Debating against "The Die is Cast"

[Connor MacLeod]

Antimatter was supposedly "deactivated" by the Doomsday device or some such nonsense as I recall - trekkies usually argue this means the PTs were useless (although the DD used antiproton beams on the enterrprise, so go figure.) I suppose you could argue that the "deactivation" (however the fuck they do that -good luck explaining it) messed with fusing (they have trouble predicting it) for so many torpedoes but I dont see why they couldnt have just used the torpedoes as mines or something.

What really bugs me is that they never bothered trying the phasers in the maw. If phasers were really so super powerful as claimed they could have matched what the detonation of the impulse engines accomplished - quite possibly more effectively since its a concentrated beam rather than an omnidirectional blast - remember that part of the energy self destructing will be "lost" so at most you might expect 2/3 or 1/2 of the energy to the DD (I dunno I suppose if it gets in deep enough it might be 80%)

[Darth Wong]

I never understood why they couldn't just park themselves outside its firing arc, and then try various tricks on it. The thing can only fire forward, and its turning rate is very slow.

[Connor MacLeod]

Or use a shuttle. I totally bet Scotty could rig some manner of explosion onto a shuttle. If not nuclear, then use an antimatter pod or something and just trigger it when they get the PK to fire. They've shown that ability before.

[Marcus Aurelius]

The timing-positioning coupling could be terribly finicky if they're trying to actually get blast fronts to coalesce.

Did TOS era photon torpedoes have variable launch speed settings to begin with? It would be a requirement for any synchronized detonation, since the torpedoes would have to detonate fairly close to each other. Or alternatively deceleration capability, which I am pretty sure they did not have.

[Marcus Aurelius]

Or use a shuttle. I totally bet Scotty could rig some manner of explosion onto a shuttle.

I recall that they actually tried a shuttle. Wikipedia seems to confirm that, although it was not a well-designed attempt rather than a desperation measure by Decker.

[Tyralak]

Just look at the name they're using. They actually want it to be like a social club. They might as well proudly put up a banner saying "We all think alike and we're proud of it".

Ironically, they accuse SDN of being a community of like-minded people. And they are not entirely incorrect either, obviously, but their real beef is still with the moderation policy, which they think is too strict.

Yeah, well, when you have people who think it's funny to post child porn, I'd say that their idea of "too strict" is so far from social norms that it can be ignored.

No, Mike. I was very plain when I said I didn't approve of it. There is nothing funny whatsoever about child porn. I really don't think anyone there was saying they approved of it. In fact, doing that or even advocating child abuse one of 5 things that will get you banned. I have very few rules, but I am pretty sensitive on that one in particular. Quote from my rules page: "2. Linking to child porn or advocating pedophilia. If you are this kind of sick bastard, I don't want you anywhere NEAR my board. This is your warning. You will NOT get a second one."

The reason I chose that name is because ASVS.net was $2000. Yes, I know it sounds a bit dippy/possibly elitist. But it was the best thing I could find at the time.

Look, I'll explain what I'm doing. You can either like it or not. Go there or don't. But clarity is better than wild speculation. Enigma is correct when he says I don't post here much because I disagree with how it's run. What I want is a board that is modeled on the early culture of ASVS. Maybe I'm just nostalgic for the past. Whatever. Doesn't much matter. Contrary to what many of you might think, I'm not an anarchist. But I feel that the best debate and debate that is the most fun is achieved in a free and open forum. I don't approve of heavy handed moderation. I don't want it to become a Trekkie circle jerk any more than I want it to become a Warsie circle jerk. I want people to be able to express their opinions openly and stand or fall on the merits of their arguments. I'm not attempting to compete with you, Mike. My site is very different. It's also very new. We only have a handful of active members, but it's growing. I also allow things that you don't here. Trolling is permitted. Sock puppets are permitted. Pretty much anything that doesn't violate my big 5 rules goes. This also makes me a less appealing target for those who want to cause problems. (Why would you bother trolling a site that doesn't give a shit?) It's also not a SFJ clone. I'm friends with JMS, but our sites are quite different from one another as are our philosophies. It's an experiment. It may work, it may not.

[Ritterin Sophia]

So exactly what purpose was served by calling Mike a control freak? Or how about, "what SDN consists of is the very worst aspects of alt.startrek.vs.starwars, stripped of it's redeeming qualities"? Your bullshit about not trying to compete makes you look like a two-faced liar, considering I've already linked the thread wherein you proclaim your attempt to compete.

