Star Trek vs. Star Wars (and a collection of memes)

[Warden]

Some cool x-wing miniatures repaints!

 

[Warden]

 

[NIGHTBRINGER]

 

[NIGHTBRINGER]

 

[Aginor]

I can only go by what I see on here. On this forum, your posts have made you the number one defender of the Sequel Trilogy. You have defended virtually every single aspect of it. Whenever I post something, you are the voice of opposition. In turn, I am likely the greatest (most vocal) adversary of Disney Star Wars.




At this point, that is objectively untrue. Recent revelations from Bob Iger's new book disprove your beliefs (search Bob Iger betrays George Lucas on YouTube for more info). In short, by Iger's own admission, they purchased the outlines for George Lucas' sequel trilogy and then decided not to use them. Suffice to say, the finished product was not in line with Lucas' vision.

So we are left with:

• George Lucas is the creator of Star Wars
• George Lucas' work is indisputably the "real Star Wars"
• George Lucas had created the stories for the Sequel Trilogy
• The Disney ST is not compatible with George Lucas' ST story
• Since Disney's and George Lucas' ST are incompatible, only one can be "real Star Wars" (they are mutually exclusive of one another)
• George Lucas, being the creator of Star Wars, trumps the validity of anything conflicting material that Disney creates

It is pretty clear cut. J.R.R. Tolkien is the ultimate source of real Lord of the Rings. J.K. Rowling is the ultimate source of real Harry Potter. By the very same measure, George Lucas is the ultimate source of real Star Wars. Anything that contradicts their work (regardless of the selling of the IP) is not "real".


That makes no sense. Inflation would actually work to help TROS to surpass TLJ. My comparison holds true. However, your comparison of the TLJ against the PT and OT is inaccurate unless you consider the very important mitigating factors that I outlined in my previous post.



Actually, if you watch the box office releases closely, you'll notice that studios are very cognizant of not releasing anything of significance near other major releases.


Unadjusted, TLJ ranks 13th.

Finding adjusted values for all the criteria I mentioned is much more difficult. Inflation is simple... but numbers of theater seats, population and global distribution are much more difficult.

I think you massively overestimate TLJ's adjusted success. (as a side note, even just considering inflation, I believe Gone with the Wind shoots up to #1)

Plus, it owes all of its success to the success of Star Wars in the past. If the Disney sequel trilogy was released today and the OT and PT had never existed, you'd find that it would have failed miserably.


I have much more than that.

• Solo lost money
• ST toys are not selling
• Galaxy's Edge is a huge failure
• there is a huge fan backlash
• Lucas and Hamill have trashed the ST
• Disney's focus on identity politics is fully apparent

You might believe Disney's excuse of Star Wars fatigue, but I can see it for what it is.

You get me wrong there.
I agree with you. It is just the metric that I questioned.
Star Wars is on a decline, both quality wise and in reception, no need to prove that.

Adjusted TLJ is somewhere in the 50s grossing movies. My phone just corrected adjusted to unadjusted (and just tried again btw.)
And about the inflation: Things are more complex than just inflation. Way more.
And Star Wars (even the less successful movies) has always been high grossing. There are hundreds of movies being released each year, and Star Wars always ranked high, Solo being the only exception so far AFAIK (cannot check right now).

And yes, studios try to deconflict to a certain degree, but there are so many movies released, there are always overlaps between top movies.

As for Lucas: Star Wars is much more than just Lucas. In fact Lucas almost ruined it more than once. So I disagree with that part of your assessment of the situation (at least for now as I haven't read Iger's book yet. All hearsay so far. I distrust YT videos so I'd like to ask you if you have read it yourself).
A franchise of that size has lots of contributors. Lucas is the most important one, but I am not a follower of the cult. Your other arguments are way better IMO. I tend to go with the content, the IP, and the general style of presentation to call something "real". And yes that might be flawed so I am open for arguments there. I would still be hesitant to use the word "real" because I don't like to make unnecessary dichotomies that further divide the community. If something is good (or bad) it shouldn't matter.

I also think that franchise fatigue is a real thing and has an impact on Star Wars as well (I just dont know how much). This is not about "believing Disney" or not.

