---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "DarkStar" Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2002 13:53:42 GMT Subject: Cloaking Tech Message-ID: -------- http://ocean.otr.usm.edu/~randers2/STSWsmcloak.html ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: John Hansen Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2002 07:58:23 -0700 Subject: Re: Cloaking Tech Message-ID: <9kgeou8e8eu43b1hae1d8c08cftl9rabic@4ax.com> -------- "DarkStar" opened Pandora's Box (cleverly disguised as ) on Tue, 17 Sep 2002 13:53:42 GMT... >http://ocean.otr.usm.edu/~randers2/STSWsmcloak.html > Wow, such a shallow comparison. Even though a Romulan cloak can be tracked with the naked eye, yet an Imperial cloak is impervious to all forms of detection save gravity, you claim that the Romulans have superior technology. Then there's the cloaking device of Darth Maul's Sith Infiltrator, a ship smaller than the Millennium Falcon... ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Supreme Commander Tyralak Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2002 15:09:02 GMT Subject: Re: Cloaking Tech Message-ID: -------- John Hansen wrote in news:9kgeou8e8eu43b1hae1d8c08cftl9rabic@4ax.com: > "DarkStar" opened Pandora's Box (cleverly > disguised as ) on > Tue, 17 Sep 2002 13:53:42 GMT... >>http://ocean.otr.usm.edu/~randers2/STSWsmcloak.html >> > > Wow, such a shallow comparison. Even though a Romulan cloak can be > tracked with the naked eye, yet an Imperial cloak is impervious to all > forms of detection save gravity, you claim that the Romulans have > superior technology. > > Then there's the cloaking device of Darth Maul's Sith Infiltrator, a > ship smaller than the Millennium Falcon... > So, who's right? Sounds like a contradiction inside the SW canon. -- Tyralak, Supreme Commander Of The Imperial Romulan Warbird, Psionax Troll Hunter For Hire Official ASVS Token Trekkie Please Visit Troll University (Under Construction) www.trolluniversity.alturl.com [END SUBSPACE TRANSMISSION] - To e-mail, remove NOSPAM ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: nitramtahalshia@aol.comAntiSpam (Sir Nitram) Date: 17 Sep 2002 15:54:30 GMT Subject: Re: Cloaking Tech Message-ID: <20020917115430.01033.00007771@mb-mq.aol.com> -------- >John Hansen wrote in >news:9kgeou8e8eu43b1hae1d8c08cftl9rabic@4ax.com: > >> "DarkStar" opened Pandora's Box (cleverly >> disguised as ) on >> Tue, 17 Sep 2002 13:53:42 GMT... >>>http://ocean.otr.usm.edu/~randers2/STSWsmcloak.html >>> >> >> Wow, such a shallow comparison. Even though a Romulan cloak can be >> tracked with the naked eye, yet an Imperial cloak is impervious to all >> forms of detection save gravity, you claim that the Romulans have >> superior technology. >> >> Then there's the cloaking device of Darth Maul's Sith Infiltrator, a >> ship smaller than the Millennium Falcon... >> > >So, who's right? Sounds like a contradiction inside the SW canon. > More like ignorance or surprise on Needa's part. It's stated several times vessels smaller than the Falcon have cloaking devices, but this is classified info(The Emperor's shuttle, Maul's ship aren't exactly ships a naval Captain needs to know about). -- 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: "DarkStar" Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2002 17:29:07 GMT Subject: Re: Cloaking Tech Message-ID: -------- "John Hansen" wrote in message news:9kgeou8e8eu43b1hae1d8c08cftl9rabic@4ax.com... > "DarkStar" opened Pandora's Box (cleverly disguised > as ) on Tue, 17 Sep 2002 > 13:53:42 GMT... > >http://ocean.otr.usm.edu/~randers2/STSWsmcloak.html > > > > Wow, such a shallow comparison. Even though a Romulan cloak can be tracked > with the naked eye, WTF? You might be able to see it when it's actually cloaking and de-cloaking, but the only cloaked ship to leave a distortion was the Klingon Bird-of-Prey in ST3. You'll note that whatever the problem was, it was fixed by ST4, when no such distortion was visible. > yet an Imperial cloak is impervious to all forms of detection save gravity Canon proof? > Then there's the cloaking device of Darth Maul's Sith Infiltrator, a ship > smaller than the Millennium Falcon... We never saw that vessel cloak. Indeed, we've never seen any SW vessel cloak, even when it would have been handy for them to do so. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: jpmwycombe@aol.com (JPMWycombe) Date: 17 Sep 2002 17:33:31 GMT Subject: Re: Cloaking Tech Message-ID: <20020917133331.10531.00004404@mb-cp.aol.com> -------- >> yet an Imperial cloak is impervious to all forms of detection save gravity > >Canon proof? CGT Traps- from The Thrawn trilogy >> Then there's the cloaking device of Darth Maul's Sith Infiltrator, a ship >> smaller than the Millennium Falcon... > >We never saw that vessel cloak. Indeed, we've never seen any SW vessel >cloak, even when it would have been handy for them to do so. Infiltrator did not cloak and has no cloak- it has sensor stealth but that's it. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "DarkStar" Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2002 18:11:35 GMT Subject: Re: Cloaking Tech Message-ID: -------- "JPMWycombe" wrote in message news:20020917133331.10531.00004404@mb-cp.aol.com... > >> yet an Imperial cloak is impervious to all forms of detection save gravity > > > >Canon proof? > > CGT Traps- from The Thrawn trilogy Allow me to repeat: "Canon proof?" ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: jpmwycombe@aol.com (JPMWycombe) Date: 17 Sep 2002 18:16:25 GMT Subject: Re: Cloaking Tech Message-ID: <20020917141625.10531.00004409@mb-cp.aol.com> -------- Cloaks in trek are only mentioned in passing in TESB. So we don't know anything about them ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: DasBastard Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2002 18:26:12 GMT Subject: Re: Cloaking Tech Message-ID: -------- On Tue, 17 Sep 2002 18:11:35 GMT, "DarkStar" wrote: > >> yet an Imperial cloak is impervious to all forms of detection save >gravity >> > >> >Canon proof? >> >> CGT Traps- from The Thrawn trilogy > >Allow me to repeat: "Canon proof?" > > Your ignorance apparently extends to the Rules & Regulations. Ofiicial sources are accepted in ASVS in accordance with Lucasfilm's continuity policy. Perhaps there should be a tag to indicate threads in which alternate, personal, admissability rulesets (such as yours) will be used. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "DarkStar" Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2002 20:21:04 GMT Subject: Re: Cloaking Tech Message-ID: -------- "DasBastard" wrote in message news:pqseousr03ctbnueuvbmtc1ioo67cgsv03@4ax.com... > On Tue, 17 Sep 2002 18:11:35 GMT, "DarkStar" > wrote: > > > >> yet an Imperial cloak is impervious to all forms of detection save > >gravity > >> > > >> >Canon proof? > >> > >> CGT Traps- from The Thrawn trilogy > > > >Allow me to repeat: "Canon proof?" > > > > > > Your ignorance apparently extends to the Rules & Regulations. He's discussing my site. > Ofiicial sources are accepted in ASVS True > in accordance with Lucasfilm's > continuity policy. False. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: DasBastard Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2002 20:46:06 GMT Subject: Re: Cloaking Tech Message-ID: -------- On Tue, 17 Sep 2002 20:21:04 GMT, "DarkStar" wrote: >He's discussing my site. On ASvS. >> Ofiicial sources are accepted in ASVS > >True > >> in accordance with Lucasfilm's >> continuity policy. > >False. If only your saying so made it so, eh, sparky? ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "DarkStar" Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2002 23:13:23 GMT Subject: Re: Cloaking Tech Message-ID: -------- "DasBastard" wrote in message news:vp4fousvsuiuuostbd8nieooo2frk8pc48@4ax.com... > On Tue, 17 Sep 2002 20:21:04 GMT, "DarkStar" > wrote: > > >He's discussing my site. > > On ASvS. My site. Which means I can ask for canon proof if I so desire. > > >> Ofiicial sources are accepted in ASVS > > > >True > > > >> in accordance with Lucasfilm's > >> continuity policy. > > > >False. > > If only your saying so made it so, eh, sparky? Fortunately, I didn't have to say so. It was said for me by those who are in charge of such things. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "C.S.Strowbridge" Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2002 00:53:23 GMT Subject: Re: Cloaking Tech Message-ID: <3D87CE48.6030509@shaw.ca> -------- DarkStar wrote: > "DasBastard" wrote: >> "DarkStar" wrote: >>>He's discussing my site. >> >>On ASvS. > > My site. Which means I can ask for canon proof if I so desire. Except you posted it here. >>>>in accordance with Lucasfilm's >>>>continuity policy. >>> >>>False. >> >>If only your saying so made it so, eh, sparky? > > Fortunately, I didn't have to say so. It was said for me by those who are > in charge of such things. False. No one has stated that the canon policy does not include official material. People have stated that the canon policy does include official material. Others have mentioned that canon only includes the movies. Or the movies, scripts, novelizations and Radio dramas. George Lucas has said the books, etc. do intrude into his universe, just not during the time of the movies. C.S.Strowbridge ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "DarkStar" Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2002 03:31:35 GMT Subject: Re: Cloaking Tech Message-ID: -------- "C.S.Strowbridge" wrote in message news:3D87CE48.6030509@shaw.ca... > DarkStar wrote: > > "DasBastard" wrote: > >> "DarkStar" wrote: > > >>>He's discussing my site. > >> > >>On ASvS. > > > > My site. Which means I can ask for canon proof if I so desire. > > Except you posted it here. Yeah, and we're talking about my site. I didn't tell him that the non-canon was disallowed, or that he was a bastard for using it. I simply asked for canon proof. > No one has stated that the canon policy does not include official > material. False. Refer to Lucas, Cerasi, etc. > People have stated that the canon policy does include official > material. Somewhat accurate. Refer to Rostoni and her peculiar phrasing. > George Lucas has said the books, etc. do intrude into his universe, just > not during the time of the movies. Unfortunately, that doesn't suggest anything like what you need it to mean. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Cmdrwilkens" Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2002 01:55:55 -0400 Subject: Re: Cloaking Tech Message-ID: -------- "DarkStar" wrote in message news:rsSh9.106822$z91.4248377@bin3.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com... > > "C.S.Strowbridge" wrote in message > news:3D87CE48.6030509@shaw.ca... > > DarkStar wrote: > > > No one has stated that the canon policy does not include official > > material. > > False. Refer to Lucas, Cerasi, etc. True. Refer to Lucas, Sansweet, SW:Insider, etc. -- Lcpl Burnett, G.R. USMCR BridgeCo B 6th EngSptBN 4th FSSG "Weapons do not penetrate armour based on force and pressure" - IXJac(taken from SB.com and SD.net) "I'm a genocidal maniac, hold me." -Anakin Vader ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "C.S.Strowbridge" Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2002 06:19:44 GMT Subject: Re: Cloaking Tech Message-ID: <3D881AC8.6010705@shaw.ca> -------- DarkStar wrote: > "C.S.Strowbridge" wrote: >>>>>He's discussing my site. >>>> >>>>On ASvS. >>> >>>My site. Which means I can ask for canon proof if I so desire. >> >>Except you posted it here. > > Yeah, and we're talking about my site. I didn't tell him that the > non-canon was disallowed, or that he was a bastard for using it. I simply > asked for canon proof. And you can't do that in ASVS. >>No one has stated that the canon policy does not include official >>material. > > False. Refer to Lucas, Cerasi, etc. Wrong. They weren't talking about Canon Policy. >>People have stated that the canon policy does include official >>material. > > Somewhat accurate. Refer to Rostoni and her peculiar phrasing. And others. Including the Star Wars Encyclopedia. >>George Lucas has said the books, etc. do intrude into his universe, just >>not during the time of the movies. > > Unfortunately, that doesn't suggest anything like what you need it to mean. It fits our theory better than yours. And considering we have direct confirmation from an actual Star Wars author it's all we need. C.S.Strowbridge ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "DarkStar" Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2002 07:54:44 GMT Subject: Re: Cloaking Tech Message-ID: <8jWh9.111504$z91.4454539@bin3.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com> -------- "C.S.Strowbridge" wrote in message news:3D881AC8.6010705@shaw.ca... > DarkStar wrote: > > "C.S.Strowbridge" wrote: > > >>>>>He's discussing my site. > >>>> > >>>>On ASvS. > >>> > >>>My site. Which means I can ask for canon proof if I so desire. > >> > >>Except you posted it here. > > > > Yeah, and we're talking about my site. I didn't tell him that the > > non-canon was disallowed, or that he was a bastard for using it. I simply > > asked for canon proof. > > And you can't do that in ASVS. Are you saying a person can't ask for canon proof ?!? That's crazy, and nowhere is it encoded or suggested in the ASVS rules that I have found. > > >>No one has stated that the canon policy does not include official > >>material. > > > > False. Refer to Lucas, Cerasi, etc. > > Wrong. They weren't talking about Canon Policy. WTF? > > >>People have stated that the canon policy does include official > >>material. > > > > Somewhat accurate. Refer to Rostoni and her peculiar phrasing. > > And others. Including the Star Wars Encyclopedia. Sansweet referred to "quasi-canon" and "official" in 1998's Encyclopedia. You sure as hell don't see that in his 2001 StarWars.com quote, do you? So, not only was it out of an intro to an encyclopedia (which, for consistency's sake, should cause you to ignore it), but it also is unsupported by any higher statements, including his own. > >>George Lucas has said the books, etc. do intrude into his universe, just > >>not during the time of the movies. > > > > Unfortunately, that doesn't suggest anything like what you need it to mean. > > It fits our theory better than yours. It does nothing of the sort. It makes absolutely no sense under your theory, because licensed materials (including EU works) *have* intruded on his chosen time period. Your attempt to use "intrude" to override "other world" and "parallel universe" fails as a result. > And considering we have direct > confirmation from an actual Star Wars author it's all we need. An EU author is obviously going to think the EU is fine . . . that's their job. It's a different standard, and it does not override Lucas. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "C.S.Strowbridge" Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2002 15:59:34 GMT Subject: Re: Cloaking Tech Message-ID: <3D88A2B3.3080105@shaw.ca> -------- DarkStar wrote: > "C.S.Strowbridge" wrote: >>>>>>>He's discussing my site. >>>>>> >>>>>>On ASvS. >>>>> >>>>>My site. Which means I can ask for canon proof if I so desire. >>>> >>>>Except you posted it here. >>> >>>Yeah, and we're talking about my site. I didn't tell him that the >>>non-canon was disallowed, or that he was a bastard for using it. I >>>simply asked for canon proof. >> >>And you can't do that in ASVS. > > Are you saying a person can't ask for canon proof ?!? That's crazy, and > nowhere is it encoded or suggested in the ASVS rules that I have found. You can't choose to restrict Star Wars to canon anymore than I can restrict Star Trek to Pre-B&B era. >>>>No one has stated that the canon policy does not include official >>>>material. >>> >>>False. Refer to Lucas, Cerasi, etc. >> >>Wrong. They weren't talking about Canon Policy. > > WTF? Read the quote. >>>>People have stated that the canon policy does include official >>>>material. >>> >>>Somewhat accurate. Refer to Rostoni and her peculiar phrasing. >> >>And others. Including the Star Wars Encyclopedia. > > Sansweet referred to "quasi-canon" and "official" in 1998's Encyclopedia. > You sure as hell don't see that in his 2001 StarWars.com quote, do you? Which talks about canon only. Not Star Wars Canon Policy. > So, not only was it out of an intro to an encyclopedia (which, for > consistency's sake, should cause you to ignore it), but it also is > unsupported by any higher statements, including his own. So you have to see a direct quote several times before you believe it. >>>>George Lucas has said the books, etc. do intrude into his universe, just >>>>not during the time of the movies. >>> >>>Unfortunately, that doesn't suggest anything like what you need it to >>>mean. > >>It fits our theory better than yours. > > It does nothing of the sort. It makes absolutely no sense under your > theory, because licensed materials (including EU works) *have* intruded on > his chosen time period. Your attempt to use "intrude" to override "other > world" and "parallel universe" fails as a result. And the term 'Quasi-Canon' makes your interpretation of "other world" and "parellel universe" fail. >>And considering we have direct >>confirmation from an actual Star Wars author it's all we need. > > An EU author is obviously going to think the EU is fine . . . that's their > job. It's a different standard, and it does not override Lucas. Fuck you, bitch. They are not telling us what they think, they are telling us what they were told. End of story. You lose. C.S.Strowbridge ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "DarkStar" Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2002 20:44:50 GMT Subject: Re: Cloaking Tech Message-ID: <6B5i9.131326$5r1.5187856@bin5.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com> -------- "C.S.Strowbridge" wrote in message news:3D88A2B3.3080105@shaw.ca... > DarkStar wrote: > > "C.S.Strowbridge" wrote: > > >>>>>>>He's discussing my site. > >>>>>> > >>>>>>On ASvS. > >>>>> > >>>>>My site. Which means I can ask for canon proof if I so desire. > >>>> > >>>>Except you posted it here. > >>> > >>>Yeah, and we're talking about my site. I didn't tell him that the > >>>non-canon was disallowed, or that he was a bastard for using it. I > >>>simply asked for canon proof. > >> > >>And you can't do that in ASVS. > > > > Are you saying a person can't ask for canon proof ?!? That's crazy, and > > nowhere is it encoded or suggested in the ASVS rules that I have found. > > You can't choose to restrict Star Wars to canon anymore than I can > restrict Star Trek to Pre-B&B era. My question of him involved no restriction. I simply asked if there was canon proof of his statement. That would be no different than you asking "hey, was that seen in TNG?" > >>>>People have stated that the canon policy does include official > >>>>material. > >>> > >>>Somewhat accurate. Refer to Rostoni and her peculiar phrasing. > >> > >>And others. Including the Star Wars Encyclopedia. > > > > Sansweet referred to "quasi-canon" and "official" in 1998's Encyclopedia. > > You sure as hell don't see that in his 2001 StarWars.com quote, do you? > > Which talks about canon only. Not Star Wars Canon Policy. What kind of insane loophole are you trying to slip through now? Praytell, what are the requirements, in your mind, for a quote regarding Canon Policy, hmmm? > > So, not only was it out of an intro to an encyclopedia (which, for > > consistency's sake, should cause you to ignore it), but it also is > > unsupported by any higher statements, including his own. > > So you have to see a direct quote several times before you believe it. What? > > >>>>George Lucas has said the books, etc. do intrude into his universe, just > >>>>not during the time of the movies. > >>> > >>>Unfortunately, that doesn't suggest anything like what you need it to > >>>mean. > > > >>It fits our theory better than yours. > > > > It does nothing of the sort. It makes absolutely no sense under your > > theory, because licensed materials (including EU works) *have* intruded on > > his chosen time period. Your attempt to use "intrude" to override "other > > world" and "parallel universe" fails as a result. > > And the term 'Quasi-Canon' makes your interpretation of "other world" > and "parellel universe" fail. It does nothing of the sort. The encyclopedia intro does not override stated Canon Policy. Or do you wish to simply confess to your inconsistency now? > >>And considering we have direct > >>confirmation from an actual Star Wars author it's all we need. > > > > An EU author is obviously going to think the EU is fine . . . that's their > > job. It's a different standard, and it does not override Lucas. > > Fuck you, bitch. They are not telling us what they think, they are > telling us what they were told. What they are told is irrelevant. An EU author will, by default, be expected to use the EU. That is its nature. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "C.S.Strowbridge" Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2002 22:59:51 GMT Subject: Re: Cloaking Tech Message-ID: <3D890569.8040302@shaw.ca> -------- DarkStar wrote: > "C.S.Strowbridge" wrote: >>You can't choose to restrict Star Wars to canon anymore than I can >>restrict Star Trek to Pre-B&B era. > > My question of him involved no restriction. I simply asked if there was > canon proof of his statement. That would be no different than you asking > "hey, was that seen in TNG?" Oh bullshit. Your intent was clear. You're still trying to limit Star Wars to canon. >>>>>>People have stated that the canon policy does include official >>>>>>material. >>>>> >>>>>Somewhat accurate. Refer to Rostoni and her peculiar phrasing. >>>> >>>>And others. Including the Star Wars Encyclopedia. >>> >>>Sansweet referred to "quasi-canon" and "official" in 1998's >>>Encyclopedia. You sure as hell don't see that in his 2001 StarWars.com quote, do you? >> >>Which talks about canon only. Not Star Wars Canon Policy. > > What kind of insane loophole are you trying to slip through now? Praytell, > what are the requirements, in your mind, for a quote regarding Canon Policy, > hmmm? SW Insider is a perfect quote. It talks about canon, it talks about official and how the two interact. Any single quote could just talk about Canon or just talk about Official. In fact, I think one quote you gave does just that. It says how, when it comes to books, those with the Infinities logo are not part of the Star Wars continuity. (Which most people would interpret as the exception that proves the rule.) Also, most of the quotes are casual in nature. They are not specific on the topic of Star Wars Canon Policy. >>>So, not only was it out of an intro to an encyclopedia (which, for >>>consistency's sake, should cause you to ignore it), but it also is >>>unsupported by any higher statements, including his own. >> >>So you have to see a direct quote several times before you believe it. > > What? You don't need a direct quote supported by other people, as long as it is not directly contradicted. If, on the other hand, you have indirect quotes that you interpret as contradictory then it's your interpretation that is thrown out, not the quotes. >>>>>>George Lucas has said the books, etc. do intrude into his universe, >>>>>>just not during the time of the movies. >>>>> >>>>>Unfortunately, that doesn't suggest anything like what you need it to >>>>>mean. >> >>>>It fits our theory better than yours. >>> >>>It does nothing of the sort. It makes absolutely no sense under your >>>theory, because licensed materials (including EU works) *have* intruded >>>on his chosen time period. Your attempt to use "intrude" to override >>>"other world" and "parallel universe" fails as a result. >> >>And the term 'Quasi-Canon' makes your interpretation of "other world" >>and "parellel universe" fail. > > It does nothing of the sort. The encyclopedia intro does not override > stated Canon Policy. Or do you wish to simply confess to your > inconsistency now? And you have _never_ supplied the stated Canon Policy. You have quotes that are dealing with related, but not direct questions. George Lucas has never said, 'Only the movies are Star Wars Fact. All other sources are Star Wars Fiction holding no more weight then a fan fic.' Unlike Star Trek, which we do have that exact quote. (If you replace Wars with Trek.) Anywho, we have quotes that both sides are using. (Sides? It makes it sound like there is someone else arguing with you.) One the one side, we have several direct quotes, (Quasi-Canon is pretty hard to argue against, that's why you are so bent on ignoring it.) We also direct quotes from Star Wars authors that agree with our 'interpretation' of those quotes. One your side, you have several quotes that you have interpreted as meaning, 'There is no Staw Wars Official. It's canon or nothing, baby.' (Ok, I might have added that last part.) We, on the other hand, interpret those quotes as saying, 'Canon is and Official are two separate classifications. Canon can ignore anything that happens in the books, and the Canon becomes the new facts. So stop asking why George Lucas's version of Boba Fett's background is different than what was said in the books. It's pissing him off.' >>>>And considering we have direct >>>>confirmation from an actual Star Wars author it's all we need. >>> >>>An EU author is obviously going to think the EU is fine . . . that's >>>their job. It's a different standard, and it does not override Lucas. >> >>Fuck you, bitch. They are not telling us what they think, they are >>telling us what they were told. > > What they are told is irrelevant. What they are told is the Official Star Wars Canon Policy. I'm sure you want it to be irrelevant, but it's not. C.S.Strowbridge ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "DarkStar" Date: Thu, 19 Sep 2002 01:11:49 GMT Subject: Re: Cloaking Tech Message-ID: -------- "C.S.Strowbridge" wrote in message news:3D890569.8040302@shaw.ca... > DarkStar wrote: > > "C.S.Strowbridge" wrote: > > >>You can't choose to restrict Star Wars to canon anymore than I can > >>restrict Star Trek to Pre-B&B era. > > > > My question of him involved no restriction. I simply asked if there was > > canon proof of his statement. That would be no different than you asking > > "hey, was that seen in TNG?" > > Oh bullshit. Your intent was clear. Funny, since my intent and what you're saying it was are two different things. > >>>>>>People have stated that the canon policy does include official > >>>>>>material. > >>>>> > >>>>>Somewhat accurate. Refer to Rostoni and her peculiar phrasing. > >>>> > >>>>And others. Including the Star Wars Encyclopedia. > >>> > >>>Sansweet referred to "quasi-canon" and "official" in 1998's > >>>Encyclopedia. You sure as hell don't see that in his 2001 StarWars.com quote, do you? > >> > >>Which talks about canon only. Not Star Wars Canon Policy. > > > > What kind of insane loophole are you trying to slip through now? Praytell, > > what are the requirements, in your mind, for a quote regarding Canon Policy, > > hmmm? > > SW Insider is a perfect quote. It talks about canon, it talks about > official and how the two interact. No mention is made of "official". > Any single quote could just talk > about Canon or just talk about Official. In fact, I think one quote you > gave does just that. It says how, when it comes to books, those with the > Infinities logo are not part of the Star Wars continuity. It also talks about Canon, the EU, and the relationship between them . . . just like Lucas quotes. > >>>So, not only was it out of an intro to an encyclopedia (which, for > >>>consistency's sake, should cause you to ignore it), but it also is > >>>unsupported by any higher statements, including his own. > >> > >>So you have to see a direct quote several times before you believe it. > > > > What? > > You don't need a direct quote supported by other people, as long as it > is not directly contradicted. If, on the other hand, you have indirect > quotes that you interpret as contradictory then it's your interpretation > that is thrown out, not the quotes. Sansweet's position is directly contradicted, most notably by Sansweet himself. > >>>>>>George Lucas has said the books, etc. do intrude into his universe, > >>>>>>just not during the time of the movies. > >>>>> > >>>>>Unfortunately, that doesn't suggest anything like what you need it to > >>>>>mean. > >> > >>>>It fits our theory better than yours. > >>> > >>>It does nothing of the sort. It makes absolutely no sense under your > >>>theory, because licensed materials (including EU works) *have* intruded > >>>on his chosen time period. Your attempt to use "intrude" to override > >>>"other world" and "parallel universe" fails as a result. > >> > >>And the term 'Quasi-Canon' makes your interpretation of "other world" > >>and "parellel universe" fail. > > > > It does nothing of the sort. The encyclopedia intro does not override > > stated Canon Policy. Or do you wish to simply confess to your > > inconsistency now? > > And you have _never_ supplied the stated Canon Policy. False. > You have quotes > that are dealing with related, but not direct questions. False. > George Lucas > has never said, 'Only the movies are Star Wars Fact. All other sources > are Star Wars Fiction holding no more weight then a fan fic.' No, but he said the EU universe was not the same as his own, which is good enough. > Unlike Star Trek, which we do have that exact quote. (If you replace > Wars with Trek.) No, you don't. > One the one side, we have several direct quotes, (Quasi-Canon is pretty > hard to argue against, that's why you are so bent on ignoring it.) No, you're bent on ignoring it. If you understood consistency you would see why. > We > also direct quotes from Star Wars authors that agree with our > 'interpretation' of those quotes. No, you have Star Wars author quotes which support my contention on the EU's Continuity. > >>Fuck you, bitch. They are not telling us what they think, they are > >>telling us what they were told. > > > > What they are told is irrelevant. > > What they are told is the Official Star Wars Canon Policy. No, it's the Continuity policy of the EU, no different than an author of one of the Trek "New Frontier" books having to have some idea what the hell New Frontier is about. There's a big difference. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "C.S.Strowbridge" Date: Thu, 19 Sep 2002 07:07:40 GMT Subject: Re: Cloaking Tech Message-ID: <3D8977C2.3080306@shaw.ca> -------- DarkStar wrote: > "C.S.Strowbridge" wrote: >>>>You can't choose to restrict Star Wars to canon anymore than I can >>>>restrict Star Trek to Pre-B&B era. >>> >>>My question of him involved no restriction. I simply asked if there >>>was canon proof of his statement. That would be no different than you >>>asking "hey, was that seen in TNG?" >> >>Oh bullshit. Your intent was clear. > > Funny, since my intent and what you're saying it was are two different > things. Funny, since your intent and what you claim it is are two different things. >>>>Which talks about canon only. Not Star Wars Canon Policy. >>> >>>What kind of insane loophole are you trying to slip through now? >>>Praytell, what are the requirements, in your mind, for a quote regarding Canon >>>Policy, hmmm? >> >>SW Insider is a perfect quote. It talks about canon, it talks about >>official and how the two interact. > > No mention is made of "official". No, I don't think that term is ever used, that's an invention of ASVS. 'Quasi-Canon' is a term used, but generally the classification is described but never named. >>Any single quote could just talk >>about Canon or just talk about Official. In fact, I think one quote you >>gave does just that. It says how, when it comes to books, those with the >> Infinities logo are not part of the Star Wars continuity. > > It also talks about Canon, the EU, and the relationship between them . . . > just like Lucas quotes. And all Lucas says is the EU is not canon. Not shit. >>>>>So, not only was it out of an intro to an encyclopedia (which, for >>>>>consistency's sake, should cause you to ignore it), but it also is >>>>>unsupported by any higher statements, including his own. >>>> >>>>So you have to see a direct quote several times before you believe it. >>> >>>What? >> >>You don't need a direct quote supported by other people, as long as it >>is not directly contradicted. If, on the other hand, you have indirect >>quotes that you interpret as contradictory then it's your interpretation >>that is thrown out, not the quotes. > > Sansweet's position is directly contradicted, most notably by Sansweet > himself. No. Your interpretation of Sansweet's position contradicts a direct statement on the subject. >>>>>>>>George Lucas has said the books, etc. do intrude into his universe, >>>>>>>>just not during the time of the movies. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Unfortunately, that doesn't suggest anything like what you need it to >>>>>>>mean. >>>>>> >>>>>>It fits our theory better than yours. >>>>> >>>>>It does nothing of the sort. It makes absolutely no sense under your >>>>>theory, because licensed materials (including EU works) *have* intruded >>>>>on his chosen time period. Your attempt to use "intrude" to override >>>>>"other world" and "parallel universe" fails as a result. >>>> >>>>And the term 'Quasi-Canon' makes your interpretation of "other world" >>>>and "parellel universe" fail. >>> >>>It does nothing of the sort. The encyclopedia intro does not override >>>stated Canon Policy. Or do you wish to simply confess to your >>>inconsistency now? >> >>And you have _never_ supplied the stated Canon Policy. > > False. > >>You have quotes >>that are dealing with related, but not direct questions. > > False. You do realize one word responses are banned by the R&R. >>George Lucas >>has never said, 'Only the movies are Star Wars Fact. All other sources >>are Star Wars Fiction holding no more weight then a fan fic.' > > No, but he said the EU universe was not the same as his own, which is good > enough. And he's also given licensing rights with the expressed purpose of expanding his universe. That's good enough for me. >>Unlike Star Trek, which we do have that exact quote. (If you replace >>Wars with Trek.) > > No, you don't. Yep. Ordover said so. >>One the one side, we have several direct quotes, (Quasi-Canon is pretty >>hard to argue against, that's why you are so bent on ignoring it.) > > No, you're bent on ignoring it. Excuse me? If I'm trying to ignore it why do I keep bringing it up? >>We also direct quotes from Star Wars authors that agree with our >>'interpretation' of those quotes. > > No, you have Star Wars author quotes which support my contention on > the EU's Continuity. Wrong. Wrong. Wrong. You haven't talked to these authors. You don't know what they said. You can't claim their quotes support your claim. But of course, at this point you are more than willing to lie to support you bullshit theory. >>>>Fuck you, bitch. They are not telling us what they think, they are >>>>telling us what they were told. >>> >>>What they are told is irrelevant. >> >>What they are told is the Official Star Wars Canon Policy. > > No, it's the Continuity policy of the EU, Nope. That's not what they are told they are told. Now, unless you want to claim the authors are lied to but LucasFlim et al ... C.S.Strowbridge ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "C.S.Strowbridge" Date: Thu, 19 Sep 2002 07:10:49 GMT Subject: Re: Cloaking Tech Message-ID: <3D897880.2050909@shaw.ca> -------- This needs to be emphasized in a separate message. >>We also direct quotes from Star Wars authors that agree with our >>'interpretation' of those quotes. > > No, you have Star Wars author quotes which support my contention on > the EU's Continuity. Wrong. Wrong. Wrong. You haven't talked to these authors. You don't know what they said. You can't claim their quotes support your claim. But of course, at this point you are more than willing to lie to support you bullshit theory. C.S.Strowbridge ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: strikeforce16m@yahoo.com (strikeforce) Date: Fri, 20 Sep 2002 03:58:08 GMT Subject: Re: Cloaking Tech Message-ID: <3d8a9bf4.35272653@basic.bs.webusenet.com> -------- > >One your side, you have several quotes that you have interpreted as >meaning, 'There is no Staw Wars Official. It's canon or nothing, baby.' >(Ok, I might have added that last part.) We, on the other hand, >interpret those quotes as saying, 'Canon is and Official are two >separate classifications. Canon can ignore anything that happens in the >books, and the Canon becomes the new facts. So stop asking why George >Lucas's version of Boba Fett's background is different than what was >said in the books. It's pissing him off.' > I have only bought few Star Wars books. I like all the "Tales from..." books, and the one book I got before "Boba Fett's official history" came out in the prequels that talks about Boba Fett's past is, "Tales from Jabba's Palace", and the only thing I remember reading about Boba Fett's past is that we don't know it. (I interpreted that to mean that the author was told not to say anything because its coming out in the prequels). So what books was Boba Fett's background was said in and what was said that your talking about? Unless your talking about what I'm talking about. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: strikeforce16m@yahoo.com (strikeforce) Date: Fri, 20 Sep 2002 04:06:42 GMT Subject: Re: Cloaking Tech Message-ID: <3d8a9ed1.36006104@basic.bs.webusenet.com> -------- Well now that I think about it, at that time I thought the author didn't know and neither did Lucas what Boba Fett's background was. And maybe thats what they wanted until Lucas decided to do the prequels... Didn't Boba Fett having such a big part in the prequels come about because all these people loved him from the other movies? On Fri, 20 Sep 2002 03:58:08 GMT, strikeforce16m@yahoo.com (strikeforce) wrote: > > >> >>One your side, you have several quotes that you have interpreted as >>meaning, 'There is no Staw Wars Official. It's canon or nothing, baby.' >>(Ok, I might have added that last part.) We, on the other hand, >>interpret those quotes as saying, 'Canon is and Official are two >>separate classifications. Canon can ignore anything that happens in the >>books, and the Canon becomes the new facts. So stop asking why George >>Lucas's version of Boba Fett's background is different than what was >>said in the books. It's pissing him off.' >> > > >I have only bought few Star Wars books. I like all the "Tales from..." >books, and the one book I got before "Boba Fett's official history" >came out in the prequels that talks about Boba Fett's past is, "Tales >from Jabba's Palace", and the only thing I remember reading about Boba >Fett's past is that we don't know it. (I interpreted that to mean that >the author was told not to say anything because its coming out in the >prequels). So what books was Boba Fett's background was said in and >what was said that your talking about? Unless your talking about what >I'm talking about. > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: DasBastard Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2002 00:56:03 GMT Subject: Re: Cloaking Tech Message-ID: -------- On Tue, 17 Sep 2002 23:13:23 GMT, "DarkStar" wrote: >My site. Which means I can ask for canon proof if I so desire. You can ask for it all you like, but you are in violation of the R&R. Therefore, you lose. >Fortunately, I didn't have to say so. True... you could have shut the fuck up instead. >It was said for me by those who are >in charge of such things. False. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "DarkStar" Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2002 03:33:31 GMT Subject: Re: Cloaking Tech Message-ID: -------- "DasBastard" wrote in message news:mljfouoaklv0btlk8f23hh00gjjli2487l@4ax.com... > On Tue, 17 Sep 2002 23:13:23 GMT, "DarkStar" > wrote: > > > >My site. Which means I can ask for canon proof if I so desire. > > You can ask for it all you like, but you are in violation of the R&R. Simply asking for canon proof is a violation? Bull. You'll note that I didn't tell him he was wrong or stupid for using the non-canon . . . I just asked for canon proof. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "C.S.Strowbridge" Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2002 06:20:39 GMT Subject: Re: Cloaking Tech Message-ID: <3D881AFF.7000902@shaw.ca> -------- DarkStar wrote: > "DasBastard" wrote: >>>My site. Which means I can ask for canon proof if I so desire. >> >>You can ask for it all you like, but you are in violation of the R&R. > > Simply asking for canon proof is a violation? Bull. You'll note that I > didn't tell him he was wrong or stupid for using the non-canon . . . I just > asked for canon proof. And limiting Star Wars to Canon is against the R&R. I should know, as ASVS Master it's my fucking job. C.S.Strowbridge ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "DarkStar" Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2002 07:57:46 GMT Subject: Re: Cloaking Tech Message-ID: <_lWh9.5368$216.208214@bin4.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com> -------- "C.S.Strowbridge" wrote in message news:3D881AFF.7000902@shaw.ca... > DarkStar wrote: > > "DasBastard" wrote: > > >>>My site. Which means I can ask for canon proof if I so desire. > >> > >>You can ask for it all you like, but you are in violation of the R&R. > > > > Simply asking for canon proof is a violation? Bull. You'll note that I > > didn't tell him he was wrong or stupid for using the non-canon . . . I just > > asked for canon proof. > > And limiting Star Wars to Canon is against the R&R. I didn't limit him. I asked him for canon proof. Or have you forgotten that for "the real story of Star Wars, you must turn to the films - and only the films"? ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "C.S.Strowbridge" Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2002 16:01:42 GMT Subject: Re: Cloaking Tech Message-ID: <3D88A332.5090904@shaw.ca> -------- DarkStar wrote: > "C.S.Strowbridge" wrote: >>And limiting Star Wars to Canon is against the R&R. > > I didn't limit him. I asked him for canon proof. Ignoring any official proof out there. Therefor limiting Star Wars to Canon. > Or have you forgotten that for "the real story of Star Wars, you must > turn to the films - and only the films"? And have you forgotten the SW Insider quote? C.S.Strowbridge ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "His Divine Shadow" Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2002 20:51:14 GMT Subject: Re: Cloaking Tech Message-ID: <6BMh9.437$Ug1.25032@read2.inet.fi> -------- "DarkStar" wrote in message news:Q8Mh9.100699$AR1.3903446@bin2.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com... > > "DasBastard" wrote in message > news:pqseousr03ctbnueuvbmtc1ioo67cgsv03@4ax.com... > > On Tue, 17 Sep 2002 18:11:35 GMT, "DarkStar" > > wrote: > > > > > >> yet an Imperial cloak is impervious to all forms of detection save > > >gravity > > >> > > > >> >Canon proof? > > >> > > >> CGT Traps- from The Thrawn trilogy > > > > > >Allow me to repeat: "Canon proof?" > > > > > > > > > > Your ignorance apparently extends to the Rules & Regulations. > > He's discussing my site. > > > Ofiicial sources are accepted in ASVS > > True > > > in accordance with Lucasfilm's > > continuity policy. > > False. Actually, that would be false too, hasn't GL come and kicked you in the nuts yet for daring to deface his work and his words? If not, he really should. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Dalton Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2002 17:14:12 -0400 Subject: Re: Cloaking Tech Message-ID: <3D879B24.4A0A42DC@daltonator.net> -------- DarkStar wrote: > > "DasBastard" wrote in message > news:pqseousr03ctbnueuvbmtc1ioo67cgsv03@4ax.com... > > On Tue, 17 Sep 2002 18:11:35 GMT, "DarkStar" > > wrote: > > > > > >> yet an Imperial cloak is impervious to all forms of detection save > > >gravity > > >> > > > >> >Canon proof? > > >> > > >> CGT Traps- from The Thrawn trilogy > > > > > >Allow me to repeat: "Canon proof?" > > > > > > > > > > Your ignorance apparently extends to the Rules & Regulations. > > He's discussing my site. > > > Ofiicial sources are accepted in ASVS > > True > > > in accordance with Lucasfilm's > > continuity policy. > > False. Shut up, bitch. -- Rob "Roby" Dalton http://daltonator.net "All tribal myths are true, for a given value of 'true'." --"The Last Continent", Terry Pratchett ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "DarkStar" Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2002 23:14:30 GMT Subject: Re: Cloaking Tech Message-ID: -------- "Dalton" wrote in message news:3D879B24.4A0A42DC@daltonator.net... > > > in accordance with Lucasfilm's > > > continuity policy. > > > > False. > > Shut up, bitch. I see your eloquence is improving. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Dalton Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2002 19:28:08 -0400 Subject: Re: Cloaking Tech Message-ID: <3D87BA88.BC547F43@daltonator.net> -------- DarkStar wrote: > > "Dalton" wrote in message > news:3D879B24.4A0A42DC@daltonator.net... > > > > > in accordance with Lucasfilm's > > > > continuity policy. > > > > > > False. > > > > Shut up, bitch. > > I see your eloquence is improving. You lost, dick. Deal with it. -- Rob "Roby" Dalton http://daltonator.net "All tribal myths are true, for a given value of 'true'." --"The Last Continent", Terry Pratchett ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "C.S.Strowbridge" Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2002 00:55:58 GMT Subject: Re: Cloaking Tech Message-ID: <3D87CEE3.20501@shaw.ca> -------- Dalton wrote: > DarkStar wrote: >>>Shut up, bitch. >> >>I see your eloquence is improving. > > You lost, dick. Deal with it. Why waste eloquence on people who don't deserve / can't understand it. C.S.Strowbridge ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Dalton Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2002 21:02:21 -0400 Subject: Re: Cloaking Tech Message-ID: <3D87D09D.84AA3AB2@daltonator.net> -------- "C.S.Strowbridge" wrote: > > Dalton wrote: > > DarkStar wrote: > > >>>Shut up, bitch. > >> > >>I see your eloquence is improving. > > > > You lost, dick. Deal with it. > > Why waste eloquence on people who don't deserve / can't understand it. > My thoughts exactly. I tried eloquence a long time ago, but now I have to resort to condescention and mockery to even have a hope of driving it through his sloping forehead. -- Rob "Roby" Dalton http://daltonator.net "All tribal myths are true, for a given value of 'true'." --"The Last Continent", Terry Pratchett ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Stuart Mackey" Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2002 14:45:04 +1200 Subject: Re: Cloaking Tech Message-ID: -------- "Dalton" wrote in message news:3D87D09D.84AA3AB2@daltonator.net... > "C.S.Strowbridge" wrote: > > > > Dalton wrote: > > > DarkStar wrote: > > > > >>>Shut up, bitch. > > >> > > >>I see your eloquence is improving. > > > > > > You lost, dick. Deal with it. > > > > Why waste eloquence on people who don't deserve / can't understand it. > > > > My thoughts exactly. I tried eloquence a long time ago, but now I have > to resort to condescention and mockery to even have a hope of driving it > through his sloping forehead. Forehead is sloped for a reason: so logic, reason and common sense are deflected to the maximum degree. This way nothing can challenge the troll's preconcived veiw of the world. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "C.S.Strowbridge" Date: Thu, 19 Sep 2002 07:26:20 GMT Subject: Re: Cloaking Tech Message-ID: <3D897C23.7050303@shaw.ca> -------- Dalton wrote: > "C.S.Strowbridge" wrote: >>Dalton wrote: >>>DarkStar wrote: >>>>>Shut up, bitch. >>>> >>>>I see your eloquence is improving. >>> >>>You lost, dick. Deal with it. >> >>Why waste eloquence on people who don't deserve / can't understand it. > > My thoughts exactly. I tried eloquence a long time ago, but now I have > to resort to condescention and mockery to even have a hope of driving it > through his sloping forehead. Preach it brother Dalton! C.S.Strowbridge ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Dalton Date: Thu, 19 Sep 2002 15:04:51 -0400 Subject: Re: Cloaking Tech Message-ID: <3D8A1FD3.179455B4@daltonator.net> -------- "C.S.Strowbridge" wrote: > > Dalton wrote: > > "C.S.Strowbridge" wrote: > >>Dalton wrote: > >>>DarkStar wrote: > > >>>>>Shut up, bitch. > >>>> > >>>>I see your eloquence is improving. > >>> > >>>You lost, dick. Deal with it. > >> > >>Why waste eloquence on people who don't deserve / can't understand it. > > > > My thoughts exactly. I tried eloquence a long time ago, but now I have > > to resort to condescention and mockery to even have a hope of driving it > > through his sloping forehead. > > Preach it brother Dalton! It is time for new tactics ;) -- Rob "Roby" Dalton http://daltonator.net ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "C.S.Strowbridge" Date: Thu, 19 Sep 2002 19:35:49 GMT Subject: Re: Cloaking Tech Message-ID: <3D8A2722.6040104@shaw.ca> -------- Dalton wrote: > "C.S.Strowbridge" wrote: >>>My thoughts exactly. I tried eloquence a long time ago, but now I have >>>to resort to condescention and mockery to even have a hope of driving it >>>through his sloping forehead. >> >>Preach it brother Dalton! > > It is time for new tactics ;) We're not going to convince him with logic, so let's mock him instead. C.S.Strowbridge ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Dalton Date: Thu, 19 Sep 2002 20:27:28 -0400 Subject: Re: Cloaking Tech Message-ID: <3D8A6B70.C3D351F6@daltonator.net> -------- "C.S.Strowbridge" wrote: > > Dalton wrote: > > "C.S.Strowbridge" wrote: > > >>>My thoughts exactly. I tried eloquence a long time ago, but now I have > >>>to resort to condescention and mockery to even have a hope of driving it > >>>through his sloping forehead. > >> > >>Preach it brother Dalton! > > > > It is time for new tactics ;) > > We're not going to convince him with logic, so let's mock him instead. Damn straight. Remember the AVF? -- Rob "Roby" Dalton http://daltonator.net "Every Starcraft nerd and Korean must be trying to get in." --Spyda visits Blizzard.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "C.S.Strowbridge" Date: Fri, 20 Sep 2002 02:49:57 GMT Subject: Re: Cloaking Tech Message-ID: <3D8A8CE6.4080405@shaw.ca> -------- Dalton wrote: > "C.S.Strowbridge" wrote: >>>>>My thoughts exactly. I tried eloquence a long time ago, but now I have >>>>>to resort to condescention and mockery to even have a hope of driving it >>>>>through his sloping forehead. >>>> >>>>Preach it brother Dalton! >>> >>>It is time for new tactics ;) >> >>We're not going to convince him with logic, so let's mock him instead. > > Damn straight. Remember the AVF? God damn, that was funny. C.S.Strowbridge ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Dalton Date: Thu, 19 Sep 2002 23:13:46 -0400 Subject: Re: Cloaking Tech Message-ID: <3D8A926A.3C7C17ED@daltonator.net> -------- "C.S.Strowbridge" wrote: > > Dalton wrote: > > "C.S.Strowbridge" wrote: > > >>>>>My thoughts exactly. I tried eloquence a long time ago, but now I have > >>>>>to resort to condescention and mockery to even have a hope of driving it > >>>>>through his sloping forehead. > >>>> > >>>>Preach it brother Dalton! > >>> > >>>It is time for new tactics ;) > >> > >>We're not going to convince him with logic, so let's mock him instead. > > > > Damn straight. Remember the AVF? > > God damn, that was funny. You realize, the more we agree with him, the less he has to bitch about. -- Rob "Roby" Dalton http://daltonator.net "All tribal myths are true, for a given value of 'true'." --"The Last Continent", Terry Pratchett ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "C.S.Strowbridge" Date: Fri, 20 Sep 2002 06:19:21 GMT Subject: Re: Cloaking Tech Message-ID: <3D8ABDFC.30203@shaw.ca> -------- Dalton wrote: > You realize, the more we agree with him, the less he has to bitch about. True, but insulting him back is the one true joy in my life. Well, that and Cyber-Stalking Amber Benson. C.S.Strowbridge ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Dalton Date: Fri, 20 Sep 2002 02:20:42 -0400 Subject: Re: Cloaking Tech Message-ID: <3D8ABE3A.915070D2@daltonator.net> -------- "C.S.Strowbridge" wrote: > > Dalton wrote: > > > You realize, the more we agree with him, the less he has to bitch about. > > True, but insulting him back is the one true joy in my life. Well, that > and Cyber-Stalking Amber Benson. > You do that! -- Rob "Roby" Dalton http://daltonator.net "All tribal myths are true, for a given value of 'true'." --"The Last Continent", Terry Pratchett ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "C.S.Strowbridge" Date: Fri, 20 Sep 2002 17:05:51 GMT Subject: Re: Cloaking Tech Message-ID: <3D8B5587.2010102@shaw.ca> -------- Dalton wrote: > "C.S.Strowbridge" wrote: >>>You realize, the more we agree with him, the less he has to bitch about. >> >>True, but insulting him back is the one true joy in my life. Well, that >>and Cyber-Stalking Amber Benson. > > You do that! I will win her over with my charms. C.S.Strowbridge ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "DarkStar" Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2002 03:37:37 GMT Subject: Re: Cloaking Tech Message-ID: <5ySh9.106948$z91.4254903@bin3.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com> -------- "Dalton" wrote in message news:3D87BA88.BC547F43@daltonator.net... > DarkStar wrote: > > > > "Dalton" wrote in message > > news:3D879B24.4A0A42DC@daltonator.net... > > > > > > > in accordance with Lucasfilm's > > > > > continuity policy. > > > > > > > > False. > > > > > > Shut up, bitch. > > > > I see your eloquence is improving. > > You lost, dick. Lost what? ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Dalton Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2002 23:44:27 -0400 Subject: Re: Cloaking Tech Message-ID: <3D87F69B.41CB34E6@daltonator.net> -------- DarkStar wrote: > > "Dalton" wrote in message > news:3D87BA88.BC547F43@daltonator.net... > > DarkStar wrote: > > > > > > "Dalton" wrote in message > > > news:3D879B24.4A0A42DC@daltonator.net... > > > > > > > > > in accordance with Lucasfilm's > > > > > > continuity policy. > > > > > > > > > > False. > > > > > > > > Shut up, bitch. > > > > > > I see your eloquence is improving. > > > > You lost, dick. > > Lost what? Shut up, lamer, and take your defeat like the man you hope to be when you grow up. -- Rob "Roby" Dalton http://daltonator.net "All tribal myths are true, for a given value of 'true'." --"The Last Continent", Terry Pratchett ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "DarkStar" Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2002 07:58:42 GMT Subject: Re: Cloaking Tech Message-ID: -------- "Dalton" wrote in message news:3D87F69B.41CB34E6@daltonator.net... > DarkStar wrote: > > > > "Dalton" wrote in message > > news:3D87BA88.BC547F43@daltonator.net... > > > DarkStar wrote: > > > > > > > > "Dalton" wrote in message > > > > news:3D879B24.4A0A42DC@daltonator.net... > > > > > > > > > > > in accordance with Lucasfilm's > > > > > > > continuity policy. > > > > > > > > > > > > False. > > > > > > > > > > Shut up, bitch. > > > > > > > > I see your eloquence is improving. > > > > > > You lost, dick. > > > > Lost what? > > Shut up, lamer, and take your defeat I have sufferred no defeat in this thread. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Iceberg the Dancing Black Mage Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2002 20:16:22 -0500 Subject: Re: Cloaking Tech Message-ID: -------- On Wed, 18 Sep 2002 07:58:42 GMT, "DarkStar" wrote: > >"Dalton" wrote in message >news:3D87F69B.41CB34E6@daltonator.net... >> DarkStar wrote: >> > >> > "Dalton" wrote in message >> > news:3D87BA88.BC547F43@daltonator.net... >> > > DarkStar wrote: >> > > > >> > > > "Dalton" wrote in message >> > > > news:3D879B24.4A0A42DC@daltonator.net... >> > > > >> > > > > > > in accordance with Lucasfilm's >> > > > > > > continuity policy. >> > > > > > >> > > > > > False. >> > > > > >> > > > > Shut up, bitch. >> > > > >> > > > I see your eloquence is improving. >> > > >> > > You lost, dick. >> > >> > Lost what? >> >> Shut up, lamer, and take your defeat > >I have sufferred no defeat in this thread. Whatever makes you believe you can get up in the morning and face your worthless existence, loser. -- Ice "Sit back. Relax. Destroy a planet." "Wonderful." - Me and Dalton ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "C.S.Strowbridge" Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2002 06:21:12 GMT Subject: Re: Cloaking Tech Message-ID: <3D881B20.2020601@shaw.ca> -------- DarkStar wrote: > "Dalton" wrote: >>You lost, dick. > > Lost what? Your dick. How's that for eloquence. C.S.Strowbridge ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: nitramtahalshia@aol.comAntiSpam (Sir Nitram) Date: 17 Sep 2002 21:22:06 GMT Subject: Re: Cloaking Tech Message-ID: <20020917172206.05626.00005663@mb-fc.aol.com> -------- >"DasBastard" wrote in message >news:pqseousr03ctbnueuvbmtc1ioo67cgsv03@4ax.com... >> On Tue, 17 Sep 2002 18:11:35 GMT, "DarkStar" >> wrote: >> >> > >> yet an Imperial cloak is impervious to all forms of detection save >> >gravity >> >> > >> >> >Canon proof? >> >> >> >> CGT Traps- from The Thrawn trilogy >> > >> >Allow me to repeat: "Canon proof?" >> > >> > >> >> Your ignorance apparently extends to the Rules & Regulations. > >He's discussing my site. > >> Ofiicial sources are accepted in ASVS > >True > >> in accordance with Lucasfilm's >> continuity policy. > >False. > True! -- 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: tedmanonions@hotmail.com (Ted Archbold) Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2002 21:39:58 GMT Subject: Re: Cloaking Tech Message-ID: <3d87a125.19617489@news.cis.dfn.de> -------- On 17 Sep 2002 21:22:06 GMT, nitramtahalshia@aol.comAntiSpam (Sir Nitram) wrote: >>"DasBastard" wrote in message >>news:pqseousr03ctbnueuvbmtc1ioo67cgsv03@4ax.com... >>> On Tue, 17 Sep 2002 18:11:35 GMT, "DarkStar" >>> wrote: >>> >>> > >> yet an Imperial cloak is impervious to all forms of detection save >>> >gravity >>> >> > >>> >> >Canon proof? >>> >> >>> >> CGT Traps- from The Thrawn trilogy >>> > >>> >Allow me to repeat: "Canon proof?" >>> > >>> > >>> >>> Your ignorance apparently extends to the Rules & Regulations. >> >>He's discussing my site. >> >>> Ofiicial sources are accepted in ASVS >> >>True >> >>> in accordance with Lucasfilm's >>> continuity policy. >> >>False. >> > >True! False! AIM: FldMrslTed ICQ: 125211976 MSN: tedmanonions@hotmail.