http://bbs.stardestroyer.net/viewtopic.php?t=124081
The thread above could very well split your side if you've followed the debate for any length of time.
The same people who seriously consider the notion that a TIE fighter is sufficiently armed to wipe the floor with any ship named Enterprise consider whether there's any such thing as a wanked pro-Wars argument or pro-Wars wankers, and find that there really aren't any.
In other news, back when David Duke, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, and like-minded souls had that conference in which they claimed the Holocaust never occurred, a straw poll was held in which they found that there wasn't a single Jew-hating sociopath in the room, and that all anti-Holocaust arguments therein expressed were both logical and valid.
The thread above could very well split your side if you've followed the debate for any length of time.
The same people who seriously consider the notion that a TIE fighter is sufficiently armed to wipe the floor with any ship named Enterprise consider whether there's any such thing as a wanked pro-Wars argument or pro-Wars wankers, and find that there really aren't any.
In other news, back when David Duke, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, and like-minded souls had that conference in which they claimed the Holocaust never occurred, a straw poll was held in which they found that there wasn't a single Jew-hating sociopath in the room, and that all anti-Holocaust arguments therein expressed were both logical and valid.
8 comments:
Does anyone else think Wong's posts sound like denial?
Yeah it did...
I looked through that thread and saw nothing about a TIE fighter being able to "wipe the floor" with an Enterprise. And Mike himself uses Slave I as an example on the main site. I'd like to know where you got that.
I do like your comparison of SDN and Holocaust deniers though, it shows who's really crazy in this internet sub-culture.
Ah yes, I remember the name Kryten.
http://www.st-v-sw.net/weblog/2008/02/history-regarding-spacebattles.html
You're the one for whom my every breath is mere proof that I am "the master of lies and deception". Wow . . . I'd forgotten how off your rocker you were.
Some things don't change, though:
I looked through that thread and saw nothing about a TIE fighter being able to "wipe the floor" with an Enterprise.
Where did I say it was in that thread, O suddenly (selectively) literalist one? Did you really have to look *that* hard to spin-doctor my words?
But I digress:
SDN 2002: Defiant would lose to Millennium Falcon. -
http://bbs.stardestroyer.net/viewtopic.php?t=2330
SDN 2004: The droid army from Attack of the Clones was sufficiently armed to shoot down the Enterprise had it appeared in the skies of Geonosis (p1) -
http://bbs.stardestroyer.net/viewtopic.php?t=47856
SDN 2004: A Federation starship will be rendered incapable of carrying out its mission (presented in the thread) if it takes a hit from TIE fighters. -
http://bbs.stardestroyer.net/viewtopic.php?t=59208
SDN 2005: ISD-berthed fighter craft can destroy 20 Sovereigns. A Sovereign would have problems defeating the Falcon. Borg cube-busting transphasic torpedoes are SW "fighter grade" weapons (somewhat in jest). That was just page one. -
http://bbs.stardestroyer.net/viewtopic.php?t=69846
SDN 2005: A possible TIE weapon loadout option is more powerful than half the torpedoes of the Enterprise-D. (p7) -
http://bbs.stardestroyer.net/viewtopic.php?t=61260
SDN 2007: A smaller-than-Falcon-sized unarmed SW freighter could destroy the Enterprise merely by its engine wash. -
http://bbs.stardestroyer.net/viewtopic.php?t=114706
And so on. You even give the Slave I example, though you obviously pretend that is not the equivalent of a TIE defeating the Enterprise.
Need I go on? Or shall I just continue to offend your lack of a sense of humor by making another crack about ridiculous-minded people (like Duke et al.) in reference to you specifically?
Grow up and get a clue. Quit taking yourself and the debate so seriously. It's obviously bad for your mental health, given your behavior in my comments.
Yeah because it wouldn't be unreasonable to provide some context for your comments.
As for my mental health, well I'm not the one manufactoring death threats or hounding Paramount and Lucasfilm employees becuase I don't agree with the canon policy.
Remember this is my hobby, it's your life.
PS. Thanks for the links.
~Have a wonderful day.
Yeah because it wouldn't be unreasonable to provide some context for your comments.
Sorry you didn't know what your friends had been saying through the years.
I'm not the one manufactoring death threats or hounding Paramount and Lucasfilm employees becuase I don't agree with the canon policy.
Neither am I. However, your friends have.
Remember this is my hobby, it's your life.
Er . . . okay. If that were so, wouldn't I write tons of daily posts on various forums and not have over a year since my last substantive update to the site? Wouldn't I have posted a reply within 15 minutes of your post, like you did mine?
I'm just sayin'. Don't get me wrong, your whole "IT IS YOU WHO ARE OBSESSED, NOT I!!!!!" routine is cute and all, but it falls flat. This is especially true considering I am clearly your Great Satan(tm) but you're just some barely-memorable nobody to me.
Have fun,
G2k
OH G2k. I just love watching you crush these pathetic warsies.
Post a Comment