Star Trek - Star Wars? Which do you prefer and why?
Ms. Newlydead
They are both great, but Star trek seems to have a more focused
base in reality. Also, Star Trek seems to be the more
idealistic future. Believe me, if I were alive in the future, I
would want to live in Star Trek where money means nothing,
except to Ferengi, and the people of Eart are at peace with each
other. That's much better than Star Wars where the key word
is "WAR" and people like Darth Vader go around killing everyone
who won't convert to the dark side.
* Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion Network *
The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet - Free!
Strowbridge
> Star Trek is much better than Star Wars.
Matter of opinion
> They are both great, but Star trek seems to have a more focused
> base in reality.
Good joke. Oh, you're serious.
> Also, Star Trek seems to be the more
> idealistic future. Believe me, if I were alive in the future, I
> would want to live in Star Trek where money means nothing,
> except to Ferengi, and the people of Eart are at peace with each
> other.
To quote Gus, "Get killed HIPPY!"
> That's much better than Star Wars where the key word
> is "WAR" and people like Darth Vader go around killing everyone
> who won't convert to the dark side.
More than 99% of the people in Star Wars were unaffected by Palpatine's
rise in power, and equally unaffected by his demise.
I'd rather live in Star Wars, get myself a small ship. Become a
prospector and make a humble living as part of the 99%.
C.S.Strowbridge
iceberg3k
Trek has too much of a focus on the technology and not on the
storytelling that the tech is supposed to support. Without a
solid story, all the technology in the world can't make a show
interesting.
Star Wars rings truly with the depth and breadth of myth - as
George Lucas has said in interviews, he wanted to create a myth
for a time without them, and he succeeded mightily. The Star
Wars universe is full of loving callbacks to classical myths of
Earth history, the magical sword by which the young hero strikes
down the evil overlord, the journey of the tragic hero through
the valley of death and redemption...
A long time ago,
In a galaxy far, far away...
Personally, I would rather live in the Star Wars universe, where
a person is free to live as they wish, as opposed to the
Federation, where individuality is considered a mental disorder
and your rights can be trampled at will beneath the boot of the
State.
Don't believe me? In ANH, Luke Skywalker cries out in
disbelief, "Ten thousand?? We could almost buy our own ship for
that!" An inexpensive car in the modern-era USA costs about
10,000 dollars. So in Star Wars, a starship (Luke didn't
explicitly specify it as such, but we must assume that this is
so, since he knew they needed passage to Alderaan and thus a
starship) costs about as much as a small car in the US today. As
Mike Wong points out, the most treasured symbol of freedom for
most people in the modern day US is the automobile.
In Star Trek, with one lone exception (Kasidy Yates), we have
NEVER seen a starship that was privately owned by a Federation
citizen. The ubiquitous "N[xx]-[number]" registry (in the
precise Starfleet style) is seen on every Federation ship seen
except for Kasidy's, indicating that no matter where they're
registered, they are owned by the Federation goverment.
I'd be bored out of my skull within a week living in the
Federation - even their video games suck ass (viz. "The Game").
If a game like THAT managed to hypnotize the crew of the
Enterprise, I could take over the entire Federation inside of a
week, simply by distributing an actually GOOD video game, like
Quake.
-- M.
-a.r.k, a.s.v.s
-YHBT, YHL. HAND
Dalton
>
> Star Trek is much better than Star Wars.
The usual obligatory opening opinion.
> They are both great, but Star trek seems to have a more focused
> base in reality.
That is the single most laughable statement I've ever read.
> Also, Star Trek seems to be the more idealistic future.
I wouldn't want to live in it.
> Believe me, if I were alive in the future, I
> would want to live in Star Trek where money means nothing,
Like in socialism.
> except to Ferengi, and the people of Eart are at peace with each
> other.
*rolls eyes* Star Trek is an example of humans trying to control human
nature. I do NOT want others suppressing my true being.
> That's much better than Star Wars where the key word
> is "WAR" and people like Darth Vader go around killing everyone
> who won't convert to the dark side.
Star Wars is more based in reality since it better reflects the true
nature of humanity. We are a warlike species, like it or not, and no
happy-go-lucky hippie future like that in Star Trek is EVER going to
change it.
--
Dalton | AIM: RobPDalton | ICQ: 50342303
"I don't have a clue." ---Elim Garak
Da ASVS Fanfic Archive: [http://members.xoom.com/Tiny11380/fanfics ]
Da ASVS FUQ: [http://members.xoom.com/Tiny11380/fuq ]
Weyoun the Dancing Borg
> NEVER seen a starship that was privately owned by a Federation
> citizen. The ubiquitous "N[xx]-[number]" registry (in the
> precise Starfleet style) is seen on every Federation ship seen
> except for Kasidy's, indicating that no matter where they're
> registered, they are owned by the Federation goverment.
what about Kavaous Fajo's ship?
Quark's Treasure?
the SS Vico (Civilian vessel)
you compleetely wrong anyway: any NCC ship is not OWNED by the Federation,
it is REGESTERED UNDER the federation.
your car has a number plate right? it is a government-issued one (normally).
does the government own your car? no, you do. it is registered UNDER the
government as a means of identification, but they dont OWN it.
Matthew Hyde
> In Star Trek, with one lone exception (Kasidy Yates), we have
> NEVER seen a starship that was privately owned by a Federation
> citizen. The ubiquitous "N[xx]-[number]" registry (in the
> precise Starfleet style) is seen on every Federation ship seen
> except for Kasidy's, indicating that no matter where they're
> registered, they are owned by the Federation goverment.
Actually the registry numbers don't have to imply gov't ownership.
Analogs:
cars, license plates
boats and planes, registry numbers
But I agree wih you
--
Matt Hyde
Math Lab Consultant
All persons, living and dead,
Are coincidental,
And should not be construed.
(Kurt Vonnegut)
iceberg3k
Dancing Borg" <wey...@btinternet.com.DESPAM> wrote:
>> In Star Trek, with one lone exception (Kasidy Yates), we have
>> NEVER seen a starship that was privately owned by a Federation
>> citizen. The ubiquitous "N[xx]-[number]" registry (in the
>> precise Starfleet style) is seen on every Federation ship seen
>> except for Kasidy's, indicating that no matter where they're
>> registered, they are owned by the Federation goverment.
>
>
AFAIK, Kivas Fajo wasn't a Federation citizen.
>Quark's Treasure?
Quark DEFINITELY isn't a Fed citizen.
>the SS Vico (Civilian vessel)
The SS Vico is explicitly stated as being registered to the
Federation Science Council, thus the NAR registry.
>you compleetely wrong anyway: any NCC ship is not OWNED by the
Federation,
>it is REGESTERED UNDER the federation.
ALL NCC and NX ships are Federation Starfleet vessels. NAR ships
are Fed Science Council.
>your car has a number plate right? it is a government-issued one
>(normally).
>does the government own your car? no, you do.
Actually, my parents own my car. ;)
>it is registered UNDER the
>government as a means of identification, but they dont OWN it.
The Nxx registry sequence indicates a ship that BELONGS DIRECTLY
TO the United Federation of Planets. How can we infer this?
Because we've never seen it in any other context.
-- M.
-a.r.k, a.s.v.s
-YHBT, YHL. HAND.
iceberg3k
In article <06cc9238...@usw-ex0105-034.remarq.com>, Ms.
Newlydead <d...@ev1.net> wrote:
>Star Trek is much better than Star Wars.
When you're a lobotomy patient, that is.
>They are both great, but Star trek seems to have a more focused
means of generating reams of technobabble, sacrificing its
>base in reality. Also, Star Trek seems to be the more
toy-generating franchise. Of course, I realize it's not a very
>idealistic future. Believe me, if I were alive in the future, I
would be the victim of a particularly harsh joke by God. Nobody
>would want to live in Star Trek where money means nothing,
which makes it really hard to find a hooker on Saturday night,
>except to Ferengi, and the people of Eart are at peace with each
and every single blue whale. They always want to kill each
>other. That's much better than Star Wars where the key word
of the day is "BOOGER!" Fighting between the Alliance and Empire
>is "WAR" and people like Darth Vader go around killing everyone
Who can't understand his sense of humor, except for his own son,
>who won't convert to the dark side.
Thank you, thank you, ladies and gentlemen!
SyG
>Star Trek is much better than Star Wars.
No acounting for taste....
>They are both great, but Star trek seems to have a more focused
>base in reality.
heheheh... warn me next time... I laughed so hard I almost blacked
out.....
>Also, Star Trek seems to be the more
>idealistic future. Believe me, if I were alive in the future, I
>would want to live in Star Trek where money means nothing,
Why wait for the future then? just travel back in time a few years
and move to USSR.
>except to Ferengi, and the people of Eart are at peace with each
>other. That's much better than Star Wars where the key word
>is "WAR" and people like Darth Vader go around killing everyone
>who won't convert to the dark side.
>
Human's fight. We are, by nature, agressive, territorial hunters.
Me, I'll take the SW universe anyday. Just give me a small hyperspace
capible ship (only about 10,000.... My car cost more then that), a
heavy blaster pistol, and the galaxy for me to roam at my pleasure.
Lagrangian
Ms. Newlydead <d...@ev1.net> schrieb in im Newsbeitrag:
06cc9238...@usw-ex0105-034.remarq.com...
> Star Trek is much better than Star Wars.
> idealistic future. Believe me, if I were alive in the future, I
> would want to live in Star Trek where money means nothing,
> other. That's much better than Star Wars where the key word
> is "WAR" and people like Darth Vader go around killing everyone
> who won't convert to the dark side.
>
it. B5 is in my opinion the most realistic science fiction movie/series of
these 3.
pablo_sa...@my-deja.com
> They are both great, but Star trek seems to have a more focused
> base in reality. Also, Star Trek seems to be the more
> idealistic future. Believe me, if I were alive in the future, I
> would want to live in Star Trek where money means nothing,
> except to Ferengi, and the people of Eart are at peace with each
> other. That's much better than Star Wars where the key word
> is "WAR" and people like Darth Vader go around killing everyone
> who won't convert to the dark side.
The Galactic Empire forged order from the chaos of the overextended and
corrupt Old Republic. One must sacrifice some things, such as personal
freedom, for the greater good. I assure that the citizens of the
Empire are much safer from their enemies than the pitiable denizens of
the weak Federation!
Seriously, because the Empire is NOT idealistic, and NOT peaceful, they
will win. The key word IS war, and this is to the Empire's benefit.
They have a much larger battle-ready navy than the Federation, and
comparing their relative industrial bases is an exercise in futility.
The Empire built a 900 km wide battle station (DS2) in six months.
It is a total mismatch.
> * Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion
Network *
> The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet -
Free!
>
>
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
pablo_sa...@my-deja.com
iceberg3k <mberg...@vax2.winona.msus.edu> wrote:
[snip]
> If a game like THAT managed to hypnotize the crew of the
> Enterprise, I could take over the entire Federation inside of a
> week, simply by distributing an actually GOOD video game, like
> Quake.
That would be funny.
Who do you think would be the best?
> -- M.
> -a.r.k, a.s.v.s
> -YHBT, YHL. HAND
>
pablo_sa...@my-deja.com
"WeeMadAndo" <weema...@start.com.au> wrote:
>
> Ms. Newlydead <d...@ev1.net> wrote in message
> news:06cc9238...@usw-ex0105-034.remarq.com...
> > Star Trek is much better than Star Wars.
> > They are both great, but Star trek seems to have a more focused
> > base in reality.
>
>
> >Also, Star Trek seems to be the more idealistic future. Believe
me, if I
> were >alive in the future, I would want to live in Star Trek where
money
> means >nothing, except to Ferengi, and the people of Eart are at
peace with
> each
> > other.
>
> conflict.
So sayeth WeeMadAndo, supreme leader of the Shadow forces. (B5)
> >That's much better than Star Wars where the key word
> > is "WAR" and people like Darth Vader go around killing everyone
> > who won't convert to the dark side.
>
> I dunno, the Galaxy seemed to be better off under the benevolent
dictator.
>
> --
> WeeMadAndo
> Self proclaimed leader of the anti-troll jihad and all round nice guy.
> Don't mock me, your playing with fire!
pablo_sa...@my-deja.com
iceberg3k <mberg...@vax2.winona.msus.edu> wrote:
> WHOOSH! Here comes Wackylacing to make your day brighter!!!
>
>
>
>
>
> >base in reality. Also, Star Trek seems to be the more
>
> toy-generating franchise. Of course, I realize it's not a very
>
>
>
> >would want to live in Star Trek where money means nothing,
>
>
>
>
> >other. That's much better than Star Wars where the key word
>
> of the day is "BOOGER!" Fighting between the Alliance and Empire
>
>
>
>
ROTFLMAO!!!!!!!!!!
> -- M.
> -a.r.k, a.s.v.s
> -YHBT, YHL. HAND.
Jonathan Boyd
wrote on 3/5/00 5:25 pm:
> "Ms. Newlydead" wrote:
>> Star Trek is much better than Star Wars.
> Matter of opinion
>> They are both great, but Star trek seems to have a more focused
>> base in reality.
> Good joke. Oh, you're serious.
Now now, it's just a newbie. We'll soon educate him/her/it.
>> Also, Star Trek seems to be the more idealistic future. Believe me, if I
>> were alive in the future, I would want to live in Star Trek where money means
>> nothing, except to Ferengi, and the people of Eart are at peace with each
>> other.
> To quote Gus, "Get killed HIPPY!"
>> That's much better than Star Wars where the key word
>> is "WAR" and people like Darth Vader go around killing everyone
>> who won't convert to the dark side.
>
> More than 99% of the people in Star Wars were unaffected by Palpatine's
> rise in power, and equally unaffected by his demise.
>
> I'd rather live in Star Wars, get myself a small ship. Become a
> prospector and make a humble living as part of the 99%.
I'd like to join Starfleet, become captain fo a Sovereign class starship,
form my own personality cult, gather my most trusted officers onth e ship
and then go on the run to find a planet that I can rule over as god using
the power of my ship.
That or hook a replicator up to a big solar panel and eat ice cream and
chocolate all day.
--
Jonathan
AIM: BoydClone | STvsSW website: http://www.jboyd.co.uk/index.html
Jonathan Boyd
mberg...@vax2.winona.msus.edu wrote on 3/5/00 5:28 pm:
> Don't believe me? In ANH, Luke Skywalker cries out in
> disbelief, "Ten thousand?? We could almost buy our own ship for
> that!" An inexpensive car in the modern-era USA costs about
> 10,000 dollars. So in Star Wars, a starship (Luke didn't
> explicitly specify it as such, but we must assume that this is
> so, since he knew they needed passage to Alderaan and thus a
> starship) costs about as much as a small car in the US today. As
> Mike Wong points out, the most treasured symbol of freedom for
> most people in the modern day US is the automobile.
