Most common attacks

[Darth Wong]

What are the most common fallacious Trekkie attacks on my website's credibility? Off-hand, I can think of the following common attacks:

1. "Wong isn't perfect; I found a mistake". Whoop-de-doo. I'm not the first human being in history who's completely infallible. Oh no! These people apparently feel that it destroys someone's credibility to prove that he is not perfect. Interesting logic; perhaps they should become more ambitious and go after scientists such as Einstein, Hawking, Krauss, Newton, Feynman, etc., thus demolishing the entirety of modern physics.
2. "Wong is biased". Ad hominem. As always, they seek to attack credibility.
3. "Wong bases his TNG database entirely on dialogue even though he supposedly uses visuals over dialogue. He contradicts himself." This is a clever strawman attack. The dialogue in my TNG database is, to the best of my knowledge, consistent with onscreen visuals. But without bothering to provide an example of visuals contradicting my interpretations, they try to portray the use of dialogue and text descriptions (a choice of necessity; video clips and screenshots of every incident in my database would create an enormous bandwidth load) as some kind of deliberate deception on my part. As always, they seek to attack credibility.
4. "Wong uses the books for SW and not for ST. This is unfair; the EU is not true Star Wars." Yet again, they take a choice of necessity and attempt to portray it as some kind of deliberate deception or hypocrisy. LFL approves the books as official, and if I didn't address them, the Trekkies would simply base all of their arguments on the books and dismiss my site on that basis (Edam, for example, bases most of his arguments on the SW books).

In the end, the common thread I notice is that they never attempt to show how a change of policy would make any difference. If I address every nit that they point out (once we get rid of the stupid ones), would the balance of power change? If I changed the Imperial style of the website, would the balance of power change? If I spent months laboriously replacing 900 entries of dialogue in my database with digitized video clips and screenshots, would anything change besides my bandwidth costs? If I eliminated the entire EU and cut back to the canon movies and their directly associated literature, would the Empire get weaker, or stronger? (hint: ask yourself why Edam relies so heavily on the EU).

Anyway, that's the list that I can think of. Can it be that most Trekkie attacks on my site are really this unimaginative? Or is there some more clever attack out there that they've been hiding from me?

[David]

Wong uses the books for SW and not for ST. This is unfair; the EU is not true Star Wars." Yet again, they take a choice of necessity and attempt to portray it as some kind of deliberate deception or hypocrisy. LFL approves the books as official, and if I didn't address them, the Trekkies would simply base all of their arguments on the books and dismiss my site on that basis (Edam, for example, bases most of his arguments on the SW books).

The problem with the ST books is that they can't be used. They are not official in any way, even though they kick the epidoes ass in every way. Not only do the books have better plotlines, they are not filled with ridiculous technobabble.

[tharkûn]

"Anyway, that's the list that I can think of. Can it be that most Trekkie attacks on my site are really this unimaginative? Or is there some more clever attack out there that they've been hiding from me?"
Sure there are, I could try my hand at a few I've been tossing around as devil's advocate against a few warsie morons. If you'd like I'll make them when I have the time to run the calcs. Don't expect anything brilliant though these are just things I've been kicking around and haven't been bothered to run the numbers on so I expect several (if not most) of them to lie somewhere between half and full assed (which, in my opinion, is a distinct step up from normal trekkie drivel).

Read through a few of my posts here and if the thread I started is still around .... see if I'm worth the entertainment value of debating. If you'd like to give it a go at a few pro-trek arguments that aren't so moronic, sure why the hell not? Just remember I'm going in expecting to lose after having tried decently =)

[Vympel]

Hmm first post. Tharkun, I definitely sit on the SW kicks ST ass side of the debate, I've read a few of your posts since I've been been lurking, and I must say they're good posts, totally unlike some of the other rubbish I've seen posted. If you've got some interesting new stuff that would actually be exciting to read rather than eye-rolling rubbish like some idiots post, by all means post away and I'll read it. If anything, I'd like some more evidence in favor of ST so I could write an interesting fan-fic.

