If I'm going to be put on trial, I at least want to be present for it.
At the moment, however, I'm still a bit stunned at the nature of this post; on one hand, I really think that AloisFisher has some emo-problems he needs to work-out if speaking with people of differing opinions has such a negative effect upon him, whereas on the other hand, I feel like I shouldn't care as someone who cannot bother himself to muster intelligent arguments is not an asset to any community and if he wants to leave, that would probably be a good thing.
Charmquark said it well and said it quickly that a good community cannot very well judge people just because they have differing opinions. This is true anywhere and even in real life. However, the pursuant comment from Nenad regarding "unfounded claims" is confusing to the very end. You see, when we discuss Robotech, I am going to give credit where credit is do and express discontent with poor content. This is what I have done from the very beginning and hope to be free to do in the future.
However, what I have found to be the problem here is that people like AloisFisher think that it's okay to bash Neo-Robotech without decent reasons or facts to back-up their comments. This is just as wrong as praising Neo-Robotech without decent reasons or facts to back-up these arguments. If one is to allow one without the other, then he is being a hypocrite and, without a doubt, is being closed-minded and foolish in his comments. Either way, praise or criticism, things need to be fair, and I truly feel that, when I have berated AloisFisher and others for being unfair and biased against
anything, I have gotten in trouble for it. This doesn't make any sense if Robotech:Genesis is intending to be a strong, intelligent community, or if AloisFisher wants to be a strong, intelligent member.
Strong members don't run away from arguments; they answer with provable facts and well-reasoned debating techniques. When everyone in a discussion uses these techniques, we can come to a common answer which satisfies our curiosity to questions. If I have somehow offered unreasonable arguments in the past, I apologise and ask that you bring exact quotes to this thread so that I may learn from them. Regardless of whether we agree with each other, of the utmost importance is that we understand that viewpoints may be different, but facts are indisputable.
Let's get this straight: "The
Shadow Chronicles sucks" is not a fact. "The character designs are awesome" is not a fact, either, nor is "Harmony Gold is stupid" or "Tommy Yune is a dumbass." These are all opinions.
However: "The Shadow Chronicles' story is unclear and poorly developed as it reaches across too many characters" is a well-reasoned deduction. "The character designs are more busty and muscular than most American and Japanese animated productions" is also a well-reasoned deduction, if not an outright fact, as is "Harmony Gold has made poor marketing decisions by not reaching-out to large retail stores to a great level, especially outside of the United States" and "Tommy Yune worked on comic books for a decade which does not necessarily translate well into a motion-picture director role."
There are key differences which amount to the differences between a logical argument and a tirade-laden rant, and I am sorry, but I cannot accept the latter. Being stupid and hating The Shadow Chronicles is just as bad as being stupid and loving The Shadow Chronicles. When I make my posts in these forums, it is to discuss on an intellectual level Robotech, it's holding company, and the stories it has developed. If it is not on an intellectual level, then yes, I'll call you stupid. If you're being biased, then yes, I'll call you biased. The tough and honest truth is that some people are incapable of self-evaluation, and a honest critique of their approaches can lead to them nevertheless pursuing self-improvement. In order to improve the community, I will call those who poorly present their arguments to the fore, and if one becomes offended by having to defend his stance, well, then I suppose their stance was never very well-founded to begin with.
Best wishes,
Adam Schiller
