Okay, so now I *am* going to United Fan Con. Apparently their money situation has sorted itself out (the fact that Aaron Douglas dropped out probably freed up some funds, I'd think) and I was reinvited.
Honestly, I toyed with the idea of saying forget it, but that didn't seem fair to all the fans who'd written me expressing dismay over my not being there, especially since they'd purchased nonrefundable tickets.
So I'll be there.
PAD
Posted by Peter David at October 23, 2007 02:07 PM | TrackBack | Other blogs commentingAfter all they put you through, that's really gracious of you.
That is really cool of you. I have to admit though, the old saying, "Fool me once . . ." did cross my mind with these guys.
Yeah, well, they offered to send me a letter of guarantee, and even money up front. I said I was willing to take them at their word. Which may have been monumentally stupid on my part, but let's hope not.
PAD
PAD, after the con is over and you've had a little time to think about it, I'll be interested in hearing your thoughts about whether or not you'd be willing to go again next year.
Boy, I'd love to hear the reasons why they reversed themselves, but the important thing is that you're going to go.
Now all you need is a "Top Ten Demand List For Attending Next Year's Convention" to read at one of your panels.
Something about this sequence of events makes it easy for me to imagine that UFC's director of programming is George Costanza.
While they certainly deserve to have your presence at the con, I can also understand not wanting to disappoint your fans. Way to take the high road, Peter. Good luck at the con.
The Red Sox in the World Series.
The Patriots undefeated.
Boston College undefeated.
The Celtics and Bruins look relevant for the first time in years.
Peter David at United Fan Con after all!
All is right with the world!
Plus this means I can buy those books I had been waiting on right from the man himself!
Huh, I'm surprised. Both that they came back to you after all this and that you accepted. Hope things go well!
There's a teen drama in this somewhere...
UFC: "Uhmmmm.... Well... uh... We know we dumped you in a really crappy way and all that so that we could ask some of those prettier girls to the ball and all, but they just dumped us. Wanna maybe, sorta, kinda rethink going to the ball with us?"
PAD: "Oh, I'll go to the ball on your ticket. I just won't go with you. I've got a better date to go with."
(Cue uplifting, sappy music - Pad exits through door and slams it loudly as UFC looks sad - PAD sticks head back in and grabs coat that he forgot, killing mood entirely)
Oh dear. I'd better write to them and say that I won't be running a writing panel after all. It would be immensely silly for me to be doing so when you'll be there.
You are more gracious than they deserve, but good for you for staying on the high ground.
While you would have been well within your rights to tell them to take a flying leap, your decision is both gracious and makes them look even smaller than they did before. Well played, sir.
Aaron Douglas cancelled? probably has something to do with that Dylan song.
Really, the whole situation sounds kinda bizarre.
After all that, it's pretty cool of you to go.
Karma would dictate that you go and have a really good time while you're there.
Jss, wht frggn' G, nd ll tht y dt dwbs r dng s FDNG t.
pthtc
H. 'M SCH N DT TRLL THT DDN'T VN BTHR T PST FRM DFFRNT P DDRSSS BCS THGHT MLTPL NMS WLD FL PPL.
"...tht ddn't sm fr t ll th fns wh'd wrttn m xprssng dsmy vr my nt bng thr, spclly snc thy'd prchsd nnrfndbl tckts"
Yh nd gttng f*ckn' fr trp ddn't hrt THR, dd t, y ft bstrd?
H. 'M SCH N DT TRLL THT DDN'T VN BTHR T PST FRM DFFRNT P DDRSSS BCS THGHT MLTPL NMS WLD FL PPL.
My, my, aren't Ms. Lemaris and Mr. Thompson wearing the childish cranky-pants today?
Personally, I think UFC treated PAD badly; that's he's willing to accept their rather backhanded offer at this point says a lot about his high level of integrity. ***idiot dweeb applauds***
By the way, Mr. David...thanks for the ST:TNG books. You and Diane Duane are my faves. :)
rn Dgls n't cmng?????
Tht's t. 'm cncllng.
Yp, cz' 'm s stpd tht 'v bsd my NTR rtnl fr gng/nt gng t CN bsd n whthr r nt N GY s gnn b thr.
H. 'M SCH N DT TRLL THT DDN'T VN BTHR T PST FRM DFFRNT P DDRSSS BCS THGHT MLTPL NMS WLD FL PPL.
"Whl y wld hv bn wll wthn yr rghts t tll thm t tk flyng lp, yr dcsn s bth grcs nd mks thm lk vn smllr thn thy dd bfr. Wll plyd, sr."
Jss, grvl mch, mr. brwn-lps?
H. 'M SCH N DT TRLL THT DDN'T VN BTHR T PST FRM DFFRNT P DDRSSS BCS THGHT MLTPL NMS WLD FL PPL.
"My, my, aren't Ms. Lemaris and Mr. Thompson wearing the childish cranky-pants today?"
You say that as if the posts were made by two different people.
Is there anything sadder than a guy who feels it's necessary to post the same opinion three times under three different names? Oh wait, there is: the guy who does that, but can't think of anything more original than using comic book names for all of his aliases.
Jason M. Bryant: You say that as if the posts were made by two different people.
Good point--I'm still kind of new to the concept of sockpuppets, so the idea that the trollishness had a single perpetrator wasn't first on my list. 'Cuz it's just so childish and pointless, y'know?
Yeah, trolls come in lots of varieties. On Tom Brevoort's blog there's a guy who is very well spoken, but everything in the world proves that he knows more about editing than actual editors. One of his favorite things is saying that recent science mistakes in comics proves that Marvel has no editorial oversight whatsoever. If you point out that comics have always had science mistakes, he ignores that and keeps right on repeating it.
H. 'M SCH N DT TRLL THT DDN'T VN BTHR T PST FRM DFFRNT P DDRSSS BCS THGHT MLTPL NMS WLD FL PPL.
H, 'm sch n dt dwb wb dmn tht thnk th trll ctlly gvs dmn whthr r nt h psts frm th sm P ddrss ndr 3 dffrnt nms.
"'m stll knd f nw t th cncpt f sckpppts, s th d tht th trllshnss hd sngl prptrtr wsn't frst n my lst. 'Cz t's jst s chldsh nd pntlss, y'knw?"
Y dwbs rmnd m f tht ld WB crtn wth th bg hg blldg nmd spk nd th lttl dg tht jmps rnd hm syng "whtt w gnn d tdy, Spk? Hh? Hh? Y wnn chs crs, hh Spk? Hh? Hh?"
Whn Ptr, r, tht s Spk, slps y wy, y lk t th cmr nd sy "Tht's spk...h's my Hr!"
H. 'M SCH N DT TRLL THT DDN'T VN BTHR T PST FRM DFFRNT P DDRSSS BCS THGHT MLTPL NMS WLD FL PPL.
Very gracious move. I hope it doesn't bite you in the backside later. Maybe they found somebody to work the finances out (or council them on the costs of getting a bad reputation for guest treatment). The fans reap the benefit though. Cool beans eh?
BTW PAD, are you set for next year's San Diego Comicon? I missed you at the last one because it was my first SDCC and I planned pretty poorly. Next year I'm going in that sucker prepped for stiff shoulder blocks, long lines, and battlefield photography!
Oh, and,....
pathetic>>
>
That's it. I'm cancelling.
Yup, cuz' I'm so stupid that I've based my ENTIRE rationale for going/not going to a CON based on whether or not ONE GUY is gonna be there.>>
>
You just can't be serious. I check out PAD's blog a couple times a week, but hardly ever comment. Just works out that way for me. Something about your posts seem to lack any sincerity at all. If you really couldn't care one way or the other about PAD or the other posters/fans of PAD then why even bother trolling for attention?
Waste some time?
Mission accomplished.
You'll only get minimal attention here. PAD and most of the people here can easily ignore you. I just felt like throwing out one comment to you since you made such a sad attempt at trolling. I mean a REALLY sad attempt. Now please go bug some other board that you actually feel passionate about.
"Nw pls g bg sm thr brd tht y ctlly fl pssnt bt."
My gd, lstn t yrslf. Lstn t hw ttlly ltst y snd.
Ys, ppl CN gnr m. dn't xpct vryn t lstn, jst s lng s plnt sd n sm f th rdrs' mnds s t hw ttlly gtstcl t s t hv wblg whlly ddctd t n mn, nd hw dsgstng t s t hv mntl mdgt fns bzzng bt hm, lk drns rnd qn b.
r fls rnd crp.
H. 'M SCH N DT TRLL THT DDN'T VN BTHR T PST FRM DFFRNT P DDRSSS BCS THGHT MLTPL NMS WLD FL PPL.
Yes, people CAN ignore me. I don't expect everyone to listen, just so long as I plant a seed in some of the readers' minds as to how totally egotistical it is to have a weblog wholly dedicated to one man, and how disgusting it is to have mental midget fans buzzing about him, like drones around a queen bee.
Sad. Haven't accomplished much in life, eh? Not many friends, eh? Well, trolling won't fix either of those deficiencies. Perhaps your time could be better spent working on your personality defects.
Ah, but of course you don't care what anyone thinks of you. You're a seed planter!
Heh. I doubt there is anyone on this board--even the usual trolls--who is more desperate for attention. Sad, really, that someone can find themselves in a position where even bemused pity from strangers is better than their usual situation of being totally ignored. It's to be expected when one has nothing to contribute but I imagine it still stings. Well, troll away. Hell, pretend you matter, if it helps. (But really, the overuse of "dweebs"...such an ineffectual word. Try something new. Use some of the various epithets that are no doubt thrown your way in middle school (you ARE in middle school, right? Because if you aren't...oh my...)).
Maybe I'm still too naive, or I've had one too many whacks to the head, but I'm utterly dumbfounded by
1) people who have violent opinions about a subject of which they know nothing
2) are filled with such utter hatred they feel compelled to destroy everything in their path.