The attacks on Darth Wong's analysis are borne out of absolute desperation. There is simply no disputing the fact that

a- the Empire is bigger in every way: total military size, industrial capacity, population, economy, sheer territory than anything either the Federation or every known ST race has to offer
b- Imperial vessels are many times faster, with both weapons and shields, and armor many times more effective than anything in the ST galaxy has to offer
c- the Imperial ground forces hopelessly outclass the Federation; there is simply no contest.
d- Imperial technology is many thousands of years ahead- as everyone knows the Death Star is the ultimate evidence of this, but other examples abound, and its bloody obvious looking at the ships, the weapons, the shields (planetary shields able to withstand bombardment from an SSD and its ISD escorts!!!)

So die-hard Trekkies are reduced to

a- nit-picking Mr Wong. Pointless.
b- thinking up idiotic tactics (usually involving transporters) that even if they would work PERFECTLY, would still not win a conflict.
c- thinking up idiotic scenarios- "The Q will save us!" (Yes I've actually heard this one, though I don't know if its been put up on the boards) or "all the ST races will band together and beat the Empire"- the best part of this one is that they'd STILL get totally squished.
d- thinking within the Treknobabble paradigm

[Cal Wright]

Personally, this advice goes to Mr. Wong. Fuck it. After about two years debate crap, it's pointless to resist. Trek stupidity will ultimately win. First I found Mr. Poe's site, and just loved it. Then I followed a link to your site. Not long after that, AoL had this big ST vs SW poll (Sw won of course) and subsequent message boards. Not only was it overly easy to out debate them, but Trekkies literally emailed me telling me that I was wrong, not disproving me and then turning around and threatening me. So I would just post thier email and rip them to shreds. I always wondered what Mr. Wong was meaning by this spacebattles.com, so I followed the link, and decided to start posting on the boards there. Needless to say, after encountering individuals like Chris O'Farrell, I learned it was just pointless. In fact, the only reason I found this post, was because there was nothing new on the Pure Star Wars boards. Go figure. Btw, O'Farrell, the Defiant ain't got SHIT on the Falcon pal.

P.S. The Defiant is a smooth ship too. Heh.

[Evil Sadistic Bastard]

I would agree with most of what's being said. Wong has such a strong case that it's virtually impossible to break it.

Everything he says is backed up with at least some knowledge of physics (which should be his strong suit) and hard numbers. But the thing about Wong is that he takes the time to explain it to those of us (myself included) whose grasp of science isn't that steady, not cloaking it in technobabble the way most trekkies do (I got a 710 for my SAT verbal and I STILL don't understand half of their bullshit).

Kudos, Wong! Long live the empire

[Captain Cyran]

"Anyway, that's the list that I can think of. Can it be that most Trekkie attacks on my site are really this unimaginative? Or is there some more clever attack out there that they've been hiding from me?"
Sure there are, I could try my hand at a few I've been tossing around as devil's advocate against a few warsie morons. If you'd like I'll make them when I have the time to run the calcs. Don't expect anything brilliant though these are just things I've been kicking around and haven't been bothered to run the numbers on so I expect several (if not most) of them to lie somewhere between half and full assed (which, in my opinion, is a distinct step up from normal trekkie drivel).

Read through a few of my posts here and if the thread I started is still around .... see if I'm worth the entertainment value of debating. If you'd like to give it a go at a few pro-trek arguments that aren't so moronic, sure why the hell not? Just remember I'm going in expecting to lose after having tried decently =)

Alright I just gained some respect for you...Very noble with your "I'm gonna try...I'm gonna get my ass kicked in horribly but I'm still gonna try" Truely honorable.

[Kamakazie Sith]

In the end, the common thread I notice is that they never attempt to show how a change of policy would make any difference. If I address every nit that they point out (once we get rid of the stupid ones), would the balance of power change? If I changed the Imperial style of the website, would the balance of power change? If I spent months laboriously replacing 900 entries of dialogue in my database with digitized video clips and screenshots, would anything change besides my bandwidth costs? If I eliminated the entire EU and cut back to the canon movies and their directly associated literature, would the Empire get weaker, or stronger? (hint: ask yourself why Edam relies so heavily on the EU).

Anyway, that's the list that I can think of. Can it be that most Trekkie attacks on my site are really this unimaginative? Or is there some more clever attack out there that they've been hiding from me?

It probably wouldn't change how it would end, but it might change something in between.....