They're becoming increasingly irrelevant. We're the next big thing. People will see that sooner or later.

That was all in good fun, eh?

Your harboring rejects from from both SDN and SB who find it hilarious that a bunch of people were literally forced to see child pornography and then blames the victim like a bunch of conservatives would a rape victim that had the audacity to be female at night, whether you realize it or not, does reflect badly upon you. You will be judged by the company you keep.

Then there's the matter of your outright retarded arguments, despite visual evidence contradicting them. I'm sorry, but a third of the Earth wasn't scourged, we've seen megaton level detonations from orbit, those clearly weren't anything of the sort.

[Vympel]

I've argued Doomsday Machine more than once on SB.com and no Connie-Cultist (who are the only ones who peddle this nonsense, IMO) can win. The argument that photon torpedoes weren't used because of 'deactivation of antimatter' is utter bullshit - only the Constellation had its antimatter deactivated, the Enterprise never did.

The Enterprise didn't fire photon torpedoes or it's 'spherical-detonation phasers' (remastered Balance of Terror) because they're weaker than 97MT. Period.

[Tyralak]

So exactly what purpose was served by calling Mike a control freak? Or how about, "what SDN consists of is the very worst aspects of alt.startrek.vs.starwars, stripped of it's redeeming qualities"? Your bullshit about not trying to compete makes you look like a two-faced liar, considering I've already linked the thread wherein you proclaim your attempt to compete.

They're becoming increasingly irrelevant. We're the next big thing. People will see that sooner or later.

That was all in good fun, eh?

I make no apologies for what I said. I do think he is. So what? He thinks I'm an anarchist, even though this isn't the case. As far as the quote, it was an inside joke referencing an obnoxious individual from Comicon.com who goes by the name "Blackfoot".

[Tyralak]

Your harboring rejects from from both SDN and SB who find it hilarious that a bunch of people were literally forced to see child pornography and then blames the victim like a bunch of conservatives would a rape victim that had the audacity to be female at night, whether you realize it or not, does reflect badly upon you. You will be judged by the company you keep.

Oh dear lord. You really can't read, can you? I don't think anyone there thought what they did was good. I certainly didn't.

[Marcus Aurelius]

Trolling is permitted. Sock puppets are permitted. Pretty much anything that doesn't violate my big 5 rules goes. This also makes me a less appealing target for those who want to cause problems. (Why would you bother trolling a site that doesn't give a shit?)

You are certainly free to run your own board the way you see fit, but "Why would you bother trolling a site that doesn't give a shit?" is a very strange question from anyone who has ever read Usenet groups for more than two minutes. Despite the complete lack of any central authority which could have cared, Newsgroups were full of trolls. Trolls aren't interested only or even primarily in harrassing sites or moderators, they are interested in provoking strong reactions from people in general.

[Tyralak]

Trolling is permitted. Sock puppets are permitted. Pretty much anything that doesn't violate my big 5 rules goes. This also makes me a less appealing target for those who want to cause problems. (Why would you bother trolling a site that doesn't give a shit?)

You are certainly free to run your own board the way you see fit, but "Why would you bother trolling a site that doesn't give a shit?" is a very strange question from anyone who has ever read Usenet groups for more than two minutes. Despite the complete lack of any central authority which could have cared, Newsgroups were full of trolls. Trolls aren't interested only or even primarily in harrassing sites or moderators, they are interested in provoking strong reactions from people in general.

You are correct. Perhaps I should have phrased it differently. Our attitude towards trolls diminishes their effectiveness. Yes, Usenet was and is full of trolls. They were the most successful when they could rile people. By having a "meh" attitude toward them, we make a less appealing target.

[Ritterin Sophia]

Oh dear lord. You really can't read, can you? I don't think anyone there thought what they did was good. I certainly didn't.

Now you're a liar too.

Yeah that was awesome

Yeah. And also, I have the good sense not to piss off 4chan. Unlike some idiots at SDN who just HAD to poke them until they responded

No. However the resulting hysterics from the senate was worth a laugh.

Guess people shouldn't be fucking around on company time then.

[Tyralak]

Oh dear lord. You really can't read, can you? I don't think anyone there thought what they did was good. I certainly didn't.

Now you're a liar too.

Yeah that was awesome

Yeah. And also, I have the good sense not to piss off 4chan. Unlike some idiots at SDN who just HAD to poke them until they responded

No. However the resulting hysterics from the senate was worth a laugh.