Um, without a currency we can't really make comparisons. Yes, 10,000 dollars
will buy you a car, but 10,000 pesetas most certainly won't. It might,
however, buy you a loaf of bread. We're not sure how much 10,000 is worth
really or how it compares to modern currency.
chrisscott
about Vader killing folk look at the Borg.
cheers johnny
--
Free audio & video emails, greeting cards and forums
Talkway - http://www.talkway.com - Talk more ways (sm)
iceberg3k
Flipping through my SWRPG books (not a good resource, I know, but
the only price listings I have handy), the price of things in
Star Wars seems to be roughly equivalent to the price of
equivalent goods in modern American dollars. A blaster pistol
costs between 250-750 credits, for example, and storage items
(like Spacer's Chests and the like) tend to be quite cheap.
-- M.
-a.r.k, a.s.v.s
-"When you're following an angel doesn't mean you have to throw
your body off a building." - They Might Be Giants
Chuck
Ms. Newlydead <d...@ev1.net> wrote in message
news:06cc9238...@usw-ex0105-034.remarq.com...
> Star Trek is much better than Star Wars.
> They are both great, but Star trek seems to have a more focused
> base in reality.
That's it; I'm adding this to my Common Claims page.
>Also, Star Trek seems to be the more
> idealistic future.
Considering that Star Wars happened in the past, I'd guess so.
>Believe me, if I were alive in the future, I
> would want to live in Star Trek where money means nothing,
Hmm, and what system of government doesn't use money? Does it start with a
"c" and end with the rise of the Iron Curtain?
> except to Ferengi, and the people of Eart are at peace with each
> other. That's much better than Star Wars where the key word
> is "WAR"
Hm, so I guess the Federation should just have surrendered to the Klingons,
Borg, or the Dominion instead of fighting a war with them all.
>and people like Darth Vader go around killing everyone
> who won't convert to the dark side.
Go to Star Trek where there are trillions waiting to assimilate your sorry
ass.
--
Chuck
"Are you willing to die for stupidity? You see, I am, if it'll teach you
something." -187
iceberg3k
wrote:
<snip>
>You make it sound like we are genetically engineered to be
warlike or
>something, as if it's never going to change. We do have free
will and
>can change if we want, but yes we are warlike
Genetic engineering has nothing to do with it - humans like
"blowing shit up real good."
WeeMadAndo
Ms. Newlydead <d...@ev1.net> wrote in message
news:06cc9238...@usw-ex0105-034.remarq.com...
> Star Trek is much better than Star Wars.
> They are both great, but Star trek seems to have a more focused
> base in reality.
*Sarcasm* *Sarcasm* *Sarcasm*
>Also, Star Trek seems to be the more idealistic future. Believe me, if I
were >alive in the future, I would want to live in Star Trek where money
means >nothing, except to Ferengi, and the people of Eart are at peace with
each
> other.
Pah, simple fools. What fun is peace? Evolution is achieved through
conflict.
>That's much better than Star Wars where the key word
> is "WAR" and people like Darth Vader go around killing everyone
> who won't convert to the dark side.
I dunno, the Galaxy seemed to be better off under the benevolent dictator.
--
WeeMadAndo
Self proclaimed leader of the anti-troll jihad and all round nice guy.
Don't mock me, your playing with fire!
>
>
PREDATOR
iceberg3k wrote:
<snip>
> which makes it really hard to find a hooker on Saturday night,
You've never contemplated the possibilities of holodecks have you?
sea...@my-deja.com
Jonathan Boyd <jona...@jboyd.co.uk> wrote:
> in article 391052E8...@home.com, Strowbridge at
strow...@home.com
> wrote on 3/5/00 5:25 pm:
>
> > "Ms. Newlydead" wrote:
>
>
>
> >> They are both great, but Star trek seems to have a more focused
> >> base in reality.
>
>
> Now now, it's just a newbie. We'll soon educate him/her/it.
>
me, if I
> >> were alive in the future, I would want to live in Star Trek where
money means
> >> nothing, except to Ferengi, and the people of Eart are at peace
with each
> >> other.
>
>
> >> is "WAR" and people like Darth Vader go around killing everyone
> >> who won't convert to the dark side.
> >
Palpatine's
> > rise in power, and equally unaffected by his demise.
> > I'd rather live in Star Wars, get myself a small ship. Become a>
> > prospector and make a humble living as part of the 99%.
> I'd like to join Starfleet, become captain fo a Sovereign class
starship,
> form my own personality cult, gather my most trusted officers onth e
ship
> and then go on the run to find a planet that I can rule over as god
using
> the power of my ship.
Ah, prime directive Jonathan? You'd be kicked out and be tried for war
crimes, heh. And what if someone else show's up wanting your planet?
> That or hook a replicator up to a big solar panel and eat ice cream
and
> chocolate all day.
Just make sure to run the exercise programs, or you'd be a blimp, and I
wouldn't want to eat all the time, but would have what I wanted when I
wanted, no waiting for anyone to cook or prepare it, or having to make
a trip to get take-out.
>
> --
> Jonathan
> AIM: BoydClone | STvsSW website: http://www.jboyd.co.uk/index.html
>
>
sea...@my-deja.com
Dalton <dalto...@erols.com> wrote:
> "Ms. Newlydead" wrote:
> >
> > Star Trek is much better than Star Wars.
>
>
> > base in reality.
>
>
>
>
> > Believe me, if I were alive in the future, I
> > would want to live in Star Trek where money means nothing,
>
>
> > except to Ferengi, and the people of Eart are at peace with each
> > other.
>
> nature. I do NOT want others suppressing my true being.
>
> > is "WAR" and people like Darth Vader go around killing everyone
> > who won't convert to the dark side.
>
> nature of humanity. We are a warlike species, like it or not, and no
> happy-go-lucky hippie future like that in Star Trek is EVER going to
> change it.
You make it sound like we are genetically engineered to be warlike or
something, as if it's never going to change. We do have free will and
can change if we want, but yes we are warlike
>
> --
> Dalton | AIM: RobPDalton | ICQ: 50342303
>
> "I don't have a clue." ---Elim Garak
>
> Da ASVS Fanfic Archive: [http://members.xoom.com/Tiny11380/fanfics ]
> Da ASVS FUQ: [http://members.xoom.com/Tiny11380/fuq ]
>
sea...@my-deja.com
> > base in reality.
>
>
> >Also, Star Trek seems to be the more idealistic future. Believe
me, if I
> were >alive in the future, I would want to live in Star Trek where
money
peace with
> each
> > other.
>
> Pah, simple fools. What fun is peace? Evolution is achieved through
> conflict.
Not quite, at least not as far as humans are concerned, maybe you could
put it that way with the dinosaurs who had millions of years to evolve
and competed with each other all that time. Humans mostly competed with
other animals until the dawn of civilzation, when we had more to gain
from rival civilizations. And anyway, it doesn't neccesarily (sp?) have
to be person-vs-person conflict, take your appendix for example which
was supposedly used as a organ to hold toxins and bacteria, etc back
when we ate our meat raw.
>
> >That's much better than Star Wars where the key word
> > is "WAR" and people like Darth Vader go around killing everyone
> > who won't convert to the dark side.
>
> I dunno, the Galaxy seemed to be better off under the benevolent
dictator.
>
> --
> WeeMadAndo
> Self proclaimed leader of the anti-troll jihad and all round nice guy.
> Don't mock me, your playing with fire!
>
> >
> >
> > * Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion
Network
> *
> > The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet -
Free!
> >
>
>
sea...@my-deja.com
> They are both great, but Star trek seems to have a more focused
> idealistic future. Believe me, if I were alive in the future, I
> would want to live in Star Trek where money means nothing
Well, I remember reading something on Wong's "Economics of Star Trek"
page that said that any society MUST have some way of measuring units
of work and resources, and thus must have some currency. I always
thought we must because why would people want to work with no
incentive, when they could get any material thing for free? Anyway, I
thought that the replicator would eliminate the need to pay for basic
human nessecities (sp?) such as food and clothing, but they don't
actually make something out of pure energy, just reshape matter from
somewhere else into what you want. If they did do this, well then I'd
like that cause I wouldn't have to work to get what I want or needed I
could quit work and have more time to practice, learn and improve
skills, rather than just getting money to pay for my food, clothes, and
car insurance, and internet bill, if that latter two are free as well.
> except to Ferengi, and the people of Eart are at peace with each
> other. That's much better than Star Wars where the key word
> is "WAR" and people like Darth Vader go around killing everyone
> who won't convert to the dark side.
You know, to tell you the truth I used to be a real big warsie when I
was a kid and started watching Trek simply because there wasn't enough
Wars to go around after ROTJ (Too bad GL didn't want to make nine
movies, like I'd heard, and had made them right after ROTJ, that would
have been enough fuel to keep me going) I used to hate star trek
because I thought I had to understand the technobabble. I started
watching Trek when I read about how Picard had been assimilated, in a
video game magazine, and it "took off" from there (Though TNG was a lot
better than the stuff now. We need explorers farting around in the
Alpha quandrant not-so far away) Anyway, I prefer Trek because of well
mostly just personal preference, I like to way the ships look and stuff
like the designs, the interiors and stuff. And well it can be fuel for
your imagination, even if it isn't realistic. I also like the
exploration and discovery attitude of Trek, whereas in Wars, in the
force is what you say it is, then they've hit the roof and there's
nothing more to explore, since that is all powerful and nothing else
can surpass it, and they'll never find anything more powerful or
intricate then it.
Dalton
[snip]
> > Star Wars is more based in reality since it better reflects the true
> > nature of humanity. We are a warlike species, like it or not, and no
> > happy-go-lucky hippie future like that in Star Trek is EVER going to
> > change it.
>
> You make it sound like we are genetically engineered to be warlike or
> something, as if it's never going to change. We do have free will and
> can change if we want, but yes we are warlike
>
We ARE genetically engineered to be warlike. By nature. Ever seen a
colony of monkeys or apes? EXTREMELY violent.
--
Dalton | AIM: RobPDalton | ICQ: 50342303
Spleen!
Dalton
> warlike or
> >something, as if it's never going to change. We do have free
> will and
> >can change if we want, but yes we are warlike
>
> "blowing shit up real good."
>
Couldn't have put it better myself.
*loads up Redneck Rampage*
--
Dalton | AIM: RobPDalton | ICQ: 50342303
"I've written 6 words." ---Baron, commenting on Domination
Chapter 24
Reid
> Well, I remember reading something on Wong's "Economics of Star Trek"
> page that said that any society MUST have some way of measuring units
> of work and resources, and thus must have some currency. I always
> thought we must because why would people want to work with no
> incentive, when they could get any material thing for free? Anyway, I
> thought that the replicator would eliminate the need to pay for basic
> human nessecities (sp?) such as food and clothing, but they don't
> actually make something out of pure energy, just reshape matter from
> somewhere else into what you want. If they did do this, well then I'd
> like that cause I wouldn't have to work to get what I want or needed I
> could quit work and have more time to practice, learn and improve
> skills, rather than just getting money to pay for my food, clothes, and
> car insurance, and internet bill, if that latter two are free as well.
Have you seen the movie Office Space?
Well there was a seen in it that went something like this...
Guy1: "What would you do if you had a million dollars?"
Guy2: "Two chicks at the same time!"
Blah Blah..
Guy3: "The whole question is bullshit, because if everyone had a million
dollars there would be no janitors in the wold, because no one would want to
clean up shit for a living!"
This brings up two points
1) Who cleans the toilets in the Federation?
2) If everything I needed was provided to me, why the hell would get a real
job? I would probably sit on my ass all day and get drunk... and do two
chicks at the same time.
--
"I was under medication when I made the decision not to burn the tapes." -
President Richard Nixon
[Go Here http://members.home.net/bcdreid/SWvsST.htm]
Kynes
> in article 02927122...@usw-ex0105-035.remarq.com, iceberg3k at
> mberg...@vax2.winona.msus.edu wrote on 3/5/00 5:28 pm:
>
> > Don't believe me? In ANH, Luke Skywalker cries out in
> > disbelief, "Ten thousand?? We could almost buy our own ship for
> > that!" An inexpensive car in the modern-era USA costs about
> > 10,000 dollars. So in Star Wars, a starship (Luke didn't
> > explicitly specify it as such, but we must assume that this is
> > so, since he knew they needed passage to Alderaan and thus a
> > starship) costs about as much as a small car in the US today. As
> > Mike Wong points out, the most treasured symbol of freedom for
> > most people in the modern day US is the automobile.
>
> Um, without a currency we can't really make comparisons. Yes, 10,000 dollars
> will buy you a car, but 10,000 pesetas most certainly won't. It might,
> however, buy you a loaf of bread. We're not sure how much 10,000 is worth
> really or how it compares to modern currency.
Well, Luke's speeder only went for a couple thousand, so that allows us to establish
a standard. Equate the speeder to a run-down crappy car today or even something like
an old moped and you get a similar standard.
--
-LK!
[ ky...@choam.org ] [ ICQ: 795238 ] [ AIM: Kynes23 ]
"Discussions which lack moral or normative assessments are rarely interesting."
- Emily Cuatto
Kynes
> I don't know I prefer Star Wars
I know why *I* prefer Star Wars.
Because Star Wars kicks fucking ass, and Trek sucks shit.
That good enough for everyone?
Naahmah
Ms. Newlydead <d...@ev1.net> wrote:
> Star Trek is much better than Star Wars.
That's an opinion. Some people like Star Wars and other people like
Star Trek. I happen to think that Star Wars is a lot better than Star
Trek.
> They are both great, but Star trek seems to have a more focused
> base in reality.
Huh? Star Trek is no where near reality (not that SW touches down).
People do not get along that
way in the real world. The Federation is composed of quite a few
planets, with all of the different races comes fear and prejudice. It
would be unnatural if no one felt those things. People rise above this,
but not everyone like the shows suggest.
Also, Star Trek seems to be the more
> idealistic future. Believe me, if I were alive in the future, I
> would want to live in Star Trek where money means nothing,
> except to Ferengi, and the people of Eart are at peace with each
> other.
Money not meaning a thing is not the signs of an ideal society. You
need money to barter with. If everyone had an equal amount of whatever
people in the Star trek glaaxy use to barter with, no one would want to
work. if I was automatically given so much money, and it was enough to
live off, I probably wouldn't work (not that I work now, as I'm between
jobs).
And what fun is peace? People thrive on conflicts. It is a sick
fascination. Kind of like when you turn to a channel on the tv that
doesn't speak your native tongue. You'll sit there for a few moments
watching, even though you don't understand what is going on.
That's much better than Star Wars where the key word
> is "WAR" and people like Darth Vader go around killing everyone
> who won't convert to the dark side.