Wouldn't you address something that you thought was wrong? Even if it doesn't change the outcome most people would still address it because it bothers them. Some people just feel the need to do so......

[Mr Bean]

Agreed, I disagree with parts of your Web-site Wong but since there amount to nothing more than nit-picks I almost did not bother emailing you about it

But still you need to add some new stuff every once in awhile Wong like maybe running some Calaculations on what a 200 GT Blast would do to say New-York We had that thread for awhile now wondering what a 200GT TurboLaser blast would do, We are always comming up with fun questions if maybe answear one or two every once in awhile it would keep the natives happy as it where

[DarkStar]

"Wong is biased". Ad hominem. As always, they seek to attack credibility.

Attacking a person's credibility is your modus operandi. Turnabout, as they say, is fair play.

Of course, I don't see why you're calling this a major argument, or even troubling yourself with it. It is obvious due to the nature of the assumptions you choose to make... the best possible for Wars, the worst possible for Trek. Your TNG database comments (not to mention the unfounded ideas you claim to draw from them) are testament to this.

LFL approves the books as official

Well, this is a discussion for another thread, but suffice it to say that Lucas recently referred to the licensed material as being of another world, and a parallel universe. Of course, these were recent comments you could not have known about.

The point people would try to make with your reliance on the EU would be the fact that you dispense with the lower-end EU or canon ideas in favor of the highest-possible EU ones.

For instance, "Vision of the Future" gives us a comment about SW sensors: 'It's all the mini-nebulae and gas offshoots, you see, coming off the Kathol Rift. All of that reflected light and radiation scrambles sensors and communications - makes it terribly difficult to find anything at all. Searching the whole region could take you decades."(194)

If something like that were in the TNG database, off to the side would be your comment about how utterly poor ST sensors are, and you would base all future ideas on ST sensor technology off of that quote. However, I can find no mention of that quote or any similar quote on your sensors page:
http://www.stardestroyer.net/Empire/Tec ... nsor2.html

Similarly, this page:
http://www.stardestroyer.net/Empire/Tec ... html#Cloak
... has no mention of what we see here:
"A cloaked warship's own sensor beams would be as useless as those of its enemies, leaving it to flail about totally blind. Worse, if it were under power, the enemy could locate it by simply tracking its drive emissions."(Dark Force Rising, 48)
Your page suggests that Imperial cloaks are perfect, if not too perfect, and that nothing gets out, with the exception of weapons fire.

On the matter of shield frequencies, you say Wars ships have none to exploit, since there are no examples. Tyrant's Test says this, on page 339:
" 'Do you know of any weaknesses or vulnerability of the vagabond that we can exploit?'
'Yes. Blaster cannon, cruiser-weight and up. The hull's not armored, and there don't seem to be ray shields, at least not at those frequencies. You can hole it and hurt it.'"

Granted, that's not an ISD, but it is an example of frequency-specific Wars shielding.

Other similar examples exist. It isn't a matter of "Damn Stupid Evil Trekkies" magicking the idea of bias out of your site or methods. It's a valid point.

If I eliminated the entire EU and cut back to the canon movies and their directly associated literature, would the Empire get weaker, or stronger? (hint: ask yourself why Edam relies so heavily on the EU).

Given the difficulty they've been having at ASVS in threads which stick to the SW canon, I'd imagine the answer is "weaker".

[Darth Wong]

Attacking a person's credibility is your modus operandi. Turnabout, as they say, is fair play.

Thanks for confirming that Trekkie imagination is as pitiful as I thought. Everyone gather round and notice how our local village idiot tries the strawman attack. Please, find me an example where I've attacked someone's credibility based solely on his style or perceived bias rather than pointing out massive dishonesty, flaws in his reasoning, or scientific ignorance.

Of course, I don't see why you're calling this a major argument, or even troubling yourself with it. It is obvious due to the nature of the assumptions you choose to make... the best possible for Wars, the worst possible for Trek. Your TNG database comments (not to mention the unfounded ideas you claim to draw from them) are testament to this.

Would you like some cheese with that whine?

