gregorum

@gregorum@lemm.ee

This profile is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.

gregorum,

I don’t know. That could become tiresome.

gregorum, (edited )

let’s just ignore how the pretext for this line was Data observing how, sometimes, terrorism is an effective vehicle for social and/or political change.

edit: just to be clear, this isn’t a criticism, just an observation about the glibness of the meme as compared to the seriousness context.

gregorum, (edited )

that was Data’s whole point. Then, just as Picard was about to dish out a bunch of huffy, self-righteous moral indignation, their conversation got cut off by an incoming message or some other rather convenient interruption. Trek was often bold in how it approached controversial sociopolitical subjects. And, sometimes, it scampered off without honestly addressing them.

this occasion was one of the latter.

edit: although, one could argue that, due to the fact that Data got his comment in before Picard was able to give a self-righteous counter-argument, the writers, in fact, were quite brave. The comment was so controversial, in fact, the episode was banned in several markets which refused to air this episode, and it still remains banned in some places to this day.

From Memory-Alpha:

Due to political sensitivity, as Ireland was still in the midst of the Troubles when “The High Ground” aired in 1990, the reference to Irish unification and terrorism in the episode resulted in its removal from first-run in the United Kingdom. To date, some syndicating networks will not air the episode, and it was only in 2007 (fifteen years after its first run, nine years after the conflict ended in a peaceful manner) that it was broadcast on the BBC.

gregorum, (edited )

It’s sort of like saying 9/11 was an effective use of terrorism shortly after it happened

here’s the thing, though: by no measure could this statement be considered even remotely true. if someone, very boldly, were, today, try to make the argument that “the Troubles were worth it,” I dare say that they’d have a good case for that argument, despite the heavy controversy which would come with it. The argument you propose, conversely, lacks the obvious evidentiary support required to substantiate such… an ambitious arguments yours.

And I certainly don’t support it.

edit: it’s a matter of factual and evidentiary support. come back with evidence to support your claims.

gregorum, (edited )

It’s sort of like saying 9/11 was an effective use of terrorism shortly after it happened

here’s the thing, though: by no measure could this statement be considered even remotely true.

what does the following statement have to do with it?

Do you want evidence that people died in the tororist attacks, or that the statement is offensive?

because, at no point, did anyone ask for evidence of nor call into doubt either of those claims.

gregorum, (edited )

It was and still is unclear what you were asking me to prove.

I made myself very clear:

It’s sort of like saying 9/11 was an effective use of terrorism shortly after it happened

here’s the thing, though: by no measure could this statement be considered even remotely true…The argument you propose, conversely, lacks the obvious evidentiary support required to substantiate such… an ambitious arguments yours….come back with evidence to support your claims.

A comparison isn’t a statement of fact, it’s to illustrate how two things are similar.

which you failed to do spectacularly by comparing two things which bear no resemblance in the way you suggest:

It’s sort of like saying 9/11 was an effective use of terrorism

because it wasn’t, for it achieved none of its intended goals. if it is your assertion that it did, it’s your job to prove that, which you have not.

I further explained why I feel that it was fair to compaire them

no you then used this straw man instead:

Do you want evidence that people died in the tororist attacks, or that the statement is offensive?

then you used a series of unrelated equivocations rather than addressing the flaw in your logic: the lack of efficacy of the 9/11 attacks as a tool for social or political change (the entire premise from the start).

If you want to keep picking things apart for the sake of it though, have at it.

you’re not a victim because you made a terrible argument and got called out for it.

is that clear enough for you now?

gregorum,

I never said that 9/11 was a successful use of terrorism

I have quoted you several times saying exactly that.

I said that the statement Data made about the troubles being successful was offensive and would be similar to saying the same thing about other terrorist attacks.

you may have intended to argue that, but you clearly argued:

It’s sort of like saying 9/11 was an effective use of terrorism

and now you keep insisting that:

You then aggressively began demanding evidence for something that was never a statement of fact, making it unclear what you were talking about.

when you very clearly said this:

It’s sort of like saying 9/11 was an effective use of terrorism

and now are acting indignant that I have to keep reminding you of that and how you’re somehow unclear of why after I’ve explained it several times.

I’’m very sorry you can’t wrap your head around this. and, yes, it’s best you don’t respond again, as I’d just keep repeating myself.

gregorum, (edited )

if that’s what you meant, perhaps you should have said that at some point…

I don’t know how this could have been clearer

by saying what you mean and actually providing evidence to back up your claims, as I have said repeatedly.

gregorum, (edited )

except for the first time you said it in your last comment, show me where you said “9/11 was a terrorist attack" before. because what you were arguing before was:

It’s sort of like saying 9/11 was an effective use of terrorism

do you have amnesia?

gregorum,

ok, so, you do have amnesia and have forgotten our entire conversation. well, then I suggest you go back to the beginning because I’m not walking you through this again.

gregorum,

There’s a reason why they call us Gen Xers the forgotten generation…

Good luck web devs (lemmy.world)

Alt text:Twitter post by Daniel Feldman (@d_feldman): Linux is the only major operating system to support diagonal mode (credit [Twitter] @xssfox). Image shows an untrawide monitor rotated about 45 degrees, with a horizontal IDE window taking up a bottom triangle. A web browser and settings menu above it are organized creating a...

gregorum, (edited )

This could totally be adapted into a game for a very interesting immersive experience. Imagine entire worlds of gameplay that adapted to the orientation of your viewport.

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • localhost
  • All magazines
  • Loading…
    Loading the web debug toolbar…
    Attempt #