Jᴀᴄᴜʀᴜᴛᴜ - Tʜᴇ Cᴀsᴛ Oᴜᴛ

DuneFishUK wrote:

Apjak wrote:

TheDukester wrote:

Apjak wrote:Maybe it's time the list went through mitosis and became:

Preeq Arguments (or stances)

and

Preeq Tactics

the later being things like this questionable #19 "I won't bother to do my homework."

Agreed. Let's not confuse a simple issue.

The purpose of this thread — and making it sticky — is to have all of the classic, specific preek arguments in one place. Adding their general tactics just muddies the water.

Well, I think they should be near each other because, illogically, stances and tactics get used interchangeably. Whenever people (myself and OH included) get passionate we just let reason go out the window. Why do you think legislatures needed rules of order. If we label the tactics as Tactics, we can respond to each in kind with "Stay on Target" instead of letting ourselves get baited onto distracting tangents.

The only tactic I've seen repeatedly is blatant evasion - which is pretty boring and not really list-worthy.

All the arguments they rely on when they work out what they're trying to say are listed here.

Damn! I thought I was getting nuts, or had to much to drink, or just the wrong meds (again!) seeing your signature change all the time.

Serkanner wrote:

DuneFishUK wrote:

Apjak wrote:

TheDukester wrote:

Apjak wrote:Maybe it's time the list went through mitosis and became:

Preeq Arguments (or stances)

and

Preeq Tactics

the later being things like this questionable #19 "I won't bother to do my homework."

Agreed. Let's not confuse a simple issue.

The purpose of this thread — and making it sticky — is to have all of the classic, specific preek arguments in one place. Adding their general tactics just muddies the water.

Well, I think they should be near each other because, illogically, stances and tactics get used interchangeably. Whenever people (myself and OH included) get passionate we just let reason go out the window. Why do you think legislatures needed rules of order. If we label the tactics as Tactics, we can respond to each in kind with "Stay on Target" instead of letting ourselves get baited onto distracting tangents.

The only tactic I've seen repeatedly is blatant evasion - which is pretty boring and not really list-worthy.

All the arguments they rely on when they work out what they're trying to say are listed here.

Damn! I thought I was getting nuts, or had to much to drink, or just the wrong meds (again!) seeing your signature change all the time.

Perhaps you're imagining things?







Two down...

DuneFishUK wrote:

Apjak wrote:

TheDukester wrote:

Apjak wrote:Maybe it's time the list went through mitosis and became:

Preeq Arguments (or stances)

and

Preeq Tactics

the later being things like this questionable #19 "I won't bother to do my homework."

Agreed. Let's not confuse a simple issue.

The purpose of this thread — and making it sticky — is to have all of the classic, specific preek arguments in one place. Adding their general tactics just muddies the water.

Well, I think they should be near each other because, illogically, stances and tactics get used interchangeably. Whenever people (myself and OH included) get passionate we just let reason go out the window. Why do you think legislatures needed rules of order. If we label the tactics as Tactics, we can respond to each in kind with "Stay on Target" instead of letting ourselves get baited onto distracting tangents.

The only tactic I've seen repeatedly is blatant evasion - which is pretty boring and not really list-worthy.

All the arguments they rely on when they work out what they're trying to say are listed here.

I yield. Tactics and the actual crap arguments "they" come up with are two separate things.

Perhaps we should start a thread on the best tactics to take on our end ... some sort of "new forum: start with this question" type of approach? We could rotate it through a "best of" system?

my #1 honest-to-god, I couldn't be more serious counter-argument
is kinda nasty & mean - (this is for the new mouthpiece, you oldfucks've heard it before ..)

goes like this -

If you've read and enjoyed anything Kevin J. Anderson has ever written,
then your judgment of literary quality is suspect at best, and I'm most
likely to discount your opinion on that basis alone.

If you've read and enjoyed his Dune books, I'll just have to call you a
simple-minded person who most likely doesn't understand Frank, anyway;
therefore, I'll have little interest in anything you have to say on the subject.

