The cancellation of Star Trek in 1969 stands among the biggest blunders that ever occurred on broadcast television. This is axiomatic, non-debatable, and beyond dispute.
Teleologically, the goal of the demiurges of television was to restore the program to the airwaves.
Every so-called “Star Trek-related” program that ever appeared was merely a placeholder in anticipation of the return of the real thing.
Picard was a character on one of those placeholder programs. As such, his existence was merely a provisional fiction. In other words, he didn’t actually exist within the context of the Star Trek reality.
Captain Kirk did exist (within the context of the Star Trek reality).
That which does (or did) not exist within the context of its reality cannot, by definition, be superior to that which does (or did).
Therefore, the assertion “Picard > Kirk” is disproven. Q.E.D.
I’m not going to argue with this, though I’ll limit it to after the third book. That’s when he seems to have developed the attitude of, “I’m a NY Times bestseller. I don’t need no stinking editor!”
My other thoughts on Martin’s interest in continuing to write the series are probably better suited for another thread, except that I’ll note that in the last four years his name continues to appear all over the place as an editor (Rogues, etc.) and on reprints (Wild Cards, etc.).
Whether you like him or not, DrDeth’s complaint was about how there were special rules for those threads that went well beyond this sort of thing.
For example, would you think mentioning that the sex scenes weren’t as explicit in the books would count as a spoiler? That’s an example he brought up in the ATMB thread, and no one contradicted that it had happened.
I mean, that literally could not spoil anything in the show. And the context indicated he was not trying to skirt the rules.
I don’t particularly like the guy. I think he actually does a lot of the things people accuse me of (still) doing. And this pit thread is justified. But I don’t like it when people exaggerate the bad things someone does. He is not going around throwing out spoilers or acting like it’s hard to know what a spoiler really is.
He objects to special rules and is being a whiny bitch about it.
You are absolutely 100% wrong on this. You obviously have no clue what you are talking about.
That shouldn’t be a surprise to anyone, including you. You’re a fucking idiot, and everyone knows it, including you. So why don’t you quit pretending you’re the voice of fucking reason when you’re actually the voice of fucking numbskull personified.
So, SenorBeef, about that recent post- do note I used a smiley, a emotion. It was a attempt at humor. Clearly rather feeble. I apologize for that.:smack:
But again, in the ATMB thread, I said I was satisfied now with Idle Thoughts well thought out post and bring the rules back in line with all the other threads.
I said this:"So Senor la tetera may I introduce myself- Doctor la olla .
Can we call a truce now? " but you rejected my offer.
*So, I offer the hand of conciliation and truce again- do you accept? *
What bullshit. You’ve been spouting this nonsense for years. It’s not an attempt at humor. It’s a petty, childish reaction to being rightfully called out as an jerk. You didn’t get your way, so anyone who disagrees with you is illiterate. What a pussy you are.
My original feeling was similar. The attitude that “the books don’t exist” seemed pretty lame and pretty extreme. But when it became clear that there were assholes like you who just couldn’t resist pushing the spoiler boundaries, it became clear that there was a need for that rule. You are probably the only reason we need that stupid rule at this point.
I kind of hate that we can’t reasonably mention the books, even offhandedly. But it’s douchebags like you that are to blame, not the OP or the mods. You are the one that ruined any reasonableness in the GoT threads.
But, hey, you want a “truce”. After several years of acting like a jerk. Good luck with that. Your “truce” is an offer to act like a decent human being. If he rejects, does that mean you continue your moronic behavior?
So all this talk you’ve said about how anyone who hasn’t read the song of fire and ice books is illiterate and they can’t read big words has been a joke this entire time? Or did you, at some point, silently decide that it’s a joke?
You’ve been barking up the “I’m so very smart, I read some fantasy books, you’re so very dumb, you didn’t” tree for 5 years now. When did it become a joke?
This thread isn’t about arguing the GoT rules. As I said in the OP, I only included that information on the context as to why you say some of the things you do. That matter is pretty well settled and everything is okay on that front.
Rather, this thread is calling you out for constantly fucking mocking people as illiterate because they haven’t read one particular series of books, which you do even when it has nothing to do with discussing GoT rules.
What does that even mean? What would a truce mean on my end? As far as I’m concerned, the matter of GoT thread rules is settled and they’re working just fine. So I don’t see what a truce would even mean in that context.
If you mean a truce as in not calling you out for still fucking bragging like you’re a genius because you read some fantasy books and calling out others as stupid because they haven’t - if you don’t want flak for that, then just don’t do it.
After reading this thread and some of the discussion threads, I propose a new rule: For the purposes of the SDMB, neither the books nor the show exist. Because, jesus…
That was funny, but his stupid repeating of “Do you mean Gonzales, there is no character named Adama on Agents of SHIELD,” or what ever it was, was more annoying than people referring to the character as “Adama” in the first place. Besides, everyone knows that Adama was really Ben Cartwright’s secret identity.
