If you were a member of Command and the measure came up for a vote, would you vote yay or nay?
Nay
-Creating an exception to a rule, is only inviting other 'exceptions' to be enacted or created.
-My thoughts are as they were with my original post. The cultural changes which developing fusion power would potentially bring about, must have internal impetus, rather than being created from an external source.
Natural cultural development and evolution, can only come within, no matter how much one might want to change the criteria just to allow ones own stance
I counter with the wise words of Captain Jean-Luc Picard, who said "...the question of justice has concerned me greatly of late. And I say ...there can be no justice so long as laws are absolute. Even life itself is an exercise in exceptions.
Words written by Melinda Snodgrass, I believe? I refuse to be cowed by, or panda to, the mouthpiece of someone so full of 'liberal vigour', that the mere mention of her president, actually causes an emotional melt-down. She's entitled to her opinions, but if I refused to be beaten about the head with them on a personal basis, I absolutely refuse to be beaten about the head with them third-hand
One cannot merely cite fear of a slippery slope to block any and all amendment to the law, each proposal must be considered on its own merits to determine if it is in keeping with the spirit of the law and the purpose to which it was enacted. One must trust the process by which law and policy is legislated to prevent spaghetti law, not taking what is now and freezing it in carbonite for all time.
One can do anything one wants, and is obliged to trust nothing. Laws are mutable and man-made. They can be changed for better or for worse.
You asked me for a yay or nay vote, which I provided, as well as my reasons for my choice. Please don't presume to lecture me about them because you disagree with my opinion or choice of vote
If you want to pretend that your character has written a stern letter to Admiral Quinn suggesting this change in policy, by all means, feel free, but please don't expect others to feel beholden to it
As to to your concern that cultural development and evolution must come from an internal impetus, tat is why the second criterion exists. To qualify for covert assistance, they must already be seeking the technology and have the willingness to implement it and thus their culture has already reached the necessary level of development. At that point it is not their culture that is lacking, it is their ability to crack a difficult technological puzzle. They want it, they're ready for it, they're seeking it, but it's difficult. They will get there, it's only a matter of time. The only thing this assistance would change is to accelerate the timetable slightly. By doing so, much unnecessary suffering and loss of life can be prevented.
And as I said, you're changing the goalposts to suit your argument. That's not giving a better argument, it's just fixing the outcome so as to try not to lose.
When faced with an 'option' like that, I will always vote counter to it on principle, because the process itself is being manipulated
I don't see how I'm moving the goalposts when everything I said is in the original proposal --I'm simply explaining it in more detail. Nothing has changed.
And you are of course beholden to nothing. The whole point is to have an enjoyable debate where ideas are explored and tested. I can't change canon and even if a hundred other forumites chimed in with "aye" votes it would still hold exactly zero weight with the developers of the game much less the writers of screen Trek at CBS and Paramount. This is just for fun.
You're not changing the goalposts of the conditions you gave, but you're changing the goalposts for the criteria for the Prime Directive, to enable your proposition
My opinion is still, like that of the Vulcans in Enterprise, that All Discoveries which impact the future of a society, Must come From that society
Also, with regards Picard, remember his stance on the Prime Directive when it came to the Klingon Civil war; He was more than prepared to uphold the absolute letter of the law
I think patrickngo said it better than I can:
but no system concieved by people could ever be perfect enough to prevent abuses or subversions, especially well intentioned subversions from within...
Fair enough. I make no secret of my affection for Kirk and his methods, with a much more nuanced and flexible Prime Directive and a lot less of the wishy-washy 90s cultural relativism uber alles mentality that took hold in TNG.
Something to consider, is that the Prime Directive was possibly (given the criteria of warp capability, I would say this is almost a certainty) amended between the eras of Kirk and Picard, specifically to prevent some of the results of the actions seen in TOS where Federation Officials became embroiled in, for want of a better term, internal native politics. If the rule was changed to reduce interactions with inhabitants of planets (such as the Capellans, or Tyree's people) I can't see why there would be an additional amendment made, such as your suggestion, which would fly counter to the notion of clamping down on interactions, which would have been made for good reasons
"I fight for the Users!" - Tron
"I was here before you, I will be here after you are gone. I am here, regardless of your acknowledgement or acceptance..." - The Truth
Even the PD as presented in TOS valued culture over individuals. Also, it was probably written by Vulcans.
It wasn't until TNG that a captain used it as a reason to not do anything. And in at least one case it seemed to be more of an excuse than a legitimate reason. The case of the Ornarans and Brekkians, for example, he felt that if he told the Ornarans the truth it'd cause a war. (While the Brekkians felt it was an internal matter and thus protected, you could also argue that since the Ornarans and Brekkians are separate civilizations, it's a matter of the Brekkians interfering with the natural development of the Ornarns) So he chose a third option. Which was to not give the Ornarans the spare parts they wanted. Granted, this was expected to lead to the collapse of both societies. But in the case of the Ornarans it'd probably only be a matter of months for the worst of it to pass.
Even though they were separate civilizations, their interraction was an internal affair between them. And of course the Prime Directive was an excuse, it was a plot device to create a challenge to be overcome
"I fight for the Users!" - Tron
"I was here before you, I will be here after you are gone. I am here, regardless of your acknowledgement or acceptance..." - The Truth
Even the PD as presented in TOS valued culture over individuals. Also, it was probably written by Vulcans.
