The Admirals character makes no sense whatsoever

[C.E. Evans]

"Absolute power corrupts absolutely."
--Captain James R. Kirk, "Where No Man Has Gone Before."

Fixed it for ya. James T. Kirk never said that. Nor was he in the episode.

Um, no. You fixed nothing for me.

Don't rewrite and change my posts please. If you want to discuss something with me, then quote what I actually wrote and we'll go from there.

 

[Sindatur]

Isn't there only about 2 or 3 Admirals, in all of Trek that have been consistently portrayed in a Good light, and not breaking rules, in bed with Section 31 or enemies?

Necheyev (Even she did that Cardassian plot thing that got Picard captured and tortured), The Admiral from Enterprise, and maybe 1 or 2 others?

Almost all of the folks above Captain (and several Captains too) were shown to break the rules, be just crazy or psycho, or in bed with enemies

Does Admiral Janeway count? Or did she simply not have enough screen time to abuse her newfound authority?

Hah, come to think of it, ADMIRAL Kirk [/khan] stole the Enterprise, blew her up, and then changed the course of history, though all for good reason. I imagine that Internal Affairs couldn't have been too happy about the outcome of that trial at the end of TVH.

Well, she broke the Temporal Prime Directive, and was warned against doing so, but, chose to do it anyways (though, the Reset button was pushed)

 

[M'Sharak]

Isn't there only about 2 or 3 Admirals, in all of Trek that have been consistently portrayed in a Good light, and not breaking rules, in bed with Section 31 or enemies?

Yep. I think it's just Komack and Westervliet.

"Absolute power corrupts absolutely."
--Captain James R. Kirk, "Where No Man Has Gone Before."

Fixed it for ya. James T. Kirk never said that. Nor was he in the episode.

Um, no. You fixed nothing for me.

Don't rewrite and change my posts please. If you want to discuss something with me, then quote what I actually wrote and we'll go from there.

It's a joke. Relax.

 

[Cyke101]

Isn't there only about 2 or 3 Admirals, in all of Trek that have been consistently portrayed in a Good light, and not breaking rules, in bed with Section 31 or enemies?

Necheyev (Even she did that Cardassian plot thing that got Picard captured and tortured), The Admiral from Enterprise, and maybe 1 or 2 others?

Almost all of the folks above Captain (and several Captains too) were shown to break the rules, be just crazy or psycho, or in bed with enemies

Does Admiral Janeway count? Or did she simply not have enough screen time to abuse her newfound authority?

Hah, come to think of it, ADMIRAL Kirk [/khan] stole the Enterprise, blew her up, and then changed the course of history, though all for good reason. I imagine that Internal Affairs couldn't have been too happy about the outcome of that trial at the end of TVH.

Well, she broke the Temporal Prime Directive, and was warned against doing so, but, chose to do it anyways (though, the Reset button was pushed)

Huh, I was thinking of Nemesis Janeway and completely forgot about Endgame Janeway. I feel ashamed. Where should I turn in my comm-badge?

 

[C.E. Evans]

Isn't there only about 2 or 3 Admirals, in all of Trek that have been consistently portrayed in a Good light, and not breaking rules, in bed with Section 31 or enemies?

Yep. I think it's just Komack and Westervliet.

Fixed it for ya. James T. Kirk never said that. Nor was he in the episode.

Um, no. You fixed nothing for me.

Don't rewrite and change my posts please. If you want to discuss something with me, then quote what I actually wrote and we'll go from there.

It's a joke. Relax.

No, I don't find rewriting other posters' quotes remotely funny nor cute. I'm also not the only one that feels that way.

 

[M'Sharak]

Um, no. You fixed nothing for me.

Don't rewrite and change my posts please. If you want to discuss something with me, then quote what I actually wrote and we'll go from there.

It's a joke. Relax.

No, I don't find rewriting other posters' quotes remotely funny nor cute. I'm also not the only one that feels that way.

If he were changing your post in an attempt to misrepresent what you were saying, then that would be a potential problem. If it's done as a friendly joke, he calls attention to it himself at the time, and it's a reference everyone here will be very likely to understand, then really there's no harm done. Even if it failed to amuse, I'm not sure it needed that response.

 

[C.E. Evans]

It's a joke. Relax.