Not exactly, he only killed those stupid enough not to survive. Weeding
out the gene pool, so to speak.
--
"Pretty. What do we blow up first?" Myn Donos to
Wedge Antilles, Solo Command.
Commander Thelea
Humans will never be peaceful like the UFP claims; It's simply
impossible, and clearly propaganda.
Hell.. Humans have been fighting since some big sabretooth
tiger thought he saw a good meal, had you cornered, and you
picked up a stout piece of wood and fought back. It's instinct.
It's been in us since before we were even human, and it ain't
going away.
Humans do not give up without fight.. Even in the UFP, it's
clear that when pushed they fight hard, they scratch and bite,
they go for low blows.. Humanity has NOT lost it's instincts,
thankfully, and clearly all that stuff about humanity having
moved beyond violence is a bunch of BS in the Federation;
Propaganda.
I'd like to take this quote from a book called "Action
Stations" based in the Wing Commander Universe:
"You'll lose."
"How?" Jukaga asked, incredulous at the audacity of the
statement and also the matter of fact way in which it was
delivered.
"You really don't know us," Abram replied. "Oh, you have the
data, the numbers, the coordinates of jump points, the
schematics of ships, the analysis of weapons. In that respect
you have us, we're an open society, you a closed one. In a
strictly military sense you should win."
Again there was that smile. "But you don't know what's in
here," and he pointed towards his heart.
The gesturestruck Jukaga as curious. The human was point to the
place where the Kilrathi believed the sould resided, and he
wondered if it was a human gesture or simply one mikicked by a
slave.
"You are most likely planning Jak-tu, the springing from
surprise. Wise move for any hunter tackling a prey. Make it
clean and quick, no chance of getting hurt. But the wrong move
with us."
How the human eve knew that was troubling. He looked over at
Harga and saw the bemused look. No, this human had reasoned it
out on his own.
"Go on."
Abram hesitated for a second.
"Funny, I start
to relax and chat with you Cats and can almost forget that we're
blood enemies, that we're destined for a fight and that whatever
Isay might hurt my race.. But what the hell, you're all so fixed
in your ways-" he smiled and looked over to Harga and nodded, "-
present company except, that it really doesn't matter."
"Continue."
"We've got a strange sort of code. Two people meet, have a
fight, maybe one gets killed, but there's a code, you shot him
from the front, not in the back. Now I know throughout our own
history that's usually not been the case, but nevertheless it
gets us upset. You see the Jak-tu as proper, we see it as
cowardly, springing from the dark."
Jukaga began to stand up. To tolerate the accusation of
cowardice from an alien was beyond all acceptance.
"Remain seated," Harga snarled. "Let him speak."
Abrahm looked straight at Jukaga, as if half waiting for him to
strik, to end it. Struggling for control, Jukaga sat back down.
"Maybe it's racial memory for both of us," Abram
continued. "You were carnivorous hunters, while we most likely
evolved from creatures who, before we discovered tools, were the
hunted."
Jukaga looked at the human in surprise. To so casually admit
being descended from prey beasts was beyond comprehension. There
was no shame in the human's voice, no humiliation. Surprised, he
looked over at Harga, who again smiled.
"I told youthere was something to learn here," Harga said.
"Did I say something interestin?" Abram asked and Jukaga
realized the human actually had no comprehension of the
humiliation he had just admitted to. Curious, an alien thougth
process. If this point was alien, beyond comprehension, than
what else was beyond understanding?
Something stirred within Jukaga, a dim glimmering of
realization, as if a weighty thought, barely perceived, was
starting to open up. He leaned forward, looking straight at
Abram. "Continue."
"well, as I was saying. You'll trigger a primal reaction in us.
For you, the hunter, the mere sight of us, the fact that we
exist, triggers the desire to hunt us to death."
He fell silent staring straight at Jukaga, who wondered if the
human was even now coming to new realizations. "As for us, the
springing from the dark will trigger certain reactions as well.
There will be terror, yes, I'll admit to that. Damn, I struggle
with that even now, sitting across from you, your talons half
bared." Jukaga looked down at his hands and realized that the
razor-sharp talons were indeed exposed, and to his own surprise
he retracted them.
"You see, there are fears worse than death for us humans. Fear
that loved ones, especially our children, might be harmed."
"We share that," Jukaga interrupted, a bit annoyed that what he
thought was an interesting insight bad become banal. Any
creature of intelligence, even the dumbest of prey, protect
their young.
"No, there's something more, though. We fear almost beyond all
other things being devoured," Abram said quietly. "To not just
be killed but to be eaten alive, to have talons, fangs, tearing
into us. Ask a human to sit quietly and contemplate such a death
and they are filled with dread. Now, let me ask you, do you
devour those whom you defeat?"
Jukaga did not answer.
Abram forced a smile.
"Even if you didn't do all that your form implies, you
thinking, your manners, your rituals, the way you fight speaks
of the carnivore, the devourer of flesh. Now, why do you
practice Jak-tu?"
"What?"
"In the hunt, why do you practice Jak-tu?"
"To overpower a prey with a single blow."
Abram shook his head.
"No. It is more. For if you do not overpower your prey with the
first strike, if you don't break it's neck or back to render it
defenseless, it will thrash about. Even as it dies it will flay
at you out of sheer terror. It then becomes dangerous, perhaps
even killing you."
"That is the core of what I'm speaking of," Adam said
softly. "You think us weak. Yes, we as individuals are weak when
compared to you. Perhaps even militarily we're weak, but we will
fight with the terror of dispair. I don't think the Varni had
that in them. From what I've heard they had maybe ten or twenty
million more years of evolution behind them and it was gone. You
see, it wasn't that long ago when all we held in our hands was a
club or rock against cats that were a damned sight bigger than
you. You haven't run into prey like us before, and I tell you,
when it's done your Empire will be dead."
The casual way in which the human spoke sent a chill down
Jukaga's spine.
Well, that's the excerpt.
It essentially says what I'm saying.. Maybe in ten or twenty
million years we could be the peaceful people who moved beyond
war that the Federation claims we are.. But a few hundred years
in the future? No. Hell no... Like Abram said.. Only a few
thousand years ago we went up against big cats with rocks and
sticks. Maybe ten million years of evolution will make us
pacifists..
But not ten hundred. Never a millenia.. And never three hundred
years, even of the Federation's BS propaganda and philisophy.
The Federation's philisophy is all propaganda, all lies.
Nothing has changed about humanity; That was proven in such
movies as First Contact and certainly by Kirk.
Humanity will NOT be like the Federation claims it will be for
ten, twenty million years atleast, and hence the Federation is
what it truely is. A communist police state, keeping it's people
in line by convincing them that they've evolved beyond being
capable of violence, when, really, like with any human.. It's
right under the surface.
And it's a good thing. In this world, and definitely in space..
We NEED the "Killer Instinct" to survive as a race. We need it,
and only with it can humantiy prosper.
Countess Marina
"Ut Veniant Omnes!"
Spyda
>
> Ms. Newlydead <d...@ev1.net> wrote in message
> news:06cc9238...@usw-ex0105-034.remarq.com...
> > base in reality.
Yep, that'll show 'em!
> >Also, Star Trek seems to be the more
> > idealistic future.
> Considering that Star Wars happened in the past, I'd guess so.
Um... you do realize that it didn't really happen?
> >Believe me, if I were alive in the future, I
> > would want to live in Star Trek where money means nothing,
> Hmm, and what system of government doesn't use money? Does it start with a
> "c" and end with the rise of the Iron Curtain?
condom?
> > except to Ferengi, and the people of Eart are at peace with each
> > other. That's much better than Star Wars where the key word
> > is "WAR"
> Hm, so I guess the Federation should just have surrendered to the Klingons,
> Borg, or the Dominion instead of fighting a war with them all.
Well, resistance was futile apparently.
> >and people like Darth Vader go around killing everyone
> > who won't convert to the dark side.
> Go to Star Trek where there are trillions waiting to assimilate your sorry
> ass.
Yep. They sure will.
--
"You speak of knowledge Judicator, you speak of experience. I have
journeyed through the darkness between the most distant stars. I have
beheld the births of negative suns. And born witness to the entropy of
entire realities. Unto my experience Aldaris, all that you have built
here on Aiur is but a fleeting dream. A dream from which your precious
Conclave will awaken, finding themselves drowned in a greater
nightmare."
-Zeratul, Prelate of the Dark Templar.
__________________________________________________________________
http://spyda.itgo.com
http://www.nano.dk/~spyda (under construction)
ICQ#: 39921647
_ _ _ _
\\ \\ // //
\\ || || //
_ \\ \\ // //
|________________________\\ \\_// //_____________________________
| ____________________ \\/ \// ____________________________/
| /_\ /_\ /
|_______________________// | | \\_________________________/
_| // /| |\ \\
// //| |\\ \\
// // \___/ \\ \\
// \\
bjorn_...@my-deja.com
> Star Trek is much better than Star Wars.
I don't agree, but hey, that's my opinion.
> They are both great, but Star trek seems to have a more focused
> base in reality.
It only seems that way for someone who fails to understand the
mechanics of reality. I don't intend to be offensive, but Star Trek
possesses all the scientifical accuracy of Monthy Python and the Holy
Grail.
> Also, Star Trek seems to be the more
> idealistic future.
Once again, I disagree.
> Believe me, if I were alive in the future, I
> would want to live in Star Trek where money means nothing,
> except to Ferengi, and the people of Eart are at peace with each
> other.
Believe me, if I were alive in one of these two futures, I would rather
have the possibility to go anywhere within the galaxy cheaply, to buy my
own spacecraft / hovercar, to start a corporation on my home planet, and
play games like laserdome. All of these things are apparently considered
'barbaric' or 'unprogressive' in the UFP.
> That's much better than Star Wars where the key word
> is "WAR" and people like Darth Vader go around killing everyone
> who won't convert to the dark side.
The only reason for us having survived up to this point is war - we have
squashed all competition. This is an unpleasant fact. No matter how
good our technology ever gets, we can never afford to relax, or the
competition *will* catch up and surpass us.
Now, on a completely unrelated topic, what should be done to make Star
Trek a good show once more? Here follows my master plan:
1. Kill the Paramount control, as well as Berman and Braga.
2. Hire a real physicist / chemist / engineer to help Sternbach on the
tough questions, and give them final say in what's possible in Trek.
3. Let Janeway, Chakotay, Neelix and Kim die in an exploding console.
4. Get some *real* writers back into the fold.
5. Make the space scenes darker, the ships a bit less shiny and
plastic-looking.
6. Kill the socialism of the Federation.
7. Show us Trek marines with actual tactical sense.
8. Ditto for captains.
Well, I can't think of anything else right now.
/ Björn
Si vis pacem, para bellum.
iceberg3k
Wars, yes? ;)
bjorn_...@my-deja.com
iceberg3k <mberg...@vax2.winona.msus.edu> wrote:
> So basically, what you're advocating is turning ST into Star
> Wars, yes? ;)
>
Yep, but without JarJar. *smiles*
/ Björn
Matthew Hyde
> > In Star Trek, with one lone exception (Kasidy Yates), we have
> > NEVER seen a starship that was privately owned by a Federation
> > citizen. The ubiquitous "N[xx]-[number]" registry (in the
> > precise Starfleet style) is seen on every Federation ship seen
> > except for Kasidy's, indicating that no matter where they're
> > registered, they are owned by the Federation goverment.
> what about Kavaous Fajo's ship?
> Quark's Treasure?
> the SS Vico (Civilian vessel)
> you compleetely wrong anyway: any NCC ship is not OWNED by the Federation,
> it is REGESTERED UNDER the federation.
> your car has a number plate right? it is a government-issued one (normally).
> does the government own your car? no, you do.
But the bank probably does for real
--
Matt Hyde
Math Lab Consultant
All persons, living and dead,
Are coincidental,
And should not be construed.
(Kurt Vonnegut)
Matthew Hyde
> In article <02927122...@usw-ex0105-035.remarq.com>,
> iceberg3k <mberg...@vax2.winona.msus.edu> wrote:
> [snip]
> > If a game like THAT managed to hypnotize the crew of the
> > Enterprise, I could take over the entire Federation inside of a
> > week, simply by distributing an actually GOOD video game, like
> > Quake.
> That would be funny.
> Who do you think would be the best?
Odo and Worf, particularly in team play. I can just see Quark being
singled out by everybody constantly. I know I would. I would let others
frag me just so I could frag him!
Matthew Hyde
> Chuck wrote:
> >
> > Ms. Newlydead <d...@ev1.net> wrote in message
> > news:06cc9238...@usw-ex0105-034.remarq.com...
> > > base in reality.
> Yep, that'll show 'em!
>
> > >Also, Star Trek seems to be the more
> > > idealistic future.
> > Considering that Star Wars happened in the past, I'd guess so.
> Um... you do realize that it didn't really happen?
that's just as sensible as what he said. Uhhh... or something. Considering
a wormhole would travel n time as well in space, and time here isn't
necessarily the same as time there, why, we could say that their
"Long long time ago" is right now or even tomorrow. It could be after ST,
it could be after the end of the human race. As we know it. Maybe
Battlestar Galactica was the evolution of ST (when they finally got around
to making truly huge ships and using true fighters) and some SW rogues
disrupted the Milky Way comms systems and they were cut off for so long
they forgot who they were, and that Search for Earth in the early 1980's
brought them to Alderaan.
Commander Thelea
>
>But the bank probably does for real
And if the bank is owned by the government?
Countess Marina
"Ut Veniant Omnes!"
* Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion Network *
Guardian2000
>
>
>> That or hook a replicator up to a big solar panel and eat ice
cream
>and
>> chocolate all day.
>
>Just make sure to run the exercise programs, or you'd be a
blimp, and I
>wouldn't want to eat all the time, but would have what I wanted
when I
>wanted, no waiting for anyone to cook or prepare it, or having
to make
>a trip to get take-out.
>
Nah, he wouldn't have to exercise. If they have Synthehol
instead of alcohol, they could probably have Synthelard.
sea...@my-deja.com
want to
> clean up shit for a living!"
Ah, if everyone had a million dollars, inflations would quickly set in,
and people would charge more money for everyday things and products, so
the money would quickly be de-valued.
>
> This brings up two points
> 1) Who cleans the toilets in the Federation?
> 2) If everything I needed was provided to me, why the hell would get
a real
> job? I would probably sit on my ass all day and get drunk... and do
two
> chicks at the same time.
There are other motivations besides money. Take Ross Perot, for
example. Why would a self-made billionaire who makes 300K in interest
ALONE want to spend millions to get a job that pays 100K something a
year? Either power(whihc I have no desire for), or personal
satification, the challenge, etc.
