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

[Lightsabre]

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.

You can just type quote=name and hte name appears. It's just polite.

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".

Please tell me how this has ANYTHING to do with the discussion, please.
YOu started all this suspension of disbelief and 2 worlds crap. It doesn't add anythign to the discussion, so I"m wondering why you fill your posts with it??

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 for god's sake, I'm tired of explaining this to you. He made a plan with knowledge of the assets at his command. This is nto reckless. It was thought through, he had a plan.

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.

Wait a second, it's more realistic to expect the leader of the opposition to turn and gun down his own people than to find some advanced technology in a spaceship your flying???
Also, COTG follows the same plot device as Rising. US personel kidnapped, rescue mission mounted. IF you are saying Rising it unrealistic, then so is COTG.

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.

WHo knows, it's a tv show. IF they tell me he had a plan, I believe them.

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

Again, tv show.

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.

Ouroborus. YOu made a statement of fact, it is your burden to prove it. Deal with it or don't but DO NOT condescend to me.
IF you still don't see it's your burden of proof, then I will simply treat everything you say as opinion and respond accordingly.

[prion]

Just a quick reply, but wow, cannot believe this thread hasn't died a rightful death yet.... we've had a new episode of Atlantis so hey, the point is moot

[Shep'sSocks]

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?

How hard is it to look at the person's name you're quoting? And no, 'lack of courtesy' isn't too much considering that my original said 'your utter rudeness'. Considering how long your replies are, then have the courtesy to quote the person's name you're replying to.

Here's a hint: reply to one person at a time. It's easier and then you can accurately quote who said something and accurately quote that person. If you're having problems with using the quote function then do it manually. [quote=name] How hard can it be?

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.

I didn't say 'not if you're a speedreader'. For one thing, speedreader is one word where I'm from so I wouldn't make such a ridiculous error. I said (twice now) "Uh, some of us are proofreaders." You're not even quoting accurately. Weir may be a speedreader, I don't know, but as I said before you seem to think that a list cannot be scanned that quickly and I point out that I could read it faster than she scanned it.

[Ouroboros]

Please tell me how this has ANYTHING to do with the discussion, please.
YOu started all this suspension of disbelief and 2 worlds crap. It doesn't add anythign to the discussion, so I"m wondering why you fill your posts with it??

No sorry I'm sick of wasting time with you. I don't know if you're being obtuse on purpose here and refusing to understand the simple distinction between discussing in story events and backstage events or if you just simply are unable to understand the concept of a fictional world and the real world being seperate entirely.

Wait a second, it's more realistic to expect the leader of the opposition to turn and gun down his own people than to find some advanced technology in a spaceship your flying???
Also, COTG follows the same plot device as Rising. US personel kidnapped, rescue mission mounted. IF you are saying Rising it unrealistic, then so is COTG.

I'm not going to be drawn into a discussion about comparing COTG to Rising in the Weir nepotism thread. I'll count myself lucky if I never get drawn into another discussion with you ever again. You don't discuss things. You shreik your unsupported opinions at the other individual, insult them when they don't agree with you, demand that they prove your baseless claims wrong and then refuse to ackowledge it as such even if they do.

Ouroborus. YOu made a statement of fact, it is your burden to prove it. Deal with it or don't but DO NOT condescend to me.
IF you still don't see it's your burden of proof, then I will simply treat everything you say as opinion and respond accordingly.

You didn't even read the link did you? The fist link clearly explains why you can not assert the existence of something (like a relationship) and then claim it true because no one can prove to you that it doesn't exist.

"There's an invisible purple elephant in my bathroom because you can't prove that there isn't" and all that. That's not the way logic works.

Assuming the default non-existence of something until it is proven to exist with evidence "there is no relationship/purple elephant because one has never been observed" does not constitute an assertion of something's existence.

How hard is it to look at the person's name you're quoting? And no, 'lack of courtesy' isn't too much considering that my original said 'your utter rudeness'. Considering how long your replies are, then have the courtesy to quote the person's name you're replying to.

I find it pretty hilarious that given your blatently insulting remarks about my person in this and the other thread that you would have the audacity to suggest that it is I who am expressing a lack of courtesy toward you because I don't quote you in the exact way that you'd prefer.

Here's your pacifier anyway since I'm such a nice guy.

I didn't say 'not if you're a speedreader'. For one thing, speedreader is one word where I'm from so I wouldn't make such a ridiculous error. I said (twice now) "Uh, some of us are proofreaders." You're not even quoting accurately. Weir may be a speedreader, I don't know, but as I said before you seem to think that a list cannot be scanned that quickly and I point out that I could read it faster than she scanned it.

So now we've degenerated into taking swipes at something as trivial as other people's e-grammer. Wow you're really reaching for ways to insult me now aren't you.

