That was a typo. I’ve edited the comment to show my original quote.

That’s… literally what I said…

“It’s sort of like saying 9/11 was an effective use of terrorism.” Sorry, I don’t know how this could have been clearer. Take care!

There’s no reason to be rude. I strongly suggest you reread what I said and consider the context of the thread. I never said that 9/11 was a successful use of terrorism, I said that the statement Data made about the troubles being successful was offensive and would be similar to saying the same thing about other terrorist attacks. You then aggressively began demanding evidence for something that was never a statement of fact, making it unclear what you were talking about. When further questioned, you became genuinely insulting for absolutely no reason. I won’t be responding again, but please take some time to consider how you approach discussions in the future.

It was and still is unclear what you were asking me to prove. A comparison isn’t a statement of fact, it’s to illustrate how two things are similar. I further explained why I feel that it was fair to compaire them. If you want to keep picking things apart for the sake of it though, have at it.

Interesting; I didn’t know that! It’s definitely an interesting subject to say the least.

Do you want evidence that people died in the tororist attacks, or that the statement is offensive? As to the first, you’re free to read up on the history of the troubles yourself if you like. As to the second, it’s a matter of opinion, not fact, but considering that history, one that I feel is fair enough. As far as I’m concerned, comparing a single terrorist attack to a series of terrorist attacks is more than reasonable.

In fairness, it’s less controversial and more that the line is outright offensive. At the time, people were being murdered by acts of terrorismin in the troubles, so to wontonly say that those attacks are effective and will get results was extremely insensitive. It’s sort of like saying 9/11 was an effective use of terrorism shortly after it happened, or the 2015 Paris attacks.

That being said, it’s still an interesting point that Data raises in the episode.

Garak is calm because he knows that they’re in the justice zone, where it’s impossible to commit a crime.

I didn’t play the remake because of the name changes. I still have my Gamecube copy and the PS2 special edition, so will probably go back to those next time nostalgia bites.

That’s good to hear at least! I’ve heard mixed things from different people, but it just doesn’t strike me as something I want to invest three hours into. I’m glad you enjoyed it though!

I was thinking this as well. Action adventure films like it were what got me into filmmaking, yet even I have less than no desire to see it. It’s actually pretty incredible how badly they missed the mark; the trailer just needed open up with Harrison Ford in costume saying something like “why is it always snakes?” followed immediately by the theme blasting up over an action montage. Instead, they chose to show a group of old men talking seriously in a bar, while some utterly stock sounding music underscores it. What were they thinking?

I’m not OP, but I feel like I want to add on to this if that’s alright. I think it’s often easy to get into this mindset when a trend seems to overtake a lot of the industry. For instance, personally I’ve noticed a common game that seems to get churned out a lot in recent years: it’s open world, but has nothing in it and is given light RPG elements that don’t really add anything. That doesn’t mean every game is like that, of course, but I think it can be easy to fixate on what we’re tired of seeing. Eventually, someone will come up with a new trend, and the empty open world games will fade out, and the cycle will continue as it always has. It’s also interesting to point out that humans tend to remember the past more fondly, so it’s easy to remember old gems and ignore the flops. Anyway, thanks for entertaining my ramble.