Strilo edit: This really isn't the place for this. If you have issue with how things work on the JC, PT or EU, please feel free to address it in the Communications forum.
Having joined the Jedi Council Forums February 25th 2007, it is now time to move on, with this first and final debate, beginning with the _LEAST_ offensive example of what this debate is about.
This first example is very prescient. It happens to be chosen from the part of the Forum dedicated to the literature of the Expanded Universe. But it applies just as well to this part of the Forum, nominally dedicated to the Prequel Trilogy, as anywhere else. As this part of the Forum is dedicated to the most well known prescient parts of the saga, in the form of the 3 films most recently released, it is the first place where those who are new to the Forum visit first. And as such it acts a champion for the rest of the Forum. So it is an appropriate place to discuss other prescient parts of the saga, to debate a prescient matter, which new visitors would be interested in. This example is merely a repeat of what happened on this part of the Forum, when the films of the Prequel Trilogy were prescient, two or more years ago.
As some of you may already be aware yesterday, February 26th, saw the release of Karen Traviss's book, Revelations: the latest book in the Legacy of the Force series. The day before, one of the administrators of the Jedi Council Forum, who happened to be Havac, started a debate entitled "The JC Lit Reviews Special: LEGACY OF THE FORCE: REVELATION (Spoilers)", on February 25th ( http://boards.theforce.net/literature/b10003/28128642/p1/?16 ). As you can tell from the title it was nominally a debate about Ms Traviss's latest book. That same day, February 25th, one of the posters on that part of Forum replied to Havac's introduction to the debate with, presumably, his impressions of the book. His name is of no consequence.
What is of consequence was the fact that the book had not been officially released yet. So how was it possible for him to give an impression? If somehow he did manage to get a copy of the book early, he could not have had time to digest it to give his impression. He must have read the book just once. And almost immediately, within minutes, typed up his reply to Havac's debate. He had no time to reflect on that part of the saga, where it had come from, where it was going, how the characters had developed and changed, the symbols and metaphors in that book and the series as a whole. He had no time to reflect on the double meanings of the words, the images, the scenes, to research, to compare and contrasts this book with other similar images, scenes in Star Wars saga, other pieces of Science Fiction or other sagas. So what exactly did his reply contain. Reason dictates that it contained absolutely nothing. There was no way he could have anything meaningful to say about the book. Yet here he was: setting the pace for the debate. And at the end of his reply he gave it a score of "6.8/10", just as Havac had instructed in his introduction to the debate. The only other instruction he gave was for those replying to have actually finished reading the book:
Havac posted:
LOTF continues -- we're only one book from the finale! Meanwhile, things are . . . brought out into public. You might even say . . . revealed.
Some rules: rate Revelation on a scale of 1 to 10, supplementing your rating with a review, if you want to (It's not necessary but is highly encouraged). However, please do not rate or review the book until after you've read the whole thing. Thanks. 
Go for it. 
Some previous review threads:...
But his score was a fraud. Reason dictates that it _MUST_BE_ a fraud. And since he nonetheless did follow Havac's instructions, those instructions were fraudulent. And since he in turn had a lot of experience, and held a position of responsibility and leadership on this Forum, Havac was a fraud. And, whoever appointed him in that position, was also a fraud. All the way up to one bearing ultimate responsibility for the Jedi Council Forum at IGN Entertainment. They were all frauds. And ultimate if the leadership, at the top of any organisation, public or private, professional or amateur, corporate or charity, were frauds, that entire organisation would also be a fraud.
Do not fool yourself by saying, "well that was on the forum for the Expanded Universe." Are you being honest when you say this? Are you not being fraudulent? This forum dedicated to the Prequel Trilogy is no different. It is full of debates began by people who are clearly and wilfully ignorant of the subject. They have made no attempt to do any research to begin an informed debate. They do not begin a debate by stating two or more sides of an argument. And they proudly profess their ignorance. They do not hide it. Take for example the post entitled "The Jedi Council and the Republic Senate", which begins only with these two lines ( http://boards.theforce.net/prequel_trilogy/b10669/28104724/p1/?22 ):
DRush78 posted:
Why would a monastic order like the Jedi believe it was necessary to pledge their allegiance to the Republic Senate? Why would they get involved with politics?