Let me guess, Mr. Multiple-Personality: you kick kittens, too, don't you?
Sad. Very sad.
how totally egotistical it is to have a weblog wholly dedicated to one man
Yes, as opposed to the majority of blogs, which are run by committee....
Yeah, I know, troll comments aren't supposed to make sense, bt that one was such a shining example of the principle it just leapt out at me.
Guys, guys, guys... Can't you read the sign?
"Don't Feed the Trolls."
I know it's tempting, but, much like the sad, scraggly, stray puppies that they are, even pat them on the head once or twice and they'll never go away :P
'Yes, people CAN ignore me. I don't expect everyone to listen, just so long as I plant a seed in some of the readers' minds...'
Oh yes, yes, finally I see the light! I could I have lived for so long without your enlighten guidance! I will never again open PAD blog and risking to read somenthing intelligent and humorous. Thank you for saving me from all this merriment, I really own you my intellectual life!
You're a stand-up guy, PAD. Would that more people tried to emulate this.
PAD, I applaud you for taking the high road here. However, I also feel you would have been well within your "rights" to just say, "thanks, but no thanks." Here's hoping they do indeed honor their agreement with you this time!
I assume that the note at the bottom of the comments posted by our DLF the troll (PRINCE CASPIAN reference) are not this person's sig, but something added by Glenn (or somesuch)?
Nice of them to ask you back and even nicer of you to accept. I guess suddenly not having to pay Aaron freed up their finances enough to be able to pay for you to come. Thank you for actually agreeing to show, since after the way they treated you before, you were under no obligation to do so. I've missed you at other conventions either due to time constraints that I had or because I ended up being ill that weekend. I'm looking forward to finally getting the chance to see you in person.
Well, trolls are proof why some people shouldn't be allowed to use the internet... or have their fingers broken.
At any rate, obviously the troll has no @#$%ing clue what a blog is about, seeing as how *gasp* blogs are dedicated to the people that run them. Oh, so many egos! *roflmao*
Man, I needed this kind of laugh.
And for what it's worth, if I were a professional and United FanCon had done this to me, I can't said I would have acted as you have done, PAD. I think I would've burned the bridge and hoped that those running UFC were standing on it as it fell.
"I assume that the note at the bottom of the comments posted by our DLF the troll (PRINCE CASPIAN reference) are not this person's sig, but something added by Glenn (or somesuch)?"
Me, actually. That's what happens when I stumble over a troll at three in the morning.
PAD
It's good to read that you're actually going to UFC, Mr. David. Although there's no hope of me travelling out of my area to go to a Con given the current state of my finances, it increases the chance that you might show up at AggieCon again sometime in the future. I couldn't make it to the last one you attended do to workload at the office, more's the pity.
Clbrty hs ts bnfts nd ts drwbcks.
Ppl cn sy wht thy dmn wll wnt t bt y nd y cn't d thng bt t.
Pttng t blg bt n's slf s lwys gng t drw bth pstv nd ngtv cmmnts. Y cn't hv n wtht th thr.
f y thnk y cn,thn y r th ns lvng n th fntsy wrld, nt m.
nlss y blv tht Mr. Dvd s th pnncl f prfctn.
Thn gn, th wy y'v ll rshd t hs sd, myb y d---*Twlght Zn msc plyng n th bckgrnd*
'd rthr b trll thn th 'chldrn f th crn' tht y ll sm t b bt PD.
(n f th dmns cmmnts: Yh yh nd y gt bg pr n y bcs y cn sy sch snn thngs nd nt b clld n t bcs th wnr f th brd ds blv n fr spch nd llws ppl lk y t pst wtht cnsrshp. Y'r nt prvng nythng thr thn y r n dt wth PD ftsh.)
"how totally egotistical it is to have a weblog wholly dedicated to one man"
Yes! What's next people writing diaries and journals filled with their own thoughts? Biographies dedicated to the history of a single person (some even written by themselves)? photo albums filled with only family pictures? And people posting in blogs just with one name? Where will this egotism stop?
This troll definitly has more than a chip on his shoulder. He has a whole bag of chips.
Then again, the way you've all rushed to his side
I just love bashing trolls.
It's just my way of inflating my ego since I don't have a blog.
"Y'r nt prvng nythng thr thn y r n dt wth PD ftsh"
'v gt PD ftsh? 'm nt hs blg's dmn, pl.......
(Yh bt y kp pstng nd pstng nd rfrshng t s f nyn hd sn yr tmflry. Fc t y'r ddctd t PD nd ths wbst. Rmmbr th frst stp s dmttng yr ddctn.)
" jst lv bshng trlls.
t's jst my wy f nfltng my g snc dn't hv blg."
Y n't dn ddly yt crggy-by. Brng t n.
Amateur Troll contestant #361: "Putting out a blog about one's self is always going to draw both positive and negative comments. You can't have one without the other."
Yes, that's quite true. But for negative comments or criticisms to mean anything at all, they should display some level of intelligence, some sort of logical point and at least a passing relationship to reality. So far, you're 0 for 3.
Amateur Troll contestant #361: "I'd rather be a troll than the 'children of the corn' that you all seem to be about PAD."
Wow, we're fans of Peter's novels, comics and screenplays. You've got us there, Tex. But since everyone here has disagreed with Peter's points and opinions more then a few times, your observation resembles sanity or reality... how?
Anybody else for Glenn just going straight to Disemvowelling Amateur Troll Contestant #361 other then me? He serves no function and he's not even any fun debating.
You know what? This guy is a waste of bandwith.
There are people who show up here who are wrongheaded in my opinion, but at least endeavor to comment on broader matters. But I've decided that life is simply too short to accommodate someone who shows up here for one reason and one reason only: To hurl insults. It's pointless. It's one thing to give free license, as I do, for people to disagree with me about all manner of things. It's quite another to provide a forum for someone whose only agenda is to spew hatred while hiding behind the names of do-gooders.
I've asked Glenn to disemvowel him.
Bye bye, troll boy.
PAD
Jerry wrote: Anybody else for Glenn just going straight to Disemvowelling Amateur Troll Contestant #361 other then me? He serves no function and he's not even any fun debating.
I second the motion. How can one debate with someone who can't even pick one name and stick with it? Say something interesting or (with all due respect) buzz off.
H*y, th*s c*n b* k*nd *f f*n.
F*ck Y**, P*t*r D*v*d!!!!
As if any more proof of the suspected age/maturity level of the troll in question was needed...
I am new at this so please forgive me I am not as knowledgable as everyone else. I just read the transcripts from a 1993(?)StarTrek.com interview. In it you stated that you were contracted for 3 more "New Frontier" books. Is that still the case and if so, when will they be released? I have the first trilogy on hardback and I am hooked. I won't even pick up a StarTrek book unless it has your name on it because of your stellar writing style. Also, where and when is United Fan Con:The Return. I am willing to travel from DC just to see you AND to have you autograph my books. Finally, I am going to Las Vegas next spring to see StarTrek:The Experience. Have you or will you ever be visiting that venue?
Peter David: "It's one thing to give free license, as I do, for people to disagree with me about all manner of things. It's quite another to provide a forum for someone whose only agenda is to spew hatred while hiding behind the names of do-gooders."
I was SO hoping you'd bring the hammer down this quickly. Your commitment to free speech is admirable, and has inspired me to make a similar commitment. But this individual isn't interested in free speech any more than a crank caller is. He's just harassing you and everyone else here. He needed being smacked down, and smack him down you did.
Back to the topic, I concur with those who have lauded your decision to take the high road. Had you chosen not to accept UFC's re-invitation, it would've hurt those who had bought tickets hoping to see you -- but that would NOT have been your fault. Nevertheless, you put the fans' interests front and center. That... is class.
For those attending UFC to see PAD, I'm glad for this development. And for the UFC folks...assuming their re-invite came with the appropriate sincere apology, I think this reflects well on them. It'd be nice if they made some sort of public...and non-spinny...statement of mea culpa over the whole thing, but I guess you can't have everything.
The only thing wrong with PAD saying yes to coming to UFC after all is that now I have to decide what I want to bring to have signed.
I've got 4 comic boxes full of goodies, plus one shelf of my book case dedicated to his prose.
Decisions, Decisions....
But at least they are good decisions!
This "David Peters" reminds me of Harlan Ellison's wonderful and scary article "Xenogenesis" where he observed that some trolls (or whatever they were called back before the Internet was around) would often use "clever" names (in his case, "Helen Arlisson") while attacking their subject. I suppose evolution isn't consistent among all.
As for PAD's going to UFC, let's just say I hope everything works out for the best for both PAD and the fans, but after the last notes on how they'd treated PAD I'm not betting money everything will work out perfectly. We shall see.
This is the funniest troll ever. How long do you think we can keep him posting before he gives up in tears of frustration?
(Now was that a deliberate attempt to get you to keep on wasting your valueless time, dweeby one? Or not? How can you be sure? Dance, trollboy, dance! You exist for our amusement!)
"... Harlan Ellison's wonderful and scary article "Xenogenesis"..."
Yeah, but at least trolls can't do some of the stuff he described through a computer screen.
The story about the cup (I'm saying no more in order to not give any trolls any con ideas) made me sick when I read it to think that some "fans" out there acted like that.
Bill Mulligan: "Dance, trollboy, dance! You exist for our amusement!"
Priceless. Truly priceless.
(Mulligan, please e-mail me. I owe you a heaping big apology about something!!!)
Myers-
What did I tell you about making sports bets with Mulligan? *grin*
Kath
Fetish? Yeah, I had a fetish once. Cortisone Cream took care of it. Perhaps it also works on warty Trolls?
To our troll from the Washington DC area using Verizon: consider this your first warning.
Second time, I remove the consonants. Don't find out what I do for a third offense.
How could someone even commit a third offense with no vowels and no consonants?
$#17
is the closest I can get to a swear without vowels and consonants. I can't wait so see what our troll comes up with.
