"Just came across this and wanted to say "you're welcome". The video leans quite heavily on work and specific concepts I pioneered. See http://www.st-v-sw.net/archive/TAborg.html . See also DITL's article for the Federation-centric side, the other half of this video. I'll be sure to credit you for this eminently watchable spin on the old page! Thanks!"
I refer to this video:
But of course, Youtube sucks terribly with commenting. The single URL post above still wouldn't fly even after I dropped the DITL link (sorry Graham!).
It does amuse me to see stuff like this. Much as Wikipedia ganked all my canon research, this guy's Borg expert obviously found me in Googling. I am happy to help, but a hat tip would be a nice touch, especially if money's being made.
Maybe I should set up a Patreon, too. ;-)
And what was up with the idea that all or many Borg had splintered? There were a couple of single-ship disruptions (Hugh's crashed ship, then his rescue ship, and the Texan Cowgirl's cube) but that wasn't the whole Collective. Seven's mini-Collective with the Admiral Forrest actor was a similar event. - G2k
Could you be more specific in how that video actually "ganked" your ideas? Claiming they stole your ideas is a fairly seriously accusation, and so is the idea that "they" are "making money" off of properties that do not belong to either of you.
Hold up, kemosloppy, I didn't say the video ganked my stuff. I said the wikiBorg assimilated my canon stuff, and that the cat who did the Borg research in the video must've found me in Googling. If he didn't, then he went to an awful lot of trouble to replicate me so precisely in facts and form.
I mean, anyone who really digs in to Trek can come to similar conclusions with all the same evidence, but of course as seen in withering debates over Trek minutiae online this is most assuredly not a given.
As for the Patreon note, the video channel has a Patreon link to take donations. Seems to me that if you're gonna make money it'd be at least a polite move to note where the video idea came from. I have never taken donations and don't run ads, so hat tips and links and such are my stock in trade.
Of course, now that I've had to explain it all over again, I have devoted more time and text than my level of concern about it warrants. "Hey buddy, how bout a hat tip?" was all that needed to be said, and all I did say.
Ranked, yanked, copied, whatever...you know what I am after. You feel you deserve credit for things said in the video. All I want to know is, what things? I think that's only fair. But point taken about the money part.
I am away from my PC and inebriated, but suffice it to say that if you trouble yourself to scan the page I linked to and watch the video, you'll note ... unless you're just being antagonistic ... numerous similarities in the handling of facts, arrangement of data, and explicit underlying suppositions.
As in, more than are to be expected given the contentious nature of most analyses of Trekdom. I've had knock-down drag-outs over far less.
"Far less" meaning details which the video and I both agree on. We agree on the broad strokes and handling of minutiae, hence my thanks. I've had severe debates with folks like you who reject proper handling of every little detail.
Ok. Enjoy your booze and hope your hangover, if any, is not like Chekov's in Star Trek 6 :)
Point being, yes I know what you are after. And you're wrong in substance and form.
Well, if you drink enough, you can find yourself firing scroton torpedoes at random Klingons you never otherwise would've considered firing upon, so…
Post a Comment