Jedi Council Forums - Making the Boards Safe for Ms. Traviss's Return: An All-Around Pledge of Good Conduct

Locked Topic | Read Only Topic | Previous Active Topic | Next Active Topic

« 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 » - Previous | Next | Reload

Author	Topic: Making the Boards Safe for Ms. Traviss's Return: An All-Around Pledge of Good Conduct
Master_Keralys Title: Manager Emeritus Registered: Oct '03	Date Posted: 10/17/05 12:22pm Subject: RE: Making the Boards Safe for Ms. Traviss's Return: An All-Around Pledge of Good Conduct - Date Edited: 10/17/05 12:24pm (2 edits total) Edited By: Master_Keralys
	Some of us have. Did you read my last couple posts? I went back and reread the entire thing just to make sure I read it right. You're right, she wasn't chased off. NOR did she do anything deserving of anything like the criticism she's had heaped on her. The point of this thread is to restore enough civility about her - there's certainly been a lack of it since she left, you can't even argue that - that she can come back if she wants to. The2ndQuest, thank you. I appreciate your work as a mod on this issue. I also appreciate the fact that as a board, we're not willing to put up with flaming. Borleias - I may have time to respond to the rest of your post later. But as for your comment that I was just flaming without using flaming phrases - I apologize if that's how you took it. I was doing nothing of the sort. It seems to me that a lot of people in certain sectors of the board have a tendency to read way too much into a simple reply. Seems to me, in fact, that this is the basic cause of our current set of contentions at its most basic level. When I argue with you and poke holes in your premise aggressively, I am not flaming. When I insult your intelligence, I am. There's a difference. Oh - and if people want to see what the real behavior of certain posters on these boards has been like elsewhere, and see just how out of line it's been, by all means follow the link posted by Borleias above, talking about Karen's allegedly attacking other authors' numbers. Read and learn. Makes it pretty clear how things really are. - Keralys -----signature----- God made man. Man rejected God. God became the man Jesus Christ, died and rose again to life, saving man from himself. The craziest story ever told. The truest.
	Locked Topic \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
GrandAdmiralJello Title: Emperor • EUC • JCC Registered: Nov '00	Date Posted: 10/17/05 12:31pm Subject: RE: Making the Boards Safe for Ms. Traviss's Return: An All-Around Pledge of Good Conduct - Date Edited: 10/17/05 12:43pm (5 edits total) Edited By: GrandAdmiralJello
	Are you basically a "maximalist"? If so, perhaps we are on the same side more often than we are not. However, if I see that there are enough people fighting more or less on my side, generally I refrain from putting my oar in the water. So maybe I'm not fighting because you already are. I'm an empiricist. Whatever the facts display is whatever I support (sorry for the passive voice). So in this instance, yes, I'd put me on the side of maximalism. You just said, a turd that is willing to conform to arbitary standards of conduct is more impressive to you than someone who has integrity enough to tell you all the unpleasant truths and opinions instead of hiding them behind the excuse of arbitrary standards? Who says they're arbitrary? They're quite established rules of conduct that have been developed for use in polite society for millennia--I'd argue there is more impressive to me than someone who is unable--or unwilling--to do so. Any child prodigy may throw a tantrum, but that child would not be put into a position of importance by anyone. Just to make this clear, I don't think they claim superiority because of such techniques. Actually, they may think it is rather crude, like belching. But they claim intellectual superiority over those who do not know how to place the importance of the crudeness correctly (somewhere very close to the bottom). Intellectual superiority, sure. But superiority in general? No, I wouldn't put it that way. Part of being superior is practicing restraint. Maintaining the proper gravitas of someone of high stature, for instance, is something aristocracies have valued from the Roman patricians through the American Federalists. It is the distinction of a superior being that they are held by superior standards, and it is by that superiority that they can afford to coddle inferiors--simply because they're better. That's the entire concept behind élitism, and it's one I hold to. Honestly, the last is actually a tragedy of mankind, who still has not evolved to place skin-deep things like politeness in their proper place (which is quite low). Really? If you truly believe so, then I implore you to take a look at prehistory. You see, once upon a time, the person with the biggest club was the better person. All one had to do is thwack their adversaries round the head, and they've proved that they're better. Then came something called civilization. You see, people realized that they live together in communities and work together to advance themselves. Though the best still would need to rise to the top, there were other virtues aside from brawn (or brains, in this case) and those were important. You can advocate Teutonic barbarism if you'd like, but I'd