TAS Elements in the Books & Comics

[trampledamage]

The prefix isn't even the issue. The issue is that either Christopher is incapable of understanding that my TYPO was irrelevant to the discussion at hand, or that he is so full of himself that he takes time out of his busy schedule to bully random users by posting disproportionately long lectures on word usage at the drop of a hat. Any hat. Considering Christopher is a published author of some note, and one that even I had some regard for up till now, I find either possibility difficult to believe, but one of them must be true.

Within this forum you address what a person has written in the post, not the person themselves please.

My point is that your typo is only known to you as being a typo, to anyone reading it could be a genuine misunderstanding of the word's use - and therefore not irrelevant

Also, what Christopher chooses to comment on or not is entirely up to him. If he decides it's worth writing a post detailing the different meanings of words, that's his decision.

And so long as he concentrates on what is in the post - which he does, then he isn't breaking any rules

Rather than thinking since we're Trek Lit readers and writers so we should know that it was a typo and skip over it, I think you and everyone else here should get used to the fact that we're Trek Lit readers and writers so the use of words properly is going to be a subject close to our hearts.


And with that, I'm claiming moderator privilege and having the last word. There will be no more discussion of mistakes or otherwise in your post, or in Christopher's response to you.

Back to TAS please

 

[TalonCard]

Within this forum you address what a person has written in the post, not the person themselves please.

This is a special case, as is Christopher himself. His particular, near constant brand of commentary and his unique position professionally makes separating the person and the posts impossible.

My point is that your typo is only known to you as being a typo, to anyone reading it could be a genuine misunderstanding of the word's use - and therefore not irrelevant.

My point is that even if it were a misunderstanding, the emphasis is severely misplaced. And I am willing to allow for the possibility that Christopher considered it to be a genuine misunderstanding--in which case I take issue with the absurdly condescending tone and needless length to which he went to rectify it. A single sentence would have sufficed.

Also, what Christopher chooses to comment on or not is entirely up to him. If he decides it's worth writing a post detailing the different meanings of words, that's his decision.

And so long as he concentrates on what is in the post - which he does, then he isn't breaking any rules.

Understood. And if I think it's worth writing a post questioning his priorities and motivation, that's my decision.

Rather than thinking since we're Trek Lit readers and writers so we should know that it was a typo and skip over it, I think you and everyone else here should get used to the fact that we're Trek Lit readers and writers so the use of words properly is going to be a subject close to our hearts.

I care about the proper use of words as well--which is why seeing a stream of them directed at me over such a trivial issue is frustrating. So we should be prepared to be critiqued at any time on the minor elements of what we say casually by people who make a living writing, but if we should respond by questioning the behavior of someone whose discourse is so tone deaf to the priorities of normal speakers that it would make even the most hackneyed writer of cartoon nerd stereotypes from decades past go "Hey, wait a minute, no one is that socially inept", then that's just a bridge too far?

I think I see your point, but I disagree. I do apologize for being rude to you, but as you're carrying on Christopher's arguments (as he seems to have uncharacteristically left the discussion), I'm responding to you instead.

TC

 

[trampledamage]

I was going to answer your comments, but that would be me breaking my own ruling.

Do not address this issue in thread again. If you do I will issue a warning for ignoring a moderator's request.

 

[Laura Cynthia Chambers]

Too bad Spock 2 didn't wind up in the alternate reality. He could've crushed Nero in one fist.

Seriously, though, whatever changes living on Phylos would have made to his POV, would he even be the same Spock by the 2380s?

 

[hbquikcomjamesl]

I'm still puzzled about how and why Arex was, in his first Pocket fiction appearance, identified as Triexian, in spite of more than ample precedent (i.e., very possibly every single one of ADF's Star Trek Log volumes) of his being Edoan, and then, when the discrepancy was addressed, it was used as the setup for a really awful in-joke ("more animated").

So far as I'm aware, M'Ress's species was never identified onscreen either (my understanding is that ADF got both species from some sort of scriptwriter's guide), and yet there was never any question about her being Caitan, in any of her appearances since TAS.

And "trampledamage" has a very good point. As Surak would say, there is no offense where none is taken.