It wasn't until TNG that a captain used it as a reason to not do anything. And in at least one case it seemed to be more of an excuse than a legitimate reason. The case of the Ornarans and Brekkians, for example, he felt that if he told the Ornarans the truth it'd cause a war. (While the Brekkians felt it was an internal matter and thus protected, you could also argue that since the Ornarans and Brekkians are separate civilizations, it's a matter of the Brekkians interfering with the natural development of the Ornarns) So he chose a third option. Which was to not give the Ornarans the spare parts they wanted. Granted, this was expected to lead to the collapse of both societies. But in the case of the Ornarans it'd probably only be a matter of months for the worst of it to pass.
I don't know, the vulcans seemed pretty reasonable about the matter in Enterprise. Their interactions with humans may not have been entirely altruistic, but they never took a "do nothing and dismiss any disaster as natural development" -position either.
On the other hand, Phlox's take on the subject (before an actual directive even existed) made me sick.
In the movie First Contact, it was mentioned that the Vulcans had known of the existence of Humans for a long time, but thought Humans were "too primitive" to be worth talking to.
But there's a big difference thinking your neighbors are too dumb to be worth talking to vs seeing their house on fire and deciding not to call for help because burning to death is part of their "natural development."
Yep, Worf's adopted brother got in hot water for SAVING a non warp planet from disaster.
Was he supposed to let them DIE horribly, and 'maintain' their natural development? Sounds pretty elitist to me.
If I recall, Nicholai didn't get in trouble with Starfleet, because he was a civilian, but he did TRIBBLE Picard off something chronic, for doing something which Picard was hamstrung by regulation, from doing
Also, Picard was a massive elitist and intellectual snob, even his own brother couldn't stand him
"I fight for the Users!" - Tron
"I was here before you, I will be here after you are gone. I am here, regardless of your acknowledgement or acceptance..." - The Truth
If you were a member of Command and the measure came up for a vote, would you vote yay or nay?
Nay
-Creating an exception to a rule, is only inviting other 'exceptions' to be enacted or created.
-My thoughts are as they were with my original post. The cultural changes which developing fusion power would potentially bring about, must have internal impetus, rather than being created from an external source.
Natural cultural development and evolution, can only come within, no matter how much one might want to change the criteria just to allow ones own stance
I counter with the wise words of Captain Jean-Luc Picard, who said "...the question of justice has concerned me greatly of late. And I say ...there can be no justice so long as laws are absolute. Even life itself is an exercise in exceptions.
Words written by Melinda Snodgrass, I believe? I refuse to be cowed by, or panda to, the mouthpiece of someone so full of 'liberal vigour', that the mere mention of her president, actually causes an emotional melt-down. She's entitled to her opinions, but if I refused to be beaten about the head with them on a personal basis, I absolutely refuse to be beaten about the head with them third-hand
One cannot merely cite fear of a slippery slope to block any and all amendment to the law, each proposal must be considered on its own merits to determine if it is in keeping with the spirit of the law and the purpose to which it was enacted. One must trust the process by which law and policy is legislated to prevent spaghetti law, not taking what is now and freezing it in carbonite for all time.
One can do anything one wants, and is obliged to trust nothing. Laws are mutable and man-made. They can be changed for better or for worse.
You asked me for a yay or nay vote, which I provided, as well as my reasons for my choice. Please don't presume to lecture me about them because you disagree with my opinion or choice of vote
If you want to pretend that your character has written a stern letter to Admiral Quinn suggesting this change in policy, by all means, feel free, but please don't expect others to feel beholden to it
As to to your concern that cultural development and evolution must come from an internal impetus, tat is why the second criterion exists. To qualify for covert assistance, they must already be seeking the technology and have the willingness to implement it and thus their culture has already reached the necessary level of development. At that point it is not their culture that is lacking, it is their ability to crack a difficult technological puzzle. They want it, they're ready for it, they're seeking it, but it's difficult. They will get there, it's only a matter of time. The only thing this assistance would change is to accelerate the timetable slightly. By doing so, much unnecessary suffering and loss of life can be prevented.
And as I said, you're changing the goalposts to suit your argument. That's not giving a better argument, it's just fixing the outcome so as to try not to lose.
When faced with an 'option' like that, I will always vote counter to it on principle, because the process itself is being manipulated
I don't see how I'm moving the goalposts when everything I said is in the original proposal --I'm simply explaining it in more detail. Nothing has changed.
And you are of course beholden to nothing. The whole point is to have an enjoyable debate where ideas are explored and tested. I can't change canon and even if a hundred other forumites chimed in with "aye" votes it would still hold exactly zero weight with the developers of the game much less the writers of screen Trek at CBS and Paramount. This is just for fun.
You're not changing the goalposts of the conditions you gave, but you're changing the goalposts for the criteria for the Prime Directive, to enable your proposition
My opinion is still, like that of the Vulcans in Enterprise, that All Discoveries which impact the future of a society, Must come From that society
Also, with regards Picard, remember his stance on the Prime Directive when it came to the Klingon Civil war; He was more than prepared to uphold the absolute letter of the law
I think patrickngo said it better than I can:
but no system concieved by people could ever be perfect enough to prevent abuses or subversions, especially well intentioned subversions from within...