No, I don't find rewriting other posters' quotes remotely funny nor cute. I'm also not the only one that feels that way.

If he were changing your post in an attempt to misrepresent what you were saying, then that would be a potential problem. If it's done as a friendly joke, he calls attention to it himself at the time, and it's a reference everyone here will be very likely to understand, then really there's no harm done. Even if it failed to amuse, I'm not sure it needed that response.

Oh, it did. It's just making the situation clear. I really don't think changing other posters' quotes should be allowed, even if the person who did so thought they were being amusing.

 

[The Wormhole]

Isn't there only about 2 or 3 Admirals, in all of Trek that have been consistently portrayed in a Good light, and not breaking rules, in bed with Section 31 or enemies?

Necheyev (Even she did that Cardassian plot thing that got Picard captured and tortured), The Admiral from Enterprise, and maybe 1 or 2 others?

Almost all of the folks above Captain (and several Captains too) were shown to break the rules, be just crazy or psycho, or in bed with enemies

Pretty much, yeah. Although while Nechayev wasn't really a villain, she was a constant thorn in Picard's side. Though I suppose she did mellow out towards her last appearance.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

^ I liked Nechayev when she wasn't mellow.

 

[Cyke101]

No, I don't find rewriting other posters' quotes remotely funny nor cute. I'm also not the only one that feels that way.

If he were changing your post in an attempt to misrepresent what you were saying, then that would be a potential problem. If it's done as a friendly joke, he calls attention to it himself at the time, and it's a reference everyone here will be very likely to understand, then really there's no harm done. Even if it failed to amuse, I'm not sure it needed that response.

Oh, it did. It's just making the situation clear. I really don't think changing other posters' quotes should be allowed, even if the person who did so thought they were being amusing.

I feel like you need to take a look at your own signature. With that said, it was a lighthearted joke that pokes fun not at you, but at one of TOS's more legendary nits -- Kirk's middle initial. Heck, if he posted a picture of a Tribble to stand for the T. in James T. Kirk, that, too, would be cute and amusing.

 

[Noname Given]

Does it really seem that reasonable though that a complete psychopath like this would become a Starfleet Admiral?

I don't see where all admirals have always been corrupt or evil. Admiral Hanson from Best of Both Worlds seemed alright. And the blonde admiral from TNG seemed normal enough.

This guy is just a bit over the top imo.

He wasn't a psychopath per se. The events of the first film pushed him over the edge and he thought it was a reasonable response. Remember:

ONE ship destroyed the planet Vulcan and was minutes away from doing the same to Earth in the 2009 film.

(NOTHING like this ever occurred in the prime timeline during this era. The closet incident was in "The Doomsday Machine" -- but it never made it to the Federation core worlds, and once Kirk defeated it, a usable method to destroy any future ones wandering around was available.)

Marcus was indeed misguided; but he was responding to a situation that wiped out one founding world and came very close to wiping out Earth.

 

[C.E. Evans]

If he were changing your post in an attempt to misrepresent what you were saying, then that would be a potential problem. If it's done as a friendly joke, he calls attention to it himself at the time, and it's a reference everyone here will be very likely to understand, then really there's no harm done. Even if it failed to amuse, I'm not sure it needed that response.

Oh, it did. It's just making the situation clear. I really don't think changing other posters' quotes should be allowed, even if the person who did so thought they were being amusing.

I feel like you need to take a look at your own signature.

No, because I consider this one of the rudest things you can do to another poster on a message board. Just because someone else thinks it's funny doesn't mean that I do, and that's all I'm saying.

 

[sojourner]

No, because I consider this one of the rudest things you can do to another poster on a message board. Just because someone else thinks it's funny doesn't mean that I do, and that's all I'm saying.

I just have to ask. Why do you think it's rude? It's not like other readers don't know that's not what you originally said. Your original post is still there for posterity.

Heck, the "fixed that for ya!" joke is almost a mainstay of internet forums. I don't see the harm when used unmaliciously.

 

[C.E. Evans]

No, because I consider this one of the rudest things you can do to another poster on a message board. Just because someone else thinks it's funny doesn't mean that I do, and that's all I'm saying.

I just have to ask. Why do you think it's rude?

