chyron8472

yhwx said:

Warbler said:

Ok, if I am understanding things correctly, someone described a character in TLJ by using the r-word. It of course pissed off Frink and he responded using the f-word and other things and got temp banned for it. Did the person using the r-word get banned or disciplined at all?

No, and that’s what I think is the real injustice.

They only said it once. And they did get warned that it’s not acceptable. Frink, meanwhile, didn’t just blow up about that, but he kept berating and harassing Jedi Master Skywalker about probably-being-JMOW instead of just reporting him and letting the mods sort it out. (by the way, JMSW is not JMOW, so say the mods.)

Frink has had more than one incident, and over an extended period of time. Just that one use of r-word is not, I think, ban-worthy.

SilverWook said:

Jay has said more bans are likely as he reviews the thread. And he hasn’t even seen the movie yet so he’s spoiling himself in the process.

He should watch it first then. This is his site, so he should have already watched it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wpu1TfjNrhk

double post.

DrDre said:

Mark Hamill:

“Luke would never say that, I’m talking about the George Lucas Star Wars…”

Screw George. George is the reason we still don’t have an official OUT in HD. The reason why the original OT was even as good as it was was because George had a team of people around him that kept his ideas in check. George was responsible for making Episode I completely irrelevant to the Ep.2-6 story arc. And it it was out of sheer spite toward the fans who hated the Prequels that he refused to make the Sequel Trilogy before now.

DominicCobb said:

LexX said:

yhwx said:

towne32 said:

chyron8472 said:

I suppose where I’m at with it is this: People saying things need to be mature and sensitive of others; and people hearing things need to be mature and not overreact.

The arguments people make about offensive conversation seem to gravitate toward one side or the other, when I think both are exactly equally important. On the one side people accuse the offended as “snowflakes”, and on the other side people accuse the offensive as racist, whatever-negative-stereotype.

I think the important thing is to be mature about things, whether speaking or listening in equal measure. And that doesn’t mean people have to watch everything they say, but that they can also diffuse a tense moment quickly and easily when it happens by being civil and mature.

A: "[unknowningly offensive word]"
B: "Please don’t use that word. It’s offensive to me."
A: “Oh. Okay, I’m sorry.”

I’m guilty of over-reacting here as well. And, for me at least, it’s because for a long time, it was nearly impossible to get the moderation to do anything unless a post was really over the top vile (like the guy who posted 100 anime dicks). So things naturally escalated, and we would all just basically act like bigger and bigger (anime) dicks toward each other. Walking away was probably the right thing to do. But with little moderation in place, walking away might have felt more like just handing over the thread to people who are in the wrong. Frink may have felt that way at times, and I certainly think people have thought it when they’ve stood up to Frink at times when he hijacked threads.

I quite agree. If you’re here, you’re probably of the argumentative type, which means that it might be hard to let your arguments go. I’ve felt that many times before. You hold on to your arguments like children.

I’m just tired of that. Just tired. It doesn’t matter who posts their opinion about anything, there’s always someone whining about it and needing to have the last word. It’s become so tiresome that it’s better to just keep your opinions to yourself if you don’t want the bully squad on your ass.

Wrong!

Mrebo said:

SilverWook said:

Cobra Kai said:

SilverWook said:

Cobra Kai said:

chyron8472 said:

KILLOFFPOE said:

I could almost guarantee that if TLJ’s story beats exactly matched expectations of what people were speculating, many people would have accused the film of being predictable and boring.

I would have settled for a competently told story, and one that spent less time on pointless sub-plots, useless characters, & cartoony gags, and more focus on the critical themes surrounding our hero’s struggles and growth as she takes the next step of her journey.

Because there never were any cartoony gags in the OOT.

Nope, not even close to the extent of the gags that were placed throughout TLJ. The only thing in the OOT that feels like a “gag” is the Tarzan yell in ROTJ, which fortunately is brief and not in-your-face, like the TLJ stuff.

Anyway, the gags are just one aspect of what’s wrong with the movie.

Forgetting Wicket hitting himself in the head with his own sling?

Cartoon physics when Paploo steals the speeder bike?

The slapstick only got worse in the SE’s. The droid in Mos Eisely hitting the other droid for example. Or the Jawas falling off the Ronto.

I thought it fashionable to hate on ROTJ, particularly because Ewoks. Has that changed?

ROTJ is my favorite Star Wars film. It might be “fashionable”, but in that haters-gonna-hate sort of way that gets tiring.

Mrebo said:

We don’t need to love every tittle of the OT to point out substantial flaws in the new films or explain differences.

That assumes such flaws are substantial or indeed flaws at all.

I still say, no matter what they did some people just have expectations that would have extremely difficult to reach, and if done so could have then appealed to only that niche and annoyed another group of people instead.

