New use for a old ship

posted on January 30th, 2009, 12:05 am

For the transwarp stuff.... wasn't it made pretty clear by the FO team that transwarp tech from Voyager will not be making a show aaaaaand that the Borg will be the only ones to use that sort of tech?

posted on January 30th, 2009, 12:10 am

Please Please make a new topic if your gonna talk about transwarp!

posted on January 30th, 2009, 1:38 am

I've learned that alot of people on the internet are exceptionally thin-skinned, and disagreeing with them is frequently seen as 'being an ass'.

So what I was doing was attempting to clarify what you view as acceptable discussion for the potential futures of the Excelsior-class within the thread.  The way you came off in it is that anything not directly related to making the Excelsior a mining scow is wrong, and that anything I said regarding anything else was going to be seen as an attack.

I don't like to dance around with words, because meaning often gets lost when you do that.  Therefore, I chose to be straightforward, with the added statement that I'm not trying to be an ass.

posted on January 30th, 2009, 2:00 am

acceptable to how? the thread was acceptable to me.

There some thing to be responsible for there.

scow is wrong

thats a personal open, when you state it as fact it cuts me down because for me it leaves me as I should have know that. What you say has a impact. I say this not to make you feel bad but to let you know you have that power and you matter.

I don't like to dance around with words, because meaning often gets lost when you do that.  Therefore, I chose to be straightforward, with the added statement that I'm not trying to be an ass.

Well what you say has a impact if you wont to be aware of it or not it still dose. It dose not cause me to stay "hurt"  I have transformed that but other have not and they wont tell you this.

posted on January 30th, 2009, 2:15 am

The way you came off in it is that anything not directly related to making the Excelsior a mining scow is wrong, and that anything I said regarding anything else was going to be seen as an attack.

That's what I said, precisely.  The only thing that is stated as 'fact' in that is the perception of your intention for the topic from when you said

You may have forgotten what this topic is about, Please reread the 1st post.

For another resign please make another topic for any thing other then that.

If your goal was to hijack this topic please be kind to other members.

That is what brought about the impression that you would not accept anything beyond turning the Excelsior into a mining scow.

I'm not trying to belabor the point.  I'm trying at this point to make sure we understand each other in order to allow us to communicate with each other clearly and effectively.

posted on January 30th, 2009, 2:33 am

scow is wrong,

is wrong, not I think it is wrong, or maybe its wrong.

I all so said:

There no resin why it can be related to mining other then people saying so. In the world with out people  a car is not a car its a heap of metal, rubber and glass, Its only a car because we say so. The Excelsior is a not a star ship in natter is a heap of metal and other materials is only a star ship because we say so, same go's for its function. I hope you get what I am saying.

Not getting some thing here

That's what I said, precisely.  The only thing that is stated as 'fact' in that is the perception of your intention for the topic from when you said

That is what brought about the impression that you would not accept anything beyond turning the Excelsior into a mining scow.

I'm not trying to belabor the point.  I'm trying at this point to make sure we understand each other in order to allow us to communicate with each other clearly and effectively.

posted on January 30th, 2009, 3:03 am

There's no comma before 'scow is wrong' for a reason.  It's not a stand-alone trio of words.  It's a fragment of a sentence that taken without the sentence it's part of acquires a completely different meaning than with the sentence taken as a whole.

posted on January 30th, 2009, 3:13 am

I am dyslexic as it said in my profile I misspell and mix up punctuation often.

Got it- Thanks

posted on January 30th, 2009, 1:54 pm

Anyway...

I just don't think the Excelsior would work as a freighter, it's too "high-profile". If the Federation had a choice between refitting an Excelsior as a freighter or put it to use as a light cruiser (or upgrade it to Lakota specifications), which would they choose?

The Constitution family, on the other hand, is very utilitarian, which is why we've seen so many variants and variations of it, such as the Miranda. The Miranda, in turn, has been seen to be used for lots of different jobs. We have seen Miranda variations being used as gunships (Saratoga), heavy survey ships (Bozeman), medical transports (Lantree), light cruisers (Reliant), blockade runners (Majestic, Sitak)... so why not make a Miranda freighter variation? Stick a couple of pods under it (as in many books, like Jackill's work), and bingo.

Anyway, we don't need to make the Excelsior a freighter to get it in game. It's gonna be ingame anyway, so what's the point in this?

posted on January 30th, 2009, 6:39 pm

I agree I think that most people feel this way too check out my new thread. Its a difrent twist on a simaler idea.

posted on January 31st, 2009, 6:03 am

MODS LOCK THIS THREAD.

posted on January 31st, 2009, 11:08 pm

? why? Why would that need to be done, The read is peace full and fallows all the rules.

Just let it fall in to the ranks with the other old threads.