View Single Post
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 12
11-03-2011, 02:53 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cailean_556 View Post
And then maybe I'll get my Fletcher class ASW destroyer and fly that around space too! Because surely in the 25th century they'll have the technology to upgrade it with warp engines, shields, phasers and photon torpedoes and it can be a T5 so I can fly that as an Admiral. Because I like old ships and I wanto to fly a 400 odd year old surface combatant in space. Oh and, btw Rayvenwing, my ship doesn't have any Borg tech. And I don't PvP either.

And to you piwright42, congratulations! You've just helped me prove my point. Trying to revive the 'good old days', running around in your TOS uniforms, wishing for a TMP era bridge layout. You're pining for an era that is dying more and more with the passing of every day. It's like you're going through a Science Fiction mid-life crisis. Or you're in denial. Seeing as you're so good at logical deductions, are you a Vulcan? You were in error anyway, as there's really only on colourful metaphor to describe manure that starts with 'S' and it isn't 'scat', that's not colourful enough.

But that's okay, because you are after all, essentially, irrational.
Hey man it was only my opinion. Did not mean to offend in the least. But if you will indulge me I would like to address a couple of your talking points.

Reviving the "good ol' days" has nothing to do with a sci-fi midlife crisis and everything to do with Trek in it's youth and in it's entirety. I am sorry you cannot share in my appreciation of all things Trek. There is no denial here. Just an understanding that before closed beta continuity was already a lost cause, (that was why I could pre-order a T+1 TOS Connie in my Digital Download Deluxe package). Call me what you will it does not change the reality of the mark that TOS left on the Trek brand and even this game.

Then again those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it's mistakes. Besides I have said in posts over a year and a half old that I favor Bones and Scott over Spock, (the allegory here is I do not think of myself as Vulcan and actually find them a little cold for my tastes, while I am an avid Nimoy fan, I am no Vulcan fanboi).

Could not help but notice the use of a 'u' in the word colorful...

Those my friend are English hunting terms and imply that the Brits had a deeper understanding of tracking and hunting than their Roman occupiers did, (who as far as I know had really one word for solid biological waste). See we all can learn a lot from history. Then again my use of those terms is naught more than an extension of Carlin's Seven Dirty Words gig, (in a nutshell nothing more than an attempt at levity). The 70's, man you gotta love 'em.

Then again as you so eloquently put it I am "irrational." Would that be name calling? Odd seeing that I have given up on the high tier Connie one could say I am very rational. My experience as a bouncer has taught me that most people who toss around colorful monikers tend to be the ones that are off balance, (read: irrational). Let's see form 1992-2006 I accrued over 12 years of forty hours a week experience dealing with violently irrational people... Maybe I am a touch of an expert on the topic? What I do know is that you are trying to provoke a irrational response from me and that is against the forum use agreement as I recall.

Thank you for your consideration on this topic. I sense we cannot see eye to eye let alone discuss in a calm fashion the finer points of our disagreement so I will leave it at that. Sorry that you read such a challenging tone into my words. All I wanted to communicate was I do not appreciate being called full of bovine droppings just because I like old school Roddenberry.