I think that, plain and simple, what many people wanted TLJ to have been was unattainable. I think no matter what LFL/Disney/RJ/JJ did people would complain. That doesn’t mean complaints aren’t valid. It means they’re damned if they do and they’re damned if they don’t.

There’s too much humor. There’s not enough humor. It’s the wrong humor. It’s too much like the OT. It’s not enough like the OT. This villain is too much like Palpatine; but now he’s dead and should have been more like Palpatine. That villain is not enough like Vader. I can’t remember the characters’ names after one viewing. The music isn’t memorable enough after one viewing and having not listened to the score.

et al.

yhwx said:

ChainsawAsh said:

That thread is cancer.

You’re not helping me trying to avoid it…

Watch the film already, then.

KILLOFFPOE said:

I simply don’t understand how that NEED to make a strong OT-worthy Star Wars film has been lost, in the second freaking movie of the Trilogy.

When TFA came out, it was the first live-action Star Wars film since the Prequels. And the Prequels were thoroughly derided. What TFA needed to do, as a modern Star Wars film, was to reinvigorate the franchise and show that Star Wars could still be done well, with a respectful homage to the films that started it all and captured the hearts of so many fans. It needed new life.

After TFA proved that Star Wars was being treated well, and that George was no longer directly ruining it for everyone, the franchise could then continue in new and fresh ways. Granted, they could have created TLJ to be another typical adventure-fantasy-in-space, but that’s not what they did. They chose, now that they’ve got everyone’s attention, to turn expectations of the story on its head.

I could almost guarantee that if TLJ’s story beats exactly matched expectations of what people were speculating, many people would have accused the film of being predictable and boring.

I didn’t like Hux (in The Force Awakens). Maybe it’s his appearance, or age, or voice, or something but I have a really hard time taking him seriously as a successor to Tarkin. He just lacks a certain amount of menace that I think someone in that position needs.

I’m not picking on him. I’m explaining his rationale for jumping on people who place TLJ below movies he hates.

MalàStrana said:

TV’s Frink said:
I continue to be amazed that some people HATED this movie so much that they could actually put it last, behind three terribly made movies.

It’s not about “hate”. I don’t even hate R1 as I have explained multiple times; ranking a movie last doesn’t mean you totally hate it… well, maybe some people do really hate the PT but I can understand the feeling that I once shared 😃 TLJ is a complex movie, very familiar and yet new, good and yet bad, impressive and yet lame… it may take a while before people know if they like it or not.

The thing is, Frink hates the Prequels. He thinks they are basically irredeemable, fanedit or not. So placing TLJ below them is baffling to him because he doesn’t see how anyone could objectively appreciate them by any stretch.

Matt.F said:

DrDre said:

MalàStrana said:

What if IX makes her the Chosen One then ? (but it would go against the “socialist” view of the movie about the Force which belongs to everyone, no-one included). If you think about it, Anakin was one of the most powerful Jedi of the Order but thanks to Obi-Wan restraints he never got too much powerful (TPM and then AOTC deal with that actually) while growing mistrust against the Order (TCW/ROTS deal with that as well). Imagine if he had stayed alone a a shitty planet, would he have become like Rey, very powerful in a matter of days ?
But I agree about Rey nonetheless, I has always been my main criticism against TFA.

Yeah, but even Anakin needed years of training to become a Jedi. He could see things before they happen, which was presented as a trait of someone with a lot of Force potential, but to use Jedi mind tricks, levitation, and to be proficient with a lightsaber required a lot of effort.

This scene in TESB clashes with the final scenes of TLJ in a major way:

Again, these are ‘perceived continuity clashes’ that you’re pulling out simply to try and discredit the new movies.

Now that you’re using the PT here’s one for you - why didn’t Ben take Luke to be trained by Yoda at a much younger age?

We know he has Skywalker blood - the Force is biological right? We know in ESB that Yoda thinks Luke should have been trained far younger. Why did Kenobi leave it so long?

Why do people assume that because Yoda says “he is too old to begin the training” in ESB that Yoda really meant it? Why can it not just be Yoda’s way of trying to get Luke to show his resolve and a willingness to take it seriously?

Luke and Leia are the only two currently-known Force-Sensitives remotely capable of taking down Vader and the Emperor. Yoda knows this. I don’t see Yoda legitimately giving up on Luke so easily.

LexX said:

Aside from that one post, it’s been long overdue with all the public name-calling, harrassing, baiting, trolling, bullying, stirring and continous de-railing of threads for years.

I quite agree. Sometimes he can say things and not get banned and it baffles me.

Now, I admit that I myself have not backed down when barked at about something I said, and maybe that makes me a hypocrite. But usually when I don’t back down it’s because I feel the response toward me is an overreaction, and I have had personal experiences with being bullied so I feel some need to stand up for myself.

I suppose where I’m at with it is this: People saying things need to be mature and sensitive of others; and people hearing things need to be mature and not overreact.