For instance, "Vision of the Future" gives us a comment about SW sensors: 'It's all the mini-nebulae and gas offshoots, you see, coming off the Kathol Rift. All of that reflected light and radiation scrambles sensors and communications - makes it terribly difficult to find anything at all. Searching the whole region could take you decades."(194)

If something like that were in the TNG database, off to the side would be your comment about how utterly poor ST sensors are, and you would base all future ideas on ST sensor technology off of that quote. However, I can find no mention of that quote or any similar quote on your sensors page:

Ah, yes. This is useful. I almost forgot the other common Trekkie attack on credibility: the habitual attempt to use lack of comprehensiveness as proof of deliberate dishonesty.

It is usually phrased in the form of "Wong mysteriously doesn't mention this on his site", as if I must address every conceivable tech argument from every paragraph of every novel in all of SW fiction or I must be a liar. The fact that my site is fucking huge already, or that many pages have not been updated for two or three years seems completely lost on these people.

Notice how he does not bother to show how SW loses strength due to this "new information". SW, after all, doesn't need technobabble tricks in order to win. Sheer firepower, speed, and hull armour density is more than sufficient to crush the Federation and stymie virtually all of its tricks. SW arguments don't normally rely on being able to pick out a deck of cards on the surface of a planet from geosynchronous orbit, or scan through ten miles of rock, or teleport objects through miles of armour. Their inability to do so, therefore, is meaningless.

On the matter of shield frequencies, you say Wars ships have none to exploit, since there are no examples. Tyrant's Test says this, on page 339:
" 'Do you know of any weaknesses or vulnerability of the vagabond that we can exploit?'
'Yes. Blaster cannon, cruiser-weight and up. The hull's not armored, and there don't seem to be ray shields, at least not at those frequencies. You can hole it and hurt it.'"

Granted, that's not an ISD, but it is an example of frequency-specific Wars shielding.

I suppose I could let fifty other people answer this stupidity, but you are making a completely irrational leap in logic from "no apparent ray shielding on the alien Vagabond at the frequency we checked" to "SW shields have frequency vulnerability" (note hidden assumption that the Vagabond had ray shields at every other frequency, instead of simply not having ray shields at all, as obviously implied by the quote).

(Re: removing EU) Given the difficulty they've been having at ASVS in threads which stick to the SW canon, I'd imagine the answer is "weaker".

Still in the habit of declaring yourself victorious, eh? Sorry, but that doesn't count for a whole lot. By the way, I find this statement pretty fucking ironic in light of the fact that this whole message is full of your attempts to use the EU to attack SW strength.

[Darth Wong]

Wouldn't you address something that you thought was wrong? Even if it doesn't change the outcome most people would still address it because it bothers them. Some people just feel the need to do so......

Sure, if I had the time. But there's a reason so many pages haven't been updated for years, and this reason is not that I think they're already perfect.

[Asst. Asst. Lt. Cmdr. Smi]

Remember all those flamers who thought you had no life because you ran this site, although it's only one of your hobbies?

[Crazy_Vasey]

I don't think the Vagabond is typical of SW ships anyway seeing as it was some funky ancient alien ship or something (been a while since I read the BFC)

[tharkûn]

Yick more trekkie drivel. Its getting to the point where is getting hard to hard to say yes I'm a trekker and not say no I'm not one of those freaks.

So what do you say, Mike? A debate with the devil's advocate where some real arguments are thrown about ... not this crap that Gothmag and the like throw around. Interested?

[Publius]

The Tejlkon vagabond is an ancient remnant of a long-dormant civilisation. Its technology is unique to it, and shares only vaguely form and function with the technology of the galaxy proper.

Publius

[Admiral Valdemar]

I only know the infamous "Wong is Wrong" campaign whereby many ignoramuses of the Trekkie genus, go out to tackle the sensible conclusions of someone who can think rationally. No doubt because they can't handle the truth.

[Master of Ossus]

The Tejlkon vagabond is an ancient remnant of a long-dormant civilisation. Its technology is unique to it, and shares only vaguely form and function with the technology of the galaxy proper.

Publius

And it comes from the WORST SW book in history (actually, three of the worst). For that matter, it comes from a subplot that is utterly unrelated to anything else. I hated that trilogy with a passion.

In any case, Mike, your website is not perfect, but it never claims to be. The Trekkie attacks on your credibility are not legitimate (no one thinks that you are perfect, either, IMHO). I do like all of those people who find tiny flaws or omissions in your site and then automatically assume that the entire site is totally wrong because you fail to address book number X, page Y, subsection Z, and I do not think that the attacks you make on your enemies are unfounded. More often than not, they ARE idiots or people who are not thinking clearly. Thus, I feel that they should be treated as such.