>
> --
> "I was under medication when I made the decision not to burn the
tapes." -
> President Richard Nixon
> [Go Here http://members.home.net/bcdreid/SWvsST.htm]
>
>
sea...@my-deja.com
Guardian2000 <randers2...@ocean.otr.usm.edu.invalid> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> >> That or hook a replicator up to a big solar panel and eat ice
> cream
> >and
> >> chocolate all day.
> >
> >Just make sure to run the exercise programs, or you'd be a
> blimp, and I
> >wouldn't want to eat all the time, but would have what I wanted
> when I
> >wanted, no waiting for anyone to cook or prepare it, or having
> to make
> >a trip to get take-out.
> >
>
> Nah, he wouldn't have to exercise. If they have Synthehol
> instead of alcohol, they could probably have Synthelard.
So what? We have nutrasweet instead of sugar and nutrasweet tastes like
crap, and who ever said "sythelard" had no calories?
>
> * Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion
Network *
> The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet -
Free!
>
>
sea...@my-deja.com
Dalton <dalto...@erols.com> wrote:
> sea...@my-deja.com wrote:
>
> [snip]
>
> > > Star Wars is more based in reality since it better reflects the
true
> > > nature of humanity. We are a warlike species, like it or not, and
no
> > > happy-go-lucky hippie future like that in Star Trek is EVER going
to
> > > change it.
> >
or
> > something, as if it's never going to change. We do have free will
and
> > can change if we want, but yes we are warlike
> >
>
> colony of monkeys or apes? EXTREMELY violent.
I don't believe in fate.
>
> --
> Dalton | AIM: RobPDalton | ICQ: 50342303
>
> Spleen!
>
> Da ASVS Fanfic Archive: [http://members.xoom.com/Tiny11380/fanfics ]
> Da ASVS FUQ: [http://members.xoom.com/Tiny11380/fuq ]
>
sea...@my-deja.com
>
> Hell.. Humans have been fighting since some big sabretooth
> tiger thought he saw a good meal, had you cornered, and you
> picked up a stout piece of wood and fought back. It's instinct.
> It's been in us since before we were even human, and it ain't
> going away.
What does having a survival instinct have to do with being warlike? I
don't see anything wrong with that, I think the ugliness really
displays itself when you take someone else's property just because you
want it.
cwic...@my-deja.com
tend to be more violent and well selfish.. they wanna get a ship of
their own and go out and live on their own flying around doing odd
jobs, well this is all your choice, just to point out the majority of
the ppl who say star trek is better let you decide for yourself and
don't try to force their opinions on you and say it's your choice.
I think this is hilarious, all you SW fans say SW is more realistic,
have u ever tried to explain the shit in SW with the laws of physics,
half of it cannot be explained, I must also point out there are flaws
in ST tech as well but I've come across way more 'plot holes' per say
in SW then in ST...
So I will continue to like ST more than SW, although I never have a
problem in watching SW movies, Science fiction is better then n e thing
else.
The economics are different, yes, but there is no MONEY, no cash, they
don't have to buy food!
and don't you have a favorite thing to do? wouldn't you spend your time
following your hobbie no matter if you got payed for it or not, yes I
know there wouldn't be n e one wanting to clean or do dirty manual
labor, but if everyone did a fair share then there wouldn't be a
problem, it's all you lazy ass selfish ppl would wouldn't do your share
that wouldn't work in the ST universe, I however would love to live
there, it would be soo much more fun, and peace is good and so is
exploration and science. I believe personal gain is irrelevant,
"The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, or the one"
This statment is pure logic, and I don't expect a SW fan to care what I
wrote, because the maturity level is on average much lower. They can't
handles someone haveing a different view from their own. It's ...
almost 'nice'
lol I expect many replies to this, from you SW fan trying to disprove
me and my philosophy. go right ahead pick your heart out, say n e thing
you want, I invite you to mock me, and mock starwars, but in the end
only peace will continue life as it is, war will only destroy life. I
do not condone being lame and if someone attacks me sittin in a corner
calling for help, on the contrary I would enjoy a good fight, a battle
to the death is good for you health.. heh... but I don't like the
warlike attitudes of you SW fans, your "attack now" theory.. I prefer
to be defensive and never start a conflict.
"Live long and prosper" yes even to my enemies! for if I have no
enemies who shall I fight!
Matthew Hyde
> Hrmm! it would seem that the ppl who think star wars is better often to
> tend to be more violent and well selfish.. they wanna get a ship of
> their own and go out and live on their own flying around doing odd
> jobs, well this is all your choice, just to point out the majority of
> the ppl who say star trek is better let you decide for yourself and
> don't try to force their opinions on you and say it's your choice.
> I think this is hilarious, all you SW fans say SW is more realistic,
got a quote, Sparky? *blatant Rob ripoff :)*
Also, you say sci-fi is better than anything else. Ever heard of a little
thing called "The literary novel?" If you haven't, that shows what a
little mind you (possibly) have. If you have, and you still say that, then
you are severely restricting yourself. Si-fi is only as good as the
stories it contains (which is why I hate TPM--"Dune Lite").
Matthew Hyde
> In article <3910F84C...@erols.com>,
> Dalton <dalto...@erols.com> wrote:
> > sea...@my-deja.com wrote:
> >
> > [snip]
> >
> > > > Star Wars is more based in reality since it better reflects the
> true
> > > > nature of humanity. We are a warlike species, like it or not, and
> no
> > > > happy-go-lucky hippie future like that in Star Trek is EVER going
> to
> > > > change it.
> > >
> > > You make it sound like we are genetically engineered to be warlike
> or
> > > something, as if it's never going to change. We do have free will
> and
> > > can change if we want, but yes we are warlike
> > >
> >
> > We ARE genetically engineered to be warlike. By nature. Ever seen a
> > colony of monkeys or apes? EXTREMELY violent.
> I don't believe in fate.
Well you're not an ape. Hooray!
iceberg3k
wrote:
>Hrmm! it would seem that the ppl who think star wars is better
often to
>tend to be more violent and well selfish..
I'm not violent or selfish. I'm a bit more free-spirited and
free-minded than the Federation would want, though, so it's in my
own best interests to wish for a more Star Wars-ish future.
The future of Wing Commander would suit me just fine. Give me an
Orion and set me in the direction of the Gemini Sector.
<snip>
As for the rest, eat shit and die, hippie freak.
Chuck
> sea...@my-deja.com wrote:
> > I don't believe in fate.
DESTINY! DESTINY! NO ESCAPING THAT'S FOR ME! DESTINY! DESTINY! NO
ESCAPING DESTINY!!!!
--
Chuck
"Are you willing to die for stupidity? You see, I am, if it'll teach you
something." -187
Chuck
We have a winner in the Longest Strawman Attack competition!<sound of
applause>
Coming up next is the Circular Reasoning Relay...
Rob Dalton
wrote:
>In article <3910F84C...@erols.com>,
> Dalton <dalto...@erols.com> wrote:
>> sea...@my-deja.com wrote:
>>
>> [snip]
>>
>> > > Star Wars is more based in reality since it better
>> > > reflects the true nature of humanity. We are a warlike
>> > > species, like it or not, and no happy-go-lucky hippie
>> > > future like that in Star Trek is EVER going to
>> > > change it.
>> >
>> > You make it sound like we are genetically engineered to be
>> > warlike or something, as if it's never going to change. We
>> > do have free will and can change if we want, but yes we are
>> > warlike
>> >
>>
>> We ARE genetically engineered to be warlike. By nature. Ever
>> seen a colony of monkeys or apes? EXTREMELY violent.
>
>
There is a difference between fate and genetic predeterminism.
Dalton | AIM: RobPDalton | ICQ: 50342303
Da ASVS Fanfic Archive: [http://members.xoom.com/Tiny11380/fanfics ]
Da ASVS FUQ: [http://members.xoom.com/Tiny11380/fuq ]
* Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion Network *
iceberg3k
<dalto...@erols.com> wrote:
<snip>
>Star Wars is more based in reality since it better reflects the
true
>nature of humanity. We are a warlike species, like it or not,
and no
>happy-go-lucky hippie future like that in Star Trek is EVER
going to
>change it.
Shouldn't that be 'hippie-go-lucky'? ;)
pablo_sa...@my-deja.com
Matthew Hyde <mdo...@mtu.edu> wrote:
> pablo_sa...@my-deja.com wrote:
> > In article <02927122...@usw-ex0105-035.remarq.com>,
> > iceberg3k <mberg...@vax2.winona.msus.edu> wrote:
>
> > [snip]
>
> > > If a game like THAT managed to hypnotize the crew of the
> > > Enterprise, I could take over the entire Federation inside of a
> > > week, simply by distributing an actually GOOD video game, like
> > > Quake.
>
> > That would be funny.
>
> > Who do you think would be the best?
>
> Odo and Worf, particularly in team play. I can just see Quark being
> singled out by everybody constantly. I know I would. I would let
others
> frag me just so I could frag him!
He'd probably be a camper.
> --
>
> Matt Hyde
> Math Lab Consultant
>
> All persons, living and dead,
> Are coincidental,
> And should not be construed.
>
> (Kurt Vonnegut)
>
Rob Dalton
wrote:
>Hrmm! it would seem that the ppl who think star wars is better
>often to tend to be more violent and well selfish..
The usual trekkie blanket statement...
>they wanna get a ship of their own and go out and live on their
>own flying around doing odd jobs,
In other words, they want to be free. Congrats, you just admitted
that freedom is selfish. Communist.
>well this is all your choice, just to point out the majority of
>the ppl who say star trek is better let you decide for yourself
>and don't try to force their opinions on you and say it's your
>choice.
>
Since it seems that you're new here, let me tell you something
you might not know: you're wrong.
>I think this is hilarious, all you SW fans say SW is more
>realistic,
In the human element, it is.
>have u ever tried to explain the shit in SW with the laws of
>physics,
Compared to a crack in the event horizon of a black hole? Oh
yeah, ST is so consistent.
>half of it cannot be explained,
Neither can half of ST.
>I must also point out there are flaws in ST tech as well but
Too little too late.
>I've come across way more 'plot holes' per say in SW then in
>ST...
>
The term is 'per se' and 'plot holes' are easily created when the
viewer is ignorant.
>So I will continue to like ST more than SW, although I never
>have a problem in watching SW movies, Science fiction is better
>then n e thing else.
>
Hey, well, good for you. I respect your opinion.
>The economics are different, yes, but there is no MONEY, no
>cash, they don't have to buy food!
>
I.E., they're communist. Working for the greater good of the
state!
>and don't you have a favorite thing to do? wouldn't you spend
>your time following your hobbie no matter if you got payed for
>it or not, yes I know there wouldn't be n e one wanting to clean
>or do dirty manual labor, but if everyone did a fair share then
>there wouldn't be a problem,
Good luck trying to do that.
>it's all you lazy ass selfish ppl would wouldn't do your share
>that wouldn't work in the ST universe,
Hey, gee, I'm sorry I don't conform to your opinion of what a
human should be.
>I however would love to live there, it would be soo much more
>fun, and peace is good and so is exploration and science.
In otherwords, it's an idealized vision of humanity minus the
'barbarism' of our warlike genetic predeterminism. Humans love to
fight, and that's final.
>I believe personal gain is irrelevant,
>
So you're a communist. Not that that's a bad thing.
>"The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, or the
>one"
>
A profound concept, but unfortunately very rarely invoked. Humans
generally don't give a shit about anyone else. That selfish tenet
coming in again.
>This statment is pure logic, and I don't expect a SW fan to care
>what I wrote,
Are you playing 'nameless warsie' with us?
>because the maturity level is on average much lower.
When you dig yourself a hole, you dig it deep. This casts a
shadow on any good points you might have made.
>They can't handles someone haveing a different view from their
>own. It's ... almost 'nice'
>
So, a generalized presumption about the attitudes of the entire
Pro-SW side. The last person that did that wound up in the
killfiles of almost every last SW AND ST fan here.
>lol I expect many replies to this, from you SW fan trying to
>disprove me and my philosophy.
Your 'philosophy' is mere opinion, and thus has no proof to
disprove.
>go right ahead pick your heart out, say n e thing you want, I
>invite you to mock me, and mock starwars,
Want a hankie?
>but in the end only peace will continue life as it is, war will
>only destroy life.
In case you haven't realized, the main reason Humans survived on
this planet was because of War. It's the principle of natural
selection. If your hippie lifestyle was a reality, we would have
never evolved to our present state. War is a fact of life, it
stimulates growth and knowledge and separates the weak from the
strong. This is why the Federation consists of a bunch of
pansy-ass hippies tripping around the galaxy in ships designed by
art majors while the Empire conquers worlds and ensures the
continued success of the human race.
Lead, follow, or get out of the way.
>I do not condone being lame
You ARE lame. You're a hippie. You believe you can foist all this
happy horseshit on us and change the very nature of humanity to
suit your needs.
>and if someone attacks me sittin in a corner calling for help,
>on the contrary I would enjoy a good fight, a battle
>to the death is good for you health..
You just contradicted your own post. Just like Paul, you proved
yourself wrong. Killing your opponent IS good for your health. It
ensures you won't die and also ensures that you will facilitate
the survival of the human race.
>heh... but I don't like the warlike attitudes of you SW fans,
your "attack now" theory..
Good, you won't be ready for us when we come a-knockin'.
>I prefer to be defensive and never start a conflict.
>
That's nice. So do I. But if needs be, I'll fucking smash the
shit out of my opponent.
>"Live long and prosper" yes even to my enemies! for if I have
>no enemies who shall I fight!
Again, you contradict your own post. You're asking for a fight,
yet you spread your hippie diarrhea all over this group.
Dalton | AIM: RobPDalton | ICQ: 50342303
Da ASVS Fanfic Archive: [http://members.xoom.com/Tiny11380/fanfics ]
Da ASVS FUQ: [http://members.xoom.com/Tiny11380/fuq ]
* Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion Network *
Jonathan Boyd
pablo_sa...@my-deja.com wrote on 4/5/00 10:55 pm:
>>> That would be funny.
>>> Who do you think would be the best?
>> Odo and Worf, particularly in team play. I can just see Quark being singled
>> out by everybody constantly. I know I would. I would let others frag me just
>> so I could frag him!
> He'd probably be a camper.
Or a camp. Then when people come and hide inside him he's in the perfect
position to attack. Not uch you can do when your tent starts attacking you.
--
Jonathan
AIM: BoydClone | STvsSW website: http://www.jboyd.co.uk/index.html
SyG
>Hrmm! it would seem that the ppl who think star wars is better often to
>tend to be more violent and well selfish.. they wanna get a ship of
>their own and go out and live on their own flying around doing odd
>jobs, well this is all your choice, just to point out the majority of
>the ppl who say star trek is better let you decide for yourself and
>don't try to force their opinions on you and say it's your choice.
