Is Dr Weir a case of nepotism? (Intruder spoilers)

[Hatcheter]

His immidiate military superiors in charge of the mission thought he was incompotent not me and they more than anyone else would know what they were talking about. Weir's remark about the president was obviously a veiled threat to call him up and whine about Caldwell and co till she got her way. Basically she was telling them their input didn't matter 'cause she could just get them overruled via her connections anyway.

Landry and Cladwell never said anything about Sheppard's competence, they simply said they didn't think a major was a high enough rank to command a unit in a location like Atlantis (even though Majors often command larger forces), and they were concerned about his ability to follow the orders of a replacement military commander. If Sheppard was incompetent, they would have fought Weir, and likely won. She was putting her own credibility on the line, something which has great value, and could suffer harm if Sheppard was deemed incompetent.

Instead, they relented, and promoted Sheppard to a more appropriate rank for the job. Those silver leaves are an official Air Force stamp of faith in his "corage and ingenuity", as Landry put it.

I really don't see why its such a big deal that she would try to protect the job of one of the people she'd worked with for the last year. If your boss' boss was trying to have you replaced, wouldn't you want your boss to stand up for you if you were deserving of the job you held?



Regarding whether Weir did or didn't know everybody on the initial expedition team prior to the mission, there is not a conclusive answer one way or the other. The best info we have is that alot of the people working in Antarctica were on the expedition (they had the closet thing to experience in this situation), and that Weir said that she had been picking her team for months. That at least suggests that she had the final say in whatever selection process was used at that time.


As well, there's simply not enough info to declare nepotism in regard to Simon. He was certainly qualified to be on Beckett's short list ("more qualified than me" Beckett said). They weren't at the point of the fianl cut yet, he very well might not hage made it. If Beckett scratched him off the list, do you really think Weir might have added him anyway? All Elizabeth tried to do was convince Simon to give himself the chance to go to Atlantis, which he ultimately turned down.

[Shep'sSocks]

Could you seriously tell me you could do anything more than scan a list for a specific name in the time it took her to do so. The list looked like it had at least a few dozen names on it to me and she only looked at it for a few seconds before she complained.

Like I said it just seemed unusually fast. It's not proof of anything on it's own it was just weird.

Uh, some of us are speedreaders. It would take me less time than Weir to read that list.

[Hatcheter]

Uh, some of us are speedreaders. It would take me less time than Weir to read that list.

There was what, 25 or so names on that list? All you have to do is scan it for the one you want to find. I suspect she already knew Simon had been given the opportunity, she wanted to find out if he made Beckett's cut. He would have, if he had signed.

Again, I come to Ouroboros' view on the character of Doctor Weir. Do you think she would have tried to get Simon onto the list if he didn't make Beckett's cut?

[Lightsabre]

There was what, 25 or so names on that list? All you have to do is scan it for the one you want to find. I suspect she already knew Simon had been given the opportunity, she wanted to find out if he made Beckett's cut. He would have, if he had signed.

Again, I come to Ouroboros' view on the character of Doctor Weir. Do you think she would have tried to get Simon onto the list if he didn't make Beckett's cut?

Personally, I don't think so. But that's merely my opinion. We cannot know what would happen.

[Shep'sSocks]

Possibly. I don't know.

I'm being fair, of course.

[not so ancient]

Don't call it crap. Just because it's not something that's necessarily accepted in the cultural mainstream right now doesn't make it crap. You're just narrow minded is all.

WTF? I'm narrow-minded? Well, that's a new one. Never been called that before, and I've been called everything at least once. Must be because I'm ..... not.

Does somebody else want to step up and explain it to him/her. It just doesn't seem right that I be the one to do it.

You're quite right. You really don't have anything at all to say to me.

[Ouroboros]

Then why did you bring it up???

You people are confusing the hell out of me. It's kinda hard to follow the 5on1 we got going here so give me a minute.

