How Bad Was The Great Escape Comet Butchered?

I'm glad you asked that question nate, here's an answer:

Did you ever see the moive "Plan 9 from Outer Space"? Its considered the worst movie ever made. The reasons for this are that, though director Ed Wood ment to direct a serious sci-fi thriller, it ended up beign a disaster due to no special effects funding, poor acting, replacing a principle actor in the middle of filming, the list goes on and on (Hubcaps for UFOs, anyone?:)).

But the movie has a following. Why? Because as horribly silly as it was, it was entertaining on a whole other level. What was ment to be serious and scarey was really silly and amusing. Thats kind of how I feel when I see you arguing with someone over opinions. That isn't a personal attack at you, btw, just saying.

Infact, alot of what you say makes sense, and I respect alot of comments you make. But its when you step over that line of opinion is fact that I can't let it go without commenting.

I wish I would have been around during all this to chime in with smart ass coments.

In response to the post with all of the ifs asking why Nate keeps comming back when he doesn't care what people think, I think it is obvious that he is competitive and likes being right. I find it really hard to keep my mouth shut when people are wrong about something, and he appears to have the same problem.

Tekno, I think Clay Aiken is on Lifetime right now. Or maybe it is after the movie with the chick that gets beat by her husband and rises above it. I have "nothing to contribute here", so I'll just go back to playing with legos or something.

I could take the time to come back at you, but, quite frankly, you're not worth using that much brain power. Nate provides intellectual stimulation when debating. I just ignore you.

Now run along back to you're Thomas the ChooChoo train show, I'm off to watch Clay Aiken.

BTW, nice attempt at a putdown with Lifetime and Clay Aiken, there Bud. Sorry it didn't work out for you.

I thought they were hilarious (isn't that all that matters?).

Saying you ignore me is a joke considering you come back at me in every post I make, even when it doesn't have anything to do with you. You even took the time to make a lame ChooChoo "insult" above. (in quotes because I don't really know *what* it is).

Shouldn't you be making stupid comments about M:TR and Pancakes and other things that don't have anything to do with you. Maybe if you comment on them, people give you the attention that you so much desire.

/\For someone that comes into every post I make to try and attack me, get a response, and then get letdown because I don't play along with it like I do nate, you're one to talk about attention whoring, which you've yet to master.

And how do you know that M:TR has nothing to do with me...Ask moosh, I made it in 3D. As for Pancakes, I never make pancake jokes, so if you're going to say something, don't be so uneducated that you can't get it atleast half right.

Moving along.

Edit: Oh, BTW, the Thomas thing wasn't an insult. You're the one that said something about you playing with Legos, I just figured since I'm watching Clay Aiken and Lifetime (Which I still don't understand how that is a putdown...), you may be watching Thomas, since you've admitted that thats about your level.

Infact, I'd like you to explain the Clay and Lifetime comments to me, just so they're not over my head. Why is me watching Clay Aiken and Lifetime an 'insult'? Please explain that in full detail... *** Edited 11/7/2004 9:12:44 AM UTC by TeknoScorpion***

Okay class, time for an English lesson!

Lesson #1 is on semantics, and this one is directed (all in good fun, of course) to Nate:

---

Word said:

Tekno, I think Clay Aiken is on Lifetime right now. Or maybe it is after the movie with the chick that gets beat by her husband and rises above it.

---

That, Nate, is a sexist comment. And with homophobic undertones no less. Get it straight next time; you will be quizzed. ;)

Lesson #2 is on irony and hypocrisy, and their place in a literary work. Take these two examples, for instance:

---

Word said:
I wish I would have been around during all this to chime in with smart ass coments.

...then later, said:

Shouldn't you be making stupid comments about M:TR and Pancakes and other things that don't have anything to do with you. Maybe if you comment on them, people give you the attention that you so much desire.

---

This is a classic example of someone who attempts to be too clever for his own good, and then f**ks up his whole argument by destroying it on his own in one fell swoop. Nothing is more attention whoring (or pathetic) than someone who openly admits that he has nothing to do with the discussion, enters it for no apparent reason except to disrupt it, and then lashes out at someone else claiming they're only trying to get attention. This will be on the exam as an essay, kids, so make sure you examine this case study closely.

Lesson #3 is a lesson in citing sources in order to construct a strong argument.

Let's say, for instance, that your argument was, "Word entered this discussion on good terms and tried to naturally or cleverly make his presence known through various means." You should NOT cite as follows:

---

I have "nothing to contribute here," so I'll just go back to playing with legos or something.

---

You should also avoid trying to contradict yourself in separate segments of your argument. For instance, you should not attempt to make a claim for the overall relevance of your point...

---

I find it really hard to keep my mouth shut when people are wrong about something,...

---

...and then compliment that later by reducing all possible counterarguments to arrogantly self-aggrandizing bullsh**:

---

I thought they were hilarious (isn't that all that matters?).

---

In contrast to this wholly ineffective strategy, you should aim for parallelism in your arguments. For instance, while Tekno did reduce himself to Word's level in dispensing an insult, his use of a television allusion, similar to Word's comment, was effective on a parallel level. One should strive to address this in a satisfactory manner, instead of brushing it aside and claiming your disputant is an irrelevant ass for throwing your own technique back in your face.