As for me defending the sequels: I think the way you displayed it is accurate, except that I want to stress that I will not defend every aspect of it to the same extent. For example the pacing and excessive use of subverting expectations (in writing), that's just bad. And so were parts of the marketing (identity politics gone too far). TLJ (and to a lesser extent TFA) ranks low among Star Wars in many aspects.

 

[NIGHTBRINGER]

Star Wars is on a decline, both quality wise and in reception, no need to prove that.

So what are we debating about?

I listed my personal metric for TROS' financial success. I never represented that benchmark as being universal.

Adjusted TLJ is somewhere in the 50s grossing movies.

If adjusted purely for ticket price (inflation) then yes, I believe it ranks 44. But that ignores the other factors such as increased global distribution, more theater seats and a larger population. Also, and much more importantly, TLJ earned its financial success because of the greatness of the Star Wars franchise. On its own, it would have failed miserably.

As for Lucas: Star Wars is much more than just Lucas. In fact Lucas almost ruined it more than once. So I disagree with that part of your assessment of the situation (at least for now as I haven't read Iger's book yet. All hearsay so far. I distrust YT videos so I'd like to ask you if you have read it yourself).
A franchise of that size has lots of contributors. Lucas is the most important one, but I am not a follower of the cult. Your other arguments are way better IMO. I tend to go with the content, the IP, and the general style of presentation to call something "real". And yes that might be flawed so I am open for arguments there.

The creator of the movie/story is the ultimate source of what is real... period. Even you admit that Lucas is the most important contributor. Some SJW writers/directors hired by Disney are not in the position to overrule George Lucas. That doesn't mean that I like everything Lucas puts out there. I hate Ewoks and Jar Jar but they are still real Star Wars. Who is in the position to overrule Rowling when it comes to Harry Potter... or Tolkien when it comes to LOTR? It has nothing to do with following a cult, the author of the story is simply the purest source.

The IP is just a purchasable asset. It gives you the legal right to release and profit from the stories/ideas/concepts of the IP. You may own it, but you didn't create it. As for "content" and "general presentation" that is completely subjective and thus irrelevant. Our personal opinions do not overrule those of the author/creator of the franchise. However, if you are attached to it, then TLJ seems to have failed on that front as well. The major criticism among half the fan base is that TLJ is not true to real Star Wars.

I would still be hesitant to use the word "real" because I don't like to make unnecessary dichotomies that further divide the community. If something is good (or bad) it shouldn't matter.

I have no issues with a "us versus them" division. I align with ideas I deem credible and have no issues with a further splintering of the fan base. I don't need everyone to hold hands and sing Kumbaya. You've got to crack a few eggs to make an omelette. I prioritize dissemination of good ideas (and the critical destruction of bad ones) over everyone being included. #chaos #sith #IDoNotServe

I also think that franchise fatigue is a real thing and has an impact on Star Wars as well (I just dont know how much). This is not about "believing Disney" or not.

It's funny, when Disney first put out that narrative, I wondered who would actually believe such a thing. But there it is. (I have a friend who buys into it as well)

Funny how the same is not true for Marvel. The time between the releases of Black Panther - Infinity War and Captain Marvel - Endgame was FAR shorter and those movies didn't suffer from fatigue. We live in a world where people binge watch hundreds of hours of TV shows and we're supposed to believe that a 2 hour Star Wars movie released every year (or 5-6 months in the case of TLJ - Solo) will lead to fatigue? That just doesn't make any sense. Simple excuses. I see through those lies.

 

[Aginor]

It's funny, when Disney first put out that narrative, I wondered who would actually believe such a thing. But there it is. (I have a friend who buys into it as well)

Funny how the same is not true for Marvel. The time between the releases of Black Panther - Infinity War and Captain Marvel - Endgame was FAR shorter and those movies didn't suffer from fatigue. We live in a world where people binge watch hundreds of hours of TV shows and we're supposed to believe that a 2 hour Star Wars movie released every year (or 5-6 months in the case of TLJ - Solo) will lead to fatigue? That just doesn't make any sense. Simple excuses. I see through those lies.

Until you mentioned it I didn't even know Disney claimed that franchise fatigue was a thing for Star Wars. I have been saying that about both Star Wars and Marvel, for years now.
I haven't watched a Marvel movie in a long time, they are just too numerous.
And Star Wars stuff is everywhere all the time, it really got boring. I said that before Disney even purchased Star Wars.
I am not a koolaid drinker, stop implying that.