>
more violent and selfish because they want their own ship? Maybe they
want to do deap space explorations (like say, another galaxy (like the
Magellanic Clouds?). Perhaps they want to open up a currier company
to provide a low cost methid of shipping. Maybe an intersteller
missionary role?
The fact is, their are as many non-selfish reasons for owning a
starship as there are shelfish ones, and more non-vilent uses of one
then violent ones.
You are making a general statement about all Star Wars fans. This
statement is incorrect. Please withdraw it.
>I think this is hilarious, all you SW fans say SW is more realistic,
>have u ever tried to explain the shit in SW with the laws of physics,
>half of it cannot be explained, I must also point out there are flaws
>in ST tech as well but I've come across way more 'plot holes' per say
>in SW then in ST...
>
I never said SW is more realisitic. I just dissagreed that ST is more
realistic. both are equaly distant from being realisitic. If
anything, the portrail of humans as individuals and as a civilisation
IS more realistic in SW then in ST.
As for using our current understanding of physics to try to explain
what happens in SW, with the sole exception of the force, it's actualy
much easier. First, they don't spout contradictory numbers and made
up psudo-science every 5 minutes, so by calculating how an effect
could have happened, there's nothing to cotradict you.
Also, may I refer you to "The Science of Star Wars" by Jeanne Cavelos.
As for plot holes, every friggen episode in ST has more holes in the
plot then not.
>So I will continue to like ST more than SW, although I never have a
>problem in watching SW movies, Science fiction is better then n e thing
>else.
>
I don't have a problem there... I'm glad you enjoy ST and SW both. It
does not bother me that you enjoy ST more. Your claim that it's
better, though, is just you personal opinion. Your intitled to that.
The reasons you have given, and your reaction to the replies, however,
indicate that you do not enjoy it when someone shows a different light
on those reasons.
>The economics are different, yes, but there is no MONEY, no cash, they
>don't have to buy food!
>
>and don't you have a favorite thing to do? wouldn't you spend your time
>following your hobbie no matter if you got payed for it or not, yes I
>know there wouldn't be n e one wanting to clean or do dirty manual
>labor, but if everyone did a fair share then there wouldn't be a
>problem, it's all you lazy ass selfish ppl would wouldn't do your share
>that wouldn't work in the ST universe, I however would love to live
>there, it would be soo much more fun, and peace is good and so is
>exploration and science. I believe personal gain is irrelevant,
>
Sure, I have hobbies. Put me in the ST universe, and I'll spend all
my time ether : Drinking (real booze, not the synthetic shit), playing
paintball on the holodeck, or getting my after paintball/prepaintball
rubdown from the identical Pam Anderson holographic octuplets.
There's no way you can convince me to work without paying me
something, as the federation in TNG time has shown no desire to force
someone against their will.
And yes, some people would go around cleaning without getting paid.
They do it now. They are known as "neat-freaks". Dirty, sweaty
manual labor without pay? been there done that already. Look around
at neighbors and family members chipping in to build a shed, reroof a
house, etc. They are not getting paid, they are doing it because they
want to help their neighbor/friend/family member.
Now before you call me lazy and or selfish, you might want to think a
moment. People, as a whole, are not going to do something if there
isn't something in it for them. Individuals may, but as a whole
humans wont. That does not make them lazy. As for selfish, a little
selfishness is not a bad thing. Every time you eat a meal, you are
being selfish as long as there is a single person in your city that
goes hungry (and trust me, it exists en every city).
>"The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, or the one"
>
>This statment is pure logic, and I don't expect a SW fan to care what I
>wrote, because the maturity level is on average much lower. They can't
>handles someone haveing a different view from their own. It's ...
>almost 'nice'
>
So because I do not share your opinions, I'm immature? You just might
want to rethink that one before you make a lot of enemies (me
included).
So you take that statement to heart and live it every day? I take it
then that you use your entire paycheck to feed/cloth/house as many
people as possible, going hungry/nakid/homeless your self? After all,
you are only one, and they are many.
You have to think of that statement in context. It does not always
hold totaly true. Otherwise, you advocate stealing 99.99999% of the
money of the richest 5% of the population of the world to feed/house
the hungry/homeless. After all, it's only a few that are hurt for the
good of many, right? The entire problem with this statement is that
it's not used correctly. While it is true that the good of many is
generaly more important then the good of one, it is also true that
generaly the one is aware of what they are doing and consider it
worthwhile.
>lol I expect many replies to this, from you SW fan trying to disprove
>me and my philosophy. go right ahead pick your heart out, say n e thing
>you want, I invite you to mock me, and mock starwars, but in the end
>only peace will continue life as it is, war will only destroy life. I
>do not condone being lame and if someone attacks me sittin in a corner
>calling for help, on the contrary I would enjoy a good fight, a battle
>to the death is good for you health.. heh... but I don't like the
>warlike attitudes of you SW fans, your "attack now" theory.. I prefer
>to be defensive and never start a conflict.
>
Once again, you are making general statement about an entire group
that do not hold up for some, perhaps many of it's members. I am not
warlike/violent/attack orriented, or whatever else you want to call
it, but I am a fan of SW more then the current era of ST.
>"Live long and prosper" yes even to my enemies! for if I have no
>enemies who shall I fight!
>
>
Commander Thelea
< snip >
Anyone who believes that war will destroy life on Earth is a
complete idiot who doesn't know the facts about nuclear weapons,
Syg.. I wouldn't bother with him.
And, admittedly, my own idea of space exploration is getting
together a group of rich friends, finding some laid-off people
in Belfast, signing them on as crewers to a group of long range
armed ships, and taking off promptly for uncharted space, where
we can start pirating the spacefairing cultures of the area,
blasting the ships of the primitive ones, capturing and
conquering non-space fairing cultures as colonies of Terra and
civilizing the population, and, of course, building the ever
popular Maglev train route from the capitol to the spaceport
using coolies, while you sit around and sip tea.
Essentially, along the line of Cecil Rhodes, the Cape to Cairo
Railroad project, his private army, and the start of the Boer
War. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't, but it's always
fun.
Countess Marina
"Ut Veniant Omnes!"
* Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion Network *
Dalton
[snip]
Very well put, Marina. Thank you :)
--
Dalton | AIM: RobPDalton | ICQ: 50342303
"Please, Captain! ...Not in front of the Klingons!"
Dalton
>
> In article <39105C7D...@erols.com>, Dalton
> <dalto...@erols.com> wrote:
> <snip>
> >Star Wars is more based in reality since it better reflects the
> true
> >nature of humanity. We are a warlike species, like it or not,
> and no
> >happy-go-lucky hippie future like that in Star Trek is EVER
> going to
> >change it.
>
> Shouldn't that be 'hippie-go-lucky'? ;)
>
LOL
--
Dalton | AIM: RobPDalton | ICQ: 50342303
I want a holodeck. Then I can simulate the impossible - like ST
beating SW.
Eric
>Hrmm! it would seem that the ppl who think star wars is better often to
>tend to be more violent and well selfish..
Proof? Examples?
>they wanna get a ship of
>their own and go out and live on their own flying around doing odd
>jobs,
How is this indicative of violence and selfishness? Is it selfish to
want to own my own ship and do what I want?
>I think this is hilarious, all you SW fans say SW is more realistic,
>have u ever tried to explain the shit in SW with the laws of physics,
>half of it cannot be explained,
Uh-uh-uh! Watch yourself there, ace. You can't explain most of ST
tech with current known laws of physics, and most can't be explained
at all.
At least SW is -consistent- and doesn't take much suspension of
disbelief to follow. In ST, though, you've got 'radiation vaccines'
and 'escaping event horizons' every other show, which are essentially
-impossible-.
>I must also point out there are flaws
>in ST tech as well but I've come across way more 'plot holes' per say
>in SW then in ST...
'Plot holes'? Such as....?
>The economics are different, yes, but there is no MONEY, no cash, they
>don't have to buy food!
No money=communism.
I'd -much- rather live in an elitist capitalist society than a
communist society like the Federation.
>and don't you have a favorite thing to do? wouldn't you spend your time
>following your hobbie no matter if you got payed for it or not, yes I
>know there wouldn't be n e one wanting to clean or do dirty manual
>labor, but if everyone did a fair share then there wouldn't be a
>problem,
That -is- the problem with communism. Everyone -won't- do their fair
share. Humanity simply isn't capable of it, apart from massive
genetic engineering. It's -human nature- to try to rise above your
neighbors. The closest thing to this in the Federation is Starfleet,
but that's a military system, not an economic system.
>it's all you lazy ass selfish ppl would wouldn't do your share
>that wouldn't work in the ST universe,
Oh, yea, lazy because we want to be mercs or start up our own private
trading firm? Face it, ace, in economics, SW is lightyears ahead of
the Federation.
>I however would love to live
>there, it would be soo much more fun, and peace is good and so is
>exploration and science. I believe personal gain is irrelevant,
>
>"The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, or the one"
>
Hmm, really? Since personal gain is irrelevant to you, give every
penny you earn to charities, give any extra possessions you have to
people who don't have them, donate your car to a Community Car
service, and let travelers sleep in your house free of charge. After
all, your needs are essentially irrelevant.
>This statment is pure logic, and I don't expect a SW fan to care what I
>wrote, because the maturity level is on average much lower.
Oh, that's -rich-. Tell me, how do you expect to convince humanity,
which has been subject to natural selection throughout its entire
evolution, to suddenly become completely altruistic?
You can't. Even most Christians can't claim alturism--they do good so
they'll avoid hell.
That little ad hominem was a pretty petty move by the way, ace.
>They can't
>handles someone haveing a different view from their own. It's ...
>almost 'nice'
Oh, we handle it just fine. We're just disgusted by communists.
>lol I expect many replies to this, from you SW fan trying to disprove
>me and my philosophy.
Er, you can't disprove a philosophy. Nor can I disprove -you-.
I -can- critique your philosophy and, by extension, you, but I
certainly can't -disprove- either.
>go right ahead pick your heart out, say n e thing
>you want, I invite you to mock me, and mock starwars, but in the end
>only peace will continue life as it is, war will only destroy life.
Has any war in our history destroyed life (not lives, -life-, which is
what you said)?
In fact, wasn't WW2 responsible for a whole shitload of new
technologies?
Peace continues life as it is, certainly--boredom, complacency,
societal decay, and technological stasis.
Conflict is -vital- for excitement and development.
>I do not condone being lame and if someone attacks me sittin in a corner
>calling for help, on the contrary I would enjoy a good fight, a battle
>to the death is good for you health.. heh... but I don't like the
>warlike attitudes of you SW fans, your "attack now" theory.. I prefer
>to be defensive and never start a conflict.
Yet you still posted this, knowing the response it would
invoke...meaning you purposely started a conflict, directly
contradicting your final statement.
Hypocrite.
As for our 'warlike attitudes'...care to cite any examples? I seem to
remember some rather big-name Trekkies defending genocide, rape, and
condemning peoples for what their ancestors did or what their
descendants will do.
Robert Williams
Ms. Newlydead wrote in message <06cc9238...@usw-ex0105-034.remarq.com>...
>Star Trek is much better than Star Wars.
In you opinion, ok.
>They are both great, but Star trek seems to have a more focused
>base in reality.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
Also, Star Trek seems to be the more
>idealistic future.
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!
Rob
SyG
<lusankya...@aol.com.invalid> wrote:
>
>
> < snip >
>
>
> Anyone who believes that war will destroy life on Earth is a
>complete idiot who doesn't know the facts about nuclear weapons,
>Syg.. I wouldn't bother with him.
>
I had the time to spare.... lately, I've had too much time on my hands
(home from work all day with strep...)
> And, admittedly, my own idea of space exploration is getting
>together a group of rich friends, finding some laid-off people
>in Belfast, signing them on as crewers to a group of long range
>armed ships, and taking off promptly for uncharted space, where
>we can start pirating the spacefairing cultures of the area,
>blasting the ships of the primitive ones, capturing and
>conquering non-space fairing cultures as colonies of Terra and
>civilizing the population, and, of course, building the ever
>popular Maglev train route from the capitol to the spaceport
>using coolies, while you sit around and sip tea.
>
Hmmmm..... I don't know about sitting around and sipping tea (I'm more
likely to sip a finely aged single malt scotch then tea). but other
then that, it sounds like a fun trip.....care to take me as a working
pasanger until we get someplace I feel like setting off on my own
from?
pablo_sa...@my-deja.com
Jonathan Boyd <jona...@jboyd.co.uk> wrote:
> in article 8esrl5$vmt$1...@nnrp1.deja.com, pablo_sa...@my-deja.com
at
> pablo_sa...@my-deja.com wrote on 4/5/00 10:55 pm:
>
> >>> That would be funny.
>
> >>> Who do you think would be the best?
>
> >> Odo and Worf, particularly in team play. I can just see Quark
being singled
> >> out by everybody constantly. I know I would. I would let others
frag me just
> >> so I could frag him!
>
> > He'd probably be a camper.
>
> Or a camp. Then when people come and hide inside him he's in the
perfect
> position to attack. Not uch you can do when your tent starts
attacking you.
????
This is simply bizarre. Have you ever played Quake?
> --
> Jonathan
> AIM: BoydClone | STvsSW website: http://www.jboyd.co.uk/index.html
>
>
Naahmah
cwic...@my-deja.com wrote:
> Hrmm! it would seem that the ppl who think star wars is better often
to
> tend to be more violent and well selfish..
You're trying to say that all SW fans are violent and selfish? Isn't
that something along the line of the kettle calling the pot black?
they wanna get a ship of
> their own and go out and live on their own flying around doing odd
> jobs, well this is all your choice, just to point out the majority of
> the ppl who say star trek is better let you decide for yourself and
> don't try to force their opinions on you and say it's your choice.
People want to survive. If getting their own personal ship and doing
odd jobs is the way they want to survive, more power to them.
Personally, I'd get a ship and do my best to get rich.
Ah, the majority of people that like SW better don't try to force their
opinions on others. If you can not offer any proof to that statement, I
suggest you take it back.
>
> I think this is hilarious, all you SW fans say SW is more realistic,
> have u ever tried to explain the shit in SW with the laws of physics,
> half of it cannot be explained, I must also point out there are flaws
> in ST tech as well but I've come across way more 'plot holes' per say
> in SW then in ST...
And the same can be said for ST. Oh yeah, all of the aliens looking
like humans in ST is SO realistic.
>
> So I will continue to like ST more than SW, although I never have a
> problem in watching SW movies, Science fiction is better then n e
thing
> else.
Try reading some classics.
>
> The economics are different, yes, but there is no MONEY, no cash, they
> don't have to buy food!
If there isn't any money, why would people work? No one would want to!
Why? Because the government is taking care of everything!