Fair enough. I make no secret of my affection for Kirk and his methods, with a much more nuanced and flexible Prime Directive and a lot less of the wishy-washy 90s cultural relativism uber alles mentality that took hold in TNG.
Something to consider, is that the Prime Directive was possibly (given the criteria of warp capability, I would say this is almost a certainty) amended between the eras of Kirk and Picard, specifically to prevent some of the results of the actions seen in TOS where Federation Officials became embroiled in, for want of a better term, internal native politics. If the rule was changed to reduce interactions with inhabitants of planets (such as the Capellans, or Tyree's people) I can't see why there would be an additional amendment made, such as your suggestion, which would fly counter to the notion of clamping down on interactions, which would have been made for good reasons
What the world needs from Star Trek in times like these are less divisive political messages and more messages (I know I'll get **** for this) like that found in Star Trek Beyond that promotes unity and fellowship in the face of tremendous odds.
So "don't destroy your environment, especially if it's for glory and money", "don't try to pretend a problem doesn't exist and don't demonize those saying it exists", "creating jobs isn't an excuse to destroy your environment", "don't be racist", "help your people with acts, not propaganda" are divisive political messages, now?
The Federation has pretty much always been about the future as liberals like to believe it would turn out if they were in the driver's seat.....fortunately for the franchise Roddenberry and Co weren't like you and certain other posters otherwise TOS wouldn't have lasted as long as it did and you'd have never gotten TNG, DS9, et al or the movies. New Kentar is frankly ridiculous, if Cryptic has decided to pander to the soi disant "Resistance" (a term which is an insult to real Resistance movements that risked their lives against real tyrannies) that path will lose them more players than they think. Andromeda's flop is strong evidence that SJW pandering cannot carry a franchise.
In short, like it or not, you need us "rightards" if you want this game to thrive...just as we need you.
The Dreadnought can be really tough. It seems to me the in the first stage of the fight it hardly takes any damage. My more advanced characters have hardly any problems with it because of the immunties and other defensive measures from spec and traits; they can survive an incoming attack. It is pretty hard to evade one, because the Dread can turn really fast and it is difficult to see its orientation.
Also, sometimes your allies stay behind even Kumaarke. I fly back and they follow me and engage. The Dread can also put its targetting reticule on you from about 15 km. Projectiles can hit you at about 12 km. That is not just after I flew out of range. It happened after disengaging and loosing aggro.
MY KDF characters use an Aceton Assimilator. As long as it is active/present the mission does not continue. It is regarded as a hostile mob.
Disabling hostile mobs is a great feature, but there are some issues. They change to a friendly status, but are still your target and receive suddenly all your heals and buffs you meant to use on yourself. Can we have a mechanic, an option, so we loose target, when it is no longer hostile? A neutral status? Sensor Analysis works unhandy since you have to deselect the target manually.
The black outs your away team is prone to in the first ground part because of the polluted air fits in with the story, gameplay wise, especially on replays, it is annoying.
It melts pretty fast with my Obelisk Carrier.....first time I went at it with that vessel I had it down to about 15% in a minute or two before it fled. My toon who tried it in a Temporal Cruiser struggled somewhat.
Map design: 10/10
Ship design: 7/10 (Ships seemed to be reused Deferi ships and the naming choice for the Prime Minister's ship could have been more creative)
Written content: 3/10 (Suffers from a long standing trend that seems to date back to season 10, rushed)
Actually you need alot more mission's like it where it is not all just shoot em up but have mission's where your exploring planet's and meeting new Race's on planet's like Star Trek was based on. Not just a shoot em up game.
> @silverlobes#2676 said:
> smokebailey wrote: »
>
> warpangel wrote: »
>
> markhawkman wrote: »
>
> warpangel wrote: »
>
> markhawkman wrote: »
>
> Even the PD as presented in TOS valued culture over individuals. Also, it was probably written by Vulcans.
>
> It wasn't until TNG that a captain used it as a reason to not do anything. And in at least one case it seemed to be more of an excuse than a legitimate reason. The case of the Ornarans and Brekkians, for example, he felt that if he told the Ornarans the truth it'd cause a war. (While the Brekkians felt it was an internal matter and thus protected, you could also argue that since the Ornarans and Brekkians are separate civilizations, it's a matter of the Brekkians interfering with the natural development of the Ornarns) So he chose a third option. Which was to not give the Ornarans the spare parts they wanted. Granted, this was expected to lead to the collapse of both societies. But in the case of the Ornarans it'd probably only be a matter of months for the worst of it to pass.
>
>
>
> I don't know, the vulcans seemed pretty reasonable about the matter in Enterprise. Their interactions with humans may not have been entirely altruistic, but they never took a "do nothing and dismiss any disaster as natural development" -position either.
>
> On the other hand, Phlox's take on the subject (before an actual directive even existed) made me sick.
>
>
>
> In the movie First Contact, it was mentioned that the Vulcans had known of the existence of Humans for a long time, but thought Humans were "too primitive" to be worth talking to.
>
>
>
> But there's a big difference thinking your neighbors are too dumb to be worth talking to vs seeing their house on fire and deciding not to call for help because burning to death is part of their "natural development."
>
>
>
>
> Yep, Worf's adopted brother got in hot water for SAVING a non warp planet from disaster.
>
>
> Was he supposed to let them DIE horribly, and 'maintain' their natural development? Sounds pretty elitist to me.