recommend that so long as you're in polite society (e.g. TFN, rather than SDN), then you'd best follow their standards. Regression is not good. Nevertheless, while I'd agree in our imperfect world that people who are rude do not get far, people who are incompetent shouldn't get anywhere. If they get farther ahead with their politeness than a competent that's rude, does that not suggest a fundamental flaw in our society to you? Do you want an engineer who's sole virtue is that he's polite? An engineer is a person who follows orders. He's directed to design/research/develop something, and he does it. There's nothing beyond sheer brainpower involved. An engineer is not an impressive person because they've got a limited scope. Here's a better example. Do you want a Chief Executive Office who's sole virtue is economic knowledge? All low-level positions have fundamental requisites, yes. The better one gets, the more requirements there are. A CEO should not merely have tact, he ought to have business savvy. Similarly, a head researcher should not merely have engineering knowledge, he should have speechcraft skill to make presentations. A rude genius and a polite idiot are both deficient and they're both inferior. If we want to get into hierarchical standards, since they seem more understandable, I look down my nose at the both of them. Neither of them are worth my time. However, since I hold myself to higher standards, I do not allow this consideration to dominate my behavior towards them. To do so would be dismissive of the merits they already possess and would be irresponsible on my part. Futhermore, they would be neglectful of the notion that every person is entitled to decent treatment (see the Terms of Service, in this instance--or apply any Enlightenment doctrine you'd like to) and as a superior individual, I hold myself to better standards. A mod, for instance, could easily call someone that posts a silly thread a "dumbhead". The reason they do not is because they hold themselves to higher standards. Such standards should be applied to anyone who considers themselves superior--a rude genius is therefore not superior, merely better at one thing and inferior at another. To be superior is to be better in all or most things, that is what characterizes a superior individual. Gentlemen like Cæsar and Napoléon were not dubbed ubermensch simply because they had one or two skills, but were generally superior individuals. Though l'Empereur was rather rude, he was known for liberal statecraft and the descendant of Venus was the epitome of politeness, clemency, and courtesy. Those attributes were just as important to their stellar success as their skill at the art of war. Your reasoning would have them simply be more worthy because they are better at killing people, and need not have any other concern. Were that their only skill, they'd be no better regarded as Attila the Hun or Ghenghis Khan--mere barbarians with a single skill. They would not possess this virtus that would mark them as 'superior' individuals. Nobody expects you to. However, they do prove a certain integrity and honesty, and is a release from the fakeness that goes on in the world all day. Also, to say that a otherwise good post deserves contempt because it incorporated a couple flames is style over substance and thus a logical fallacy. You've made an entailment error. Contempt is a form of regard for a person or thing. I can easily be contemptuous of a person's methods and realize that they're correct. There is no logical fallacy because I do not doubt the logic of the individual--there is no error in thinking. You seem to think that giving respect to a person who doesn't prove themselves more intelligent is dishonesty. I call it courtesy. Respect isn't a single attribute. It's not a case of having respect or not. I generally respect everyone, even those I absolutely dislike. Disrespect, to me, is juvenile and proves one no better than the individual they do not respect. I, for instance, loathe fundamentalists. Do I give them disrespect? No--they simple are unrespected. That's the essential difference. I respect you as a user. I give additional respect on the basis that you frequently make intelligent posts. However, I do not respect your atttitude towards those who haven't "proven themselves." I respect X as a user. I give additional respect to X on the basis he's courteous. I give even more respect to X on the basis that he sometimes, though not often, says something right. So though I may respect one more than the other, I still respect both and most importantly, I set standards for myself above and beyond the general rules of the board (which ought to be followed, no matter how arbitrary [they're not] they seem--that's what you agree to when you signed up). Being friendly isn't dishonest, it's what is expected. Pretending to like someone may be dishonest, but I am perfectly respectful of those I dislike. Isn't it rather arbitrary to decide that if someone did not conform to arbitrary, indoctrinated norms in constructing his paragraph, despite putting his life's knowledge and reasoning in it, they've failed to use it? No. See the above parts on superiority and what that means. That's not really the argument anyway. Might makes Right is Mod Abuse. A better way to put it is that If He is Correct, He is not Wrong because He swore a Little. If He is Wrong, He Does