>
> and don't you have a favorite thing to do? wouldn't you spend your
time
> following your hobbie no matter if you got payed for it or not, yes I
> know there wouldn't be n e one wanting to clean or do dirty manual
> labor, but if everyone did a fair share then there wouldn't be a
> problem, it's all you lazy ass selfish ppl would wouldn't do your
share
> that wouldn't work in the ST universe,
Why would anyone do their fair share? They aren't being paid for it, so
what's the motivation?
I however would love to live
> there, it would be soo much more fun, and peace is good and so is
> exploration and science. I believe personal gain is irrelevant,
So what do we have to motivate us?
>
> "The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, or the one"
If we lose track of the individual, we lose track of our identities.
The needs of many do not outweigh the needs of few. No one would follow
that philosophy anyway. Why? 'Cause the theory does not work. How would
we set the standard for this theory? Do we just say, "Oh, the
earthquake killed a lot and three hundred are trapped, but those are
only a few people. Other people's needs outweigh their's."? I mean, how
we tell the difference between the many or the few?
>
> This statment is pure logic, and I don't expect a SW fan to care what
I
> wrote, because the maturity level is on average much lower. They can't
> handles someone haveing a different view from their own. It's ...
> almost 'nice'
You say that ST fans are more mature? If you're an example of the ST
fan, I seriously doubt that comment.
>
> lol I expect many replies to this, from you SW fan trying to disprove
> me and my philosophy. go right ahead pick your heart out, say n e
thing
> you want, I invite you to mock me, and mock starwars, but in the end
> only peace will continue life as it is, war will only destroy life.
War weeds out those that would not survive.
I
> do not condone being lame and if someone attacks me sittin in a corner
> calling for help, on the contrary I would enjoy a good fight, a battle
> to the death is good for you health.. heh... but I don't like the
> warlike attitudes of you SW fans, your "attack now" theory.. I prefer
> to be defensive and never start a conflict.
Okay...you just said that you prefer peace, but you enjoy a good fight?
Okay...
>
> "Live long and prosper" yes even to my enemies! for if I have no
> enemies who shall I fight!
Yeah! And the May the Force Be With You!
--
"Pretty. What do we blow up first?" Myn Donos to
Wedge Antilles, Solo Command.
Matthew Hyde
> Chuck wrote:
> >
> > Ms. Newlydead <d...@ev1.net> wrote in message
> > news:06cc9238...@usw-ex0105-034.remarq.com...
> > > Star Trek is much better than Star Wars.
> > > base in reality.
> Yep, that'll show 'em!
>
> > >Also, Star Trek seems to be the more
> > > idealistic future.
> > Considering that Star Wars happened in the past, I'd guess so.
> Um... you do realize that it didn't really happen?
>
> > >Believe me, if I were alive in the future, I
> > > would want to live in Star Trek where money means nothing,
> > Hmm, and what system of government doesn't use money? Does it start with a
> > "c" and end with the rise of the Iron Curtain?
> condom?
Iron mini-skirt?
Matthew Hyde
Commander Thelea <lusankya...@aol.com.invalid> wrote:
> < snip >
> Anyone who believes that war will destroy life on Earth is a
> complete idiot who doesn't know the facts about nuclear weapons,
> Syg.. I wouldn't bother with him.
> And, admittedly, my own idea of space exploration is getting
> together a group of rich friends, finding some laid-off people
> in Belfast, signing them on as crewers to a group of long range
> armed ships, and taking off promptly for uncharted space, where
> we can start pirating the spacefairing cultures of the area,
> blasting the ships of the primitive ones, capturing and
> conquering non-space fairing cultures as colonies of Terra and
> civilizing the population, and, of course, building the ever
> popular Maglev train route from the capitol to the spaceport
> using coolies, while you sit around and sip tea.
> Essentially, along the line of Cecil Rhodes, the Cape to Cairo
> Railroad project, his private army, and the start of the Boer
> War. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't, but it's always
> fun.
Like you know jack abt war
Matthew Hyde
pablo_sa...@my-deja.com wrote:
> In article <B537B951.E220%jona...@jboyd.co.uk>,
> Jonathan Boyd <jona...@jboyd.co.uk> wrote:
> > in article 8esrl5$vmt$1...@nnrp1.deja.com, pablo_sa...@my-deja.com
> at
> > pablo_sa...@my-deja.com wrote on 4/5/00 10:55 pm:
> >
> > >>> That would be funny.
> >
> > >>> Who do you think would be the best?
> >
> > >> Odo and Worf, particularly in team play. I can just see Quark
> being singled
> > >> out by everybody constantly. I know I would. I would let others
> frag me just
> > >> so I could frag him!
> >
> > > He'd probably be a camper.
> >
> > Or a camp. Then when people come and hide inside him he's in the
> perfect
> > position to attack. Not uch you can do when your tent starts
> attacking you.
> ????
> This is simply bizarre. Have you ever played Quake?
that's funny! just a bizarre image.
did you play Quake 1 with the morning star patch? It's
actually a mace on a chain that you can use as a grappling hook, and if
you grapple a far wall, and hold on, it'll pull you up to where it is, and
you can hang there and switch weapons. Good for flying around to
escape firefights, and cool to disembowel ppl with too. Pick a nice dark
spot and grab your minigun, and rock and roll! One time I was playing
this girl named Megan who was a very fast study in Quake, and I caught
her camping, hanging on the ceiling, so I morning-starred her ass (I
mean her little Quake guy's butt) and hung on until she died, lol. When I
was a humanities computer lab consultant, we would have all-night games
with anywhere from 7 to 15 of us killing each other in the lab. It rocked.
I should go over there now and see if anyone wants to play. P-3 450s with
one as a dedicated server,
> > --
> > Jonathan
> > AIM: BoydClone | STvsSW website: http://www.jboyd.co.uk/index.html
> >
> >
> Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> Before you buy.
--
Elim Garak
>
> In terms of fiction, I much prefer Star Wars over Star Trek.
>
> Trek has too much of a focus on the technology and not on the
> storytelling that the tech is supposed to support. Without a
> solid story, all the technology in the world can't make a show
> interesting.
>
> Star Wars rings truly with the depth and breadth of myth - as
> George Lucas has said in interviews, he wanted to create a myth
> for a time without them, and he succeeded mightily. The Star
> Wars universe is full of loving callbacks to classical myths of
> Earth history, the magical sword by which the young hero strikes
> down the evil overlord, the journey of the tragic hero through
> the valley of death and redemption...
>
> A long time ago,
> In a galaxy far, far away...
>
> Personally, I would rather live in the Star Wars universe, where
> a person is free to live as they wish, as opposed to the
> Federation, where individuality is considered a mental disorder
> and your rights can be trampled at will beneath the boot of the
> State.
Ah, but there you will eventually die, be trampled under the foot of the Empire or some passing Sith, or get something equally
unpleasant happen to you. I much prefer ST where the possibilities are limitless. You can live forever, have unimaginable power,
and do whatever you want. There's plenty of adventure, etc. And if you don't like Federation? Go to the future, to the next
timeline/universe on the left, to another dimension, to another quadrant.
> I'd be bored out of my skull within a week living in the
> Federation - even their video games suck ass (viz. "The Game").
>
> If a game like THAT managed to hypnotize the crew of the
> Enterprise, I could take over the entire Federation inside of a
> week, simply by distributing an actually GOOD video game, like
> Quake.
You missed the entire point of the episode, didn't you?
iceberg3k
Ah, but what are the two great constants in this life? Death and
taxes, my friend. Death and taxes. I'd rather my epitaph be "He
reached for the stars" than "He was a good citizen."
>be trampled under the foot of the Empire or some passing Sith,
Funny, Han Solo seemed to be making a killing operating outside
the laws of the Empire, even to the point that he eventually
joined the Rebellion, and he was never "trampled under the foot
of the Empire". Sith aren't exactly a dime a dozen - there are
precisely two in the galaxy (Palpatine had lesser apprentices
than Vader, but they were Dark Jedi, not Sith - there IS a
difference).
>or get something equally
>unpleasant happen to you. I much prefer ST where the
>possibilities are limitless. You can live forever,
BORING. I don't WANT to live forever. The thrill of life comes
from knowing that the next moment could be your last, defying
death and laughing in his face when you walk away.
>have unimaginable power,
Far less likely than, in the SW universe, saving enough money to
buy a small starship.
>and do whatever you want.
As long as it doesn't break or even just bend the rules.
>There's plenty of adventure, etc.
But only if you're a member of Starfleet. How many
non-Starfleeties have the chance to do anything other than live a
mundane life that's useful to the Federation?
>And if you don't like Federation? Go to the future, to the next
>timeline/universe on the left, to another dimension, to another
>quadrant.
Which you can't do unless you're in Starfleet, because they
control the technologies that make such actions possible.
>> I'd be bored out of my skull within a week living in the
>> Federation - even their video games suck ass (viz. "The
Game").
>>
>> If a game like THAT managed to hypnotize the crew of the
>> Enterprise, I could take over the entire Federation inside of
a
>> week, simply by distributing an actually GOOD video game, like
>> Quake.
>
>You missed the entire point of the episode, didn't you?
What point? The writers themselves listed that as one of their
five worst efforts (ST: The Magazine). It was a "Wesley Saves
the Day" episode combined with a "Preachy Moralistic" episode
about video game "addiction." This comes from the writers
themselves - they made it because they were pushing deadline and
they didn't have any better ideas, and going with a mediocre idea
is better than having no episode at all.
And all this STILL doesn't change the fact that that game sucked
all known quantities of ass off of the Enterprise-D.
-- M.
-a.r.k, a.s.v.s
-YHBT, YHL. HAND.
Aron Kerkhof
>> > We ARE genetically engineered to be warlike. By nature. Ever seen a
>> > colony of monkeys or apes? EXTREMELY violent.
>
>> I don't believe in fate.
>
>Well you're not an ape. Hooray!
"You maniacs!!! You blew it up! ARRRGHH!! Damn you... damn you all
to hell!"
Aron Kerkhof
neolith.org
Strowbridge
>
> Elim Garak <pol...@u.washington.edu> wrote:
<SNIP!>
Hey Iceberg! Why aren't you questioning Elim's claims? Live forever,
unimaginable powers? How the hell would a person in Star Trek manage to
do this?
BTW, always questions Elim's claims, he's a lying sack of shit.
C.S.Strowbridge
Commander Thelea
I believe that he's convinced the Q reward Federation citizens
who exceed their Five Year Plan production quota with
immortality and godhood.
Countess Marina
"Ut Veniant Omnes!"
iceberg3k
five years with such baubles. ;)
BTW, I agree with you and Strowbridge. Elim is more full of shit
than a constipated Klingon.
-- M.
-a.r.k, a.s.v.s
-"When you're following an angel doesn't mean you have to throw
your body off a building" - They Might Be Giants
Matthew Hyde
> in article 02927122...@usw-ex0105-035.remarq.com, iceberg3k at
> mberg...@vax2.winona.msus.edu wrote on 3/5/00 5:28 pm:
> > Don't believe me? In ANH, Luke Skywalker cries out in
> > disbelief, "Ten thousand?? We could almost buy our own ship for
> > that!" An inexpensive car in the modern-era USA costs about
> > 10,000 dollars. So in Star Wars, a starship (Luke didn't
> > explicitly specify it as such, but we must assume that this is
> > so, since he knew they needed passage to Alderaan and thus a
> > starship) costs about as much as a small car in the US today. As
> > Mike Wong points out, the most treasured symbol of freedom for
> > most people in the modern day US is the automobile.
> Um, without a currency we can't really make comparisons. Yes, 10,000 dollars
> will buy you a car, but 10,000 pesetas most certainly won't. It might,
> however, buy you a loaf of bread. We're not sure how much 10,000 is worth
> really or how it compares to modern currency.
Well since they in effect sold a beater car for 10,000 "units" then that
places the "units" at about dollar value.
> --
> Jonathan
> AIM: BoydClone | STvsSW website: http://www.jboyd.co.uk/index.html
--
"You are stupid."
-Ian "Kynes" Samuel, in response to just about everyone
Matthew Hyde
> Jonathan Boyd <jona...@jboyd.co.uk> wrote:
> > in article 02927122...@usw-ex0105-035.remarq.com, iceberg3k at
> > mberg...@vax2.winona.msus.edu wrote on 3/5/00 5:28 pm:
> > > Don't believe me? In ANH, Luke Skywalker cries out in
> > > disbelief, "Ten thousand?? We could almost buy our own ship for
> > > that!" An inexpensive car in the modern-era USA costs about
> > > 10,000 dollars. So in Star Wars, a starship (Luke didn't
> > > explicitly specify it as such, but we must assume that this is
> > > so, since he knew they needed passage to Alderaan and thus a
> > > starship) costs about as much as a small car in the US today. As
> > > Mike Wong points out, the most treasured symbol of freedom for
> > > most people in the modern day US is the automobile.
> > Um, without a currency we can't really make comparisons. Yes, 10,000 dollars
> > will buy you a car, but 10,000 pesetas most certainly won't. It might,
> > however, buy you a loaf of bread. We're not sure how much 10,000 is worth
> > really or how it compares to modern currency.
> Well since they in effect sold a beater car for 10,000 "units" then that
> places the "units" at about dollar value. ^^^^^^^^^^
Woops. Point still stands though
iceberg3k
Yep. About equivalent to a buck.
Lord Edam de Fromage
<8et60q$anc$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>...
>> > He'd probably be a camper.
>>
>> Or a camp. Then when people come and hide inside him he's in the
>perfect
>> position to attack. Not uch you can do when your tent starts
>attacking you.
>
>????
>
>This is simply bizarre. Have you ever played Quake?
ROFL!!!
Cheers gents, you just made me waste a mouthfull of whiskey.
Lord Edam de Fromage
Find me at www.trek-wars.co.uk
or on AIM as Sorborus
A mocker resents correction; he will not consult the wise.
cwic...@my-deja.com
not haveing the best time right now, rough breakup... however no excuse
for my behavior, I must appologize to n e one I have offended!
I have a reference to a book here, I would urge you to read, I am gonna
look up that book someone told me to read. I hope you actually look
into this book, it explains alot.
- Life Signs: The Biology of Star Trek
Susan, Robert Jenkins!
Communism
It is a good form of that yes, it is not the brute form implemented in
the past and present.
in my view and opinion, I would rather be there, i would do the work
without pay, and as for human instinct... I can always dream that
humans will evolve to that...
You claim the ecomomics of SW is light years ahead of ST, bah, star
trek is the ulitmate utopia for earth,
"The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, or the one"
my view on that still stands, I would give my life to save many!
it is a sacrifice I am willing to make!"
I do, I don't give everything away, but I am generous and I do help out
n e one I see, I am also saying that I'd be like this in the ST
situation, in this world I am not like that to the same extent.