>
>
>
> If I recall, Nicholai didn't get in trouble with Starfleet, because he was a civilian, but he did **** Picard off something chronic, for doing something which Picard was hamstrung by regulation, from doing
>
> Also, Picard was a massive elitist and intellectual snob, even his own brother couldn't stand him
The only reason Nikolai didn't face charges in a Federation court is because he stayed with the primitives on their new planet to raise the child he had on the way (mother played by the same actress as Cassidy Yates). Had he returned with the Enterprise he would have faced charges for his actions.
I don't believe he would have, because as I said, the Prime Directive is a Starfleet General Order, it doesn't apply to Federation civilians, and Nikolai, was a civilian scientist, not a Starfleet officer
"I fight for the Users!" - Tron
"I was here before you, I will be here after you are gone. I am here, regardless of your acknowledgement or acceptance..." - The Truth
which doesn't mean the federation doesn't have its own law against interfering with pre-warp alien cultures, but as such a thing hasn't ever been mentioned onscreen...it doesn't exist
A normie goes "Oh, what's this?"
An otaku goes "UwU, what's this?"
A furry goes "OwO, what's this?"
A werewolf goes "Awoo, what's this?"
"It's nothing personal, I just don't feel like I've gotten to know a person until I've sniffed their crotch." "We said 'no' to Mr. Curiosity. We're not home. Curiosity is not welcome, it is not to be invited in. Curiosity...is bad. It gets you in trouble, it gets you killed, and more importantly...it makes you poor!"
Passion and Serenity are one.
I gain power by understanding both.
In the chaos of their battle, I bring order.
I am a shadow, darkness born from light.
The Force is united within me.
Among the list of charges on Harry Mudd's rap sheet were several that equated to interfering with underdeveloped cultures. As for Nikolai, Worf & Picard both told him he would face charges.
Link?
"I fight for the Users!" - Tron
"I was here before you, I will be here after you are gone. I am here, regardless of your acknowledgement or acceptance..." - The Truth
> @silverlobes#2676 said:
> smokebailey wrote: »
>
> warpangel wrote: »
>
> markhawkman wrote: »
>
> warpangel wrote: »
>
> markhawkman wrote: »
>
> Even the PD as presented in TOS valued culture over individuals. Also, it was probably written by Vulcans.
>
> It wasn't until TNG that a captain used it as a reason to not do anything. And in at least one case it seemed to be more of an excuse than a legitimate reason. The case of the Ornarans and Brekkians, for example, he felt that if he told the Ornarans the truth it'd cause a war. (While the Brekkians felt it was an internal matter and thus protected, you could also argue that since the Ornarans and Brekkians are separate civilizations, it's a matter of the Brekkians interfering with the natural development of the Ornarns) So he chose a third option. Which was to not give the Ornarans the spare parts they wanted. Granted, this was expected to lead to the collapse of both societies. But in the case of the Ornarans it'd probably only be a matter of months for the worst of it to pass.
>
>
>
> I don't know, the vulcans seemed pretty reasonable about the matter in Enterprise. Their interactions with humans may not have been entirely altruistic, but they never took a "do nothing and dismiss any disaster as natural development" -position either.
>
> On the other hand, Phlox's take on the subject (before an actual directive even existed) made me sick.
>
>
>
> In the movie First Contact, it was mentioned that the Vulcans had known of the existence of Humans for a long time, but thought Humans were "too primitive" to be worth talking to.
>
>
>
> But there's a big difference thinking your neighbors are too dumb to be worth talking to vs seeing their house on fire and deciding not to call for help because burning to death is part of their "natural development."
>
>
>
>
> Yep, Worf's adopted brother got in hot water for SAVING a non warp planet from disaster.
>
>
> Was he supposed to let them DIE horribly, and 'maintain' their natural development? Sounds pretty elitist to me.
>
>
>
> If I recall, Nicholai didn't get in trouble with Starfleet, because he was a civilian, but he did **** Picard off something chronic, for doing something which Picard was hamstrung by regulation, from doing
>
> Also, Picard was a massive elitist and intellectual snob, even his own brother couldn't stand him
The only reason Nikolai didn't face charges in a Federation court is because he stayed with the primitives on their new planet to raise the child he had on the way (mother played by the same actress as Cassidy Yates). Had he returned with the Enterprise he would have faced charges for his actions.
Do the right thing.....get thrown into a jail cell.
Even if they didn't have laws against civilians interfering with alien culture, they're pretty much guaranteed to have one against commandeering the flagship's transporters and holodeck to do it.
Even if they didn't have laws against civilians interfering with alien culture, they're pretty much guaranteed to have one against commandeering the flagship's transporters and holodeck to do it.
And what if they do? What difference does it make to the story? What's the point in nitpicking the moral minutiae? What does it matter?
"I fight for the Users!" - Tron
"I was here before you, I will be here after you are gone. I am here, regardless of your acknowledgement or acceptance..." - The Truth
Even if they didn't have laws against civilians interfering with alien culture, they're pretty much guaranteed to have one against commandeering the flagship's transporters and holodeck to do it.
And what if they do? What difference does it make to the story? What's the point in nitpicking the moral minutiae? What does it matter?
Because good stories make you think. Thinking is good.