Guess people shouldn't be fucking around on company time then.

Cherry picking things out of context. I shouldn't be surprised. I noticed you omitted the most important aspects of the thread. Plus, you still apparently have trouble with your reading comprehension. 1. Raycav was talking about the invasion itself. 2. I was stating the fact that I have the good sense not to piss off people who would vandalize my board. How you gleaned support for their actions from that is beyond me. 3. I don't speak for Cow. 4. See 3. Also, his point was about personal use of the internet on company time, not excusing the actions of the vandals.

[Kythnos]

Citizen, give me a spaceship and I can kill billions. Being at the top of a gravity well means that you can drop things and they hit the ground hard. Aim an asteroid at each ocean and you can basically end modern civilization.

I have tried to come up with a reasonable explanation between the many errors in ST, and of course you can never truly solve the problem because the writers and creators of the series just did not care. That being considered I have worked up a theory that helps explain why many times the visuals and dialog are inconsistent. In the “Balance of Terror” the Romulans destroy asteroids with very powerful torpedoes, they are never seen again but the ship was very slow, in show they say it had impulse only but this is almost impossible. If you add that with a comment from Tom Paris from “Year of Hell”, he said that the Krenin ship could not go faster than warp 5 because of its mass. You get a reasonable explanation that although more powerful weapons can be made it would take them way to long to ever deliver them. Again it is not a perfect explanation, but it might fill a few plot holes.

[Darth Wong]

Ooooh, Tyralak thinks that seniority on ASVS is some kind of badge of honour, that the year is 1995, and that troll invasions are a good thing.

ASVS in the early years was nothing great. In fact, it was pitiful; the reason the debate was so heated was due in large part to the fact that the early debate was utterly dominated by uneducated fools, with no real standards to speak of. Back then, it was actually common to see utterly idiotic arguments like "the Ent flew near a star so it's invincible" and the infamous nav-deflector argument to block Death Star superlaser blasts.

If you're so nostalgic for those days, you're welcome to them. It was a time when the debate was dominated primarily by persistence, when raving imbeciles like Elim Garak would "defeat" other debaters by simply outlasting them and repeating the same dishonest talking points over and over.

[Serafina]

Ooooh, Tyralak thinks that seniority on ASVS is some kind of badge of honour, that the year is 1995, and that troll invasions are a good thing.

ASVS in the early years was nothing great. In fact, it was pitiful; the reason the debate was so heated was due in large part to the fact that the early debate was utterly dominated by uneducated fools, with no real standards to speak of. Back then, it was actually common to see utterly idiotic arguments like "the Ent flew near a star so it's invincible" and the infamous nav-deflector argument to block Death Star superlaser blasts.

If you're so nostalgic for those days, you're welcome to them. It was a time when the debate was dominated primarily by persistence, when raving imbeciles like Elim Garak would "defeat" other debaters by simply outlasting them and repeating the same dishonest talking points over and over.

Mike summed it up nicely.

Free speech is necessary for a debate, but it does not constitute a debate alone.
Two people can shout their oppinions at each other all they want, but thats not a debate.

Your forum lacks an critical aspect of debate: Scrutiny.
If someone says something idiotic on your forum, no one will call him on it.
Oh, sure, some people will disagree, but based on their oppinion, not any kind of critical thinking.

Now, why is it important to me?
Simple, i learned from SD.Net - logic, critical thinking and various other things.
It's not my only source for these ideals, but it is by far the best place to exercise them.

You get what you bargained for - Mike based his forum on critical thinking, and thats what he got.
You based yours on free speech, and thats what you got (so far) - but free speech is worthless on its own, it's the allowance of good ideas that makes it a good thing.

[Darth Wong]

I think that Tyralak has latched onto free speech as a moral concept, but it's only a moral concept insofar as people have a right to be free of criminal persecution for their speech.

It doesn't mean that anarchy actually improves discussions! Some people have gotten a very warped idea of why free speech is good.

[Ted C]

Antimatter was supposedly "deactivated" by the Doomsday device or some such nonsense as I recall - trekkies usually argue this means the PTs were useless (although the DD used antiproton beams on the enterrprise, so go figure.) I suppose you could argue that the "deactivation" (however the fuck they do that -good luck explaining it) messed with fusing (they have trouble predicting it) for so many torpedoes but I dont see why they couldnt have just used the torpedoes as mines or something.