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: nitramtahalshia@aol.comAntiSpam (Sir Nitram) Date: 17 Sep 2002 21:40:20 GMT Subject: Re: Cloaking Tech Message-ID: <20020917174020.05626.00005675@mb-fc.aol.com> -------- >On 17 Sep 2002 21:22:06 GMT, nitramtahalshia@aol.comAntiSpam (Sir >Nitram) wrote: > >>>"DasBastard" wrote in message >>>news:pqseousr03ctbnueuvbmtc1ioo67cgsv03@4ax.com... >>>> On Tue, 17 Sep 2002 18:11:35 GMT, "DarkStar" >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>> > >> yet an Imperial cloak is impervious to all forms of detection save >>>> >gravity >>>> >> > >>>> >> >Canon proof? >>>> >> >>>> >> CGT Traps- from The Thrawn trilogy >>>> > >>>> >Allow me to repeat: "Canon proof?" >>>> > >>>> > >>>> >>>> Your ignorance apparently extends to the Rules & Regulations. >>> >>>He's discussing my site. >>> >>>> Ofiicial sources are accepted in ASVS >>> >>>True >>> >>>> in accordance with Lucasfilm's >>>> continuity policy. >>> >>>False. >>> >> >>True! > >False! > Red light! -- 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: "Cmdrwilkens" Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2002 18:05:43 -0400 Subject: Re: Cloaking Tech Message-ID: -------- "Sir Nitram" wrote in message news:20020917174020.05626.00005675@mb-fc.aol.com... > >On 17 Sep 2002 21:22:06 GMT, nitramtahalshia@aol.comAntiSpam (Sir > >Nitram) wrote: > > > >>>"DasBastard" wrote in message > >>>news:pqseousr03ctbnueuvbmtc1ioo67cgsv03@4ax.com... > >>>> On Tue, 17 Sep 2002 18:11:35 GMT, "DarkStar" > >>>> wrote: > >>>> > >>>> > >> yet an Imperial cloak is impervious to all forms of detection save > >>>> >gravity > >>>> >> > > >>>> >> >Canon proof? > >>>> >> > >>>> >> CGT Traps- from The Thrawn trilogy > >>>> > > >>>> >Allow me to repeat: "Canon proof?" > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> > >>>> Your ignorance apparently extends to the Rules & Regulations. > >>> > >>>He's discussing my site. > >>> > >>>> Ofiicial sources are accepted in ASVS > >>> > >>>True > >>> > >>>> in accordance with Lucasfilm's > >>>> continuity policy. > >>> > >>>False. > >>> > >> > >>True! > > > >False! > > > > Red light! > Project Greenlight! -- Lcpl Burnett, G.R. USMCR BridgeCo B 6th EngSptBN 4th FSSG "Weapons do not penetrate armour based on force and pressure" - IXJac(taken from SB.com and SD.net) "I'm a genocidal maniac, hold me." -Anakin Vader ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: nitramtahalshia@aol.comAntiSpam (Sir Nitram) Date: 17 Sep 2002 22:08:45 GMT Subject: Re: Cloaking Tech Message-ID: <20020917180845.05626.00005685@mb-fc.aol.com> -------- >"Sir Nitram" wrote in message >news:20020917174020.05626.00005675@mb-fc.aol.com... >> >On 17 Sep 2002 21:22:06 GMT, nitramtahalshia@aol.comAntiSpam (Sir >> >Nitram) wrote: >> > >> >>>"DasBastard" wrote in message >> >>>news:pqseousr03ctbnueuvbmtc1ioo67cgsv03@4ax.com... >> >>>> On Tue, 17 Sep 2002 18:11:35 GMT, "DarkStar" > >> >>>> wrote: >> >>>> >> >>>> > >> yet an Imperial cloak is impervious to all forms of detection >save >> >>>> >gravity >> >>>> >> > >> >>>> >> >Canon proof? >> >>>> >> >> >>>> >> CGT Traps- from The Thrawn trilogy >> >>>> > >> >>>> >Allow me to repeat: "Canon proof?" >> >>>> > >> >>>> > >> >>>> >> >>>> Your ignorance apparently extends to the Rules & Regulations. >> >>> >> >>>He's discussing my site. >> >>> >> >>>> Ofiicial sources are accepted in ASVS >> >>> >> >>>True >> >>> >> >>>> in accordance with Lucasfilm's >> >>>> continuity policy. >> >>> >> >>>False. >> >>> >> >> >> >>True! >> > >> >False! >> > >> >> Red light! >> > >Project Greenlight! > Project Mantuak! -- 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: "Cmdrwilkens" Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2002 19:21:11 -0400 Subject: Re: Cloaking Tech Message-ID: -------- "Sir Nitram" wrote in message news:20020917180845.05626.00005685@mb-fc.aol.com... > >"Sir Nitram" wrote in message > >news:20020917174020.05626.00005675@mb-fc.aol.com... > >> >On 17 Sep 2002 21:22:06 GMT, nitramtahalshia@aol.comAntiSpam (Sir > >> >Nitram) wrote: > >> > > >> >>>"DasBastard" wrote in message > >> >>>news:pqseousr03ctbnueuvbmtc1ioo67cgsv03@4ax.com... > >> >>>> On Tue, 17 Sep 2002 18:11:35 GMT, "DarkStar" > > > >> >>>> wrote: > >> >>>> > >> >>>> > >> yet an Imperial cloak is impervious to all forms of detection > >save > >> >>>> >gravity > >> >>>> >> > > >> >>>> >> >Canon proof? > >> >>>> >> > >> >>>> >> CGT Traps- from The Thrawn trilogy > >> >>>> > > >> >>>> >Allow me to repeat: "Canon proof?" > >> >>>> > > >> >>>> > > >> >>>> > >> >>>> Your ignorance apparently extends to the Rules & Regulations. > >> >>> > >> >>>He's discussing my site. > >> >>> > >> >>>> Ofiicial sources are accepted in ASVS > >> >>> > >> >>>True > >> >>> > >> >>>> in accordance with Lucasfilm's > >> >>>> continuity policy. > >> >>> > >> >>>False. > >> >>> > >> >> > >> >>True! > >> > > >> >False! > >> > > >> > >> Red light! > >> > > > >Project Greenlight! > > > > Project Mantuak! > Contest Searchlight. -- Lcpl Burnett, G.R. USMCR BridgeCo B 6th EngSptBN 4th FSSG "Weapons do not penetrate armour based on force and pressure" - IXJac(taken from SB.com and SD.net) "I'm a genocidal maniac, hold me." -Anakin Vader ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: tedmanonions@hotmail.com (Ted Archbold) Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2002 22:10:52 GMT Subject: Re: Cloaking Tech Message-ID: <3d87a84e.21451308@news.cis.dfn.de> -------- On 17 Sep 2002 21:40:20 GMT, nitramtahalshia@aol.comAntiSpam (Sir Nitram) wrote: >>On 17 Sep 2002 21:22:06 GMT, nitramtahalshia@aol.comAntiSpam (Sir >>Nitram) wrote: >> >>>>"DasBastard" wrote in message >>>>news:pqseousr03ctbnueuvbmtc1ioo67cgsv03@4ax.com... >>>>> On Tue, 17 Sep 2002 18:11:35 GMT, "DarkStar" >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> > >> yet an Imperial cloak is impervious to all forms of detection save >>>>> >gravity >>>>> >> > >>>>> >> >Canon proof? >>>>> >> >>>>> >> CGT Traps- from The Thrawn trilogy >>>>> > >>>>> >Allow me to repeat: "Canon proof?" >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> >>>>> Your ignorance apparently extends to the Rules & Regulations. >>>> >>>>He's discussing my site. >>>> >>>>> Ofiicial sources are accepted in ASVS >>>> >>>>True >>>> >>>>> in accordance with Lucasfilm's >>>>> continuity policy. >>>> >>>>False. >>>> >>> >>>True! >> >>False! >> > >Red light! GGAAAAAHHHHH!!!!!!!!! *Sounds of a multiple car pile up occurr* AIM: FldMrslTed ICQ: 125211976 MSN: tedmanonions@hotmail.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: nitramtahalshia@aol.comAntiSpam (Sir Nitram) Date: 17 Sep 2002 22:09:28 GMT Subject: Re: Cloaking Tech Message-ID: <20020917180928.05626.00005686@mb-fc.aol.com> -------- >>>>>False. >>>>> >>>> >>>>True! >>> >>>False! >>> >> >>Red light! > >GGAAAAAHHHHH!!!!!!!!! >*Sounds of a multiple car pile up occurr* > I am your God, bow before me. -- 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: "Cmdrwilkens" Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2002 19:21:38 -0400 Subject: Re: Cloaking Tech Message-ID: -------- "Sir Nitram" wrote in message news:20020917180928.05626.00005686@mb-fc.aol.com... > >>>>>False. > >>>>> > >>>> > >>>>True! > >>> > >>>False! > >>> > >> > >>Red light! > > > >GGAAAAAHHHHH!!!!!!!!! > >*Sounds of a multiple car pile up occurr* > > > > I am your God, bow before me. > You are his small God, I am his God that gives you penis envy. -- Lcpl Burnett, G.R. USMCR BridgeCo B 6th EngSptBN 4th FSSG "Weapons do not penetrate armour based on force and pressure" - IXJac(taken from SB.com and SD.net) "I'm a genocidal maniac, hold me." -Anakin Vader ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: nitramtahalshia@aol.comAntiSpam (Sir Nitram) Date: 17 Sep 2002 23:57:10 GMT Subject: Re: Cloaking Tech Message-ID: <20020917195710.01154.00007465@mb-mq.aol.com> -------- >"Sir Nitram" wrote in message >news:20020917180928.05626.00005686@mb-fc.aol.com... >> >>>>>False. >> >>>>> >> >>>> >> >>>>True! >> >>> >> >>>False! >> >>> >> >> >> >>Red light! >> > >> >GGAAAAAHHHHH!!!!!!!!! >> >*Sounds of a multiple car pile up occurr* >> > >> >> I am your God, bow before me. >> > >You are his small God, I am his God that gives you penis envy. > Not until you've done your paperwork. -- 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: "Cmdrwilkens" Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2002 23:20:55 -0400 Subject: Re: Cloaking Tech Message-ID: -------- "Sir Nitram" wrote in message news:20020917195710.01154.00007465@mb-mq.aol.com... > >"Sir Nitram" wrote in message > >news:20020917180928.05626.00005686@mb-fc.aol.com... > >> >>>>>False. > >> >>>>> > >> >>>> > >> >>>>True! > >> >>> > >> >>>False! > >> >>> > >> >> > >> >>Red light! > >> > > >> >GGAAAAAHHHHH!!!!!!!!! > >> >*Sounds of a multiple car pile up occurr* > >> > > >> > >> I am your God, bow before me. > >> > > > >You are his small God, I am his God that gives you penis envy. > > > > Not until you've done your paperwork. > Wrong Wilkens, the other Wilkens is still processing, Wilkens has already attained his status and has the card to prove it. -- Lcpl Burnett, G.R. USMCR BridgeCo B 6th EngSptBN 4th FSSG "Weapons do not penetrate armour based on force and pressure" - IXJac(taken from SB.com and SD.net) "I'm a genocidal maniac, hold me." -Anakin Vader ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: nitramtahalshia@aol.comAntiSpam (Sir Nitram) Date: 18 Sep 2002 13:51:48 GMT Subject: Re: Cloaking Tech Message-ID: <20020918095148.25620.00006728@mb-md.aol.com> -------- >"Sir Nitram" wrote in message >news:20020917195710.01154.00007465@mb-mq.aol.com... >> >"Sir Nitram" wrote in message >> >news:20020917180928.05626.00005686@mb-fc.aol.com... >> >> >>>>>False. >> >> >>>>> >> >> >>>> >> >> >>>>True! >> >> >>> >> >> >>>False! >> >> >>> >> >> >> >> >> >>Red light! >> >> > >> >> >GGAAAAAHHHHH!!!!!!!!! >> >> >*Sounds of a multiple car pile up occurr* >> >> > >> >> >> >> I am your God, bow before me. >> >> >> > >> >You are his small God, I am his God that gives you penis envy. >> > >> >> Not until you've done your paperwork. >> > >Wrong Wilkens, the other Wilkens is still processing, Wilkens has already >attained his status and has the card to prove it. > You bloody Wilkenses play merry hell with the system. Alright, drive through. -- 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: "Cmdrwilkens" Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2002 23:05:41 -0400 Subject: Re: Cloaking Tech Message-ID: -------- "Sir Nitram" wrote in message news:20020918095148.25620.00006728@mb-md.aol.com... > >"Sir Nitram" wrote in message > >news:20020917195710.01154.00007465@mb-mq.aol.com... > >> >"Sir Nitram" wrote in message > >> >news:20020917180928.05626.00005686@mb-fc.aol.com... > >> >> >>>>>False. > >> >> >>>>> > >> >> >>>> > >> >> >>>>True! > >> >> >>> > >> >> >>>False! > >> >> >>> > >> >> >> > >> >> >>Red light! > >> >> > > >> >> >GGAAAAAHHHHH!!!!!!!!! > >> >> >*Sounds of a multiple car pile up occurr* > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> I am your God, bow before me. > >> >> > >> > > >> >You are his small God, I am his God that gives you penis envy. > >> > > >> > >> Not until you've done your paperwork. > >> > > > >Wrong Wilkens, the other Wilkens is still processing, Wilkens has already > >attained his status and has the card to prove it. > > > > You bloody Wilkenses play merry hell with the system. Alright, drive through. Oh yeah that's right...say it...say it...who's my bitch?...whose my bitch?...that's right you...say it...say it... -- Lcpl Burnett, G.R. USMCR BridgeCo B 6th EngSptBN 4th FSSG "Weapons do not penetrate armour based on force and pressure" - IXJac(taken from SB.com and SD.net) "I'm a genocidal maniac, hold me." -Anakin Vader ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: nitramtahalshia@aol.comAntiSpam (Sir Nitram) Date: 19 Sep 2002 03:29:40 GMT Subject: Re: Cloaking Tech Message-ID: <20020918232940.05505.00005339@mb-fc.aol.com> -------- >"Sir Nitram" wrote in message >news:20020918095148.25620.00006728@mb-md.aol.com... >> >"Sir Nitram" wrote in message >> >news:20020917195710.01154.00007465@mb-mq.aol.com... >> >> >"Sir Nitram" wrote in message >> >> >news:20020917180928.05626.00005686@mb-fc.aol.com... >> >> >> >>>>>False. >> >> >> >>>>> >> >> >> >>>> >> >> >> >>>>True! >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>False! >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>Red light! >> >> >> > >> >> >> >GGAAAAAHHHHH!!!!!!!!! >> >> >> >*Sounds of a multiple car pile up occurr* >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> >> >> I am your God, bow before me. >> >> >> >> >> > >> >> >You are his small God, I am his God that gives you penis envy. >> >> > >> >> >> >> Not until you've done your paperwork. >> >> >> > >> >Wrong Wilkens, the other Wilkens is still processing, Wilkens has already >> >attained his status and has the card to prove it. >> > >> >> You bloody Wilkenses play merry hell with the system. Alright, drive >through. > > >Oh yeah that's right...say it...say it...who's my bitch?...whose my >bitch?...that's right you...say it...say it... > *summons Thor, who smashes Wilkens through a wall, demonstrating the move he learned from Dalton* Punk ass. -- 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: "Cmdrwilkens" Date: Thu, 19 Sep 2002 00:38:02 -0400 Subject: Re: Cloaking Tech Message-ID: -------- "Sir Nitram" wrote in message news:20020918232940.05505.00005339@mb-fc.aol.com... > >"Sir Nitram" wrote in message > >news:20020918095148.25620.00006728@mb-md.aol.com... > >> >"Sir Nitram" wrote in message > >> >news:20020917195710.01154.00007465@mb-mq.aol.com... > >> >> >"Sir Nitram" wrote in message > >> >> >news:20020917180928.05626.00005686@mb-fc.aol.com... > >> >> >> >>>>>False. > >> >> >> >>>>> > >> >> >> >>>> > >> >> >> >>>>True! > >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >> >>>False! > >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >>Red light! > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> >GGAAAAAHHHHH!!!!!!!!! > >> >> >> >*Sounds of a multiple car pile up occurr* > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > >> >> >> I am your God, bow before me. > >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> >You are his small God, I am his God that gives you penis envy. > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> Not until you've done your paperwork. > >> >> > >> > > >> >Wrong Wilkens, the other Wilkens is still processing, Wilkens has already > >> >attained his status and has the card to prove it. > >> > > >> > >> You