And the third offense punishment? I'm imagining a lighting bolt going through the internet and frying his computer. Nobody correct me if I'm wrong, I'm enjoying that image too much. :)
David Peters: "M*ll*G*N_&_MY*RS_--Y**_S*CK!!!"
I'm sorry, I'm having trouble hearing you. It's as though you're missing all of your vowels or something.
Yes, yes, I know -- feeding the troll is bad. Bad, bad, bad. But, y'know, I'm not made of stone, and this guy is PRICELESS!
Sorry, new to this venue--long time Peter David fan, first time poster.
What's a troll? I'm about a computer literate as a Jethro Bodine.
DT
A troll is someone in an internet conversation who isn't trying to contribute to the conversation, he's just trying to cause trouble. Sometimes they just start lots of arguments, but this one has decided to spew profanity until he gets completely banned.
Actually, I'm also wondering-is United Fan Con such a big deal? I mean, its on the same weekend as World Fantasy Con, isn't it? I've heard of Boskone, and Windycon, and of course World Con...I've not heard of United Fan Con
Pardon my ignorance, but is it really that big a deal? Sorry-the last convention I went to was Magicon back in the 'dark ages' . I was in Orlando at the tail end of a business trip, so I stayed a couple of extra days.
How big is United Fan Con?
Aw, man...I missed the disemvowelling! ***Rats***
What startled me, though, was to see a poster named "David Peters"...because I happen to know a wonderful, erudite, funny, exceptionally talented singer/songwriter/musician/sound engineer named David Peters, and I know he'd never be a troll. For Trollboy's stealing of my friend's name, I applaud the disemvowelling! (Also for the rest, but that one really irked me.)
Goodness, he must have really gotten under your collective skins for a response like that! But the parody is obvious, isn't it? Peter David to David Peters.
His tone and ranting does somewhat remind me of Harlan Ellison in his early days. The forewards in some of his anthologies were almost as scathing as this guy's rants.
DT
"Actually, I'm also wondering-is United Fan Con such a big deal?"
As PAD said in the initial post, the fans are the big deal. Some people bought their tickets partly because PAD was going to be one of the guests. Even if there is other stuff worth seeing there, they expected to see PAD, so he doesn't want to disappoint the fans who bought nonrefundable tickets.
M*ll*G*N_&_MY*RS_--Y**_S*CK!!!"
What about my sock? Are you the one who keeps taking one of them? What kind of sick sock stealing freak are you???
Dan--please, I beg you, don't compare this chucklehead to the great Harlan Ellison! Ellison under anesthetics would still be wittier than this guy. Hell, Bill Myers' cat gets off better lines.
No, no, no, Mulligan, that wasn't about your sock. He was trying to make up with you and Myers by bringing Asian actress Yau Suck Ching (an AKA for Chingmy Yau) and her film 666 Devil Reincarnates (The literal translation of 666 mo gui fu huo and also known as Satan Returns in thye U.S.) to your attention.
Not a bad little Hong Kong film. Think Se7en with demonic undertones and kung-fu. Not for everyone, but it was nice of him to try and share.
The disemvowelled one wrote: H*RL*N_*LL*S*N_R*L*S!!!
Which, if I am filling in the *s correctly reads, "Harlan Ellison Rules." If so, it's the first sensible thing he's said! Ye Gods, does this mean he has a redeeming quality?
Bill Mulligan wrote: Ellison under anesthetics would still be wittier than this guy
Agreed. He might even do better while unconscious!
"As PAD said in the initial post, the fans are the big deal. Some people bought their tickets partly because PAD was going to be one of the guests. Even if there is other stuff worth seeing there, they expected to see PAD, so he doesn't want to disappoint the fans who bought nonrefundable tickets."
I think you may have misunderstood the tone of my question. I did not mean to imply that the fans were not important.
I was just wondering if United Fan Con is that big a convention. I'm sure there are Aaron Douglas fans out there who are now just as pissed off as Peter David fans were that *their* guy is not showing up at the convention. I mean, they bought non-refundable tickets too!
My question was not one of "is this such a big deal that Peter David *needs* to make such a big deal about it by posting it as a blog topic?"
I've been told that people get cut all the time from talk shows--segments run long, and Mr.X doesn't get to come on to talk up his new movie.
If Peter David was so concerned about disappointing the fans, couldn't he have just as easliy simply gone to the convention as a paying member?
If United Fan Con was so strapped for cash that they could not afford Peter David and Aaron Douglas both, couldn't Mr. David have said that he'd come anyway, just so that he would not disappoint his fans?
Let me give you an example from my personal life:
I'm on the board of directors of a resort. We have campsites, etc. and we promote ourselves as being a 'year-round' resort. Things have been a little tight lately, and it looks like we are going to have to shut down for 2-3 weeks in the Winter in order to save on heating costs. Yet, we have members that have bought year-round memberships, even lifetime memberships, that expect the resort to be open every weekend in the Winter...what do we do? Please our members and stay open, or go into the red to where we can't pay our bills? In our case, we're closing down--its the lesser of two evils.
The bottom line is just that---the bottom line. Are the venues going to be able to afford the talent? Would you rather have United Fan Con go in the red just to please the fans this year, then decide that can't afford to put on a Convention in 2008?
Its nothing personal...its just business.
I think Peter David may, to a certain extent, be posting this incident on his blog in order to gain sympathy from his fan base...at least that's what it looks like from an outsider's perspective.
I don't mean to disagree with you all, and I hope this isn't sounding 'trollish' (still not really sure what that is), but there truly is another side to the story other than simply a celebrity getting dissed.
DT
I liked her better in Kung Fu Cult Master and Raped by an Angel 4: Damn, That's an Awfully Large Number of Times to be Raped by an Angel
"I liked her better in Kung Fu Cult Master... "
Do you think it at all scares some people here two people can know that much twisted film trivia?
Oh, and I still think her best work was all those years ago now in Naked Killer and City Hunter (the silliest movie Jackie Chan ever did).
oops, sorry. I got a little ahead of myself in my typing. The part where I said "My question was not one of "is this such a big deal that Peter David *needs* to make such a big deal about it by posting it as a blog topic?"
Should have read "My question was one of "is this such a big deal...etc..."
Still getting the hang of this.
DT
"Oh, and I still think her best work was all those years ago now in Naked Killer and City Hunter (the silliest movie Jackie Chan ever did)."
City Hunter was just a plain stupid movie. It had nothing in common with the Manga or the Anime...they simply picked Jackie Chan to play Ryo Saeba cuz' he's an International draw.
Take it from me, the manga and the Anime are way, way more entertaining, especially in the original Japanese (I'm fluent in Japanese and City Hunter is my all time favorite Anime)
I've read the manga and seen the Anime & know that they're better. But I still liked the silly nature of the film. Plus I'm a Chan fanatic. That helps.
Dan Taylor---
All your points were discussed quite thoroughly on a previous thread.
http://peterdavid.malibulist.com/archives/005744.html
----------
As to the TRLL, were it my site, it wouldn't get a third chance. I'd just contact Verizon and have its account deleted.
It's okay to go to a blog and express its disdain to the host if it does it in at least a semi-polite way. Then go away. Continued TRLLNG is stalking and can get it jail time.
DT wrote: I think Peter David may, to a certain extent, be posting this incident on his blog in order to gain sympathy from his fan base...at least that's what it looks like from an outsider's perspective.
::tilts her head ever so slightly:: Perhaps, from a complete outsider's perspective...and stretching it... Maybe.
However, let me suggest another perspective. Say, for example, I was on the fence about going to that Con. It's a distance away so I'd have to pay for travel, a hotel room, and the entrance fee. Let's also say that knowing PAD would be there was just the nudge to get me to go through the time and expense of going.
Given the afformentioned time and expense, I would want to know if there was a change ahead of time. I'd also want to know (in general) why; and if it was the Con who cancels, they'd better have a good reason and return policy.
Frankly, depending on the other guests, I might even consider just eating the cost of the entrance fee, and save the money I would have spent on the hotel and travel.
Do you see what I mean, DT?
Hey Guys...
Honestly, it's good to see that the UFC grew a pair and extended the proverbial laurel to PAD. But as a matter of principle, I still wouldn't send any more buisness their way just for the poor handling of a respected author's INVITATION to appear at their con.
Still, I don't think anyone really believes they "deleted " Aaron to make room for Peter. As a matter of record, the BSG schedules have made it quite an adventure booking any guests from that extremely popular show. (Mary McDonnell from a couple Farpoint's ago, for example.) I just hope James Callis doesn't get the call from Vancouver before Farpoint '08 happens.
And finally, we really shouldn't deride the troll Dave Peters... pity the poor soul who is grey-matter challenged.
]:-)
That's just an opinion, of course.
Bob Ahrens
Dan Taylor: Sorry, new to this venue--long time Peter David fan, first time poster. What's a troll? I'm about a computer literate as a Jethro Bodine.
Luigi Novi: Dan, two very important websites that you should check out are dictionary.com and wikipedia.org. They're a free online dictionary and encyclopedia, respectively. You'll find all sorts of Internet lingo on the latter in particular.
Dan Taylor: But the parody is obvious, isn't it? Peter David to David Peters.
Luigi Novi: "David Peters" was also a pseudonym under which Peter wrote some of his early work, such as his Photon novels.
Luigi Novi: "David Peters" was also a pseudonym under which Peter wrote some of his early work, such as his Photon novels.
I still think In Search of Mom is greatly underrated in geek circles.
The Photon novels were great. I still remember reading the first line of the second book, "A hush fell over the crowd." It was memorable because the next paragraph explained that a hush was an alien that looked a lot like a bear rug, and this one was particularly drunk. Damn funny opening.
I don't see how this thread doesn't demonstrate I won the NABJ/Imus debate.
Hi Alan,
I did go over to the link you posted on the previous discussion of this topic...boy, what a discussion!