Ok it looks like you started trying to use the "it's just a show" cop out to declare that it didn't matter that Shep planned a reckless mission. In other words it seemed as if you were asking me to disregard the poor and careless way in which the mission was planned because it's just a TV show. Even though examining the way the mission was planned would be the only real way to answer the question of whether or not it was reckless. If we brought out "it's only a show" everytime we got questions like "is the Shep character reckless" it would be impossible to answer because people would just come in with the cop out. Discussing it at all would pretty much be pointless. "It's just a show" isn't an answer the the question "in story". It's an explanation for why the story was written the way it was but it doesn't change the implications for the characters in the story.

1)It's a tv show. It doesn't have to be 100% real all of the time, they are allowed to play with things.

That's what I was responding to originally. Maybe you'd like to clairfy what "things" you were talking about then if I got it wrong.

The fact is, it's relevant. It's almost the exact same situation.
SO you are claiming that COTG is unrealistic???

What are you trying to do here exactly? You're confusing the hell out of me.

First off I don't even remember that SG-1 episode that well since I haven't seen it in literally years. Secondly it's so not related to Weir's nepotism as to make it completely irrelevant content for this thread. Thirdly what does it matter if it was or wasn't also an unrealistic scenario? I'm not claiming anything about it, I don't even remember the episode and you're the one that brought it up in the first place. It might be unrealistic as well, I couldn't tell you right now because I don't remember anything about it. Even if it is or isn't I don't get what you're trying to prove with it, that the Stargate franchise can have more than one unrealistic scenario in it, well yeah so and....?

Point being?? They could have accomplished the mission without the scanner. All it did was make it more likely they would suceed.

If I tell you I'm going to England on Saterday and then set out without booking plane tickets but as I'm walking in the street a helicopter just swoops down out of nowhere, picks me up and flies me to England was my original plan to get to England a good well thought out one that was responsible for me getting to England or was the only reason I ever got to England the helicopter that appeared out of nowhere.

I don't know how much simpler I can put it do you.

HUH???
You claimed Weir knew none of the members of the expidition previously.
You gave no proof of this.
I pointed out a flaw, ie for all we know, Rodney and Elizabeth were lovers once.
YOu have nothing to prove your original point. You need to prove that.
I do not have to prove anything, I was not asserting a fact.

The non existence of something is the default state of not just proper burden of proof but of reality.

The example I gave is to show why the method of "I can just claim the existence of things then you have to prove they don't exist or it's equal" is broken. I can't just say that you knew those 6 murderers because there's no evidence for it. Do you really think we should all just go around assuming by defealt that everyone we encounter knows these murderers unless they can prove that they don't. Am I going to be considered by default to potentially know every one of the 6 billion+ people on this planet until I can prove one at a time that I don't know them all.

Again, no I don't. IT was a possible connection. The possibility cannot be dismissed, since you have nothing to prove otherwise.

A possible connection is just speculation. It's not evidence and thus it does not prove that she knew anyone anymore than someone speculating you or I knew the murderers would be reason to believe that we did. It's possible that we did, as in it's not completely impossible, but a possability is not evidence in and of itself. Anything is possible and you can't ask someone to systematically disprove a whole slew of baseless possible situations without any direct evidence to support any of them. How would they even do so? Such a thing could go on forever.

This is ridiculous and not what I said. IF you respond to all challenges to your theories with teh demand that challangers prove beyond a doubt that the flaws in it don't exist, it's a wonder people respond to you at all.

The elephant example is an extreme example of why you can't ask someone to prove a negative. Despite the ridiculousness of the example there is no current means for us to prove that the elephant does not exist. Thus if we go by the standard that a claim of something existing is true until proven false instead of false until proven true than we have to give at least equal weight to the idea that the elephant exists, just because some quack can think it up and there's no way for present day science to actually prove him wrong on it.

What if this quack next claims that the elephant can cause the sun to fire invisable death beams that are undetectable by modern science but will spontainiously kill anyone not wearing a tinfoil hat. Do we all start putting on tinfoil hats jsut because there's no good way to actually conclusively prove him wrong.

Or do we demand he actually prove that the elephant exists before we take his claims seriously.