bloody Wilkenses play merry hell with the system. Alright, drive > >through. > > > > > >Oh yeah that's right...say it...say it...who's my bitch?...whose my > >bitch?...that's right you...say it...say it... > > > > *summons Thor, who smashes Wilkens through a wall, demonstrating the move he > learned from Dalton* > > Punk ass. > Stands back up and pulls an "Agent Smith" move sealing Thor's lips shut before kicking him in the nuts and giving him a merciless beating whilst Thor screams for mercy unheard. -- Lcpl Burnett, G.R. USMCR BridgeCo B 6th EngSptBN 4th FSSG "Weapons do not penetrate armour based on force and pressure" - IXJac(taken from SB.com and SD.net) "I'm a genocidal maniac, hold me." -Anakin Vader ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "C.S.Strowbridge" Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2002 00:47:10 GMT Subject: Re: Cloaking Tech Message-ID: <3D87CCD3.4000200@shaw.ca> -------- Sir Nitram wrote: >>>>False. >>> >>>True! >> >>False! > > Red light! There are four lights! C.S.Strowbridge ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Dalton Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2002 17:13:27 -0400 Subject: Re: Cloaking Tech Message-ID: <3D879AF7.701399B3@daltonator.net> -------- DarkStar wrote: > > "JPMWycombe" wrote in message > news:20020917133331.10531.00004404@mb-cp.aol.com... > > >> yet an Imperial cloak is impervious to all forms of detection save > gravity > > > > > >Canon proof? > > > > CGT Traps- from The Thrawn trilogy > > Allow me to repeat: "Canon proof?" Allow me to repeat: Official counts unless contradicted. Fuck off, crybaby. -- Rob "Roby" Dalton http://daltonator.net "All tribal myths are true, for a given value of 'true'." --"The Last Continent", Terry Pratchett ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "DarkStar" Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2002 23:15:53 GMT Subject: Re: Cloaking Tech Message-ID: -------- "Dalton" wrote in message news:3D879AF7.701399B3@daltonator.net... > DarkStar wrote: > > > > "JPMWycombe" wrote in message > > news:20020917133331.10531.00004404@mb-cp.aol.com... > > > >> yet an Imperial cloak is impervious to all forms of detection save > > gravity > > > > > > > >Canon proof? > > > > > > CGT Traps- from The Thrawn trilogy > > > > Allow me to repeat: "Canon proof?" > > Allow me to repeat: Official counts unless contradicted. Not on my site. Unlike some people, I follow the stated policy of Lucas, LFL, LB, etc. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Cmdrwilkens" Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2002 19:22:04 -0400 Subject: Re: Cloaking Tech Message-ID: -------- "DarkStar" wrote in message news:JIOh9.110560$5r1.4187258@bin5.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com... > > "Dalton" wrote in message > news:3D879AF7.701399B3@daltonator.net... > > DarkStar wrote: > > > > > > "JPMWycombe" wrote in message > > > news:20020917133331.10531.00004404@mb-cp.aol.com... > > > > >> yet an Imperial cloak is impervious to all forms of detection save > > > gravity > > > > > > > > > >Canon proof? > > > > > > > > CGT Traps- from The Thrawn trilogy > > > > > > Allow me to repeat: "Canon proof?" > > > > Allow me to repeat: Official counts unless contradicted. > > Not on my site. Unlike some people, I follow the stated policy of Lucas, > LFL, LB, etc. > Only the one that the voice in your head tells you exists. -- Lcpl Burnett, G.R. USMCR BridgeCo B 6th EngSptBN 4th FSSG "Weapons do not penetrate armour based on force and pressure" - IXJac(taken from SB.com and SD.net) "I'm a genocidal maniac, hold me." -Anakin Vader ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Dalton Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2002 19:28:58 -0400 Subject: Re: Cloaking Tech Message-ID: <3D87BABA.C323F249@daltonator.net> -------- DarkStar wrote: > > "Dalton" wrote in message > news:3D879AF7.701399B3@daltonator.net... > > DarkStar wrote: > > > > > > "JPMWycombe" wrote in message > > > news:20020917133331.10531.00004404@mb-cp.aol.com... > > > > >> yet an Imperial cloak is impervious to all forms of detection save > > > gravity > > > > > > > > > >Canon proof? > > > > > > > > CGT Traps- from The Thrawn trilogy > > > > > > Allow me to repeat: "Canon proof?" > > > > Allow me to repeat: Official counts unless contradicted. > > Not on my site. Sorry, I don't play by your freaky (and wrong) rules. > Unlike some people, I follow the stated policy of Lucas, > LFL, LB, etc. No you don't, no matter how much you waffle. -- Rob "Roby" Dalton http://daltonator.net "All tribal myths are true, for a given value of 'true'." --"The Last Continent", Terry Pratchett ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "DarkStar" Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2002 03:37:38 GMT Subject: Re: Cloaking Tech Message-ID: <6ySh9.106949$z91.4254831@bin3.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com> -------- "Dalton" wrote in message news:3D87BABA.C323F249@daltonator.net... > DarkStar wrote: > > > > "Dalton" wrote in message > > news:3D879AF7.701399B3@daltonator.net... > > > DarkStar wrote: > > > > > > > > "JPMWycombe" wrote in message > > > > news:20020917133331.10531.00004404@mb-cp.aol.com... > > > > > >> yet an Imperial cloak is impervious to all forms of detection save > > > > gravity > > > > > > > > > > > >Canon proof? > > > > > > > > > > CGT Traps- from The Thrawn trilogy > > > > > > > > Allow me to repeat: "Canon proof?" > > > > > > Allow me to repeat: Official counts unless contradicted. > > > > Not on my site. > > Sorry, I don't play by your freaky (and wrong) rules. "My" rules are correct, and simply asking for canon proof here doesn't violate your freaky (and wrong) rules. > > Unlike some people, I follow the stated policy of Lucas, > > LFL, LB, etc. > > No you don't, no matter how much you waffle. Waffle? I'm right, you're wrong . . . where's the waffling in that? ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Dalton Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2002 23:45:48 -0400 Subject: Re: Cloaking Tech Message-ID: <3D87F6EC.CB23C6F7@daltonator.net> -------- DarkStar wrote: > > "Dalton" wrote in message > news:3D87BABA.C323F249@daltonator.net... > > DarkStar wrote: > > > > > > "Dalton" wrote in message > > > news:3D879AF7.701399B3@daltonator.net... > > > > DarkStar wrote: > > > > > > > > > > "JPMWycombe" wrote in message > > > > > news:20020917133331.10531.00004404@mb-cp.aol.com... > > > > > > >> yet an Imperial cloak is impervious to all forms of detection > save > > > > > gravity > > > > > > > > > > > > > >Canon proof? > > > > > > > > > > > > CGT Traps- from The Thrawn trilogy > > > > > > > > > > Allow me to repeat: "Canon proof?" > > > > > > > > Allow me to repeat: Official counts unless contradicted. > > > > > > Not on my site. > > > > Sorry, I don't play by your freaky (and wrong) rules. > > "My" rules are correct, According to your inane misinterpretation of out-of-context quote fragments. > and simply asking for canon proof here doesn't > violate your freaky (and wrong) rules. Ohh, the famous insult reversal. I'll reiterate what Kynes once said: am I rubber, or glue? You can ask. We won't comply. > > > Unlike some people, I follow the stated policy of Lucas, > > > LFL, LB, etc. > > > > No you don't, no matter how much you waffle. > > Waffle? I'm right, you're wrong . . . where's the waffling in that? Bright boy misses the point again... -- Rob "Roby" Dalton http://daltonator.net "All tribal myths are true, for a given value of 'true'." --"The Last Continent", Terry Pratchett ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "DarkStar" Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2002 08:01:01 GMT Subject: Re: Cloaking Tech Message-ID: <1pWh9.112491$AR1.4567848@bin2.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com> -------- "Dalton" wrote in message news:3D87F6EC.CB23C6F7@daltonator.net... > You can ask. We won't comply. In which case I will assume, as per the common notion of this group, that there is no canon evidence, and that therefore, as per the statements of Lucas and company, there is no evidence at all. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: nitramtahalshia@aol.comAntiSpam (Sir Nitram) Date: 18 Sep 2002 13:56:21 GMT Subject: Re: Cloaking Tech Message-ID: <20020918095621.25620.00006730@mb-md.aol.com> -------- >"Dalton" wrote in message >news:3D87F6EC.CB23C6F7@daltonator.net... > >> You can ask. We won't comply. > >In which case I will assume, as per the common notion of this group, that >there is no canon evidence, and that therefore, as per the statements of >Lucas and company, there is no evidence at all. > Oh wow, like anyone here gives a shit what you assume. You assume the stupidest nonsense and post it here anyways. -- SirNitram ASVS Small Gods Keeper and Amateur Genius Uptight Christians pray for God to save themselves. Upright Christians pray for God to save others in need. "And they say that a hero can save us, I'm not gonna stand here to wait..." -Hero ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "His Divine Shadow" Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2002 09:47:29 +0300 Subject: Re: Cloaking Tech Message-ID: -------- "DarkStar" wrote in message news:6ySh9.106949$z91.4254831@bin3.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com... > > "Dalton" wrote in message > news:3D87BABA.C323F249@daltonator.net... > > DarkStar wrote: > > > > > > "Dalton" wrote in message > > > news:3D879AF7.701399B3@daltonator.net... > > > > DarkStar wrote: > > > > > > > > > > "JPMWycombe" wrote in message > > > > > news:20020917133331.10531.00004404@mb-cp.aol.com... > > > > > > >> yet an Imperial cloak is impervious to all forms of detection > save > > > > > gravity > > > > > > > > > > > > > >Canon proof? > > > > > > > > > > > > CGT Traps- from The Thrawn trilogy > > > > > > > > > > Allow me to repeat: "Canon proof?" > > > > > > > > Allow me to repeat: Official counts unless contradicted. > > > > > > Not on my site. > > > > Sorry, I don't play by your freaky (and wrong) rules. > > "My" rules are correct, and simply asking for canon proof here doesn't > violate your freaky (and wrong) rules. > > > > Unlike some people, I follow the stated policy of Lucas, > > > LFL, LB, etc. > > > > No you don't, no matter how much you waffle. > > Waffle? I'm right, you're wrong . . . where's the waffling in that? Well, you're wrong you see, you're just too stupid to see it. Thats waffling. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "DarkStar" Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2002 08:02:09 GMT Subject: Re: Cloaking Tech Message-ID: <5qWh9.5440$216.211710@bin4.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com> -------- "His Divine Shadow" wrote in message news:SkVh9.38$II2.3586@read2.inet.fi... > Well, you're wrong you see, you're just too stupid to see it. > Thats waffling. No, you're just too stupid to know what waffling is: http://www.dictionary.com/search?q=waffling ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "His Divine Shadow" Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2002 11:10:51 +0300 Subject: Re: Cloaking Tech Message-ID: <1zWh9.69$II2.5189@read2.inet.fi> -------- "DarkStar" wrote in message news:5qWh9.5440$216.211710@bin4.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com... > > "His Divine Shadow" wrote in message > news:SkVh9.38$II2.3586@read2.inet.fi... > > > Well, you're wrong you see, you're just too stupid to see it. > > Thats waffling. > > No, you're just too stupid to know what waffling is: > > http://www.dictionary.com/search?q=waffling I know you're waffling right now, I don't give a shit what the dictionary says, I'm saying your waffling and then by god you'be better waffle for your dear life cause breakfast is up and I want waffles you sad sack o' manure! ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "DarkStar" Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2002 10:07:28 GMT Subject: Re: Cloaking Tech Message-ID: -------- "His Divine Shadow" wrote in message news:1zWh9.69$II2.5189@read2.inet.fi... > > "DarkStar" wrote in message > news:5qWh9.5440$216.211710@bin4.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com... > > > > "His Divine Shadow" wrote in message > > news:SkVh9.38$II2.3586@read2.inet.fi... > > > > > Well, you're wrong you see, you're just too stupid to see it. > > > Thats waffling. > > > > No, you're just too stupid to know what waffling is: > > > > http://www.dictionary.com/search?q=waffling > > I know you're waffling right now, I don't give a shit what the dictionary > says, > I'm saying your waffling and then by god you'be better waffle for your dear > life cause breakfast is up and I want waffles you sad sack o' manure! Ha ha, punk got caught. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "His Divine Shadow" Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2002 13:23:49 +0300 Subject: Re: Cloaking Tech Message-ID: -------- "DarkStar" wrote in message news:AfYh9.112983$z91.4521592@bin3.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com... > > "His Divine Shadow" wrote in message > news:1zWh9.69$II2.5189@read2.inet.fi... > > > > "DarkStar" wrote in message > > news:5qWh9.5440$216.211710@bin4.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com... > > > > > > "His Divine Shadow" wrote in message > > > news:SkVh9.38$II2.3586@read2.inet.fi... > > > > > > > Well, you're wrong you see, you're just too stupid to see it. > > > > Thats waffling. > > > > > > No, you're just too stupid to know what waffling is: > > > > > > http://www.dictionary.com/search?q=waffling > > > > I know you're waffling right now, I don't give a shit what the dictionary > > says, > > I'm saying your waffling and then by god you'be better waffle for your > dear > > life cause breakfast is up and I want waffles you sad sack o' manure! > > Ha ha, punk got caught. Now thats waffling, and not the kind I want either. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "DarkStar" Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2002 10:30:07 GMT Subject: Re: Cloaking Tech Message-ID: -------- "His Divine Shadow" wrote in message news:FvYh9.125$II2.8466@read2.inet.fi... > > "DarkStar" wrote in message > news:AfYh9.112983$z91.4521592@bin3.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com... > > > > "His Divine Shadow" wrote in message > > news:1zWh9.69$II2.5189@read2.inet.fi... > > > > > > "DarkStar" wrote in message > > > news:5qWh9.5440$216.211710@bin4.