I guess my next question is this: if there was that much vemon spewed on both sides of the issue in the previous thread, why did Mr. David accept when he was re-invited?
I mean that in all honesty and sincerity.
I mean, such name calling and bad feeling on both sides! Both sides trying to convince the other that their side is right.
Why go thru that again? I'm sure the fans, after reading that, would have understood if PAD turned down the re-invitation.
And to Christine,
I see your point, but as the old saying goes 'one monkey don't stop no show.' If he does, its a really bad show to begin with.
It seems like the main issue here is the non-refundability of the tickets. I do have some experience here as well, having worked as an airline reservationist in my younger days. I would frequently get people on the phone who would want to change their tickets, and I'd have to remind them that they bought a non-refundable, non-changable ticket. They'd scream and yell at me, swearing up and down that they would 'never fly your airline again.' Secretly, I used to say under my breath 'yeah, at least not until our next airfare sale.'
I hear the talk of the talk, but I don't see the walk of the walk. Even in your language, Christine, I hear you saying 'I might even consider...' instead of a 'I definitely would not.'
I think you guys need to boycott UFC altogether...PAD ought to refuse to do another one and his fans ought to refuse to go to another one.
Oh, and BTW, the decision we made to close the resort for the 3 weeks angered several of the lifetime members so much that they flat out refuse to use the restaurant facilites that the resort has, and cook their meals at their own campsites...walking the walk...
DT
Hi Alan,
I did go over to the link you posted on the previous discussion of this topic...boy, what a discussion!
I guess my next question is this: if there was that much vemon spewed on both sides of the issue in the previous thread, why did Mr. David accept when he was re-invited?
I mean that in all honesty and sincerity.
I mean, such name calling and bad feeling on both sides! Both sides trying to convince the other that their side is right.
Why go thru that again? I'm sure the fans, after reading that, would have understood if PAD turned down the re-invitation.
And to Christine,
I see your point, but as the old saying goes 'one monkey don't stop no show.' If he does, its a really bad show to begin with.
It seems like the main issue here is the non-refundability of the tickets. I do have some experience here as well, having worked as an airline reservationist in my younger days. I would frequently get people on the phone who would want to change their tickets, and I'd have to remind them that they bought a non-refundable, non-changable ticket. They'd scream and yell at me, swearing up and down that they would 'never fly your airline again.' Secretly, I used to say under my breath 'yeah, at least not until our next airfare sale.'
I hear the talk of the talk, but I don't see the walk of the walk. Even in your language, Christine, I hear you saying 'I might even consider...' instead of a 'I definitely would not.'
I think you guys need to boycott UFC altogether...PAD ought to refuse to do another one and his fans ought to refuse to go to another one.
Oh, and BTW, the decision we made to close the resort for the 3 weeks angered several of the lifetime members so much that they flat out refuse to use the restaurant facilites that the resort has, and cook their meals at their own campsites...walking the walk...
DT
"I guess my next question is this: if there was that much vemon spewed on both sides of the issue in the previous thread, why did Mr. David accept when he was re-invited?"
UFC isn't just inviting him down, they're also paying for airfare and hotel accommodations for him and his family. Without that, him just going on his own to keep from disappointing the fans would have been way too expensive, so it wasn't feasible. Now that they have re-invited him, they're also taking care of those expenses again, allowing him to go and not disappoint the fans.
One other thing. When I say, "the fans" that includes people who don't read this blog and will go to the convention totally unaware of what has been going on.
Dan, since I didn't mention this before, thank you for your civility and honesty in disagreeing with Peter and most of the others here. :-)
In answer to your question "If there was that much vemon spewed on both sides of the issue in the previous thread, why did Mr. David accept when he was re-invited?", Peter answered this in the blog entry at the top of this page, when he said:
"Honestly, I toyed with the idea of saying forget it, but that didn't seem fair to all the fans who'd written me expressing dismay over my not being there, especially since they'd purchased nonrefundable tickets."
"UFC isn't just inviting him down, they're also paying for airfare and hotel accommodations for him and his family. Without that, him just going on his own to keep from disappointing the fans would have been way too expensive, so it wasn't feasible. Now that they have re-invited him, they're also taking care of those expenses again, allowing him to go and not disappoint the fans."
So, it was a money issue on his side as well? They agree to pay for everything, and now everything is hunky-dorey?
you know, I don't get this pissed off when they cancel schduled overtime at work...I just take it that I get to go home on time and I'm happy...there's no drama there...in fact, I get more pissed off if they cancel my OT and then tell me they need me again!!!
I guess I just don't understand.
You know, folks, I'm just going to have to leave this debate...trying to figure out the logistics of all this is giving me a headache, and that's when I know its time to let go.
Hope everything works out.
see you guys on another topic.
DT
Dan, I'm not really sure where you're coming from.
PAD made plans with them a long time ago. They used his name to get people to come to their show. They made an agreement to do certain things for him. He *didn't* make other plans for the weekend, even thought there were other cons he could have gone to. When UFC fell through on their obligations, that was worth getting annoyed with.
When they offered to take him again and offered assurances that there wouldn't be more problems, PAD agreed because he didn't want to disappoint people. No, UFC didn't make everything hunky-dorey, but there were other people in the consideration.
It's really fairly straightforward.
And the third offense punishment? I'm imagining a lighting bolt going through the internet and frying his computer. Nobody correct me if I'm wrong, I'm enjoying that image too much. :)
One of these days I have to get around to typing up the story of the poor fellow who broke into my house and stole my computer, how I found him, and what happened to him afterwards...
...but think in those terms.
DT: I hear the talk of the talk, but I don't see the walk of the walk. Even in your language, Christine, I hear you saying 'I might even consider...' instead of a 'I definitely would not.'
Well, I am not in the position to "walk the walk" as I was never going to this particular Con. I was giving an example.
DT: you know, I don't get this pissed off when they cancel schduled overtime at work.
But have you lost other opportunities to make a living because you had the time scheduled at your job? There is the difference.
DT: I'm just going to have to leave this debate
'kay.
Dan Taylor, conventions represent an opportunity for Peter to make money by selling his merchandise. When Peter committed to this year's UFC, he turned down invitations to other conventions that would have conflicted. Therefore, when UFC pulled the plug on Peter's appearance, it represented a loss of revenue for Peter.
Worse still, the convention advertised Peter as a guest and some people bought non-refundable tickets because of that. When UFC un-invited Peter without having the stones to announce far and wide "this is our fault," they were setting up Peter for an undeserved backlash from fans.
As far as going at his own expense: why should he? That's quite a lot of money to spend to attend a convention that's treated him like crap. A convention where he's appeared as a guest in years past, by the way.
Anyway, UFC has re-invited Peter and he's graciously accepted out of a sense of fairness to his fans. Those people who derided Peter in a prior thread for "daring" to air out this issue in the first place should take heed, because Peter is showing more character than they give him credit for.
Kath the Wife David: "Myers - What did I tell you about making sports bets with Mulligan? *grin*"
The same thing you told me about not sticking my finger in a light socket: don't do it. I should have listened on both counts. ;)
Oops, the prior post contained a double negative. It should have read "The same thing you told me about sticking my finger in a light socket..."
Well, I guess I've ruined any potential humor value in my prior post. My work here is done. :(
Mr. "Taylor" equates what the con had been doing (before they reinstated Mr. David) to what his resort had been doing, by closing their resort at times when they had promised year-round access.
Why yes, it is like that. The resort advertised and accepted money for something it was not actually prepared to provide. It engaged in improper business. And if someone were to point out to their customers that the company was not living up to its promises, that would be a good communication.
To compare it to non-refundable flight tickets is missing one vital point: even non-refundable flight tickets are refunded if the flight is canceled... and that's true if the plane still flies, and they just cancel that stop in Akron which you bought the ticket to get to.
It might not be necessary for me to say anything about this, but I just thought I'd offer some information that I have regarding the most recent guest line-up changes at UFC. Aaron Douglas is a friend of mine and he told me that due to BSG filming and a season 4 promo photoshoot the weekend of UFC, he was forced to cancel his appearance. I know some folks will be disappointed, but I hope that they will understand that his professional committments take priority over doing convention appearances.
That being said, I am sure that Aaron's cancellation freed up a substantial amount of funds (between his appearance fee, his airfare, hotel, and other expenses) that then allowed them to re-invite PAD. I admit that I do not know PAD from Adam, but I think it says a lot about his character that he is willing to risk getting burned again so that his fans will get what they paid for. I hope everything works out smoothly and you all have a great time.
Bill, what have we all told you about employing double negatives? I don't care if you checked their green cards.
You know, I'm in a comparable situation as PAD right now.
The NLL (which most of you have probably never heard of) canceled the '08 season 10 days ago after the team owners and the player's union couldn't agree on a new Collective Bargaining Agreement.
My wife and I have season tickets for our local team, the Colorado Mammoth. So, the day after the season was canceled, we received info on if we wanted a refund on our season tickets. Since they were willing to refund our money but hold on to our seats for the '09 season, we wanted the refund.
Then, we went and adjusted one of our trips in February (since there was no more home game to worry about that weekend), and booked another trip for May (which would have been during the playoffs). Since I'm probably going to be changing jobs next summer, we wanted to go ahead and squeeze these trips in now, since the dates are all now open.
In short, we were planning the next 6 months of our life around our love of box lacrosse and the all of 8 games the Mammoth will play in Denver this spring. I imagine PAD is doing much the same when he's invited to all these conventions each year.
Now, here we are, 10 days after the cancellation of the season, and rumors are floating around that the season may go on after all.
The point?
I made plans based on what somebody else had guaranteed me was going to happen (in this case, no season).
So, I'm completely fragged, and I'm likely going to call today to demand they refund my money regardless, because I can't wait another month for them to figure out what they're going to do with the mess they've created.
Now I'm not sure I'll bother with this league again down the road. Why? Because they can't keep their word, because they are jerking us around. And there's no reason for me to put up with it.
