The Size of the Droid Army "Retconned"

IceHawk-181 · Post by **IceHawk-181** » 2006-05-15 11:18am

Noticed that did you?

Karen apparently owns TF.N

I am most definetly NOT letting the mods redirect the Odds discussion into some Karen vs. Trolls bullshit.

The Anti-3Mil crowd has essentially trounced the supporters for the last dozen pages of that debate.

Mange · Post by **Mange** » 2006-05-15 11:30am

IceHawk-181 wrote:Noticed that did you?

Karen apparently owns TF.N

I am most definetly NOT letting the mods redirect the Odds discussion into some Karen vs. Trolls bullshit.

The Anti-3Mil crowd has essentially trounced the supporters for the last dozen pages of that debate.

I deleted my message as you posted in the other thread, but yeah, I noticed. It's so ridiculous, one person said something about Karen Traviss, but Sapient mentions 15-20 people.

IceHawk-181 · Post by **IceHawk-181** » 2006-05-15 11:34am

Yeah, I think there are maybe a dozen people actually engaged in the thread.

15-20 "trolls" would have to include me, D-K, mange, JR, Ewok, and D4pm.

Mange · Post by **Mange** » 2006-05-15 11:48am

IceHawk-181 wrote:Yeah, I think there are maybe a dozen people actually engaged in the thread.

15-20 "trolls" would have to include me, D-K, mange, JR, Ewok, and D4pm.

I haven't mentioned Karen Traviss over at TFN as I've discussed the issue rather than the author and most people have done so as well, there have been very few people (I can only think of two posts) who has said anything negative about KT. Sapient is talking out of his hat.

Lord Poe · Post by **Lord Poe** » 2006-05-15 12:19pm

Fuck this noise. I posted this:

rhonderoo wrote:There have been quite a few transgressions in this thread, even by continuing to discuss anything that personally references Karen Traviss in this case and not he actual GAR size in a tactful way. There are two posts right now that reference a fan made video parodying this situation in which the character that bears a strking resemble to the author in this situation is called something terribly offensive.

As the person that made that parody video, I have to take exception to what you've just posted.

First of all, the only reason I even RESPONDED to the message which brought up that parody (completely out of context, and seems the sole puropse of doing so was to derail the current thread off its legitimate target), was that the person doing so willfully misrepresented said parody into something that it does NOT do. Also, maybe a few of you should crack open a dictionary and look up the word "parody". The concept is is older than Shakespeare, and allowed him to lampoon the Royals without losing his head.

Secondly, the poster in question gave my real name along with my screen name, which is something I did a couple months ago to a new Mod here hiding behind multiple accounts, and I was threatened with a ban for giving out "personal information". Now while I have no objection whatsoever is everyone knows who I am, I find it curious the Modsdidn't sweep in and edit that post too.

Thirdly, the worst disservice to said author is to say that the character "Sharon Crevice" quote, "bears a strking resemble to the author". She doesn't. Said author doesn't have a bulbous nose or wears makeup like the character "Mimi" from the "Drew Carey Show."

rhonderoo wrote:Don't post about her personally. Just don't. Don't refer to her or any other author in a factual way with statements like "ODDS was specifically created to anger those fans that actually care about realistic clone numbers for a galaxy-wide conflict, and continuity in general. Fact. That it was sold as a retcon "fix" and got under the nose of LFL "continuity experts" is embarassing."

Since this also refers to me, I feel the need to respond. As others pointed out already, the above is factual. Bringing it up in this discussion is perfectly relevant.

Now, can we please continue the discussion we were having, instead of the one people who skim and not read carefully CLAIM we're having?

Lord Poe · Post by **Lord Poe** » 2006-05-15 12:35pm

And another great purge has begun. Those of you participating in that thread should look at your previous posts before these, and see how Emperor Traviss has decreed they be edited.

Its probably already too late, but is anyone saving that thread? I won't be able to defend myself there for seveal hours, as I'm off to work now.

Mange · Post by **Mange** » 2006-05-15 12:40pm

Lord Poe wrote:And another great purge has begun. Those of you participating in that thread should look at your previous posts before these, and see how Emperor Traviss has decreed they be edited.

Its probably already too late, but is anyone saving that thread? I won't be able to defend myself there for seveal hours, as I'm off to work now.

I've saved some of the pages, but not nearly all of them (I started doing so after the sound-off thread vanished).

000 · Post by **000** » 2006-05-15 12:52pm

As usual, I'm a bit nonplussed about all this. I'm having trouble figuring out the admin's reasoning here.

I mean, while I do feel that folks on both side of the debate have gone a bit too far, none of that has occurred on TF.N.

