---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "C.S.Strowbridge" Date: Fri, 18 Oct 2002 17:45:13 GMT Subject: Re: Commentary on the Wong-Anderson Debate Message-ID: <3DB048CC.4060400@shaw.ca> -------- Wayne Poe wrote: > "CaptainSheridan" wrote: >>Darkstar, you're Round 3 post was 23 THOUSAND+ words! What the fucks wrong >>with you? > > "I was quite the robot about arguments " --Robert Scott Anderson > > He's a cowardly fuck who can't stand up to a debate, so he pulls this shit. And he's now picking a choosing what posts he replies to very carefully. He'll only go after posts he thinks he can challenge, and even then he snips anything beyond his meager grasp. C.S.Strowbridge ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "DarkStar" Date: Sat, 19 Oct 2002 18:32:10 -0500 Subject: Re: Commentary on the Wong-Anderson Debate Message-ID: <0PydnSELbe8UdyygXTWcoA@comcast.com> -------- "C.S.Strowbridge" wrote in message news:3DB048CC.4060400@shaw.ca... > Wayne Poe wrote: > > "CaptainSheridan" wrote: > > >>Darkstar, you're Round 3 post was 23 THOUSAND+ words! What the fucks wrong > >>with you? > > > > "I was quite the robot about arguments " --Robert Scott Anderson > > > > He's a cowardly fuck who can't stand up to a debate, so he pulls this shit. > > And he's now picking a choosing what posts he replies to very carefully. Indeed . . . I don't feel it necessary to waste my time replying to every irrelevant BS argument. I'm only replying to the ones that attack my position in even the slightest meaningful way. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "C.S.Strowbridge" Date: Sat, 19 Oct 2002 23:43:51 GMT Subject: Re: Commentary on the Wong-Anderson Debate Message-ID: <3DB1EE68.3010909@shaw.ca> -------- DarkStar wrote: > "C.S.Strowbridge" wrote: >>And he's now picking a choosing what posts he replies to very carefully. > > Indeed . . . I don't feel it necessary to waste my time replying to every > irrelevant BS argument. I'm only replying to the ones that attack my > position in even the slightest meaningful way. And the posts that show that the mathematical definition of Parallel is not equivalent to the most common definitions? How do you explain you ignoring those messages? C.S.Strowbridge ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Graeme Dice Date: Sat, 19 Oct 2002 17:54:59 -0600 Subject: Re: Commentary on the Wong-Anderson Debate Message-ID: <3DB1F0D3.CDA7CD2D@sk.sympatico.ca> -------- "C.S.Strowbridge" wrote: > > DarkStar wrote: > > "C.S.Strowbridge" wrote: > > >>And he's now picking a choosing what posts he replies to very carefully. > > > > Indeed . . . I don't feel it necessary to waste my time replying to every > > irrelevant BS argument. I'm only replying to the ones that attack my > > position in even the slightest meaningful way. > > And the posts that show that the mathematical definition of Parallel is > not equivalent to the most common definitions? How do you explain you > ignoring those messages? It actually doesn't matter if he uses the mathematical definition of parallel, as that only requires that the lines always be the same distance apart. If they meet at one point, they must meet at all points to satisfy the criterion. Thus, Lucas is actually stating that the EU and the canon are in the same universe if you use his definition of parallel. -- "Never express yourself more clearly than you are able to think." — Niels Bohr. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "C.S.Strowbridge" Date: Sun, 20 Oct 2002 00:34:07 GMT Subject: Re: Commentary on the Wong-Anderson Debate Message-ID: <3DB1FA2F.70505@shaw.ca> -------- Graeme Dice wrote: > "C.S.Strowbridge" wrote: >>DarkStar wrote: >>>>And he's now picking a choosing what posts he replies to very carefully. >>> >>>Indeed . . . I don't feel it necessary to waste my time replying to every >>>irrelevant BS argument. I'm only replying to the ones that attack my >>>position in even the slightest meaningful way. >> >>And the posts that show that the mathematical definition of Parallel is >>not equivalent to the most common definitions? How do you explain you >>ignoring those messages? > > It actually doesn't matter if he uses the mathematical definition of > parallel, as that only requires that the lines always be the same > distance apart. If they meet at one point, they must meet at all points > to satisfy the criterion. Thus, Lucas is actually stating that the EU > and the canon are in the same universe if you use his definition of > parallel. Wouldn't that make the two lines in fact the same? Canon and EU are equivalent! Wow, thanks Darkstar. C.S.Strowbridge ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "DarkStar" Date: Sat, 19 Oct 2002 21:55:02 -0500 Subject: Re: Commentary on the Wong-Anderson Debate Message-ID: -------- "Graeme Dice" wrote in message news:3DB1F0D3.CDA7CD2D@sk.sympatico.ca... > If they meet at one point, they must meet at all points > to satisfy the criterion. You'd have to prove that they actually meet . . . only then can you override and ignore Lucas. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Graeme Dice Date: Sat, 19 Oct 2002 21:30:57 -0600 Subject: Re: Commentary on the Wong-Anderson Debate Message-ID: <3DB22371.A8438263@sk.sympatico.ca> -------- DarkStar wrote: > > "Graeme Dice" wrote in message > news:3DB1F0D3.CDA7CD2D@sk.sympatico.ca... > > If they meet at one point, they must meet at all points > > to satisfy the criterion. > > You'd have to prove that they actually meet . . . only then can you override > and ignore Lucas. Okay. They meet due to the fact that the EU named Coruscant. Graeme Dice -- "Never express yourself more clearly than you are able to think." — Niels Bohr. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Dalton Date: Sat, 19 Oct 2002 23:40:33 -0400 Subject: Re: Commentary on the Wong-Anderson Debate Message-ID: <3DB225B1.254244E2@daltonator.net> -------- Graeme Dice wrote: > > DarkStar wrote: > > > > "Graeme Dice" wrote in message > > news:3DB1F0D3.CDA7CD2D@sk.sympatico.ca... > > > If they meet at one point, they must meet at all points > > > to satisfy the criterion. > > > > You'd have to prove that they actually meet . . . only then can you override > > and ignore Lucas. > > Okay. They meet due to the fact that the EU named Coruscant. *giggle* -- Rob "Roby" Dalton http://daltonator.net America: Never attribute to stupidity that which can be adequately explained by malice. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "C.S.Strowbridge" Date: Sun, 20 Oct 2002 04:49:27 GMT Subject: Re: Commentary on the Wong-Anderson Debate Message-ID: <3DB23609.8000505@shaw.ca> -------- Graeme Dice wrote: > DarkStar wrote: >>> If they meet at one point, they must meet at all points >>>to satisfy the criterion. >> >>You'd have to prove that they actually meet . . . only then can you override >>and ignore Lucas. > > Okay. They meet due to the fact that the EU named Coruscant. Just to jump in and explain even more for Darkstar. EU = Films at point (Imperial Capital - Name) EU is || to Canon. Therefore: EU = CANON! CAN YOU FEEL THAT! C.S.Strowbridge ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "DarkStar" Date: Sun, 20 Oct 2002 03:21:18 -0500 Subject: Re: Commentary on the Wong-Anderson Debate Message-ID: -------- "C.S.Strowbridge" wrote in message news:3DB23609.8000505@shaw.ca... > Graeme Dice wrote: > > DarkStar wrote: > > >>> If they meet at one point, they must meet at all points > >>>to satisfy the criterion. > >> > >>You'd have to prove that they actually meet . . . only then can you override > >>and ignore Lucas. > > > > Okay. They meet due to the fact that the EU named Coruscant. > > Just to jump in and explain even more for Darkstar. > > EU = Films at point (Imperial Capital - Name) > > EU is || to Canon. > > Therefore: EU = CANON! > > CAN YOU FEEL THAT! Yes . . . the waves of retardation you pour out are boring into my skull. George Lucas appropriating a name from the EU does not make "the EU = films" valid at any point. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "C.S.Strowbridge" Date: Sun, 20 Oct 2002 08:24:27 GMT Subject: Re: Commentary on the Wong-Anderson Debate Message-ID: <3DB2686F.8050803@shaw.ca> -------- DarkStar wrote: > "C.S.Strowbridge" wrote: >>Graeme Dice wrote: >>>>>If they meet at one point, they must meet at all points >>>>>to satisfy the criterion. >>>> >>>>You'd have to prove that they actually meet . . . only then can you >>>>override and ignore Lucas. >>> >>>Okay. They meet due to the fact that the EU named Coruscant. >> >>Just to jump in and explain even more for Darkstar. >> >>EU = Films at point (Imperial Capital - Name) >> >>EU is || to Canon. >> >>Therefore: EU = CANON! >> >>CAN YOU FEEL THAT! > > Yes . . . the waves of retardation you pour out are boring into my skull. > > George Lucas appropriating a name from the EU does not make "the EU = films" > valid at any point. It does if they are mathematically parallel. Now, if George Lucas was just using parallel in the sense of interdependent. That would be another story. C.S.Strowbridge ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "DarkStar" Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2002 10:24:03 -0500 Subject: Re: Commentary on the Wong-Anderson Debate Message-ID: -------- "C.S.Strowbridge" wrote in message news:3DB2686F.8050803@shaw.ca... > DarkStar wrote: > > "C.S.Strowbridge" wrote: > >>Graeme Dice wrote: > > >>>>>If they meet at one point, they must meet at all points > >>>>>to satisfy the criterion. > >>>> > >>>>You'd have to prove that they actually meet . . . only then can you > >>>>override and ignore Lucas. > >>> > >>>Okay. They meet due to the fact that the EU named Coruscant. > >> > >>Just to jump in and explain even more for Darkstar. > >> > >>EU = Films at point (Imperial Capital - Name) > >> > >>EU is || to Canon. > >> > >>Therefore: EU = CANON! > >> > >>CAN YOU FEEL THAT! > > > > Yes . . . the waves of retardation you pour out are boring into my skull. > > > > George Lucas appropriating a name from the EU does not make "the EU = films" > > valid at any point. > > It does if they are mathematically parallel. Which they aren't. In a parallel universe, there's another me and another thee, but it isn't the same universe as a result. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: nitramtahalshia@aol.comAntiSpam (Sir Nitram) Date: 21 Oct 2002 16:40:31 GMT Subject: Re: Commentary on the Wong-Anderson Debate Message-ID: <20021021124031.24379.00002424@mb-ce.aol.com> -------- >"C.S.Strowbridge" wrote in message >news:3DB2686F.8050803@shaw.ca... >> DarkStar wrote: >> > "C.S.Strowbridge" wrote: >> >>Graeme Dice wrote: >> >> >>>>>If they meet at one point, they must meet at all points >> >>>>>to satisfy the criterion. >> >>>> >> >>>>You'd have to prove that they actually meet . . . only then can you >> >>>>override and ignore Lucas. >> >>> >> >>>Okay. They meet due to the fact that the EU named Coruscant. >> >> >> >>Just to jump in and explain even more for Darkstar. >> >> >> >>EU = Films at point (Imperial Capital - Name) >> >> >> >>EU is || to Canon. >> >> >> >>Therefore: EU = CANON! >> >> >> >>CAN YOU FEEL THAT! >> > >> > Yes . . . the waves of retardation you pour out are boring into my >skull. >> > >> > George Lucas appropriating a name from the EU does not make "the EU = >films" >> > valid at any point. >> >> It does if they are mathematically parallel. > >Which they aren't. In a parallel universe, there's another me and another >thee, but it isn't the same universe as a result. > In an infinite number of parallel universes there is no difference between them, apart from the life or death or a single blade of grass. This quote has also been disproven. -- SirNitram ASVS Small Gods Keeper and Amateur Genius Uptight Christians pray for God to save themselves. Upright Christians pray for God to save others in need. "And they say that a hero can save us, I'm not gonna stand here to wait..." -Hero ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "C.S.Strowbridge" Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2002 19:15:02 GMT Subject: Re: Commentary on the Wong-Anderson Debate Message-ID: <3DB4527C.5040509@shaw.ca> -------- DarkStar wrote: > "C.S.Strowbridge" wrote: >>>>EU = Films at point (Imperial Capital - Name) >>>> >>>>EU is || to Canon. >>>> >>>>Therefore: EU = CANON! >>>> >>>>CAN YOU FEEL THAT! >>> >>>Yes . . . the waves of retardation you pour out are boring into my >>>skull. George Lucas appropriating a name from the EU does not make "the EU = >>>films" valid at any point. >> >>It does if they are mathematically parallel. > > Which they aren't. Well, thank god for that. > In a parallel universe, there's another me and another > thee, but it isn't the same universe as a result. No, but they are INTERDEPENDENT. Read that again. INTERDEPENDENT. What happens in one, happens in the other. When Luke Skywalker lost his hand in the films it happened in the EU. When the Imperial Capital was named Courseucant in EU then it was named that in the film too. You can judge the one universe based on what happens in the other. We've seen this effect dozens of times. Lucas, Sansweet, Cersie, SW Insider, Saxton, etc. all agree this is how it works. C.S.Strowbridge ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Colin'The Yosemite Bear'Witz" Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2002 19:19:30 -0700 Subject: Re: Commentary on the Wong-Anderson Debate Message-ID: -------- "C.S.Strowbridge" wrote in message news:3DB4527C.5040509@shaw.ca... > DarkStar wrote: > > "C.S.Strowbridge" wrote: > > >>>>EU = Films at point (Imperial Capital - Name) > >>>> > >>>>EU is || to Canon. > >>>> > >>>>Therefore: EU = CANON! > >>>> > >>>>CAN YOU FEEL THAT! > >>> > >>>Yes . . . the waves of retardation you pour out are boring into my > >>>skull. George Lucas appropriating a name from the EU does not make "the EU = > >>>films" valid at any point. > >> > >>It does if they are mathematically parallel. > > > > Which they aren't. > > Well, thank god for that. > > > In a parallel universe, there's another me and another > > thee, but it isn't the same universe as a result. > > No, but they are INTERDEPENDENT. Read that again. INTERDEPENDENT. What > happens in one, happens in the other. When Luke Skywalker lost his hand > in the films it happened in the EU. When the Imperial Capital was named > Courseucant in EU then it was named that in the film too. You can judge > the one universe based on what happens in the other. > > We've seen this effect dozens of times. Lucas, Sansweet, Cersie, SW > Insider, Saxton, etc. all agree this is how it works. > > C.S.Strowbridge > After all Splinter in the Minds Eye now has the Canonicity of Diddly/Squat. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "DarkStar" Date: Wed, 23 Oct 2002 05:12:57 -0500 Subject: Re: Commentary on the Wong-Anderson Debate Message-ID: -------- "C.S.Strowbridge" wrote in message news:3DB4527C.5040509@shaw.ca... > DarkStar wrote: > > "C.S.Strowbridge" wrote: > > >>>>EU = Films at point (Imperial Capital - Name) > >>>> > >>>>EU is || to Canon. > >>>> > >>>>Therefore: EU = CANON! > >>>> > >>>>CAN YOU FEEL THAT! > >>> > >>>Yes . . . the waves of retardation you pour out are boring into my > >>>skull. George Lucas appropriating a name from the EU does not make "the EU = > >>>films" valid at any point. > >> > >>It does if they are mathematically parallel. > > > > Which they aren't. > > Well, thank god for that. > > > In a parallel universe, there's another me and another > > thee, but it isn't the same universe as a result. > > No, but they are INTERDEPENDENT. Read that again. INTERDEPENDENT. Lucas's canon is independent from the EU . . . he does not need it, does not use it, and does not base his canon off of it. > What happens in one, happens in the other. That's a one-way street. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Graeme Dice Date: Wed, 23 Oct 2002 08:09:54 -0600 Subject: Re: Commentary on the Wong-Anderson Debate Message-ID: <3DB6ADB2.1B320169@sk.sympatico.ca> -------- DarkStar wrote: > > "C.S.Strowbridge" wrote in message > news:3DB4527C.5040509@shaw.ca... > > No, but they are INTERDEPENDENT. Read that again. INTERDEPENDENT. > > Lucas's canon is independent from the EU . . . he does not need it, does not > use it, and does not base his canon off of it. The EU named Coruscant. Therefore he uses it and bases his canon off of it. -- "It's a little like wrestling a gorilla. You don't quit when you're tired- you quit when the gorilla is tired." -- Robert Strauss ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "DarkStar" Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2002 03:51:49 -0500 Subject: Re: Commentary on the Wong-Anderson Debate Message-ID: -------- "Graeme Dice" wrote in message news:3DB6ADB2.1B320169@sk.sympatico.ca... > DarkStar wrote: > > > > "C.S.Strowbridge" wrote in message > > news:3DB4527C.5040509@shaw.ca... > > > > > > No, but they are INTERDEPENDENT. Read that again. INTERDEPENDENT. > > > > Lucas's canon is independent from the EU . . . he does not need it, does not > > use it, and does not base his canon off of it. > > The EU named Coruscant. Therefore he uses it and bases his canon off of > it. Coruscant is Canon. The EU is not. Backstage, Lucas does not depend on the EU. You claim he does, because he hijacked a name. Your stupidity is astonishing. