I know it's splitting hairs and all but the emphasis on Galactica isn't on finding and killing an implacable, deadly enemy. It's about running like hell from them.
I do agree with you though that multiple seasons of no hope would get pretty tough to watch. At this point it's seemingly correct as the story goes IMO. It "fits". I'm just hoping that when the time comes to move the story along the producers realize it and do so. For now though I'm digging it.
I agree, what did Usenet do to deserve this? If in fact Usenet is dying (and I don't believe it is personally) then it's not because there's something wrong with it.
The truth? It means nothing at this point. Usenet is for the most part already so screwed up that their leaving will hardly be noticed.
If they hadn't come in like that and it hadn't drawn so much attention Usenet would still be screwed. They were just a large obnoxious preview of the things to come.
You forgot to ask "them" to put you on "the list".
That was always my favorite. The idea that there were just some guys out there who ran the Usenet and they had this list you needed to be on in order to get emailed the "nekkid pichers". I think every third AOL user I saw in the newgroups was trying to get on that list.
How can one attempt to intimidate another poster on Slashdot? I'll buy that I can be longwinded but please spare me the argument that it's an intimidation tactic. It's not and I don't expect to find the slightest hint of common ground with you so rest assured that we'll both walk away from this believing exactly what we want to.
My response has not been the same in all my other posts. It was the same in the three responses to this one post because all three of them merited IMO the exact same response.
My entire "argument" if you wish to call it that is based on one thing and that is the idea that suicide bombing in any instance you wish to discuss it (WWII Pacific theater, Vietnam, Israel/Palestine, Iraq occupation) is simply not an intelligent approach to winning a conflict. Yes the Japanese flew their planes into American ships during WWII. Did they win the war? Did they fly them into civilians? How about their own civilians, did they try and murder a bunch of them using this tactic during the occupation of Japan? And by the way how is that American occupation of Japan going today? It's non-existent and I'd like to see you make a case for Japan (or Germany and Italy for that matter) being forced to live under "American rule". We got out of there when the job was done. Sure you'll bring up American troops stationed in Europe and on Okinawa to this day. I expect nothing less but I can't possibly see how you'll spin that into American rule.
And honestly I think the pilots who flew the aircraft into American ships during the war were foolish to do so. Those above them who ordered or allowed this to take place were in fact inhuman monsters. There's always someone ordering this shit to take place and the one deciding that this is going to be our approach to fighting the occupation is never the poor sap with the C4 around his waist.
No, I don't know for a fact that the US will pull up and leave as soon as the suicide bombers stop murdering their fellow Iraqis. The Bush administration has said they will pull out of Iraq when the new Iraqi government is in place and running the country and I accept that at face value. I am certain you do not and clearly the insurgents don't either because they're doing the one thing that will prolong this. They're fighting what appears to me at least to be a fairly straightforward process.
Throw out Saddam (Iraq in general seemed pretty happy about this part), and then get a government in place that can run the country seems pretty simple to me. I guess they'd prefer to fire up another Islamic republic or just fight it out amongst themselves instead of dealing with an election and having to accept a majority rule situation. Regardless nobody has once stated that the US is there to set up the 51st state or to begin embarking on Imperialism Part Deux.
No in fact there weren't suicide bombings in Iraq prior to the US getting there. They were living in their little paradise happily (please, nevermind the mass graves) and we came along and brought that whole suicide bombing thing with us. It happens so often here in the states.
Take all the pleasure you wish from thinking your point has been proven. All you've proven to me is you didn't read what I wrote before reaching your conclusion. I did not say that Iraqis were subhuman. I said that those Iraqis sending their idiot fellow Iraqis to blow up even more of their fellow Iraqis were subhuman.
If I do get a clue I'll be sure to look you up and pass it on. You need it more than I ever will.
Look at what my postings have "earned" me in moderation. If I cared about my karma then you think I might strike a different note every now and then. Certainly the three responses that I assume you are talking about where I cut/pasted the same thing to three distince assholes didn't exactly draw the +5's.
You know, soldiers in the army recieve a paycheck that they live on and support their families with. They don't get a big cash prize when they check out. One is a professional who does a job and the other is a murdering asshole who gets a prize. work it out.
