of the >rules, but that only makes sense, since it was the numerical superiority of >the Warsies that implemented them (that's like justifying apartheid in South >Africa because it was codified into law). LOL, jeez now you are joking right, apartied was because the Whites were outnumbered by the blacks not the other way round. >However, you do not have the facts to comfort you. You twist, rend, and >tear the facts to suit your theories, instead of altering theories to suit >facts. I'd say PKB but its to easy. >This is your great weakness . . . the pro-Wars bias you refuse to >let go of is the origin of your intellectual dishonesty, lies, and general >idiocy. Repeat above reply. >When I consider the Star Wars vs. Star Trek question, I don't look at it >from the point of view of trying to make Star Trek win, like Ian. *snicker* > I don't >try to distort canon SW facts, like you. *chortle* > In spite of idiots like you, I >still try to be as fair as possible when considering Star Wars, leaving >plenty of room open in case there is bias hiding in my thought process. *snort* >Clearly, it is your opinion that I fail miserably. Well duh. >Well, that's your >opinion, and you've made it abundantly clear over the time I've dealt with >you that your opinions do not change in order to fit facts, nor do they need >to be based on facts to begin with. I'd laugh but I'm not sure if laughter or pity is correct. >Do forgive me if I hold your opinion of >what I do and how I do it in extremely low regard. If you want forgivness ask Boyd, just don't mention God. >I wasn't aware I was strutting. I argued the same ideas there as I did >here, though I did allow myself the evil pleasure of slipping Warsie-esque >insults and other such Warsie stupidity into my posts. If you thought I >was strutting, it only goes to show what I have said all along . . . you >and those who think as you do pay more attention to the presentation than >you do to the actual meal. You sit there with an almost empty stomach and >bad aftertaste, yet declare the meal fabulous so long as the presentation >was good. > I think DS just accused Poe of 'Style over Substance' but since that's the general Trek argument I'm dubious. >Right, right. Push on, little man, and keep trying to convince yourself >that I'm wrong. One day, you might even believe it. > Belief is not required. Skywarp:"Starscream, What's Megatron's plan this time? Starscream:"Who cares? You just Know it's going to be evil. And evil is always fun." ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Wayne Poe" Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2002 19:32:28 -0700 Subject: Re: Oh, boys . . . Message-ID: -------- "Setesh" wrote > >Don't bitch at me. The existing statements already made this pretty clear, > >and Lucas cinched the deal. > > And Natalie Portman is a lesbian because she likes girls as much as guys. This is so funny. He acts like Lucas has JUST declared that the EU is an alternate universe, when he's said this all along! ******************************************************************* I already know that George is throwing out past "facts" in the prequels. As far as George is concerned, all the other stuff is "alternate galaxies." As far as Lucasfilm as an entity is concerned, all the other stuff is Star Wars until George says it isn't. At that point, they'll pay someone like me or Kevin Anderson or Bill Smith to scramble around trying to fix the problems. And as far as future events are concerned, I don't mean to sound dismal, but as I've implied before, I don't think George will ever do the final trilogy. His intro to the TESB paperback is about as clear as it gets. Andy Mangels 12-5-95 www.aol.com SW fan forum. ANDY MANGELS, author of STAR WARS: THE ESSENTIAL GUIDE TO CHARACTERS and the BOBA FETT: TWIN ENGINES OF DESTRUCTION comic **************************************************************************** *********** > Gee, I never knew Kynes and Poe were the same guy, oh wait they aren't. So > quit harpin' at Poe about it, the page has been in the Google archieves for > quite a while. Please, let me clarify the issue. I am absolutely 100% in favor of Ian's RSA website. I have NO PROBLEMS with it, nor do I have any problem being associated with it. It's the ultimate "fuck you" to an annoying little fuckface like Scooter. And its so incredibly funny and insidious that I laugh every time I read it. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "DarkStar" Date: Wed, 21 Aug 2002 07:02:23 GMT Subject: Re: Oh, boys . . . Message-ID: <3WG89.117679$Fw3.4962144@bin2.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com> -------- "Wayne Poe" wrote in message news:um5utvbr0h645e@corp.supernews.com... > > "Setesh" wrote > > > >Don't bitch at me. The existing statements already made this pretty > clear, > > >and Lucas cinched the deal. > > > > And Natalie Portman is a lesbian because she likes girls as much as guys. > > This is so funny. He acts like Lucas has JUST declared that the EU is an > alternate universe, when he's said this all along! > > ******************************************************************* > I already know that George is throwing out past "facts" in the > prequels. > > As far as George is concerned, all the other stuff is "alternate > galaxies." > > As far as Lucasfilm as an entity is concerned, all the other stuff is > Star Wars until George says it isn't. At that point, they'll pay > someone like me or Kevin Anderson or Bill Smith to scramble around > trying to fix the problems. > > And as far as future events are concerned, I don't mean to sound > dismal, but as I've implied before, I don't think George will ever do > the final trilogy. His intro to the TESB paperback is about as clear > as it gets. > > Andy Mangels 12-5-95 www.aol.com SW fan forum. ANDY MANGELS, author of > STAR WARS: THE ESSENTIAL GUIDE TO CHARACTERS and the BOBA FETT: TWIN ENGINES > OF DESTRUCTION comic > **************************************************************************** > *********** Thanks, Wayne. That lends further support to my argument, and I'll be sure to tack it on during the next update. > > > Gee, I never knew Kynes and Poe were the same guy, oh wait they aren't. > So > > quit harpin' at Poe about it, the page has been in the Google archieves > for > > quite a while. > > Please, let me clarify the issue. > > I am absolutely 100% in favor of Ian's RSA website. I have NO PROBLEMS with > it, nor do I have any problem being associated with it. It's the ultimate > "fuck you" to an annoying little fuckface like Scooter. And its so > incredibly funny and insidious that I laugh every time I read it. That's why you score a 10 on the Sick Fuck scale. