www.ditl.org

Thorin wrote: In opinion arguments there is no winning or losing side. This is not an opinion argument, and the side that wins the argument (when it isn't opinion) based on fact is the correct side.

If you mean correct = truth, try telling that to all the innocent people who've spent years in prison because the prosecution had a "stronger argument". I'm not saying that applies here, just that the statement that "stronger argument" = correct or true is flat wrong.

Rochey wrote:

Dusk wrote:The ship seems badly in need of a ship counselor.

You want the job?

Suggestion: take some of Thorin's NPC fighter pilots, maybe not the main named ones but some of the lesser known/generic ones, and kill them off or reassign them. Necessitating new pilots and possibly a reorganization of the fighter wing.

The problem is not getting Blackstar in as a pilot. We've proposed numerous ways shi can do that. The problem is that shi insists on keeping hir rank, which would cause problems given that Thorin's just a lieutenant, and shi doesn't want to be answerable to him.

Promote him? Lieutenant is kind of a low rank for head tactical officer anyway isn't it?

There's a problem there in that we have a ridiculous amount of Lt Cmdrs already. Seriously, all but three people in this thing are higher than the rank of Lieutenant.
Still, if it'll get Blackstar to stop bitching and get on with it, I'm more than happy to let it go ahead if the others agree.

Damnit, where are Mikey and Teaos today, anyway?

Tsukiyumi wrote:
If you mean correct = truth, try telling that to all the innocent people who've spent years in prison because the prosecution had a "stronger argument". I'm not saying that applies here, just that the statement that "stronger argument" = correct or true is flat wrong.

This is not a dictatorship. Everyone has a fair say and all the ability in the world to put together the best possible argument. It is even ground. There is no chance of 'being in the wrong place at the wrong time'. You cannot be an innocent man condemned because everyone has equal ability to put together an argument.

Let's say I argue that 2 x 3 = 6
You argue that 2 x 3 = 5

I then prove that my argument is correct by saying that 3 lots of 2 (2, 4, 6) is 6. My argument is based off fact and is correct. Your argument, because it is not based off fact, is not correct.

Lieutenant isn't particularly low for chief tactical officer. Worf was a Lieutenant (and he was chief of security as well).

Rochey wrote:...Damnit, where are Mikey and Teaos today, anyway?

I'd guess Mikey is at work (4:48 PM), and Teaos is in dreamy-time (6:48 AM).

I'd guess Mikey is at work (4:48 PM),

Oh, right. You Yanks and your ridiculous 'time zones'.
Still, he normaly posts while at work. Must be a busy day.
Typicaly, it's when all this crap breaks out. I'm sure he'll be thrilled to see that about ten pages have popped up in the space of a day.

and Teaos is in dreamy-time (6:48 AM).

Ah, okay.

ChakatBlackstar wrote:

You are the one who came up with the idea of the Caitian captain being your father.

No I didn't. I went along with it.

That's true, that was my idea. I left it open in case Blackstar didn't want to do that but I thought it sounded like good RP potential.
And to get Munro off M'Real's back all she would have to point out is he's being a hypocrit since he's Breen and has suffered intolerance because of his race before. I probably shouldn't tell you how to get out of that but that would be a low blow to Munro.

Thorin wrote:

Tsukiyumi wrote:
If you mean correct = truth, try telling that to all the innocent people who've spent years in prison because the prosecution had a "stronger argument". I'm not saying that applies here, just that the statement that "stronger argument" = correct or true is flat wrong.

This is not a dictatorship. Everyone has a fair say and all the ability in the world to put together the best possible argument. It is even ground. There is no chance of 'being in the wrong place at the wrong time'. You cannot be an innocent man condemned because everyone has equal ability to put together an argument.

I said, I don't believe my objection to your black/white statement applies here.

Thorin wrote:Let's say I argue that 2 x 3 = 6
You argue that 2 x 3 = 5

I then prove that my argument is correct by saying that 3 lots of 2 (2, 4, 6) is 6. My argument is based off fact and is correct. Your argument, because it is not based off fact, is not correct.

On a question of mathematics, there is often only one "truth", or correct answer. I'm saying that outside of the lab or the classroom, "stronger argument" + facts does not equal truth, or "correct".

Thorin wrote:

ChakatBlackstar wrote: That sounds like an idea. Of coarse Thorin has to agree to let his NPC's 'dissappear' so to speak and we might work it out.