And overall yes, America is morally a damned sight better than any single nation in the Middle-East/Arab World. There is absolutely no way in the universe you can make a believable case otherwise.
Operating under the assumption that you are the AC who I responded to then sure, I'd be happy to explain the perfectly obvious to you. Let's summarize this chain of posts briefly before I begin.
Michaeldot posted the following:
"Anyone who could strap themselves with explosives, walk into a crowded area filled with civilian men, women and children and blow everyone into small bloody fragments, cannot have any more intelligence than the stupidest machine it's possible to manufacture.
I'm afraid civilization is playing catchup to terrorists when it comes to the dumb robot category."
To which you claim to have replied with:
"As opposed to straping a bomb on to a plane and dropping it on crowded areas filled with civilian men, women and children and blow everyone into small bloody fragments?"
And of course I confess to thinking you a complete idiot at this point and calling you a fucktard. Now, ignoring the long list of completely unrelated questions you tossed out in the post I'm responding to lets get back to the actual subject matter. That is the idea that a suicide bomber killing "civilian men, women, and children cannot have any more intelligence than the stupidest machine it's possible to manufacture"
Now looking at this objectively do you think that it's intelligent to strap a bomb to yourself and detonate it? Do you think that suicide in this situation is an intelligent response when your alternatives include organizing those people in your country (as opposed to killing them) and then winning the power you wish through an election process? If you knew that the sooner Iraq appeared stable then the sooner the Americans would pull out the majority of their forces then what would you do? Would you lay low or grab the satchel charge?
The parent posters point was that a suicide bomber was a fucking idiot and that these so-called robots couldn't be any less intelligent than that. You then compared this act to a pilot bombing a target in a war. These acts couldn't be any further apart.
For on thing Lets also stop and point out that the suicide bomber we're talking about in Iraq is killing his own civilian men, women, and children. The pilot is dropping a bomb from his aircraft on a target he is given. This target is not in the United States. I'd give the intelligence edge to the pilot here. He is at the very least not executing an attack on his own people.
Then lets look at the survival rate of pilots versus suicide bombers. It comes as no surprise that pilots dropping bombs live through their mission far more often than suicide bombers. Again, I'm going to have to say that the pilot is more intelligent than the suicide bomber.
In addition to this I have to ask you whether you are in posession of any information about American attacks specifically aimed at civilian men, women, and children. That's important and if you know about some air strikes like this then you should probably let someone know in the media or at the very least find a way to mention it to a congressman. Pick a democrat for this because they're way into bringing things like this to light.
I'm probably going to go out on a limb here but you know what? I don't believe that the US military has made dropping bombs on civilian men, women, and children a priority in this war. I know that sounds zany and all but seriously, you would think that if this had been at the top of their list then we'd be hearing more about it.
Have they never dropped a bomb on civilians? Of course they have. It's called war and in wars there are civilian casualties. There are a lot fewer of them today then there were back in WWII or even back in Vietnam but they still happen. That ol' Iraqi suicide bomber though is intentionally trying to take out some civilians. That's why he's there. That's what he's about.
Now how can you honestly compare one of those assholes to an American pilot bombing a target he's been given?
Yes, and just like those guards who recieved the proper training in treatment of POW's (which oddly enough doesn't include beheading them or shooting them alongside a road but people like you don't ever seem to point that out) the people operating these "robots" will in general do a solid job of it while a handful of them, or possibly even one will do something despicable.
See, the military gets it's evil killing machines with no remorse from... wait for it.... the civilian population.
That is of course where you and I come from and just as the civilian world is filled with good people with complete monsters sprinkled here and there in between the military sometimes finds that the guy they have leading a platoon or supervising in a POW camp is in fact a person with the judgement skills of a potato and the moral compass of a serial killer.
It happens there just like it happens here. In the world you learn that some guy who took care of his elderly mom and helped his neighbors fix their roof had the bodies of fourteen little boys buried under his house. In the military you find out that a bunch of assholes did what happened at Abu Ghraib.
The only difference between the civilian and the military there is people don't get to whine about the evil military when it happens in their town or on their street.
What a complete fucking asshole you must be if that was the first thing that popped into your mind. How many soldiers are in Iraq? What percentage of them were involved in torturing people in Iraq?
