Star Wreak Time Period.

[Barbreader]

Part of the problem breaking out major Parody/Comedy groups is that my website is organized by time line, and these groups often take place in their own space/time continuum with no relationship to the time line of TOS, the Mirror Universe, or JJA Trek.

In most cases, I'm just placing it according to which series they seem to be making fun of.

So far, the Finnish Star Wreak is still difficult. I've watched the first three (of six) and will watch the forth later today (it's loading at Dailymotion as I type this) but so far, there's a commander named Mr. Spook but TNG ships.

Does anyone here know what they have in mind? Unless I get a clear signal, I'll place it next to Go!Animate, as an ambigous show between TOS and TNG.
*****
OK, this is after the first edit. They got rid of their Spook character, and all that's left from TOS is their engineer. Plus the uniforms are clearly TNG/DS9/VOY. It's silver age.

 

[FalTorPan]

Since Star Wreck is a parody, does it need to fit neatly into a TOS or TNG time frame?

 

[Barbreader]

No, and neither do the dramas. But that's how Star Trek Reviewed is organized. It can be moved to a borderline location between the TOS and TNG stuff, but for the moment, I've placed it with the TNG stuff.

 

[Potemkin_Prod]

I'd throw all the parodies into one group, and call it something altogether different.

 

[Barbreader]

I'd throw all the parodies into one group, and call it something altogether different.

I look forward to seeing your website. Be sure to post a link about it at the Trek BBS so we can find it.

 

[Potemkin_Prod]

Actually, Barb, first of all, that's uncalled for. You were asking for opinions, and I gave you mine. You're having trouble placing parodies in your timeline, and I gave you a reasonable suggestion. If you don't want suggestions, then you shouldn't ask for them.

Secondly, the Orion Press webpage on Fan Films has been around much longer than yours... (June 4th 2007). I don't promote it simply because it's easy enough to find by Googling "Classic Star Trek Fan Films." However, it generally comes up in the top 10 in the search results: http://www.fastcopyinc.com/orionpress/fanfilms/index.html. Nearly 20,000 fans haven't had any complaints...

Next time I'd recommend not being so snotty.

 

[Barbreader]

Your website IS timeline dependent... it doesn't include fan films not in the TOS era. It also doesn't include comedies or parodies at all, except prose you published yourself from that era. Not even fan film parodies clearly in the TOS era. So, your solution isn't to create a separate part of parodies and comedies, but to leave them out altogether, along with all films not in the TOS era. So, that's your real answer. You said, " I'd throw all the parodies into one group, and call it something altogether different." but that's not what you did. You left it out. In fact, you leave out every single entry in my website before Blog 20 and after Blog 37, except a few items which have no releases in Blog 143. (You left out some of the items between 20 and 37 that are TOS era, too).

If somebody has put on a suit, and asks you if you think they should wear a red tie or a blue tie, and you say, 'wear a toga' and they say, 'fine, you wear a toga' they aren't the one being snotty. I asked for people's views on one set of films, and you responded, "Throw out your whole website."

If you asked, say, "what color should I make a command chair on the bridge set I'm building" (which you recently did ask) and somebody responded by telling you that building a TOS era bridge was a bad idea, it was already done, you should build a movie era bridge, or a TNG bridge (nobody was arrogant enough to do that) and you suggested they build their own bridge set if they wanted one from a different era, would they be right to say that you asked for their opinion? It happens that I had no opinion on the command chair color. I couldn't tell which one would be best, But, if I had thought it was a bad command chair, (I didn't), I still wouldn't have said that, because it wasn't what you asked. (Nor would I have even considered suggesting you build something else, I was just trying to set up an analogy.)

If you want a website that is not organized by time line and puts comedies in a group, try this one: http://www.trekkiecentral.info/ .

You are correct that the search engines place your website above mine, and it's easier to find. Your website includes many things about the TOS era, not just a fan film listing. Did you notice I didn't tell you to include TOS era parodies, or historical TOS era fan films you haven't included, like Jr. Star Trek? You know why I didn't? Because I respect the integrity of your work. Same with your choices on your bridge. I've read your thread, in fact I've recommended it as good reading, and linked to it from another forum. It's a great thread. I also have a link to your website from mine. It's a great website.