The arguments people make about offensive conversation seem to gravitate toward one side or the other, when I think both are exactly equally important. On the one side people accuse the offended as “snowflakes”, and on the other side people accuse the offensive as racist, whatever-negative-stereotype.

I think the important thing is to be mature about things, whether speaking or listening in equal measure. And that doesn’t mean people have to watch everything they say, but that they can also diffuse a tense moment quickly and easily when it happens by being civil and mature.

A: "[unknowningly offensive word]"
B: "Please don’t use that word. It’s offensive to me."
A: “Oh. Okay, I’m sorry.”

yhwx said:

Handman said:

yhwx said:

Handman said:

yhwx said:

Handman said:

Autistic people aren’t retarded, constantly linking the two together kind of bothers me. I know the intentions are well-meaning, but I can’t get over that.

I don’t think he’s trying to link the two. I just think he’s trying to go against the linking of those two by other people.

Indeed, but most times it’s used here, they aren’t linking the two.

So if I use the n-word, not intending to link it to slavery, it’s fine?

That’s ridiculous. The two words are completely different.

They offend people in similar ways, right?

Do they? In the context of the relevant incident, the person who said R was calling a TLJ character an R for not seeing something coming when he thought they should have, as an example of the film for not living up to their expectations. Afterward, he seemed to think calling a fictional character R was not as offensive as calling an actual person that.

Personally, I didn’t know that to say “that is retarded” about some annoyingly unfortunate event occurring is extremely offensive. Crass and moderately profane, yes, but not offensive.

yhwx said:

chyron8472 said:

yhwx said:

Handman said:

yhwx said:

Handman said:

Autistic people aren’t retarded, constantly linking the two together kind of bothers me. I know the intentions are well-meaning, but I can’t get over that.

I don’t think he’s trying to link the two. I just think he’s trying to go against the linking of those two by other people.

Indeed, but most times it’s used here, they aren’t linking the two.

So if I use the n-word, not intending to link it to slavery, it’s fine?

I hate that comparison. Not all derogatory words are equally derogatory.

I wasn’t trying to rate the the badness of bad words (mostly a worthless endeavor); I was just trying to state that good intentions don’t change the way things are taken.

That is true. One can not know how things might be taken and so one should endeavor to not say things that can be construed offensively.

At the same time, a person on the receiving end ought to endeavor to be mature, and not automatically assume that something that is said was intended offensively.

yhwx said:

Handman said:

yhwx said:

Handman said:

Autistic people aren’t retarded, constantly linking the two together kind of bothers me. I know the intentions are well-meaning, but I can’t get over that.

I don’t think he’s trying to link the two. I just think he’s trying to go against the linking of those two by other people.

Indeed, but most times it’s used here, they aren’t linking the two.

So if I use the n-word, not intending to link it to slavery, it’s fine?

I hate that comparison. Not all derogatory words are equally derogatory.

R is not automatically equal to N on the scale of offensiveness.

All I know is one of Frink’s responses during the incident was

TV’s Frink said:

pleasehello said:

DrDre said:

TV’s Frink said:

chyron8472 said:

TV’s Frink said:

Nandi said:

TV’s Frink said:

DrDre said:

at which point he suddenly becomes a retard.

Oh fuck off already.

Before I just disagreed with your opinion on a film. Now I think you’re an asshole too.

How do you keep avoiding moderator warnings with all fights you start

Go ask them, but maybe it’s partly because I don’t use “retard” as an insult?

I have to admit, that’s a pretty weak defense.

“Retard” as an insult is offensive, but “asshole” is not. Telling people to “fuck off” is not, as being belligerent is also not.
Umm… okay.

Your objection is noted.

Using “retard” as an insult makes you an asshole. Sorry.

I see. Calling someone dumb is also insulting. If I call Snoke a dumb character would that also be passing those high and mightly standards of yours? How about Snoke is ugly? Is that an insult, which makes me an asshole, or simply the truth?

I think insulting a fictional character is not really on the same level of dickery as insulting real people, but hey that’s me. Anyways, I will avoid the r-word with regards to fictional characters from now on, as it seems to be inflammatory to some.

Frink loves being outraged. Best to just ignore him.

How’s your autistic child doing these days? Mine sends her love.

in defense of his reaction to someone using that word.

JayArgonaut said:

BTW: a belated welcome back.

Thank you. 😃

yhwx said:

chyron8472 said:

He doesn’t have to explain himself. All he’d need say is “Please don’t use that word. It is offensive.”

I don’t understand what you’re responding to.

Oh. I thought the “mentioning your children” was a reference to Frink being supposed to explain that he gets upset about that word because he has an autistic child.

yhwx said:

On another note, I can understand where Frink is coming from, but having to respond, mentioning your children, to every post that contains that word is a bit excessive.

He doesn’t have to explain himself. All he’d need say is “Please don’t use that word. It is offensive.”

But instead he says