The military gets their soldiers from the civilian population (that would be the same pool of folks your brilliant ass came from) and just as you see in the civilian population a portion of them are twisted assholes who think it's amusing to do this kind of shit.
Not that you don't have a very good point in lots of ways but I think it's also kind of important to note that sometimes, every once in a while the human beings which we are told are our enemies in fact are our enemies.
Sometimes it's important not to welcome our new swastika wearing, deathcamp building overlords. Sometimes it's important to kill them.
This will probably not be well recieved by all but it's completely true.
Call me odd but I tend to discount the level to which a society values human life when it's cranking out suicide bombers and their families are hauling in fat paychecks for their actions. I of course know that not everyone in said society feels this way.
That probably won't go over too well either but it's only slashdot karma so who cares.
Star Wars on VHS Star Wars Special Edition on VHS Star Wars Special Edition on DVD
Sounds oddly similar to
Star Wars 1.0 Star Wars 2.0 Star Wars 3.0 Professional Edition
You know sooner or later they'll just release "Star Wars X", pronounced "Star Wars Ten" and then all the fans will get confused thinking that they skipped Episodes VII, VIII, and IX. Minor revisions to Star Wars X will be released yearly with changes here and there and new exciting features but each one will cost you full price.
And it's possible that the fine products from Marlin Firearms will be incorporated in some fashion in this new DRM solution. It's still early in the process though so nothings certain.
"Mental Masturbation", nothing more. What else can you possibly get from this? An interesting read but nothing I can really wrap my brain around in there if you know what I mean.
They killed the Lone Gunmen? Well thanks a lot for the spoiler warning there pal! I was waiting until the Really Very Special Edition DVD's with added commentary from the set caterer came out but now what's the point.
What am I, 9th in line or something? My first thought on seeing that pic was "IMHOTEP..."
That's not a diet my friends, that's an illness. Ok, maybe it could be a diet that became an illness but someone needs to sit down and have a talk with her and as another poster mentioned that talk might need to happen at a Krispy Kreme shop.
True that. The only way to even the battlefield here is if Adama and Vader (or whoever happens to be in charge on the SSD) get to also make up any shit they want at the drop of a hat.
You can't even say "Ok, Enterprise has to go with only what we absolutely know it can do" because who in the hell can honestly say they really know what it can and can't do? They've made so much shit up over the course of the various series that nobody could keep up with it. They wouldn't have a series "bible" over at Paramount. They'd have to have a series "Library of Congress" or something if they did try to write it all down and the first half of it would probably conflict with the rest.
See this is the kind of shit that happens when hacks like Berman and Braga run a SciFi franchise! Honest, hard working, and faithful fans can't even have a simple discussion about who would win in a fight anymore!
The Super Star Destroyer has not entered the fight yet. This match is between the Enterprise and the Galactica and no interference by Imperial forces will be permitted until a winner is decided. At that time, following a repair and reload interval the Super Star Destroyer may challenge the surviving vessel.
In the match we are currently on I'm going to ask for specifics before choosing a victor.
I want to know the following if this is to be done right.
a) Is this the original Galactica we're talking about or the new one?
b) Is this the Enterprise, Enterprise A, B, C, D, or E?
c) What are the rules of engagement? All weapons available (Can the Galactica launch Vipers) or simply ship to ship combat?
When I have recieved a response I shall speculate on this further.
And I wouldn't be so proud of the technological terror that is the Super Star Destroyer Mr AC. That thing went down pretty darn quick in ROTJ. Lost bridge shields and took on A-Wing to the bridge and it was heading for the second Death Star. That's pretty sad IMO.
Maybe you're on to something here. Could it be that this isn't the Rick Berman of "our" universe? Could it be that this is the mirror universe Rick Berman and he just shaved off his trademark mirror universe goatee? Could this all be intentional?
I think you're right and I think he needs to die.
And by the way, the simple fact that Battlestar Galactica rocks and Star Trek is terrible should tell everyone that the world has turned upside down. If someone had told me twenty years ago that I'd be getting my good SciFi from a remade Battlestar Galactica while Trek and Star Wars would make my stomach turn I'd have laughed till I cried.