I have said all along you can join tactical either as yourself or as a new character. Which ever way you join tactical, though, you would be reporting to my character, regardless of your rank. That is what you have the problem with. You have however left me with little incentive for you to take over my NPC characters - after your various comments. You've threatened to hack me, send me a virus, called me a snotty nosed brat, a moron...

I hope you're not saying your feeling were hurt by a few minor insults. If you can't handle those insults you shouldn't get in an arguement boy.

In opinion arguments there is no winning or losing side. This is not an opinion argument, and the side that wins the argument (when it isn't opinion) based on fact is the correct side.

I thought this arguement was about you being inflexable

Fighters are tactical
I am the head of tactical
That is not changing

Actually the fighters would be under the command of the wing commander. I was always under the impression the fighters of a carrier weren't operated by the guy in charge of the carrier's defensive weapons

Thorin wrote:

Tsukiyumi wrote:
If you mean correct = truth, try telling that to all the innocent people who've spent years in prison because the prosecution had a "stronger argument". I'm not saying that applies here, just that the statement that "stronger argument" = correct or true is flat wrong.

This is not a dictatorship. Everyone has a fair say and all the ability in the world to put together the best possible argument. It is even ground. There is no chance of 'being in the wrong place at the wrong time'. You cannot be an innocent man condemned because everyone has equal ability to put together an argument.

Let's say I argue that 2 x 3 = 6
You argue that 2 x 3 = 5

I then prove that my argument is correct by saying that 3 lots of 2 (2, 4, 6) is 6. My argument is based off fact and is correct. Your argument, because it is not based off fact, is not correct.

Lieutenant isn't particularly low for chief tactical officer. Worf was a Lieutenant (and he was chief of security as well).

The difference is, math is a simple and easily objectifiable process we can observe, repeat, and prove.

Something like "I refuse to budge, so there, now stop with your weak arguments and foolish suggestions" is not so easily proved. And in fact... is very poor sportsmanship and conduct, to be honest.

ChakatBlackstar wrote:I hope you're not saying your feeling were hurt by a few minor insults. If you can't handle those insults you shouldn't get in an arguement boy.

Mmmkay; you're not having my NPCs.

Actually the fighters would be under the command of the wing commander. I was always under the impression the fighters of a carrier weren't operated by the guy in charge of the carrier's defensive weapons

It's a good job that tactical doesn't have the sole job of being in charge of the carrier's defensive weapons then, isn't it? And that tactical is tasked with protecting the ship via military means and military assets, including fighters.
The Akira isn't just a carrier, anyway. Its job is not to move around it's fighters, it just happens that it can do that too.

ChakatBlackstar wrote:Actually the fighters would be under the command of the wing commander. I was always under the impression the fighters of a carrier weren't operated by the guy in charge of the carrier's defensive weapons

Allow me to look this up. Be back momentarily.

Duskofdead wrote:The difference is, math is a simple and easily objectifiable process we can observe, repeat, and prove.

As are the facts I have already mentioned;

Tactical is tasked with protecting the ship with military means
This includes fighters
I am head of tactical

Not subjective. But fact.

Something like "I refuse to budge, so there, now stop with your weak arguments and foolish suggestions" is not so easily proved. And in fact... is very poor sportsmanship and conduct, to be honest.

I agree, saying things like that would be a very weak argument. Saying things like that make your argument weak, which is precisely why I have not and precisely why my argument is far stronger.

Tsukiyumi wrote:

ChakatBlackstar wrote:Actually the fighters would be under the command of the wing commander. I was always under the impression the fighters of a carrier weren't operated by the guy in charge of the carrier's defensive weapons

Allow me to look this up. Be back momentarily.

The Akira is not comparable to a modern day aircraft carrier. Indeed, Starfleet is not comparable in most aspects to the US Navy.

Monroe wrote:

ChakatBlackstar wrote:

You are the one who came up with the idea of the Caitian captain being your father.

No I didn't. I went along with it.

That's true, that was my idea. I left it open in case Blackstar didn't want to do that but I thought it sounded like good RP potential.
And to get Munro off M'Real's back all she would have to point out is he's being a hypocrit since he's Breen and has suffered intolerance because of his race before. I probably shouldn't tell you how to get out of that but that would be a low blow to Munro.

Well, thank you Monroe. It's nice that you're being helpful. That's really the type of thing I should've thought of though...oh well, I was distracted with keeping my character on ship though. Thank you monroe