Trying to argue the inconsistencies point-by-point, while mildly entertaining
to a mean old person like me, is mostly a worthless waste of time.
(BrianConway as the lastest example)

I find it easier and more fulfilling to tell them to just shut the fuck up,
and go play on Star Wars forums.


and will one of you photoshop wizards change the subtitle of this to
A Pretard's Guide to Frank Herbert's Dune



and change the byline to "The Jacurutu Five"


thanks, and May the God of Your Choice Bless & Keep You.

here you go:
(I can change the Jacurutu logo into the Jacurutu FIve if you'd rather, but I thought since you have a cool logo why not use it )

SandRider wrote:I knew new guy was a mouthpiece from his user name ....

they startin' to congregate 'round here ...

somebody get the rope ready, jus' in case ...

I'd go for the tar and feathers myself

Mr. Urban [the editor of Gentlemen’s Magazine],
As tarring and feathering has been of late much used by way of punishment amongst the inhabitants of North-America, it may not, perhaps, be unacceptable to some of your readers to inform them what gave rise to that custom ; as I believe a great many are ignorant of its original [origins?] and think it a new mode of chastisement.

http://www.nwta.com/Spy/spring99/tar.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

edit - the pretard-mocking, that is.

I prefer to ride lawyers outta town on a rail ...

well as someone said i exist only to amuse myself

I was tryin to save Riff Raff in case Brian Conway made a point, but ....

I'm honored...
... I think (to contend with Brian is an easy win by the looks of it)

edit: in fact i like it so much I might use it as an avatar if that's ok, but do you think it would be a kind of provocation if I used it on other dune boards(well it would be one but would it be mild enough? )

if you mean Merritt's board, you'd have to change "pretard" ...

has he been taking offense to "Preek" or "Preeq" lately ?

and you can't even think "jacurutu" Over There now, can you ?

thank you for using your brain for me

sometimes I am a bit naïve, or so it seems...

Can I use it here then?

Guys you won't believe this, there is a guy over at Dunenovels accusing ME of being a new Dune hater and he is the ULTIMATE KJA fanboy.

I explained to him I hated Sandworms of Dune but not the previous books. His screen name is Xianghua.

I'm not arguing for or against him, I just think there are much bigger OH around compared to me so his accusation is rather silly.

"96% percent of Dune fans like the new books."

He does have a point.

Wait, so Nebiros, are you denying that you dislike the KJA and BH books? I know at first you liked them and Chig, Freak and all them made fun of you, then you start hating them, and joined this site but still get the occasional jab. Have you gone back?

Yes, BACKSLIDER!!!

Sandwurm88 wrote:Wait, so Nebiros, are you denying that you dislike the KJA and BH books? I know at first you liked them and Chig, Freak and all them made fun of you, then you start hating them, and joined this site but still get the occasional jab. Have you gone back?

I didn't make fun of him for being a fan of KJA's books, for other things maybe...

Backsliding? Not at all.

I was not a hater of BH and KJA books before reading Sandworms of Dune. The opposite was true: I loved the House books and still do. After reading Sadworms I became a hater. That and some other annoyances I could tell you.

What I'm saying is that fanboys should not accuse me of being a talifan since I liked the series at first and there are people out there who hate KJA a lot more than me.

What I'm saying is that fanboys should not accuse me of being a talifan since I liked the series at first and there are people out there who hate KJA a lot more than me.

Are you implying that people who didn't like any of the books *should* be called talifans by fanboys?

HBJ

I'm a FH "fanboy", want to make something of it?
KJA and BH are also "anti-authors".

No HBJ, I'm not saying that. I'm saying that if fanboys want to passionately defend their heroes like KJA, they should not start with calling somebody who was let down by ONE book by KJA a talifan especially since I had no grudge with him on previous books. I mean how stupid can somebody get?

You do not have to worry about fanboys calling the OH talifans because you can defend yourself against such stupidity with valid arguments and they have nothing to counter them with other than the weak arguments you have posted here on this thread.

Plus don't you find it amusing that KJA has to send fanboys out to defend his crap on the Internet?

Nebiros wrote:...don't you find it amusing that KJA has to send fanboys out to defend his crap on the Internet?

A little at first, now it's just sad.

Actually, Kevin often says not to engage people on his works. Those who do, like myself, come of our own volition. He doesn't send anybody.

Of course not.

Plausible denial, right?

He's one of those things Teg calls Myron all the time, what was it again? Oh, yeah:

A PUSSY.

Fuck 'im.

Nebiros wrote: What I'm saying is that fanboys should not accuse me of being a talifan since I liked the series at first and there are people out there who hate KJA a lot more than me.

For sure you're not one of us ( ), 'cause we assume who we are