All the things that Berman hates that you've pointed out oddly fit Galactica in it's new version but there they work. I can only speak for myself on this but the thing to me is that in the context of that story I want them there. I don't want them in Trek. They don't fit or work in Trek just as you've stated. It's like Berman is making a completely different show, poorly.
This entire season with all of it's episodes whipping out random items from the past (Orion slave girls glimpsed for what? 2 seconds?, augments doing a piss poor "Wrath of Khan" imitation, and the whole Sarek storyline with a Romulan thrown in has all been about trying to pull out the old "cool" and rubbing it up against the new crap to try and get some people interested again. It's no Bermans cool though. It's stuff that came from the body of work he's standing on as you said.
As for Friday nights this year I think Enterprise in all it's darker, lower-tech, on ship conflicted glory is doomed to get mugged by Galactica which frankly does what Berman would like to do and does it much better than he could ever hope to do it.
The year long story arc is a blessing to die hard fans and a bane to the network that wants new fans to find the program and start watching. Buffy was in much the same situation for most of it's run. It was a great show from the start IMO and so it managed to hook enough people early on to keep it respectable for years but the audience seemed to never grow. I remember reading somewhere that a person associated with Buffy said something along the lines of "The ratings pretty much never vary more than a point or so either way. We could do a nude episode and it would probably draw two points higher than normal". That's not word for word of course but it conveys the general idea.
Enterprise ran off more viewers than it could spare early on and so the very good idea of running a season long arc turned into a bad idea for them. You just don't jumpstart a weak series that way. If you have a good core audience then it makes for a sweet season but you're not going to gain any ground with it. You're more likely to lose people over the course of the year.
Slashdot Mirror
I know it's splitting hairs and all but the emphasis on Galactica isn't on finding and killing an implacable, deadly enemy. It's about running like hell from them.
I do agree with you though that multiple seasons of no hope would get pretty tough to watch. At this point it's seemingly correct as the story goes IMO. It "fits". I'm just hoping that when the time comes to move the story along the producers realize it and do so. For now though I'm digging it.
I agree, what did Usenet do to deserve this? If in fact Usenet is dying (and I don't believe it is personally) then it's not because there's something wrong with it.
Usenet didn't fail. People did.
The truth? It means nothing at this point. Usenet is for the most part already so screwed up that their leaving will hardly be noticed.
If they hadn't come in like that and it hadn't drawn so much attention Usenet would still be screwed. They were just a large obnoxious preview of the things to come.
You forgot to ask "them" to put you on "the list".
That was always my favorite. The idea that there were just some guys out there who ran the Usenet and they had this list you needed to be on in order to get emailed the "nekkid pichers". I think every third AOL user I saw in the newgroups was trying to get on that list.
How can one attempt to intimidate another poster on Slashdot? I'll buy that I can be longwinded but please spare me the argument that it's an intimidation tactic. It's not and I don't expect to find the slightest hint of common ground with you so rest assured that we'll both walk away from this believing exactly what we want to.
My response has not been the same in all my other posts. It was the same in the three responses to this one post because all three of them merited IMO the exact same response.
My entire "argument" if you wish to call it that is based on one thing and that is the idea that suicide bombing in any instance you wish to discuss it (WWII Pacific theater, Vietnam, Israel/Palestine, Iraq occupation) is simply not an intelligent approach to winning a conflict. Yes the Japanese flew their planes into American ships during WWII. Did they win the war? Did they fly them into civilians? How about their own civilians, did they try and murder a bunch of them using this tactic during the occupation of Japan? And by the way how is that American occupation of Japan going today? It's non-existent and I'd like to see you make a case for Japan (or Germany and Italy for that matter) being forced to live under "American rule". We got out of there when the job was done. Sure you'll bring up American troops stationed in Europe and on Okinawa to this day. I expect nothing less but I can't possibly see how you'll spin that into American rule.
And honestly I think the pilots who flew the aircraft into American ships during the war were foolish to do so. Those above them who ordered or allowed this to take place were in fact inhuman monsters. There's always someone ordering this shit to take place and the one deciding that this is going to be our approach to fighting the occupation is never the poor sap with the C4 around his waist.