A lot of people would do that naturally but a lot of the same people would also lose track of this correct method of establishing burden of proof in the face of a less ridiculous or more possible seeming claim. In reality though there is no difference. Whether it's pink elephants in space, invisible death beams or that it's going to rain tomorrow a logical discussion demands nurden of proof for an assertion that something is going to happen or exist NOT that it is not going to happen or does not exist.

I really don't see why its such a big deal that she would try to protect the job of one of the people she'd worked with for the last year. If your boss' boss was trying to have you replaced, wouldn't you want your boss to stand up for you if you were deserving of the job you held?

Does that qualify as Nepotism though? It's probably mostly a matter of opinion. For me personally it cuts dangerously close, mostly because Weir made it clear that she didn't really care what the two military officers thought she was going to get her way via the president. This then basically means that someone else who would have got the job through normal chanells didn't get it because Weir knows the president and is willing to use that fact to leverage staffing decisions on the expedition so her friends stay in positions of power. Basically if you ask yourself "will being on good personal terms with Weir help my carear in a positive manner" and the answer is yes then that smells pretty much like nepotism to me.

To make it a little clearer ask also if you think she would have stood up for Sumner or that other Colonel in seige part 2 in the same fashion. She didn't get along very well with either of these men. Is it just as likely she would have gone over the heads of their bosses had they come up for reassigment. They were both qualified officers and they both outranked Shep thus they would seem to be perfect candidates for mission commanders. If Sumner or the other man had lived though and then been threatened with re-assigment by the SGC command staff I don't think Weir would have fought quite so hard to stop it happening and the reason wouldn't have been because they were incompotent as military officers.

Personally I don't think she would even have gone to the meeting with either of those two.

That's my take on it anyway.

Uh, some of us are speedreaders. It would take me less time than Weir to read that list.

So Weir's a speed reader. I didn't know that. What episode was that in?

[Ouroboros]

WTF? I'm narrow-minded? Well, that's a new one. Never been called that before, and I've been called everything at least once. Must be because I'm ..... not.

You're quite right. You really don't have anything at all to say to me.

I'm going to give you one last whack at this. Here's the whole original exchange from begining to end.

You Said: That sounds more like Grand Theft Auto than Joseph Campbell and I can only rejoice that the writers seem more acquainted with the latter than the former. I wouldn't watch a story arc along your lines, whereas Atlantis has elements that resonate with me.

I said: GTA:Atlantis would be pretty cool though. You could pull Wraith out of their darts and stuff and then go rob a liquor store with your P90 and unlock an explicet hidden sex scene with Dr. Beckett to get the game pulled from stores.

You said: Atlantis: As Nasty As You Wanna Be. I don't even play video games and I'd buy that. But the naughty business? Has to be with McKay. Or Caldwell. Oooh, Caldwell and Weir. Steamy. Or Sheppard. Or, aw heck, just throw 'em all in there nekkid and they'll sort it out.

Oh dear. In The Gutter? again.

I said: Yeah in this one Shep does find a "diplomatic solution" with the Wraith woman and the Pegasus galaxy is saved by his truely noble sacrifice.

[Shep'sSocks]

Uh, some of us are speedreaders. It would take me less time than Weir to read that list.

So Weir's a speed reader. I didn't know that. What episode was that in?

I'll preface my reply by noting your lack of courtesy in not citing who you've quoted.

I didn't say Weir was a speedreader. You seem to think that it's unbelievable that someone could read that fast. I merely noted that it would take me less time than Weir took to read the list.

[not so ancient]

I'm going to give you one last whack at this. Here's the whole original exchange from begining to end.

Okay, it was a joke about the 'diplomatic solution' and a 'sacrifice' that Sheppard made? I plead guilty to missing the joke. I see now that it has some fairly amusing sexual innuendo, but I didn't take your statement as jest.

Here's why: I was considering your statement in the context of your previous statements, some time ago, in another thread, that I could certainly find if I looked if it isn't one that got locked away and gone poof! by the moderators, that Sheppard didn't have to kill Marilyn Manson!Wraith Keeper. You do recall saying that? I do try to put people's statements together as a whole to get a complete picture of their POV.

So, my bad for missing the funny.