The point I was trying to make is that, in my experience the SW fans I
have met tried to force their opinions on me and tried to change them,
I guess reading some of the ppl's posts just sorta triggered a negative
reaction. I must again apologize for my generalized comments.
Developpment is gained from war, that's motivation. I'd rather motivate
myself without being shot @.
I am not trying to start a conflict, I explained myself at the start of
this post.
Genocide, rape, murder and other such crimes I do not condone!
________________________________
Dalton, this is replying to you!
"In other words, they want to be free. Congrats, you just admitted that
freedom is selfish. Communist"
Are you saying the ppl in ST are not free?
personally I think communism is noble, not in the way it was practiced
on earth.
I'm wrong? my opinion is wrong? what the hell kinda statement is that.
I've read my share of SW and ST books, in my readings and viewings I've
encountered more plot holes in SW than ST, from a scientific point a
view ST is more attainable than that of SW, Gorge lucas even said he
was going for more FANTASY than realitic... you gonna argue with the
creator of SW?
thank you for respecting my opinion, I repect your opinion, and I have
tried to think about it from the other way. as in SW is better.
It is too bad that in most ppl's eyes their needs outweight the needs
of others.
is that muliple choice, if so I choose to lead. If I had followers I'd
attempt to start the utopia of ST, hard but I think everything is
possible, and yes it's possible i'm wrong about everything.
I will fight if need be, I'd rather not... who says I can't enjoy
something I don't want to start. but if a wars starts I'm not gonna
hold a white flag. I WILL not start a conflict..
I am human I do have instincts and yes I admit I'm not as unselfish as
I want to be, but saying that there is no possiblity for change is
illogical, things change.. no matter what happnens things WILL change,
maybe for the good maybe for the bad.
and for the last time sorry for my generalized comments to you SW fans.
Naahmah
cwic...@my-deja.com wrote:
>
> "The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, or the one"
> my view on that still stands, I would give my life to save many!
> it is a sacrifice I am willing to make!"
I'm sorry, but until you are put into that position, you will never
know if you can sacrifice your life for someone else. Would you give up
your life for a stranger?
>
> The point I was trying to make is that, in my experience the SW fans I
> have met tried to force their opinions on me and tried to change them,
> I guess reading some of the ppl's posts just sorta triggered a
negative
> reaction. I must again apologize for my generalized comments.
You met bad fans, it is a s simple as that. Everyone should know that a
couple of...cranky Sw fans does not speak for the whole group.
>
> I am not trying to start a conflict, I explained myself at the start
of
> this post.
>
> Genocide, rape, murder and other such crimes I do not condone!
No one else here was saying they condone them.
> personally I think communism is noble, not in the way it was practiced
> on earth.
If everyone had the same, we wouldn't want to improve ourselves. We see
someone drive an expensive car, we think "Oh, i want. I'm gonna try to
get a better job and save for that nice car". But if we all have nice
cars, why would we try to improve?
>
> I've read my share of SW and ST books, in my readings and viewings
I've
> encountered more plot holes in SW than ST, from a scientific point a
> view ST is more attainable than that of SW, Gorge lucas even said he
> was going for more FANTASY than realitic... you gonna argue with the
> creator of SW?
Sorry, but I don't think St is that realistic. They are both fantasy.
> It is too bad that in most ppl's eyes their needs outweight the needs
> of others.
A person can only see outside of his own eyes. He has to survive. He
wants to survive, and this survival instinct tells us to help ourselves
first. My grandmother has a saying, Sweep your own doorstep before you
sweep other's. In other words, take care of your own need's, and then
someone else's.
--
"Pretty. What do we blow up first?" Myn Donos to
Wedge Antilles, Solo Command.
bjorn_...@my-deja.com
> I will rephrase that comment, I generalized when i shouldn't have, I'm
> not haveing the best time right now, rough breakup... however no
excuse
> for my behavior, I must appologize to n e one I have offended!
I think that's cool. At times this place gets a bit virulent. Or as
someone from my side said once: "You have to flame the newbies. Toughens
them up."
> I have a reference to a book here, I would urge you to read, I am
gonna
> look up that book someone told me to read. I hope you actually look
> into this book, it explains alot.
>
> - Life Signs: The Biology of Star Trek
> Susan, Robert Jenkins!
Not trying to be offensive here, but the biology of Star Trek is even
less realistic than its technology. IIRC, in Star Trek, humanity did not
evolve on Earth, but were put there by an ancient lost species. For any
biologist such an idea is laughable. As is the idea that an alien with
different *blood* could be genetically compatible to a human.
> Communism
> It is a good form of that yes, it is not the brute form implemented in
> the past and present.
Sadly, this brute form is the only one that is ever going to be
implemented, because it is the only one that can be erected. It is a
fact that benevolent communism does not work because it assumes that the
people holding absolute power are incorruptible and omniscient. Sadly,
the reverse is true. Absolute power corrupts and all that.
> in my view and opinion, I would rather be there, i would do the work
> without pay, and as for human instinct... I can always dream that
> humans will evolve to that...
As Thelea said, humans might evolve that far... given a hundred thousand
years.
But that would in my humble opinion be improbable. We are talking basic
survival. Altruism is fine, but only up to a certain point. For example,
what would happen if I chose to always be altruistic? I'll tell you:
"nice guys finish last". Meaning that anyone ruthless enough will
exploit what he sees as a weakness. Meaning that *that* guy will prosper
and I will not, and thus humanity will evolve a little bit in his
direction, not mine.
Of course, no one said I had to like it. :)
> You claim the ecomomics of SW is light years ahead of ST, bah, star
> trek is the ulitmate utopia for earth,
I disagree. Everywhere is conformity. Everything is rigid, bland,
unexciting, Microsoft-like. Rather than you owning technology,
technology owns you. Just like Windows users, Federationers seem to
revere their technology in a strange quasi-religious way.
> "The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, or the one"
> my view on that still stands, I would give my life to save many!
> it is a sacrifice I am willing to make!"
Yes, and I share your sentiments. But what if someone told you: "You are
hereby ordered to go and give 80% of your possessions to the poor. If
you complain, we will ignore you. If you attempt to stop us, we will use
force. The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few."
What if your government said this to you?
> I do, I don't give everything away, but I am generous and I do help
out
> n e one I see, I am also saying that I'd be like this in the ST
> situation, in this world I am not like that to the same extent.
The thing is just that no society can work that way. You can never
assume that just because you're decent others will be too. Modelling a
society around the axiom "everyone wants to help" might be noble, but it
would certainly be misguided.
The freeloaders could be handled, sure. But what about the black sheep?
What about gangster bosses who are used to spitting on persian rugs
because they know that they can get another one without a shred of work?
Would *they* be altruistic? How would you deal with them?
> The point I was trying to make is that, in my experience the SW fans I
> have met tried to force their opinions on me and tried to change them,
We all get that from time to time, from both sides. Ignore them - you'll
find that their beliefs are set in stone.
> I guess reading some of the ppl's posts just sorta triggered a
negative
> reaction. I must again apologize for my generalized comments.
>
> Developpment is gained from war, that's motivation. I'd rather
motivate
> myself without being shot @.
So would a lot of people. If all was free, how many soldiers of today
would have chosen to go into battle? Very few people are that patriotic.
> I am not trying to start a conflict, I explained myself at the start
of
> this post.
>
> Genocide, rape, murder and other such crimes I do not condone!
That's a relief.
> ________________________________
> Dalton, this is replying to you!
>
> "In other words, they want to be free. Congrats, you just admitted
that
> freedom is selfish. Communist"
>
> Are you saying the ppl in ST are not free?
He's right, you know. They don't have these things in the Federation:
* Freedom of travel (you can't own a ship unless you're starfleet)
* Freedom of commerce (no money)
* Free communication (starfleet is listening)
* Dissidents (all who object to their planets being surrendered to an
enemy are considered traitors and sent to camps)
> personally I think communism is noble, not in the way it was practiced
> on earth.
Sure, the basic idea some libereal socialists have is noble, I'll grant
you that. But communism? It's rotten through and through, in my opinion.
[snip]
> I've read my share of SW and ST books, in my readings and viewings
I've
> encountered more plot holes in SW than ST, from a scientific point a
> view ST is more attainable than that of SW,
I don't want to be rude, but... Star Trek is less realistic. I don't say
Star Wars is realistic - it's not. It's just that there are few
instances where trek-science makes *any* sense.
> Gorge lucas even said he
> was going for more FANTASY than realitic... you gonna argue with the
> creator of SW?
No, I don't want to do that and I doubt Rob wants to, either. But the
fact is that we aren't arguing for Star Wars - we're arguing *against*
Trek in this matter. Trek wants to *seem* technological - fine. But it
commits crimes against science the magnitude of which I haven't seen in
any other series.
> thank you for respecting my opinion, I repect your opinion, and I have
> tried to think about it from the other way. as in SW is better.
=)
> It is too bad that in most ppl's eyes their needs outweight the needs
> of others.
Sad, yes. True, yes. :/
> is that muliple choice, if so I choose to lead. If I had followers I'd
> attempt to start the utopia of ST, hard but I think everything is
> possible, and yes it's possible i'm wrong about everything.
The problem is that if you did that you'd get squashed by those nasty
guys who *aren't* playing by the rules. Generally, countries can be
nasty to each other. So if your utopia ever became a country, you'd have
three options:
1. Accept that the other countries could do what they wanted with you.
2. Only pay lip service to this utopian ideal and be just as nasty when
nobody is looking.
3. Arrange to be the only country left when the dust settles. *BOOM!*
> I will fight if need be, I'd rather not... who says I can't enjoy
> something I don't want to start. but if a wars starts I'm not gonna
> hold a white flag. I WILL not start a conflict..
I believe that's human too.
> I am human I do have instincts and yes I admit I'm not as unselfish as
> I want to be, but saying that there is no possiblity for change is
> illogical, things change.. no matter what happnens things WILL change,
> maybe for the good maybe for the bad.
Things change, yep. However, I believe we won't evolve much more at this
pace. Right now, almost everyone survive - the weak with the strong.
Furthermore, wars kill randomly, the strong and the weak alike. Thus,
evolution is stifled. In the short term, this age is great when compared
to the previous ones. But I can't help but wonder if we'll reap the
whirlwind later on...
> and for the last time sorry for my generalized comments to you SW
fans.
No worries. I was much, much worse the first time I was here. :)
/ Björn Paulsen (Kheleck)
A. Polinger
> > Elim Garak <pol...@u.washington.edu> wrote:
>
> <SNIP!>
>
> Hey Iceberg! Why aren't you questioning Elim's claims? Live forever,
> unimaginable powers? How the hell would a person in Star Trek manage to
> do this?
Umm... Go to the same anomaly that Picard went to and beam through
it? Or just do some creative transporter buffer programming?
And if you live long enough (and are smarter than an average rock (that
leaves Strowbridge out)) you can get unimaginable power.
> BTW, always questions Elim's claims, he's a lying sack of shit.
I would have thought that even you could figure this one out. Silly me!
A. Polinger
> Maybe they just reward Federation Redshirts who survive more than
> five years with such baubles. ;)
No, anyone smarter than you could figure it out. Hmm, can you think how
to live forever in ST? I even posted one way here. Can you find that
post? Come on, you can do it!
> BTW, I agree with you and Strowbridge. Elim is more full of shit
> than a constipated Klingon.
Proved you wrong one time too many, have I?
A. Polinger
iceberg3k
<Pine.A41.4.21.000505...@dante10.u.washington.ed
<snip>
>> BTW, I agree with you and Strowbridge. Elim is more full of
shit
>> than a constipated Klingon.
>
>Proved you wrong one time too many, have I?
ROFLOL! So that's how you pronounce "Made you laugh yourself
silly" in Russian, is it?
-- M.
-a.r.k, a.s.v.s
-"The Sun is a mass of incandescent gas" - They Might Be Giants
SyG
<snip>
>Dalton, this is replying to you!
>
>"In other words, they want to be free. Congrats, you just admitted that
>freedom is selfish. Communist"
>
>Are you saying the ppl in ST are not free?
>
>personally I think communism is noble, not in the way it was practiced
>on earth.
>
<snip>
No, the people of the ST federation are NOT free. Not truely. Noone
living in a comunist state is truely free, no matter how idealic that
state is. (of course, 99.99999% of the earth is currently not truely
free).
Unless you are free to do/say what you wish, without interference, so
long as it does not cause physical harm to another, you are not free.
Hell, the federation citizens can't even own a major possestion, can't
buy whatever they want (even with cash... it's not like there a
competing market out there...), can't go werever they want (without
going through starfleet for the ride). Simpley put, they have the
freedom to do what they are told to do.
As for communism being noble, well, I'll agree that in THEORY it's a
wonderful idea. The problem with that theory is that it ignores human
nature, and unless they start BRAINWASHING humans at 1 week old (and
continue till they die), you can forget about it ever working
correctly.
A. Polinger
> >> a person is free to live as they wish, as opposed to the
> >> Federation, where individuality is considered a mental
> disorder
> >> and your rights can be trampled at will beneath the boot of
> the
> >> State.
> >
> >Ah, but there you will eventually die,
>
> Ah, but what are the two great constants in this life? Death and
> taxes, my friend. Death and taxes. I'd rather my epitaph be "He
> reached for the stars" than "He was a good citizen."
I would rather have no epithath until the Big Crunch, have trillions of
clones/versions of myself (a la Borg or just copies) all over the
multiverse, and have it say "Bow Down to the Eternal Emperor". And have
it written across the stars of the new galaxy in several hundred quazars.
Or even better - have no epithath, because I am too powerful, and
known forever, everywhere, everywhen.
> >be trampled under the foot of the Empire or some passing Sith,
>
> Funny, Han Solo seemed to be making a killing operating outside
> the laws of the Empire,
For a while. Then he almost got whacked by Jabba.
> even to the point that he eventually
> joined the Rebellion, and he was never "trampled under the foot
> of the Empire". Sith aren't exactly a dime a dozen - there are
> precisely two in the galaxy (Palpatine had lesser apprentices
> than Vader, but they were Dark Jedi, not Sith - there IS a
> difference).
Really? What is it?
> >or get something equally
> >unpleasant happen to you. I much prefer ST where the
> >possibilities are limitless. You can live forever,
>
> BORING. I don't WANT to live forever.
So? Commit suiside when you get bored enough. Or go into suspended
animation or something.
> The thrill of life comes
> from knowing that the next moment could be your last, defying
> death and laughing in his face when you walk away.
Live short and die in a big boom, eh? I am more of an empire builder
myself.
> >have unimaginable power,
>
> Far less likely than, in the SW universe, saving enough money to
> buy a small starship.