[Kamakazie Sith]

Wouldn't you address something that you thought was wrong? Even if it doesn't change the outcome most people would still address it because it bothers them. Some people just feel the need to do so......

Sure, if I had the time. But there's a reason so many pages haven't been updated for years, and this reason is not that I think they're already perfect.

Don't get me wrong maintaining a site this huge would be a chore and I'm sure it is, I was just throwing out a reason or two why people do that even though it won't change the outcome....

[DarkStar]

Attacking a person's credibility is your modus operandi. Turnabout, as they say, is fair play.

Thanks for confirming that Trekkie imagination is as pitiful as I thought. Everyone gather round and notice how our local village idiot tries the strawman attack. Please, find me an example where I've attacked someone's credibility based solely on his style or perceived bias rather than pointing out massive dishonesty, flaws in his reasoning, or scientific ignorance.

"Solely"? Nice way to change the rules in the middle of the game. No, you don't generally respond "solely" with such BS, but it is what you spend the majority of your time doing. Take, for instance, the use of "Village Idiot" under my name. You can hardly claim that is not an attack on credibility.

Of course, I don't see why you're calling this a major argument, or even troubling yourself with it. It is obvious due to the nature of the assumptions you choose to make... the best possible for Wars, the worst possible for Trek. Your TNG database comments (not to mention the unfounded ideas you claim to draw from them) are testament to this.

Would you like some cheese with that whine?

You asked questions, you got answers. I see no reason for you to bitch about it.

However, I can find no mention of that quote or any similar quote on your sensors page:

Ah, yes. This is useful. I almost forgot the other common Trekkie attack on credibility: the habitual attempt to use lack of comprehensiveness as proof of deliberate dishonesty.

Well, you did fashion it as a propaganda site. When you conveniently leave out the negative, what do you expect? People are left to draw their own conclusions, and based on your style of argumentation it is hardly a long leap to charges of dishonesty.

It is usually phrased in the form of "Wong mysteriously doesn't mention this on his site", as if I must address every conceivable tech argument from every paragraph of every novel in all of SW fiction or I must be a liar. The fact that my site is fucking huge already, or that many pages have not been updated for two or three years seems completely lost on these people.

Excuses aside, the fact remains that your site is not a reliable source of balanced information. When people say you're biased, it isn't an ad hominem. You said it yourself in the FAQ... a one-sided conclusion is fine, but a one-sided method is not. Your methods are demonstrably one-sided. What do you expect people to think?

Notice how he does not bother to show how SW loses strength due to this "new information".

Tell that to the ASVS crowd. They flounder in canon-only threads.

SW, after all, doesn't need technobabble tricks in order to win. Sheer firepower, speed, and hull armour density is more than sufficient to crush the Federation and stymie virtually all of its tricks.

If that is true, then why do you resort to the methods you use to try to prove it?

On the matter of shield frequencies, you say Wars ships have none to exploit, since there are no examples. Tyrant's Test says this, on page 339:
" 'Do you know of any weaknesses or vulnerability of the vagabond that we can exploit?'
'Yes. Blaster cannon, cruiser-weight and up. The hull's not armored, and there don't seem to be ray shields, at least not at those frequencies. You can hole it and hurt it.'"

Granted, that's not an ISD, but it is an example of frequency-specific Wars shielding.

I suppose I could let fifty other people answer this stupidity, but you are making a completely irrational leap in logic from "no apparent ray shielding on the alien Vagabond at the frequency we checked" to "SW shields have frequency vulnerability" (note hidden assumption that the Vagabond had ray shields at every other frequency, instead of simply not having ray shields at all, as obviously implied by the quote).

There don't seem to be ray shields, at least not at the frequencies used by blaster cannons on ships which are cruiser-weight and up. You can claim hidden assumptions all you want, but they certainly don't seem surprised by the idea of frequencies for weapons and shields.

You claim that I assume the Vagabond had ray shields at other frequencies. I made no such assumption. Whether they did or didn't is irrelevant.