I still am rankled by 'narrow-minded' however.

[not so ancient]

I'll preface my reply by noting your lack of courtesy in not citing who you've quoted.

Indeed, it makes it very hard to follow things. Given that his complaint is about how the thread has gotten confusing and convoluted, attribution and a cite to the post number, or a link, would help immensely.

I didn't say Weir was a speedreader. You seem to think that it's unbelievable that someone could read that fast. I merely noted that it would take me less time than Weir took to read the list.

I suppose it's not inconceivable that the list was ....alphabetized.

Or what if the list were sorted by physician specialty? Dr. Wallace is doing research, which suggests he's probably not a GP. So he's a(n) Neurologist, Endocrinologist, Internist, Psychiatrist, Cardiologist, etc?

Weir could just go to the category in which his name would appear.

[Lightsabre]

Or what if the list were sorted by physician specialty? Dr. Wallace is doing research, which suggests he's probably not a GP. So he's a(n) Neurologist, Endocrinologist, Internist, Psychiatrist, Cardiologist, etc?

Weir could just go to the category in which his name would appear.

Buit I thought the problem was she mentioned his not being on hte list at all??
Still NOTHING we've discussed here proves nepotism. Shall we take it as given that is wasn't and all move on??

[Lightsabre]

Ok it looks like you started trying to use the "it's just a show" cop out to declare that it didn't matter that Shep planned a reckless mission. In other words it seemed as if you were asking me to disregard the poor and careless way in which the mission was planned because it's just a TV show. Even though examining the way the mission was planned would be the only real way to answer the question of whether or not it was reckless. If we brought out "it's only a show" everytime we got questions like "is the Shep character reckless" it would be impossible to answer because people would just come in with the cop out. Discussing it at all would pretty much be pointless. "It's just a show" isn't an answer the the question "in story". It's an explanation for why the story was written the way it was but it doesn't change the implications for the characters in the story.

'It's just a show' is NOT a cop out. If you see a character in a movue get thrown through a window and get up without a scratch, do you say 'god that unrealistic??" No. Cause it's just a movie.
SAm here. Shep planned a mission on the best intel he had available.(Note here, he consulted Athosians who had been living under the Wriath for years)
Yes, the mission succeeded cause of the scanner, but that's cuase there were things he didn't account for in his plan. Why?? he didn't know about them. You cannot expect him to know every single thing about the wraith. If you want to maintain he shouldn't have mounted a rescue, that's your choice. But please leave this unrealistic thing out of it.
[QUOTE=Ouroboros]
1)It's a tv show. It doesn't have to be 100% real all of the time, they are allowed to play with things.

That's what I was responding to originally. Maybe you'd like to clairfy what "things" you were talking about then if I got it wrong.

First off I don't even remember that SG-1 episode that well since I haven't seen it in literally years. Secondly it's so not related to Weir's nepotism as to make it completely irrelevant content for this thread. Thirdly what does it matter if it was or wasn't also an unrealistic scenario? I'm not claiming anything about it, I don't even remember the episode and you're the one that brought it up in the first place. It might be unrealistic as well, I couldn't tell you right now because I don't remember anything about it. Even if it is or isn't I don't get what you're trying to prove with it, that the Stargate franchise can have more than one unrealistic scenario in it, well yeah so and....?

Oh, well cuase you don't remember it, it's not relevant. I'll recap it for oyu.
Apophis steals some US personel, they get teh code to the planet he was from ande follow him. they all get caught, then Teal'c busts them out. This alerts the Goa'uld (namely, Apophis) that ther is a human planet with Tech that can threaten them. Sound familiar???

If I tell you I'm going to England on Saterday and then set out without booking plane tickets but as I'm walking in the street a helicopter just swoops down out of nowhere, picks me up and flies me to England was my original plan to get to England a good well thought out one that was responsible for me getting to England or was the only reason I ever got to England the helicopter that appeared out of nowhere.

I don't know how much simpler I can put it do you.

