Topic: Late Era TNG discusion thread  (Read 7954 times)

0 Members and 3 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline Captain Pierce

  • Lt. Junior Grade
  • *
  • Posts: 356
Re: Late Era TNG discusion thread
« Reply #40 on: December 26, 2004, 07:01:55 pm »
Adonis, what part of

(and I don't want to start up that flame war again either)

did you not understand?  Jesus, I don't even dislike the Defiant, I think that--for the mission the Defiant was designed for--the model we got is probably better than the more "traditional" designs that were kicked about (which I would give some sort of link to if I could get to the site that has them  :-\ ).  My point was, that model wasn't picked because it was better for the mission, it was picked because it looked cooler, and that was the beginning of the problem...
Trekmods SFC/BC/Nexus forum

"Don't forget the original series, or dismiss it as obsolete. You owe it everything."  --Shane Johnson, author of Mr. Scott's Guide to the Enterprise

Offline Adonis

  • Dark Slayer
  • Lt. Junior Grade
  • *
  • Posts: 475
  • Gender: Male
  • Da Death Squad ™®©
    • Star Trek Excalibur
Re: Late Era TNG discusion thread
« Reply #41 on: December 26, 2004, 08:48:33 pm »
Adonis, what part of

(and I don't want to start up that flame war again either)

did you not understand?  Jesus, I don't even dislike the Defiant, I think that--for the mission the Defiant was designed for--the model we got is probably better than the more "traditional" designs that were kicked about (which I would give some sort of link to if I could get to the site that has them  :-\ ).  My point was, that model wasn't picked because it was better for the mission, it was picked because it looked cooler, and that was the beginning of the problem...

There is a big difference between a flamewar and facts ya know.
Easy is the path to wisdom for those not blinded by themselves.


Offline OlBuzzard

  • renegade
  • Lt. Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 1759
  • Gender: Male
Re: Late Era TNG discusion thread
« Reply #42 on: December 26, 2004, 11:28:26 pm »
IMHO ..   you are all missing the point (s) ..

and I think it's safe to say that this entire converstaion has now eroded away to the point that I feel as thought the work I have already started will be pointless to post here ...  at least for now.

(BTW...  there are quite a number of us who are not the least bit impressed with anyone refering to the NX-1 as a refinement of the Akira...  sorry ...  it's just not so.)

I think I will just leave the rest of this alone for now...

thanks

If you aim at nothing:  you WILL hit it every time !

Offline manitoba1073

  • FLEET ADMIRAL OF THE YARDS
  • Lt. Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 1119
  • Gender: Male
    • manitobashipyards
Re: Late Era TNG discusion thread
« Reply #43 on: December 27, 2004, 03:58:09 am »
a little better than the last one  lol



Offline Captain Pierce

  • Lt. Junior Grade
  • *
  • Posts: 356
Re: Late Era TNG discusion thread
« Reply #44 on: December 27, 2004, 11:21:50 am »
(BTW...  there are quite a number of us who are not the least bit impressed with anyone refering to the NX-1 as a refinement of the Akira...  sorry ...  it's just not so.)

And you certainly have a right to that opinion.  :)  I'm not trying to suggest otherwise, and I'm sorry if I've contributed to the erosion of the conversation that has made you feel posting your work would be pointless.  I, for one, would like to see it.
Trekmods SFC/BC/Nexus forum

"Don't forget the original series, or dismiss it as obsolete. You owe it everything."  --Shane Johnson, author of Mr. Scott's Guide to the Enterprise

Offline OlBuzzard

  • renegade
  • Lt. Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 1759
  • Gender: Male
Re: Late Era TNG discusion thread
« Reply #45 on: December 27, 2004, 11:35:25 am »
Captain Pierce ....

you are not the problem.  There is a difference between disagreement ..  and other wise ...  well...  let's just let it go before things get out of hand.

BTW...  I'm not up set.  I just think it would be best to handle this from another approach !  There's no point in futher review when key elements of our discussion has been ignored or pushed aside in order to hold on to a philosophy that only generates futher argumentation (as opposed to a resloution). 

thanks
If you aim at nothing:  you WILL hit it every time !