In the ST galaxy save money, found a few civilizations, discover some
secrets, and in a few thousand years you will probably own half the
galaxy.
> >and do whatever you want.
>
> As long as it doesn't break or even just bend the rules.
When you are powerful enough, there are no rules.
> >There's plenty of adventure, etc.
>
> But only if you're a member of Starfleet. How many
> non-Starfleeties have the chance to do anything other than live a
> mundane life that's useful to the Federation?
Dunno. Hansens did it. Chasing after the Borg for 3 years is anything
but mundane.
> >And if you don't like Federation? Go to the future, to the next
> >timeline/universe on the left, to another dimension, to another
> >quadrant.
>
> Which you can't do unless you're in Starfleet, because they
> control the technologies that make such actions possible.
They control transporters? Warp drives? Deflector dishes?
> >> If a game like THAT managed to hypnotize the crew of the
> >> Enterprise, I could take over the entire Federation inside of
> a
> >> week, simply by distributing an actually GOOD video game, like
> >> Quake.
> >
> >You missed the entire point of the episode, didn't you?
>
> What point?
The point that the game did not just hypnotize them, it made subtle
changes in their brains, and gave them physical pleasure. Each time you
win, you get a mini orgasm.
> The writers themselves listed that as one of their
> five worst efforts (ST: The Magazine). It was a "Wesley Saves
> the Day" episode combined with a "Preachy Moralistic" episode
> about video game "addiction."
Yup.
> This comes from the writers
> themselves - they made it because they were pushing deadline and
> they didn't have any better ideas, and going with a mediocre idea
> is better than having no episode at all.
>
> And all this STILL doesn't change the fact that that game sucked
> all known quantities of ass off of the Enterprise-D.
Yup.
A. Polinger
> >Dalton, this is replying to you!
> >
> >"In other words, they want to be free. Congrats, you just admitted that
> >freedom is selfish. Communist"
> >
> >Are you saying the ppl in ST are not free?
> >
> >personally I think communism is noble, not in the way it was practiced
> >on earth.
>
> No, the people of the ST federation are NOT free. Not truely. Noone
> living in a comunist state is truely free, no matter how idealic that
> state is. (of course, 99.99999% of the earth is currently not truely
> free).
>
> Unless you are free to do/say what you wish, without interference, so
> long as it does not cause physical harm to another, you are not free.
And Feds are not free to do that?
> Hell, the federation citizens can't even own a major possestion,
Says who?
> can't
> buy whatever they want
Why not?
> (even with cash... it's not like there a
> competing market out there...
Ferenginar.
> ), can't go werever they want (without
> going through starfleet for the ride).
Nope. Even Klingons have civilian ships. Are you saying that the Feds
don't?
> Simpley put, they have the freedom to do what they are told to do.
They are not told to do anything.
> As for communism being noble, well, I'll agree that in THEORY it's a
> wonderful idea. The problem with that theory is that it ignores human
> nature, and unless they start BRAINWASHING humans at 1 week old (and
> continue till they die), you can forget about it ever working
> correctly.
More or less.
A. Polinger
> >> BTW, I agree with you and Strowbridge. Elim is more full of
> shit
> >> than a constipated Klingon.
> >
> >Proved you wrong one time too many, have I?
>
> ROFLOL! So that's how you pronounce "Made you laugh yourself
> silly" in Russian, is it?
I suggest you don't try to learn any languages. You suck at it.
Commander Thelea
100...@dante10.u.washington.edu>, "A. Polinger"
For the last time, Anton.. I am not married, and I have waist
length hair.
Countess Marina
"Ut Veniant Omnes!"
Guardian2000
>>
>> Are you saying the ppl in ST are not free?
>
>He's right, you know. They don't have these things in the
Federation:
>* Freedom of travel (you can't own a ship unless you're
starfleet)
False: Harry Mudd. Captain Yates. Sisko's private lightship.
Whatever the hell Soong used to get away from the giant
snowflake. Whatever Flint used to get to his planet. The fact
that we do not often see private craft in ST does not mean that
they are not there, and that the other examples do not exist.
>* Freedom of commerce (no money)
We know they have credits and other means of exchange.
According to a thought I once had, Star Trek's economy is so far
beyond our own that it is neither communist nor capitalist,
thanks in large part to replicator technology. That, combined
with cheap and almost inexhaustible power sources and other
incredible technological advancements, could take us beyond
economics as we now know it.
Mind you, I'm a fervent capitalist, and I feel that communism is
futile and foolish, based on erroneous assumptions.
However, I would allow the idea that, as capitalism emerged from
more "primitive" systems, it may also be the case that
capitalism could one day be viewed as "primitive" . . . though I
don't think that day is anytime in the near future.
>* Free communication (starfleet is listening)
There's nothing to suggest that Starfleet listens in. As for
the subspace relays, I liken that to how the United States built
interstate highways and railways to facilitate economic growth.
In the same way, the Federation may have built the "interstate"
comm system to facilitate communication and information sharing
between its member worlds and citizens therefrom.
>* Dissidents (all who object to their planets being surrendered
to an
>enemy are considered traitors and sent to camps)
>
What?
Commander Thelea
<dalto...@erols.com> wrote:
>Matthew Hyde wrote:
>
>[snip]
>
>> > Essentially, along the line of Cecil Rhodes, the Cape to
Cairo
>> > Railroad project, his private army, and the start of the
Boer
>> > War. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't, but it's
always
>> > fun.
>>
>> Like you know jack abt war
>
two
>about war.
>
>--
>Dalton | AIM: RobPDalton | ICQ: 50342303
>
>Carlin for Prez
>
>Da ASVS Fanfic Archive:
[http://members.xoom.com/Tiny11380/fanfics ]
>Da ASVS FUQ: [http://members.xoom.com/Tiny11380/fuq ]
>
>
Mister Hyde doesn't believe I'm an Archeologist, Rob. Don't
bother to try and defend me.. I'm not going to try and defend
myself anymore, either. Let him say what he wants to; I figure
I've made all the friends I can here, and new people joining can
just make up their minds on what to believe about me.
Countess Marina
"Ut Veniant Omnes!"
Commander Thelea
deja.com wrote:
>In article <0274854a...@usw-ex0104-031.remarq.com>,
should
>conquer the universe (or something), and you know a damned lot
about
>history and previous wars.
>
>> Countess Marina
>>
>> "Ut Veniant Omnes!"
>>
>> * Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's
Discussion
>Network *
>> The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in
Usenet -
>Free!
>>
>>
>
>
Well, all I can say in response, is this...
"When Britain first, at Heaven’s command
Arose from out the azure main,
Arose from out the azure main;
This was the charter, the charter of the Land:
And Guardian Angels sang this strain:
Rule Britannia, Britannia rule the waves!
Britons never will be slaves!
Rule Britannia, Britannia rule the waves!
Still more majestic shalt thou rise,
More dreadful from each foreign stroke;
More dreadful from each foreign stroke.
As the loud blast, the blast that tears the skies,
Serves but to root the native oak.
Rule Britannia, Britannia rule the waves!
Thee haughty tyrants ne’er shall tame;
All their attempts to bend thee down;
All their attempts to bend thee down.
Will but arouse; arouse thy gen’rous flame,
But work their woe and their renown.
Rule Britannia, Britannia rule the waves!
The Muses still with Freedom found,
Shall to thy happy coast repair;
Shall to thy happy coast repair.
Blest isle with matchless, with matchless beauty crown’d,
And manly hearts to guard the fair.
Rule Britannia, Britannia rule the waves!"
Eric
up on deja.
>I have a reference to a book here, I would urge you to read,
>I am gonna look up that book someone told me to read. I hope you
>actually look into this book, it explains alot.
>- Life Signs: The Biology of Star Trek
>Susan, Robert Jenkins
Any particular reason you want me to read that book? It doesn't seem
to have much to do with our current conversation...
>Communism
>It is a good form of that yes, it is not the brute form implemented in the past
>and present.
My point is, when it comes to humans, there is no 'good form' of
communism.
It's all good, -in theory-, in a -perfect- society. But we're
incapable of forming such a society. It goes against our very nature.
>in my view and opinion, I would rather be there, i would do the work
>without pay, and as for human instinct... I can always dream that
>humans will evolve to that...
They certainly won't evolve to it within 400 years unless there's a
massive surge of genetic engineering--and we all know what the
Federation thinks of -that-.
>You claim the ecomomics of SW is light years ahead of ST, bah, star trek is
>the ulitmate utopia for earth,
For the moderate fraction of humanity that lives on Earth, perhaps.
But what about all of those colonies? Remember when the Federation
threw the Maquis to the Cardassian wolves? They didn't care much
about them. Not much Utopia there.
The Federation spends enormous amounts of resources making their home
system so idyllic, when they clearly don't give a rat's ass about what
happens to their own colonies.
>"The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, or the one" my
>view on that still stands, I would give my life to save many! it is a
>sacrifice I am willing to make!"
I sure as hell wouldn't give my life up for anyone not worthy of it.
As others have said, would you give your life up for a complete
stranger? I don't have anyone, apart from my family, that I'd risk my
life for.
>I do, I don't give everything away, but I am generous and I do help
>out n e one I see, I am also saying that I'd be like this in the ST
>situation, in this world I am not like that to the same extent.
But you just said that the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the
few, and you still support it fully. If you aren't charitable to the
extent of giving -everything- away, then you're ignoring your own
philosophy.
>The point I was trying to make is that, in my experience the SW fans
>I have met tried to force their opinions on me and tried to change
>them, I guess reading some of the ppl's posts just sorta triggered a
>negative reaction. I must again apologize for my generalized
>comments.
That's the point of this newsgroup--forcing our opinions on each other
and trying to change each other's minds.
You'll get that sort of feeling in -any- debate newsgroup, especially
ones where many regulars have blood feuds with each other.
>Developpment is gained from war, that's motivation. I'd rather motivate
>myself without being shot @.
Good for you.
But, the point remains. War hurries development. It happened during
WW2, it happened during the Cold War, and it's happening during the
Capitalist Information War that's going on as we speak.
>I am not trying to start a conflict, I explained myself at the start of this post.
But, you also said that you -knew- what kind of response your post
would bring. You -knew- it would bring conflict. Yet you still
posted it. Therefore, you knowingly started a conflict.
>Genocide, rape, murder and other such crimes I do not condone!
Perhaps you don't, but my point still stands. You generalized SW
fans--I pointed out that the same could be done in reverse. And it
would be much more harmful if it was done in reverse.
This part's actually a reply to Dalton, but I feel a need...
>personally I think communism is noble, not in the way it was practiced
>on earth.
Communism is only noble if you're someone who thinks that no one
should own anything. That's the central theme to communism--everyone
owns everything.
Yippie, it sounds so...noble, doesn't it? But, -think- about it. You
own -nothing-. You have -nothing- to your name. You live in a house
not your own...you drive a car not your own...you use a computer not
your own...you sleep in a bed not your own...you wear clothes not your
own. -THAT- is Communism.
What has been practiced on Earth is Socialism--the -government- owns
everything instead of everyone owning everything.
>I've read my share of SW and ST books, in my readings and viewings
>I've encountered more plot holes in SW than ST, from a scientific
>point a view ST is more attainable than that of SW, Gorge lucas even
>said he was going for more FANTASY than realitic... you gonna argue
>with the creator of SW?
I'm still waiting for you to give -examples- of these so-called
'technological plot holes'
Eric
remove NO.SPAM.DAMMIT to mail
"Sufficiently advanced technology is often indistinguishable
from magic." Clarke's Third Law
Commander Thelea
>
>OK, whatever ya want. I just have a thing about people fucking
with my
>friends...coz then they fuck with me.
>
>--
>Dalton | AIM: RobPDalton | ICQ: 50342303
Thank you, Rob. The sentiment and loyalty both are greatly
appreciated.
WeeMadAndo
Follow us.
--
WeeMadAndo
Self proclaimed leader of the anti-troll jihad adn all round nice guy.
Don't mock me, your playing with fire!
<pablo_sa...@my-deja.com> wrote in message
news:8eq3hk$sjo$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
> In article <8epkb1$9h446$1...@fu-berlin.de>,
> "WeeMadAndo" <weema...@start.com.au> wrote:
> >
> > Ms. Newlydead <d...@ev1.net> wrote in message
> > news:06cc9238...@usw-ex0105-034.remarq.com...
> > > Star Trek is much better than Star Wars.
> > > They are both great, but Star trek seems to have a more focused
> > > base in reality.
> >
> > *Sarcasm* *Sarcasm* *Sarcasm*
> >
> > >Also, Star Trek seems to be the more idealistic future. Believe
> me, if I
> > were >alive in the future, I would want to live in Star Trek where
> money
> > means >nothing, except to Ferengi, and the people of Eart are at
> peace with
> > each
> > > other.
> >
> > Pah, simple fools. What fun is peace? Evolution is achieved through
> > conflict.
>
> So sayeth WeeMadAndo, supreme leader of the Shadow forces. (B5)
>
> > >That's much better than Star Wars where the key word
> > > is "WAR" and people like Darth Vader go around killing everyone
> > > who won't convert to the dark side.
> >
> > I dunno, the Galaxy seemed to be better off under the benevolent
> dictator.
> >
> > --
> > WeeMadAndo
> > Self proclaimed leader of the anti-troll jihad and all round nice guy.
> > Don't mock me, your playing with fire!
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > * Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion
> Network
> > *
> > > The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet -
> Free!
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
Dalton
[snip]
> > Essentially, along the line of Cecil Rhodes, the Cape to Cairo
> > Railroad project, his private army, and the start of the Boer
> > War. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't, but it's always
> > fun.
>
> Like you know jack abt war
She's an archaeologist, superguy. I think she'd know a thing or two
about war.
--
Dalton | AIM: RobPDalton | ICQ: 50342303
pablo_sa...@my-deja.com
Commander Thelea <lusankya...@aol.com.invalid> wrote:
> In article <3913A7C9...@erols.com>, Dalton
> <dalto...@erols.com> wrote:
> bother to try and defend me.. I'm not going to try and defend
> myself anymore, either. Let him say what he wants to; I figure
> I've made all the friends I can here, and new people joining can
> just make up their minds on what to believe about me.
I believe that you are an imperialist who believe's that the UK should
conquer the universe (or something), and you know a damned lot about
history and previous wars.
> Countess Marina
>
> "Ut Veniant Omnes!"
>
Dalton
>
> iceberg3k wrote:
> >
> > Elim Garak <pol...@u.washington.edu> wrote:
>
> <SNIP!>
>
> Hey Iceberg! Why aren't you questioning Elim's claims? Live forever,
> unimaginable powers? How the hell would a person in Star Trek manage to
> do this?
>
>
REALLY?!?
--
Dalton | AIM: RobPDalton | ICQ: 50342303
Warp is for pussies.