Not become Correct because His Opponent Swore. Put the battle in reasoning, not rhetoric. Rhetoric and reason are inextricably linked. Reasoning is unimportant if one does not have the rhetorical skills to demonstrate them. One most "Show work" in math and write reports in science--rhetoric is as important as--and sometimes is a part of--reasoning. But like I said above, he's not wrong because he swore. He's right, but it doesn't mean much if one has to resort to swearing to do it. He must have pretty crummy skills if he has to use crude terms as a substitute for better demonstration. To the argument in specific. I think 3 million is silly and ridiculously low. However, here's a problem. Ms. Traviss isn't a normal user: she's a user with authority. GrandAdmiralJello may say that the clones are special forces, but GrandAdmiralJello better have material or reasoning to back that up. Ms. Traviss, on the other hand, is a qualified author and though her words are not canon, she's speaking from the official canonical perspective. Curtis Saxton sniping has often been cited as a justification for this conduct--it's not a fair comparison. The SWTC is unofficial, and that's as valid for attack (note: the material can be attacked, not the person) as anything--but his canonical contributions are inassailable. They can be criticized, but they stand. That may not have enough reason behind it to sway you, so let's add this: scientific method. I've brought it up before, because it's something you ostensibly like to follow. I mentioned I'm an empiricist, and this has a lot to do with it. Canon is our factual record. Canon says 3 million clones. We can argue about how little this is 'til the cows come home, but the fact of the matter is that it's the factual number. Can it be changed? Sure, but attacking those who are trying to provide a sort of reasoning for it is a case of trying to force those using proper scientific method to make the material suit the hypothesis. Fact: 3 million clones Hypothesis: They must be special forces. Scientific? Yes. Hypothesis: A lot of clones are required to subdue a galaxy. Fact: There most be more than 3 million clones. Bzzzzt! Error, error. The facts cannot be twisted to suit the hypothesis. Also: keep and mind that scientific does not equate to true. It just means that it fits the facts. Futhermore, with your arguments in mind, keep in mind also that logical does not mean truthful. It merely means valid. Validity is not the same as veridity, as I often point out. I'm sure that Ms. Traviss doesn't have any personal stake in how many clones there are. She's just trying to explain why so little clones are around from an official perspective. And lastly, read what E_S said. What makes a VIP different? The fact that they're VIPs. They're guests of the board management and the management saw fit to give them special status. By the rules of this very board you've agreed to follow by registering, they automatically and unquestionably are worthy of more respect. Forget the Enlightnment theory and classical virtues I preached earlier, even--this board is private property and whatever the management says goes. That's the bottom line, if we have to go that low. I'd hope that a reasonable and intelligent man like you (and your colleagues) would understand my reasoning from earlier without having to resort to this rather blunt statement. If Dr. Saxton posted here, I would expect each and every single user here to treat him with the courtesy due any other user. If he was VIPed, which he likely would be, then I'd demand that each and every single user treat him with courtesy due to the wishes of the board management. EDIT: Whoops, "bored management" EDIT again: Too much subjunctive. More indicative added for emphasis and oomph. -----signature----- SPQR Vates Jυλιαδις Moribus antiquis res stat Romana virisque - Ennius Tu regere imperio populos, Romanæ, memento; hæ tibi erunt artes; pascisque imponere morem, parcere subjectis et debellare superbos - Virgil
	Locked Topic \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
RogueWompRat Registered: Feb '03	Date Posted: 10/17/05 12:49pm Subject: RE: Making the Boards Safe for Ms. Traviss's Return: An All-Around Pledge of Good Conduct
	Mm. Good point. God knows enough people here bash Zahn, KJA, Hambly, and Saxton (I just don't like Saxton's style much, for my part). Style? The man writes techincal books. You just don't like the conclusions he came up with. -----signature----- "the Force is between you, me, the tree, the rock, everywhere..."
	Locked Topic \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
Esplin9466 Registered: Oct '02	Date Posted: 10/17/05 1:26pm Subject: RE: Making the Boards Safe for Ms. Traviss's Return: An All-Around Pledge of Good Conduct
	Master_Keralys posted: Oh - and if people want to see what the real behavior of certain posters on these boards has been like elsewhere, and see just how out of line it's been, by all means follow the link posted by Borleias above, talking about Karen's allegedly attacking other authors' numbers. Read and learn. Makes it pretty clear how things really are. Wow, that's terrible. -----signature----- Nom Anor WILL return . . . eventually! Recipient of the Golden Ewok™ No-Prize. "Why . . . why did she choose you? What makes you able to defeat me, defeat me here?" "The place is not what matters, it is the man."