It's a bit odd, especially consdiering that Traviss is not very well liked anymore among the lit fanbase-- listen closely, and there are many, many others who, like myself, don't really take part in the debates but make asides about Traviss and her creations in other threads. There are even a couple people who used to post with her on a regular basis.

I'm just confused. I'm debating if it's worth my trouble posting a response in that thread. Probably not.

IceHawk-181 · Post by **IceHawk-181** » 2006-05-15 12:59pm

I always find it funny when someone says...

"Prove LFL didn't give here the numbers!!!"

or

"Prove she is attacking people!!!"

It's so fun to use Karen's own words to support my arguments.

I feel fuzzy

.... I have begun back-checking at least 5-10 pages of my posts of late, as a particular mod has taken it upon himself to line-edit these threads with a red sharpie....

It's not paranoia if they're really after you!!!

Master of Ossus · Post by **Master of Ossus** » 2006-05-15 01:37pm

IceHawk-181 wrote:Yeah, I think there are maybe a dozen people actually engaged in the thread.

15-20 "trolls" would have to include me, D-K, mange, JR, Ewok, and D4pm.

At least we're up to 15 or 20, now. Karen's been saying there are fewer than a dozen of us.

IceHawk-181 · Post by **IceHawk-181** » 2006-05-15 01:45pm

Karen will likely email the moderators and have them fix the number later.

000 · Post by **000** » 2006-05-15 02:15pm

Well, I just got banned. Sigh.

I reckon I had it coming, though.

Mange · Post by **Mange** » 2006-05-15 02:19pm

000 wrote:Well, I just got banned. Sigh.

I reckon I had it coming, though.

Really? May I ask for what?

EDIT: I saw it now. I'm not sure what the insult was...

IceHawk-181 · Post by **IceHawk-181** » 2006-05-15 02:22pm

000 wrote:Well, I just got banned. Sigh.

I reckon I had it coming, though.

Interesting.
The moderators have been looking for a reason to close/derail the thread for sometime.

I didn't miss the veiled threat of banning in rhonderoo's post.
I quess you did....

As a moderator trying to redirect the discussion away from authors why did he bring up two more and bait a response?

He was fishing for a ban.

000 · Post by **000** » 2006-05-15 02:25pm

She deleted the second part, which read:

"And, incidentally, comparing Dan Wallace and Joe Corroney to the author in question is a bit of a disservice to them."

Which in retrospect was a bit risky considering the mod's mood right now. But I wasn't trying to dis Traviss so much as defend those two.

I mean, I've kvetched to Wallace about stuff he's written in the past, and while I still don't totally agree with him I've nothing but respect for him since he gave his reasoning and didn't freak out about criticism and so on.

Respect is earned, I always say, and pretty much all the VIPs still active on there earned mine by the way they conduct themselves. I didn't think it was fair for them to be dragged into it by association.

Meh, whatever.

EDIT: Yeah, Icehawk, like I said, in retrospect, I should've realized that even something minor like that was playing with fire. I just figured it was fair game since it was brought back up by the admin.

Connor MacLeod · Post by **Connor MacLeod** » 2006-05-15 02:32pm

Mange the Swede wrote:I can't believe I read this in a response to the essay by one of the managers:
The G-Canon approach, admittedly, has its flaws as its relying heavily on visuals. Which don't always match the reality. Admittedly, examples, the size of the Executor and Second Death Star, have been eventually corrected, though the films are not always accurate to the EU, or the reality.

Except that we know Traviss also contradicts more than the movies, she contradicts various instances in the EU as well (ROTS regiments deployed with system governors, 1000 Acclamators ordered after Geonosis, "millions of clone divisions" and "quintillions of battle droids", etc.)

IceHawk-181 · Post by **IceHawk-181** » 2006-05-15 02:36pm

I have already attempted to express the System Governor Regiment inconsistency.

The problem is that people like Ewok and others think Moffs can control trans-senatorial boundaries without system level Imperial agents.

Logic is not thier strong suit...

Master of Ossus · Post by **Master of Ossus** » 2006-05-15 02:36pm

According to the mod "rhonderoo," this is an insult:

000 wrote: I think you remember wrong, rhonda. She left Lit before she had anything to defend against.

000 · Post by **000** » 2006-05-15 02:38pm

Well, to be fair, she deleted this part:

I wrote:And, incidentally, comparing Dan Wallace and Joe Corroney to the author in question is a bit of a disservice to them.

VT-16 · Post by **VT-16** » 2006-05-15 03:38pm

...people like Ewok and others think Moffs can...

I don't give a flying fuck what people like McEwok think. Unless their opinions are backed up by anything, they can shut up.

