 |
Newsgroups: alt.startrek.vs.starwars
From: Dalton <r...@daltonator.net>
Date: Fri, 19 Jul 2002 21:00:00 -0400
Subject: Re: hehe
DarkStar wrote: Of course, you haven't yet explained why this renders EU null and void > "Dalton" <r...@daltonator.net> wrote in message > > > "Dalton" <r...@daltonator.net> wrote in message > > > > > "Celes Knight" <My_First_and_Last_N...@rconnectSP.AMcom.SPAM> wrote > > > > [snip] > > > > > > Which part of the rules are bad? Point them out. > > > > > 1. The SW canon policy. (ignores Lucas) > > > > Nothing Lucas says contradicts current policy. > > > (sigh) > > Don't sigh me, bitchtits. I've read that quote and he does nothing to > Yes, I know, "everything's interpretation and nothing means anything", blah > (sigh) in terms of evidence. *sigh* > > > > > 2. The ST canon policy. (based on Ordover) ...er, so? He's Star Trek. He edits the books. Sucks for you. > > > > And the information on StarTrek.com. > > > Actually, I don't disagree with the ST policy itself, just the fact that > > ...a matter on which, of course, you have total say? > He's not Paramount, and Gaskill agreed. > > > > Meanwhile, we always get dicks like you who prance in here with Which has never been stated anywhere. Ever. > > > > eloquent sophistry about how our current rules are wrong because "oh, > > > > Lucas meant THIS, not THAT" and that sort of shit, which has the > > > > resulting impression of the Trekkie (you) trying your damndest to > shaft > > > > the Warsies (us). And I've noticed that it's picked up ever since > > > > SW2:ICS came out. > > > Well, there was already plenty of evidence to suggest that the EU wasn't > > The EU was NEVER considered canon. It was called official. Which is as > "wasn't canon" = "had no canonicity whatsoever" > You're ascribing a level of canonicity to something which never had it. > Also, I've never found the source for the idea that something from the That's a logical extrapolation by us. > non-canon is "canon unless contradicted by canon", or the alternate version > which says that unless the canon _directly_ contradicts the official, that > the official is only wrong "on that point." Do you know anything about the > source of that? I haven't found it anywhere. > > > Then, Lucas' comments about So the EU is so out of tune with the "real" universe that it's totally > > > the EU being a parallel universe and not his world cinched it up. > > Oh really? So a parallel universe wouldn't match up at all with the > Maybe it would, maybe it wouldn't. In a parallel universe, you and I might useless. Gotcha. > > Or maybe he meant "parallel universe" in the sense that if Where? > > something he did contradicted official material, it could easily be > > explained as a "parallel universe"? > He never says anything of the sort. He refers to the entire world of > >Here's some more for ya: Lucas has Strawman attack. I'm saying that Lucas can do as he chooses, which is > > incorporated EU into Canon, the most obvious inclusion being Coruscant. > So? Elements that fall under "Infinities" have been incorporated into the the point of that quote. > But, you must also then argue that your argument does not give any of the I'd say the same for you, but you don't even have an argument, just > EU's continuity (or canonicity) to Infinities tales. > Pick a consistent argument. misdirection. > > Oh, and I'll remind you that your argument/Lucas's quote only affects I take that back. > > the novels, not the reference books and manuals based on Canon, such as > > SW2:ICS. > "There's my world, which is the movies, and there's this other world that > Now, I think it is proper to exclude the _known canon books_ like the film Do me a favor and provide a source for that quote. > > > > I'm sick of this canon bitching. The Trekkies have six hundred fucking The fuck he is. You're just trying to ream us with this because you > > > > hours of canon to work with. We have about TEN, not counting the > > > > novelizations, Radio scripts, etc. > > > So? > > Stop trying to neuter us just because you can't win. > I'm not neutering you. Lucas is. can't win any other way. We've had no problems with this before. > Besides, can't you win with canon? Why should I trust you to accept canon evidence? > > > >Stop crying because of 200GT Nice, you snip my reply and ignore it. Others have done that before. It > > > > turbolasers. > > > They don't bother me. That figure is just crap. has not gone over well. -- "It's tasteless, disgusting, and offensive. I love it." You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
| |||||||||||||