No, you see, this is your problem, I understand you , I just don't agree. You are likening SHeps mission to waking up and deciding to go to England. That's just ludicrious. HE had a plan, he used the assets he had to his best advantage. The scanner was useful and ultimately saved their asses, but it's hardly the holy grail you seem to think it is.

The non existence of something is the default state of not just proper burden of proof but of reality.

The example I gave is to show why the method of "I can just claim the existence of things then you have to prove they don't exist or it's equal" is broken. I can't just say that you knew those 6 murderers because there's no evidence for it. Do you really think we should all just go around assuming by defealt that everyone we encounter knows these murderers unless they can prove that they don't. Am I going to be considered by default to potentially know every one of the 6 billion+ people on this planet until I can prove one at a time that I don't know them all.

I do not know how much simpler I can make this for you.
You made a statement of fact taht Weir knew NONE of the expedition members.
I asked you for some proof. I also said, how can we know that Weir wasn't ROdney's lover?? Beckitt's childhood friend.
YOu asked me to prove these realationships. I say again, you made the original assertion of FACT. IT is your burden to prove your statement correct, not mine to prove it incorrect.

A possible connection is just speculation. It's not evidence and thus it does not prove that she knew anyone anymore than someone speculating you or I knew the murderers would be reason to believe that we did. It's possible that we did, as in it's not completely impossible, but a possability is not evidence in and of itself. Anything is possible and you can't ask someone to systematically disprove a whole slew of baseless possible situations without any direct evidence to support any of them. How would they even do so? Such a thing could go on forever.

However, if you don't have evidence to disprove my speculation, all you have is a theory, not a fact. SO we can conclude Weir possibly DID know some of the expedition members. Thank you.

[Easter Lily]

I do not know how much simpler I can make this for you.
You made a statement of fact taht Weir knew NONE of the expedition members.
I asked you for some proof. I also said, how can we know that Weir wasn't ROdney's lover?? Beckitt's childhood friend.
YOu asked me to prove these realationships. I say again, you made the original assertion of FACT. IT is your burden to prove your statement correct, not mine to prove it incorrect.
However, if you don't have evidence to disprove my speculation, all you have is a theory, not a fact. SO we can conclude Weir possibly DID know some of the expedition members. Thank you.

The fact that she uses first names with some of the members and not all, suggests different degrees of familiarity to me as well.

[Ouroboros]

I'll preface my reply by noting your lack of courtesy in not citing who you've quoted.

I just open a new window and cut/paste. My browser doesn't seem to like the quote button much and I can't select your name without clicking on your profile.

My quotes will always appear in the order they were posted in so that should help you find your own if I quoted you. I also give each person I reply to their own post if there's a lot of points to be made.

Also "lack of courtesy", a bit much you think?

I didn't say Weir was a speedreader. You seem to think that it's unbelievable that someone could read that fast. I merely noted that it would take me less time than Weir took to read the list.

I said I thought it was weird to think that someone would scan a list that long that quickly and be able to notice the absence of a name unless it was one they were specifically looking for. You said "not if you're a speed reader" so you're implying that Weir could be one right. I was just wondering if there was anything she might have said to the effect of her being one.

Okay, it was a joke about the 'diplomatic solution' and a 'sacrifice' that Sheppard made? I plead guilty to missing the joke. I see now that it has some fairly amusing sexual innuendo, but I didn't take your statement as jest.

Yep you really turned that one silly little quip of mine into something far greater than the sum of it's parts.

Here's why: I was considering your statement in the context of your previous statements, some time ago, in another thread, that I could certainly find if I looked if it isn't one that got locked away and gone poof! by the moderators, that Sheppard didn't have to kill Marilyn Manson!Wraith Keeper. You do recall saying that? I do try to put people's statements together as a whole to get a complete picture of their POV.

Yeah I figured it had to do with that. They did delete it I think because I couldn't find it when I came back the next day.

I still am rankled by 'narrow-minded' however.

Well who are you to tell a man what he can and can't try to err "make a sarifice with".

'It's just a show' is NOT a cop out. If you see a character in a movue get thrown through a window and get up without a scratch, do you say 'god that unrealistic??" No. Cause it's just a movie.

