New Testingstan

you enjoyed skyfall? good for you.

i didn't say i didn't enjoy it. i just sort of have mixed feelings. it didn't really feel like old bond films or dcraig's other films. thats not good or bad just different.

It was my favourite Bond film so far, actually.

Crazedwraith wrote:you enjoyed skyfall? good for you.

i didn't say i didn't enjoy it. i just sort of have mixed feelings. it didn't really feel like old bond films or dcraig's other films. thats not good or bad just different.

Yeah I meant to say something more along the lines of "best Bond film thus far (that I've seen, anyway)" but kinda didn't. My bad. It would make more sense to have used that emote if I had conveyed what I meant to.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/christine ... 73965.html

That such dissonant voices were preserved in the canon of Star Wars, their tensions and contradictions unresolved, says something important about the conception of canon at Lucasfilm. Readers viewed this anthology as a collection of culturally significant writings worthy of preservation without the expectation or requirement that they agree with one another. Just as an attempt to impose harmony and consistency on the short stories collected in the Norton Anthology of English Literature would do great violence to those stories, any attempt to impose harmony and consistency on the diverse books collected in the Star Wars universe -- to extract a single message or truth -- does great violence to those books.

interesting take on canon

Crossposting random philosophical thought from SB.com shit-thread.

People say "hypocrite" like it's the worst thing ever but I don't really agree. There seems to be this idea out there that an honest, consistent, and unashamed douchebag is somehow better than a douchebag who's ashamed of being a douchebag. I kind of think the opposite. I suspect renounciation often begins with shame.

Agree/disagree?

It depends.

If a person changes their mind because they examined the issue and feels that they were wrong, ok.

If it's a politician, I'm immediately suspect.

eh i say it can go either way depending on the specific circumstances

it just came to my attention that mike wong didn't just ban me from his website, but also specifically blocked my account on the facebook, meaning i can't even see his comments on mutual friends' links (thus explaining why i see some posts with "show all 3 comments" but i can only see one or two...)

now the reason i find this funny is he and i never interacted on that site. weren't fb friends, didn't talk in comments, so there was no particular reason for it....

...except....hatred? LOL

Blocking him on Facebook was one of the best ideas I've had on there, he's just so toxic, angry all the time.

I get the sense that your banning and erasure was at least partially just a symptom of him getting sick and tired of SDN. He barely ever spends any time there anymore, and he just didn't want to put up with you baiting him in what he considers to be his house.

I think it even says somewhere in the board rules that he considers the board to be like an extension of his living room since he pays for the hardware.

I hope he doesn't treat people in his living room the way he treats them on his forum.

Everytime he has talked about his work place certainly makes me think that he would

Aaron wrote:Blocking him on Facebook was one of the best ideas I've had on there, he's just so toxic, angry all the time.

I can certainly see how someone might not want to deal with his more argumentative nature.

Ugh. So I watched NCIS again this week, thanks again for that ADR, your bomb present is in the mail.

They're still doing the painfully annoying sexual tension between the foreign chick and the dumbass. After like nine fucking seasons!. Why are they still dragging that out? Either have them fuck or shove the plot line in a closet somewhere and never let it out again.

On another note, I caught an episode of the cop drama that Kate's (the lady who got headshot in season 1) actress is doing now, and I certainly wouldn't mind a little sexual tension between those two leads

Viewers love unresolved sexual tension!

edit: Christ. JAG did it for nine years between Harm and Mac, and the last episode left it literally hanging on a coin toss!

What adr said.

Although it was resolved, sort of, in that they had agreed to get married. We'll just never know who had to retire and give up their career to make it work. But it was going to happen. Finally.

Granted when NCIS does it it makes DiNozzo seem a bit like a creeper. Granted Harm came across as an insecure child who couldn't just man up and get it on with Mac (she seemed perfectly willing at various points) but at least he didn't seem like a psuedo-stalker like Tony. Of course it didn't help with that one episode where Tony became downright obsessive with some author chick or whatever who went missing/dead I don't remember which. That and the one episode where it was heavily implied they actually did sleep together for reals but for some reason keep up the whole UST. I'm guessing maybe they thought that would be the last season so were planning to finally wrap it up except whoops lol they're still going so have to drag it out.

so google has owed me $25 since 2006

they don't send a check until it exceeds 100

but it's been six fucking years. i don't think its ever gonna happen

fucking google

edit:

"You can cancel your account now, and you''ll receive your final payment within approximately 90 days of the end of the month."

