posted
Nomad's designer, Dr. Roykirk, was featured in an episode of Team Knight Rider.
But, back to the topic at hand, I really don't expect to see Nomad brought up in Enterprise unless Tucker or Archer or Mayweather bring up ancient Earth space-probe history. The launch and lost of Nomad happening over a century prior to the current year set for Enterprise, right?
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
"i'm guessing you don't understand what that little greenish/yellow guy with his tongue sticking out means. let me welcome you to the internet. that thing is called an "e-mot-i-con". that particular one gives an air of levity to anything that is written."
No it doesn't. It's representative of sticking your tongue out. Whether you're doing it out of silliness, derision, or disgust is something that needs to be implied by your words. Which it wasn't.
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
quote:Originally posted by Ryan McReynolds: Seeing as this topic is not a spoiler, and the only mention of spoilers was in a later joke, why are we discussing spoilers? Does anyone have anything to say about the spiffy Nomad model that is already only marginally qualifying for inclusion in the Enterprise forum?
Some people are such fucking killjoys. I have to ask, do you actually enjoy watching Star Trek in and of itself? Or are you too busy making technical notes about the show and wishing Seven's breats were a little smaller so you could see more of that MSD behind her?
Meanwhile, as resident Spoiler God, I'm a bit concerned about opinions expressed that if someone, say, in the UK hasn't bought the latest video or been able to see the epsisode on Sky, then it's their own fault if they get spoiled?
On the subject of "Endgame" I'm as bad as everyone else here, really. I saw it last year on Sky and have joined the majority in trying desperately ever since to forget the whole sorry mess. So we haven't been brilliant at guarding against spoilers. Unfortunately people restricted to seeing it on BBC2 will be seeing it any time now, while Australians will see it. . . God only knows. At any time we could have some newbie who fits those categories start posting here, you want to drive them away because they're obviously insufficiently-hardcore Trekkies?
So I can't believe that I'm seeing it said that "if you don't buy the videos or have Sky it's your own fault, you should expect to get spoiled" when just a couple of years back others were saying "if you don't live in the US or Canada it's your owen fault, you should expect to get spoiled." For shame!
quote:Originally posted by Ryan McReynolds: Seeing as this topic is not a spoiler, and the only mention of spoilers was in a later joke, why are we discussing spoilers? Does anyone have anything to say about the spiffy Nomad model that is already only marginally qualifying for inclusion in the Enterprise forum?
Some people are such fucking killjoys. I have to ask, do you actually enjoy watching Star Trek in and of itself? Or are you too busy making technical notes about the show and wishing Seven's breats were a little smaller so you could see more of that MSD behind her?
Meanwhile, as resident Spoiler God, I'm a bit concerned about opinions expressed that if someone, say, in the UK hasn't bought the latest video or been able to see the epsisode on Sky, then it's their own fault if they get spoiled?
On the subject of "Endgame" I'm as bad as everyone else here, really. I saw it last year on Sky and have joined the majority in trying desperately ever since to forget the whole sorry mess. So we haven't been brilliant at guarding against spoilers. Unfortunately people restricted to seeing it on BBC2 will be seeing it any time now, while Australians will see it. . . God only knows. At any time we could have some newbie who fits those categories start posting here, you want to drive them away because they're obviously insufficiently-hardcore Trekkies?
So I can't believe that I'm seeing it said that "if you don't buy the videos or have Sky it's your own fault, you should expect to get spoiled" when just a couple of years back others were saying "if you don't live in the US or Canada it's your owen fault, you should expect to get spoiled." For shame!
What does any of this have to do with the section of my post that you quoted? And more importantly, what does any of this spoiler business have to do with Nomad--the topic of the thread? For what it's worth, I am in favor of spoiler warnings in titles. I'm not sure why you chose my post to attach a spoiler-warning diatribe to. I suggest the topic of spoiler warnings be dropped or begun anew in a more appropriate setting.
Back to Nomad (again)...
quote:Originally posted by Siegfried: But, back to the topic at hand, I really don't expect to see Nomad brought up in Enterprise unless Tucker or Archer or Mayweather bring up ancient Earth space-probe history. The launch and lost of Nomad happening over a century prior to the current year set for Enterprise, right?
Yeah, I think the only connection to Enterprise at all is the aforementioned set dressing of Mayweather's quarters. Although obviously just an art department thing, it's nice continuity.
"Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away." --Phillip K. Dick
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
EdipisReks
Ex-Member
posted
quote:Originally posted by TSN:
"i'm guessing you don't understand what that little greenish/yellow guy with his tongue sticking out means. let me welcome you to the internet. that thing is called an "e-mot-i-con". that particular one gives an air of levity to anything that is written."
No it doesn't. It's representative of sticking your tongue out. Whether you're doing it out of silliness, derision, or disgust is something that needs to be implied by your words. Which it wasn't.
no, you are wrong. the mad face followed by the tongue face is a standard formula in every forum i have ever participated in (which is a lot). + = "ooooh, i'm mad. oh, no i'm not, it was a joke".
IP: Logged
posted
You know, it might be helpful if I actually had read the page linked in the original post rather than just stared at the pretty pictures.
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
"no, you are wrong. the mad face followed by the tongue face is a standard formula in every forum i have ever participated in (which is a lot)."
Well, excuse me then. I'll go write a letter to the ISO and tell them they forgot to include that in their publications.
In case you didn't notice, you were the one who was misunderstood. By multiple people, in fact. I would point out that that suggests your "standard" isn't as standard as you'd think.
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
EdipisReks
Ex-Member
posted
it's what they use at the hardforum, anandtech forum, genmay forum, techzone forum, firingsquad forum, blah blah blah. that is about 175,000 people. none of them misunderstands the formula. pretty standard stuff.
IP: Logged
posted
Do any of these forums understand the concept of "capital letters"?
quote: it's what they use at the hardforum
Now that as deserving of an "ooh-er" as anything else I've seen recently.
-------------------- Yes, you're despicable, and... and picable... and... and you're definitely, definitely despicable. How a person can get so despicable in one lifetime is beyond me. It isn't as though I haven't met a lot of people. Goodness knows it isn't that. It isn't just that... it isn't... it's... it's despicable.
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
I UNDERSTAND THE CONCEPT OF CAPITAL LETTERS. DO YOU? DRUNK SNAAAAAY!!!!
Registered: Sep 2000
| IP: Logged
EdipisReks
Ex-Member
posted
hardforum as in [H]ardOCP forum. do you understand the concept of english, PsyLiam? because i have used english several times to tell you that i don't use capitals at the beginning of sentences when i write e-mail or post on internet forums. i think the problem is that you can't read: you simply find sentences of the desired length in magazines, scan them in, copy them from the scanning program, and then paste them here. it's just been an incredibly huge coincidence that these random sentences have more or less made sense after being pasted together and have, more than half of the time, actually referred to previous posts in the thread.
IP: Logged
-------------------- "I was surprised by the matter-of-factness of Kafka's narration, and the subtle humor present as a result." (Sizer 2005)
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
Topic Closed
![[Mad]](mad.gif)
+ ![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
= "ooooh, i'm mad. oh, no i'm not, it was a joke".
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic