Welcome to Star Trek Simulation Forum

Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to contribute to this site by submitting your own content or replying to existing content. You'll be able to customize your profile, receive reputation points as a reward for submitting content, while also communicating with other members via your own private inbox, plus much more! This message will be removed once you have signed in.

Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Shane

Trekkie or Trekker?

Trekkie or Trekker?   24 members have voted

  1. 1. Trekkie or Trekker?

    • Trekkie
      15
    • Trekker
      4
    • Other
      5

Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.
29 posts in this topic

Are you a Trekkie or a Trekker? I seen both of these used by to fans describe themselves. Which is the most popular?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Are you a Trekkie or a Trekker?

 

I prefer to consider myself "Reality Challenged"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm a Sith Lord.

Wait. You're never at any of the meetings...

Sorehl_Sith_50.JPG

Edited by Sorehl

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I never go, putting a bunch of Sith Lords in a room just brews trouble.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What is the difference? Is there a definition for each? I am just reluctant to shoehorn myself into a title that is undefined.

 

~Brian

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What is the difference? Is there a definition for each? I am just reluctant to shoehorn myself into a title that is undefined.

 

~Brian

 

That's why I consider myself "Reality Challenged" Mr. "Freedom Challenged". ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I never go, putting a bunch of Sith Lords in a room just brews trouble.

 

OK, this is what I don't get. You put a bunch of Immortals in a room (assuming there is at least one sword) and... well, you find out what "There can be only one." means. And yet the Immortals have been taking heads for millenia. Millenia! In fact Ramírez says "From the dawn of time we came..." and Connor says, "In the days before memory..." so the Immortals go back from at least before recorded history. And the more heads you take the more power you have, so there is an incentive to take as many heads as possible.

 

We don't know how long the Sith have been around, but most timelines have it close to 6000 years with varying years of activity, so let's say it is 6 millenia. The point is they have a measurable history and before that there simply were no Sith. Sith do kill each other, and since Darth Bane's time a Sith apprentice is required to kill his master eventually, but there is no transfer of power (karma, manu, whatever) inherent in the act.

 

So the Immortals have a biological incentive to kill each other. The Sith do not. So why then are there plenty of Immortals (in the series and Endgame anyway) and only 2 (occasionally 1) Sith?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
OK, this is what I don't get. You put a bunch of Immortals in a room (assuming there is at least one sword) and... well, you find out what "There can be only one." means. And yet the Immortals have been taking heads for millenia. Millenia! In fact Ramírez says "From the dawn of time we came..." and Connor says, "In the days before memory..." so the Immortals go back from at least before recorded history. And the more heads you take the more power you have, so there is an incentive to take as many heads as possible.

 

We don't know how long the Sith have been around, but most timelines have it close to 6000 years with varying years of activity, so let's say it is 6 millenia. The point is they have a measurable history and before that there simply were no Sith. Sith do kill each other, and since Darth Bane's time a Sith apprentice is required to kill his master eventually, but there is no transfer of power (karma, manu, whatever) inherent in the act.

 

So the Immortals have a biological incentive to kill each other. The Sith do not. So why then are there plenty of Immortals (in the series and Endgame anyway) and only 2 (occasionally 1) Sith?

 

I love this site. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I consider myself as..... well probably something but I just can't think of it right now. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

omfg this is the funniest topic I think I've ever read. Will your freedom challenged comment was great.

 

as for the poll. I've never heard the word Trekker...settled.

 

As for sith...they take themselves way to seriously...count dookoo...guys' freakin name was dookoo...yet he thought he was the sh**.

 

Man it's late.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think Trekkie is the term first used by others to describe Star Trek fans. Then geeks got indignant as only geeks can and insisted that they be called Trekkers. Then everyone else went, yeah, whatever. So, Trekkie has been the more enduring label.

 

As for Sith/Immortal; Sith have to be trained while Immortals are born randomly. Sith have to come from those who are "strong with the force" but slip past the Jedi Midi-chlorians screening (or go rogue afterwards without being noticed). Immortals, you've chopped your last neck and some Highland brat is clawing his way outta a grave and now ya gotta go kill another one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

sorry...I missed this part of sci fi literature. what's an immortal?

 

 

...besides the definition of the word of course.

Edited by Sam_SemaJ

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So the Immortals have a biological incentive to kill each other. The Sith do not. So why then are there plenty of Immortals (in the series and Endgame anyway) and only 2 (occasionally 1) Sith?

 

The Sith operate under a system of strongest rules. It's an apprentices duty to kill their master when they know they are more powerful then the master. Failure to do so would breed weakness.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
sorry...I missed this part of sci fi literature. what's an immortal?

...besides the definition of the word of course.

 

Immortals from The Highlander movies and TV series. Can't die unless they're beheaded and if they are by another Immortal then there's a big lighting light show and the surviving Immortal gets all buffed from it and such.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That's why I consider myself "Reality Challenged" Mr. "Freedom Challenged". :lol:

 

Temporarily "Freedom Challenged". I sure hope that the Cap'n doesn't consider this little vacation in the "Great White North" shore leave. If I am stuck there much longer I may end up calling everyone Hoser and start eating unhealthy amounts of back bacon.

 

 

gwn.jpg

Tom Servo and Me on the Right.

 

~Brian

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wait a mo, back there did someone actually say "midi-chlorians"? Grrrrrr! Damn you Lucas! Damn you to hades!

 

 

...And Han always, always...shoots first.

 

We will now return you to your scheduled programming.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Trekkie and Trekker. Trekker meaning you like a series other than the Orginal.

 

Images, I am not even going to ask what your ranting about...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think he hates the plot writing, script and basically everything else about episode I...probably a viewpoint held by almost everyone here

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not a trekkie and I'm not a trekker ... I'm a trek-a-holic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think he hates the plot writing, script and basically everything else about episode I...probably a viewpoint held by almost everyone here

 

I'm still reality challenged, and you're quite right, Sam. Lucas went from a "Living Force" idea from Episodes IV and V to an "Oh look, microscopic critters are responsible for the Force" concept. :ph34r:

 

Also didn't care for the stilted acting between Christiansen and Portman in II and III either. I honestly think Lucas could have found someone better to portray an older Anakin and Padme in the last two movies.

Edited by will_marx

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think he hates the plot writing, script and basically everything else about episode I...probably a viewpoint held by almost everyone here

 

 

Are you kidding?! Episode one is one of my favorites! It has one of the best lightsaber battles in the whole series! And Will, if you listen closely to Qui-gon he doesn't say that the midi-chlorians are responsible for the Force he says the Jedi(or the Sith) use them to wield and sense the Force.If you have more mid-chlorians, you have more ability to use the Force through them. Thats why Anakin was so powerful, he had a huge midi-chlorian count.

Edited by Shane

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm still reality challenged, and you're quite right, Sam. Lucas went from a "Living Force" idea from Episodes IV and V to an "Oh look, microscopic critters are responsible for the Force" concept. :ph34r:

 

Also didn't care for the stilted acting between Christiansen and Portman in II and III either. I honestly think Lucas could have found someone better to portray an older Anakin and Padme in the last two movies.

Yeah I guess, though Portman was O.K., Christiansen was no good. By the way how did we get on the topic of Star Wars?

 

~A-L

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've been pushing this topic in that direction since the third post.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I happen to love Star Wars: Phantom Menance. And yes, the mircroscopic critters only help their host weild the Force. They have a minute similairity to a Trill smymbiont, they both require hosts to live and give their host a bit of personality and power. (symbiont's power being to have the past lives of other host be transferred to the current individual)

 

The girl who played Padme was really bad, and the Lucas writers were probably a bit desperate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0