	Locked Topic \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
RK_Striker_JK_5 Registered: Jul '03	Date Posted: 10/17/05 1:42pm Subject: RE: Making the Boards Safe for Ms. Traviss's Return: An All-Around Pledge of Good Conduct
	I followed that link as well... Shakes head That is not good at all. -----signature----- E-married to the wonderful DarthIshtar. Now also her Padawan. Member of the Y.J.K. Revolution Staring into the Darkness http://boards.theforce.net/beyond_the_saga/b10477/27537567/p1/?23
	Locked Topic \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
Jedi Ben Registered: Jul '99	Date Posted: 10/17/05 1:45pm Subject: RE: Making the Boards Safe for Ms. Traviss's Return: An All-Around Pledge of Good Conduct - Date Edited: 10/17/05 2:19pm (1 edits total) Edited By: Jedi Ben
	Indeed, I haven't such an excellent piece of evidence for proving that Kevin Smith nailed the purpose of the internet in Jay And Silent Bob Strike Back for ages. Oh, and Havac, sad to say that this thread of yours is developing in a sadly ironic direction given what you created for. I mean a thread you created to foster good conduct has become a battle ground over the nature of it! Sad really. JB -----signature----- Excellence: "You are the forum's Quick Ben." SW EU fans: John Ostrander needs your help! http://www.comix4sight.com
	Locked Topic \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
Qu_Klaani Registered: Mar '04	Date Posted: 10/17/05 1:56pm Subject: RE: Making the Boards Safe for Ms. Traviss's Return: An All-Around Pledge of Good Conduct
	Well if we're going to point to how people have acted elsewhere then perhaps we should look to Karen's livejournal post shortly after the debate about 3 mil started, in which she was rambling about how much she was annoyed about someone, its entirely possible it wasnt to do with what happened shortly before as she didnt name names, but it seems unlikely. Anyway, in this entry she had this to say: Karen Traviss posted: Something got right up our collective noses. So we vented our spleen to each other, unable to target the object of our shared rage - not with the ordnance we preferred, anyway - and felt a bit better. And it's at times like this that I say thank God for Mando'a. Developing the language has saved my sanity more than once. Driven to the brink of ripping someone's trachea out of their pitifully unworthy neck, I can now step back from the precipice by rushing to my spreadsheet and creating a few more choice insults and anatomically impossible instructions. I might be massivley mistaken, but my point is that people have every damned right to think what they like, and in some places they can say it, so whilst this forum has strict rules about what can and can not be said how we act elsewhere should have no bearing on the debate here. If a poster chooses to vent about something here on a completly different forum then they are surely allowed to. -----signature----- "Perhaps George Lucas should have copied the methods of Peter Jackson in order to make the otherworldly corruption of Anakin's soul more obvious to those who can't fill in the lines without slow-motion close-ups and pounding heart-beat sound effects"
	Locked Topic \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
Master_Keralys Title: Manager Emeritus Registered: Oct '03	Date Posted: 10/17/05 2:58pm Subject: RE: Making the Boards Safe for Ms. Traviss's Return: An All-Around Pledge of Good Conduct
	That wasn't my point at all - you're correct that people have a right to vent. My point was simply that people haven't been nearly as reasonable as they claim to have been. Also, in case you haven't noticed, Karen has a penchant for tossing around phrases like that rather cavalierly, and in rather sarcastic manner. Not to say she's not expressing valid frustration, but rather that I highly doubt she'd actually rip someone's trachea out. In any case it'd be metaphoric since we're talking about the internet here. These people - not everyone, please understand I'm not generalizing, but I think any reader of that link can see exactly which specific individuals I'm referring to - claim they've been reasonable and never personally insulted Karen, her intelligence, etc. And as far as I'm concerned, that particular thread is fair play for demonstrating intent and behavior, since it was brought in by someone opposed to my view on this. And mainly, I was trying to emphasize the difference. Karen goes off to her blog and basically says, "Hey, why don't we all not get so worked up about this, it's not that big of a deal." These particular individuals go off to another forum and call the authors ******* idiots, and so forth, with a constant attack on her intelligence, ability to think, etc. She makes comments expressing her frustration in a manner consistent with her role as "Mandalore" if you will, never actually insulting anyone in particular, and not even singling out a group. Which is again consistent with the fact that she has repeatedly addressed both sides of the 3 mil issue, suggesting they stand down. I again point out that her actions do not leave her deserving the kind of crap she's getting. And are in no way similar to the comments that people on this board have made. In no way. - Keralys -----signature----- God made man. Man rejected God. God became the man Jesus Christ, died and rose again to life, saving man from himself. The craziest story ever told. The truest.
