[Saquist]

You never offered logical debate.
You offer obvious debate....there is a distinct difference.

[Zardoz]

Originally Posted by Saquist

You never offered logical debate.
You offer obvious debate....there is a distinct difference.

Sir that would be your definition of logic, not the dictionary's.

If you don't want to debate the topic, please say so.

[Saquist]

Fortunatly I offered no definition of logic for which to jump to such a random conclusion.
I don't think you aspired to any definition of logic, Zardoz.

[Zardoz]

Originally Posted by Saquist

Fortunatly I offered no definition of logic for which to jump to such a random conclusion.
I don't think you aspired to any definition of logic, Zardoz.

I do belive the same has been said of you on more than one occasion, by more than one person there, Saquist.

[Saquist]

Truth by consensus is a flawed concept. One which you've magnificently have borne obvious over and over and over again. But that doesn't stop you from cheerleading nor does it prevent you from using flawed logic as you do now.

[Zardoz]

Originally Posted by Saquist

Truth by consensus is a flawed concept. One which you've magnificently have borne obvious over and over and over again. But that doesn't stop you from cheerleading nor does it prevent you from using flawed logic as you do now.

Now flattery will not get you anywhere Saquist.

Unless we all heed to your brand of logic, you declare us all "illogical."

We live by consensus, we all agree on a "reality' by consensus, laws by consensus, and even defintions of life by consensus. So your debate has no real merit.

You can use labels, and veiled insults all you wish, but they are of no consequence. the facts speak for themselves and you are in "error", as you would put it in your own unique style.

[Saquist]

Flattery is irrelevant.
Most people are illogical but not in every way. Humans have a tendency to make descisions with ther emotions, this leads to a myriad of errors.

They also make frequent use of consensus to decide what is logical. Sometimes it works but most often it leads to harmful mob actions, contradictory behavior, oppression, and death. I understand why you cherish consensus and why many humans do. It requires nary a glimmer of logic merely a motivation, the will to act with the power of many.

So heres the error in your post.
You say we live by consensus, we all agree on a "reality" by consensus, laws by consensus, and even defintions of life by consensus.

This is a half truth.
Laws are decided not merely by consensus but on the concept of fair treatment. It actually includes the minority instead of excluding them. The governement is not run based on true consensus. If it were minorities would never have a worth while vote. Again it is run on the fair distribution of those votes, giving voice to those who by consensus would have no voice.

You're correct when you say the facts do speak for themselves.
They say justice and consensus are not related.

[Zardoz]

So...back on topic.

What do you folks think of this promo?

[Saquist]

I think it was padded, fluff. They made sure to show you skin, and all there best lines, deep voice and all. that was the purpose of having catsuit T'pol on the show. And she was about as intresting as a cat suit too. You could tell they really weren't taking Trek fans seriously. TOS may have done some similar things but you know this isn't the 1960's anymore Trek has matured. With Entperprise it litteraly turned into pornograhy.

[sir num nums]

Girls... break it up before I get the hose.