 

[NIGHTBRINGER]

Until you mentioned it I didn't even know Disney claimed that franchise fatigue was a thing for Star Wars. I have been saying that about both Star Wars and Marvel, for years now.
I haven't watched a Marvel movie in a long time, they are just too numerous.

As I laid it out before, that narrative fails from a financial standpoint.


Black Panther (released Jan. 29, 2018) - Infinity War (released April 27, 2018) ➨ (88 day spread, Infinity War grosses $2 billion)

Captain Marvel (released Feb 27, 2019) - End Game (released April 26, 2019) ➨ (58 day spread, End Game grosses $2.8 billion)


The Last Jedi (released Dec. 15, 2017) - Solo (released May 10, 2018) ➨ (146 day spread, Solo is the first Star Wars movie to lose money at the box office)

The MCU movies were much closer to each other in terms of release dates and they fared exceptionally well at the box office. TLJ and Solo had more time between them, but supposedly Star Wars fatigue caused Solo's box office failure. You're expressing how you personally feel and I am providing you with facts that contradict your feelings. Facts > Feelings (or if you prefer: "facts don't care about your feelings")

On top of that, we live in a culture (in North America) where people binge watch shows all the time. Many people watch entire multi-season TV series in a matter of weeks. People are always in search of good content (the keyword is: good). If people can't manage 4 hours worth of Star Wars movies in the course of a year, then it is probably because those are shitty Star Wars movies. I recognize that those movies are also accompanied by other sources of media (TV, video games, etc.), but the same is true for the MCU and it didn't fail because of fatigue! Now if the MCU crashes and burns because of phase 4 wokeness, people will likely blame fatigue (and toxic masculinity).

And Star Wars stuff is everywhere all the time, it really got boring. I said that before Disney even purchased Star Wars.

And yet it was always financially successful before the Disney acquisition. ALL the movies were box office successes and the toys flew off the shelves. How you personally feel about it is irrelevant in the face of overwhelming societal metrics.

I am not a koolaid drinker, stop implying that.

If anything, I'd make that implication based on your assertion that "content" and "general presentation" are greater measures of Star Wars "realness" than the direct stories & ideas of the franchise's creator, George Lucas.

I've outlined why that is absurd, but at the same time, you are entitled to your opinion. However, it is not a winning strategy from a debating standpoint.

 

[Aginor]

supposedly Star Wars fatigue caused Solo's box office failure

Said who? I said again and again that the fans' reaction (and an extreme overreaction IMO) to TLJ was what caused it.
You are building up a strawman. Again.

I am providing you with facts that contradict your feelings

No you dont.

You act like what you say are facts, you claim to argue with facts, and still you drag it onto a personal level each time.

I told you that I am not into the discussion for that.
This is not about winning. You are again dragging this to meta.

I resist.
I just deleted a whole rant about what you seem to call a style of discussion. Go discuss your crude theories with someone else.

 

[NIGHTBRINGER]

supposedly Star Wars fatigue caused Solo's box office failure.

Said who? I said again and again that the fans' reaction (and an extreme overreaction IMO) to TLJ was what caused it.
You are building up a strawman. Again.

Says who?... that is the claim made by Disney (CEO Bob Iger, plus some others)
https://www.indiewire.com/2019/09/disney-ceo-bob-iger-star-wars-solo-flop-1202175861/
https://www.inverse.com/article/55608-new-star-wars-trilogy-release-dates-fatigue-disney

(the above is an example of a fact, I make a claim and then support that claim with facts... more on this later)

That was the PR angle that Disney threw out there. Which I first brought up here:

You might believe Disney's excuse of Star Wars fatigue, but I can see it for what it is.

Of course, if you felt otherwise, you could have simply said so. All you had to say was that the Star Wars fatigue was bulls%$^ and state that the real cause was the fan's reaction to TLJ (which I actually agree with, I just don't think it was an overreaction). At this point, that avenue of debate would have been closed, however... that isn't what actually happened:

I also think that franchise fatigue is a real thing and has an impact on Star Wars as well (I just dont know how much).

In response to this I opened up a series of arguments disproving the Star Wars fatigue claim. Counter-arguing a point that you made (and we have the exact quote to prove it) is not setting up a strawman. I have no desire to explain how a proper debate is conducted or what a strawman is. However, this appears to be a microcosm of our overall debate...