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: setesh@aol.com (Setesh) Date: 21 Aug 2002 20:40:02 GMT Subject: Re: Oh, boys . . . Message-ID: <20020821164002.03677.00002334@mb-fq.aol.com> -------- >That's why you score a 10 on the Sick Fuck scale. Nope, its the consensous he only scores a 6. Hit-man scores an 8. Skywarp:"Starscream, What's Megatron's plan this time? Starscream:"Who cares? You just Know it's going to be evil. And evil is always fun." ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: nitramtahalshia@aol.comAntiSpam (Sir Nitram) Date: 21 Aug 2002 23:11:26 GMT Subject: Re: Oh, boys . . . Message-ID: <20020821191126.21633.00003337@mb-cg.aol.com> -------- >>That's why you score a 10 on the Sick Fuck scale. > >Nope, its the consensous he only scores a 6. Hit-man scores an 8. > Has he been shown the horrors of Strowbridge's links yet? -- SirNitram ASVS Small Gods Keeper and Amateur Genius Uptight Christians pray for God to save themselves. Upright Christians pray for God to save others in need. "And they say that a hero can save us, I'm not gonna stand here to wait..." -Hero ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: swineherd@7dof.org (The Baron) Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2002 19:42:47 GMT Subject: Re: Oh, boys . . . Message-ID: <3d653eb2.13325190@news.freeserve.co.uk> -------- On Thu, 22 Aug 2002 19:23:33 GMT, "C.S.Strowbridge" wrote: >Sir Nitram wrote: > >>>>That's why you score a 10 on the Sick Fuck scale. >>> >>>Nope, its the consensous he only scores a 6. Hit-man scores an 8. >> >> Has he been shown the horrors of Strowbridge's links yet? > >They're not my links. I didn't find then, I didn't bring them here, I >didn't post them the most. > I did, dammit, I did. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "C.S.Strowbridge" Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2002 20:55:26 GMT Subject: Re: Oh, boys . . . Message-ID: <3C3381EC.3010208@shaw.ca> -------- The Baron wrote: > "C.S.Strowbridge" wrote: >>Sir Nitram wrote: >>>Has he been shown the horrors of Strowbridge's links yet? >> >>They're not my links. I didn't find then, I didn't bring them here, I >>didn't post them the most. > > I did, dammit, I did. But I've stolen your glory. Ha ha ha. You want it back? C.S.Strowbridge ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: swineherd@7dof.org (The Baron) Date: Fri, 23 Aug 2002 00:52:59 GMT Subject: Re: Oh, boys . . . Message-ID: <3d658761.1581061@news.freeserve.co.uk> -------- On Thu, 22 Aug 2002 20:55:26 GMT, "C.S.Strowbridge" wrote: >The Baron wrote: >> "C.S.Strowbridge" wrote: >>>Sir Nitram wrote: > >>>>Has he been shown the horrors of Strowbridge's links yet? >>> >>>They're not my links. I didn't find then, I didn't bring them here, I >>>didn't post them the most. >> >> I did, dammit, I did. > >But I've stolen your glory. Ha ha ha. You want it back? > No, I poisoned it, the last laugh's on you! haha! ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: setesh@aol.com (Setesh) Date: 22 Aug 2002 21:00:40 GMT Subject: Re: Oh, boys . . . Message-ID: <20020822170040.08012.00001911@mb-mi.aol.com> -------- >Subject: Re: Oh, boys . . . >From: swineherd@7dof.org (The Baron) >Date: 8/22/02 3:42 PM Eastern Daylight Time >Message-id: <3d653eb2.13325190@news.freeserve.co.uk> > >On Thu, 22 Aug 2002 19:23:33 GMT, "C.S.Strowbridge" > wrote: > >>Sir Nitram wrote: >> >>>>>That's why you score a 10 on the Sick Fuck scale. >>>> >>>>Nope, its the consensous he only scores a 6. Hit-man scores an 8. >>> >>> Has he been shown the horrors of Strowbridge's links yet? >> >>They're not my links. I didn't find then, I didn't bring them here, I >>didn't post them the most. >> >I did, dammit, I did. > Your rating just went from 4 to 6 Skywarp:"Starscream, What's Megatron's plan this time? Starscream:"Who cares? You just Know it's going to be evil. And evil is always fun." ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: swineherd@7dof.org (The Baron) Date: Fri, 23 Aug 2002 00:52:42 GMT Subject: Re: Oh, boys . . . Message-ID: <3d658751.1564564@news.freeserve.co.uk> -------- On 22 Aug 2002 21:00:40 GMT, setesh@aol.com (Setesh) wrote: >>Subject: Re: Oh, boys . . . >>From: swineherd@7dof.org (The Baron) >>Date: 8/22/02 3:42 PM Eastern Daylight Time >>Message-id: <3d653eb2.13325190@news.freeserve.co.uk> >> >>On Thu, 22 Aug 2002 19:23:33 GMT, "C.S.Strowbridge" >> wrote: >> >>>Sir Nitram wrote: >>> >>>>>>That's why you score a 10 on the Sick Fuck scale. >>>>> >>>>>Nope, its the consensous he only scores a 6. Hit-man scores an 8. >>>> >>>> Has he been shown the horrors of Strowbridge's links yet? >>> >>>They're not my links. I didn't find then, I didn't bring them here, I >>>didn't post them the most. >>> >>I did, dammit, I did. >> >Your rating just went from 4 to 6 > > Fuck you, I'm at least a 6.2 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: setesh@aol.com (Setesh) Date: 23 Aug 2002 14:55:44 GMT Subject: Re: Oh, boys . . . Message-ID: <20020823105544.19479.00002257@mb-fs.aol.com> -------- (The Baron) harkoned: >Fuck you, I'm at least a 6.2 That was my gut reaction I'll gather the others and have you rerated by commity. Skywarp:"Starscream, What's Megatron's plan this time? Starscream:"Who cares? You just Know it's going to be evil. And evil is always fun." ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "C.S.Strowbridge" Date: Wed, 21 Aug 2002 21:27:36 GMT Subject: Re: Oh, boys . . . Message-ID: <3D6405DD.6040600@shaw.ca> -------- DarkStar wrote: > "Wayne Poe" wrote: >>I am absolutely 100% in favor of Ian's RSA website. I have NO PROBLEMS >>with it, nor do I have any problem being associated with it. It's the >>ultimate "fuck you" to an annoying little fuckface like Scooter. And >>its so incredibly funny and insidious that I laugh every time I read >>it. > > That's why you score a 10 on the Sick Fuck scale. It's not that we think you're going to get beat up cause of this site, we think you're lying about being in danger in the first place. If you really have a stalker and he wasn't able to find all this information on line in 5 minutes, then he's too stupid to find this website. C.S.Strowbridge ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "DarkStar" Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2002 08:01:50 GMT Subject: Re: Oh, boys . . . Message-ID: -------- "C.S.Strowbridge" wrote in message news:3D6405DD.6040600@shaw.ca... > DarkStar wrote: > > "Wayne Poe" wrote: > > >>I am absolutely 100% in favor of Ian's RSA website. I have NO PROBLEMS > >>with it, nor do I have any problem being associated with it. It's the > >>ultimate "fuck you" to an annoying little fuckface like Scooter. And > >>its so incredibly funny and insidious that I laugh every time I read > >>it. > > > > That's why you score a 10 on the Sick Fuck scale. > > It's not that we think you're going to get beat up cause of this site, > we think you're lying about being in danger in the first place. That's our Strowbridge . . . always willing to err on the side of caution when risking the lives of others. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "C.S.Strowbridge" Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2002 19:40:57 GMT Subject: Re: Oh, boys . . . Message-ID: <3C337076.9040509@shaw.ca> -------- DarkStar wrote: > "C.S.Strowbridge" wrote: >>It's not that we think you're going to get beat up cause of this site, >>we think you're lying about being in danger in the first place. > > That's our Strowbridge . . . always willing to err on the side of caution > when risking the lives of others. It's all based on Risk / Reward analysis. Risk: You get your ass kicked. Chance Risk will occur: << 0.001% Reward: Opportunity to Mock you. Chance Reward will occur: 99.99% C.S.Strowbridge ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Dalton Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2002 16:13:12 -0400 Subject: Re: Oh, boys . . . Message-ID: <3D6545D8.4C8B24EE@daltonator.net> -------- "C.S.Strowbridge" wrote: > > DarkStar wrote: > > "C.S.Strowbridge" wrote: > > >>It's not that we think you're going to get beat up cause of this site, > >>we think you're lying about being in danger in the first place. > > > > That's our Strowbridge . . . always willing to err on the side of caution > > when risking the lives of others. > > It's all based on Risk / Reward analysis. > > Risk: You get your ass kicked. > Chance Risk will occur: << 0.001% I don't know, the phone books are usually pretty accurate. > Reward: Opportunity to Mock you. > Chance Reward will occur: 99.99% > > C.S.Strowbridge -- Rob "Roby" Dalton http://daltonator.net ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "C.S.Strowbridge" Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2002 20:57:13 GMT Subject: Re: Oh, boys . . . Message-ID: <3C338256.6060401@shaw.ca> -------- Dalton wrote: > "C.S.Strowbridge" wrote: >>DarkStar wrote: >>>>It's not that we think you're going to get beat up cause of this site, >>>>we think you're lying about being in danger in the first place. >>> >>>That's our Strowbridge . . . always willing to err on the side of caution >>>when risking the lives of others. >> >>It's all based on Risk / Reward analysis. >> >>Risk: You get your ass kicked. >>Chance Risk will occur: << 0.001% > > I don't know, the phone books are usually pretty accurate. Yeah, but you have to consider the odds that DarkStar is telling the truth and the odds that his imaginary enemy could find the site in the first place. C.S.Strowbridge ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Dalton Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2002 17:19:05 -0400 Subject: Re: Oh, boys . . . Message-ID: <3D655549.B80B77E8@daltonator.net> -------- "C.S.Strowbridge" wrote: > > Dalton wrote: > > "C.S.Strowbridge" wrote: > >>DarkStar wrote: > > >>>>It's not that we think you're going to get beat up cause of this site, > >>>>we think you're lying about being in danger in the first place. > >>> > >>>That's our Strowbridge . . . always willing to err on the side of caution > >>>when risking the lives of others. > >> > >>It's all based on Risk / Reward analysis. > >> > >>Risk: You get your ass kicked. > >>Chance Risk will occur: << 0.001% > > > > I don't know, the phone books are usually pretty accurate. > > Yeah, but you have to consider the odds that DarkStar is telling the > truth and the odds that his imaginary enemy could find the site in the > first place. It's a million to one chance, but it might just work. -- Rob "Roby" Dalton http://daltonator.net ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Kazuaki Shimazaki" Date: Fri, 23 Aug 2002 07:52:36 +0800 Subject: Re: Oh, boys . . . Message-ID: -------- "C.S.Strowbridge" wrote in message news:3C337076.9040509@shaw.ca... > It's all based on Risk / Reward analysis. > > Risk: You get your ass kicked. > Chance Risk will occur: << 0.001% > > Reward: Opportunity to Mock you. > Chance Reward will occur: 99.99% Just as a hypothetical. If Robert Scott Anderson can produce proper and firm evidence to show that the chance of him getting killed outright is say 3% or more, will you still do it? ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "C.S.Strowbridge" Date: Fri, 23 Aug 2002 00:10:20 GMT Subject: Re: Oh, boys . . . Message-ID: <3C33AF9B.1040508@shaw.ca> -------- Kazuaki Shimazaki wrote: > "C.S.Strowbridge" wrote: >>It's all based on Risk / Reward analysis. >> >>Risk: You get your ass kicked. >>Chance Risk will occur: << 0.001% >> >>Reward: Opportunity to Mock you. >>Chance Reward will occur: 99.99% > > Just as a hypothetical. If Robert Scott Anderson can produce proper and firm > evidence to show that the chance of him getting killed outright is say 3% or > more, will you still do it? Yep, cause the way I see it it's 3% with RSAAP and 3% without it. If whoever is stalking him can find that page he can find the pages that information came from. Lesson to be learned: If you want to maintain a low profile stay the hell off the internet. C.S.Strowbridge ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Kazuaki Shimazaki" Date: Fri, 23 Aug 2002 11:37:06 +0800 Subject: Re: Oh, boys . . . Message-ID: -------- "C.S.Strowbridge" wrote in message news:3C33AF9B.1040508@shaw.ca... > Yep, cause the way I see it it's 3% with RSAAP and 3% without it. If > whoever is stalking him can find that page he can find the pages that > information came from. > > Lesson to be learned: If you want to maintain a low profile stay the > hell off the internet. OK, I agree. But I should have rephrased my question. Let's say he can find good evidence to say that there will be a 3% INCREASE in the chance of him getting murdered (like from 3% up to 6% or 97% up to 100%.) Personally, I still would. How about you? :-) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: setesh@aol.com (Setesh) Date: 23 Aug 2002 14:48:02 GMT Subject: Re: Oh, boys . . . Message-ID: <20020823104802.19479.00002256@mb-fs.aol.com> -------- Kazuaki Shimazaki seppuku: >Just as a hypothetical. If Robert Scott Anderson can produce proper and firm >evidence to show that the chance of him getting killed outright is say 3% or >more, will you still do it? > Everyone has a 6% chance of getting killed by random chance. Skywarp:"Starscream, What's Megatron's plan this time? Starscream:"Who cares? You just Know it's going to be evil. And evil is always fun." ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "DarkStar" Date: Wed, 21 Aug 2002 06:59:56 GMT Subject: Re: Oh, boys . . . Message-ID: -------- "Setesh" wrote in message news:20020820155516.19463.00001427@mb-fs.aol.com... > Darkstar subspaced: > > > >the warp turn argument, > > Which we're still contesting and you have been asked again for you evidence. It was provided. The argument ended the first time I posted. All that remains is Rabid Warsie whining. > > >the Romulan weapon argument > > which you still haven't proved, except by calling me an idiot for interpreting > a still shot of the Romulan ship coming dead on in the view screen as just > that. Rather than your 'its above the plane of the ship' argument which you > still have no case and in fact stopped posting when I pointed this out to you. 1. It was not dead on in the viewscreen shot. http://ocean.otr.usm.edu/~randers2/Romman2.jpg (Note how I drew the lines I suggested Wayne draw, but which he obviously chose not to.) 2. The ship's course is made plain by the fact that the stars are merging toward the center of the viewscreen (where X marks the spot above), just as they had been moving away from that point prior to the order for reverse warp. For confirmation, feel free to download the clip Wayne provided at http://h4h.com/louis/baldy2.mpv 3. It was above the plane of the ship. The fact that we can see the top of the Romulan saucer is meaningless, contrary to your opinion. Since you have utterly failed to grasp this simple concept, I shall draw it out for you: http://ocean.otr.usm.edu/~randers2/Romman.jpg (the line is the track the weapon would have to take to hit the ship . . . the pic is not intended to represent scale, but to illustrate the point). Hey, wow, guess what that would look like on the Enterprise viewscreen? http://www.trek5.com/caps/tos/09_BOT/pages/09BOT_157.htm > I especially liked your attempt to refute Wong's > turbolaser fire power yeilds and Hull strength calcs by contradicting yourself. It is either a lie or an error to claim self-contradiction on my part in those instances. Which would you prefer to claim? > > >> Oh, this is rich. Robbie is comparing himself to Hawking now? > > > >WTF? Where, oh where, do you see a comparison of myself to Hawking? > > right here > > >> > Stephen Hawking (or any other appropriate genius) could come in here and > >> > start laying down the law, and you'd pull some of your stupid arguments I say again, where do you see a comparison of myself to Hawking? At no point in the above sentence do I give any reason for you to claim such a comparison, unless you are choosing to *assume* it. > >In your mind, of course not. Fortunately, fact is not based on the opinion > >of Poe. > > No but he's a little more in touch with reality. LOL Ow, my sides! LOL > >> "Oh! There IS no official Star Wars info, only canon!" > > > >Don't bitch at me. The existing statements already made this pretty clear, > >and Lucas cinched the deal. > > And Natalie Portman is a lesbian because she likes girls as much as guys. Hmm . . . oh, sorry, what were we talking about again? :-) I already had a fine argument in play which showed the common Warsie misinterpretation of the canon policy to be questionable, at