Thinking is good, but this isn't thinking. It's arguing. And as smokebailey pointed out:
> @silverlobes#2676 said:
> smokebailey wrote: »
>
> warpangel wrote: »
>
> markhawkman wrote: »
>
> warpangel wrote: »
>
> markhawkman wrote: »
>
> Even the PD as presented in TOS valued culture over individuals. Also, it was probably written by Vulcans.
>
> It wasn't until TNG that a captain used it as a reason to not do anything. And in at least one case it seemed to be more of an excuse than a legitimate reason. The case of the Ornarans and Brekkians, for example, he felt that if he told the Ornarans the truth it'd cause a war. (While the Brekkians felt it was an internal matter and thus protected, you could also argue that since the Ornarans and Brekkians are separate civilizations, it's a matter of the Brekkians interfering with the natural development of the Ornarns) So he chose a third option. Which was to not give the Ornarans the spare parts they wanted. Granted, this was expected to lead to the collapse of both societies. But in the case of the Ornarans it'd probably only be a matter of months for the worst of it to pass.
>
>
>
> I don't know, the vulcans seemed pretty reasonable about the matter in Enterprise. Their interactions with humans may not have been entirely altruistic, but they never took a "do nothing and dismiss any disaster as natural development" -position either.
>
> On the other hand, Phlox's take on the subject (before an actual directive even existed) made me sick.
>
>
>
> In the movie First Contact, it was mentioned that the Vulcans had known of the existence of Humans for a long time, but thought Humans were "too primitive" to be worth talking to.
>
>
>
> But there's a big difference thinking your neighbors are too dumb to be worth talking to vs seeing their house on fire and deciding not to call for help because burning to death is part of their "natural development."
>
>
>
>
> Yep, Worf's adopted brother got in hot water for SAVING a non warp planet from disaster.
>
>
> Was he supposed to let them DIE horribly, and 'maintain' their natural development? Sounds pretty elitist to me.
>
>
>
> If I recall, Nicholai didn't get in trouble with Starfleet, because he was a civilian, but he did **** Picard off something chronic, for doing something which Picard was hamstrung by regulation, from doing
>
> Also, Picard was a massive elitist and intellectual snob, even his own brother couldn't stand him
The only reason Nikolai didn't face charges in a Federation court is because he stayed with the primitives on their new planet to raise the child he had on the way (mother played by the same actress as Cassidy Yates). Had he returned with the Enterprise he would have faced charges for his actions.
Do the right thing.....get thrown into a jail cell.
~face palm~
"I fight for the Users!" - Tron
"I was here before you, I will be here after you are gone. I am here, regardless of your acknowledgement or acceptance..." - The Truth
Even if they didn't have laws against civilians interfering with alien culture, they're pretty much guaranteed to have one against commandeering the flagship's transporters and holodeck to do it.
And what if they do? What difference does it make to the story? What's the point in nitpicking the moral minutiae? What does it matter?
Because good stories make you think. Thinking is good.
Thinking is good, but this isn't thinking. It's arguing. And as smokebailey pointed out:
> @silverlobes#2676 said:
> smokebailey wrote: »
>
> warpangel wrote: »
>
> markhawkman wrote: »
>
> warpangel wrote: »
>
> markhawkman wrote: »
>
> Even the PD as presented in TOS valued culture over individuals. Also, it was probably written by Vulcans.
>
> It wasn't until TNG that a captain used it as a reason to not do anything. And in at least one case it seemed to be more of an excuse than a legitimate reason. The case of the Ornarans and Brekkians, for example, he felt that if he told the Ornarans the truth it'd cause a war. (While the Brekkians felt it was an internal matter and thus protected, you could also argue that since the Ornarans and Brekkians are separate civilizations, it's a matter of the Brekkians interfering with the natural development of the Ornarns) So he chose a third option. Which was to not give the Ornarans the spare parts they wanted. Granted, this was expected to lead to the collapse of both societies. But in the case of the Ornarans it'd probably only be a matter of months for the worst of it to pass.
>
>
>
> I don't know, the vulcans seemed pretty reasonable about the matter in Enterprise. Their interactions with humans may not have been entirely altruistic, but they never took a "do nothing and dismiss any disaster as natural development" -position either.
>
> On the other hand, Phlox's take on the subject (before an actual directive even existed) made me sick.
>
>
>
> In the movie First Contact, it was mentioned that the Vulcans had known of the existence of Humans for a long time, but thought Humans were "too primitive" to be worth talking to.
>
>
>
> But there's a big difference thinking your neighbors are too dumb to be worth talking to vs seeing their house on fire and deciding not to call for help because burning to death is part of their "natural development."
>
>
>
>
> Yep, Worf's adopted brother got in hot water for SAVING a non warp planet from disaster.
>
>
> Was he supposed to let them DIE horribly, and 'maintain' their natural development? Sounds pretty elitist to me.
>
>
>
> If I recall, Nicholai didn't get in trouble with Starfleet, because he was a civilian, but he did **** Picard off something chronic, for doing something which Picard was hamstrung by regulation, from doing
>
> Also, Picard was a massive elitist and intellectual snob, even his own brother couldn't stand him
The only reason Nikolai didn't face charges in a Federation court is because he stayed with the primitives on their new planet to raise the child he had on the way (mother played by the same actress as Cassidy Yates). Had he returned with the Enterprise he would have faced charges for his actions.
Do the right thing.....get thrown into a jail cell.
~face palm~
If you don't believe our sharing of thought worthwhile, you're free to not participate.