 

[Potemkin_Prod]

Your website IS timeline dependent... it doesn't include fan films not in the TOS era. It also doesn't include comedies or parodies at all, except prose you published yourself from that era. Not even fan film parodies clearly in the TOS era. So, your solution isn't to create a separate part of parodies and comedies, but to leave them out altogether, along with all films not in the TOS era. So, that's your real answer.

I'm not the one who keeps asking for suggestions about my website. I'm quite happy with focusing on the Classic Star Trek Fan Films.

You, on the other hand, were asking for suggestions about YOURS. Were I to do a website that encompasses all genres of Star Trek fan films (as yours professes to do), then I would put parodies in their own section.

You said, " I'd throw all the parodies into one group, and call it something altogether different." but that's not what you did. You left it out.

Again, I'm happy with focusing on Classic Star Trek Fan Films. The Orion Press website focusses only on Classic Star Trek. We've got fan fiction, articles, interviews, treknology, all sorts of things and all focused on Classic Trek. But I'm not the one who's in here asking for help and suggestions about my website. You are.

In fact, you leave out every single entry in my website before Blog 20 and after Blog 37, except a few items which have no releases in Blog 143. (You left out some of the items between 20 and 37 that are TOS era, too).

None of this means anything to me. Blog this, blog that. I don't keep up with that sort of thing. Films aren't blogs. They're listed on my site either by film title or production. If there are non-parody Classic Star Trek Fan Film omissions in my listings and someone wants to see them listed, they can email me and ask me to add them. That's how I find out about 95% of all the fan films listed (the three exceptions: Star Trek: The New Voyages (aka Phase 2), Starship Farragut and Starship Exeter which I had stumbled upon years ago).

If somebody has put on a suit, and asks you if you think they should wear a red tie or a blue tie, and you say, 'wear a toga' and they say, 'fine, you wear a toga' they aren't the one being snotty.

That's utter nonsense and not even parallel to this matter. You keep asking for help on where to place this film or that one, and I gave you a suggestion which you were free to disregard. Instead, you got snotty.

I asked for people's views on one set of films, and you responded, "Throw out your whole website."

That's completely untrue. I made no suggestion to "throw out" your website. I recommended that if you're having problems with parodies, the simplest solution is to put them in their own category instead of the "golden" age and "silver" and "stone" age. Maybe the "gas" age or the "shecky" age or some such.

If you asked, say, "what color should I make a command chair on the bridge set I'm building" (which you recently did ask) and somebody responded by telling you that building a TOS era bridge was a bad idea, it was already done, you should build a movie era bridge, or a TNG bridge (nobody was arrogant enough to do that) and you suggested they build their own bridge set if they wanted one from a different era, would they be right to say that you asked for their opinion?

Yes, it would. That wouldn't have bothered me in the slightest. I'd've simply informed them that while we published 100 TNG fanzines (along with 15 DS9 zines and 24 VOY zines), I've lost interest in the TNG/Modern Trek era, and would've recommended a number of TNG fan films they might enjoy. I'd also refer them to the Eridani archive on-line for some of our fan fiction still available on-line. QED.

It happens that I had no opinion on the command chair color. I couldn't tell which one would be best, But, if I had thought it was a bad command chair, (I didn't), I still wouldn't have said that, because it wasn't what you asked. (Nor would I have even considered suggesting you build something else, I was just trying to set up an analogy.)

None of that is germaine to the discussion here. You asked for help in placing parodies. I've recommended (and continue to recommend) you place them in their own category. That is not a repudiation of your website. Merely an alternative suggestion as to what you could do to eliminate the problem you were having.

If you want a website that is not organized by time line and puts comedies in a group, try this one: http://www.trekkiecentral.info/ .

Geez, Barb, you've really lost it on this one. They didn't ask for help placing parodies. You did. Are you saying that fans such as myself should simply no longer visit your website? See, that's the sort of reaction you're provoking here.

You are correct that the search engines place your website above mine, and it's easier to find.

The reason I brought that up was that you got snotty and said, "Go start your own site." To which I quite rightly replied that I already did. Years before you did.

Your website includes many things about the TOS era, not just a fan film listing. Did you notice I didn't tell you to include TOS era parodies, or historical TOS era fan films you haven't included, like Jr. Star Trek? You know why I didn't? Because I respect the integrity of your work.