90 days???? well i guess what's that after six years

Darksi4190 wrote:I get the sense that your banning and erasure was at least partially just a symptom of him getting sick and tired of SDN. He barely ever spends any time there anymore, and he just didn't want to put up with you baiting him in what he considers to be his house.

I think it even says somewhere in the board rules that he considers the board to be like an extension of his living room since he pays for the hardware.

wow i didn't realize adr's posts literally got deleted entirely

dude must have been having a bad day or something

Yeah, that incident was weird. If DW had just banned adr, no one really would have batted an eye. But there was just so much bile that I guess he felt obligated to make adr an unperson in his online life, as if even seeing past posts would send him into a rage.

Yeah, I wasn't happy with Mike deleting him, mainly because it destroyed alot of PST. A simple banning would have sufficed, but it's Mikes board and he makes it clear from the getgo that he can and will do whatever the fuck he wants.

I rather like Stark's own unique brand of brutal honesty. But it may be my masochistic side and my placing honesty over civilities when discussing things talking here.

edit : whoops, wrong thread

Flagg wrote:Yeah, I wasn't happy with Mike deleting him, mainly because it destroyed alot of PST. A simple banning would have sufficed, but it's Mikes board and he makes it clear from the getgo that he can and will do whatever the fuck he wants.

Doesn't make him any less of a contemptible human being though. Even though I think adr is a fool and his ego outstrips his knowledge, since that day I've considered SDN to be totally disposable and don't care if I violate the rules or get banned.

ADR getting banned shocked me when it happened, but in retrospect I can kinda understand why Mike does it. Maybe that's because I've had years of associating with him privately as well as publicly, as well as having had some very fun and interesting conversations with ADR, but.... I see the two as being very similar. I've long noted in myself how the way I approach discussions with ADR (esp on SDN) was the same way I approached discussions with Mike. One of the things that drew me into conversation with ADR on SDN was how intelligent he was, but also how forthright and reasonable he was... as long as you approached him the right way. Go in iwth the usual 'LOLTREKSUCKS' mindset expecting it to be quietly taken and he wouldn't back down. He'd give as good as he took, and he did it well. He was opinionated, sometimes abrasive, but if you got past the attitude he was reasonable and fun. Which is... pretty much the same with Mike. He's very abrasive, he's difficult to get along with even if he calls you a friend (This I know from personal experience, having observed the conflicts between, for example, Wayne Poe and Rob Brown.)

I sometimes think part of the problem is most people view Mike through the lens of the forum, which is... a bit misleading, because the current nature and atmosphere of SDN is... not the best format to view anyone I think, really. We're not talking a massive difference mind, its just.. take away the adversarial nature, the conflicts, and the opportunity for yelling and insults, and he's not quite the same. Still opinionated, still blunt, but not nearly as abrasive.

The funny thing about ADR and Mike butting heads is... I see it stemming from them being way too much alike. Mike, on his board, is pretty much an alpha wolf, and IMHO ADR has always been another sort of 'alpha wolf' mindset. And when it comes to certain issues having those two interact is going to invariably result in friction because of that 'alpha-wolf-ness'.

now that isn't to say they're alike in ALL ways, or even most ways, because I don't think they are. But at least when it comes to certain key aspects pertaining to discussion and debate they have alot of similarities, and they're enough to stir up the conflict.

except he went further than just banning adr for some reason, and it wasn't in a thread that had anything to do with vs arguments

Dude, I'm not going to get into a debate trying to defend Mike from anyone here. He doesnt' need defenders and I doubt he really pays all that much attention. I'm not saying you have to like the guy, or change your attitude about him, but this is really like the whole STARK discussion, or the ICS debates, or discussions about TECHNICAL VS THEMATIC shit in general. Some things people will just feel passionately about for their own reasons, there is nothing inherently bad about that, and I don't expect people to magically change their minds because I post something different. I mean Its not like I run off when people go 'LOL BIGGATON LOVING STATBLOCK HUGGING FATNERDS THEY SUCK', I can at least understand a bit why they're saying it, even if it makes me uncomfortable and depressed.

My own interactions and view of Mike is different, and I simply feel I've had a different perspective on dealing with him (much as I have a different perspective on the ICS shit, and technical shit in general.) I'm posting this shit to put out that different point of view, hoping maybe it at least gives some undestanding of the issue. Isn't 'sharing experiences and trying to cultivate a greater awareness/understanding/empathy' part of the reason this board is here (because it was lacking on SDN?)