Absurd though it sounds, if all of the antimatter on the Constellation was somehow rendered inert, then it really does boil down to whatever they could get out of the remaining fuel for the impulse engines.

As for firing torpedoes into the DDM, if whatever goes on inside that thing is capable of "deactivating" antimatter, torpedoes might simply do nothing, since their payload would be inert. The same would presumably apply to a shuttle-based weapon: an anti-matter based charge would be unreliable. They already know that the existing impulse engine payload of a shuttle isn't enough, and I don't think they even carry any king of genuine fusion warhead, so the impulse engine of the Constellation was really the only thing they had that looked like a viable weapon.

As for just following along outside its firing arc, that could presumably be done for a while. It's top speed was better than theirs after Decker's stupidity, but it seemed to try to get them in front of it whenever they were within a certain distance, and with their superior maneuverability it shouldn't really be a problem to lurk along its tail somewhere and stay out of danger. That would presumably leave them running around in circles, which would be fine for a while, but they would still need to find a way to affect it sooner or later, since communications were blocked and they'd eventually run out of supplies.

[Ted C]

I think that Tyralak has latched onto free speech as a moral concept, but it's only a moral concept insofar as people have a right to be free of criminal persecution for their speech.

To my knowledge, "free speech" only means that the government can't keep people from peacefully expressing their opinions. It doesn't oblige anyone to provide a platform for that expression.

For any private entity to allow complete freedom of expression through media it owns is a choice, not an obligation.

[Darth Wong]

I'm wondering if they could land a small vessel on it, and try to deploy something to cut through its hull. I know they said it's "solid neutronium", but as has been pointed out many times, if "neutronium" means "neutron star stuff", then the very term "solid neutronium" is a contradiction in terms. If it's like the material the Dyson Sphere was made of, that stuff could be damaged. The shuttle scraped its hull up nicely when it crash-landed after all.

[Ted C]

I'm wondering if they could land a small vessel on it, and try to deploy something to cut through its hull. I know they said it's "solid neutronium", but as has been pointed out many times, if "neutronium" means "neutron star stuff", then the very term "solid neutronium" is a contradiction in terms.

That's not too far-fetched an idea. Phasers were presumably failing largely because they have so little effect on extremely dense materials. I suppose the question would be whether they carry anything more effective on board.

[Enigma]

I'm wondering if they could land a small vessel on it, and try to deploy something to cut through its hull. I know they said it's "solid neutronium", but as has been pointed out many times, if "neutronium" means "neutron star stuff", then the very term "solid neutronium" is a contradiction in terms. If it's like the material the Dyson Sphere was made of, that stuff could be damaged. The shuttle scraped its hull up nicely when it crash-landed after all.

Besides, even if they were able to use true "neutronium", would the shuttle be reduced to paste? Or does that just apply to the neutron star itself?

[Junghalli]

Besides, even if they were able to use true "neutronium", would the shuttle be reduced to paste? Or does that just apply to the neutron star itself?

A neutron star packs more mass than the sun into a ~12 km sphere. The Doomsday Machine looked to me to be at least in the kilometer or so size range, so if the hull was actually neutronium would have had enormous mass, and enormous surface gravity given that much mass packed into such a small area. I haven't actually ran the numbers for a hollow horn of neutronium that size but if it was a solid sphere of neutronium 1 km across it would have had more than 100 times Earth's mass.

Don't ask me how you'd get something like that to actually move... If it were actually neutronium no wonder it consumes entire planets as fuel.

[bz249]

Besides, even if they were able to use true "neutronium", would the shuttle be reduced to paste? Or does that just apply to the neutron star itself?

A neutron star packs more mass than the sun into a ~12 km sphere. The Doomsday Machine looked to me to be at least in the kilometer or so size range, so if the hull was actually neutronium would have had enormous mass, and enormous surface gravity given that much mass packed into such a small area. I haven't actually ran the numbers for a hollow horn of neutronium that size but if it was a solid sphere of neutronium 1 km across it would have had more than 100 times Earth's mass.

Don't ask me how you'd get something like that to actually move... If it were actually neutronium no wonder it consumes entire planets as fuel.

If it would have been similar to the matter in a neutron star it would blow up like a firecracker since the Pauli-principle does not allow two particles to be in the same quantum state... well the consequence is quite simple: the matter of a neutron star is something very far away non-equilibrium, stabilized only by the huge gravity. Thus whatever it was it was certainly not the matter of the neutron stars.

So any argument based on real life neutron stars is misleading.