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com... > > > > > > > > "His Divine Shadow" wrote in message > > > > news:SkVh9.38$II2.3586@read2.inet.fi... > > > > > > > > > Well, you're wrong you see, you're just too stupid to see it. > > > > > Thats waffling. > > > > > > > > No, you're just too stupid to know what waffling is: > > > > > > > > http://www.dictionary.com/search?q=waffling > > > > > > I know you're waffling right now, I don't give a shit what the > dictionary > > > says, > > > I'm saying your waffling and then by god you'be better waffle for your > > dear > > > life cause breakfast is up and I want waffles you sad sack o' manure! > > > > Ha ha, punk got caught. > > Now thats waffling, and not the kind I want either. No, dumbass. Waffling would involve me being vague or evasive. There's nothing evasive about calling you on the fact that you don't know what waffling is. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "His Divine Shadow" Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2002 13:35:20 +0300 Subject: Re: Cloaking Tech Message-ID: -------- "DarkStar" wrote in message news:PAYh9.7694$216.296804@bin4.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com... > > "His Divine Shadow" wrote in message > news:FvYh9.125$II2.8466@read2.inet.fi... > > > > "DarkStar" wrote in message > > news:AfYh9.112983$z91.4521592@bin3.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com... > > > > > > "His Divine Shadow" wrote in message > > > news:1zWh9.69$II2.5189@read2.inet.fi... > > > > > > > > "DarkStar" wrote in message > > > > news:5qWh9.5440$216.211710@bin4.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com... > > > > > > > > > > "His Divine Shadow" wrote in message > > > > > news:SkVh9.38$II2.3586@read2.inet.fi... > > > > > > > > > > > Well, you're wrong you see, you're just too stupid to see it. > > > > > > Thats waffling. > > > > > > > > > > No, you're just too stupid to know what waffling is: > > > > > > > > > > http://www.dictionary.com/search?q=waffling > > > > > > > > I know you're waffling right now, I don't give a shit what the > > dictionary > > > > says, > > > > I'm saying your waffling and then by god you'be better waffle for your > > > dear > > > > life cause breakfast is up and I want waffles you sad sack o' manure! > > > > > > Ha ha, punk got caught. > > > > Now thats waffling, and not the kind I want either. > > No, dumbass. Waffling would involve me being vague or evasive. There's > nothing evasive about calling you on the fact that you don't know what > waffling is. You're such a tool ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Dalton Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2002 19:32:39 -0400 Subject: Re: Cloaking Tech Message-ID: <3D87BB97.C8AB39A7@daltonator.net> -------- DarkStar wrote: > > "Dalton" wrote in message > news:3D879AF7.701399B3@daltonator.net... > > DarkStar wrote: > > > > > > "JPMWycombe" wrote in message > > > news:20020917133331.10531.00004404@mb-cp.aol.com... > > > > >> yet an Imperial cloak is impervious to all forms of detection save > > > gravity > > > > > > > > > >Canon proof? > > > > > > > > CGT Traps- from The Thrawn trilogy > > > > > > Allow me to repeat: "Canon proof?" > > > > Allow me to repeat: Official counts unless contradicted. > > Not on my site. Unlike some people, I follow the stated policy of Lucas, > LFL, LB, etc. And the policy that LFL and LB uses is...*gasp* official counts unless contradicted by canon! Surprise! Eat my shit, loser. Parallel universe != invalid evidence. It merely means Lucas can change whatever part of the story he wants without affecting EU continuity. You lost, later. -- Rob "Roby" Dalton http://daltonator.net "All tribal myths are true, for a given value of 'true'." --"The Last Continent", Terry Pratchett ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: nitramtahalshia@aol.comAntiSpam (Sir Nitram) Date: 18 Sep 2002 00:04:38 GMT Subject: Re: Cloaking Tech Message-ID: <20020917200438.01154.00007467@mb-mq.aol.com> -------- >"Dalton" wrote in message >news:3D879AF7.701399B3@daltonator.net... >> DarkStar wrote: >> > >> > "JPMWycombe" wrote in message >> > news:20020917133331.10531.00004404@mb-cp.aol.com... >> > > >> yet an Imperial cloak is impervious to all forms of detection save >> > gravity >> > > > >> > > >Canon proof? >> > > >> > > CGT Traps- from The Thrawn trilogy >> > >> > Allow me to repeat: "Canon proof?" >> >> Allow me to repeat: Official counts unless contradicted. > >Not on my site. Unlike some people, I follow the stated policy of Lucas, >LFL, LB, etc. > But not, and this is the really important part, the stated continuity policy. Thus your claims that novels outside the movie novelizations are invalid. And, finally, you have still not addressed the canon novelizations and their stances on cloaks. And I'll be real surprised if you figure it out and try and rebutt them. -- 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: "DarkStar" Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2002 03:39:19 GMT Subject: Re: Cloaking Tech Message-ID: -------- "Sir Nitram" wrote in message news:20020917200438.01154.00007467@mb-mq.aol.com... > >"Dalton" wrote in message > >news:3D879AF7.701399B3@daltonator.net... > >> DarkStar wrote: > >> > > >> > "JPMWycombe" wrote in message > >> > news:20020917133331.10531.00004404@mb-cp.aol.com... > >> > > >> yet an Imperial cloak is impervious to all forms of detection save > >> > gravity > >> > > > > >> > > >Canon proof? > >> > > > >> > > CGT Traps- from The Thrawn trilogy > >> > > >> > Allow me to repeat: "Canon proof?" > >> > >> Allow me to repeat: Official counts unless contradicted. > > > >Not on my site. Unlike some people, I follow the stated policy of Lucas, > >LFL, LB, etc. > > > > But not, and this is the really important part, the stated continuity policy. So? LucasBooks' decision on how to handle EU Continuity is an internal matter. The fact that it isn't part of the canon is not. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Cmdrwilkens" Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2002 01:57:29 -0400 Subject: Re: Cloaking Tech Message-ID: -------- "DarkStar" wrote in message news:HzSh9.107993$AR1.4375878@bin2.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com... > > "Sir Nitram" wrote in message > news:20020917200438.01154.00007467@mb-mq.aol.com... > > >"Dalton" wrote in message > > >news:3D879AF7.701399B3@daltonator.net... > > >> DarkStar wrote: > > >> > > > >> > "JPMWycombe" wrote in message > > >> > news:20020917133331.10531.00004404@mb-cp.aol.com... > > >> > > >> yet an Imperial cloak is impervious to all forms of detection > save > > >> > gravity > > >> > > > > > >> > > >Canon proof? > > >> > > > > >> > > CGT Traps- from The Thrawn trilogy > > >> > > > >> > Allow me to repeat: "Canon proof?" > > >> > > >> Allow me to repeat: Official counts unless contradicted. > > > > > >Not on my site. Unlike some people, I follow the stated policy of Lucas, > > >LFL, LB, etc. > > > > > > > But not, and this is the really important part, the stated continuity > policy. > > So? LucasBooks' decision on how to handle EU Continuity is an internal > matter. The fact that it isn't part of the canon is not. > We've never claimed its part of the Star Wars canon, we've claimed, with adequate support, that it is part of the Star Wars continuity. -- Lcpl Burnett, G.R. USMCR BridgeCo B 6th EngSptBN 4th FSSG "Weapons do not penetrate armour based on force and pressure" - IXJac(taken from SB.com and SD.net) "I'm a genocidal maniac, hold me." -Anakin Vader ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "DarkStar" Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2002 08:03:40 GMT Subject: Re: Cloaking Tech Message-ID: -------- "Cmdrwilkens" wrote in message news:am94jk$3l1hh$1@ID-97732.news.dfncis.de... > "DarkStar" wrote in message > news:HzSh9.107993$AR1.4375878@bin2.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com... > > > > "Sir Nitram" wrote in message > > news:20020917200438.01154.00007467@mb-mq.aol.com... > > > >"Dalton" wrote in message > > > >news:3D879AF7.701399B3@daltonator.net... > > > >> DarkStar wrote: > > > >> > > > > >> > "JPMWycombe" wrote in message > > > >> > news:20020917133331.10531.00004404@mb-cp.aol.com... > > > >> > > >> yet an Imperial cloak is impervious to all forms of detection > > save > > > >> > gravity > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > >Canon proof? > > > >> > > > > > >> > > CGT Traps- from The Thrawn trilogy > > > >> > > > > >> > Allow me to repeat: "Canon proof?" > > > >> > > > >> Allow me to repeat: Official counts unless contradicted. > > > > > > > >Not on my site. Unlike some people, I follow the stated policy of > Lucas, > > > >LFL, LB, etc. > > > > > > > > > > But not, and this is the really important part, the stated continuity > > policy. > > > > So? LucasBooks' decision on how to handle EU Continuity is an internal > > matter. The fact that it isn't part of the canon is not. > > > > We've never claimed its part of the Star Wars canon, we've claimed, with > adequate support, that it is part of the Star Wars continuity. In which case you are allowing certain LucasBooks personnel (besides Cerasi) to dictate the canon policy of Lucas and LFL. That is a profound error on your part. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Cmdrwilkens" Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2002 23:08:12 -0400 Subject: Re: Cloaking Tech Message-ID: -------- "DarkStar" wrote in message news:wrWh9.112535$AR1.4568933@bin2.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com... > > "Cmdrwilkens" wrote in message > news:am94jk$3l1hh$1@ID-97732.news.dfncis.de... > > "DarkStar" wrote in message > > news:HzSh9.107993$AR1.4375878@bin2.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com... > > > > > > "Sir Nitram" wrote in message > > > news:20020917200438.01154.00007467@mb-mq.aol.com... > > > > >"Dalton" wrote in message > > > > >news:3D879AF7.701399B3@daltonator.net... > > > > >> DarkStar wrote: > > > > >> > > > > > >> > "JPMWycombe" wrote in message > > > > >> > news:20020917133331.10531.00004404@mb-cp.aol.com... > > > > >> > > >> yet an Imperial cloak is impervious to all forms of > detection > > > save > > > > >> > gravity > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > >Canon proof? > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > CGT Traps- from The Thrawn trilogy > > > > >> > > > > > >> > Allow me to repeat: "Canon proof?" > > > > >> > > > > >> Allow me to repeat: Official counts unless contradicted. > > > > > > > > > >Not on my site. Unlike some people, I follow the stated policy of > > Lucas, > > > > >LFL, LB, etc. > > > > > > > > > > > > > But not, and this is the really important part, the stated continuity > > > policy. > > > > > > So? LucasBooks' decision on how to handle EU Continuity is an internal > > > matter. The fact that it isn't part of the canon is not. > > > > > > > We've never claimed its part of the Star Wars canon, we've claimed, with > > adequate support, that it is part of the Star Wars continuity. > > In which case you are allowing certain LucasBooks personnel (besides Cerasi) > to dictate the canon policy of Lucas and LFL. That is a profound error on > your part. > Really LFL continuity editors are LucasBooks personnel? You must be stupid if you don't realize that the LucasBooks division didn't exist when half those quotes were made, those people were employes of LucasFilm Liscensing, go back to the special bus. -- Lcpl Burnett, G.R. USMCR BridgeCo B 6th EngSptBN 4th FSSG "Weapons do not penetrate armour based on force and pressure" - IXJac(taken from SB.com and SD.net) "I'm a genocidal maniac, hold me." -Anakin Vader ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: nitramtahalshia@aol.comAntiSpam (Sir Nitram) Date: 18 Sep 2002 13:58:03 GMT Subject: Re: Cloaking Tech Message-ID: <20020918095803.25620.00006731@mb-md.aol.com> -------- >"Sir Nitram" wrote in message >news:20020917200438.01154.00007467@mb-mq.aol.com... >> >"Dalton" wrote in message >> >news:3D879AF7.701399B3@daltonator.net... >> >> DarkStar wrote: >> >> > >> >> > "JPMWycombe" wrote in message >> >> > news:20020917133331.10531.00004404@mb-cp.aol.com... >> >> > > >> yet an Imperial cloak is impervious to all forms of detection >save >> >> > gravity >> >> > > > >> >> > > >Canon proof? >> >> > > >> >> > > CGT Traps- from The Thrawn trilogy >> >> > >> >> > Allow me to repeat: "Canon proof?" >> >> >> >> Allow me to repeat: Official counts unless contradicted. >> > >> >Not on my site. Unlike some people, I follow the stated policy of Lucas, >> >LFL, LB, etc. >> > >> >> But not, and this is the really important part, the stated continuity >policy. > >So? LucasBooks' decision on how to handle EU Continuity is an internal >matter. The fact that it isn't part of the canon is not. > It's never been part of canon. But repeatedly stated continuity policy is still the same. Official counts as far as any external groups is concerned. But, please. Try and prove me wrong. Watching you flail your arms around is so amusing. -- 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: "DarkStar" Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2002 20:46:21 GMT Subject: Re: Cloaking Tech Message-ID: -------- "Sir Nitram" wrote in message news:20020918095803.25620.00006731@mb-md.aol.com... > >"Sir Nitram" wrote in message > >news:20020917200438.01154.00007467@mb-mq.aol.com... > >> >"Dalton" wrote in message > >> >news:3D879AF7.701399B3@daltonator.net... > >> >> DarkStar wrote: > >> >> > > >> >> > "JPMWycombe" wrote in message > >> >> > news:20020917133331.10531.00004404@mb-cp.aol.com... > >> >> > > >> yet an Imperial cloak is impervious to all forms of detection > >save > >> >> > gravity > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > >Canon proof? > >> >> > > > >> >> > > CGT Traps- from The Thrawn trilogy > >> >> > > >> >> > Allow me to repeat: "Canon proof?" > >> >> > >> >> Allow me to repeat: Official counts unless contradicted. > >> > > >> >Not on my site. Unlike some people, I follow the stated policy of Lucas, > >> >LFL, LB, etc. > >> > > >> > >> But not, and this is the really important part, the stated continuity > >policy. > > > >So? LucasBooks' decision on how to handle EU Continuity is an internal > >matter. The fact that it isn't part of the canon is not. > > > > It's never been part of canon. But repeatedly stated continuity policy is still > the same. LucasBooks does not override Lucas or LFL. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: nitramtahalshia@aol.comAntiSpam (Sir Nitram) Date: 18 Sep 2002 20:57:26 GMT Subject: Re: Cloaking Tech Message-ID: <20020918165726.01119.00006701@mb-ch.aol.com> -------- >"Sir Nitram" wrote in message >news:20020918095803.25620.00006731@mb-md.aol.com... >> >"Sir Nitram" wrote in message >> >news:20020917200438.01154.00007467@mb-mq.aol.com... >> >> >"Dalton" wrote in message >> >> >news:3D879AF7.701399B3@daltonator.net... >> >> >> DarkStar wrote: >> >> >> > >> >> >> > "JPMWycombe" wrote in message >> >> >> > news:20020917133331.10531.00004404@mb-cp.aol.com... >> >> >> > > >> yet an Imperial cloak is impervious to all forms of detection >> >save >> >> >> > gravity >> >> >> > > > >> >> >> > > >Canon proof? >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > > CGT Traps- from The Thrawn trilogy >> >> >> > >> >> >> > Allow me to repeat: "Canon proof?" >> >> >> >> >> >> Allow me to repeat: Official counts unless contradicted. >> >> > >> >> >Not on my site. Unlike some people, I follow the stated policy of >Lucas, >> >> >LFL, LB, etc. >> >> > >> >> >> >> But not, and this is the really important part, the stated continuity >> >policy. >> > >> >So? LucasBooks' decision on how to handle EU Continuity is an internal >> >matter. The fact that it isn't part of the canon is not. >> > >> >> It's never been part of canon. But repeatedly stated continuity policy is >still >> the same. > >LucasBooks does not override Lucas or LFL. > Lucasfilm, however, does override statements not commenting on continuity policy. You have a real problem recignizing reality, Robert. -- 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: "DarkStar" Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2002 21:08:40 GMT Subject: Re: Cloaking Tech Message-ID: -------- "Sir Nitram" wrote in message news:20020918165726.01119.00006701@mb-ch.aol.com... > >"Sir Nitram" wrote in message > >news:20020918095803.25620.00006731@mb-md.aol.com... > >> >"Sir Nitram" wrote in message > >> >news:20020917200438.01154.00007467@mb-mq.aol.com... > >> >> >"Dalton" wrote in message > >> >> >news:3D879AF7.701399B3@daltonator.net... > >> >> >> DarkStar wrote: > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > "JPMWycombe" wrote in message > >> >> >> > news:20020917133331.10531.00004404@mb-cp.aol.com... > >> >> >> > > >> yet an Imperial cloak is impervious to all forms of detection > >> >save > >> >> >> > gravity > >> >> >> > > > > >> >> >> > > >Canon proof? > >> >> >> > > > >> >> >> > > CGT Traps- from The Thrawn trilogy > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > Allow me to repeat: "Canon proof?" > >> >> >> > >> >> >> Allow me to repeat: Official counts unless contradicted. > >> >> > > >> >> >Not on my site. Unlike some people, I follow the stated policy of > >Lucas, > >> >> >LFL, LB, etc. > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> But not, and this is the really important part, the stated continuity > >> >policy. > >> > > >> >So? LucasBooks' decision on how to handle EU Continuity is an internal > >> >matter. The fact that it isn't part of the canon is not. > >> > > >> > >> It's never been part of canon. But repeatedly stated continuity policy is > >still > >> the same. > > > >LucasBooks does not override Lucas or LFL. > > > > Lucasfilm, however, does override statements not commenting on continuity > policy. Okay, so what's the problem? Why do you continue to disagree? ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Iceberg the Dancing Black Mage Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2002 16:36:09 -0500 Subject: Re: Cloaking Tech Message-ID: -------- On Wed, 18 Sep 2002 21:08:40 GMT, "DarkStar" wrote: >> Lucasfilm, however, does override statements not commenting on continuity >> policy. > >Okay, so what's the problem? Why do you continue to disagree? Because Lucas wasn't commenting on company policy regarding the EU but on the way he sees how Star Wars is produced. Lucas doesn't write EU fiction, other authors do. But by the same token, other authors don't write the movies or movie novels (more's the pity, I'd like to see Tim Zahn write the Episode III novelization). Both, however, were produced by Lucasfilm, to expand upon the universe first created by George Lucas in the 1977 film known as "Star Wars Episode IV: A New Hope." -- Ice "Sit back. Relax. Destroy a planet." "Wonderful." - Me and Dalton ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "DarkStar" Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2002 22:16:40 GMT Subject: Re: Cloaking Tech Message-ID: -------- "Iceberg the Dancing Black Mage" wrote in message news:kashou85gjknqhf647bb8mr8gg2759acse@4ax.com... > On Wed, 18 Sep 2002 21:08:40 GMT, "DarkStar" > wrote: > > >> Lucasfilm, however, does override statements not commenting on continuity > >> policy. > > > >Okay, so what's the problem? Why do you continue to disagree? > > Because Lucas wasn't commenting on company policy regarding the EU but > on the way he sees how Star Wars is produced. That interpretation is contrary to the quote. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Iceberg the Dancing Black Mage Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2002 19:59:44 -0500 Subject: Re: Cloaking Tech Message-ID: -------- On Wed, 18 Sep 2002 22:16:40 GMT, "DarkStar" wrote: > >"Iceberg the Dancing Black Mage" wrote in message >news:kashou85gjknqhf647bb8mr8gg2759acse@4ax.com... >> On Wed, 18 Sep 2002 21:08:40 GMT, "DarkStar" >> wrote: >> >> >> Lucasfilm, however, does override statements not commenting on >continuity >> >> policy. >> > >> >Okay, so what's the problem? Why do you continue to disagree? >> >> Because Lucas wasn't commenting on company policy regarding the EU but >> on the way he sees how Star Wars is produced. > >That interpretation is contrary to my interpretation of the quote. I corrected your sentence. -- Ice "Sit back. Relax. Destroy a planet." "Wonderful." - Me and Dalton ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "DarkStar" Date: Thu, 19 Sep 2002 01:12:58 GMT Subject: Re: Cloaking Tech Message-ID: -------- "Iceberg the Dancing Black Mage" wrote in message news:cb8iousnu3a9g7u5v8vqc4k63573t3h46m@4ax.com... > On Wed, 18 Sep 2002 22:16:40 GMT, "DarkStar" > wrote: > > > > >"Iceberg the Dancing Black Mage" wrote in message > >news:kashou85gjknqhf647bb8mr8gg2759acse@4ax.com... > >> On Wed, 18 Sep 2002 21:08:40 GMT, "DarkStar" > >> wrote: > >> > >> >> Lucasfilm, however, does override statements not commenting on > >continuity > >> >> policy. > >> > > >> >Okay, so what's the problem? Why do you continue to disagree? > >> > >> Because Lucas wasn't commenting on company policy regarding the EU but > >> on the way he sees how Star Wars is produced. > > > >That interpretation is contrary to my interpretation of the quote. > > I should agree, but I'm too stupid to. I corrected your sentence, too. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Iceberg the Dancing Black Mage Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2002 20:32:49 -0500 Subject: Re: Cloaking Tech Message-ID: -------- On Thu, 19 Sep 2002 01:12:58 GMT, "DarkStar" wrote: > >"Iceberg the Dancing Black Mage" wrote in message >news:cb8iousnu3a9g7u5v8vqc4k63573t3h46m@4ax.com... >> On Wed, 18 Sep 2002 22:16:40 GMT, "DarkStar" >> wrote: >> >> > >> >"Iceberg the Dancing Black Mage" wrote in message >> >news:kashou85gjknqhf647bb8mr8gg2759acse@4ax.com... >> >> On Wed, 18 Sep 2002 21:08:40 GMT, "DarkStar" >> >> wrote: >> >> >> >> >> Lucasfilm, however, does override statements not commenting on >> >continuity >> >> >> policy. >> >> > >> >> >Okay, so what's the problem? Why do you continue to disagree? >> >> >> >> Because Lucas wasn't commenting on company policy regarding the EU but >> >> on the way he sees how Star Wars is produced. >> > >> >That interpretation is contrary to my interpretation of the quote. >> >> I should agree, but I'm too stupid to. > >I corrected your sentence, too. You just want to get killfiled, don't you? I corrected your statement to what it should have been in the first place. You're just a flaming idiot. But that should be no surprise, since you've done nothing but flame, stonewall and hide behind your Wall of Invincible Ignorance since you've arrived on ASVS last year. You, Scott, are such a reprehensible pile of human excrement that words fail me. -- Ice "Sit back. Relax. Destroy a planet." "Wonderful." - Me and Dalton ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "DarkStar" Date: Thu, 19 Sep 2002 02:53:26 GMT Subject: Re: Cloaking Tech Message-ID: -------- "Iceberg the Dancing Black Mage" wrote in message news:g7aiougg9nuevebvdsh7govmence8vrksa@4ax.com... > On Thu, 19 Sep 2002 01:12:58 GMT, "DarkStar" > wrote: > > > > >"Iceberg the Dancing Black Mage" wrote in message > >news:cb8iousnu3a9g7u5v8vqc4k63573t3h46m@4ax.com... > >> On Wed, 18 Sep 2002 22:16:40 GMT, "DarkStar" > >> wrote: > >> > >> > > >> >"Iceberg the Dancing Black Mage" wrote in message > >> >news:kashou85gjknqhf647bb8mr8gg2759acse@4ax.com... > >> >> On Wed, 18 Sep 2002 21:08:40 GMT, "DarkStar" > >> >> wrote: > >> >> > >> >> >> Lucasfilm, however, does override statements not commenting on > >> >continuity > >> >> >> policy. > >> >> > > >> >> >Okay, so what's the problem? Why do you continue to disagree? > >> >> > >> >> Because Lucas wasn't commenting on company policy regarding the EU but > >> >> on the way he sees how Star Wars is produced. > >> > > >> >That interpretation is contrary to my interpretation of the quote. > >> > >> I should agree, but I'm too stupid to. > > > >I corrected your sentence, too. > > You just want to get killfiled, don't you? I corrected your statement > to what it should have been in the first place. And vice versa. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Cmdrwilkens" Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2002 23:09:28 -0400 Subject: Re: Cloaking Tech Message-ID: -------- "DarkStar" wrote in message news:cX6i9.124252$AR1.5161851@bin2.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com... > > "Iceberg the Dancing Black Mage" wrote in message > news:kashou85gjknqhf647bb8mr8gg2759acse@4ax.com... > > On Wed, 18 Sep 2002 21:08:40 GMT, "DarkStar" > > wrote: > > > > >> Lucasfilm, however, does override statements not commenting on > continuity > > >> policy. > > > > > >Okay, so what's the problem? Why do you continue to disagree? > > > > Because Lucas wasn't commenting on company policy regarding the EU but > > on the way he sees how Star Wars is produced. > > That interpretation is contrary to the quote. > No that interpretation is contrary to YOUR interpretation of the quote. -- Lcpl Burnett, G.R. USMCR BridgeCo B 6th EngSptBN 4th FSSG "Weapons do not penetrate armour based on force and pressure" - IXJac(taken from SB.com and SD.net) "I'm a genocidal maniac, hold me." -Anakin Vader ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Dalton Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2002 17:04:04 -0400 Subject: Re: Cloaking Tech Message-ID: <3D88EA44.107AFC11@daltonator.net> -------- DarkStar wrote: [snip] > LucasBooks does not override Lucas or LFL. Of course not. LucasBooks doesn't exist. The continuity policy comes from Lucas and LFL, and the entire gamut of quotes support our position far more than it does your creative interpretations. -- Rob "Roby" Dalton http://daltonator.net ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "DarkStar" Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2002 21:34:32 GMT Subject: Re: Cloaking Tech Message-ID: -------- "Dalton" wrote in message news:3D88EA44.107AFC11@daltonator.net... > DarkStar wrote: > > [snip] > > > LucasBooks does not override Lucas or LFL. > > Of course not. LucasBooks doesn't exist. What? > The continuity policy comes > from Lucas and LFL, and the entire gamut of quotes support our position > far more than it does your creative interpretations. You are incorrect. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Dalton Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2002 22:39:47 -0400 Subject: Re: Cloaking Tech Message-ID: <3D8938F3.BE5797A1@daltonator.net> -------- DarkStar wrote: > > "Dalton" wrote in message > news:3D88EA44.107AFC11@daltonator.net... > > DarkStar wrote: > > > > [snip] > > > > > LucasBooks does not override Lucas or LFL. > > > > Of course not. LucasBooks doesn't exist. > > What? LucasBooks doesn't exist. > > The continuity policy comes > > from Lucas and LFL, and the entire gamut of quotes support our position > > far more than it does your creative interpretations. > > You are incorrect. Of course! So sorry to doubt you. -- Rob "Roby" Dalton http://daltonator.net "All tribal myths are true, for a given value of 'true'." --"The Last Continent", Terry Pratchett ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Lee, Son of Col" Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2002 12:29:02 +1000 Subject: Re: Cloaking Tech Message-ID: -------- DarkStar wrote in message news:JIOh9.110560$5r1.4187258@bin5.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com... > > "Dalton" wrote in message > news:3D879AF7.701399B3@daltonator.net... > > DarkStar wrote: > > > > > > "JPMWycombe" wrote in message > > > news:20020917133331.10531.00004404@mb-cp.aol.com... > > > > >> yet an Imperial cloak is impervious to all forms of detection save > > > gravity > > > > > > > > > >Canon proof? > > > > > > > > CGT Traps- from The Thrawn trilogy > > > > > > Allow me to repeat: "Canon proof?" > > > > Allow me to repeat: Official counts unless contradicted. > > Not on my site. Unlike some people, I follow the stated policy of Lucas, > LFL, LB, etc. > > Proof of Stated Policy then ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: tedmanonions@hotmail.com (Ted Archbold) Date: Thu, 19 Sep 2002 03:27:54 GMT Subject: Re: Cloaking Tech Message-ID: <3d894423.8249992@news.cis.dfn.de> -------- On Tue, 17 Sep 2002 23:15:53 GMT, "DarkStar" wrote: > >"Dalton" wrote in message >news:3D879AF7.701399B3@daltonator.net... >> DarkStar wrote: >> > >> > "JPMWycombe" wrote in message >> > news:20020917133331.10531.00004404@mb-cp.aol.com... >> > > >> yet an Imperial cloak is impervious to all forms of detection save >> > gravity >> > > > >> > > >Canon proof? >> > > >> > > CGT Traps- from The Thrawn trilogy >> > >> > Allow me to repeat: "Canon proof?" >> >> Allow me to repeat: Official counts unless contradicted. > >Not on my site. Unlike some people, I follow the stated policy of Lucas, >LFL, LB, etc. > > Have you ever read Lucas' statement on canon etc.? AIM: FldMrslTed ICQ: 125211976 MSN: tedmanonions@hotmail.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "C.S.Strowbridge" Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2002 21:17:38 GMT Subject: Re: Cloaking Tech Message-ID: <3D879BB6.8030408@shaw.ca> -------- DarkStar wrote: > "JPMWycombe" wrote: >>>>yet an Imperial cloak is impervious to all forms of detection save >>>>gravity >>> >>>Canon proof? >> >>CGT Traps- from The Thrawn trilogy > > Allow me to repeat: "Canon proof?" You don't get to restrict information. C.S.Strowbridge ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: John Hansen Da