You don't understand what's going on here. There are two "realities" that exist when discussing a show/book or any work of creative fiction. There's the in story canon world or story world and then there's the real world. The worlds are seperate for the purposes of discussion because that's the way they're created. The author of a creative work creates another fictional world within his work, the world that his fictional characters live in.

If a person comes along and asks you a question like "why did Jim kill his dad in the story". There are two possible answers. The real world answer might be something like "because the actor playing Jim's Dad wanted to leave the show". The story world answer might be something like "because Jim found out his dad was the infamous lakeside strangler all along".

If a person is trying to analyse the character of Jim or Jim's dad or the quality of the writing in "the life of Jim" then the story answer is all they're interested in. The real world's effects can be felt in the story world by making it come up with story reasons when factors in the real world force certain things to happen but real world answers are seperate and irrelevent to any discussion of in story characterizations or what not. Story Jim's dad didn't get killed because he wanted to quit a show. He got killed because he was the strangler.

Now if the authors of Jim's life didn't offer up an explanation in the show as to why the character of Jim's dad was suddenly missing viewers would have to come up with one on their own to explain what happened to the character in the story world. Maybe Jim's dad went out of town, maybe he even died offscreen or something. The point is the story world answer wouldn't be "because the actor playing him wanted out". In the story world Jim's dad is not a guy being played by an actor, he's supposed to be a real guy who the story is being told about.

Now in the case of Shep(not Joe Flannigan) in the story his character did not have the hand scanner or any known means of knowing where the prisoners he was trying to save were located and yet he set out to try and rescue them. He did it even though with things as they were at the time he set out it would have been pretty much impossible for him to succeed since he didn't even know where they were.

Now the best story world answer for why Shep(not Joe Flannigan) did this in my estimation is that he acted without thinking everything through which makes him reckless as a character.

Oh, well cuase you don't remember it, it's not relevant. I'll recap it for oyu.
Apophis steals some US personel, they get teh code to the planet he was from ande follow him. they all get caught, then Teal'c busts them out. This alerts the Goa'uld (namely, Apophis) that ther is a human planet with Tech that can threaten them. Sound familiar???

I remembered that much about it I just don't remember enough of the details to make any judgement about its realism. As I recall though didn't they basically only escape/survive because Teal'c turned on the other guards by surprise. That was a lot more believable than what happened in Atlantis in Rising.

No, you see, this is your problem, I understand you , I just don't agree. You are likening SHeps mission to waking up and deciding to go to England. That's just ludicrious. HE had a plan, he used the assets he had to his best advantage. The scanner was useful and ultimately saved their asses, but it's hardly the holy grail you seem to think it is.

Ok so how was he going to find the prisoners without it? Even if we give it to him that he'll find the hiveship hiveships are gigantic with many decks and countless rooms. They're also full of Wraith who don't want you there. He wouldn't even know the people were in the hiveship without the scanner and even if he did it would be almost impossible for him to search every room in it systematicaly without the Wraith noticing him.

Nobody in their right mind would plan a mission like that see.

He'd basically land on the planet and then someone would ask him. "Ok which way boss" and what would possibly be his answer. "Well lets start behind those pine trees over there. Be quick though guys, we got a whole planet to cover".

I do not know how much simpler I can make this for you.
You made a statement of fact taht Weir knew NONE of the expedition members.
I asked you for some proof. I also said, how can we know that Weir wasn't ROdney's lover?? Beckitt's childhood friend.
YOu asked me to prove these realationships. I say again, you made the original assertion of FACT. IT is your burden to prove your statement correct, not mine to prove it incorrect.

However, if you don't have evidence to disprove my speculation, all you have is a theory, not a fact. SO we can conclude Weir possibly DID know some of the expedition members. Thank you.

Alright I'm punching my clock on this one. I've tried and I'm not a paid teacher so it's up to you to do your homework by yourself now. Here's a start for you.

http://www.nizkor.org/features/falla...-of-proof.html

Pay special attention to the second and third examples illustrated here. First link on google.

http://www.google.ca/search?hl=en&q=...=Google+Search

Here's the rest of the google search.

Enjoy.