best, and a dirty lie, at worst. As I said, though, Lucas' comments were the final nail in the coffin. > >Of course not! If I were trying to keep company with people who based > >their opinions on facts, and their opinions of me on facts about me, do you > >really think I would be here? > > Since we are, let me think, YES. You're apparently trying to derail the conversation . . . first, you used humor. Then, you used Natalie Portman. Now, you're using humor again. > Since to you a 'relevent point' is to agree with you No, a relevant point is a point relevant to the topic at hand, preferably a valid one. > >The very fact that you sick fucks try to help armed and dangerous psychotic > >stalkers gather data on those you disagree with is more than sufficient > >reason for anyone to prefer anonymity. > > LOL, still clinging to the delusion of web 'anonymity' No, just the 'illusion' that people should behave ethically, maturely, et cetera. > Besides I've been attacked by trekkies in RL for speaking my opinion, no hiding, no safe > distance. I'm still not complaining. Riiiight. Based on what I've seen here, the only people likely to try to throttle an opponent in real life would be Warsies. > >What's amusing about it is how it ended up backfiring on you. > > Not a whole lot of backfire is it? After all its Kynes site so Poe can't really > be held accountable. He's the one who posted the link, and the backfire hits both of them equally. > >Nope, not a one, ever. > >http://scn.infopop.net/0/OpenTopic?a=tpc&s=526090832&f=9440964644&m=4610976 8 > >25 > > Lets look at your 'supporters', (though I notice they don't agree with you they > just don't like Wong. > > > >Razor Contacted me via e-mail long before bringing up the topic. > >Many trek fans know about this site and >Wong's arrogant attitudes. Recently > >Wong added a message board to his site > >http://www.stardestroyer.net/phpBB2/viewforum.php?f=2 >which is interesting > insofar >as you get to see how a petulant child >would run such a thing. > WTF? You'll note that he quoted my links page: http://ocean.otr.usm.edu/~randers2/STSWlinks.html > >Those he does not like get posts edited >and their personal information > altered, >and threads which refer to anything >contrary to his views get > closed, > 3 lies, your out, he 'asks' that we stop threads but the thread wasn't closed > (You just posted in it) the only other threads closed because no one posted in > them for a month. Also a quote from my page, and also correct. Posts of mine have been edited, personal info has been altered (where the hell do you think "Village Idiot" came from?), and the Death Star superlaser thread was closed in mid-stride, as have threads by others. > >after he says something about not having >time to update the site. Oh, yes, > very >impressive . . . especially when you take >into account how much time he > spends >reading and writing in the forums. > I've seen Darth Wong post 8 times total, 3 were threads he started. He has that many posts in the Death Star superlaser thread, alone. > The rest of your suppporters basically agree with him with the usual 'We hate > Wong' lines. Who hates Wong? I don't. I imagine he's probably a decent guy in some circumstances. However, when it comes to this topic, he's off his rocker. I think this says it best: http://scn.infopop.net/0/OpenTopic?a=tpc&s=526090832&f=9440964644&m=76109499 25 > >You have the massive support from the regulars . . . but then, the vast > >majority are Warsies or Rabid Warsies, anyway. You have the support of the > >rules, but that only makes sense, since it was the numerical superiority of > >the Warsies that implemented them (that's like justifying apartheid in South > >Africa because it was codified into law). > > LOL, jeez now you are joking right, apartied was because the Whites were > outnumbered by the blacks not the other way round. You're right, the analogy was a little off . . . but thanks for proving the point anyway. :-) > >When I consider the Star Wars vs. Star Trek question, I don't look at it > >from the point of view of trying to make Star Trek win, like Ian. > > *snicker* "Debate is a game. This debate is a game. The purpose is not to discover truth; the purpose is to win." - Ian "Kynes" Samuels http://groups.google.com/groups?q=g:thl3209294336d&dq=&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&se lm=lrJbO53Uh7Glz7MA8cRqh%3DPpY3G8%404ax.com > > > I don't > >try to distort canon SW facts, like you. > > *chortle* http://www.h4h.com/louis/vsfaq.html > > > In spite of idiots like you, I > >still try to be as fair as possible when considering Star Wars, leaving > >plenty of room open in case there is bias hiding in my thought process. > > *snort* http://ocean.otr.usm.edu/~randers2/STSWhi.html > > >I wasn't aware I was strutting. I argued the same ideas there as I did > >here, though I did allow myself the evil pleasure of slipping Warsie-esque > >insults and other such Warsie stupidity into my posts. If you thought I > >was strutting, it only goes to show what I have said all along . . . you > >and those who think as you do pay more attention to the presentation than > >you do to the actual meal. You sit there with an almost empty stomach and > >bad aftertaste, yet declare the meal fabulous so long as the presentation > >was good. > > > > I think DS just accused Poe of 'Style over Substance' but since that's the > general Trek argument I'm dubious. Yes, Wayne and those like him were just accused of "style over substance". > > >Right, right. Push on, little man, and keep trying to convince yourself > >that I'm wrong. One day, you might even believe it. > > > Belief is not required. When you have neither truth nor belief, that leaves your point out in the cold, doesn't it? ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: setesh@aol.com (Setesh) Date: 21 Aug 2002 20:38:07 GMT Subject: Re: Oh, boys . . . Message-ID: <20020821163807.03677.00002333@mb-fq.aol.com> -------- >1. It was not dead on in the viewscreen shot. >http://ocean.otr.usm.edu/~randers2/Romman2.jpg (Note how I drew the lines I >suggested Wayne draw, but which he obviously chose not to.) >2. The ship's course is made plain by the fact that the stars are merging >toward the center of the viewscreen (where X marks the spot above), just as >they had been moving away from that point prior to the order for reverse >warp. For confirmation, feel free to download the clip Wayne provided at >http://h4h.com/louis/baldy2.mpv >3. It was above the plane of the ship. The fact that we can see the top of >the Romulan saucer is meaningless, contrary to your opinion. Since you >have utterly failed to grasp this simple concept, I shall draw it out for >you: http://ocean.otr.usm.edu/~randers2/Romman.jpg (the line is the track >the weapon would have to take to hit the ship . . . the pic is not intended >to represent scale, but to illustrate the point). > >Hey, wow, guess what that would look like on the Enterprise viewscreen? >http://www.trek5.com/caps/tos/09_BOT/pages/09BOT_157.htm Did I say it was dead on in the view screen, no. I said its on a dead on to the enterprise. Your lines prove it was above the centerline of the CAMERA not the ships plane. Point still unproven. >It is either a lie or an error to claim self-contradiction on my part in >those instances. Which would you prefer to claim? > In one thread you argued that Wongs LTL yeild is to high, meaning the asteroids must be made of something with a lower melt/vape point that Nickel/Iron, but in the collision thread you tried to argue the asteroids were of the silicate carbide type, which has a HIGHER melting point. >I say again, where do you see a comparison of myself to Hawking? At no >point in the above sentence do I give any reason for you to claim such a >comparison, unless you are choosing to *assume* it. Di I say I thought you compared yourself to Hawkings, No. This is Poe's point talk to him. I just pointed out you did mention the Hawkman. >> No but he's a little more in touch with reality. > >LOL Ow, my sides! LOL > Jesters always laugh at themselves. >> >> "Oh! There IS no official Star Wars info, only canon!" >> > >> >Don't bitch at me. The existing statements already made this pretty >clear, >> >and Lucas cinched the deal. >> >> And Natalie Portman is a lesbian because she likes girls as much as guys. > >Hmm . . . oh, sorry, what were we talking about again? :-) >I already had a fine argument in play which showed the common Warsie >misinterpretation of the canon policy to be questionable, at best, and a >dirty lie, at worst. As I said, though, Lucas' comments were the final nail >in the coffin. Its called a comparison, the guy who reported Natalie was a lesbian used the same argument style you do, one and only one source, ignore all others. Even the Lucas Arts/Films stated Canon vs. official policy. Our version fits with everything else , yours does not. >> >Of course not! If I were trying to keep company with people who based >> >their opinions on facts, and their opinions of me on facts about me, do >you >> >really think I would be here? >> >> Since we are, let me think, YES. > >You're apparently trying to derail the conversation . . . first, you used >humor. Then, you used Natalie Portman. Now, you're using humor again. > Strategic Incompatence is trademarked. >> Since to you a 'relevent point' is to agree with you > >No, a relevant point is a point relevant to the topic at hand, preferably a >valid one. > > That's our definition care to ever make one. >> LOL, still clinging to the delusion of web 'anonymity' > >No, just the 'illusion' that people should behave ethically, maturely, et >cetera. Ethics? What's that? >> Besides I've been attacked by trekkies in RL for speaking my opinion, no >hiding, no safe >> distance. I'm still not complaining. > >Riiiight. Based on what I've seen here, the only people likely to try to >throttle an opponent in real life would be Warsies. > Try the wacko who put his Bat'leth replicat through the winshield of my girlfriends car while we were in it. Or how about the guy who turned and swung after I gave a radio show on scene my opinion of ST:FC in the theater lobby. I won't get into the Con... Point being I have never attacked someone for their opinions except through sarcasm. Excepting Jehovas Witnesses and that was only the one time, I'm sure the stains came out. >> >What's amusing about it is how it ended up backfiring on you. >> >> Not a whole lot of backfire is it? After all its Kynes site so Poe can't >really >> be held accountable. > >He's the one who posted the link, and the backfire hits both of them >equally. Not really most were 'Take the site down' something Poe can't do so it's not on him. >> >Nope, not a one, ever. >> >>http://scn.infopop.net/0/OpenTopic?a=tpc&s=526090832&f=9440964644&m=4610976 >8 >> >25 >> >> Lets look at your 'supporters', (though I notice they don't agree with you >they >> just don't like Wong. >> >> >> >Razor > >Contacted me via e-mail long before bringing up the topic. > >> >Many trek fans know about this site and >Wong's arrogant attitudes. >Recently >> >Wong added a message board to his site >> >http://www.stardestroyer.net/phpBB2/viewforum.php?f=2 >which is >interesting >> insofar >as you get to see how a petulant child >would run such a thing. >> WTF? > >You'll note that he quoted my links page: >http://ocean.otr.usm.edu/~randers2/STSWlinks.html > > >> >Those he does not like get posts edited >and their personal information >> altered, >and threads which refer to anything >contrary to his views get >> closed, >> 3 lies, your out, he 'asks' that we stop threads but the thread wasn't >closed >> (You