No, I don't know for a fact that the US will pull up and leave as soon as the suicide bombers stop murdering their fellow Iraqis. The Bush administration has said they will pull out of Iraq when the new Iraqi government is in place and running the country and I accept that at face value. I am certain you do not and clearly the insurgents don't either because they're doing the one thing that will prolong this. They're fighting what appears to me at least to be a fairly straightforward process.
Throw out Saddam (Iraq in general seemed pretty happy about this part), and then get a government in place that can run the country seems pretty simple to me. I guess they'd prefer to fire up another Islamic republic or just fight it out amongst themselves instead of dealing with an election and having to accept a majority rule situation. Regardless nobody has once stated that the US is there to set up the 51st state or to begin embarking on Imperialism Part Deux.
No in fact there weren't suicide bombings in Iraq prior to the US getting there. They were living in their little paradise happily (please, nevermind the mass graves) and we came along and brought that whole suicide bombing thing with us. It happens so often here in the states.
Take all the pleasure you wish from thinking your point has been proven. All you've proven to me is you didn't read what I wrote before reaching your conclusion. I did not say that Iraqis were subhuman. I said that those Iraqis sending their idiot fellow Iraqis to blow up even more of their fellow Iraqis were subhuman.
If I do get a clue I'll be sure to look you up and pass it on. You need it more than I ever will.
Just a couple of points.
Look at what my postings have "earned" me in moderation. If I cared about my karma then you think I might strike a different note every now and then. Certainly the three responses that I assume you are talking about where I cut/pasted the same thing to three distince assholes didn't exactly draw the +5's.
You know, soldiers in the army recieve a paycheck that they live on and support their families with. They don't get a big cash prize when they check out. One is a professional who does a job and the other is a murdering asshole who gets a prize. work it out.
And overall yes, America is morally a damned sight better than any single nation in the Middle-East/Arab World. There is absolutely no way in the universe you can make a believable case otherwise.
Operating under the assumption that you are the AC who I responded to then sure, I'd be happy to explain the perfectly obvious to you. Let's summarize this chain of posts briefly before I begin.
Michaeldot posted the following:
"Anyone who could strap themselves with explosives, walk into a crowded area filled with civilian men, women and children and blow everyone into small bloody fragments, cannot have any more intelligence than the stupidest machine it's possible to manufacture.
I'm afraid civilization is playing catchup to terrorists when it comes to the dumb robot category."
To which you claim to have replied with:
"As opposed to straping a bomb on to a plane and dropping it on crowded areas filled with civilian men, women and children and blow everyone into small bloody fragments?"
And of course I confess to thinking you a complete idiot at this point and calling you a fucktard. Now, ignoring the long list of completely unrelated questions you tossed out in the post I'm responding to lets get back to the actual subject matter. That is the idea that a suicide bomber killing "civilian men, women, and children cannot have any more intelligence than the stupidest machine it's possible to manufacture"
Now looking at this objectively do you think that it's intelligent to strap a bomb to yourself and detonate it? Do you think that suicide in this situation is an intelligent response when your alternatives include organizing those people in your country (as opposed to killing them) and then winning the power you wish through an election process? If you knew that the sooner Iraq appeared stable then the sooner the Americans would pull out the majority of their forces then what would you do? Would you lay low or grab the satchel charge?
The parent posters point was that a suicide bomber was a fucking idiot and that these so-called robots couldn't be any less intelligent than that. You then compared this act to a pilot bombing a target in a war. These acts couldn't be any further apart.
For on thing Lets also stop and point out that the suicide bomber we're talking about in Iraq is killing his own civilian men, women, and children. The pilot is dropping a bomb from his aircraft on a target he is given. This target is not in the United States. I'd give the intelligence edge to the pilot here. He is at the very least not executing an attack on his own people.
Then lets look at the survival rate of pilots versus suicide bombers. It comes as no surprise that pilots dropping bombs live through their mission far more often than suicide bombers. Again, I'm going to have to say that the pilot is more intelligent than the suicide bomber.
In addition to this I have to ask you whether you are in posession of any information about American attacks specifically aimed at civilian men, women, and children. That's important and if you know about some air strikes like this then you should probably let someone know in the media or at the very least find a way to mention it to a congressman. Pick a democrat for this because they're way into bringing things like this to light.