• you make a claim with no factual support (you don't believe in Star Wars fatigue, or at least in its effect on the Solo collapse and that I am setting up a strawman)
• I disprove your claim factually by providing an exact quote of you supporting the idea of Star Wars fatigue (thus negating your strawman accusation and legitimizing my counter-arguments)

You act like what you say are facts, you claim to argue with facts

Another baseless and unsupported claim made by you. I will once again provide facts to dispprove your claims. Here are some examples of facts I used in our discussion to support my arguments:

There are some very significant factors that you have forgotten (or purposely chosen not) to consider:

• INFLATION!!!
• there are more theaters and theater seats available today than in the past
• the population of the world has increased (i.e. more potential viewers)

Ever wonder why most of the highest grossing films of all time are from the last decade (Titanic being the most notable exception)? Let's look at the top 20 worldwide box office grosses of all time...

https://www.boxofficemojo.com/alltime/world/


19 of the 20 movies on the list were released in the last decade (soon to be 18 of the 20, as Avatar will fall out of the decade range in November).

All three of those are facts, you could google that information yourself and you'll find them to be factually correct. In the case of inflation, I even gave you a bit of a head start with the image and website link.

Recent revelations from Bob Iger's new book disprove your beliefs (search Bob Iger betrays George Lucas on YouTube for more info). In short, by Iger's own admission, they purchased the outlines for George Lucas' sequel trilogy and then decided not to use them. Suffice to say, the finished product was not in line with Lucas' vision.

That is a factual statement. Bob Iger said these things in his book. You can look it up, it is not just my subjective opinion.

• George Lucas had outlines for the ST
• Disney bought those outlines
• Disney did not use those outlines to craft the ST

Those are all cold hard facts. You have several options available to you:

• read it in his book directly
• watch YouTube videos on the subject (many of which are well supported)
• read articles about it
• any combination of the above

There is plenty of information that is readily available, you have simply not taken the time to look it up for yourself.

I have much more than that.

• Solo lost money
• ST toys are not selling
• Galaxy's Edge is a huge failure
• there is a huge fan backlash
• Lucas and Hamill have trashed the ST
• Disney's focus on identity politics is fully apparent

All the points above, with the exception of the last one, are clear facts. You can look them up very quickly on your computer to confirm this. I should mention that the second point should read "ST toys are not selling well". Of course some units have been sold, but not up to Star Wars historical standards.
The last point might be a bit more murky, only because it might not be "fully apparent" to some. It is there, but it is not factual that it is fully apparent to everyone. However, aside from that, these are more valid demonstrations of my usage of facts. With a bit more effort, I could have provided links that definitely prove each of those statements. That is a great deal of work though and I expect you to do some work too. However, had you have strongly argued against one of them, rest assured, I would have countered with direct supporting evidence.

As I laid it out before, that narrative fails from a financial standpoint.


Black Panther (released Jan. 29, 2018) - Infinity War (released April 27, 2018) ➨ (88 day spread, Infinity War grosses $2 billion)

Captain Marvel (released Feb 27, 2019) - End Game (released April 26, 2019) ➨ (58 day spread, End Game grosses $2.8 billion)


The Last Jedi (released Dec. 15, 2017) - Solo (released May 10, 2018) ➨ (146 day spread, Solo is the first Star Wars movie to lose money at the box office)

The MCU movies were much closer to each other in terms of release dates and they fared exceptionally well at the box office. TLJ and Solo had more time between them, but supposedly Star Wars fatigue caused Solo's box office failure.

How are these not facts?!?!? How can you claim I don't present and use facts. Please, google it for me before you make such a unsubstantiated claim. If I was able to collect factual data using google, I'm pretty sure you can too.




I think I've sufficiently proven (with evidence) that your claim that I don't use facts is completely incorrect. I never considered you to be dishonest, so I can only hazard a guess that you haven't been following along very closely. If you had, you would clearly see that your accusation holds no merit.

This is not about winning.

To be honest, I'm not exactly patting myself over the back for this one. You're not really a debater (by your own admission!) and I had the high ground (pun intended) to begin with. My side was admittedly far easier to defend.

That said, what did you expect? We've already discussed at great length how we have different approaches to "debates". You knew full well that we did not have compatible styles. Why do you feel that the burden of conforming should fall on me?

