View Single Post
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 14
11-04-2011, 12:08 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by piwright42 View Post
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.
The "irrational" statement was not directed at you at all in an offensive manner and you can like old school Roddenberry as much as you want. I like TOS/TMP, it may not have the cool FX of the newer movies and series but it still tells a story. In fact, the very statement at the end of my previous post IS old school Roddenberry. Season 2, Episode 9 of TOS. "Metamorphosis". It's what Spock says to Zefram Cochrane when he says he loves the Companion/Commissioner Hedford. I figured you might appreciate the analogy.

Also I spell colourful with a 'u' because that is the version of the English language I use. Not that I am as much of a historian as you appear to be but I'm pretty sure that the version of English I use has been around a substantial amount of time longer than the version you're using but that's neither here nor there. If you get upset by being referred to as full of bovine droppings, friend, may I suggest you endeavour to develop a thicker skin. That, or spend some time in a place where life is harder than it appears to be for you so that you may gain a better understanding of what it is to be offended.

Breakout, you are wrong. I'm not saying that these people play the way I see STO being played. I'm saying, more indirectly than directly, that instead of the T5 Connie, they explore other possibilities that offer both a compromise and also somewhat stabilise the already severely distorted STO timeline. The Exeter is one such option. If they offered the Exeter at T2 and an updated version (in the tradition of the Excelsior and the Excelsior refit) at T4/T5 I would champion their cause. Despite the design not really complying with modern SFCE theory, it's old school enough to satisfy the ENT/TOS/TMP fans out there and new enough for the TNG/DS9/VOY fans.

Protector, you're wrong too. I didn't miss your point. Making the Exeter a skin for the Excelsior. That isn't practical as it's a ship with a special console and not just a cosmetic application. Instead of asking for a mere skin which doesn't do much more than change the outward appearance, why not ask for a T5 version of the Exeter (Exeter refit)? They did it with the Excelsior, so I don't see why they wouldn't want one of their own latest designs as a T5 if enough people wanted it. Then we might all stand side by side as opposed to trading forum salvoes.