What terribly crude metaphors. You did ask, so I answered.2046 wrote:I feel like an ass for saying this, given that you expended effort on the post, but . . . why was I supposed to care and/or be surprised about the products of some EU-phile SDN dude's autoerotic behavior? Such mental man-goo is par for the course over there.Jedi Master Spock wrote:Found it. p46 of the SDN thread here Ender digs up the New Essential Guide to Droids and proceeds to make a high-spin interpretation. It's being considered fresh evidence contradicting Traviss's clone figures, although it only discusses droids.2046 wrote:What the hell is this "a unit is not a clone" crap springing up again?
Seriously, though, my only source of alarm was seeing folks seeming to ponder it here.
Really? Astonishing!At this point, it does look like they're grasping at straws on SDN.
I think, for those of us willing to examine the EU, conditionally or generally, the question of whether or not LL has changed their editorial policies is one worth keeping an open mind on. Currently, for example, it seems pretty clear that for the foreseeable immediate future, clone numbers will be kept in the millions, and droid numbers will tend towards sub-trillion or ambiguous descriptions.
However, change remains quite possible, at any level of canon. Remember Greedo and Han? It would be quite foolish of us to close our minds to anything new happening to Star Wars.
At any moment, Lucas could decide it's time for a third live-action trilogy featuring Ewok pornography, a chibi pink Darth Vader clone hunting down droids that have been possessed by the malevolent ghost of the Emperor, and Han having the twins implanted in him for the last two trimesters for "security reasons." He could even ask William Shatner to do the soundtrack.
We could say it isn't Star Wars - but we certainly would have to reconsider what we're talking about when we, as silly Star Wars fanfolk interested in cross-universe VS scenarios, talk about what the fictional reality of Star Wars really is.