This is analogous to wargaming in terms of fluff/narrative/casual players (having a discussion) and power gamers (having a debate). There is nothing wrong with either group, but they don't intermix very well. And in the end, the casual player is the one that gets hurt.

I just deleted a whole rant about what you seem to call a style of discussion.

Well then, it isn't worth too much to us now, is it? (although it is probably for the best)

Go discuss your crude theories with someone else.

Funny that you should describe my ideas as crude. Since you've dropped the guise of politeness, let me be blunt: you're outclassed. Normally one might take offense to having their ideas dismissed as crude, but your argumentation in this discussion has been so disjointed, inconsistent and unsupported, that your characterization is completely meaningless. Normally I wouldn't be so mean spirited, but if you have the desire to label my theories/ideas as crude, then I will defend myself.

This is the third time you have pulled the victim card on me in Star Wars discussions. When you did it the second time, I kindly suggested that we not engage in Star Wars discussions. I did not start this discussion with you, I was having a discussion with someone else. You chimed in an quoted me (and you did so several times before that).


Once again, I'll factually prove the claim I made above...

That is an overreaction! You recognize that it is joke, but still find it insulting (fair enough some jokes can be, let us continue). The underlying meaning of the joke is a fun poke that your defense of TLJ seems unsubstantiated by the situation (which is pretty much what we are debating, from both sides) and that your response is so passionate that I suggest a fictitious claim that you must have an ulterior motive (paid off by Disney). Nothing really that insulting there and no different than you dismissing my stance on the topic as an overreaction. The difference is I don't get insulted by it (remember that conversation we had about left wing vs. right wing snowflakes/triggering?). Not to be mean, but if you find such an innocent comment insulting (even after recognizing that it was made in jest), how do you navigate the cruel world of the internet? I don't mean for this to offend you, but if that is insulting, perhaps it is best that you don't discuss Star Wars with (against) me. I think you are a nice guy, I really do, but I have little desire to dance on egg shells to avoid offending you. If you have the right to claim my position is an overreaction I have an equal right to jokingly suggest that your position is that of a shill. I'm not sorry for that. However, in hopes of maintaining forum positivity, I'm happy to leave it right here. Based on our past interactions, it is clear that this will end up nowhere. No amount of evidence I have ever laid before you has ever even come close to swaying your opinion (and I'm sure you feel the same going in the opposite direction). Normally, I'd love to keep discussing the topic, but I have no desire to see your feelings hurt. Apparently we can talk politics, but not Star Wars. Let us go in peace, I wish you well.

With all that said, I think you are good member of this community. I harbor no ill will against you personally. I actually think you are a pretty nice guy. As I said before, we just shouldn't discuss Star Wars with one another (like a Jedi and a Sith trying to have a productive discussion together... I'll even take ownership of the sith ) I predicted that no good would come of it; sadly (and regrettably) time has proven me wise. This is exactly the type of situation I was trying to avoid the last time. I'm to blame as well, I should have ignored your entry into the discussion. My competitive nature does leave me susceptible to be being goaded (even if unintentionally, I'm not claiming a nefarious plot on your part) into debates.

At least now, looking at the positive, we both agree that Star Wars topics shouldn't be discussed between us.


Go in peace. May the force be with you.

 

[NIGHTBRINGER]

 

[Lord Agragax of Lunaxoatl]

Here we go again, and this time, it was me who started it with a less-than-hopeful comment about Episode IX...

 

[Aginor]

EDIT: This is @NIGHTBRINGER of course (sniped).

You still think that your facts support your position?
(Notice how I don't claim they aren't facts, just that they don't prove what you think they prove).

That's your main problem. You post a plethora of (mostly indisputable) facts that don't necessarily prove your position and then argue against something else instead of the matter at hand. I'll not claim that you do so on purpose even though it looks that way. I cannot prove it, and thus I apologize for calling it attacking strawmen. I used the wrong word there.

I also won't claim that I haven't done the same a few times myself, it is a common error after all. But you do it often enough that it gets annoying, especially since you combine it with personal attacks.

Still you seem to think that you outclassed me. And you probably do, but not in what you seem to think you outclass me in.
You are trying to present this as a facts vs. feelings thing, which it isn't.
You are trying to tell the (probably very few) people who read this thread that you attack opinions, not people. Still you attack me personally instead of making arguments, and when called out for it you call it playing the victim card? Seriously?

