On SDN

[Deepcrush]

I've gotta ask, DC........who are our biggest haters?

And just for the record, I've never tried any of the other fourms out there. But from what I'm hearing, I don't think I'd fit in out there as well as I do in here. Our unique insanity works for me 8)

We catch a lot of hell from Stardestroyer.net

They seem to like running the Universe vs Universe thing and DITL has a strong stance against that. Other then Graham's STvSW.

[Tsukiyumi]

Well, I just read through some of that shite on SD.net. Very funny stuff. They should do sketch comedy.

Wait, it's not a parody? I see... Apparently, they're a bunch of jackasses. Especially "Darth Wong". He can suck my Darth Wa...

Never mind. I'll play nice. Hi, jackasses!

[Teaos]

Oh StarDestroyer.net hate us. This is just one example of the hatred they have for this site. They're mostly SW fanboys.

EAS tends to be a mixed bag. Honeslty they are kind of like us with slightly less insanity and a lot less creativity. They have been around for twice as long as us and have more members yet not as many posts. They have nothing like our RP's or the WOTW's or the design projects we do. They just tick along. We get referenced there sometimes but not a lot.

[Sionnach Glic]

Tsu, you're fairly luck Kendall isn't around anymore. He's a long time member of that site.

[Teaos]

He hasnt posted on that site since he left this one as well.

[Captain Seafort]

SDN's problem isn't so much the forum (which I can't say I've ever seen mentioned) so much as the main site.

Well, I just read through some of that shite on SD.net.

Got any specific examples of this "shite".

[Graham Kennedy]

I know Stardestroyer is no fan of the DITL site... that mostly dates back to the time I was heavy into the whole versus thing, many a year ago now. I don't really care what they think; lots of people in the world, and you sure as hell won't please them all no matter what you do, so you may as well do what you think is best. Besides, it amuses me somewhat that they care enough to still go on about it. Provoking hatred is better than provoking apathy!



I was thinking more of people's opinion of our forums. Somebody used the word "controversial"... it made me think of forums across the net saying "I can't believe what they just said on the DITL forum!"

I don't really look at other Trek sites much at all, especially now I have this forum to eat my time up. I used to lurk on SCN off and on, but I never got around to registering there.

[Mikey]

I have to say the only thing that annoys me (slightly) about Bernd's site (and it is excellent) is some of the fan-submitted tech and designs; "wank-tastic," as Rochey would say. For backstage info, anecdotes, and reference, EAS is great.

[Graham Kennedy]

I love EAS. It easily outdoes DITL in terms of researching the real world details of how a ship was built; if you want to know what models were used to kitbash something, or how many rows of windows there are on the Excelsior model, stuff like that, then EAS is the best there is, far and away. I have uber-respect for what Berndt has accomplished over there.

DITL doesn't come close to that, and doesn't attempt to; we're a different kind of site, almost a fan fiction kind of thing. We score over EAS in terms of breadth rather than depth IMO; a few thousand character bios, weapon write ups, the lists section, that kind of thing. And our database structure gives us a LOT of capability for cross-linking information.

[Tsukiyumi]

...Got any specific examples of this "shite".

Everything I saw.

[Captain Seafort]

I asked for examples. In my experience, SDN's the best site on the web for technical analysis of Trek ships' demonstrated capabilities, as opposed to DITL's focus on historical speculation and relative strengths. I'd like to know which aspects of it you consider "shite".

[KuvahMagh]

I love EAS. It easily outdoes DITL in terms of researching the real world details of how a ship was built; if you want to know what models were used to kitbash something, or how many rows of windows there are on the Excelsior model, stuff like that, then EAS is the best there is, far and away. I have uber-respect for what Berndt has accomplished over there.

DITL doesn't come close to that, and doesn't attempt to; we're a different kind of site, almost a fan fiction kind of thing. We score over EAS in terms of breadth rather than depth IMO; a few thousand character bios, weapon write ups, the lists section, that kind of thing. And our database structure gives us a LOT of capability for cross-linking information.

Completely agree. That's what I love about DITL how you work out histories and Specs for things, I may not always agree with everything but I can never dispute your material as being ridiculous, its always balanced and well thought out, in other words, no Uber-Cruisers here.

[Tsukiyumi]

...I'd like to know which aspects of it you consider "shite".

Sorry for not clarifying. I meant the forum.

[KuvahMagh]

Its funny that they blast Trekkies for being a bunch of fanbois but yet they are just as bad, if not worse than some Trekkie Fanbois. The continually have to twist what is said to fit their own arguments and then bash others for doing the same.

Frankly this whole thing they have with SW vs ST is crap, you can't compare the two, they are completely different and rely on less than real world physics. This type of argument helps neither side and int he end the only thing that matters is; 1969 & 1977, we were first, we win...

[Captain Seafort]

Its funny that they blast Trekkies for being a bunch of fanbois but yet they are just as bad, if not worse than some Trekkie Fanbois. The continually have to twist what is said to fit their own arguments and then bash others for doing the same.

Examples?

Frankly this whole thing they have with SW vs ST is crap, you can't compare the two, they are completely different and rely on less than real world physics.

Of course there are some aspects of it that you can't use real physics to analyse - that doesn't mean you can't analyse it in other respects, nor does it mean that all aspects of the shows are immune to real physics. Look at the number of debates we've had here that would have been impossible if we'd used the "it's not real" cop-out.

This type of argument helps neither side and int he end the only thing that matters is; 1969 & 1977, we were first, we win...

Wrong. 23 November 1963. We win.