 

[JD]

I've wondered the whole Triexian/Edoan thing myself, was Peter David not aware Arex's species had already gotten a name when hew came up with Triexian?

 

[Therin of Andor]

I've wondered the whole Triexian/Edoan thing myself, was Peter David not aware Arex's species had already gotten a name when hew came up with Triexian?

Well, Arex's race was never mentioned in episodes. Neither was M'Ress's, but i think there were plans to feature her in an episode that didn't end up being made, because the TAS Writers' Bible even featured a hand-drawn diagram of where Cait and the constellation of the Lynx were, in relation to Earth, and "Caitian" made it into Bjo Trimble's "ST Concordance", maybe because M'Ress was described in a script direction in her first appearance.

The only "Edoan" and "Edos" references were in Alan Dean Foster's "Log" adaptations and the bio distributed by then-Lincoln Enterprises. (EDITED) - Edos' nomenclature of "92 Trianguli-Rho" came from Bantam's "ST Maps". DS9 and ENT made references to "Edosians", and fans assumed it refered to Arex's people. Complicating all this for PAD (if he only ever referred to the Concordance) was that TNG featured the almost-naked, causasian, bipedal, humanoid Edo in "Justice".

there was never any question about her being Caitan, in any of her appearances since TAS.

Caitian was in the "Concordance", Edos was not. But...

The Caitians had to be removed from an RPG. Decipher's roleplay gaming materials referred to the Caitians as "Regulans" by request of then-Paramount/Viacom Licensing.

 

[Christopher]

Edos' nomenclature of "Triangula-Rho" came from Bantam's "ST Map's".

That's "92 Trianguli-Rho" (or "Trianuli-Rho" on the second map) -- supposedly a star in the Triangulum constellation, which is where Arex's unofficial biography places Edos. Although Triangulum is too small a constellation to have Flamsteed designations going up to 92 (since those refer to naked-eye stars), and I don't know what the "-Rho" is supposed to represent. If it were a Bayer designation, the Greek letter would go before the genitive constellation name, e.g. Alpha Centauri, but there is no Rho Trianguli either.

And yes, putting tripedal aliens in the constellation Triangulum is as corny as putting catlike aliens in Lynx. Or putting Saurians in Serpens, as The Worlds of the Federation and Star Charts do.

 

[CorporalCaptain]

And yes, putting tripedal aliens in the constellation Triangulum is as corny as putting catlike aliens in Lynx. Or putting Saurians in Serpens, as The Worlds of the Federation and Star Charts do.

Where's the Arcadian star system and Motherlode, with the Ursinoid miners? Did it go into Ursa Major?

 

[Dayton Ward]

One of these days, I'm going to make good on my threat to introduce Ambassador Scrotus from the planet Testiculon.

 

[TheAlmanac]

One of these days, I'm going to make good on my threat to introduce Ambassador Scrotus from the planet Testiculon.

There's some sort of euphemistic expression for having the courage to do this, but I can't seem to recall it at the moment...

 

[Therin of Andor]

One of these days, I'm going to make good on my threat to introduce Ambassador Scrotus from the planet Testiculon.

Is that near the Coal Sac?

 

[hbquikcomjamesl]

One of these days, I'm going to make good on my threat to introduce Ambassador Scrotus from the planet Testiculon.

That sounds nuts.

The way this thread is turning also reminds me of all the ambassadors Kathleen Sky came up with for Death's Angel. (Given that she was, at the time, married to Stephen Goldin, whom David Gerrold described as a "were-koala," I have no doubt whatsoever that Karhu was Goldin. I remember a free mini-con held at a local shopping mall, not long before that book was released, in which Sky and Goldin shared a stage as featured speakers. ADF, as I recall, was also there, but I missed him.)

 

[Therin of Andor]

not long before that book was released, in which Sky and Goldin shared a stage as featured speakers.

I was visiting Bjo and John Trimble in January 1984 and we bumped into Kathleen Sky in her local supermarket in LA. Later in the same visit, David Gerrold and "Cinefantastique" writer, Dennis Fischer, both dropped by, separately, unannounced.