At the same time you see it as a personal attack on you that I call your theories crude? You seem to be suggesting simple causal relations in a field where there are _never_ simple solutions and that's what I called crude. How is that "dropping the guise of politeness"? I am still polite.
And again I attacked your theories and you attacked me personally.

And now you even act smugly suggesting that you were the one who wanted to let our discussions (the factual parts of which I do enjoy btw.) rest, when I was the one who wanted to end them months before that, to which back then you reacted by taunting me, starting the personal attacks.
When you run out of arguments you call me a shill or gullible.

It isn't only my standards of discussion you don't meet, it is your own as well.

I still think that discussions in this thread are not beyond being salvageable. The stuff you dig up is quite informative and entertaining, even when it doesn't fit the discussion at hand. But I strongly suggest that you reevaluate some of your discussion techniques, because they - and not the facts - are the reason why your discussions end in meta-discussions (like this one) or in people just leaving. It's not your facts, and it's not whether you are right or not. Your competitiveness leads to you driving people out if the discussion and then, when you are the last one that is still there, you see that as a sign that you won.

And see, I made a post about you again instead of Star Wars (which we both seem to love). That's where it leads. And that's where it stops being fun and starts to be a waste of our time.

I like to discuss Star Wars, what I don't like is the personal side. I don't like that I have to constantly ignore the personal attacks in order to not get dragged into... this. I can ignore a few of them as I don't have a big ego, but when there are enough of them it just dilutes an otherwise nice fact based discussion to... well... this.

I still don't want this to end with a personal attack, that's not my style. I don't know if we will be able to stop this meta discussion if none of us is ready to just leave (or carry on posting Star Wars content) without replying to this. I'll try after your next post, but I couldn't let that last post of yours go unanswered (for the reasons posted above) and I don't know if I will be able to ignore the next.

But here's a nice picture I found. May the Force be with you.

 

[Aginor]

Oooh, I just read some brand new Star Trek news!

Picard will "air" (yeah, not really, you know what I mean) on January 23th (USA, some CBS service) and 24th (Germany, Amazon Prime). Dont know about other countries.

 

[NIGHTBRINGER]

This is @NIGHTBRINGER of course

It takes two to tango, as they say.

You still think that your facts support your position?
(Notice how I don't claim they aren't facts, just that they don't prove what you think they prove).

That's your main problem. You post a plethora of (mostly indisputable) facts that don't necessarily prove your position and then argue against something else instead of the matter at hand.

For the record, you are shifting the goalposts slightly. Your original comment was that I don't use use facts and I don't argue with facts [which I then proceeded to prove otherwise]. To be specific you wrote "You act like what you say are facts, you claim to argue with facts". If what you meant to say was that the facts I provide do not support my arguments, then you should have said so and provided some rationale as to why that is true.

I assure you that the facts I provide support my argumentation exceptionally well. Once again you make a claim (based on your personal feelings) without actually demonstrating anything. Show me the discrepancy between the facts I provide and the arguments I am claiming. Throwing out a general blanket statement is not very helpful in making your point. I've written and evaluated enough essays/papers to know how to produce an argument that is factually supported. You haven't provided any supporting evidence this entire discussion and it is a very rare occurrence when you do (I do admit that you have done so at times in other discussions). I don't particularly find you to be a strong debater (which you shouldn't be as, by your own admission, your focus is on discussions) so your unsubstantiated claim that there is an incongruency between my arguments and supporting facts carries little weight. As such, I find little purpose in going through the trivial but extremely laborious task of going back through the entire discussion to demonstrate how the evidence I provided supports my arguments.

especially since you combine it with personal attacks.

You are trying to tell the (probably very few) people who read this thread that you attack opinions, not people. Still you attack me personally instead of making arguments, and when called out for it you call it playing the victim card? Seriously?

It isn't only my standards of discussion you don't meet, it is your own as well.

When you run out of arguments you call me a shill or gullible.