It is not fun, regardless of whether you're a professional, or merely a fan, to be pissed on in such a fashion.
ALL:
Okay! Okay! I get it already!!!
Fine! You have your way of thinking and I have mine. Lets just agree to disagree!
What is with you people and your incessant need to convince me that you're right??????
Geeez....I am officially of this topic now.
Bill Mulligan: Ah, but of course you don't care what anyone thinks of you. You're a seed planter!
Given his antics, I'd say he's more of a seed spreader -- as in the Onan variety. :)
Wish I was in the area to attend this con. Any of the few comic book conventions I've attended in my life (and they were long ago, back when Chicago was in it's pre-Wizard days), PAD was always head-and-shoulders above the rest in terms of politeness and accessibility.
"Any of the few comic book conventions I've attended in my life (and they were long ago, back when Chicago was in it's pre-Wizard days), PAD was always head-and-shoulders above the rest in terms of politeness and accessibility."
Did you say CHICAGO? As in the legendary Chicago Comic-Con? Were you there that one summer when the convention was downtown at the Congress Hotel and THE AIR CONDITIONING BROKE DOWN?? I think they called it 'the Con of Wrath'?
Those were some FUN conventions....
Dan Taylor: "What is with you people and your incessant need to convince me that you're right??????"
Conversations are a two-way street. If you're not comfortable hearing what others have to say, you should probably steer clear of the conversation.
Dan Taylor: "What is with you people and your incessant need to convince me that you're right??????"
It's not trying to convince you that we're right, it's more just pointing out that your observations haven't swayed us to your point of view. That's the thing with a topic like this one though. This isn't like a debate where we're discussing provable facts of whether or not some political figure lied about facts or whether or not 4+4=8 or not. This is pure POV.
Your trying to convince us that our POV that was formed by our past experiences and from what we had already discussed about this before you started posting on the topic should be altered to your POV. Rather then simply persuading us that you have a valid point of view for yourself, you're trying to convince is that you're right and we're wrong. So far, you haven't done that and we've not said anything that has dissuaded you from your POV on the subject.
Dan, that's actually fine. Don't get so flustered with it. Flip through the archives and you'll see lots of us hitting points in debates ranging from musical genres to how to deal with African genocide were we just agree to disagree and walk away from things in a friendly manner. You can't win 'em all (any more then any of us can) and some of 'em ain't worth trying win past a certain point.
Dan, we agree to disagree here. Catch you in the next debate, thread or even the not-quite-totally-rare none-argument discussion.
Posted by Jerry Chandler
...City Hunter (the silliest movie Jackie Chan ever did)...
...and apparently somewhat de-silly-ised from the original anime source. (Which i saw once in Japanese without subtitles. At opne point, remarked to a friend that "...now is when the girl pulls out the ten-kilo hammer..." and he said "Nah - this isn't Lum, and then she pulled out the ten-kilo hammer...)
Posted by Alan Coil
As to the TRLL, were it my site, it wouldn't get a third chance. I'd just contact Verizon and have its account deleted.
Except that i bet it wouldn't happen - there's a spammer who continues to hit rec.arts.sf.fandom with drive-bys advertising things on eBay, and, despite numerous complaints from several rasff regulars, neither eBay nor his ISP (one of the majors) will do anything, even though it's in clear violation of both their abuse policies.
Posted by Dan Taylor
Okay! Okay! I get it already!!!
Fine! You have your way of thinking and I have mine. Lets just agree to disagree!
What is with you people and your incessant need to convince me that you're right??????>
Perhaps it's a reaction to someone who comes 'round here to our playground and begins to lecture us on why we're not playing right because we don't do it the same way kids at his playground would do it?
And then lectures us on how his game is much superior to our game when we point out to him that we're not playing the game he thinks we are?
(Personally, i *enjoy* playing Calvinball...)
"Nah - this isn't Lum..."
Don't be hating on one of my favorite aliens from days gone by. I haven't seen any of the Anime or read the manga in years, but I really like the humor in that series when I was younger.
"Perhaps it's a reaction to someone who comes 'round here to our playground and begins to lecture us on why we're not playing right because we don't do it the same way kids at his playground would do it?"
Huh? Who's LECTURING????? I was just presenting another point of view!!! What's with this 'our playground' vs. 'your playground' nonsense????
You know what? You're right. You're RIGHT. GO and play in 'your playground.' Apparently I don't fit in.
HAVE BLOODY FUN.
Guess I'm going to be considered a TROLL now. If I am, then look back at my thread---ever stop to consider that maybe, just maybe, the reason you get so many trolls here is because you create them?
Take a look back at ALL your threads...I would be willings to bet you anything that 99.9% of the people who don't agree with you, you end up labelling as trolls. Why is that?
Do it. I dare you.
AAAAAAAAAARRRRRRRRRRRGGGGGGGGHHHHHH!!!!!!!!
Dan Taylor: Okay! Okay! I get it already!!! Fine! You have your way of thinking and I have mine. Lets just agree to disagree! What is with you people and your incessant need to convince me that you're right??????
Luigi Novi: I don't think anyone here has an "incessant need to convince anyone that they're right". You simply asked a question, and we answered it. We thought that's what you wanted. And I think most of the responses here were very polite to you, weren't they? I even complimented you on your honesty and civility in disagreeing with Peter above. I don't see how merely expressing our opinion--in answer to a question you posed--constitutes an attempt to make you agree. :-)
Dan Taylor: Huh? Who's LECTURING????? I was just presenting another point of view!!!
Luigi Novi: Well, you did a bit more than that, actually. You criticized us for answering your question by accusing us of trying to make you agree with us. "Lecturing" isn't the precise word I would use to describe that, but at the same time, I wouldn't call it "just presenting another point of view". You seemed to become genuinely angry that most of the others here disagreed with you, even though they explained to you why they did so, and politely. Why is this?
Dan Taylor: Guess I'm going to be considered a TROLL now. If I am, then look back at my thread---ever stop to consider that maybe, just maybe, the reason you get so many trolls here is because you create them?
Luigi Novi: No, but I'd be more than willing to do so, if the evidence for that assertion existed. A troll is someone who deliberately tries to invoke a negative emotional reaction from others on the Net. You're saying that if someone began doing this after seeing that others on a thread disagreed with him, that this would be the fault of the others? Obviously, this would just be an attempt to absolve the troll of responsibility for their actions, since mere disagreement with someone does not justify trolling.
Dan Taylor: Take a look back at ALL your threads...I would be willings to bet you anything that 99.9% of the people who don't agree with you, you end up labelling as trolls. Why is that? Do it. I dare you.
Luigi Novi: Actually, there are plenty of memorable threads that I've read and participated in on this site since its inception, and I've even archived many of them in Word documents that I keep on my computer. They show me and many others here disagreeing with both Peter and with others, and they do not depict such people being labeled as trolls for mere disagreement, even when they're in the minority.
Dan,
It's kinda chilly here in southeast Michigan. The wind is howling. I am wearing a sweater and I have wrapped a throw around me to keep warm. I haven't yet turned on the furnace, even though it has been in the 30s a couple nights in the last few days. Brrr. I sometimes think I am more than frugal, perhaps a little miserly. Other than that, life is treating me just fine.
Talk to you soon.
Dan, you're only going to risk being labeled a troll if you chose certain course of action here. And, no, disagreeing with even 100% of the people here on a given topic doesn't get you tagged as a troll. I once brought up a point about Iraq that had everybody disagreeing with me, and a couple of people borderline flaming me, for the better part of a day. Next topic, everything started over from zero. It's not whether someone disagrees or not, it's how one comports oneself that invites a troll label.
Now, you may be getting close to that line in some people's eyes by your above reaction. Here's why. Bill Myers, Mike Weber and I all responded to you on this topic. Myers was fairly neutral, I was trying to be as neutral and polite as possible and Mike Weber, while being neutral in his own way (Mike's examples have to be read in a friendly tone of voice rather then a nasty one. He's actually a really nice guy and I say that as someone who has been in many disagreements with him.) can be taken the wrong way, taken with a grain of salt or ignored. Plus, please bare in mind that Mike was responding to a rather... impolite... posting of yours. Instead, you ignored Bill's post, ignored my post and went off the rails about Mike Weber's post.
Pick and chose what you feel is worth responding to at any given time. There are some people here who don't respond to others here at all or very infrequently. There are some here who respond to everybody because they don't take anything here the least bit personally. Figure out what works for you.
Again, chill out a bit and don't get so flustered with it.. This is a fun little blog, even if you disagree with others here, if you don't take anything too personally, don't read everything like it's meant to be insulting and pick and chose how much you really want to debate some points here.
Oh, and cutting out silly stuff like this...
"HAVE BLOODY FUN.
Guess I'm going to be considered a TROLL now. If I am, then look back at my thread---ever stop to consider that maybe, just maybe, the reason you get so many trolls here is because you create them?
Take a look back at ALL your threads...I would be willings to bet you anything that 99.9% of the people who don't agree with you, you end up labelling as trolls. Why is that?
Do it. I dare you.
AAAAAAAAAARRRRRRRRRRRGGGGGGGGHHHHHH!!!!!!!!
... will go a long way towards not having too many people here wanting to lump you in with the other trolls here.
Cheers.
You lose that bet, Dan. Almost everyone on here disagrees with other people here on a regular basis.
And nobody has called you a troll. But the screaming at the end of your last post isn't helping you.
You had an opinion. That's fine, but it's also fine for other people to explain why they disagree with you. Most of the responses have bee quite calm, while you've been going, "AAAAAAAAAARRRRRRRRRRRGGGGGGGGHHHHHH!!!!!!!!"
Yes, we disagree with you. But just because several people are disagreeing with you at the same time doesn't mean that we don't think that you have a right to an opinion. Nobody is oppressing you, Dan, nobody even wants you to hold back.