Even if they didn't have laws against civilians interfering with alien culture, they're pretty much guaranteed to have one against commandeering the flagship's transporters and holodeck to do it.
And what if they do? What difference does it make to the story? What's the point in nitpicking the moral minutiae? What does it matter?
Because good stories make you think. Thinking is good.
Thinking is good, but this isn't thinking. It's arguing. And as smokebailey pointed out:
> @silverlobes#2676 said:
> smokebailey wrote: »
>
> warpangel wrote: »
>
> markhawkman wrote: »
>
> warpangel wrote: »
>
> markhawkman wrote: »
>
> Even the PD as presented in TOS valued culture over individuals. Also, it was probably written by Vulcans.
>
> It wasn't until TNG that a captain used it as a reason to not do anything. And in at least one case it seemed to be more of an excuse than a legitimate reason. The case of the Ornarans and Brekkians, for example, he felt that if he told the Ornarans the truth it'd cause a war. (While the Brekkians felt it was an internal matter and thus protected, you could also argue that since the Ornarans and Brekkians are separate civilizations, it's a matter of the Brekkians interfering with the natural development of the Ornarns) So he chose a third option. Which was to not give the Ornarans the spare parts they wanted. Granted, this was expected to lead to the collapse of both societies. But in the case of the Ornarans it'd probably only be a matter of months for the worst of it to pass.
>
>
>
> I don't know, the vulcans seemed pretty reasonable about the matter in Enterprise. Their interactions with humans may not have been entirely altruistic, but they never took a "do nothing and dismiss any disaster as natural development" -position either.
>
> On the other hand, Phlox's take on the subject (before an actual directive even existed) made me sick.
>
>
>
> In the movie First Contact, it was mentioned that the Vulcans had known of the existence of Humans for a long time, but thought Humans were "too primitive" to be worth talking to.
>
>
>
> But there's a big difference thinking your neighbors are too dumb to be worth talking to vs seeing their house on fire and deciding not to call for help because burning to death is part of their "natural development."
>
>
>
>
> Yep, Worf's adopted brother got in hot water for SAVING a non warp planet from disaster.
>
>
> Was he supposed to let them DIE horribly, and 'maintain' their natural development? Sounds pretty elitist to me.
>
>
>
> If I recall, Nicholai didn't get in trouble with Starfleet, because he was a civilian, but he did **** Picard off something chronic, for doing something which Picard was hamstrung by regulation, from doing
>
> Also, Picard was a massive elitist and intellectual snob, even his own brother couldn't stand him
The only reason Nikolai didn't face charges in a Federation court is because he stayed with the primitives on their new planet to raise the child he had on the way (mother played by the same actress as Cassidy Yates). Had he returned with the Enterprise he would have faced charges for his actions.
Do the right thing.....get thrown into a jail cell.
~face palm~
If you don't believe our sharing of thought worthwhile, you're free to not participate.
Nice attitude.
I returned to this conversation, because azrael directed a comment at something I had previously posted as part of the conversation. Two weeks ago.
Given that azrael's comments to me have been nothing but argumentative, I find his responding to a comment made fifteen days ago, utterly insincere in any attempt to have a meaningful dialogue, but that doesn't mean that I should simply ignore them.
"I fight for the Users!" - Tron
"I was here before you, I will be here after you are gone. I am here, regardless of your acknowledgement or acceptance..." - The Truth
I returned to this conversation, because azrael directed a comment at something I had previously posted as part of the conversation. Two weeks ago.
Given that azrael's comments to me have been nothing but argumentative, I find his responding to a comment made fifteen days ago, utterly insincere in any attempt to have a meaningful dialogue, but that doesn't mean that I should simply ignore them.
Actually, the only person I see being argumentative here is you.
The fact that azrael responded 15 days later doesn't speak to his sincerity or whether he intends on meaningful dialogue at all, only that for his own reasons he didn't respond any earlier. You're jumping to conclusions.
Star Trek Online Volunteer Community Moderator and Resident She-Wolf
Community Moderators are Unpaid Volunteers and NOT Employees of Gearbox/Cryptic
Views and Opinions May Not Reflect the Views and Opinions of Gearbox/Cryptic
I returned to this conversation, because azrael directed a comment at something I had previously posted as part of the conversation. Two weeks ago.
Given that azrael's comments to me have been nothing but argumentative, I find his responding to a comment made fifteen days ago, utterly insincere in any attempt to have a meaningful dialogue, but that doesn't mean that I should simply ignore them.
Actually, the only person I see being argumentative here is you.
The fact that azrael responded 15 days later doesn't speak to his sincerity or whether he intends on meaningful dialogue at all, only that for his own reasons he didn't respond any earlier. You're jumping to conclusions.
Every comment azrael has made to me,p since signing up and posting, has been either argumentative or condescending. Perhaps if people stopped treating me like some n00b piece of TRIBBLE to ignore or bait for an argument, perhaps I would no longer need to be what you call 'argumentative', and what I call 'standing up for my opinion'. I'll stop 'jumping to conclusions', when people start engaging me in a civilized conversation, rather than simply being dismissive or condescending.
