Broken Allegiance 2: The fanfilm that never quite made it - secrets revealed!!

WHERE does it say in there that the project was cancelled due to financial reasons and/or "not meeting the budget?" IT DOESN'T.

Therefore, there IS NO breech of contract, implied or otherwise. The language is clear and it was the responsibility of those who donated money to read and understand the agreement before they invested.

Nice try, Dorkman . . . but, in a legal sense, you're on the losing end of this argument..

No, TAC, I'm not, because what you just said IS my argument.

I said in my last post. The agreement was that there would be a refund if the donations did not meet the budget. They met and surpassed it, therefore legally speaking there was no obligation to refund.

Try to wrap what brain you have around the concept that I AGREED with you on that point instead of just arguing blindly.

As for the rest of your post, I refer you back to the part of your first post here where you told Fig to grow up. Your hypocrisy is unbelievable sometimes.

I may not say likeable things, but at least I'm consistent and practice what I preach -- especially within three posts of each other.

I invite you, and anyone else who is griping about the whole idea of "donations" to produce a FanFilm, to RE-read Chris Hanel's original statement on the BA2 donation page.

No one's griping about the IDEA of donations for fan films. Just its execution as it applies to BA2. Work on your reading comprehension for God's sake.

M. Scott

 

As for your little snippity "digging up the hatchet" comments toward me, as well as your baseless accusations of Nick's "sleeping better with $14K in the bank" . . . you are cordially invited to KISS MY ASS.


(On second thought, forget it ... you'd probably enjoy that too much)

I'm stepping in here, not only in defense of Mike, but in defense of rational, non gay-bashing people everywhere.

That post calls for a banning. It's beyond flaming, and into the territory of insulting a member based on their race and/or religion. Tac has been an ******* many times before, but this just crosses the line. There is something very. very wrong with the moderation 'round these parts if that post is allowed to go by with nothing more than a slap on the wrist.


- Rico

EDIT: The original post has been edited, but I'm still stunned. I've lost quite a bit of respect for you, Tac.

 

There is no hypocicy in my argument or reasoning, Michael . . . I attack the falacy of the griping and unreasonable attacks against Nick Hallam and his character due to a clear case of "sour grapes."

Seems to me that the likes of Fig, Eagle and Humvee (whomever that is) failed to consider the "whole picture" before going after Nick - focusing soley on the "money" issue rather than the facts surrounding it. THIS, dear Michael, is an example of immaturity in critical analysis and reasoning - especially considering the information which Nick took the time to complie and post on the BA2 website.

Hell, Nick could have simply taken the money and ran. He didn't. Instead, Nick demonstrated his moral fortitude, integrity and maturity in publically owning up to the demise of the BA2 project - not only on his BA2 website, but here for the entire TFN Community. He wanted the information presented FIRST HAND and not reaching the TFN Community via third-party "guess what I heard."


You can throw the word "hypocricy" around all you like . . . but your accusation would be much stronger if the charge actually fit the crime.




JediTAC

 

//Gets more popcorn

This is getting good again.

 

I've still got some lamb.

This is getting good. It's usually pretty entertaining to watch TAC explode into little self-righteous nuggets.

 

To DarthSlimer:
By your own words, you note that the post has been EDITED, Slimer.

True, I was angry when I originally wrote it, but I later (and within the editing time frame) decided to take a step back and edit the comments -
as I openly admit and regret that the comment was made out of anger and could be construed as inappropriate.


BUT NOW, you decide to DO THE EXACT SAME THING in re-posting the deleted comment AFTER IT WAS DELETED.
How, I ask you, is this any different than the transgression for which you are so adamantly protesting against??


Remember that word "hypocricy" that Dorkman and I have been throwing around . . . Unless you want to consider the "edit/delete" feature yourself, you might want to look the word up and then see if your own name is listed under "see also."



JediTAC

 

This is getting good. It's usually pretty entertaining to watch TAC explode into little self-righteous nuggets.


Especially when you LEARN something from them, eh Funk-E ???



JediTAC

 

Dear TAC,

Go make something.

Love, Fig

EDIT: Had to emphasize make.

 

Now Funk will run away... we all know that learning isn't fun...

 

Not unless Big Bird is involved!

Big Bird doesn't call people names and actually has real friends, too.