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "C.S.Strowbridge" Date: Wed, 23 Oct 2002 16:12:04 GMT Subject: Re: Commentary on the Wong-Anderson Debate Message-ID: <3DB6C9E2.6010902@shaw.ca> -------- DarkStar wrote: > "C.S.Strowbridge" wrote: >>> In a parallel universe, there's another me and another >>> thee, but it isn't the same universe as a result. >> >>No, but they are INTERDEPENDENT. Read that again. INTERDEPENDENT. > > Lucas's canon is independent from the EU . . . he does not need it, does not > use it, and does not base his canon off of it. This is simply a lie. While George Lucas _can_ ignore the EU we've proven he doesn't. We gave a list of probably a dozen events, names or people that originated in the EU that made it into the films. You claims that they were coincidence are without evidence or merit. >>What happens in one, happens in the other. > > That's a one-way street. That's been proven wrong. C.S.Strowbridge ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "DarkStar" Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2002 03:53:28 -0500 Subject: Re: Commentary on the Wong-Anderson Debate Message-ID: -------- "C.S.Strowbridge" wrote in message news:3DB6C9E2.6010902@shaw.ca... > DarkStar wrote: > > "C.S.Strowbridge" wrote: > > >>> In a parallel universe, there's another me and another > >>> thee, but it isn't the same universe as a result. > >> > >>No, but they are INTERDEPENDENT. Read that again. INTERDEPENDENT. > > > > Lucas's canon is independent from the EU . . . he does not need it, does not > > use it, and does not base his canon off of it. > > This is simply a lie. While George Lucas _can_ ignore the EU we've > proven he doesn't. With the exception of when he does. > We gave a list of probably a dozen events, names or > people that originated in the EU that made it into the films. You claims > that they were coincidence are without evidence or merit. Yes, because EU = RS if and only if EU = OF. > >>What happens in one, happens in the other. > > > > That's a one-way street. > > That's been proven wrong. Like hell, you filthy lying whore. Lucas is not bound by the EU. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "C.S.Strowbridge" Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2002 17:08:28 GMT Subject: Re: Commentary on the Wong-Anderson Debate Message-ID: <3DB828A7.20603@shaw.ca> -------- DarkStar wrote: > "C.S.Strowbridge" wrote: >>>>>In a parallel universe, there's another me and another >>>>>thee, but it isn't the same universe as a result. >>>> >>>>No, but they are INTERDEPENDENT. Read that again. INTERDEPENDENT. >>> >>>Lucas's canon is independent from the EU . . . he does not need it, does >>>not use it, and does not base his canon off of it. >> >>This is simply a lie. While George Lucas _can_ ignore the EU we've >>proven he doesn't. > > With the exception of when he does. And how many times has he done that? Give a comprehensive list of all times he's contradict the EU? >>We gave a list of probably a dozen events, names or >>people that originated in the EU that made it into the films. You claims >>that they were coincidence are without evidence or merit. > > Yes, because EU = RS if and only if EU = OF. Again, you are setting up a Strawman. EU = ACCEPTABLE SOURCES. Only the movies are the real story. Real, in this case, meaning important. It's the only definition that fits all the evidence. >>>>What happens in one, happens in the other. >>> >>>That's a one-way street. >> >>That's been proven wrong. > > Like hell, you filthy lying whore. Lucas is not bound by the EU. Nor does he ignore it. C.S.Strowbridge ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: swineherd@swineherd.co.uk (The Baron) Date: Wed, 23 Oct 2002 21:24:56 GMT Subject: Re: Commentary on the Wong-Anderson Debate Message-ID: <3db7139f.87718989@news.freeserve.co.uk> -------- On Wed, 23 Oct 2002 05:12:57 -0500, "DarkStar" wrote: > >"C.S.Strowbridge" wrote in message >news:3DB4527C.5040509@shaw.ca... >> DarkStar wrote: >> > "C.S.Strowbridge" wrote: >> >> >>>>EU = Films at point (Imperial Capital - Name) >> >>>> >> >>>>EU is || to Canon. >> >>>> >> >>>>Therefore: EU = CANON! >> >>>> >> >>>>CAN YOU FEEL THAT! >> >>> >> >>>Yes . . . the waves of retardation you pour out are boring into my >> >>>skull. George Lucas appropriating a name from the EU does not make "the >EU = >> >>>films" valid at any point. >> >> >> >>It does if they are mathematically parallel. >> > >> > Which they aren't. >> >> Well, thank god for that. >> >> > In a parallel universe, there's another me and another >> > thee, but it isn't the same universe as a result. >> >> No, but they are INTERDEPENDENT. Read that again. INTERDEPENDENT. > >Lucas's canon is independent from the EU . . . he does not need it, does not >use it, and does not base his canon off of it. > >> What happens in one, happens in the other. > >That's a one-way street. > Just shut up and die. -- As you read this sig I waste your worthless life. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Greg Burnett" Date: Wed, 23 Oct 2002 17:27:41 -0400 Subject: Re: Commentary on the Wong-Anderson Debate Message-ID: -------- "DarkStar" wrote in message news:Opmcnc6Cweq46yugXTWcqA@comcast.com... > > "C.S.Strowbridge" wrote in message > news:3DB4527C.5040509@shaw.ca... > > DarkStar wrote: > > > "C.S.Strowbridge" wrote: > > > > >>>>EU = Films at point (Imperial Capital - Name) > > >>>> > > >>>>EU is || to Canon. > > >>>> > > >>>>Therefore: EU = CANON! > > >>>> > > >>>>CAN YOU FEEL THAT! > > >>> > > >>>Yes . . . the waves of retardation you pour out are boring into my > > >>>skull. George Lucas appropriating a name from the EU does not make "the > EU = > > >>>films" valid at any point. > > >> > > >>It does if they are mathematically parallel. > > > > > > Which they aren't. > > > > Well, thank god for that. > > > > > In a parallel universe, there's another me and another > > > thee, but it isn't the same universe as a result. > > > > No, but they are INTERDEPENDENT. Read that again. INTERDEPENDENT. > > Lucas's canon is independent from the EU . . . he does not need it, does not > use it, and does not base his canon off of it. You know it would help if you didnt' lie so blatantly. As Strow and Graeme, amongst others, mentioned you've been shown no less than a dozen instances where material generate originally in the EU was inserted into Canon. In other words even though Lucas doesn't HAVE to use the EU he DOES thus the Canon and EU are interdependent. -- 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: Thu, 24 Oct 2002 03:54:17 -0500 Subject: Re: Commentary on the Wong-Anderson Debate Message-ID: -------- "Greg Burnett" wrote in message news:ap746q$s7a6p$1@ID-97732.news.dfncis.de... > "DarkStar" wrote in message > news:Opmcnc6Cweq46yugXTWcqA@comcast.com... > > > > "C.S.Strowbridge" wrote in message > > news:3DB4527C.5040509@shaw.ca... > > > DarkStar wrote: > > > > "C.S.Strowbridge" wrote: > > > > > > >>>>EU = Films at point (Imperial Capital - Name) > > > >>>> > > > >>>>EU is || to Canon. > > > >>>> > > > >>>>Therefore: EU = CANON! > > > >>>> > > > >>>>CAN YOU FEEL THAT! > > > >>> > > > >>>Yes . . . the waves of retardation you pour out are boring into my > > > >>>skull. George Lucas appropriating a name from the EU does not make > "the > > EU = > > > >>>films" valid at any point. > > > >> > > > >>It does if they are mathematically parallel. > > > > > > > > Which they aren't. > > > > > > Well, thank god for that. > > > > > > > In a parallel universe, there's another me and another > > > > thee, but it isn't the same universe as a result. > > > > > > No, but they are INTERDEPENDENT. Read that again. INTERDEPENDENT. > > > > Lucas's canon is independent from the EU . . . he does not need it, does > not > > use it, and does not base his canon off of it. > > You know it would help if you didnt' lie so blatantly. No, it would help if you weren't so fucking stupid. > As Strow and Graeme, > amongst others, mentioned you've been shown no less than a dozen instances > where material generate originally in the EU was inserted into Canon. And that doesn't fucking help you! Can you not comprehend that? ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Greg Burnett" Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2002 16:53:23 -0400 Subject: Re: Commentary on the Wong-Anderson Debate Message-ID: -------- "DarkStar" wrote in message news:AW2dnRmiebasKCqgXTWcpA@comcast.com... > > "Greg Burnett" wrote in message > news:ap746q$s7a6p$1@ID-97732.news.dfncis.de... > > "DarkStar" wrote in message > > news:Opmcnc6Cweq46yugXTWcqA@comcast.com... > > As Strow and Graeme, > > amongst others, mentioned you've been shown no less than a dozen instances > > where material generate originally in the EU was inserted into Canon. > > And that doesn't fucking help you! Can you not comprehend that? > If Lucas uses material generated in the EU this means that material in the Canon is DEPENDENT upon the EU for its creation. This means the two objects are, in practice, interpendent. -- 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: Sun, 20 Oct 2002 03:14:22 -0500 Subject: Re: Commentary on the Wong-Anderson Debate Message-ID: <0JOdnSZP45Jx-S-gXTWcoA@comcast.com> -------- "Graeme Dice" wrote in message news:3DB22371.A8438263@sk.sympatico.ca... > DarkStar wrote: > > > > "Graeme Dice" wrote in message > > news:3DB1F0D3.CDA7CD2D@sk.sympatico.ca... > > > If they meet at one point, they must meet at all points > > > to satisfy the criterion. > > > > You'd have to prove that they actually meet . . . only then can you override > > and ignore Lucas. > > Okay. They meet due to the fact that the EU named Coruscant. You're kidding, right? ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "C.S.Strowbridge" Date: Sun, 20 Oct 2002 08:20:05 GMT Subject: Re: Commentary on the Wong-Anderson Debate Message-ID: <3DB26769.20002@shaw.ca> -------- DarkStar wrote: > "Graeme Dice" wrote: >>>> If they meet at one point, they must meet at all points >>>>to satisfy the criterion. >>> >>>You'd have to prove that they actually meet . . . only then can you >>>override and ignore Lucas. >> >>Okay. They meet due to the fact that the EU named Coruscant. > > You're kidding, right? Here's another place they meet. The name of the scoundrel that saves the day at Yavin is named Han Solo. That's two points where where EU and Canon meet. And since they are mathematically parallel, they must be the same line. Oh. My. God! EU=CANON! C.S.Strowbridge ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "DarkStar" Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2002 10:27:56 -0500 Subject: Re: Commentary on the Wong-Anderson Debate Message-ID: -------- "C.S.Strowbridge" wrote in message news:3DB26769.20002@shaw.ca... > DarkStar wrote: > > "Graeme Dice" wrote: > > >>>> If they meet at one point, they must meet at all points > >>>>to satisfy the criterion. > >>> > >>>You'd have to prove that they actually meet . . . only then can you > >>>override and ignore Lucas. > >> > >>Okay. They meet due to the fact that the EU named Coruscant. > > > > You're kidding, right? > > Here's another place they meet. "Another" implies that you had one to begin with. You don't. > The name of the scoundrel that saves the > day at Yavin is named Han Solo. Well, hot damn. That means there's a parallel universe with a scoundrel named Han, and a planet called Yavin. > Oh. My. God! EU=CANON! Well, lookie-lookie . . . you want the EU to be canon. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "C.S.Strowbridge" Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2002 19:20:31 GMT Subject: Re: Commentary on the Wong-Anderson Debate Message-ID: <3DB453C5.1010209@shaw.ca> -------- DarkStar wrote: > "C.S.Strowbridge" wrote: >>>>>>If they meet at one point, they must meet at all points >>>>>>to satisfy the criterion. >>>>> >>>>>You'd have to prove that they actually meet . . . only then can you >>>>>override and ignore Lucas. >>>> >>>>Okay. They meet due to the fact that the EU named Coruscant. >>> >>>You're kidding, right? >> >>Here's another place they meet. > > "Another" implies that you had one to begin with. You don't. Fucking lies. There's a list given in [Canon] Parallel Universe Quote Proven False. >>Oh. My. God! EU=CANON! > > Well, lookie-lookie . . . you want the EU to be canon. There you go again. Taking a quote out of context. I was mocking the ultimate conclusion of your theory using the YUO=FAGGOT cliche as a template. C.S.Strowbridge ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "DarkStar" Date: Wed, 23 Oct 2002 05:15:36 -0500 Subject: Re: Commentary on the Wong-Anderson Debate Message-ID: -------- "C.S.Strowbridge" wrote in message news:3DB453C5.1010209@shaw.ca... > DarkStar wrote: > > "C.S.Strowbridge" wrote: > > >>>>>>If they meet at one point, they must meet at all points > >>>>>>to satisfy the criterion. > >>>>> > >>>>>You'd have to prove that they actually meet . . . only then can you > >>>>>override and ignore Lucas. > >>>> > >>>>Okay. They meet due to the fact that the EU named Coruscant. > >>> > >>>You're kidding, right? > >> > >>Here's another place they meet. > > > > "Another" implies that you had one to begin with. You don't. > > Fucking lies. There's a list given in [Canon] Parallel Universe Quote > Proven False. And I have demonstrated the falseness of the idea behind that, and the notions themselves. > >>Oh. My. God! EU=CANON! > > > > Well, lookie-lookie . . . you want the EU to be canon. > > There you go again. Taking a quote out of context. My subtle joke, your tiny brain. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "C.S.Strowbridge" Date: Wed, 23 Oct 2002 16:13:57 GMT Subject: Re: Commentary on the Wong-Anderson Debate Message-ID: <3DB6CA53.9000108@shaw.ca> -------- DarkStar wrote: > "C.S.Strowbridge" wrote: >>>>Here's another place they meet. >>> >>>"Another" implies that you had one to begin with. You don't. >> >>Fucking lies. There's a list given in [Canon] Parallel Universe Quote >>Proven False. > > And I have demonstrated the falseness of the idea behind that, and the > notions themselves. Bullshit, you little fucker. You declared them coincidence like your opinion of them means shit. Here's a fucking clue, your opinion means shit on any topic. C.S.Strowbridge ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "DarkStar" Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2002 03:55:16 -0500 Subject: Re: Commentary on the Wong-Anderson Debate Message-ID: -------- "C.S.Strowbridge" wrote in message news:3DB6CA53.9000108@shaw.ca... > DarkStar wrote: > > "C.S.Strowbridge" wrote: > > >>>>Here's another place they meet. > >>> > >>>"Another" implies that you had one to begin with. You don't. > >> > >>Fucking lies. There's a list given in [Canon] Parallel Universe Quote > >>Proven False. > > > > And I have demonstrated the falseness of the idea behind that, and the > > notions themselves. > > Bullshit, you little fucker. You declared them coincidence like your > opinion of them means shit. Here's a fucking clue, your opinion means > shit on any topic. You're hardly in a position to say so, you ignorant little shit-for-brains. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "C.S.Strowbridge" Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2002 17:10:21 GMT Subject: Re: Commentary on the Wong-Anderson Debate Message-ID: <3DB82918.4060809@shaw.ca> -------- DarkStar wrote: > "C.S.Strowbridge" wrote: >>>>>>Here's another place they meet. >>>>> >>>>>"Another" implies that you had one to begin with. You don't. >>>> >>>>Fucking lies. There's a list given in [Canon] Parallel Universe Quote >>>>Proven False. >>> >>>And I have demonstrated the falseness of the idea behind that, and the >>>notions themselves. >> >>Bullshit, you little fucker. You declared them coincidence like your >>opinion of them means shit. Here's a fucking clue, your opinion means >>shit on any topic. > > You're hardly in a position to say so, you ignorant little shit-for-brains. My opinions are based on _all_ the evidence. Not picking and choosing pieces of evidence that fit my already determined position. C.S.Strowbridge ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: nitramtahalshia@aol.comAntiSpam (Sir Nitram) Date: 21 Oct 2002 02:35:26 GMT Subject: Re: Commentary on the Wong-Anderson Debate Message-ID: <20021020223526.23856.00000074@mb-fb.aol.com> -------- >"Graeme Dice" wrote in message >news:3DB22371.A8438263@sk.sympatico.ca... >> DarkStar wrote: >> > >> > "Graeme Dice" wrote in message >> > news:3DB1F0D3.CDA7CD2D@sk.sympatico.ca... >> > > If they meet at one point, they must meet at all points >> > > to satisfy the criterion. >> > >> > You'd have to prove that they actually meet . . . only then can you >override >> > and ignore Lucas. >> >> Okay. They meet due to the fact that the EU named Coruscant. > >You're kidding, right? > Well known fact. Didn't you know? -- 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: Mon, 21 Oct 2002 10:29:40 -0500 Subject: Re: Commentary on the Wong-Anderson Debate Message-ID: -------- "Sir Nitram" wrote in message news:20021020223526.23856.00000074@mb-fb.aol.com... > >"Graeme Dice" wrote in message > >news:3DB22371.A8438263@sk.sympatico.ca... > >> DarkStar wrote: > >> > > >> > "Graeme Dice" wrote in message > >> > news:3DB1F0D3.CDA7CD2D@sk.sympatico.ca... > >> > > If they meet at one point, they must meet at all points > >> > > to satisfy the criterion. > >> > > >> > You'd have to prove that they actually meet . . . only then can you > >override > >> > and ignore Lucas. > >> > >> Okay. They meet due to the fact that the EU named Coruscant. > > > >You're kidding, right? > > > > Well known fact. Didn't you know? That you're kidding? Yes, I did. I wasn't sure for a moment, because I didn't think anyone could be so moronic as to claim that the same name means EU = Canon, but . . . oh, wait, that is the claim. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: nitramtahalshia@aol.comAntiSpam (Sir Nitram) Date: 21 Oct 2002 16:42:01 GMT Subject: Re: Commentary on the Wong-Anderson Debate Message-ID: <20021021124201.24379.00002425@mb-ce.aol.com> -------- >"Sir Nitram" wrote in message >news:20021020223526.23856.00000074@mb-fb.aol.com... >> >"Graeme Dice" wrote in message >> >news:3DB22371.A8438263@sk.sympatico.ca... >> >> DarkStar wrote: >> >> > >> >> > "Graeme Dice" wrote in message >> >> > news:3DB1F0D3.CDA7CD2D@sk.sympatico.ca... >> >> > > If they meet at one point, they must meet at all points >> >> > > to satisfy the criterion. >> >> > >> >> > You'd have to prove that they actually meet . . . only then can you >> >override >> >> > and ignore Lucas. >> >> >> >> Okay. They meet due to the fact that the EU named Coruscant. >> > >> >You're kidding, right? >> > >> >> Well known fact. Didn't you know? > >That you're kidding? Yes, I did. I wasn't sure for a moment, because I >didn't think anyone could be so moronic as to claim that the same name means >EU = Canon, but . . . oh, wait, that is the claim. > Of course it is. The original name is Had Abbadon. The name Coruscant is the EU intruding on the movies, specifically, Zahn's work being placed in at Lucas' nod. I'm sorry your argument just fell apart, would you like a lollipop? -- 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, 23 Oct 2002 09:10:53 -0500 Subject: Re: Commentary on the Wong-Anderson Debate Message-ID: -------- "Sir Nitram" wrote in message news:20021021124201.24379.00002425@mb-ce.aol.com... > >"Sir Nitram" wrote in message > >news:20021020223526.23856.00000074@mb-fb.aol.com... > >> >"Graeme Dice" wrote in message > >> >news:3DB22371.A8438263@sk.sympatico.ca... > >> >> DarkStar wrote: > >> >> > > >> >> > "Graeme Dice" wrote in message > >> >> > news:3DB1F0D3.CDA7CD2D@sk.sympatico.ca... > >> >> > > If they meet at one point, they must meet at all points > >> >> > > to satisfy the criterion. > >> >> > > >> >> > You'd have to prove that they actually meet . . . only then can you > >> >override > >> >> > and ignore Lucas. > >> >> > >> >> Okay. They meet due to the fact that the EU named Coruscant. > >> > > >> >You're kidding, right? > >> > > >> > >> Well known fact. Didn't you know? > > > >That you're kidding? Yes, I did. I wasn't sure for a moment, because I > >didn't think anyone could be so moronic as to claim that the same name means > >EU = Canon, but . . . oh, wait, that is the claim. > > > > Of course it is. The original name is Had Abbadon. . . . and Alderaan, and Jhantor, and so on . . . > The name Coruscant is the EU intruding on the movies No, because Lucas's EU intrusion is temporal. > , specifically, Zahn's work being placed in at Lucas' nod. Which made Coruscant canon . . . that doesn't mean the EU has canonicity. It means Lucas liked the name. > I'm sorry your argument just fell apart, would you like a lollipop? My argument's just fine, thanks, and you can suck on it. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Greg Burnett" Date: Wed, 23 Oct 2002 17:29:55 -0400 Subject: Re: Commentary on the Wong-Anderson Debate Message-ID: -------- "DarkStar" wrote in message news:RU6dnXrhtsZ0MCugXTWcoQ@comcast.com... > > > , specifically, Zahn's work being placed in at Lucas' nod. > > Which made Coruscant canon . . . that doesn't mean the EU has canonicity. > It means Lucas liked the name. It means that Lucas DID use EU material in the Canon films thus the two are interdpendent (since they draw from one another) I find it funny that you can continue to say that Lucas doesn't use EU material in half this thread and then outright admit that he used it here. Furthermore the reason why Lucas used it DOESN'T MATTER. He called the planet Tatooine because he liked it...does that make it any less canon? -- 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: Thu, 24 Oct 2002 03:55:41 -0500 Subject: Re: Commentary on the Wong-Anderson Debate Message-ID: -------- "Greg Burnett" wrote in message news:ap74b0$riaij$1@ID-97732.news.dfncis.de... > "DarkStar" wrote in message > news:RU6dnXrhtsZ0MCugXTWcoQ@comcast.com... > > > > > > , specifically, Zahn's work being placed in at Lucas' nod. > > > > Which made Coruscant canon . . . that doesn't mean the EU has canonicity. > > It means Lucas liked the name. > > It means that Lucas DID use EU material in the Canon films thus the two are > interdpendent (since they draw from one another) > > I find it funny that you can continue to say that Lucas doesn't use EU > material in half this thread I never said that, you lying fuck. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Iceberg the Dancing Black Mage Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2002 08:48:25 -0500 Subject: Re: Commentary on the Wong-Anderson Debate Message-ID: -------- On Thu, 24 Oct 2002 03:55:41 -0500, "DarkStar" wrote: > >"Greg Burnett" wrote in message >news:ap74b0$riaij$1@ID-97732.news.dfncis.de... >> "DarkStar" wrote in message >> news:RU6dnXrhtsZ0MCugXTWcoQ@comcast.com... >> > >> >> > > , specifically, Zahn's work being placed in at Lucas' nod. >> > >> > Which made Coruscant canon . . . that doesn't mean the EU has >canonicity. >> > It means Lucas liked the name. >> >> It means that Lucas DID use EU material in the Canon films thus the two >are >> interdpendent (since they draw from one another) >> >> I find it funny that you can continue to say that Lucas doesn't use EU >> material in half this thread > >I never said that, you lying fuck. I just have to point out that it's supremely ironic that you're calling ANYBODY a lying fuck. -- Iceberg, the Dancing Black Mage With only a single word/The future is decided Our beat is/A shining diamond Into the true sky into the true sky/Our life shining into the sky - "Try Again," Macross 7 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "C.S.Strowbridge" Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2002 17:11:36 GMT Subject: Re: Commentary on the Wong-Anderson Debate Message-ID: <3DB82963.6070906@shaw.ca> -------- DarkStar wrote: > "Greg Burnett" wrote >>I find it funny that you can continue to say that Lucas doesn't use EU >>material in half this thread > > I never said that, you lying fuck. You declared all the incidents as /independent developments/. What the hell did you mean when you said that? C.S.Strowbridge ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Greg Burnett" Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2002 16:55:06 -0400 Subject: Re: Commentary on the Wong-Anderson Debate Message-ID: -------- "DarkStar" wrote in message news:DfqcnXW3u8gbKCqgXTWc3g@comcast.com... > > "Greg Burnett" wrote in message > news:ap74b0$riaij$1@ID-97732.news.dfncis.de... > > "DarkStar" wrote in message > > news:RU6dnXrhtsZ0MCugXTWcoQ@comcast.com... > > > > > > > > > , specifically, Zahn's work being placed in at Lucas' nod. > > > > > > Which made Coruscant canon . . . that doesn't mean the EU has > canonicity. > > > It means Lucas liked the name. > > > > It means that Lucas DID use EU material in the Canon films thus the two > are > > interdpendent (since they draw from one another) > > > > I find it funny that you can continue to say that Lucas doesn't use EU > > material in half this thread > > I never said that, you lying fuck. > Then you must agree that the Canon is dependent on the EU for creation of material. If Lucas uses material generated originally in the EU and inserts it into the canon this creates an interdependency that the hierarchy does not require but practice dictates. Once again if Lucas uses EU material then he is making the Canon dependent upon the EU. -- Lcpl Burnett, G.R. USMCR BridgeCo B 6th EngSptBN 4th FSSG "Weapons do not penetrate armour based on force and pressure" - IXJac(taken from SB.com and SD.net) "I'm a genocidal maniac, hold me." -Anakin Vader ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "DarkStar" Date: Fri, 25 Oct 2002 12:59:37 -0500 Subject: Re: Commentary on the Wong-Anderson Debate Message-ID: -------- "Greg Burnett" wrote in message news:ap9mlv$ss1ms$1@ID-97732.news.dfncis.de... > "DarkStar" wrote in message > news:DfqcnXW3u8gbKCqgXTWc3g@comcast.com... > > > > "Greg Burnett" wrote in message > > news:ap74b0$riaij$1@ID-97732.news.dfncis.de... > > > "DarkStar" wrote in message > > > news:RU6dnXrhtsZ0MCugXTWcoQ@comcast.com... > > > > > > > > > > > > , specifically, Zahn's work being placed in at Lucas' nod. > > > > > > > > Which made Coruscant canon . . . that doesn't mean the EU has > > canonicity. > > > > It means Lucas liked the name. > > > > > > It means that Lucas DID use EU material in the Canon films thus the two > > are > > > interdpendent (since they draw from one another) > > > > > > I find it funny that you can continue to say that Lucas doesn't use EU > > > material in half this thread > > > > I never said that, you lying fuck. > > > > Then you must agree that the Canon is dependent on the EU for creation of > material. I must agree with nothing demanded by your ignorance or dishonesty. What I will agree to is that the Canon is at liberty to use the EU, and on rare occasion has done so. This is not dependence . . . this is choice. In the "frontstage" sense, this is mere independent development in separate universes. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Greg Burnett" Date: Fri, 25 Oct 2002 14:48:38 -0400 Subject: Re: Commentary on the Wong-Anderson Debate Message-ID: -------- "DarkStar" wrote in message news:Z9CdnWhb56jjGySgXTWcpQ@comcast.com... > > "Greg Burnett" wrote in message > news:ap9mlv$ss1ms$1@ID-97732.news.dfncis.de... > > "DarkStar" wrote in message > > news:DfqcnXW3u8gbKCqgXTWc3g@comcast.com... > > > > > > "Greg Burnett" wrote in message > > > news:ap74b0$riaij$1@ID-97732.news.dfncis.de... > > > > "DarkStar" wrote in message > > > > news:RU6dnXrhtsZ0MCugXTWcoQ@comcast.com... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > , specifically, Zahn's work being placed in at Lucas' nod. > > > > > > > > > > Which made Coruscant canon . . . that doesn't mean the EU has > > > canonicity. > > > > > It means Lucas liked the name. > > > > > > > > It means that Lucas DID use EU material in the Canon films thus the > two > > > are > > > > interdpendent (since they draw from one another) > > > > > > > > I find it funny that you can continue to say that Lucas doesn't use EU > > > > material in half this thread > > > > > > I never said that, you lying fuck. > > > > > > > Then you must agree that the Canon is dependent on the EU for creation of > > material. > > I must agree with nothing demanded by your ignorance or dishonesty. > > What I will agree to is that the Canon is at liberty to use the EU, and on > rare occasion has done so. This is not dependence . . . this is choice. > > In the "frontstage" sense, this is mere independent development in separate > universes. > Circular logic. You claim that "parallel" can not mean interdependent because in the "fronstage" it is development in parallel (as you define it) entities. -- 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: Sat, 26 Oct 2002 10:32:45 -0500 Subject: Re: Commentary on the Wong-Anderson Debate Message-ID: <9SKdnfmet4wMKCegXTWcqQ@comcast.com> -------- "Greg Burnett" wrote in message news:apc3kn$7l8j$1@ID-97732.news.dfncis.de... > "DarkStar" wrote in message > news:Z9CdnWhb56jjGySgXTWcpQ@comcast.com... > > > > "Greg Burnett" wrote in message > > news:ap9mlv$ss1ms$1@ID-97732.news.dfncis.de... > > > "DarkStar" wrote in message > > > news:DfqcnXW3u8gbKCqgXTWc3g@comcast.com... > > > > > > > > "Greg Burnett" wrote in message > > > > news:ap74b0$riaij$1@ID-97732.news.dfncis.de... > > > > > "DarkStar" wrote in message > > > > > news:RU6dnXrhtsZ0MCugXTWcoQ@comcast.com... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > , specifically, Zahn's work being placed in at Lucas' nod. > > > > > > > > > > > > Which made Coruscant canon . . . that doesn't mean the EU has > > > > canonicity. > > > > > > It means Lucas liked the name. > > > > > > > > > > It means that Lucas DID use EU material in the Canon films thus the > > two > > > > are > > > > > interdpendent (since they draw from one another) > > > > > > > > > > I find it funny that you can continue to say that Lucas doesn't use > EU > > > > > material in half this thread > > > > > > > > I never said that, you lying fuck. > > > > > > > > > > Then you must agree that the Canon is dependent on the EU for creation > of > > > material. > > > > I must agree with nothing demanded by your ignorance or dishonesty. > > > > What I will agree to is that the Canon is at liberty to use the EU, and on > > rare occasion has done so. This is not dependence . . . this is choice. > > > > In the "frontstage" sense, this is mere independent development in > separate > > universes. > > > > Circular logic. You claim that "parallel" can not mean interdependent > because in the "fronstage" it is development in parallel (as you define it) > entities. God damn, you're fucking retarded. Did you even read what I wrote? ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: setesh@aol.com (Setesh) Date: 26 Oct 2002 20:38:32 GMT Subject: Re: Commentary on the Wong-Anderson Debate Message-ID: <20021026163832.14837.00000640@mb-cl.aol.com> -------- Darkstar subspaced: >"Greg Burnett" wrote in message >news:apc3kn$7l8j$1@ID-97732.news.dfncis.de... >> "DarkStar" wrote in message >> news:Z9CdnWhb56jjGySgXTWcpQ@comcast.com... >> > >> > "Greg Burnett" wrote in message >> > news:ap9mlv$ss1ms$1@ID-97732.news.dfncis.de... >> > > "DarkStar" wrote in message >> > > news:DfqcnXW3u8gbKCqgXTWc3g@comcast.com... >> > > > >> > > > "Greg Burnett" wrote in message >> > > > news:ap74b0$riaij$1@ID-97732.news.dfncis.de... >> > > > > "DarkStar" wrote in message >> > > > > news:RU6dnXrhtsZ0MCugXTWcoQ@comcast.com... >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > > , specifically, Zahn's work being placed in at Lucas' nod. >> > > > > > >> > > > > > Which made Coruscant canon . . . that doesn't mean the EU has >> > > > canonicity. >> > > > > > It means Lucas liked the name. >> > > > > >> > > > > It means that Lucas DID use EU material in the Canon films thus >the >> > two >> > > > are >> > > > > interdpendent (since they draw from one another) >> > > > > >> > > > > I find it funny that you can continue to say that Lucas doesn't >use >> EU >> > > > > material in half this thread >> > > > >> > > > I never said that, you lying fuck. >> > > > >> > > >> > > Then you must agree that the Canon is dependent on the EU for creation >> of >> > > material. >> > >> > I must agree with nothing demanded by your ignorance or dishonesty. >> > >> > What I will agree to is that the Canon is at liberty to use the EU, and >on >> > rare occasion has done so. This is not dependence . . . this is choice. >> > >> > In the "frontstage" sense, this is mere independent development in >> separate >> > universes. >> > >> >> Circular logic. You claim that "parallel" can not mean interdependent >> because in the "fronstage" it is development in parallel (as you define >it) >> entities. > >God damn, you're fucking retarded. Did you even read what I wrote? > > You do realize all he did was repeat your position back to you with the words '(as you define it)' attached to 'parallel'? Skywarp:"Starscream, What's Megatron's plan this time? Starscream:"Who cares? You just Know it's going to be evil. And evil is always fun." ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Greg Burnett" Date: Sun, 27 Oct 2002 22:32:53 -0500 Subject: Re: Commentary on the Wong-Anderson Debate Message-ID: -------- "DarkStar" wrote in message news:9SKdnfmet4wMKCegXTWcqQ@comcast.com... > > "Greg Burnett" wrote in message > news:apc3kn$7l8j$1@ID-97732.news.dfncis.de... > > "DarkStar" wrote in message > > news:Z9CdnWhb56jjGySgXTWcpQ@comcast.com... > > > > > > "Greg Burnett" wrote in message > > > news:ap9mlv$ss1ms$1@ID-97732.news.dfncis.de... > > > > "DarkStar" wrote in message > > > > news:DfqcnXW3u8gbKCqgXTWc3g@comcast.com... > > > > > > > > > > "Greg Burnett" wrote in message > > > > > news:ap74b0$riaij$1@ID-97732.news.dfncis.de... > > > > > > "DarkStar" wrote in message > > > > > > news:RU6dnXrhtsZ0MCugXTWcoQ@comcast.com... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > , specifically, Zahn's work being placed in at Lucas' nod. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Which made Coruscant canon . . . that doesn't mean the EU has > > > > > canonicity. > > > > > > > It means Lucas liked the name. > > > > > > > > > > > > It means that Lucas DID use EU material in the Canon films thus > the > > > two > > > > > are > > > > > > interdpendent (since they draw from one another) > > > > > > > > > > > > I find it funny that you can continue to say that Lucas doesn't > use > > EU > > > > > > material in half this thread > > > > > > > > > > I never said that, you lying fuck. > > > > > > > > > > > > > Then you must agree that the Canon is dependent on the EU for creation > > of > > > > material. > > > > > > I must agree with nothing demanded by your ignorance or dishonesty. > > > > > > What I will agree to is that the Canon is at liberty to use the EU, and > on > > > rare occasion has done so. This is not dependence . . . this is choice. > > > > > > In the "frontstage" sense, this is mere independent development in > > separate > > > universes. > > > > > > > Circular logic. You claim that "parallel" can not mean interdependent > > because in the "fronstage" it is development in parallel (as you define > it) > > entities. > > God damn, you're fucking retarded. Did you even read what I wrote? > Failure to address the point noted, concession accepted. Evasion, the last resort of the defeated. -- 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: Mon, 21 Oct 2002 16:57:10 -0400 Subject: Re: Commentary on the Wong-Anderson Debate Message-ID: <3DB46A26.55E1C90C@daltonator.net> -------- DarkStar wrote: > > "Sir Nitram" wrote in message > news:20021020223526.23856.00000074@mb-fb.aol.com... > > >"Graeme Dice" wrote in message > > >news:3DB22371.A8438263@sk.sympatico.ca... > > >> DarkStar