Jim Raynor · Post by **Jim Raynor** » 2006-05-15 04:11pm

This was my only post in Daniel-K's "Starship Troopers" thread:

JimRaynor55 wrote:
Sinrebirth wrote:The G-Canon approach, admittedly, has its flaws as its relying heavily on visuals. Which don't always match the reality. Admittedly, examples, the size of the Executor and Second Death Star, have been eventually corrected, though the films are not always accurate to the EU, or the reality.
Ah, the "G-canon visuals are not always perfect" argument. Do you think the EU text is perfectly consistent? Funny how you appeal to "reality" when you support a ridiculous idea like 3 million clones in a galaxy-wide war. And, as Mange pointed out, the EU is supposed to follow the movies, not the other way around.

Basically what I said here, but with "fanwhores" taken out and "idiotic" toned down into "ridiculous." Nothing objectionable at all. I just found this post later in the thread:

The_Red_Blade wrote:P.S. JimRaynor, I am slightly amazed that you haven't been banned yet. Just remeber: there are better things in life than Star Destroyer length debates. So just take it easy.

Seriously, if even the ban and delete happy moderators haven't seen fit to ban me yet, then why the FUCK is this retard butting in? Pussy, "play nice" civility whores like this are so common at TFN. God, I REALLY hate that fucking board.

VT-16 · Post by **VT-16** » 2006-05-15 04:14pm

Tell him you asked a question, and that didn't answer it.

EU is supposed to follow the movies, not the other way around. Insisting on the latter is instigating a false dilemma.

Covenant · Post by **Covenant** » 2006-05-15 04:23pm

There's nothing wrong with conducting a debate in a civil manner--if anything it helps get the actual issues out into the open without the entire thing being mired on accusations. It allows it to seem much more objective, and objectivity is something that should be strived for when ideas are in play. It's subjective, selective reasoning that these people engage in that causes the problems. They hide behind civility because they like the Traviss idea more, not because they think it's more rational. It's easy to get angry, but it's just giving them an easy 'out' to avoid the discussion.

So don't fall into the "Well Spoken means Poorly Researched" hole that a lot of people seem to, at least around here. If they're taking issue with the level of emotion in your statements rather than the facts, just quiet it down and make it more civil.

You can wrap the truth in as many layers of gentility as possible and it still remains the truth--there's no need to flail it around, you're only going to make them turtle up and avoid the debate entirely. If you're sure of your numbers and they aren't putting out any of theirs then you can speak in the most candy-coated terms of politeness and they're still getting their asses kicked. I don't know why a lot of people think that unless you raise your voice and throw in a lot of attack language, you're not winning. ;p

Post by **Ghost Rider** » 2006-05-15 04:27pm

Covenant wrote:There's nothing wrong with conducting a debate in a civil manner--if anything it helps get the actual issues out into the open without the entire thing being mired on accusations. It allows it to seem much more objective, and objectivity is something that should be strived for when ideas are in play. It's subjective, selective reasoning that these people engage in that causes the problems. They hide behind civility because they like the Traviss idea more, not because they think it's more rational. It's easy to get angry, but it's just giving them an easy 'out' to avoid the discussion.

So don't fall into the "Well Spoken means Poorly Researched" hole that a lot of people seem to, at least around here. If they're taking issue with the level of emotion in your statements rather than the facts, just quiet it down and make it more civil.

You can wrap the truth in as many layers of gentility as possible and it still remains the truth--there's no need to flail it around, you're only going to make them turtle up and avoid the debate entirely. If you're sure of your numbers and they aren't putting out any of theirs then you can speak in the most candy-coated terms of politeness and they're still getting their asses kicked. I don't know why a lot of people think that unless you raise your voice and throw in a lot of attack language, you're not winning. ;p

Then attack the problem over there instead of making vieled bullshit about how over here, we have no problem with going "it's bullshit."

Elfdart · Post by **Elfdart** » 2006-05-15 04:28pm

I didn't really have a dog in this fight at the beginning, but Traviss is being a hysterical old biddie. It's bad enough that she wrote something that was very poorly thought out (if it was thought out at all) and went flaky when called on it. That happens -nobody's perfect. Now a simple solution to the Three Million hiccup would have been to say that the Grand Army was one of a vast number of clone armies. Problem solved and nobody gets their noses rubbed in anything.

That wouldn't do for Traviss. She now takes it upon herself to screw up continuity even more so her own "mistakes" fit into the greater whole. To top it off, she causes brownnosers on web boards to ban those who call her on her ridiculous gaffes.

I haven't seen anything like this since TSR decided to shit all over the games, characters and settings Gary Gygax created, when without Gygax's works, they wouldn't have anything to wreck in the first place. TSR alienated so many loyal fans and customers that the company went bankrupt. I doubt LFL will lose that much, but I'll wager a lot of EU fans will avoid the next Travissty if they can possibly help it.

Nice going, asshole.