Finally, one should be conscious of never being guilty of utilizing a technique that you openly criticize in your work, as it downgrades the effective of your argument before you've even begun. I will provide you with an example, and leave the analysis for you as a take-home exercise:

---

Saying you ignore me is a joke considering you come back at me in every post I make, even when it doesn't have anything to do with you.

---

Although these formal lessons are significant, there is more to be said on more nuanced topics that we can't address at this time. If you'd like further examples, I encourage you all to pursue the Message Board Etiquette track of my program, with particular highlights being:

MBE 201 - Basic Message Board Etiquette
MBE 214 - How to Come Off like You Don't Have the Maturity or Brain Capacity of a 2-Year-Old
MBE 314 - How to Come Off like You Don't Have the Maturity or Brain Capacity of a 2-Year-Old Even If You DO Have the Maturity or Brain Capacity of a 2-Year-Old
MBE 424 - Advanced Topics in Grammar and Punctuation

and the graduate seminar:

MBE 531 - Recognizing When You've Been Owned and How to React Accordingly; or, How to Learn When You Shut Your Damn Mouth

That is all. Class dismissed.

OH MY GOD! Dave, you are so my hero! That was just too funny, I'm going to be laughing all nite, and I didn't even have to do anything.:)

I, too, took that as a sexist comment with homophobic undertones, but I guess he was too afraid to explain himself there.

Good job!

Hmm. . .

I spose I have been a bit rediculous in this thread and others. I'm going to make it a point to post less (especially while intoxicated), and read more.

Or perhaps you could post all you want while trying to contribute atleast something other than you're self proclaimed 'smart ass comments'.

Nate tried to say that I came into the thread just to argue with him, which, infact, was totally untrue, I came in reading about the comet. Nate happened to be arguing here, and, as usual, I couldn't let that go without throwing in my .02 to the argument, which was actually going fine.

Then you came in, and as usual, started trying to hang with the big boys. No offense ment here, but it seems like you only and often look for a reason to make said 'smart ass comments', and you found a reason here, though nothing was directed at you, and, while I was arguing with nate about opinions(which, btw, has been on going between the 2 of us for over a year now), you start yelling at me with a "Hey, I'm over here arguing with you, pay attention to me!" kind of tone.

Then you make some remarks that, as Dave said, where of a very homophobic nature, which you didn't even try to dispute. I knew what you ment by that, and tried to get you to explain, but you didn't, and quite frankly, you don't need to now since I think everyone realizes why I was asking you to explain.

If you want to argue, thats fine. Pick a subject that you feel strongly about, stand by your position, get your facts straight, and do it in a more proper manner. Go read "The Structure of Argument", it can give you lots of pointers on how to argue effectivly, even if your opponent refuses to listen.

And never accuse someone of being the very thing you are when trying to lay on an insult. *** Edited 11/8/2004 8:45:25 AM UTC by TeknoScorpion***

ROFL Dave...you made being awake at 3am totally worth it! ;)

mOOSH [back to bed now...er, soon]

Yeah, why are you awake this late, mooshie?

Scott, his friends Nima and Matthew, and myself went to the All Tomorrow's Party Festival over the weekend. The three of them took the train up Saturday morning and were supposed to return by train Sunday night. Turns out the last train from LA to SD departed as the show was letting out at 10pm. Instead of making everyone leave the show early I drove them to San Diego and then drove back home to LA.

Highlights of the show:

1. Shins. Life changing good ;)

2. Peaches. OMFG, I can't wait to see her again.

3. Flaming Lips. Made me wish I'd went to Day One of the Coachella Music Festival last spring. Awesome!

4. Lou Reed. The man still gots it.

5. When the ice cream vendor saw the sweatshirt I bought at PPP and shouted "Knoebels! Knoebels! Best park in the USA!"

Lowlights:

1. The crappy beef burrito I took three bites of, which turned out to be four bites too many.

2. Cococut Water, being sold at a Vegan booth in REAL coconuts. Advertised as "cool and refreshing" we all took one sip and the nut was in the trash. ICK!

3. Modest Mouse's problematic set. They sounded fantastic but were obviously having a bad night.

mOOSH [off to work after only three hours sleep]

*** Edited 11/8/2004 4:45:56 PM UTC by Mamoosh***

Hmmm...how to steer this back on topic...

I haven't bothered to read all of the novels above (I've read enough of them to know that reading them all would be a waste of my time), but I'd have to agree that there is no reason to complain about the modifications if you haven't ridden the Comet. I certainly can't form a valid opinion of a coaster I have never experienced for myself. How many times had I heard, prior to riding, how rough Texas Giant is? How painful Viper @ GADv or Manhattan Express are? How terrible Vekoma SLCs are? Having ridden them all, I was able to form an opinion of them: they were all extremely enjoyable for various reasons. In fact, after riding so many good coasters that I'd previously heard nothing good about, I absolutely refuse to take anyone's opinion as fact until I experience it first hand. This includes positive feedback, as well.

My point is, some of us, myself included, are unable to tell whether or not The Great Escape's star attraction has been affected by these modifications, either negatively, positively, or not at all. I suggest that you not go ballistic until you know for sure.

*** Edited 11/8/2004 4:57:21 PM UTC by Vater***

Well if it's ANY help to anyone, I rated The Comet a 1 in the Wooden Coaster Polls.

I would have rated it a 2, but the new wood added this year bumped it up to a 1 for me.