savmagoett said:
For the rest of your diatribe as you are so prompt judging me I will be as well, I'm sorry Adywan, but you're the one making affirmations here, saying "i have proved that i am right", "this shot is wrong", "this one is right", "this tower has an oversized bridge section", "the Executor is the only one that has the bridge section at the correct scale" (based on what please?). For someone who's "the first to admit when he's wrong" you don't sound very open to discussion…
For one, i have not judged you whatsoever. You have totally taken what i have said out of context by quoting a few sections here . For one, the bridge size on the Executor was introduced in ESB where as the oversized bridge on the large scale stardestroyer tower wasn't introduced until ROTJ. And we know that the towers between the tow designs of ships are the same size as the proof was in the movies. The stardestroyer tower built for ROTJ wasn't a very detailed model because it was only to be used in a couple of shots. It's seems that they were working on the assumption that the Executor tower was supposed to be larger so they made the bridge section larger to fit with that scale. They got the scaling wrong about a lot of things in ROTJ so i wouldn't use that movie as any point of reference, which is why i use the Executor as a point of reference for my scaling. Plus as i showed in my examples the Tantive IV is at least 25% smaller than you have in your scaling diagram which indeed fits in with the smaller shuttle scale.
savmagoett said:
You're even patronizing me about what I should consider as argument: "Forget about the so called sizes of ships that are documented because many are just so wrong". At least speak for yourself man! If I choose to use one such document it's because i find that one relevant, not because they are "official". I'm not taking them for granted nor as stand alone proof but I'm not systematically discarding them either.
When was i patronising you? All i said that you shouldn't really use a lot of these guides as reference because they have been proven to be incorrect many times. How is that patronising? You see it all the time that people will argue facts about things in Star Wars just because it says so in a book and not even bother to try an work things out for themselves, so i was just offering some advise. You want to read through my ANH:R & ESB:R threads to see just how many times an argument has started because i'm doing something that in "such and such" book it says different and that i'm making a mistake. At least you seem to be working things out for yourself to provide your side of the arguments, for which i applaud you.
savmagoett said:
I just wish to explain my point of view here (which can only be done trough several posts) and therefore answering your question. Sorry I failed to answer you question right away sir! Why are you getting obnoxious just because someone is challenging your statement. I was just trying to present you with some document that you may not know and alternate reasoning that you may not have come up with, that's all…
But you just won't let me, don't you?
Me getting obnoxious? Where was i being obnoxious? All i was asking was how you were determining the scale of the shuttle against the stardestroyer and even though i had agreed with you the shuttle was approx 20mtrs long your reply was to go on about the size of the shuttle again. All i wanted to know was your calculation, so how is that being obnoxious? All i was trying to do was open up the discussion a bit, that's all. But now who's being patronising calling me sir like that? Hmmm? lol
savmagoett said:
Wow wow, Ady, I was just kidding (that's why I putted the smiley). Maybe my english was ambiguous, if so, I'm sorry. I'm a French talking guy who do his best to speak your language, and humor is the most difficult part of that. I assure you I wasn't making any assumption toward your personality.
smiley or no smiley what you said came across as a smug assumption that i'm not going to like your arguments for your case, which is totally wrong about me. But now you have explained that English isn't your first language then i can see how things may be getting confused between what we both say and the manor in which they are meant, so i say we should start a fresh. I really do want to hear your side of things, maybe you will come up with a good argument that may change my mind? You never know.
You have to remember that things do come across differently in a forum because you can't hear the tone in which something is said. And if you read through my threads you will see that i am very willing to admit when i am wrong. In my ESB:R thread i have admitted that i am wrong about the original size i had for the shuttle and have changed it accordingly to my final calculations, which i wouldn't have bothered doing in so much depth if you hadn't put your argument across. So please don't think i'm trying to stop you in any way, because that isn't my intention at all.