I like Big Bird.

 

By now, guys, I think Tommy TACmiester is arguing for the sake of arguing, as per usual, after the inital statements have been made.

So, I'm gonna give him the benefit of the doubt, and ask him this:

What is your parting shot?

Let's end this right now, and let Nick have his thread back. My parting shot is as follows.

I'm sorry your film didn't work out, I know what it's like to have a lot invested in a project to have a mixture of flakiness and bad karma keep it from getting finished. But I do think it was irresponsible to hype anything so much when there was always the chance it'd never get done. This is exactly the reason I'm not tooting my horn (watch TAC make a gay joke there) on the project I'm working on - because if it dies, god forbid, it won't be my legacy.

 

TAC, your hypocrisy (<-- the correct spelling, BTW) was not in your argument. It was in you trying to belittle someone about not being able to understand "big words" when you yourself blatantly misused one.

It was in you telling Fig to "grow up" in one post, defending attacks on Nick Hallam's character, and then attempting to attack MY character with a defamatory comment based on my sexual orientation, which, like much of your behavior is something I would expect from an immature teenager. I'm glad DarthSlimer kept the comment up. Real life has no edit button, and just because the mods didn't see it doesn't mean I, to whom it was directed, didn't. I think you should be held accountable for what you said, whether or not you're fast enough to delete it under time.

You are a child, TAC, and everyone sees it but you.

M. Scott

 

You know, I didn't see that as a gay crack anyway... The implication of a butt kisser has nothing to do with sexual orientation.

 

Well, one good insult deserves another, doesn't it Michael . . . which is why I guess you felt you needed to jump back into the whole mix in the first place, isn't it? After all, none of my comments were originally directed toward YOU ... yet you felt the compelling need to jump in and come after me. Don't remember? Allow me to refresh your memory . . .

JediTAC:
You three have to be some of the most CLASSLESS JERKS I have seen on here in a long time.

DorkmanScott:
You HAVE been gone a long time, haven't you TAC? Someone had to fill the void.



Who is the child now, Michael ??




I'm not going to say anything further on the matter as it relates to Fig or Eagle. I've said my piece and I think people pretty much know where I stand.

Michael, I made a potentially inappropriate comment out of anger in response to your previous comment, and for that I apologize. I deleted the comment so it would not be permanently scribed in the thread, recognizing that I made a mistake which could be possibly misinterpreted or miscontrued (as it apparently was).



JediTAC . . . out.


P.S. (Incidentally, my use of the word "acquiese" was indeed correct . . . cuz I DID look it up before i used it - winky winky)

 

Well, one good insult deserves another, doesn't it Michael . . . which is why I guess you felt you needed to jump back into the whole mix in the first place, isn't it?

After all, none of my comments were originally directed toward YOU ... yet you felt the compelling need to jump in and come after me.

Thanks for the reminder, but what I ACTUALLY don't recall is what comments were originally directed at YOU that required YOU to jump into this thread.

*checks again*

Nope, nothing directed at JediTAC requiring his input. Once more, your argument is based on self-righteousness, inflated self-importance, and the word of the day, hypocrisy.

M. Scott

 

*Sigh*

I'm gonna have to speak up here. I didn't want to get involved, but curse you people for buzzing around this thread like a moth to a... well... flame. Pun, i guess, is intended.

You wanna talk money? Fine, let's talk money. Let's look JUST at the fundraising. Remove all the BS problems we had with casting and re-casting, animated or not, etc. and focus JUST on how the money was receieved and the lines of communication between the crew and people who put up their money.

From what I understand, there were zero complaints. Nobody that donated money was ever out of the loop on what was being done with it. At every point that something major had to be decided, everyone was consulted and their input was desired. When the project was cancelled and Nick wanted to do an original project, everyone was consulted AGAIN. You want your money back? Great. It's your money, take it. We're not holding it hostage. Don't feel like it's the best place for your cash? Then here's your refund. I don't know of a single person that should feel "cheated" out of their money.

Of all the problems that plagued this project (and are in full view on Nick's page for your digestment and amusement), none of it had to do with any money changing hands. It was all on the crew side of things, and all the whiny morons who decided to cry foul about something they knew nothing about and weren't participating in.