If you'd "respect the integrity" of my work, then you might ought to "respect the integrity" of an honest suggestion rather than get snotty about it.

BTW, "Junior Star Trek" is indeed listed on my Classic Star Trek Fan Films Index page along with some other films that aren't truly parodies. I also have suggestions for Stone Trek and how to find the hundreds of You Tube Star Trek parodies. Just because they're not highlighted doesn't mean that they're not listed and/or mentioned.

You may "respect the integrity" of my work, but you might ought to actually go read that webpage. It's updated often.

Same with your choices on your bridge. I've read your thread, in fact I've recommended it as good reading, and linked to it from another forum. It's a great thread. I also have a link to your website from mine. It's a great website.

That's nice, but I was really, really disappointed with your response to my initial suggestion. Not that you chose to disregard it; that doesn't bother me at all. But the snotty tone is something you should work to avoid in response to a well-intended suggestion.

 

[Barbreader]

I didn't ask about placing parodies, either. I asked about ONE SERIES. In Finnish. A language I don't speak. But a film which is reputed to be the most watched Finnish film in the history of Finnish film. Just like the guy asking about tie color didn't ask if he should dress in a suit or a toga. Since you say you don't know what I mean, here is an exerpt of some of the TOS era films from my Table of Contents.

Golden Age Fan Films

(20)Star Trek Phase II or Star Trek New Voyages http://startrekreviewed.blogspot.com/2009/06/20.html
(21)Starship Exeter http://startrekreviewed.blogspot.com/2009/06/21.html
(22)Starship Farragut http://startrekreviewed.blogspot.com/2009/06/22.html
(23)Curt Danhauser's Guide to Animated Star Trek http://startrekreviewed.blogspot.com/2009/06/23.html
(24)Star Trek: Of Gods and Men http://startrekreviewed.blogspot.com/2009/06/24.html
(25)Star Trek: Aurora http://startrekreviewed.blogspot.com/2009/06/25.html
(26)Tales of the Seventh Fleet http://startrekreviewed.blogspot.com/2009/06/26.html
(27)Star Trek: Counter Worlds http://startrekreviewed.blogspot.com/2009/06/27.html
(28)Turist Ömer Uzay Yolunda (a.k.a. Turkish Star Trek) http://startrekreviewed.blogspot.com/2009/06/28.html
(29)Star Trek: Frontier http://startrekreviewed.blogspot.com/2009/06/29.html
(30)Starship Mojave http://startrekreviewed.blogspot.com/2009/06/30.html
(31)Star Trix http://startrekreviewed.blogspot.com/2009/06/31.html
(32)Jr. Star Trek (1969) http://startrekreviewed.blogspot.com/2009/06/32.html
(33)Star Trek: The First Missions http://startrekreviewed.blogspot.com/2009/06/33.html
(34)The Multiverse Crisis http://startrekreviewed.blogspot.com/2009/06/34.html
(35)Calvertfilms Presents http://startrekreviewed.blogspot.com/2009/06/35.html
(36)Star Trek Eagle http://startrekreviewed.blogspot.com/2009/06/36.html
(37)Star Trek: The Machinima Series http://startrekreviewed.blogspot.com/2009/06/37.html
(38)Bastards of Kirk http://startrekreviewed.blogspot.com/2009/06/38.html
(39)The Search for Spock's Body Parts http://startrekreviewed.blogspot.com/2009/06/39.html
(40)Star Trek the Quasi Mechinima http://startrekreviewed.blogspot.com/2009/06/40.html

Golden Age exerpts from my Go!Animate listings. Many of these folk do more than one era. Even if they haven't done more than one at the time of listing, they often go on and do more than one later. The ones I placed here aren't parodies.
The best Go!Animate TOS era creator:
(61)RoTV Animations http://startrekreviewed.blogspot.com/2009/06/61.html
Produced an entire TOS series, Star Trek Armada, and will be upgrading it and producing more:
(62)Section 31's Star Trek Armada, and other Section 31 Animations http://startrekreviewed.blogspot.com/2009/06/62.html
Created an animation based on a TOS based book:
(63)DMAC6806's the Kobayashi Maru, and other Animations http://startrekreviewed.blogspot.com/2009/06/63.html

There are a lot more TOS era films at Go!Animate, but these are note-worthy for the reasons given.

