SDN's relationship with SB and SFJ

[Mike DiCenso]

Some of this is also individual fatigue; I know I started off updating my website a lot, and slowed over time; Wong shows the same pattern. G2k has been very good at updating his website in general, but we shouldn't be surprised he has slowed down a lot in the last couple years.

Things are very slowly re-energizing, in part due to the CGI Clone Wars series, which is clearly chipping away at the Warsies' AoTC:ICS bible that they previously used to hit the ignorant over the head with. As the old Strek vs Swars forum showed; once you take the ICS out of the debating equation, the Warsies no longer have a leg to stand on, and they actually have to work to prove their points... most often failing in the process. For ISD firepower the only thing they had to cling to was Saxton's erronous BDZ assumptions and the silly idea that the Death Stars actually do generate beams of 1e32 to 1e38 joules of energy, and that Dodonna ment Death Star firepower = superlaser which is greater than half the Imperial starfleet, and not the TL batteries. At least people defending other franchises are picking up on the TCW's major contradictions of the ICS and wanked out Warsie firepower, if not the pro-Trek people.
-Mike

[Trinoya]

Ah, thanks for the compliment JMS, and yes, I was refering to STvSW in regards to being active, I should have clarified ^_^

In regards to the slowing down: It is sad but true that we all must have lives and other issues to deal with... if only there was some way to make debating economical we'd all be set, now wouldn't we. ^_^ I guess things can slow if it means G2k and Mike Wong get to eat... (damn them and their need for food and shelter!)

And Mike brings up a very good point, the clone wars is definitely taking its toll on the now dated ICS. At places like SB and other sites people have begun to question it.... that, perhaps more than anything gives credit to the fact that so many people in star trek vs star wars have denounced it for years. Brings a tear to me eye, it does. ^_^;

[Praeothmin]

the clone wars is definitely taking its toll on the now dated ICS

Actually, even the AotC movie took a toll on the ICS.
Nothing we saw in the movies, except perhaps the "obviously subspace" "sonic mine", even approached the firepower figures in the ICS.

:)

[Mike DiCenso]

Well, yeah, of course the actual AoTC movie took it's toll on the wank; the silly seismic mine aside, the silly firepower figures took a massive hit thanks to Slave-I only shattering a relatively small section of a 12 meter (on the long axis) asteroid, and breaking up two other similarly sized ones with it's blasters, thus contradicting the kilotons firepower number the Warsies love to toss out.

Even long before that, in TESB, we saw the bolts from a Tie fighter hit a rock outcropping and it doesn't do anything to it, just makes some nifty red sparkles.
-Mike

[Mr. Oragahn]

Even long before that, in TESB, we saw the bolts from a Tie fighter hit a rock outcropping and it doesn't do anything to it, just makes some nifty red sparkles.
-Mike

Considering that those TIEs were said to fire flak, I suggested that the bolts which didn't explode were flak bolts which didn't react before hitting their target, like if you smashed a bomb on a wall before the reactants did what they should do. It's possible that such flak bolts do have a level of energy, but it's obviously not as high as bolts which would be supposed to deal their damage when they hit, not when they flak.

When the MF and the two TIEs fly above the asteroid, one of the bolts does still produce an explosion bigger than those sparkles seen later on in the crater.

What's been particularly annoying was the length which Leo went at to pretend that the cannons were dialed down on purpose, and argued that these bolts were still supposed to convince Solo and his petawatt shielded ship to surrender.

[Mike DiCenso]

When the MF and the two TIEs fly above the asteroid, one of the bolts does still produce an explosion bigger than those sparkles seen later on in the crater.

Where is this explosion? All I see are small flashes on the large asteroid's surface as the TIEs inadvertently strafe it when they miss the Falcon. Before that, there is a modest sized asteroid that has a reddish-orange flash, and there are several much more impressive explosions from colliding asteroids.

What's been particularly annoying was the length which Leo went at to pretend that the cannons were dialed down on purpose, and argued that these bolts were still supposed to convince Solo and his petawatt shielded ship to surrender.

Yes, but that's typical of him and other fanatical Warsies; as if we should believe that the TIE pilots are going to try and threaten the Falcon with firepower that would be in relation to it's supposed shields as throwing your average baseball at a M-1A Abrams tank's armor.
-Mike

[Mr. Oragahn]

When the MF and the two TIEs fly above the asteroid, one of the bolts does still produce an explosion bigger than those sparkles seen later on in the crater.

Where is this explosion? All I see are small flashes on the large asteroid's surface as the TIEs inadvertently strafe it when they miss the Falcon. Before that, there is a modest sized asteroid that has a reddish-orange flash, and there are several much more impressive explosions from colliding asteroids.

That view from above, just before they all go down into the crater, when Solo nosedives his cargo ship towards the biggest asteroid in the vicinity.
The TIEs miss and one of the shots ends in shadowy region of the surface, and makes an explosion there. That's the last explosion.
The explosions (there are three) in that sequence are interesting. One "spreads" like a ripple (2nd).

[Mike DiCenso]

I'll have to look more closely, then. Either way, so far, I don't see any cratering or shattering like we do in the AoTC Slave-I scenes.