[Shep]

I'd forgotten how much I don't miss you.

[Lightsabre]

No sorry I'm sick of wasting time with you. I don't know if you're being obtuse on purpose here and refusing to understand the simple distinction between discussing in story events and backstage events or if you just simply are unable to understand the concept of a fictional world and the real world being seperate entirely.

Neither, I'm askign why the hell you brought it up int first place and what relevance it has. But, like all troublemakers, once you can no longer obscure and cloud things, you just say 'I'm tired of this'.

I'm not going to be drawn into a discussion about comparing COTG to Rising in the Weir nepotism thread. I'll count myself lucky if I never get drawn into another discussion with you ever again. You don't discuss things. You shreik your unsupported opinions at the other individual, insult them when they don't agree with you, demand that they prove your baseless claims wrong and then refuse to ackowledge it as such even if they do.

YOu started the discussion when you started on the stuff about Shep. Just because you can't argue it, you attack me. It's the sign of a weak argument.

You didn't even read the link did you? The fist link clearly explains why you can not assert the existence of something (like a relationship) and then claim it true because no one can prove to you that it doesn't exist.

"There's an invisible purple elephant in my bathroom because you can't prove that there isn't" and all that. That's not the way logic works.

Assuming the default non-existence of something until it is proven to exist with evidence "there is no relationship/purple elephant because one has never been observed" does not constitute an assertion of something's existence.

Ourbourous, YOU made the statement. You have to prove it, not me disprove it.
Using your logic I could say, "I'm President of the United States of America'
ANd I don't have to do a damn thign to prove it, you have to disprove it.
It doesn't work like that.
YOu claimed Weir didn't know the expedition members previously. I"d like some proof of that.

[Tok'Ra Hostess]

IMO:

No nephews were harmed by Weir in Intruder. (I say "harmed" because Atlantis is not exactly the safest assignment a nephew could have, now is it? )

As to how quickly Weir responded to her BF's name not being on the list - it's just one of the oldest tricks in the theater/tv book; you only have so many minutes per scene, so you cheat reality a bit by speeding up response times. There are scenes where timing is absolutely imperative to the plot. This isn't one of those times. The only thing of importance in this scene is that Weir discovers that her BF's name is not on Beckett's list. The audience is just supposed to go along with it.

With regards to Sheppard, a non-issue, IMO. As Oscar Wilde said, experience is the name everyone gives to their mistakes. No military person of whatever rank has the experience that Shep has with regard to Atlantis. ATM, if there is anyone qualified to write the (military)book about the Atlantis situation it is Sheppard.

If anyone thinks that Sheppard acted incompetently by mounting a rescue mission in Rising, what must you think of the carefully planned fiasco that was the Vietnam war? Lotsa highly qualified officers were in on all the planning stages of that little mission....

Personally, I saw Weir showing, not nepotism toward Shep, but loyalty.

[Ouroboros]

I'd forgotten how much I don't miss you.

Oh look another one with more baseless personal insults, way to go champ, you sure showed me.

Neither, I'm askign why the hell you brought it up int first place and what relevance it has. But, like all troublemakers, once you can no longer obscure and cloud things, you just say 'I'm tired of this'.

I've tried numerous times to explain it to you. You were unable to grasp it despite those numerous examples. I'm going to stop because I'm sick of ice skating uphill with you.

Yeah and I'm a real big trouble maker here to. Tell me what I did to "make trouble" exactly. Post something other than "I agree". I've been nothing but civil in my disgreement with you while you and the others have directly insulted and swore at me numerous times.

YOu started the discussion when you started on the stuff about Shep. Just because you can't argue it, you attack me. It's the sign of a weak argument.

No you first brought in Children of the Gods. Shep is not a character featured in Children of the Gods. And if attacking people is a sign of a weak argument the lot of you lost this one some time ago.

Ourbourous, YOU made the statement. You have to prove it, not me disprove it.
Using your logic I could say, "I'm President of the United States of America'
ANd I don't have to do a damn thign to prove it, you have to disprove it.
It doesn't work like that.
YOu claimed Weir didn't know the expedition members previously. I"d like some proof of that.

That's exactly what you're doing when you say Weir knew everybody on Atlantis before hand without evidence. It doesn't matter who made the initial statement regarding the situation you're the one asserting the existence of something new, the relationships. You're the one saying you know who the president is. All I'm saying is "there's no evidence you're the president" then you're coming back and saying "you said I'm not the president. Prove I'm not the president. You made a statement of fact you have to back it up!"

Stating that there's no evidence to support the idea of pre-existing relationships is not something I have to back up with proof. It's an objective fact.

Q:Is there evidence to support the idea that Weir knew the expedition members before hand?

