Author Topic: Crossovers you would want to see  (Read 7523 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline damianblack

  • Neonate
  • *
  • Posts: 22
  • Gender: Male
  • That's metal....
Re: Crossovers you would want to see
« Reply #30 on: March 27, 2014, 01:13:48 pm »
actually, given the intellectual and (at least pseudo) technobabble basis of both series, i'd like to see a dr. who/star trek crossover.
"A wise man can learn more from a foolish question than a fool can learn from a wise answer."-Bruce Lee



Offline Dr. Weird

  • Bishop
  • ***
  • Posts: 182
  • Gender: Male
  • Gentlemen, Behold--Corn!!!
Re: Crossovers you would want to see
« Reply #31 on: March 27, 2014, 04:28:02 pm »
actually, given the intellectual and (at least pseudo) technobabble basis of both series, i'd like to see a dr. who/star trek crossover.

Has actually been done in comic form:

http://comicbookdb.com/title.php?ID=37180
Fundie Doublethink:
* The Bible is the inerrant, literal word of God when it talks about the Earth being created in six days and homosexuality being an abomination. The Bible is a flawed work interpreted by errant humans when it talks about loving your neighbor, turning the other cheek, and the evils of greed.
*  All life is sacred and precious from the moment of conception until the moment of birth.
* You're not a sexist.  You just think women are nothing but baby machines and servants.

Art Vandelay

  • Guest
Re: Crossovers you would want to see
« Reply #32 on: March 27, 2014, 05:26:50 pm »
Maybe something like The X-Files and Harry Potter. Not so much for the characters of either, but rather the conspiracies of the former coupled with the underground magical community of the latter. Could be alright for a laugh.

Offline damianblack

  • Neonate
  • *
  • Posts: 22
  • Gender: Male
  • That's metal....
Re: Crossovers you would want to see
« Reply #33 on: March 27, 2014, 05:40:43 pm »
actually, given the intellectual and (at least pseudo) technobabble basis of both series, i'd like to see a dr. who/star trek crossover.

Has actually been done in comic form:

http://comicbookdb.com/title.php?ID=37180

huh, i didn't know about that comic.
whelp, i'm off to amazon to see if they have a copy.
thanks for the heads up, chummer!
"A wise man can learn more from a foolish question than a fool can learn from a wise answer."-Bruce Lee



Offline ironbite

  • Overlord of all that is good in Iacon City
  • Kakarot
  • ******
  • Posts: 10686
  • Gender: Male
  • Stuck in the middle with you.
Re: Crossovers you would want to see
« Reply #34 on: March 27, 2014, 07:36:28 pm »
The Punisher/Bronie convention.

Offline chitoryu12

  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 4009
  • Gender: Male
  • Tax-Payer Rhino
Re: Crossovers you would want to see
« Reply #35 on: March 27, 2014, 07:47:39 pm »
Dude, Star Wars is obscenely powerful. Never mind that the Empire built giant energy cannons powerful enough to detonate a planet like a hand grenade multiple times, Star Destroyers canonically have main guns in the gigaton range. One Star Destroyer is enough to completely depopulate a planet.

I know. There is a forum (at least one) which was originally created for the whole "Star wars vs Star trek" debates and they did some math, at least as far as they could. Star wars also has much faster FTL engines.

bbs.stardestroyer.net. I was a part of it since 2004 or 2005, but I rarely go on it now; a lot of the longtime members are complete assholes. The site freely allows you to mock people during debates as long as you have a point behind your post (so no ad hominems where you do nothing but insult the other guy without simultaneously pointing out how he's wrong; they really hate logical fallacies), but it's influenced the veterans enough that they can barely even communicate at this point without swearing and insulting whoever they're disagreeing with, no matter how mild the error.
Ok. I've only occasionally skimmed the site so I hadn't noticed that (or had forgotten.)

I kinda approve that kind of rules since I don't mind arguments as long as people don't go completely overboard and with the no-adhominems rules it might have been hoped that those rules keep it to being different ideas arguing rather than just people arguing.

Though apparently it didn't work.

Like, in theory I approve of it. Actually writing down "We don't care what kind of language you use in a debate" stops one of the major logical fallacies: style over substance. The substance of the argument is what people have to debate, rather than tone policing or claiming that you refuse to debate someone because they get offended by your blatant stupidity and call you a fuckhead.

The problem is that many of the more curmudgeonly ones have gotten to the point where they just can't not fly into a frothing rage or call you a shitmonkey for minor mistakes in etiquette. The usual response to asking them to chill is to "Get a thicker skin" and continue coming up with creative names for you.
Still can't think of a signature a year later.