An update: I'am taking some of our esteemed pro-Wars friends' advice and have gotten an account with ImperiWiki. I've made some modification to their article on SFNJ, some of which has been allowed to stand, some has be reverted.
-Mike

[Mr. Oragahn]

An update: I'am taking some of our esteemed pro-Wars friends' advice and have gotten an account with ImperiWiki. I've made some modification to their article on SFNJ, some of which has been allowed to stand, some has be reverted.
-Mike

An error. You're giving their mediocre and slander filled "wiki" an attention it does not deserve in the slightest.

[Mike DiCenso]

Maybe. But I consider it an experiment. I found it funny, though, that Ted moved you back into the "Trekkie" section that he insists on having, rather than using my methodology, which would place you and some others into a third category of participant... As if SFJ only ever has ST vs SW discussions. ;-)
-Mike

[ILikeDeathNote]

Hmmm. I've now been clearly identified as an active user of this forum by ImperialWiki, whether it's from someone from SDN or by Mike. Not that I'm bothered, not in the slightest (in fact I'm quite flattered they got my true allegiance down, though, as I've said repeatedly, I'm kinda burned out on the debate - yet why am I here? is what I know a lot of you are thinking), but I'm thinking of changing my username now. Not to hide my identity (in fact once again I don't mind if someone were to update my identity to the ImperialWiki) but just to remove any anime references. This is a move I've been contemplating for some time.

Besides, with a name like "ILikeDeathNote" they'll probably mistake me for an emo :p

An update: I'am taking some of our esteemed pro-Wars friends' advice and have gotten an account with ImperiWiki. I've made some modification to their article on SFNJ, some of which has been allowed to stand, some has be reverted.
-Mike

An error. You're giving their mediocre and slander filled "wiki" an attention it does not deserve in the slightest.

I have to agree with Mr. Oragahn on this.

[l33telboi]

I still can't believe no one's mentioned me in that wiki. It’s damn well insulting.

And reading through it I'm a little uncertain about just what was going through the mind of whoever wrote it. It just reads like mindless propaganda. I can't imagine a newbie reading that article and not raising an eyebrow in response. Surely, the author is aware of this?

But then I suppose versus debating has always been a little strange in that regard. Once you're biased enough you'll believe anything the guy arguing for your team is saying. And like any true extremist, you become unaware of how you look in the eyes of the ‘common folk’.

Got a good laugh at Oragahn’s description though. It first says “He insists he isn't a trekkie in spite of his mindless copying many of the idiotic ideas spouted by Darkstar, JMSpock, Mike DiCenso and tjhairball.” Alright, so you think he’s a trekkie dispite the somewhat in-your-face evidence to the contrary (just take a look at any random thread involving Trek on SB). But then it continues with: “In all fairness, he does appear to be more of a Stargate wanker rather than a true trektard.”

So basically he’s a trekkie dispite his claims to the opposite. But in all fairness he’s more of a Stargate wanker? Quite brilliant, if I may say.

[Mike DiCenso]

I still can't believe no one's mentioned me in that wiki. It’s damn well insulting.

And reading through it I'm a little uncertain about just what was going through the mind of whoever wrote it. It just reads like mindless propaganda. I can't imagine a newbie reading that article and not raising an eyebrow in response. Surely, the author is aware of this?

But then I suppose versus debating has always been a little strange in that regard. Once you're biased enough you'll believe anything the guy arguing for your team is saying. And like any true extremist, you become unaware of how you look in the eyes of the ‘common folk’.

Got a good laugh at Oragahn’s description though. It first says “He insists he isn't a trekkie in spite of his mindless copying many of the idiotic ideas spouted by Darkstar, JMSpock, Mike DiCenso and tjhairball.” Alright, so you think he’s a trekkie dispite the somewhat in-your-face evidence to the contrary (just take a look at any random thread involving Trek on SB). But then it continues with: “In all fairness, he does appear to be more of a Stargate wanker rather than a true trektard.”

So basically he’s a trekkie despite his claims to the opposite. But in all fairness he’s more of a Stargate wanker? Quite brilliant, if I may say.

Compare my last version of the article to the original one authored by none other than Darth Servo (surprise, surprise as to the style of the whole thing, huh? And this is what Ted C wants to revert back into the article!?). They're obviously trying to make SFJN appear in rather overly simplistic terms; only Trek versus Wars, rather than have anyone see that it involves many different topics with more than just two factions.
-Mike

[ILikeDeathNote]

Just out of curiosity, where is Imperial Wiki getting it's funding from? I'm assuming it's donations from SDN members, though I'd be surprised that people would be willing to take out of their personal fortunes to fund...this.

Then again, it is SDN.

[Jedi Master Spock]

Just out of curiosity, where is Imperial Wiki getting it's funding from? I'm assuming it's donations from SDN members, though I'd be surprised that people would be willing to take out of their personal fortunes to fund...this.

Then again, it is SDN.

The wiki probably doesn't take up much bandwidth. Our wiki uses only a fraction of the resources used by the forum, and they're probably in the same situation.

So really, who pays for it is who pays for SDN, which would mean Darth Wong, offset by whatever he takes in from advertising, "free e-mail" membership fees, and PayPal donations.