"I fight for the Users!" - Tron
"I was here before you, I will be here after you are gone. I am here, regardless of your acknowledgement or acceptance..." - The Truth
Every comment azrael has made to me,p since signing up and posting, has been either argumentative or condescending. Perhaps if people stopped treating me like some n00b piece of **** to ignore or bait for an argument, perhaps I would no longer need to be what you call 'argumentative', and what I call 'standing up for my opinion'. I'll stop 'jumping to conclusions', when people start engaging me in a civilized conversation, rather than simply being dismissive or condescending.
The thing is, I read nothing argumentative, condescending, dismissive, or uncivil from anyone in this exchange towards you. The only argumentative, condescending, dismissive, or uncivil tone struck in this exchange that I see has been by you.
Star Trek Online Volunteer Community Moderator and Resident She-Wolf
Community Moderators are Unpaid Volunteers and NOT Employees of Gearbox/Cryptic
Views and Opinions May Not Reflect the Views and Opinions of Gearbox/Cryptic
You know, the head of the Trads, who sicks his fleet on yas at the end battle of the quest, reminds of me that jerk from "First Contact", the TNG episode, not the film, where that one guy.....the close minded gimp with the glasses, who martyred himself, to "keep to the old ways" and caused the entire planet's governments to dismantle their planned warp flights, reject first contact with the Federation, and intending to teach the youth to stick to their old ways. Same as in the Jodie Foster film, "Contact" (notice a trend, folks? ) where the obsessed head of a religious group went as far to try and blow up the facility Jodie's character was at for her planned trip...and, interestingly enough, the govt knuckle draggers also tried to discredit her. (watch the film, it's a good one).
So that Trad guy does not remind me of a certain politician the media's been one sided against thus far, BUT of your crusty, Douglas MacArthur type....and even HIS way of thinking is similar:
However, General MacArthur did not deliver a speech at West Point that year, nor is there any record of his specifically stating an opinion that the “next war” would be an “interplanetary” one.
“He believes that because of the developments of science all the countries on earth will have to unite to survive and to make a common front against attack by people from other planets.”
Military fear mongering, dislike for the unlike to the next level.
Can see the Trad guy rally to 'unite' the Kentari against the Federation and Klingons, fearing a loss of status quo and his ideologies rendered obsolete.
You know, the head of the Trads, who sicks his fleet on yas at the end battle of the quest, reminds of me that jerk from "First Contact", the TNG episode, not the film, where that one guy.....the close minded gimp with the glasses, who martyred himself, to "keep to the old ways" and caused the entire planet's governments to dismantle their planned warp flights, reject first contact with the Federation, and intending to teach the youth to stick to their old ways. Same as in the Jodie Foster film, "Contact" (notice a trend, folks? ) where the obsessed head of a religious group went as far to try and blow up the facility Jodie's character was at for her planned trip...and, interestingly enough, the govt knuckle draggers also tried to discredit her. (watch the film, it's a good one).
So that Trad guy does not remind me of a certain politician the media's been one sided against thus far, BUT of your crusty, Douglas MacArthur type....and even HIS way of thinking is similar:
However, General MacArthur did not deliver a speech at West Point that year, nor is there any record of his specifically stating an opinion that the “next war” would be an “interplanetary” one.
“He believes that because of the developments of science all the countries on earth will have to unite to survive and to make a common front against attack by people from other planets.”
Military fear mongering, dislike for the unlike to the next level.
Can see the Trad guy rally to 'unite' the Kentari against the Federation and Klingons, fearing a loss of status quo and his ideologies rendered obsolete.
I honestly think he was planning a coup against the progressive prime minister, he had all his chess pieces lined up, and our arrival screwed everything up. He failed to stop us making contact, he saw everything falling apart that he had built up, and he snapped. Blaze of glory time, hoping to take down the aliens with sheer force of numbers by throwing his entire space military at us. He was still outgunned and he failed, but he had nothing to lose at that point anyhow. Had he won he surely would have killed the PM and blamed it on us, saying we pretended to come in peace and then attacked their moon and slaughtered their leader looking to take over but the brave military rallied to wipe out the evil alien threat...
And he would have gotten away with it too, if not for those meddling Feds!
Yeah, that was similar to my take on it too.
Also, I'm pretty sure MacArthur's statement was meant to be taken in the context of explaining what sort of influence could possibly cause humans to actually work together.
and he was proven right in independence day - pretty much all of humanity fought together as one to take out...whatever those aliens were called (did they ever give their species name or get an earth designation - that wasn't derogatory?)
A normie goes "Oh, what's this?"
An otaku goes "UwU, what's this?"
A furry goes "OwO, what's this?"
A werewolf goes "Awoo, what's this?"
"It's nothing personal, I just don't feel like I've gotten to know a person until I've sniffed their crotch." "We said 'no' to Mr. Curiosity. We're not home. Curiosity is not welcome, it is not to be invited in. Curiosity...is bad. It gets you in trouble, it gets you killed, and more importantly...it makes you poor!"
Passion and Serenity are one.
I gain power by understanding both.
In the chaos of their battle, I bring order.
I am a shadow, darkness born from light.
The Force is united within me.