I'm probably going to go out on a limb here but you know what? I don't believe that the US military has made dropping bombs on civilian men, women, and children a priority in this war. I know that sounds zany and all but seriously, you would think that if this had been at the top of their list then we'd be hearing more about it.
Have they never dropped a bomb on civilians? Of course they have. It's called war and in wars there are civilian casualties. There are a lot fewer of them today then there were back in WWII or even back in Vietnam but they still happen. That ol' Iraqi suicide bomber though is intentionally trying to take out some civilians. That's why he's there. That's what he's about.
Now how can you honestly compare one of those assholes to an American pilot bombing a target he's been given?
The poster you respond
Yes, and just like those guards who recieved the proper training in treatment of POW's (which oddly enough doesn't include beheading them or shooting them alongside a road but people like you don't ever seem to point that out) the people operating these "robots" will in general do a solid job of it while a handful of them, or possibly even one will do something despicable.
See, the military gets it's evil killing machines with no remorse from... wait for it.... the civilian population.
That is of course where you and I come from and just as the civilian world is filled with good people with complete monsters sprinkled here and there in between the military sometimes finds that the guy they have leading a platoon or supervising in a POW camp is in fact a person with the judgement skills of a potato and the moral compass of a serial killer.
It happens there just like it happens here. In the world you learn that some guy who took care of his elderly mom and helped his neighbors fix their roof had the bodies of fourteen little boys buried under his house. In the military you find out that a bunch of assholes did what happened at Abu Ghraib.
The only difference between the civilian and the military there is people don't get to whine about the evil military when it happens in their town or on their street.
What a complete fucking asshole you must be if that was the first thing that popped into your mind. How many soldiers are in Iraq? What percentage of them were involved in torturing people in Iraq?
The military gets their soldiers from the civilian population (that would be the same pool of folks your brilliant ass came from) and just as you see in the civilian population a portion of them are twisted assholes who think it's amusing to do this kind of shit.
There's a reason why the parent posted using his name and you posted as AC.
It's because he had a point and you are a fucktard.
There's a reason why the parent posted using his name and you posted as AC.
It's because he had a point and you are a fucktard.
There's a reason why the parent posted using his name and you posted as AC.
It's because he had a point and you are a fucktard.
Not that you don't have a very good point in lots of ways but I think it's also kind of important to note that sometimes, every once in a while the human beings which we are told are our enemies in fact are our enemies.
Sometimes it's important not to welcome our new swastika wearing, deathcamp building overlords. Sometimes it's important to kill them.
This will probably not be well recieved by all but it's completely true.
Call me odd but I tend to discount the level to which a society values human life when it's cranking out suicide bombers and their families are hauling in fat paychecks for their actions. I of course know that not everyone in said society feels this way.
That probably won't go over too well either but it's only slashdot karma so who cares.
Hmmm.
Star Wars on VHS
Star Wars Special Edition on VHS
Star Wars Special Edition on DVD
Sounds oddly similar to
Star Wars 1.0
Star Wars 2.0
Star Wars 3.0 Professional Edition
You know sooner or later they'll just release "Star Wars X", pronounced "Star Wars Ten" and then all the fans will get confused thinking that they skipped Episodes VII, VIII, and IX. Minor revisions to Star Wars X will be released yearly with changes here and there and new exciting features but each one will cost you full price.
And it's possible that the fine products from Marlin Firearms will be incorporated in some fashion in this new DRM solution. It's still early in the process though so nothings certain.
Your last line reminded me of something.
Programmer #1: "Not a bad bit of programming huh? You know sometimes I amaze even myself."
Programmer #2: "They let us get that market share. It's the only explanation for the amount of adoption Linux has seen.
Programmer #1: "Easy? You call that easy?"
"Mental Masturbation", nothing more. What else can you possibly get from this? An interesting read but nothing I can really wrap my brain around in there if you know what I mean.
They killed the Lone Gunmen? Well thanks a lot for the spoiler warning there pal! I was waiting until the Really Very Special Edition DVD's with added commentary from the set caterer came out but now what's the point.
What am I, 9th in line or something? My first thought on seeing that pic was "IMHOTEP..."