But at the same time, we're not going to stop disagreeing with you or writing out our own thoughts on the matter. We might want to keep discussing something even after the person who started that part of the conversation has left.
And yes, some of your comments have had a lecturing tone. Statements like "Okay! Okay! I get it already!!!" sounds like a lecture. Perhaps you're just not used to having several people respond to your statements at once, but that's how message boards work. We're not a mob who are all attacking you, each individual person is stating an opinion. Those individual opinions can sometimes add up to an onslaught, but they weren't meant that way since each person was only trying to state their own opinion.
Wow. I started typing as soon as I saw Dan's post, but three people posted their's before I finished typing.
That's another odd thing about the internet, Dan. Sometimes you get several responses at once just because each person didn't realise that the others were typing already. :)
Guess I'm going to be considered a TROLL now.
Nope. You presented your argument reasonably (remember, in my first response I said I could almost see your PoV) I just didn't agree and presented a different PoV.
Trolls tend to throw personal insults rather than present their thoughts coherently.
No harm, no foul. See you at the next topic/debate. :)
Now we've had our very own Howard Dean moment. :)
What happened to Dan Taylor? Up to the last one or two pots there was a seemingly regular conversation -- quite calm in the standards of this blog. But then all these capital letters.
Strange.
Actually, Jason brings up a good point that I should have thought of due to my own past with the old style BB's. We're all answering or disagreeing on our own and as only one person, but we’re doing it at more or less the same time. Dan mentioned above that he’s new to the blog and, from some other comments in that post, I think new to blogging regularly.
Am I right in my guess Dan?
See, years ago now, I got on to a BB for the first time and picked one where they were discussing Star Trek. Yeah, I wasn’t looking for polarized POV’s. I mentioned some point I had (I don’t remember what it was now) and had 30 or 40 posts responding in no time at all to disagree with me. Some responses phrased in very brusque manners I might add. It felt like a pile-on to me at the time.
My buddy, whose computer I was using, pointed out that they weren’t all disagreeing with me together, they were all just doing it individually at the same time. It happened to him, and everybody else, all the time. It was an obvious when you thought about it, but I can definitely understand someone not seeing it that way at first.
Dan, no matter how it seemed, if you are relatively new to blogging and if that’s how you took it, we’re not all jumping on you as a group to disagree with you or dismiss your ideas or views. The thing with blogs like this is that you’re not having one discussion with 20 other people; you’re having 20 different conversations on one subject with 20 different people and with frequent crosstalk.
No pile on. Again, chill out, relax and just enjoy the debates.
Hmmm. Micha brings up an interesting point. Can someone check to see if the Dan Taylor who first appeared has the same URL as the one who last appeared on this thread? Could it be an imposter?
J. Alexander-
Dan Taylor is Dan Taylor. Trust me on this one.
And everyone play nice. Don't make me pull over this Internet.
Kath
I thought most of us were playing nice. Some of us have even been bending over backwards to convince him that we’re not engaging in a metaphorical gang beating of him or his opinions. Are any of us, by your perspective, trying too hard and coming off as condescending instead? I was a bit worried about that with some of my posts, but I was trying to make my points to him as clearly and as understandably as possible.
Over did it?
Jeez... I'm having a hell of a problem with typos today. I really need some rest.
Take a look back at ALL your threads...I would be willings to bet you anything that 99.9% of the people who don't agree with you, you end up labelling as trolls. Why is that?
Dan, it doesn't seem to be so much disagreement that gets you labeled as a troll than people disliking the principles you demonstrate you live by or failing to comprehend them fearing you don't live by principles at all. Either seems to give them what they feel is a justification to abandon any pretense of consistency when principle doesn't get them what they want.
Although I live by rules, the most recent assessment of me by some of the people responding to you -- without referring to anything I've said to deserve the assessment -- is that I'm a shit.
Let me offer a word of advice to you, Dan. When it comes to looking to anyone around here for tips on proper blog behavior, Mike is not the place to go. Actually, at this point, Mike is someone you should avoid as often as possible. His status as a nuisance, a troll or a trollish presence on these boards is quite legitimately earned. And it’s not just a viewpoint that the posters on this blog have. Note the following exchange from the August 29, 2007 Miss South Carolina Teen thread:
_____________________________________________________________
Posted by: Mike at August 31, 2007 11:48 PM
Are you saying art is qualified by consensus? That if enough people, or one, or the right person disqualifies as art what you are credited with writing, it isn't art?
No. And no. But thanks for suggesting something that didn't remotely relate to what I said.
You said "I don't think that most of the crap that passes for entertainment and music could reasonably be termed art..." but withheld a definition of art. Thank you for making my suggestion -- which gives you a point of reference from which to provide a definition of art if you feel like it -- relevant regardless of its remoteness from what you are thinking.
Posted by: Peter David at September 1, 2007 01:34 AM
"You said "I don't think that most of the crap that passes for entertainment and music could reasonably be termed art..." but withheld a definition of art. Thank you for making my suggestion -- which gives you a point of reference from which to provide a definition of art if you feel like it -- relevant regardless of its remoteness from what you are thinking."
Didn't do that either. However, if it's any consolation, it could be easily said--based upon your track record on this board--that you've transformed obtuseness into an art form. So you can take some pride in that, I suppose.
Done with you now.
PAD
____________________________________________________
Just some advice. Ignore or not as you wish.
Dan, notice how Jerry will visit a page to gather evidence, yet obstruct your own review of it by withholding its location.
He only seems to stand by the principle that never let him down: whatever you can get away with is always an option.
Posted by Jerry Chandler
Actually, Jason brings up a good point that I should have thought of due to my own past with the old style BB's. We're all answering or disagreeing on our own and as only one person, but we’re doing it at more or less the same time. Dan mentioned above that he’s new to the blog and, from some other comments in that post, I think new to blogging regularly.
(First, if i came across as too snarky, i apologise; this thread has led to all too many people nver before seen here coming in and lecturing us, and i guess i just conflated some of the unfamiliar names... Though Dan was getting a little defensive/everyone's-out-of-step-but-me by that time, it seemed to me...)
If you think this is bad, you ought to have been in an amateur press alliance, back in the days even before BBS's. An APA consisted (well, consists, there are a few still going, i'm in one) of paper fanzines containing anything at all the author feels like doing ... plus Mailing Comments - responses to *previous* zines by other people. Sorta like a BBS/Usenet group with a latency operiod of two months.
So in January, Member A says something that seems stupid or offensive to some of the other members. By March, he's thought better of it, and is apologising, but meanwhile, Mwembers X, Y and Z are either correcting him or flaming him.
Come May, Member A is either lashing back at X and Y and telling Z She completely Misunderstood. Meanwhile, Member B is taking A's side in an intemperate manner, and Member C is telling them all just to Grow Up...
One little remark can lead to literally *years* of bickering. (And entertainment - or otherwise - for the bystanders.)
Posted by Kath the Wife David
Dan Taylor is Dan Taylor. Trust me on this one.
Not, i trust the Dan(iel) Taylor i've known for years here in Atlanta...
Although i'm sure Daniel would have a lot better idea how things work - not to mention knowing me and responding differently to my remarks, than we've seen...
Posted by Mike
Dan, notice how Jerry will visit a page to gather evidence, yet obstruct your own review of it by withholding its location.
It took me about ten seconds using Google, and about five using the archive listing at the bottom of the page, to find the thread in question. If i really wante do, it ould have taken me just a few more seconds to find your posts in it.
But why would i bother? The thread is over and done, and you contributed nothing but a lowering of the signal-to-noise ratio, anyway.
Dan, notice how Jerry will visit a page to gather evidence, yet obstruct your own review of it by withholding its location.It took me about ten seconds using Google, and about five using the archive listing at the bottom of the page, to find the thread in question. If i really wante do, it ould have taken me just a few more seconds to find your posts in it.
But why would i bother?
How does you asking "why would i bother [searching for an unlinked page]?" not simply demonstrate my point?
The thread is over and done, and you contributed nothing but a lowering of the signal-to-noise ratio, anyway.
Dan asked a question, and I provided an answer no one has demonstrated is implausible.
If you think this is bad, you ought to have been in an amateur press alliance, back in the days even before BBS's. An APA consisted (well, consists, there are a few still going, i'm in one) of paper fanzines containing anything at all the author feels like doing ... plus Mailing Comments - responses to *previous* zines by other people. Sorta like a BBS/Usenet group with a latency operiod of two months.
So in January, Member A says something that seems stupid or offensive to some of the other members. By March, he's thought better of it, and is apologising, but meanwhile, Mwembers X, Y and Z are either correcting him or flaming him.
Come May, Member A is either lashing back at X and Y and telling Z She completely Misunderstood. Meanwhile, Member B is taking A's side in an intemperate manner, and Member C is telling them all just to Grow Up...
One little remark can lead to literally *years* of bickering. (And entertainment - or otherwise - for the bystanders.)
tell me about it. I was one of the early members of the late great X-APA. At one time it was, pound for pound, the best collection of amateur comics fandom writing around, in my humble opinion. Then there was The Feud. The details of said feud are too silly to mention, but the feeling it created were not. When it was over...so was the apa, more or less. At the very least, the family--and I still consider some of the members to be among my very favorite people ever, even the ones I've lost touch with--was never the same.
I'm still glad I was in it--for starters, it's directly responsible for my meeting my wife. It's also nice to have the closest thing to a diary I've ever kept. But if the internet makes it too easy for trollish dolts like you-know-who to make pests of themselves, the apa made it all too easy for decent people to get embroiled in long term feuds.
I have a feeling apas were a terrifying glimpse into what it will be like to communicate with alien life forms many light years away. One intemperate message and the next thing you know it's all ray guns and screaming and stuff.
"I have a feeling apas were a terrifying glimpse into what it will be like to communicate with alien life forms many light years away. One intemperate message and the next thing you know it's all ray guns and screaming and stuff."
