Star Trek ship sets - Page 4

ManOfWar · #31 August 13th, 2002, 05:48 PM

I think he means Awe. Dude buy a spell checker

Let me take a step back. I know next to nothing about Babylon 5. We did not get it in this area so I could not watch it. From what I read at TrekBBs and other Trek sites, it was a direct rip off of Star Trek. If that judgement is incorrect, then I have only the Network Tv Stations to blame.

So your telling me as dedicated Star Trek fans from your era, and with a history of SFB under your belt, you can sit in your Captains chair and type that you like these star trek sets?

The only set I like of his is the Klingons and Romulan sets. The rest suck horribly. I had to edit them in order to use them, but alas they are useable. Perhaps I should submit them for the TDM Mod. My sets are far better than the onese they are using currently.

geoschmo · #32 August 13th, 2002, 05:50 PM

Oh man. Now he is critisizing TDM. Duck!

You really like getting under peoples skin MOW?

Growltigga · #33 August 13th, 2002, 05:50 PM

So your telling me as dedicated Star Trek fans from your era, and with a history of SFB under your belt, you can sit in your Captains chair and type that you like these star trek sets?

I do believe that is exactly what we are staying.

Are you so narrow-minded, egocentric and unaware that you consider only your opinion matters on these sets?

I say it again, if you dont like them, fine. Your choice and you dont have to use them. Just dont bother the rest of us with your opinion.

and if your sets are so much better than what is currently available, please share them. I am sure we would all like to see what a master craftsman like yourself can come up with.

[ August 13, 2002, 16:53: Message edited by: Growltigga ]

dogscoff · #34 August 13th, 2002, 05:55 PM

Quote:

Oh man. Now he is critisizing TDM. Duck!

You really like getting under peoples skin MOW?

Please do not feed the troll.

I vote for a lock on this thread: MoW is either taking the piss or is so rigidly set in his opinion that any reasonable solution other than "agree to differ" is impossible.

Growltigga · #35 August 13th, 2002, 05:57 PM

I concur with Dogscoff. Geo, please close this thread down. It is obvious Manofwar enjoys encitement more than any logical progression of views through discussion.

sachmo · #36 August 13th, 2002, 05:57 PM

Ok, I've wasted enough time waiting for you to say something intelligent, MoW. I was so impressed that you were able to give some criticism without insulting anyone in my Remorhaz thread, and then you quickly move back to verbal diarrhea in this one. Until you apologize to everyone you have insulted on this board (no, that does NOT include me...yet!) then you are on my ignore list. You are nothing but a TROLL, and I don't play that game.

**MUTE**

geoschmo · #37 August 13th, 2002, 05:58 PM

Yeah, that was probably a bad idea. He had gone past the point of annoying and had reached ridiculous I thought. But I shouldn't have said anything.

The next sound you hear will be the thread being locked....

Mephisto · #38 August 14th, 2002, 12:31 AM

*Sound of the second lock engaged*

dogscoff · #39 August 14th, 2002, 01:08 AM

When I was at school I used to think Star Trek fans were the stereotypical sad, nerdy losers who attach an unbalanced amount of importance to what is- when it boils down to it- just a TV series.

Since coming to this forum, I have met ppl like Q and Atrocities who have shown me that Trekkies can equally be broad-minded, sociable and creative folk who are able to just enjoy the show without treating it like a holy war.

Thankyou MoW for taking me back to school and helping me re-learn what is to be a true star trek fan.

BTW, you need to either look up what "JMHO" actually stands for, or think long and hard about the meaning of the word "Humble".

tesco samoa · #40 August 14th, 2002, 01:15 AM

At, Q. Very classy responce.

Welcome to the forum ManofWar