I didn't think it was possible to rile me up enough to make an appearance in this thread, but my threshold for ignorance only goes so far. Please crawl back into whatever holes you've come from and let this thread be dedicated to something more worthwhile than insinuating who knows big words and who doesn't.

Sometimes you all make me sick.

-Chris

 

*sigh* I was truly hoping to see BA2... showed much promise it did... a landmark it would have been. Much thanks and appreciation to all involved! Even though it wasn't done, you guys came up with a lot of powerful ideas and flaunted a great imagination and grip of the Star Wars universe. Sad to see it finally gone... however, I look foward to the orginal Sci-Fi movie with great interest!



As for all the argumentation here... Can we:
1. Respect everyone's opinions and use the constructive criticism rules here? NO bashing and flaming and all that... just think before you reply...
2. Understand the situation.. Nick and the rest came up with amazing ideas and made EVERY effort possible to put those ideas to concrete movie. Yes they fundraised money (which was obviously voluntary as fundraising implies)... this money was put forth into the film, not "making money" off of a fanfilm.. And am I just dreaming but didn't Nick come to us again to ask if the money should have gone to the new Sci-Fi venture? *EDIT* Hanel beat me to it... I wasn't dreaming apparently
3. Have a happy time and respect Nick (whether we wanted BA2 or not/agreed with it or not)?

Now, with my utopian version of the board out of the way, carry on.

 

For your unwitting information, Michael ... NICK HIMSELF, just this morning, asked me to read his post.
I did so and saw the "lambasting" that some select few were slinging ... so I decided to post a response of my own.

If you want to get down to logistics, no one invited the comments from those who had harsh words for Nick either ...
but then again, that is the very nature of a Forum, isn't it?


I am thankful that Chris decided to chime in above. As someone who was, perhaps, more directly involved with the development of BA2 with Nick than anyone else within this forum Community, his words (hopefully) clarify a great deal about issues involved and events that occurred.





JediTAC

 

If you want to get down to logistics, no one invited the comments from those who had harsh words for Nick either ...
but then again, that is the very nature of a Forum, isn't it?

I completely agree. My point is that you can't say I had no right to jump in and say something insulting since no comments were directed at me, when you yourself jumped in and said something insulting when no comments were directed at you.

Either we're both right, or we're both wrong, but you can't make a division there.

I'm willing to accept and admit that we are both wrong and should not be doing it. I just don't take double standards quietly.

That being said, we're both wrong. And knowing how rare an apology and/or admission of wrongdoing is from TAC, I have to say I appreciate it.

Now, as I said several hours ago and as Chris restated angrily: if you don't have a personal monetary stake in this matter, or were directly involved in the film's production, then you have no right to be making any complaints about the money -- or defenses to it, for that matter. Other than that, Nick has posted some interesting stuff on his site, and this is the place to talk about it.

M. Scott

 

And I like VirulentShadow's idea ... time to move on, don'tcha think?

You could have started by not opening your mouth again. But you just HAD to have the last word.

No, i will not give you that satisfaction.

And that's all I have to say about that.

*thunks head on desk repeatedly*

-Chris

PS - TAC edited his message again after he got caught with his hands in the troll cookie-jar. The Italicized comment above was his.

 

I really admire the style of those production paintings. Would you mind relaying contact information on the artists? It?s a shame some folks are giving you such a rough time over this. I congratulate you on coming this far and I wish you the best of luck on your future projects. Thanks for entertaining us and sharing with us the level of dedication and hard work that went into this film. I hope to hear from you again sometime.


Regards,
TheMcGuffin(after all, I'm only here to advance the story)

 

The implication of a butt kisser has nothing to do with sexual orientation.

That depends on where you kiss.

I couldn't resist that one.

If the energy level in this thread could be harnessed, we could possibly power a small city for a month.

 

The juvenile behavior saddens me. This thread went from something interesting and enjoyable to the suckiest thing that ever sucked suck.

Can't we all just get along?

EDIT: If this thread were turned into a script for a Forum Fanfilm, the drama and tension would be awesome. Somebody wanna take a stab at it?

 

This is nothing. The energy in the Social Thread through October was enough to power a small city until the next election.

Again, mainly Dorkman and TAC.

 

Maybe there should be a restriction put on them - they can't post in the same thread within 24 hours of each other, or something.