 

[Potemkin_Prod]

All of this doesn't explain the snotty reply, Barb. It's just a bunch of stuff thrown out to confuscate the fact that you got ugly without any real reason to do so. Further, looking over your post, I think it's clear you didn't realize that I am indeed the host for the Orion Press website.

 

[doubleohfive]

After a cursory viewing of this thread, it strikes me that the original question Barbreader has asked would seem to be solved by largely the same solution that would (likely) solve the question in her last thread ... just put them all together in a subsection for parodies. I don't see how that's unhelpful; there's such a thing as being too organized, and I think everyone should just calm down.

Barbreader, I certainly don't believe for a moment that Potemkin was trying to be nasty with you... we should all take a step back and breathe deeply. We're all here for the same reason, so let's all agree to start over and be friendly.

 

[Barbreader]

All of this doesn't explain the snotty reply, Barb. It's just a bunch of stuff thrown out to confuscate the fact that you got ugly without any real reason to do so. Further, looking over your post, I think it's clear you didn't realize that I am indeed the host for the Orion Press website.

I did not recognize who you were. That is absolutely true.

 

[Barbreader]

After a cursory viewing of this thread, it strikes me that the original question Barbreader has asked would seem to be solved by largely the same solution that would (likely) solve the question in her last thread ... just put them all together in a subsection for parodies. I don't see how that's unhelpful; there's such a thing as being too organized, and I think everyone should just calm down.

Barbreader, I certainly don't believe for a moment that Potemkin was trying to be nasty with you... we should all take a step back and breathe deeply. We're all here for the same reason, so let's all agree to start over and be friendly.

The question would be solved equally well be deleting the entire website. Both solutions accomplish the same thing, neither addresses my question at all. All of the parodies and comedies were in fact in one heading until late last month, when I got some requests that they be moved into individual pages like the dramas, and I thought these requests were valid. There is no space on the website without deleting it and starting again for placing them all together as you keep saying, and that would not serve the purpose intended of treating them like other fan films, anyway.

When I have a question about a specific fan film, I won't post it here again. Clearly, such questions are unwelcome. I have gotten the message. No more postings.

 

[Melonpool]

Can't we argue about something more constructive? Like who is better? Picard or Kirk?

 

[doubleohfive]

After a cursory viewing of this thread, it strikes me that the original question Barbreader has asked would seem to be solved by largely the same solution that would (likely) solve the question in her last thread ... just put them all together in a subsection for parodies. I don't see how that's unhelpful; there's such a thing as being too organized, and I think everyone should just calm down.

Barbreader, I certainly don't believe for a moment that Potemkin was trying to be nasty with you... we should all take a step back and breathe deeply. We're all here for the same reason, so let's all agree to start over and be friendly.

The question would be solved equally well be deleting the entire website. Both solutions accomplish the same thing, neither addresses my question at all. All of the parodies and comedies were in fact in one heading until late last month, when I got some requests that they be moved into individual pages like the dramas, and I thought these requests were valid. There is no space on the website without deleting it and starting again for placing them all together as you keep saying, and that would not serve the purpose intended of treating them like other fan films, anyway.

My apologies. I don't run a website, so I'm not familiar with the technical intricacies of how they're managed. Please note: I never once suggested you delete your page; I simply suggested the best solution my (admittedly limited) experience with such things could offer.

When I have a question about a specific fan film, I won't post it here again. Clearly, such questions are unwelcome. I have gotten the message. No more postings.

I fail to see how you can logically interpret anything I've said could lead you to believe your questions are unwelcome. I simply made the comparison to your other thread because it seemed very much like both issues were facing the same predicament; the details were different, sure, but the larger question seemed the same to me.

There's no need to get passive-aggressive though. You asked some questions and the posters kind enough to reply offered answers. I honestly don't understand what the problem here is.

 

[Barbreader]

A few weeks ago, before I undertook the whole comedy/parody reorganization, Randy PMed me and said I was the source of misinformation on some items at my website that I had, in fact, carefully checked. We had a heated, private exchange. I realize you were not a party to that exchange. However, relations between us were not all happy and nice long before he posted this, and I mistook him for somebody who does not, in fact, have a website at all, and is not the productive and creative person that he is. He has a great website he is building a great set, he'll probably produce a great fan film. I can understand why you would admire him and want to support him.