Surely, a debate has at least two sides. So where are the two sides of this debate? What sign is the author showing that he, presumably, has taken time to research both sides and present them? Where are the signs that he has taken time to research even one side and present it in a comprehensible fashion? Where are the sources in Star Wars or otherwise to back up this presentation?
Do not fool yourself by saying, "well Havac's debate was just a one off." Are you being honest when you say this? Are you not being fraudulent? That debate is the rule: not the exception on the Forum. It is man's habits which makes his character: not his eccentricities. The leadership of the Forum wilfully encourage superficial debates. And the rest of the Forum take their lead, and produce other superficial debates. The leadership are constantly putting forward nominal debates, pitting one part of the saga against another, one character against another, one scene against another, one chapter against another, one trilogy against another, often competitively, and asking the rest of the Forum to vote or rank them. The leadership are constantly putting forward debates asking the rest of the Forum to vote on whether they prefer this or that chapter: yes or no? Where are the two or more sides of those debates? Where are the signs that the author has taken time to research both sides and present them? Such debates are purely superficial! As the author of the novelisation of Revenge Of The Sith, Matthew Stover, said on his Web-Site ( http://mattstover.blogspot.com/2007/06/surrendering-to-pressure.html ) :
"I've never forgotten a general social maxim from my dissipated youth: Great minds discuss ideas. Average minds discuss events. Small minds discuss people."
Pitting one component of Star Wars against another competitively, only encourages the discussion of the minutiae, that is people, characters, scenes and other petty items in the saga: or small minds. And this is what the leadership of the Forum chooses to do. Instead of pitting components of Star Wars against other sagas, or Science Fiction, which encourages a discussion of ideas, an educational debate and great minds. As it is, the Jedi Council Forum, as well as being a fraud, encourages small minds.
Do not fool yourself by saying, "well that is just one of the administrators, Havac." Are you being honest when you say this? Are you not being fraudulent? Remember this was the _LEAST_ offensive example. Havac is one of the better leaders on the Forum. He is not the worst: not by a long shot. This is not the first time he has done this. And it will not be the last. He is not the first to do this. And he will not be the last. Nevertheless, even though he is not the worst, he is fraudulent and small minded.
Do not fool yourself by saying, "well there are many people who make worthy contributions to the Forum. It is just that they are a silent majority." Are you being honest when you say this? Are you not being fraudulent? If they were silent, then there would be no point in them being on a forum for public debate. They would be no different than someone who has never seen or heard about the Jedi Council Forum, or someone who was dead. If they have no effect then, on the Forum, they might as well not exist. As has already been said, it is a man's habits which determines his character: not his eccentricities. It is those who regularly post on a forum which determines its characters: not those who post rarely or not at all.
Do not fool yourself by saying, "well the administrators are fairly laid back and relax. And so are most of the posters. So long as they allow people to express themselves, those who make positive contributions will stand out from the rest in the end." Are you being honest when you say this? Are you not being fraudulent? The administrators and the vast majority of the posters are not laid back and relaxed. They are fraudulent and small minded. There _IS_ a difference. This means that they have the weakness of character which produces corruption when placed in a position of leadership. Whenever they encounter someone who has strength of character (that is the willingness to stand out and endure), who stands out from the rest, they make an example of them, due to their petty understanding of their position. This principle would be fine if the Forum were dominated by honest and great minds. But it is not. It is dominated by fraudulent and small minds as has been explained. The Forum is full of cynics whose relationship with Star Wars is purely incidental, due to its popularity, and whose relationship to the leadership of the Forum is reciprocal, due to both suffering from a weakness of character. So it is the honest and great minds, on the Forum, who stand out. And it is they who become the targets of the administrators. The repeated harassment and banishment of Cryogenic being a perfect example, and a damning indictment on this entire Forum.
To the_immolated_one, Cryogenic (if he is still here), _Erasmus_, Obi-Chron, MisterVader, and all the authors of the comics, books, scripts that make up the Star Wars saga, both in the films and in the Expanded Universe, who were brave enough to show their faces on this Forum, my respects.
To the rest this challenge: define the "Jedi Council Forums". Or, which is the same question, at what point does the "Jedi Council Forums" stop being the "Jedi Council Forums"? Or, which is the same question, at what point does a debate about the Prequel Trilogy stop being a debate about the Prequel Trilogy?
You already have counter-examples above, in the form of the debate started by DRush78 and Havac above! What are yours?
|