That's not a diet my friends, that's an illness. Ok, maybe it could be a diet that became an illness but someone needs to sit down and have a talk with her and as another poster mentioned that talk might need to happen at a Krispy Kreme shop.
True that. The only way to even the battlefield here is if Adama and Vader (or whoever happens to be in charge on the SSD) get to also make up any shit they want at the drop of a hat.
You can't even say "Ok, Enterprise has to go with only what we absolutely know it can do" because who in the hell can honestly say they really know what it can and can't do? They've made so much shit up over the course of the various series that nobody could keep up with it. They wouldn't have a series "bible" over at Paramount. They'd have to have a series "Library of Congress" or something if they did try to write it all down and the first half of it would probably conflict with the rest.
See this is the kind of shit that happens when hacks like Berman and Braga run a SciFi franchise! Honest, hard working, and faithful fans can't even have a simple discussion about who would win in a fight anymore!
Berman and Braga must die.
Premature speculation Anonymous Idiot.
The Super Star Destroyer has not entered the fight yet. This match is between the Enterprise and the Galactica and no interference by Imperial forces will be permitted until a winner is decided. At that time, following a repair and reload interval the Super Star Destroyer may challenge the surviving vessel.
In the match we are currently on I'm going to ask for specifics before choosing a victor.
I want to know the following if this is to be done right.
a) Is this the original Galactica we're talking about or the new one?
b) Is this the Enterprise, Enterprise A, B, C, D, or E?
c) What are the rules of engagement? All weapons available (Can the Galactica launch Vipers) or simply ship to ship combat?
When I have recieved a response I shall speculate on this further.
And I wouldn't be so proud of the technological terror that is the Super Star Destroyer Mr AC. That thing went down pretty darn quick in ROTJ. Lost bridge shields and took on A-Wing to the bridge and it was heading for the second Death Star. That's pretty sad IMO.
Maybe you're on to something here. Could it be that this isn't the Rick Berman of "our" universe? Could it be that this is the mirror universe Rick Berman and he just shaved off his trademark mirror universe goatee? Could this all be intentional?
I think you're right and I think he needs to die.
And by the way, the simple fact that Battlestar Galactica rocks and Star Trek is terrible should tell everyone that the world has turned upside down. If someone had told me twenty years ago that I'd be getting my good SciFi from a remade Battlestar Galactica while Trek and Star Wars would make my stomach turn I'd have laughed till I cried.
All the things that Berman hates that you've pointed out oddly fit Galactica in it's new version but there they work. I can only speak for myself on this but the thing to me is that in the context of that story I want them there. I don't want them in Trek. They don't fit or work in Trek just as you've stated. It's like Berman is making a completely different show, poorly.
This entire season with all of it's episodes whipping out random items from the past (Orion slave girls glimpsed for what? 2 seconds?, augments doing a piss poor "Wrath of Khan" imitation, and the whole Sarek storyline with a Romulan thrown in has all been about trying to pull out the old "cool" and rubbing it up against the new crap to try and get some people interested again. It's no Bermans cool though. It's stuff that came from the body of work he's standing on as you said.
As for Friday nights this year I think Enterprise in all it's darker, lower-tech, on ship conflicted glory is doomed to get mugged by Galactica which frankly does what Berman would like to do and does it much better than he could ever hope to do it.
Good post and I couldn't agree more.
The year long story arc is a blessing to die hard fans and a bane to the network that wants new fans to find the program and start watching. Buffy was in much the same situation for most of it's run. It was a great show from the start IMO and so it managed to hook enough people early on to keep it respectable for years but the audience seemed to never grow. I remember reading somewhere that a person associated with Buffy said something along the lines of "The ratings pretty much never vary more than a point or so either way. We could do a nude episode and it would probably draw two points higher than normal". That's not word for word of course but it conveys the general idea.
Enterprise ran off more viewers than it could spare early on and so the very good idea of running a season long arc turned into a bad idea for them. You just don't jumpstart a weak series that way. If you have a good core audience then it makes for a sweet season but you're not going to gain any ground with it. You're more likely to lose people over the course of the year.
I didn't drink 15 beers without passing out for the "respect" or the "admiration".
I did it for the only reason worth drinking 15 beers. Because they're there man.