Comments
"I was here before you, I will be here after you are gone. I am here, regardless of your acknowledgement or acceptance..." - The Truth
"I was here before you, I will be here after you are gone. I am here, regardless of your acknowledgement or acceptance..." - The Truth
Also, Picard was a massive elitist and intellectual snob, even his own brother couldn't stand him
"I was here before you, I will be here after you are gone. I am here, regardless of your acknowledgement or acceptance..." - The Truth
The Federation has pretty much always been about the future as liberals like to believe it would turn out if they were in the driver's seat.....fortunately for the franchise Roddenberry and Co weren't like you and certain other posters otherwise TOS wouldn't have lasted as long as it did and you'd have never gotten TNG, DS9, et al or the movies. New Kentar is frankly ridiculous, if Cryptic has decided to pander to the soi disant "Resistance" (a term which is an insult to real Resistance movements that risked their lives against real tyrannies) that path will lose them more players than they think. Andromeda's flop is strong evidence that SJW pandering cannot carry a franchise.
In short, like it or not, you need us "rightards" if you want this game to thrive...just as we need you.
It melts pretty fast with my Obelisk Carrier.....first time I went at it with that vessel I had it down to about 15% in a minute or two before it fled. My toon who tried it in a Temporal Cruiser struggled somewhat.
Map design: 10/10
Ship design: 7/10 (Ships seemed to be reused Deferi ships and the naming choice for the Prime Minister's ship could have been more creative)
Written content: 3/10 (Suffers from a long standing trend that seems to date back to season 10, rushed)
Overall rating: 6/10.
(not you personally, but in general
"I was here before you, I will be here after you are gone. I am here, regardless of your acknowledgement or acceptance..." - The Truth
"I was here before you, I will be here after you are gone. I am here, regardless of your acknowledgement or acceptance..." - The Truth
#LegalizeAwoo
A normie goes "Oh, what's this?"
An otaku goes "UwU, what's this?"
A furry goes "OwO, what's this?"
A werewolf goes "Awoo, what's this?"
"It's nothing personal, I just don't feel like I've gotten to know a person until I've sniffed their crotch."
"We said 'no' to Mr. Curiosity. We're not home. Curiosity is not welcome, it is not to be invited in. Curiosity...is bad. It gets you in trouble, it gets you killed, and more importantly...it makes you poor!"
"I was here before you, I will be here after you are gone. I am here, regardless of your acknowledgement or acceptance..." - The Truth
Do the right thing.....get thrown into a jail cell.
~face palm~
"I was here before you, I will be here after you are gone. I am here, regardless of your acknowledgement or acceptance..." - The Truth
And what if they do? What difference does it make to the story? What's the point in nitpicking the moral minutiae? What does it matter?
"I was here before you, I will be here after you are gone. I am here, regardless of your acknowledgement or acceptance..." - The Truth
"I was here before you, I will be here after you are gone. I am here, regardless of your acknowledgement or acceptance..." - The Truth
I returned to this conversation, because azrael directed a comment at something I had previously posted as part of the conversation. Two weeks ago.
Given that azrael's comments to me have been nothing but argumentative, I find his responding to a comment made fifteen days ago, utterly insincere in any attempt to have a meaningful dialogue, but that doesn't mean that I should simply ignore them.
"I was here before you, I will be here after you are gone. I am here, regardless of your acknowledgement or acceptance..." - The Truth
Actually, the only person I see being argumentative here is you.
The fact that azrael responded 15 days later doesn't speak to his sincerity or whether he intends on meaningful dialogue at all, only that for his own reasons he didn't respond any earlier. You're jumping to conclusions.
Views and Opinions May Not Reflect the Views and Opinions of Gearbox/Cryptic
Moderation Problems/Issues? Please contact the Community Manager
Terms of Service / Community Rules and Policies / FCT
Facebook / Twitter / Twitch
"I was here before you, I will be here after you are gone. I am here, regardless of your acknowledgement or acceptance..." - The Truth
The thing is, I read nothing argumentative, condescending, dismissive, or uncivil from anyone in this exchange towards you. The only argumentative, condescending, dismissive, or uncivil tone struck in this exchange that I see has been by you.
Views and Opinions May Not Reflect the Views and Opinions of Gearbox/Cryptic
Moderation Problems/Issues? Please contact the Community Manager
Terms of Service / Community Rules and Policies / FCT
Facebook / Twitter / Twitch
So that Trad guy does not remind me of a certain politician the media's been one sided against thus far, BUT of your crusty, Douglas MacArthur type....and even HIS way of thinking is similar:
However, General MacArthur did not deliver a speech at West Point that year, nor is there any record of his specifically stating an opinion that the “next war” would be an “interplanetary” one.
“He believes that because of the developments of science all the countries on earth will have to unite to survive and to make a common front against attack by people from other planets.”
http://www.snopes.com/quotes/macarthur.asp
Military fear mongering, dislike for the unlike to the next level.
Can see the Trad guy rally to 'unite' the Kentari against the Federation and Klingons, fearing a loss of status quo and his ideologies rendered obsolete.
Also, I'm pretty sure MacArthur's statement was meant to be taken in the context of explaining what sort of influence could possibly cause humans to actually work together.
My character Tsin'xing
#LegalizeAwoo
A normie goes "Oh, what's this?"
An otaku goes "UwU, what's this?"
A furry goes "OwO, what's this?"
A werewolf goes "Awoo, what's this?"
"It's nothing personal, I just don't feel like I've gotten to know a person until I've sniffed their crotch."
"We said 'no' to Mr. Curiosity. We're not home. Curiosity is not welcome, it is not to be invited in. Curiosity...is bad. It gets you in trouble, it gets you killed, and more importantly...it makes you poor!"