just posted in it) the only other threads closed because no one >posted in >> them for a month. > >Also a quote from my page, and also correct. Posts of mine have been >edited, personal info has been altered (where the hell do you think "Village >Idiot" came from?), and the Death Star superlaser thread was closed in >mid-stride, as have threads by others. Village idiot isn't personal info, its a title any moderator can alter them, you cannot. the default is newbie. I will look into your claim of the DS thread but I'm dubious. >> >after he says something about not having >time to update the site. Oh, >yes, >> very >impressive . . . especially when you take >into account how much >time he >> spends >reading and writing in the forums. >> I've seen Darth Wong post 8 times total, 3 were threads he started. > >He has that many posts in the Death Star superlaser thread, alone. There's that thread I've never seen again, if it was the same argument you had with me I'll just say well, duh. >> The rest of your suppporters basically agree with him with the usual 'We >hate >> Wong' lines. > >Who hates Wong? I don't. I imagine he's probably a decent guy in some >circumstances. However, when it comes to this topic, he's off his rocker. Self describing again are ye? >http://scn.infopop.net/0/OpenTopic?a=tpc&s=526090832&f=9440964644&m=76109499 >25 > Gee what a suprise, I notice that one admits that he can't even 'understand' our points, boy color me suprised. >> >You have the massive support from the regulars . . . but then, the vast >> >majority are Warsies or Rabid Warsies, anyway. You have the support of >the >> >rules, but that only makes sense, since it was the numerical superiority >of >> >the Warsies that implemented them (that's like justifying apartheid in >South >> >Africa because it was codified into law). >> >> LOL, jeez now you are joking right, apartied was because the Whites were >> outnumbered by the blacks not the other way round. > >You're right, the analogy was a little off . . . but thanks for proving the >point anyway. :-) > I'm not going to ask how you reached the conclusion I 'proved' your point. >> >When I consider the Star Wars vs. Star Trek question, I don't look at it >> >from the point of view of trying to make Star Trek win, like Ian. >> >> *snicker* > >"Debate is a game. This debate is a game. The purpose is not to discover >truth; >the purpose is to win." > - Ian "Kynes" Samuels > >http://groups.google.com/groups?q=g:thl3209294336d&dq=&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&se >lm=lrJbO53Uh7Glz7MA8cRqh%3DPpY3G8%404ax.com > What I was snickering at went completely over your head apparently. >> >> > I don't >> >try to distort canon SW facts, like you. >> >> *chortle* > >http://www.h4h.com/louis/vsfaq.html > Ditto above replace snicker with chortle. >> >> > In spite of idiots like you, I >> >still try to be as fair as possible when considering Star Wars, leaving >> >plenty of room open in case there is bias hiding in my thought process. >> >> *snort* > >http://ocean.otr.usm.edu/~randers2/STSWhi.html Oh joy my own link to your site, I'll get to that later. >> >> >I wasn't aware I was strutting. I argued the same ideas there as I did >> >here, though I did allow myself the evil pleasure of slipping >Warsie-esque >> >insults and other such Warsie stupidity into my posts. If you thought I >> >was strutting, it only goes to show what I have said all along . . . you >> >and those who think as you do pay more attention to the presentation than >> >you do to the actual meal. You sit there with an almost empty stomach >and >> >bad aftertaste, yet declare the meal fabulous so long as the presentation >> >was good. >> > >> >> I think DS just accused Poe of 'Style over Substance' but since that's the >> general Trek argument I'm dubious. > >Yes, Wayne and those like him were just accused of "style over substance". > Ahh. >> >> >Right, right. Push on, little man, and keep trying to convince yourself >> >that I'm wrong. One day, you might even believe it. >> > >> Belief is not required. > >When you have neither truth nor belief, that leaves your point out in the >cold, doesn't it? Nope, the Sword of Truth still strikes true. Skywarp:"Starscream, What's Megatron's plan this time? Starscream:"Who cares? You just Know it's going to be evil. And evil is always fun." ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "DarkStar" Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2002 08:18:15 GMT Subject: Re: Oh, boys . . . Message-ID: -------- "Setesh" wrote in message news:20020821163807.03677.00002333@mb-fq.aol.com... > >1. It was not dead on in the viewscreen shot. > >http://ocean.otr.usm.edu/~randers2/Romman2.jpg (Note how I drew the lines I > >suggested Wayne draw, but which he obviously chose not to.) > >2. The ship's course is made plain by the fact that the stars are merging > >toward the center of the viewscreen (where X marks the spot above), just as > >they had been moving away from that point prior to the order for reverse > >warp. For confirmation, feel free to download the clip Wayne provided at > >http://h4h.com/louis/baldy2.mpv > >3. It was above the plane of the ship. The fact that we can see the top of > >the Romulan saucer is meaningless, contrary to your opinion. Since you > >have utterly failed to grasp this simple concept, I shall draw it out for > >you: http://ocean.otr.usm.edu/~randers2/Romman.jpg (the line is the track > >the weapon would have to take to hit the ship . . . the pic is not intended > >to represent scale, but to illustrate the point). > > > >Hey, wow, guess what that would look like on the Enterprise viewscreen? > >http://www.trek5.com/caps/tos/09_BOT/pages/09BOT_157.htm > > Did I say it was dead on in the view screen, no. I said its on a dead on to > the enterprise. Your lines prove it was