I actually remember something like that idea being used once. The radio series Alien Worlds had an over zealous Earth Force military leader attack a group of aliens because of a communications breakdown with Earth followed by scrambled transmissions from Earth describing an alien assault launched from Mars. After lots of stupidity and unnecessary deaths, the communications net comes back up and the attack is stopped by the not under attack Earth Government. The scrambled communications from Earth detailing the attack was the Mercury Theatre's War of the Worlds, still traveling through space on it's trip to infinity.
And then, of course, there's always Galaxy Quest.
Here's another one on that theme--Carl Sagan said that some people complained about the plaque put on one of our space probes--Voyager?--that showed two naked humans with the male holding out an upraised arm in greeting because they feared that aliens would misinterpret it as proof that the Nazis won WWII.
I wasm't actually suggesting that Dan Taylor was not Dan Taylor. I was just surprised by his reaction. although, Jerry is right, he might have felt people were ganging up on him, just like Mike weber felt he was being lectured to by a newcomer. I personaly did not find ang of the replies he received to be very aggresive -- I've seen worse here -- but that's just my perspective.
In any case, dan Taylor seems to have left. Somebody should develop some sound-emoticon that will sound like a door slamming and play whenever you read the relevant post.
I think that some of the time, but not all, when people misinterpret a message in a way that causes them to perceive it as an insult or offence, it is indicative of their own state of mind -- in a way they were looking for a fight or expecting it. But this is not a general rule.
I find the idea of Dan Taylor (or anybody else new to this blog) actually going over any or all of the Mike-discussions we've had, to be quite funny. Imagine if aliens got hold of those discussions.
Take a look back at ALL your threads...I would be willings to bet you anything that 99.9% of the people who don't agree with you, you end up labelling as trolls. Why is that?
Dan, it doesn't seem to be so much disagreement that gets you labeled as a troll than people disliking the principles you demonstrate you live by or failing to comprehend them fearing you don't live by principles at all. Either seems to give them what they feel is a justification to abandon any pretense of consistency when principle doesn't get them what they want.
Although I live by rules, the most recent assessment of me by some of the people responding to you -- without referring to anything I've said to deserve the assessment -- is that I'm a shit.
[Bill] I have a feeling apas were a terrifying glimpse into what it will be like to communicate with alien life forms many light years away. One intemperate message and the next thing you know it's all ray guns and screaming and stuff.
Bill's observation seems to literally demonstrate the plausibility of my answer to Dan's question.
"Here's another one on that theme--Carl Sagan said that some people complained about the plaque put on one of our space probes--Voyager?--that showed two naked humans with the male holding out an upraised arm in greeting because they feared that aliens would misinterpret it as proof that the Nazis won WWII."
I wonder why they weren't concerned about the far more likely misinterpretation that the world was conquered by nudists.
PAD
Hello all,
Sorry for going all Howard Dean on y'all...been a bad week at work and I think I'm coming down with a cold...all these posts about my 'behavior' on this board didn't help either.
But step back with me and look at the big piture for a minute, will you?
I voiced my opinions about this UFC thing in one reply. Then, someone mentioned Chicago, and I mentioned the old Chicago Comic-Cons of the early--mid 80's.
There have been no less than TWENTY-SIX responses back to my UFC rant from yesterday at noon till now, of everyone wanting to get their licks in on that topic--reminded me of vultures swooping down to pick a carcass clean.
Guess how many replies I've received on the comparatively innocuous topic of comic book convention history?
Zero. Zip. Nada. No replies.
I mean, in its heyday, the Chicago Comic-Con was almost as big a deal as Worldcon. I didn't just meet writers and artists there--I mert LEGENDS--Gil Kane, Julie Schwartz, etc. Their panel discussions didn't take place in some dinky little meeting room---they had them in the hotel BALLROOM.
I'm sorry, I was wrong.
Your need to prove to me that you're right isn't incessant.
It's obsessive.
I tried to take the discussion back to a neutral, civil digression, but you people simply would not let it go.
(Sound of door lock gently clicking shut behind him...)
I can see it now. Gleeple and Zort from the planet Fuzzbop find the Voyager probe, play the gold record, and say, "Sweet Frozhnich, that looks like a fun place that we've never heard of. But maybe we shouldn't go, I mean, look at this plaque, maybe some guy with a stupid mustache won their second global conflict and we'd get put into a camp!" To which, of course, Zort would reply, "What's a mustache?" Now, personally, if I was an alien life form, and I found the Voyager, with it's inscription of naked people, I'd be on the horn to my home planet to get the franchise rights for a clothing store to cover all these naked space probe launching hippies.
And at no time, ever, did I think after reading Bill's post, that maybe the probe should brush more and then use probewash. Nope, not me. Never.
"I wonder why they weren't concerned about the far more likely misinterpretation that the world was conquered by nudists."
As a practicing, card-carrying nudist myself, my first reaction was "holy crap! Somebody's figured out our master plan to take over the world with alien help!!" and to immediately report this to HQ....
But then I realized you were joking, so...never mind...
Uh, Dan, where do you keep that card?
Please don't answer that. ;-)
I wonder how we would feel if an unmanned (or unaliened) spaceship came here with a picture of naked aliens on it.
He carries it. So, clearly, it's in his hand.
Dan, I think you need to work some Jedi magic here...along the lines of "these aren't the nudists you're looking for....they aren't trying to take over the world...no, they haven't aleady taken over the world, either...go about your business....I SAID, go about your business...hey, aren't those the droids you're looking for? Yeah, those droids, on the back of that beat up XP-34..."
As for people seemingly cherry-picking your topics to respond do...
While your comment on the old Chicago Con was insightful, what about it demands a response? It's a nice bit of nostalgia, but unless folks here have actually been to it pre Wizard, what do they have to say about it? On the other hand, your comments about UFC, presenting a view that was contrary to many of the opinions already posted here, was clearly asking for debate. I don't know that anyone was setting out trying to convince you that you were wrong, more that they were simply responding to your opinion with their own. And while I haven't checked, I don't recall anyone blasting you for trying to convince all of us that we're wrong.
For the most part, we debate here. We don't try to "win," with a few trllsh exceptions, we don't make our comments personal...see above reference to trlls...and we try to have good, spirited, intelligent conversation as much as a blog can allow.
And every once in a while, we talk about zombies. It seems to be a recurrent theme.
Wasn't there an issue of Alien Fire that ended on the fatal reproductive rights of an alien crew returning home with artifacts was triggered by a cheap dime-store game where you role the ball-bearings into the eyes of a monkey holding a banana? They were all like, "How can a civilization survive by distributing these hazardous pornographic materials?"
"I wonder how we would feel if an unmanned (or unaliened) spaceship came here with a picture of naked aliens on it."
How do you know it hasn't already? Maybe that's the real reason for the Roswell coverup? Some ultra-conservative found the ship first, was so affronted by the display of alien hardware, and decided, for the sake of protecting young americans, covered it up?
We don't try to "win," with a few trllsh exceptions, we don't make our comments personal...see above reference to trlls...and we try to have good, spirited, intelligent conversation as much as a blog can allow.
If calling someone a shit without referring to anything they say qualifies as impersonal, sure.
"I wonder how we would feel if an unmanned (or unaliened) spaceship came here with a picture of naked aliens on it."
Easy to answer, Micha. Hefner would want to do an all-weightless green issue of Playboy, while Dobson and the rest of Focus On The Family would both denounce the fact that there are alien life forms and not allow them to be naked.
Hey, you asked. You should know not to give a mind like mine stuff to play with.
Bobb--they didn't want to protect young Americans(BTW--song's gonna be going through my head for a week, THANK you) they did it so they could go home and their wives wouldn't snicker.
I think Dan's diabolic plan is going to work. Look, everybody who has researched the subject (i.e. watched too much TV and movies) knows that 7 out 10 aliens walk around naked. So who do you think they are going to reach out to when they come to this planet? Nudists.
""I wonder how we would feel if an unmanned (or unaliened) spaceship came here with a picture of naked aliens on it."
How do you know it hasn't already? Maybe that's the real reason for the Roswell coverup? Some ultra-conservative found the ship first, was so affronted by the display of alien hardware, and decided, for the sake of protecting young americans, covered it up?"
gives all new meaning to the word coverup.
"Hefner would want to do an all-weightless green issue of Playboy,"
Unless the aliens look very much like humans, we aren't likely to find naked aliens very sexy. i mean, i liked E.T., but I wouldn't want to see him or his female counterpart in a centerfold.
Dan Taylor: "Sorry for going all Howard Dean on y'all...been a bad week at work and I think I'm coming down with a cold..."
Everyone has a bad day now and again. No biggie.
Dan Taylor: "There have been no less than TWENTY-SIX responses back to my UFC rant from yesterday at noon till now, of everyone wanting to get their licks in on that topic--reminded me of vultures swooping down to pick a carcass clean."
That's one interpretation. Another, more reasonable interpretation is the one Jerry offered: when you converse via a blog, you're having lots of conversations with lots of different people. There's no conspiracy. How could there be? Most of us have no contact with each other outside of this forum.
Dan Taylor: "Guess how many replies I've received on the comparatively innocuous topic of comic book convention history?
"Zero. Zip. Nada. No replies."
Dan, that's happened to everyone here. You throw out something you hope would be a discussion topic, and no one bites on it. There are a lot of posts competing for people's attention. Sometimes I've been the very center of attention. Sometimes I can't even get arrested around here. Usually it's nothing personal.
Take a deep breath, and accept that the world doesn't and shouldn't revolve around you. Trust me, it's better that way. Less pressure.
Dan Taylor: "Your need to prove to me that you're right isn't incessant.
"It's obsessive."
Again, a discussion requires interplay between two or more people. Otherwise, it's not a discussion. If you express an opinion, you need to be prepared for others to express contrary opinions -- even to the point of telling you, "You're wrong."