	Locked Topic \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
The2ndQuest Title: Manager: -Literature -LACWAC -Games Registered: Jan '00	Date Posted: 10/17/05 2:59pm Subject: RE: Making the Boards Safe for Ms. Traviss's Return: An All-Around Pledge of Good Conduct
	What happens on other forums is not our concern (unless some direct problem is stemming from our boards over to there, in which case we will stop our end of things). However when on this forum, everyone is expected to act with some civility towards one another. -----signature----- "When your future self tells you to do something, YOU DO IT." K'Kruhk, 140 ABY:"Why haven't I come forth earlier to share my Jedi knowledge with Skywalker? Well, it's kinda a long story, see, I had this freaking sweet hat..."
	Locked Topic \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
-RebelScum- Registered: Feb '04	Date Posted: 10/17/05 3:02pm Subject: RE: Making the Boards Safe for Ms. Traviss's Return: An All-Around Pledge of Good Conduct
	Just out of curiosity what is the 3 mill issue? -The Scummy- -----signature----- Fantasy Keeps Me Sane.
	Locked Topic \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
Master_Keralys Title: Manager Emeritus Registered: Oct '03	Date Posted: 10/17/05 3:08pm Subject: RE: Making the Boards Safe for Ms. Traviss's Return: An All-Around Pledge of Good Conduct - Date Edited: 10/17/05 3:09pm (2 edits total) Edited By: Master_Keralys
	Basically a dispute over whether or not 3 million clones is enough to fight the Clone Wars. Irrelevant, really, for many reasons, not the least of which that the number was only specified for a very specific time, for a very specific group. But if you really want to get into it, you can see the beginnings of the discussion at the link I posted to that thread near the top of this page. I'd recommend it, in fact. The argument is still going strong, 25 pages later. T2Q - I'm aware that it's outside our purview in terms of having any place to take action about it. I certainly wouldn't expect you to do anything because of it. I was simply pointing out the fallacies that have been committed by individuals who have claimed to be a heck of a lot more fair and a heck of a lot less insulting than they actually have. And one individual - you can go over there and read for yourself whom; I'm not getting into it - was direct quoting from arguments made on this board over there, and then mocking Karen and Ryan based on those direct quotes. Not sure if that counts as a "direct problem" or not, and I honestly don't care if there's any consequence to it. It serves well enough to let people see how things have really been, rather than the distorted image that's being presented by certain members - certainly not all, but some - of the Saxtonite group. - Keralys -----signature----- God made man. Man rejected God. God became the man Jesus Christ, died and rose again to life, saving man from himself. The craziest story ever told. The truest.
	Locked Topic \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
Quiet_Mandalorian Registered: Apr '05	Date Posted: 10/17/05 3:12pm Subject: RE: Making the Boards Safe for Ms. Traviss's Return: An All-Around Pledge of Good Conduct
	Master_Keralys posted: Also, in case you haven't noticed, Karen has a penchant for tossing around phrases like that rather cavalierly, and in rather sarcastic manner. Not to say she's not expressing valid frustration, but rather that I highly doubt she'd actually rip someone's trachea out. In any case it'd be metaphoric since we're talking about the internet here. These people - not everyone, please understand I'm not generalizing, but I think any reader of that link can see exactly which specific individuals I'm referring to - claim they've been reasonable and never personally insulted Karen, her intelligence, etc. And as far as I'm concerned, that particular thread is fair play for demonstrating intent and behavior, since it was brought in by someone opposed to my view on this. And mainly, I was trying to emphasize the difference. Karen goes off to her blog and basically says, "Hey, why don't we all not get so worked up about this, it's not that big of a deal." These particular individuals go off to another forum and call the authors ******* idiots, and so forth, with a constant attack on her intelligence, ability to think, etc. She makes comments expressing her frustration in a manner consistent with her role as "Mandalore" if you will, never actually insulting anyone in particular, and not even singling out a group. Which is again consistent with the fact that she has repeatedly addressed both sides of the 3 mil issue, suggesting they stand down. I again point out that her actions do not leave her deserving the kind of crap she's getting. And are in no way similar to the comments that people on this board have made. In no way. Bravo. -----signature----- Fey'la was right! Bring Asyr Sei'lar to justice!