We continually end up at this point. The problem is that your threshold of what constitutes a personal attack is extremely sensitive (we've discussed this whole left vs. right triggered/snowflake phenomena at length). Furthermore, this threshold seems to vary greatly depending on whether these "personal attacks" are incoming or outgoing. The last time we got into this, you called my position an overreaction but were then were offended when I jokingly (which you acknowledged that you recognized as a joke) called your position that of a shill. Live by the sword, die by the sword. There are more examples of this from the first time we got into it, but I'm not going to drudge up old wounds (mainly because I am lazy to go through hundreds of pages of this thread to find the quotes ). I think we disagree greatly on what constitutes a personal attack. If I actually wanted to go down that route it would be extremely easy; wittiness has always been my ally.

At the same time you see it as a personal attack on you that I call your theories crude? You seem to be suggesting simple causal relations in a field where there are _never_ simple solutions and that's what I called crude. How is that "dropping the guise of politeness"? I am still polite.

The statement "Go discuss your crude theories with someone else." was anything but polite. If your intention was the actually bring the discussion to a conclusion there, that was a very poor choice of words. It was an antagonistic statement that virtually assured an escalated response on my part. You are free to feel otherwise, but my theories in this discussion were both better argued and better supported than yours (you actually didn't provide any supporting evidence) so for you to throw out such a parting statement was either exceptionally well thought out or completely naive (depending on your intention).

Don't get me wrong, I'm not deeply offended by it, but it did force me to call a few things out. I've been in debates that have been infinitely more aggressive than your statement and I've enjoyed the process.

And now you even act smugly suggesting that you were the one who wanted to let our discussions (the factual parts of which I do enjoy btw.) rest, when I was the one who wanted to end them months before that, to which back then you reacted by taunting me, starting the personal attacks.

Maybe you did way back when, I don't remember. A quote would be helpful (just as I had provided when I made my claim).

As for the "personal attacks", I don't remember what you are specifically referring to, so it is hard to deny or confirm (unless quoted). As it stands, I'm not going to abide by your arbitrary measure of what is and isn't a personal attack, especially in the absence of the contextual framework within which it was written.

Anyways, me saying that I thought it best that we discontinue the discussion for fear of hurting your feelings is not some sort of grand victory on my part. That is actually very much against my motto of "iron sharpens iron", and is more of a loss on my part. I don't view it as a victory or show of strength.

I still think that discussions in this thread are not beyond being salvageable.

I disagree (specifically in terms of Star Wars conversations, not in the case of other conversations). Three times we have ended up in this exact same place, so it is fair to assume the trend will continue in the future. You and I have had many peaceful and fruitful discussions in other topics, but Star Wars is not one of them.

I'd kindly suggest (as it pertains to Star Wars alone, not other topics) that we don't tag or quote one another. What is the point? Our inherent debating/discussion styles are ultimately incompatible and will constantly end up with us butting heads. I honestly don't want that and I'm wiling to simply avoid such interactions in the future. I'm hoping you are willing to do the same. Why try to delicately dance between mines when we can just avoid the minefield altogether?

But here's a nice picture I found. May the Force be with you.

For the record, leaving it off with a sequel trilogy picture was not the best way to leave things off! That could only serve to entice a counter "not real star wars" blah blah blah rant on my part.

 

[Aginor]

mainly because I am lazy to go through hundreds of pages of this thread to find the quotes

This. Very much. At this point I'd rather admit that I am/was wrong than searching for what I mean.

that was a very poor choice of words

A few times this, I admit I got annoyed. Shouldn't though, sorry.
Same goes for shifting of goal posts. I didn't intend to, but now that you pointed it out I noticed that the equivalence of a few statements is debatable.

For the record, leaving it off with a sequel trilogy picture was not the best way to leave things off!

I thought it fit well, because them being visually interesting is one of the few things concerning the sequel movies that we seem to be in agreement about.

I honestly don't want that and I'm wiling to simply avoid such interactions in the future. I'm hoping you are willing to do the same. Why try to delicately dance between mines when we can just avoid the minefield altogether?

I guess you are right. Let's do it that way.

Edit: corrected some typos/tenses. Long day and autocorrect hates me today.

 

[NIGHTBRINGER]

A few times this, I admit I got annoyed. Shouldn't though, sorry.

No worries. The exact same can be said of me. I am also at fault.

To use my own line against me, it takes two to tango.



Now that all of this is behind us... maybe I'll get back to working on my Hellcannon.

I thought it fit well, because them being visually interesting is one of the few things concerning the sequel movies that we seem to be in agreement about.

This is true.

 

[NIGHTBRINGER]

 

[NIGHTBRINGER]

 

[Aginor]