Dan Taylor: "I tried to take the discussion back to a neutral, civil digression, but you people simply would not let it go."
It's a bit... presumptuous... to join an ongoing discussion and then demand that it shift focus. Again, the world doesn't revolve around you. Neither does this blog. That's a GOOD thing. As I said -- less pressure.
Dan, it's not my blog but I am a long-time regular here, and I know I speak for a lot of people when I say: it's always nice when someone new like you comes along. The idea that you "don't fit in" or that anyone is out to get you is one that exists solely in your imagination. I, for one, welcome you with open arms.
But if you insist on interpreting everything as a personal attack, you're not going to have any fun here. And there's nothing I or anyone else can do about that. It's up to you.
Dan,
"Guess how many replies I've received on the comparatively innocuous topic of comic book convention history?
Zero. Zip. Nada. No replies."
Well, your post about the cons...
"Did you say CHICAGO? As in the legendary Chicago Comic-Con? Were you there that one summer when the convention was downtown at the Congress Hotel and THE AIR CONDITIONING BROKE DOWN?? I think they called it 'the Con of Wrath'?"
... read like a direct question to R.J. about a specific event. On top of that, and I can't speak for anybody else here, I didn't respond to it because I've never been to any of the Chicago Comic-Cons and really had no opinion on them one way or another.
"all these posts about my 'behavior' on this board didn't help either. "
Reread them. Some weren't about your behavior as much as they were explaining that you weren't being jumped on by a gang, telling you that you really shouldn't take some of the posts here the way you were as they weren't meant the way you were taking them and even our questioning ourselves as to whether you had a legitimate point from the POV of a newbie here. You've been treated very well by a number of people here.
"I voiced my opinions about this UFC thing in one reply. Then, someone mentioned Chicago, and I mentioned the old Chicago Comic-Cons of the early--mid 80's.
There have been no less than TWENTY-SIX responses back to my UFC rant from yesterday at noon till now, of everyone wanting to get their licks in on that topic--reminded me of vultures swooping down to pick a carcass clean."
All right, Dan, that's not actually true. You posted about UFC at October 24, 2007 08:42 PM, got a response, posted again on the topic at October 24, 2007 10:56 PM, threw in a quick correction (been there done that enough times) at October 24, 2007 11:13 PM, got a response directing you to the previous UFC thread and two direct responses, posted again on the topic responding to them, got three responses, posted again o it yourself, etc.
The actually count isn't one reply to twenty-six responses. It was, in a longer time period, seven UFC posts by you and only ten (eleven if you count Craig's post form October 25, 2007 11:29 AM that wasn't directed specifically at you, but rather the ongoing discussion as a whole) direct responses to your posts. Then, from your post of October 25, 2007 11:49 AM forward, most of the responses (less then twenty with another small handful addressing the new topic in general rather then you directly) have been not about UFC, but rather telling you, some very politely that you weren't being ganged up on and that it's fine to agree to disagree.
"Your need to prove to me that you're right isn't incessant.
It's obsessive.
I tried to take the discussion back to a neutral, civil digression, but you people simply would not let it go."
Several of us have. We've agreed that we're going to disagree with you. Around here, that is letting go. You have your POV, a number of us have an opposite POV and neither side is going to sway the other. That having been said prior to your October 26, 2007 08:51 AM, it would have been nice if you had let it go to some degree and not acted as though you've ignored all of those posts and posted yourself about how we're being "obsessive" with still trying to prove your POV wrong and ours right on the UFC matter.
Although, I'm unquestionably right when I say that the UFC losing Randy Couture this week sucks beyond all measure.
Bill Mulligan: "Here's another one on that theme--Carl Sagan said that some people complained about the plaque put on one of our space probes--Voyager?--that showed two naked humans with the male holding out an upraised arm in greeting because they feared that aliens would misinterpret it as proof that the Nazis won WWII."
I remember reading something like that a few times, but only now vaguely remember that it was credited to Sagan. My biggest ???? moment with that idea was, how would aliens even know what a Nazi was in the first place in order to be worried about it?
Dan Taylor: "As a practicing, card-carrying nudist myself, my first reaction was "holy crap! Somebody's figured out our master plan to take over the world with alien help!!" and to immediately report this to HQ...."
That's not something I would really mind that much if the majority of female nudists I encountered down in Florida looked more like Miss October and less like Ethel Merman. Er... I can of course say that as I in every way resemble a Greek god.
Why are you all looking at me like that?
Micha: "I wonder how we would feel if an unmanned (or unaliened) spaceship came here with a picture of naked aliens on it."
As a fan of THE REAL (that would be the one with Kirk) Star Trek, I must say that I have absolutely no problem with any of the female aliens Kirk... encountered... plastering their nude images all over their ship. Yes indeed... Fine with me.
Sean: "Easy to answer, Micha. Hefner would want to do an all-weightless green issue of Playboy,... "
I actually had an issue years ago where they did a mock up spoof of their future "alien girls" issue. Kirk would have been proud.
Micha: "I think Dan's diabolic plan is going to work. Look, everybody who has researched the subject (i.e. watched too much TV and movies) knows that 7 out 10 aliens walk around naked. So who do you think they are going to reach out to when they come to this planet? Nudists."
Well, yeah... If you wanna sit around watching those types of movies. Freak.
What... Oh... You mean those types of movies. The horror ones. Yeah, well, who wants to see an alien that only looks different from something that I blew it out of my nose during a bad cold due to the huge number of razor sharp teeth and claws it has naked? Well, other then the old joke about another thing that looks like...
"Unless the aliens look very much like humans, we aren't likely to find naked aliens very sexy. i mean, i liked E.T., but I wouldn't want to see him or his female counterpart in a centerfold. "
Thanks, Micha. You're getting the psychiatrist's bill for the therapy sessions that image just created the need for.
Ick...
I, for one, wonder how nudists could possibly conquer the world. I mean, if there are enough of 'em, they can take the temperate zones, sure. But they'd die of exposure trying to take parts of the U.S., Canada, and Europe! And I would NOT want to go running around naked in the desert! Or the jungle. Or New York City.
I'm just saying, I think the nudists aren't much of a threat.
Great, a double rebuttal. Thanks, Bill. You couldn't have called me and told me that you had posted on the topic while I was typing?!?
Jeez, Bill... If I can't count on you to do the little things right...
"I wonder how we would feel if an unmanned (or unaliened) spaceship came here with a picture of naked aliens on it."
I wonder how we know they were naked?
I live in a household with four cats. Considering how....strangely they act sometimes, I could believe they're an alien species, not native to Earth. And they run around nekkid all the time.
It would also explain the spread of the lolcats everywhere. It's part of their masterplan to take over the world.
Me: "We don't try to "win," with a few trllsh exceptions, we don't make our comments personal...see above reference to trlls...and we try to have good, spirited, intelligent conversation as much as a blog can allow."
Mike: "If calling someone a shit without referring to anything they say qualifies as impersonal, sure."
That's got to be some kind of effeciency record. Mike proves my first two points in 15 words.
Micha: "Unless the aliens look very much like humans, we aren't likely to find naked aliens very sexy. i mean, i liked E.T., but I wouldn't want to see him or his female counterpart in a centerfold. "
Jerry: "Thanks, Micha. You're getting the psychiatrist's bill for the therapy sessions that image just created the need for."
Happy to help :)
E.T. likes bicycle rides under the moon, long phone calls, classic movies and building electronic devices with spare parts. He dislikes people working for the government, cross-dressing and cruelty to lab animals.
On a more serious note, a very ambitious project would be to try to write a good sequel to E.T. The chances for failure are great, but if sucessful it could prove very interesting.
---------------
"That's not something I would really mind that much if the majority of female nudists I encountered down in Florida looked more like Miss October and less like Ethel Merman. Er... I can of course say that as I in every way resemble a Greek god."
I think part of the ideology of nudists is to seperate the connection between nudity and sexuality. I remeber seeing this documentary about this younf british woman who grew up in a nudist colony. It seemed the most natural thing to her. But at the same time, like many young women, she was very self conscious about her body and about people looking at her with sexuality in mind, so she began to question nudism.
------------------
"7 out 10 aliens walk around naked"
Usually aliens that are visiting earth are naked while aliens that live in galactic empires and federations are dressed. Is it possible that earth is a nudist resort for aliens?
------------------
Obeekris: "I live in a household with four cats. Considering how....strangely they act sometimes, I could believe they're an alien species, not native to Earth. And they run around nekkid all the time."
Humans view having fur as an alternative to clothes or the Star Wars movies would have been pornographic.
I remeber a bit in the Muppet Show in which the bald eagle realizes that they are all naked under their fur and feathers.
Dan...there's no other way to say it...you've got a chip on your shoulder as wide as the great outdoors. You're looking for insult that isn't there, and perceiving a gang mentality that likewise isn't present.
Have I seen people pile on trolls? Yes. But you didn't present yourself trollishly, nor did I see people treating you in that manner. Yet you continued to act as if people were treating you like a troll, and posters hereabouts began to display--at most--mild frustration with you as you painted yourself as a victim in the making when (as near as I could tell) that was the intent of no one here. The result is that you've left a lot of people scratching their heads while having inserted yourself into a self-fulfilling prophecy.
Why did no one comment on your Chicago comment? You answered your own question: It was innocuous. There didn't seem to be much to add, so no one added anything.
Frankly, I'm still unclear as to what it was you were trying to say or trying to prove. Perhaps that's just me being limited or oblivious. If you can boil it down for me to fifteen words or less, I'll do my best to address it. But if you do, please lose the chip, because you're really not doing yourself any favors.
To convey to you a visual image of the way you're coming across: Imagine if someone came up to you and said he wanted to ask you a question, but he had his fists cocked defensively in front of his face in a boxing guard position and kept bobbing and weaving as he asked, as if afraid you were going to try and punch him in the head. Now I suspect that's not your intent...but speaking for myself, at lest, that's how you seem to me.
PAD