	Locked Topic \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
Kudzu Registered: Jun '05	Date Posted: 10/17/05 3:23pm Subject: RE: Making the Boards Safe for Ms. Traviss's Return: An All-Around Pledge of Good Conduct
	Borleias posted: Agreed, but they can still try. BTW, Saxtonites are a pretty even mix when it comes to other things, like politics. So are there Saxtonite entry exams and Saxtonite surveys? Wonder if their acceptance rate is like Harvard's... Borleias posted: A TFNer might be fooled because there was no "Shut Up", but a Saxtonite can easily see through this civility. When you add that to the "fantasy" stuff right above... "Us intelligent beings known as Saxtonites, though, we're not stupid enough to be fooled by these fallacious lies. We are a more intelligent breed, and all ye who disagree with us are primitive idiots." Borleias posted: No. Here is another solution. Actually give me some semi-decent debate. You'd notice that even though I think you are actually flaming me without using the commonly associated flame series (not using flame words does not mean you are not flaming), because you are not acting like a total idiot, you continue to have my respect ... which is why you are not being flamed. I actually have a much bigger reserve than the "Saxtonite" norm. So if you actually do consider somebody to be a total idiot, they're fair game for flaming? Read the ToS lately? Borleias posted: This does not mean I won't try to force you to surrender, though. Just that I probably won't use "Flame Weapons." "Yes! The mighty warrior Borleias has forced Master_Keralys to his knees in the glorious Battle of Fictional Numbers!" Borleias posted: Fortunately for us, it is not, really. If GL said it, it'd be G-canon, no? Please tell me that disaster had not happened! Someone in LFL said it. That's all. Someone in LFL once said the Executor was 8km long too... "And the Saxtonite fans are more intelligent than those foolish people at LFL and can override whatever they say by sheer weight of logic in a fictional universe!" Were they forced to surrender to you as well? The Internet "tough guy" routine wears thin. -----signature----- Super Golden Ewok™ Recipient It should be the right of every American to go out and get wasted the day they're told that they're being sent to war. Ron Paul for U.S. President 2008
	Locked Topic \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
Havac Title: Lit Mod of War Registered: Sep '05	Date Posted: 10/17/05 3:50pm Subject: RE: Making the Boards Safe for Ms. Traviss's Return: An All-Around Pledge of Good Conduct
	All I'll say is, from the posts that have been made defending the Saxtonite POV, they seem to believe that civility is irrelevant, and if soemone disagrees with them, that person lacks inteeligence and deserves their direct disrespect. They also suggest that society is very screwed up in this department and its views concerning civility should be remade to fit theirs. Fine. That's their right. They can think whatever they want. But if they think society's opinion is really that much beneath them, then I suggest they save themselves the headache and withdraw from society, purchase a Pacific island, and build their own society. Until then, they can expect to be required to abide by the rules of the society that exists. If you think the atmosphere on SD.N is that much better than TF.N, then go there. Don't go here. Don't expect everyone else to bow to your equally arbitrary standards of behavior. I was really hoping for some civility, but the attitude that has been expressed in the posts explaining the Saxtonite outlook make it quite clear they consider themselves better than everyone else and nothing will convince them they are mere mortals themselves. If that's the case, I feel sorry for everyone else. -----signature----- "Is there a captain's hat involved in this?"
	Locked Topic \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
Sinrebirth Title: Sith Emperor of the SWC Registered: Nov '04	Date Posted: 10/17/05 4:10pm Subject: RE: Making the Boards Safe for Ms. Traviss's Return: An All-Around Pledge of Good Conduct
	shrugs Essentially, we have two sides. But what you should be fighting over is - If one side "gestures at one" Apologises, Will the other? "gestures at other" Perhaps an apology from both sides is required? Both sides have had their sensibilities injured, and is that not the real object of this arguement? Fandalorian, Saxtonite, Purist, Waru-ite, Freaking Hat Lover - it makes no difference. An apology from both sides? -----signature----- Darth Insipid Proud Fan of the Tragedy of Jacen Solo Missing Chapters of Invincible; Chapter 7.5 is up! Jacen and Tassels; Lecersen; Syal; Wedge and Wes and... Tarfang! http://boards.theforce.net/beyond_the_saga/b10477/28933751/p3/?70
	Locked Topic \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History

« 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 » - Previous | Next | Reload