above the centerline of the CAMERA not > the ships plane. Point still unproven. > I reiterate point #2 above, which you have ignored. > >It is either a lie or an error to claim self-contradiction on my part in > >those instances. Which would you prefer to claim? > > > > In one thread you argued that Wongs LTL yeild is to high, meaning the asteroids > must be made of something with a lower melt/vape point that Nickel/Iron, but in > the collision thread you tried to argue the asteroids were of the silicate > carbide type, which has a HIGHER melting point. There is an option you are not considering: http://ocean.otr.usm.edu/~randers2/STSWaster.html > >I say again, where do you see a comparison of myself to Hawking? At no > >point in the above sentence do I give any reason for you to claim such a > >comparison, unless you are choosing to *assume* it. > > Di I say I thought you compared yourself to Hawkings, No. This is Poe's point > talk to him. I just pointed out you did mention the Hawkman. Then next time, when I ask him for where I made a comparison, don't say "right here". > >I already had a fine argument in play which showed the common Warsie > >misinterpretation of the canon policy to be questionable, at best, and a > >dirty lie, at worst. As I said, though, Lucas' comments were the final nail > >in the coffin. > > Its called a comparison, the guy who reported Natalie was a lesbian used the > same argument style you do, one and only one source, ignore all others. You seem to be confused. It is the Rabid Warsies who opt for the "Magic Bullet" theory of evidence. Witness DasBastard's efforts in the sd.net asteroid collision thread, Wong's choice of a particular shot more powerful than all others, the fallacious Poe argument about warp stars, et cetera. I, on the other hand, opt for a more logical treatment of evidence. Sometimes, this requires that I weigh some evidence higher than others, but this is done in strict accord with canon. > Ethics? What's that? The sad part is, you could be serious. > > >> Besides I've been attacked by trekkies in RL for speaking my opinion, no > >hiding, no safe > >> distance. I'm still not complaining. > > > >Riiiight. Based on what I've seen here, the only people likely to try to > >throttle an opponent in real life would be Warsies. > > > > Try the wacko who put his Bat'leth replicat through the winshield of my > girlfriends car while we were in it. Or how about the guy who turned and swung > after I gave a radio show on scene my opinion of ST:FC in the theater lobby. I > won't get into the Con... If these events actually occurred, then you have my apologies. However, if these things have occurred, how would you feel if I had a huge billboard put up in your area giving all your pertinent information? Even better, suppose I had all of this information placed in Trekkie areas, with signs leading to the billboard? Would you find that appropriate? > >> >What's amusing about it is how it ended up backfiring on you. > >> > >> Not a whole lot of backfire is it? After all its Kynes site so Poe can't > >really > >> be held accountable. > > > >He's the one who posted the link, and the backfire hits both of them > >equally. > > Not really most were 'Take the site down' something Poe can't do so it's not on > him. Actually, it is, since he evidently got the site back up to begin with. It was down prior to that time. > Village idiot isn't personal info, its a title any moderator can alter them, > you cannot. the default is newbie. I will look into your claim of the DS > thread but I'm dubious. So, "All About DarkStar" is not personal information? I certainly can't modify it. > >When you have neither truth nor belief, that leaves your point out in the > >cold, doesn't it? > > Nope, the Sword of Truth still strikes true. And from where I sit, it looks like you must find that reeeaaallll painful. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: setesh@aol.com (Setesh) Date: 22 Aug 2002 20:58:27 GMT Subject: Re: Oh, boys . . . Message-ID: <20020822165827.08012.00001909@mb-mi.aol.com> -------- >> >2. The ship's course is made plain by the fact that the stars are >merging >> >toward the center of the viewscreen (where X marks the spot above), just >as >> >they had been moving away from that point prior to the order for reverse >> >warp. For confirmation, feel free to download the clip Wayne provided at >> >http://h4h.com/louis/baldy2.mpv >> Did I say it was dead on in the view screen, no. I said its on a dead on >to >> the enterprise. Your lines prove it was above the centerline of the >CAMERA not >> the ships plane. Point still unproven. >> > >I reiterate point #2 above, which you have ignored. My point still stands, in fact this proves you wrong. The center point would not be in view if the Romulan ship were above the plane. It is in front of the enterprise slightly above the center of the camera's view point. Or does the word Distance not appear in your vocabulary. >There is an option you are not considering: > >http://ocean.otr.usm.edu/~randers2/STSWaster.html Silicates have very poor thermal conductivity, even given the (unspecified) iron content. Given the timescale over which the energy is absorbed (1/12s), we can expect local vaporisation to occur almost immediately. This local expansion is much greater than that required to blast said asteroid apart. Since the asteroid is campletely destroyed with no fragments this is fairly inane. The "lower limit" calcs are nothing of the sort. The figure obtained is meaningless, based on a false assumptions - namely that the entire mass of the asteroid is vaporised, and that the energy is absorbed uniformly and instantly throughout the entire mass (this second assumption also flies in the face of all known physics). So you want to ignore canon, then fail to realize that non uni