(Re: removing EU) Given the difficulty they've been having at ASVS in threads which stick to the SW canon, I'd imagine the answer is "weaker".

Still in the habit of declaring yourself victorious, eh?

That's hardly my habit. If an argument stands, it stands... if it falls, it falls, and I change my views accordingly.

You still seem to be under the mistaken impression that I treat this debate as you do.

Sorry, but that doesn't count for a whole lot. By the way, I find this statement pretty fucking ironic in light of the fact that this whole message is full of your attempts to use the EU to attack SW strength.

You use select portions to bolster it. It's your site... you can use whatever you want. I'm just letting you in on the fact that you use things in a way that can be quite easily construed as intellectually dishonest.

[Darth Wong]

You use select portions to bolster it. It's your site... you can use whatever you want. I'm just letting you in on the fact that you use things in a way that can be quite easily construed as intellectually dishonest.

Darkstar, you would construe "2+2=4" as intellectually dishonest, because it doesn't mention multiplication.

[Mr. B]

What do you expect from the village idiot.

[CmdrWilkens]

The Tejlkon vagabond is an ancient remnant of a long-dormant civilisation. Its technology is unique to it, and shares only vaguely form and function with the technology of the galaxy proper.

Publius

And it comes from the WORST SW book in history (actually, three of the worst). For that matter, it comes from a subplot that is utterly unrelated to anything else. I hated that trilogy with a passion.

That is a bad thing to say, sure Shield of Lies was horrible and Tyrant's Test was a little rushed at the end but I loved Before the Storm and I actually loved Tyrant's Test despite the rush. Let me explain why.

1) For the first time the NR suddenly realizes that it ought to standardize its combat formations and pretend that its a real military. I mean for goodness sake it took a while but damn if it isn't satisfying to see a SciFi military that actualy looks like one (they've got ground crews, Air Bosses, command staffs, intel groups). For that matter its good to see a SciFi fleet which does things like have recon assets and send out patrols in force to locate enemy installations to hit.

2) My god the characters can be differnt. If nothing else the fact that the characters were differnt was amazing. I mena we got so used to one leai that seeing her vulnerable, burned out, sad, and resiliant was just wonderful. The series made Leia a human being. Luke, well Luke had some great growth (that seems to have been all but forgotten except for the submergence trick, hey Mike there's a SW specific brain bug). Luke at the beginning and Luke at the end are two differnt people and they should be.

3) The support characters were interesting. Nil Spaar was vicious and power hungry with a blind spot that was shown very clearly and explained jsut as clearly. There is a message ther in that our cultural outlook prevents us from seeing our weaknesses. Ayyddar was also a neat addition in that he was a regular guy (who of course ended up getting blown out of proportion later on in NJO). Ditto with Commodore Brand who I loved, even if NJO bastardized him completely. A'baht was also an interesting study in command though he did have a few more weak points in characterization than he should have for such a central character to the story arc. Drayson was intersting and useful in many ways as was Ackbar and Plat Mallar.

4) Let me break off and continue the above because its easier for me to say that the series has so many bit players who are INTERESTING. I mean normally thses one time characters serve no real purpose and aren't very exciting but I think they way they interact with the main characters makes them very real.

5) The combat scenes were just freakin awesome.

Now I won't pretend that the Teljkon sideline was stupid and represented the largest portion of the bad writing in the series but the Black Fleet Crisi as a whole was a good read.

[Kazuaki Shimazaki]

The Black Fleet Crisis in fact seems to me more like three stories bashed into one. One is a (by SW writing standards) beautiful combat epic involving the Yevetha. One is a very...Trekkish episode involving the Vagabond, and the last seems to be a Jedi work.

You might notice how in Shield of Lies, they actually split the story up. It is as if the author acknowledges that they are in fact three separate stories that he has to bash into one. Speaking personally, I'll prefer it if he uses the vagabond idea for writing for a Star Trek novel, and splits the Jedi and combat scenes into separate stories. Cut out that part about the illusion, while you are at it. Have it done using something like traffic control buoys. Those work too, and don't require any magic. Hell, the entire Akanah subplot is not really necessary for SW

[Lusankya]

I particularly like the Trekkies who complain about Lord Wong's site, but continue reading it. Then they send in the message saying, "I've been to this site a few times, and I loathed it completely."

They crack me up.