I have been told in the course of this exchange that asking any question is an invitation to any answer, no matter how unresponsive. His answer was unresponsive to my question, and you jumped in to support him. I do not think that deciding to not, therefore, ask questions is 'passive aggressive.' I think it is logical.

 

[Potemkin_Prod]

Honestly, Barb, I don't understand you at all. Why are you bringing up a completely different matter that was conducted through PM? Further, you clearly mis-stated my position in that exchange (I never said you were the "source of misinformation" or anything else so drastic), and then instead of admitting we resolved it amicably, you assert that "relations between us were not all happy and nice long before" I made my post. This came as a complete surprise and shock to me, and is either an outright lie being made to justify your snotty reply to my suggestion, or perhaps you've mistaken me for someone else again.

Either way, it's clear you don't want to hear anything from me or anyone else with honest suggestions for your website.

 

[doubleohfive]

A few weeks ago, before I undertook the whole comedy/parody reorganization, Randy PMed me and said I was the source of misinformation on some items at my website that I had, in fact, carefully checked. We had a heated, private exchange. I realize you were not a party to that exchange. However, relations between us were not all happy and nice long before he posted this, and I mistook him for somebody who does not, in fact, have a website at all, and is not the productive and creative person that he is. He has a great website he is building a great set, he'll probably produce a great fan film. I can understand why you would admire him and want to support him.

First of all, none of that has anything to do with me, nor my opinion of Randy -- who I assume refers to Potemkin.

I don't know that I agreed with or supported him beyond simply pointing out that things were getting heated in the thread, and that it would probably benefit everyone if we all took a step back and calmed down. I said that primarily because the LAST time I tried to offer anyone any constructive criticism or suggestion in this forum, it became dragged out and convoluted in to a major melodrama by someone who absolutely refused to be reasonable or mature about the situation.

This time around, I'm not even bothering. I simply suggested we all just dial it back a bit. If you go back and re-read my first post in this thread, it says pretty much that, in addition to my admittedly cursory review of this thread, a suggestion which I thought (at the time) might be helpful. Clearly it isn't, as you've explained and I have thus redacted and apologized for my (uninformed) suggestion.

I have been told in the course of this exchange that asking any question is an invitation to any answer, no matter how unresponsive. His answer was unresponsive to my question, and you jumped in to support him.

That's a leap from one discussion (of which I have not taken part in), so it makes little sense to try to connect me to it. Again, I was and am simply responding based on what I read in this thread.

I do not think that deciding to not, therefore, ask questions is 'passive aggressive.' I think it is logical.

Not asking more questions based on the reaction you've gotten so far would be logical. Announcing that you will no longer be asking questions is the passive-aggressive part.

First of all, there's no need for such a statement, let alone that course of action. This is an open forum where many things are discussed, so it's only logical (there's that word again) that there will be many, differing points of view to be read.

I am still (almost completely) at a loss as to how this all spiraled out of control and wound up here.

I'm going to assume for a moment that you take great pride in your website and the work you put in to it, Barb. Hand in hand with that, I will also assume you appreciate whatever positive feedback, kudos, compliments and other supportive reactions you receive for the work you put in to it. It may not be the reason behind why you post the site or work on it, but it's natural to appreciate being appreciated.

Likewise however, you now have a voice. A public voice through which you speak and promote the fan productions. It's out there and people read it. That's a great thing. But the one thing everyone seems to forget when they do this kind of thing is that it's still open to public commentary, both good and bad, positive and negative, and yes, useful and useless.

To suggest now that because the comments you received in this thread (from what, a total of three people?) are so useless to you that you will no longer ask any more questions is not only passive-aggressive, it's downright insulting.

You saw the nasty, pointless road both Potemkin and I had to go down with another reviewer, despite numerous attempts to make peace and logic out and reason with said reviewer. It did not end, I think, in a place where any of us were happy with the result but there was little else to be done. It was a temper-tantrum that never ended. Is that what this is, or can we re-boot and try again? Because I'd very much like to ... I like your website a lot and think it's a great, useful tool in terms of finding other productions and will be quite beneficial to the rest of the fan film community.

Can't we put this all behind us and simply start over again?

 

[Barbreader]

Fine.

 

[Potemkin_Prod]

Can't we put this all behind us and simply start over again?

I certainly can agree with that.