aridas sofia wrote:
You see, this is why I don't post much here anymore. I was trying to make a point civilly to someone I respect and have worked with, and you guys try to make it into a pissing contest. Everything doesn't have to be a pissing contest, you know. Cary and I understand where each of us are coming from just fine, and we respect each other's positions. I thought the OP might benefit from hearing other POVs. If we can't discuss this shit without all the kids gathering around in a circle and yelling, "fight! fight!" then this really isn't a forum. It's a joke.
I've been noticing this becoming more and more of an issue on the 'net over the past couple of years. There's a real sense that DISCUSSION isn't permissible, and that "conflicts of ideas" are just plain wrong.
Of course, that's the one idea that someone can toss out that I WILL fight tooth-and-nail over.
I love Aridas' work, and have been following what he's done for most of my adult life. I consider much of what he's done to be among the best Star Trek work put out. But that doesn't mean that we have to be in 100% agreement about every possible element of every possible topic.
In real life, if two different positions are out there, the best thing to do is to toss those ideas into the "arena" and let the ideas... NOT THE PERSONS PROMOTING THEM... "fight it out." Realistically, most times neither position is 100% accurate, and what comes out of the discussion is a conclusion which incorporates elements of both, but which is closer to the TRUTH than either was originally.
A fair, honest, and yes, dispassionate, argument about a disputed point is one of the best learning techniques in existence.
That's why I cringe when I see supposed "scientists" making points about how some disputed scientific concept is "settled" by "consensus." That's about as anti-science as any position could ever be... because actual science includes many characteristics, but foremost among them is that EVERYTHING CAN AND MUST BE OPEN TO CHALLENGE AND QUESTIONING.
The concept of "forced consensus" by silencing opposing voices has been promoted in a variety of realms, and it's becoming more and more common these days. There are those here, and on other related boards, who actively try to silence ANYONE who dares question the "consensus" on any given point... whether it be a matter of politics, of social discussion, of engineering techniques, of model-building techniques, or just conversation about a series of TV shows and/or movies. "Agree with the 'in-crowd' or be silenced!" is becoming more and more common online... in a realm, the 'net, which used to be the single most free medium for unfettered personal expression.
Let's be clear... I consider Aridas a friend, and there was not even the tiniest hint of disrespect, shown from him to me, or from me towards him, in this interchange.
I'm disturbed that anyone would try to infer otherwise, even if some of those comments were clearly "tongue-in-cheek."
We were discussing, and that's all. This is a FORUM... which, by definition, is a "location set aside for the free exchange of information and ideas," now, isn't it?
Now... back to your regularly scheduled discussion.