Why I now think Book was an ex-Operative by asarian

FIREFLY EPISODE DISCUSSIONS

Why I now think Book was an ex-Operative

POSTED BY: ASARIAN
UPDATED: Monday, December 27, 2010 18:23
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 14343
PAGE 2 of 2

Thursday, December 16, 2010 8:09 AM

You're right - I did make an assumption.... based upon your several posts defending the theory.

Don't know HOW I coulda gotten the idea that you believed what you were writing about. My bad.

But the tone of your posts, not to mention the actual words, kinda makes it tough to not view you as defensive. And since you now say you were pissed from my first comment - even more so.

And you say I want to "win".... when I said you can believe what you like. Sorry if you feel an analysis of what's on the page rather than speculation (your word, mind) isn't discussion. I would be curious to know what you think does qualify.... is it only a discussion if someone agrees with you? Hmmm....

But given that you only seem to want to discuss your interpretation, and have done your best to dismiss the analysis of any others (not just me).... I kinda doubt your honesty when asking for a discussion.

Otherwise - whatever. You want to take your toys and go home, that's your call.

"I thoroughly disapprove of duels. If a man should challenge me, I would take him kindly and forgivingly by the hand and lead him to a quiet place and kill him."

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, December 16, 2010 9:08 AM

BYTEMITE

You wanna know WHY I was defending it at first? Really? Because of THIS:

Quote:
Well, as they say on tvtropes, this theory has been thoroughly Jossed by the Shepherd's Tale comic. Unfortunate, because I think it's an interesting one. Not to say that the canon backstory (though vague) is not interesting, but with his speech about how Operatives believe hard and the seemingly intimate knowledge of how they think, this was a poetic theory.~Lili

Whenever someone says something is "unfortunate," my knee jerk response is to say, "Oh! That's all right! It could still turn out!"

But, it also appears I've completely misinterpreted the intentions of everyone in this here thread.

Quote:
And since you now say you were pissed from my first comment - even more so.

Because you were OFFENSIVE.

Quote:
is it only a discussion if someone agrees with you? Hmmm....

Actually no! It stops being a discussion when you assume that I have ulterior motives - THAT I DON'T - and can dismiss all my arguments as being irrational and me clinging to a pet theory!

So hey, that kinda makes me think that you didn't care about what I was saying or how I felt and just cared about winning, because those are kinda tactics used by someone when they want to discredit their opponent for some reason! Excuse me for feeling slighted and misrepresented!

Now, it's possible that's never how you meant it, but it sure as hell is how I took it. Plus it seems to me at this point like you're trying to bait me into an actual fight, especially considering this:

Quote:
Otherwise - whatever. You want to take your toys and go home, that's your call.

Condescension ahoy!

But you know what? I'm wrong, and you haven't been insulting since your very first response to me in this thread. Sure.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, December 16, 2010 9:17 AM

BYTEMITE

Quote:
have done your best to dismiss the analysis of any others (not just me).... I kinda doubt your honesty when asking for a discussion.

Yeah! Because when I checked the comic and found that Book was called an Officer at three points and conceded that it does look like a military thing, that was dismissing the analysis of any others (not just you) in favour of my pet theory!

Yeaaaaaaaah! I'm just a big old dishonest liar with some weird agenda about a comic book!

Or maybe I'm just playing devil's advocate to Lili because she said she liked the theory and we're trying out various possible directions or seeing if there's any way the operative thing could still apply. (That's what I thought I was doing, but I see now that's not what Lili was doing)

Maybe you can't just take everything someone else says to you and reflect it on them and call it a valid argument and not expect someone to get thoroughly pissed off at you!

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, December 16, 2010 9:43 AM

STORYMARK

Fine, you were sticking up, for Lilli. That's great. She didn't seem to be asking for it, nor did she seem offended by my discussing what's in the comic, nor did anyone seem to be picking on her, but good for you. Very heroic.

My first comment wasn't even directed at you specifically, it was a general comment, but hey, you dove in, so I responded.

Sure, it''s just a COMIC BOOK, and Firefly is just a TV show. So what?

Maybe I am being over-assertive about it. But at least it actually exists, as opposed to the pure speculation. Meanwhile, you're being over assertive about something IS pure speculation, and someone else's to boot. So, why exactly are you getting so worked up, if you're not tied to that theory?

And no, I'm not trying to bait you into a fight. But I'm not just going to go "Yeah, that theory totally makes sense as long as you ignore this and this and this" because it might offend someone to say "No, that does not fit with what we've seen". If someone is going to be offended that others have different views, they need a thicker skin.

Quote:
Maybe you can't just take everything someone else says to you and reflect it on them and call it a valid argument and not expect someone to get thoroughly pissed off at you!

Uh.... huh? I reflected what now? I would call my looking at the comic, in context of what we saw on the show and in the film as a valid argument. If that pisses someone off, so be it. But I really can't even make sense of this statement.

"I thoroughly disapprove of duels. If a man should challenge me, I would take him kindly and forgivingly by the hand and lead him to a quiet place and kill him."

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, December 16, 2010 9:49 AM

BYTEMITE

I'm getting worked up because you called me/ implied I was irrational. It's a berserk button of mine.

I have been overreacting, and I'm sorry. But we can't change our triggers.

For the record, I have a similarly over the top reaction to being told to shut up, which you thankfully haven't done here, and I appreciate that.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, December 16, 2010 9:53 AM

STORYMARK

Well, sorry to have set you off.... but for the record, the only one to use the word irrational in this thread was you.

"I thoroughly disapprove of duels. If a man should challenge me, I would take him kindly and forgivingly by the hand and lead him to a quiet place and kill him."

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, December 16, 2010 9:54 AM

BYTEMITE

I know. It was the "clinging" thing, there was this whole implication. And I realized maybe you didn't mean it that way.

I'm sorry for "offensive, insulting, and condescending." You probably weren't any of these, but I was angry and couldn't see straight.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, December 27, 2010 6:23 PM

ALYSSRICHES

Sorry to interrupt the... debate(?) but I just wanted to chip in and say that A Shepards Tale, was like a sigh of relif for me! Finally knowing what happened, even if it leaves plenty of doors open- it at least explains some!

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

YOUR OPTIONS

SHARE THREAD

NEW POSTS TODAY

USER	POST DATE

USER

POST DATE