It's nothing short of totally changing what someone said and superimposing their own words over it. And if I don't like that being done with what I said, I'll let people know I don't appreciate it.

Sooo, is there anyone else who wants to ask me about my views on message board behavior or is the original thread topic now dead?

 

[Sindatur]

No, because I consider this one of the rudest things you can do to another poster on a message board. Just because someone else thinks it's funny doesn't mean that I do, and that's all I'm saying.

I just have to ask. Why do you think it's rude? It's not like other readers don't know that's not what you originally said. Your original post is still there for posterity.

Heck, the "fixed that for ya!" joke is almost a mainstay of internet forums. I don't see the harm when used unmaliciously.

Yea, when someone truncates your post to deliberately take it out of context (though, Sometimes it's an accident that it is taken out of context, when a poster merely meant to be succinct and only quoted the pertinent part) or changes it to deliberately try to take it out of context (I've never seen it, but, I'm sure it's happened), that's totally wrong and reason to be outraged.

But, the "I fixed it for you" joke or making a joke when some mis-spells something making their post say something else (The other day I spelled Jem, when I was referring to the character from The Empath, and someone made a joke about Jem being truly outrageous, and I laughed my head off) to me, it's all part of the fun of socializing on the internet.

So, for the record, anyone who wants to make a mis-spelling joke at my expense or an "I fixed it for you" joke, feel free, it makes me feel appreciated and part of the crowd

 

[Cyke101]

No, because I consider this one of the rudest things you can do to another poster on a message board. Just because someone else thinks it's funny doesn't mean that I do, and that's all I'm saying.

I just have to ask. Why do you think it's rude? It's not like other readers don't know that's not what you originally said. Your original post is still there for posterity.

Heck, the "fixed that for ya!" joke is almost a mainstay of internet forums. I don't see the harm when used unmaliciously.

Yea, when someone truncates your post to deliberately take it out of context (though, Sometimes it's an accident that it is taken out of context, when a poster merely meant to be succinct and only quoted the pertinent part) or changes it to deliberately try to take it out of context (I've never seen it, but, I'm sure it's happened), that's totally wrong and reason to be outraged.

But, the "I fixed it for you" joke or making a joke when some mis-spells something making their post say something else (The other day I spelled Jem, when I was referring to the character from The Empath, and someone made a joke about Jem being truly outrageous, and I laughed my head off) to me, it's all part of the fun of socializing on the internet.

So, for the record, anyone who wants to make a mis-spelling joke at my expense or an "I fixed it for you" joke, feel free, it makes me feel appreciated and part of the crowd

I'll see your internet trend and raise you another: Challenge Accepted!

I believe that Star Trek is too good-natured to have a stick in the mud. even Spock and Seven can crack the occasional joke (and it's usually funny).

Ironically though, I noticed C.E. omitted this part when quoting Sojourner:

Heck, the "fixed that for ya!" joke is almost a mainstay of internet forums. I don't see the harm when used unmaliciously.

George Takei has newfound popularity because he (or his staff, whatever) has been great at staying on top of internet and forum trends on Facebook, and deservedly so. I'll leave it at that as I don't want things to get personal, but geeze C.E., lighten up and recognize that people are trying to laugh with, not at. Sulu, one of the more stoic men in all of Trek, can do forum humor, and if he can do it, anyone can. Forum humor is meant to make forums more enjoyable and less combative.

 

[C.E. Evans]

I guess the original thread topic is dead after all.

Cyke101, please don't tell me how to feel. And I also didn't omit anything since I said earlier that I didn't care if others thought it was funny. If I don't like something or don't find it funny, I'm not going to just laugh it off, especially when it does concern me. You may be able to accept people rewriting your posts to make you say something different than you originally did, but I don't have to. And that's really all there is to it.

And really, any further discussion on this subject by you (or anyone else) is just continuing to derail this thread and make it just about what I don't like about message board behavior.

 

[Opus]

I thought it was funny/cute. It didn't seem to be done in malice, simply in jest. No harm was meant, I'm sure.

Anybody know what the R. stood for? Was it for a name, or was it just an R.?

R.
Huh! Yeah!
What is it good for?
Absolutely nothin'!

 

[M'Sharak]

Riberius.

 

[Opus]

Sounds like Burger King's answer to the 'McRib'