wrote: > > >> > > > >> > "Graeme Dice" wrote in message > > >> > news:3DB1F0D3.CDA7CD2D@sk.sympatico.ca... > > >> > > If they meet at one point, they must meet at all points > > >> > > to satisfy the criterion. > > >> > > > >> > You'd have to prove that they actually meet . . . only then can you > > >override > > >> > and ignore Lucas. > > >> > > >> Okay. They meet due to the fact that the EU named Coruscant. > > > > > >You're kidding, right? > > > > > > > Well known fact. Didn't you know? > > That you're kidding? Yes, I did. I wasn't sure for a moment, because I > didn't think anyone could be so moronic as to claim that the same name means > EU = Canon, but . . . oh, wait, that is the claim. I do believe you missed the fact that Zahn created the name Coruscant, and Lucas decided to use it. -- Rob "Roby" Dalton http://daltonator.net "Always in motion is the future." --Yoda ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "DarkStar" Date: Wed, 23 Oct 2002 09:11:44 -0500 Subject: Re: Commentary on the Wong-Anderson Debate Message-ID: -------- "Dalton" wrote in message news:3DB46A26.55E1C90C@daltonator.net... > DarkStar wrote: > > > > "Sir Nitram" wrote in message > > news:20021020223526.23856.00000074@mb-fb.aol.com... > > > >"Graeme Dice" wrote in message > > > >news:3DB22371.A8438263@sk.sympatico.ca... > > > >> DarkStar wrote: > > > >> > > > > >> > "Graeme Dice" wrote in message > > > >> > news:3DB1F0D3.CDA7CD2D@sk.sympatico.ca... > > > >> > > If they meet at one point, they must meet at all points > > > >> > > to satisfy the criterion. > > > >> > > > > >> > You'd have to prove that they actually meet . . . only then can you > > > >override > > > >> > and ignore Lucas. > > > >> > > > >> Okay. They meet due to the fact that the EU named Coruscant. > > > > > > > >You're kidding, right? > > > > > > > > > > Well known fact. Didn't you know? > > > > That you're kidding? Yes, I did. I wasn't sure for a moment, because I > > didn't think anyone could be so moronic as to claim that the same name means > > EU = Canon, but . . . oh, wait, that is the claim. > > I do believe you missed the fact that Zahn created the name Coruscant, > and Lucas decided to use it. Nope, I already knew that. I also already knew that it didn't make the EU canon. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: swineherd@swineherd.co.uk (The Baron) Date: Wed, 23 Oct 2002 21:26:09 GMT Subject: Re: Commentary on the Wong-Anderson Debate Message-ID: <3db713e9.87792957@news.freeserve.co.uk> -------- On Wed, 23 Oct 2002 09:11:44 -0500, "DarkStar" wrote: > >"Dalton" wrote in message >news:3DB46A26.55E1C90C@daltonator.net... >> DarkStar wrote: >> > >> > "Sir Nitram" wrote in message >> > news:20021020223526.23856.00000074@mb-fb.aol.com... >> > > >"Graeme Dice" wrote in message >> > > >news:3DB22371.A8438263@sk.sympatico.ca... >> > > >> DarkStar wrote: >> > > >> > >> > > >> > "Graeme Dice" wrote in message >> > > >> > news:3DB1F0D3.CDA7CD2D@sk.sympatico.ca... >> > > >> > > If they meet at one point, they must meet at all points >> > > >> > > to satisfy the criterion. >> > > >> > >> > > >> > You'd have to prove that they actually meet . . . only then can >you >> > > >override >> > > >> > and ignore Lucas. >> > > >> >> > > >> Okay. They meet due to the fact that the EU named Coruscant. >> > > > >> > > >You're kidding, right? >> > > > >> > > >> > > Well known fact. Didn't you know? >> > >> > That you're kidding? Yes, I did. I wasn't sure for a moment, because >I >> > didn't think anyone could be so moronic as to claim that the same name >means >> > EU = Canon, but . . . oh, wait, that is the claim. >> >> I do believe you missed the fact that Zahn created the name Coruscant, >> and Lucas decided to use it. > >Nope, I already knew that. I also already knew that it didn't make the EU >canon. > Just shut up and die. -- As you read this sig I waste your worthless life. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Greg Burnett" Date: Wed, 23 Oct 2002 19:27:46 -0400 Subject: Re: Commentary on the Wong-Anderson Debate Message-ID: -------- "DarkStar" wrote in message news:DlOdndzFJ-6GMyugXTWcqA@comcast.com... > > "Dalton" wrote in message > news:3DB46A26.55E1C90C@daltonator.net... > > DarkStar wrote: > > > > > > "Sir Nitram" wrote in message > > > news:20021020223526.23856.00000074@mb-fb.aol.com... > > > > >"Graeme Dice" wrote in message > > > > >news:3DB22371.A8438263@sk.sympatico.ca... > > > > >> DarkStar wrote: > > > > >> > > > > > >> > "Graeme Dice" wrote in message > > > > >> > news:3DB1F0D3.CDA7CD2D@sk.sympatico.ca... > > > > >> > > If they meet at one point, they must meet at all points > > > > >> > > to satisfy the criterion. > > > > >> > > > > > >> > You'd have to prove that they actually meet . . . only then can > you > > > > >override > > > > >> > and ignore Lucas. > > > > >> > > > > >> Okay. They meet due to the fact that the EU named Coruscant. > > > > > > > > > >You're kidding, right? > > > > > > > > > > > > > Well known fact. Didn't you know? > > > > > > That you're kidding? Yes, I did. I wasn't sure for a moment, because > I > > > didn't think anyone could be so moronic as to claim that the same name > means > > > EU = Canon, but . . . oh, wait, that is the claim. > > > > I do believe you missed the fact that Zahn created the name Coruscant, > > and Lucas decided to use it. > > Nope, I already knew that. I also already knew that it didn't make the EU > canon. > Yup, I agree the EU isn't canon...its official. It has canonicity. -- 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: Thu, 24 Oct 2002 03:56:29 -0500 Subject: Re: Commentary on the Wong-Anderson Debate Message-ID: -------- "Greg Burnett" wrote in message news:ap7b80$sdgan$1@ID-97732.news.dfncis.de... > "DarkStar" wrote in message > news:DlOdndzFJ-6GMyugXTWcqA@comcast.com... > > > > "Dalton" wrote in message > > news:3DB46A26.55E1C90C@daltonator.net... > > > DarkStar wrote: > > > > > > > > "Sir Nitram" wrote in message > > > > news:20021020223526.23856.00000074@mb-fb.aol.com... > > > > > >"Graeme Dice" wrote in message > > > > > >news:3DB22371.A8438263@sk.sympatico.ca... > > > > > >> DarkStar wrote: > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > "Graeme Dice" wrote in message > > > > > >> > news:3DB1F0D3.CDA7CD2D@sk.sympatico.ca... > > > > > >> > > If they meet at one point, they must meet at all points > > > > > >> > > to satisfy the criterion. > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > You'd have to prove that they actually meet . . . only then can > > you > > > > > >override > > > > > >> > and ignore Lucas. > > > > > >> > > > > > >> Okay. They meet due to the fact that the EU named Coruscant. > > > > > > > > > > > >You're kidding, right? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Well known fact. Didn't you know? > > > > > > > > That you're kidding? Yes, I did. I wasn't sure for a moment, > because > > I > > > > didn't think anyone could be so moronic as to claim that the same name > > means > > > > EU = Canon, but . . . oh, wait, that is the claim. > > > > > > I do believe you missed the fact that Zahn created the name Coruscant, > > > and Lucas decided to use it. > > > > Nope, I already knew that. I also already knew that it didn't make the EU > > canon. > > > > Yup, I agree the EU isn't canon...its official. It has canonicity. Are you a pathological liar, or do you have some control over it? ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Graeme Dice Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2002 08:03:21 -0600 Subject: Re: Commentary on the Wong-Anderson Debate Message-ID: <3DB7FDA9.7D34894B@sk.sympatico.ca> -------- DarkStar wrote: > > Yup, I agree the EU isn't canon...its official. It has canonicity. > > Are you a pathological liar, or do you have some control over it? Your arguments are so incredibly convincing. Please continue to wow us with your massive intellect and stellar insults. -- "Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored." — Aldous Huxley (1894-1963). ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Greg Burnett" Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2002 16:55:33 -0400 Subject: Re: Commentary on the Wong-Anderson Debate Message-ID: -------- "DarkStar" wrote in message news:JqSdnRDUqvArKCqgXTWcpg@comcast.com... > > "Greg Burnett" wrote in message > news:ap7b80$sdgan$1@ID-97732.news.dfncis.de... > > "DarkStar" wrote in message > > news:DlOdndzFJ-6GMyugXTWcqA@comcast.com... > > > > > > "Dalton" wrote in message > > > news:3DB46A26.55E1C90C@daltonator.net... > > > > DarkStar wrote: > > > > > > > > > > "Sir Nitram" wrote in message > > > > > news:20021020223526.23856.00000074@mb-fb.aol.com... > > > > > > >"Graeme Dice" wrote in message > > > > > > >news:3DB22371.A8438263@sk.sympatico.ca... > > > > > > >> DarkStar wrote: > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > "Graeme Dice" wrote in message > > > > > > >> > news:3DB1F0D3.CDA7CD2D@sk.sympatico.ca... > > > > > > >> > > If they meet at one point, they must meet at all points > > > > > > >> > > to satisfy the criterion. > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > You'd have to prove that they actually meet . . . only then > can > > > you > > > > > > >override > > > > > > >> > and ignore Lucas. > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> Okay. They meet due to the fact that the EU named Coruscant. > > > > > > > > > > > > > >You're kidding, right? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Well known fact. Didn't you know? > > > > > > > > > > That you're kidding? Yes, I did. I wasn't sure for a moment, > > because > > > I > > > > > didn't think anyone could be so moronic as to claim that the same > name > > > means > > > > > EU = Canon, but . . . oh, wait, that is the claim. > > > > > > > > I do believe you missed the fact that Zahn created the name Coruscant, > > > > and Lucas decided to use it. > > > > > > Nope, I already knew that. I also already knew that it didn't make the > EU > > > canon. > > > > > > > Yup, I agree the EU isn't canon...its official. It has canonicity. > > Are you a pathological liar, or do you have some control over it? > lack of counter-argument or link to counter-argument noted, concession accepted. -- 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: Sun, 20 Oct 2002 22:40:50 -0400 Subject: Re: Commentary on the Wong-Anderson Debate Message-ID: <3DB36932.D112F08C@daltonator.net> -------- DarkStar wrote: > > "Graeme Dice" wrote in message > news:3DB22371.A8438263@sk.sympatico.ca... > > DarkStar wrote: > > > > > > "Graeme Dice" wrote in message > > > news:3DB1F0D3.CDA7CD2D@sk.sympatico.ca... > > > > If they meet at one point, they must meet at all points > > > > to satisfy the criterion. > > > > > > You'd have to prove that they actually meet . . . only then can you > override > > > and ignore Lucas. > > > > Okay. They meet due to the fact that the EU named Coruscant. > > You're kidding, right? "Heir to the Empire", Timothy Zahn -- Rob "Roby" Dalton http://daltonator.net "Pretty," Donos said. "What do we blow up first?" --"Solo Command", Aaron Allston ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "DarkStar" Date: Sat, 19 Oct 2002 21:54:13 -0500 Subject: Re: Commentary on the Wong-Anderson Debate Message-ID: -------- "C.S.Strowbridge" wrote in message news:3DB1EE68.3010909@shaw.ca... > DarkStar wrote: > > "C.S.Strowbridge" wrote: > > >>And he's now picking a choosing what posts he replies to very carefully. > > > > Indeed . . . I don't feel it necessary to waste my time replying to every > > irrelevant BS argument. I'm only replying to the ones that attack my > > position in even the slightest meaningful way. > > And the posts that show that the mathematical definition of Parallel is > not equivalent to the most common definitions? 1. That does not attack my position in any meaningful way. 2. When it might've seemed to the first sixteen times it was posted, I replied. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "C.S.Strowbridge" Date: Sun, 20 Oct 2002 03:50:31 GMT Subject: Re: Commentary on the Wong-Anderson Debate Message-ID: <3DB22839.7030501@shaw.ca> -------- DarkStar wrote: > "C.S.Strowbridge" wrote: >>DarkStar wrote: >>>>And he's now picking a choosing what posts he replies to very carefully. >>> >>>Indeed . . . I don't feel it necessary to waste my time replying to >>>every irrelevant BS argument. I'm only replying to the ones that attack my >>>position in even the slightest meaningful way. >> >>And the posts that show that the mathematical definition of Parallel is >>not equivalent to the most common definitions? > > 1. That does not attack my position in any meaningful way. Bullshit. Those definitions had the opposite implication than the definition you choose to use. > 2. When it might've seemed to the first sixteen times it was posted, I > replied. Could you write that again. With proper English. C.S.Strowbridge ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "DarkStar" Date: Sun, 20 Oct 2002 03:22:24 -0500 Subject: Re: Commentary on the Wong-Anderson Debate Message-ID: -------- "C.S.Strowbridge" wrote in message news:3DB22839.7030501@shaw.ca... > DarkStar wrote: > > "C.S.Strowbridge" wrote: > >>DarkStar wrote: > > >>>>And he's now picking a choosing what posts he replies to very carefully. > >>> > >>>Indeed . . . I don't feel it necessary to waste my time replying to > >>>every irrelevant BS argument. I'm only replying to the ones that attack my > >>>position in even the slightest meaningful way. > >> > >>And the posts that show that the mathematical definition of Parallel is > >>not equivalent to the most common definitions? > > > > 1. That does not attack my position in any meaningful way. > > Bullshit. Those definitions had the opposite implication than the > definition you choose to use. Only one, and it contradicts the use from the quote. > > 2. When it might've seemed to the first sixteen times it was posted, I > > replied. > > Could you write that again. With proper English. Read #1. Then Read #2. Figure it out, dipshit. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "C.S.Strowbridge" Date: Sun, 20 Oct 2002 08:27:06 GMT Subject: Re: Commentary on the Wong-Anderson Debate Message-ID: <3DB2690E.4080605@shaw.ca> -------- DarkStar wrote: > "C.S.Strowbridge" wrote: >>>>>>And he's now picking a choosing what posts he replies to very >>>>>>carefully. > >>>>>Indeed . . . I don't feel it necessary to waste my time replying to >>>>>every irrelevant BS argument. I'm only replying to the ones that >>>>>attack my position in even the slightest meaningful way. >>>> >>>>And the posts that show that the mathematical definition of Parallel is >>>>not equivalent to the most common definitions? >>> >>>1. That does not attack my position in any meaningful way. >> >>Bullshit. Those definitions had the opposite implication than the >>definition you choose to use. > > Only one, and it contradicts the use from the quote. Prove it. No wait. You can't. Your only evidence that it contradicts the quote is your conclusion that it contradicts the quote. >>>2. When it might've seemed to the first sixteen times it was posted, I >>>replied. >> >>Could you write that again. With proper English. > > Read #1. Then Read #2. Figure it out, dipshit. Translation: Wow, I really fucked up writing that. But I can never admit that. C.S.Strowbridge ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "DarkStar" Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2002 10:30:50 -0500 Subject: Re: Commentary on the Wong-Anderson Debate Message-ID: -------- "C.S.Strowbridge" wrote in message news:3DB2690E.4080605@shaw.ca... > DarkStar wrote: > > "C.S.Strowbridge" wrote: > > >>>>>>And he's now picking a choosing what posts he replies to very > >>>>>>carefully. > > > >>>>>Indeed . . . I don't feel it necessary to waste my time replying to > >>>>>every irrelevant BS argument. I'm only replying to the ones that > >>>>>attack my position in even the slightest meaningful way. > >>>> > >>>>And the posts that show that the mathematical definition of Parallel is > >>>>not equivalent to the most common definitions? > >>> > >>>1. That does not attack my position in any meaningful way. > >> > >>Bullshit. Those definitions had the opposite implication than the > >>definition you choose to use. > > > > Only one, and it contradicts the use from the quote. > > Prove it. No wait. You can't. Your only evidence that it contradicts the > quote is your conclusion that it contradicts the quote. No, the evidence is the use and context . . . I know context is something you idiots have a problem with, but you could at least try. > > >>>2. When it might've seemed to the first sixteen times it was posted, I > >>>replied. > >> > >>Could you write that again. With proper English. > > > > Read #1. Then Read #2. Figure it out, dipshit. > > Translation: Wow, I really fucked up writing that. But I can never admit > that. No, you just can't read. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "C.S.Strowbridge" Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2002 19:25:49 GMT Subject: Re: Commentary on the Wong-Anderson Debate Message-ID: <3DB45502.9040401@shaw.ca> -------- DarkStar wrote: > "C.S.Strowbridge" wrote: >>>>Bullshit. Those definitions had the opposite implication than the >>>>definition you choose to use. >>> >>>Only one, and it contradicts the use from the quote. >> >>Prove it. No wait. You can't. Your only evidence that it contradicts the >>quote is your conclusion that it contradicts the quote. > > No, the evidence is the use and context . . . I know context is something > you idiots have a problem with, but you could at least try. Context? Is that what you call it when you take half a quote and use it to override the other half? C.S.Strowbridge