A:No

If you think there's an answer to that question other than no I'd love to hear what it is and why.

[Hatcheter]

IMO:

No nephews were harmed by Weir in Intruder. (I say "harmed" because Atlantis is not exactly the safest assignment a nephew could have, now is it? )

As to how quickly Weir responded to her BF's name not being on the list - it's just one of the oldest tricks in the theater/tv book; you only have so many minutes per scene, so you cheat reality a bit by speeding up response times. There are scenes where timing is absolutely imperative to the plot. This isn't one of those times. The only thing of importance in this scene is that Weir discovers that her BF's name is not on Beckett's list. The audience is just supposed to go along with it.

With regards to Sheppard, a non-issue, IMO. As Oscar Wilde said, experience is the name everyone gives to their mistakes. No military person of whatever rank has the experience that Shep has with regard to Atlantis. ATM, if there is anyone qualified to write the (military)book about the Atlantis situation it is Sheppard.

If anyone thinks that Sheppard acted incompetently by mounting a rescue mission in Rising, what must you think of the carefully planned fiasco that was the Vietnam war? Lotsa highly qualified officers were in on all the planning stages of that little mission....

Personally, I saw Weir showing, not nepotism toward Shep, but loyalty.

Just gotta say that I agree with all of the above.

While Vietnam doesn't exactly compare to one small rescue mission, it does show how good plans don't guarantee success.

[Lightsabre]

I've tried numerous times to explain it to you. You were unable to grasp it despite those numerous examples. I'm going to stop because I'm sick of ice skating uphill with you.

Oh you've explained the concepts(which I already knew btw) but never how/why they are relvant to THIS discussion.
All of this you say relates to Shep, which you aren't going to argue cause this is a weir thread.
YOu can see how I"m confused.

Yeah and I'm a real big trouble maker here to. Tell me what I did to "make trouble" exactly. Post something other than "I agree". I've been nothing but civil in my disgreement with you while you and the others have directly insulted and swore at me numerous times.

I have not sworn at you or attacked you directly in this thread, so I'll ask you to stop saying I have. I cannot be responsible for the behaviour of others.
I called you a trouble maker cuase you entered this thread, made what I consider a weak argument, then refused to back it up, but aggressively responded to everyone who disagreed in a tone guaranteed to cause problems.
I call that trouble making.

No you first brought in Children of the Gods. Shep is not a character featured in Children of the Gods. And if attacking people is a sign of a weak argument the lot of you lost this one some time ago.

I brought in COTG cause it's relevant. And you couldn't refute my argument, so you wrote a nasty little paragraph about me.

That's exactly what you're doing when you say Weir knew everybody on Atlantis before hand without evidence. It doesn't matter who made the initial statement regarding the situation you're the one asserting the existence of something new, the relationships. You're the one saying you know who the president is. All I'm saying is "there's no evidence you're the president" then you're coming back and saying "you said I'm not the president. Prove I'm not the president. You made a statement of fact you have to back it up!"

Stating that there's no evidence to support the idea of pre-existing relationships is not something I have to back up with proof. It's an objective fact.

Q:Is there evidence to support the idea that Weir knew the expedition members before hand?

A:No

If you think there's an answer to that question other than no I'd love to hear what it is and why.

I will say this one last time.
YOu stated that Weir did not know any of the expedition.
I challanged that.
You started going on about burden of proof.
I have never alleged that Weir knew all of the expedition, but I consider it to be likely that she knew some of them.
Now either back up your statement or shut up about it.(yes, that is rude, but I'm dead sick of this.)

[Shep'sSocks]

I find it pretty hilarious that given your blatently insulting remarks about my person in this and the other thread that you would have the audacity to suggest that it is I who am expressing a lack of courtesy toward you because I don't quote you in the exact way that you'd prefer.

Quoting someone accurately so as to provide an accurate response in return I would have thought was normal.

Here's your pacifier anyway since I'm such a nice guy.

Funny.

So now we've degenerated into taking swipes at something as trivial as other people's e-grammer. Wow you're really reaching for ways to insult me now aren't you.

I'm not taking a swipe at your grammar. I'm taking a swipe at your ability to quote someone accurately. I know perfectly well that 'speed reader' may well be two words where you're from. You misquoted me and I pointed that out, noting that I wouldn't have used 'speed reader'. If you're going to quote, quote accurately.

[Tok'Ra Hostess]

While Vietnam doesn't exactly compare to one small rescue mission, it does show how good plans don't guarantee success.

Yeah, you're right. I was just using hyperbole to show that, as Robert Frost said, "the best laid plans of mice and men often go awry"

One of the corniest things about the Goa'uld, to me, was how they were always killing their Jaffa for failing or for making mistakes. Sheesh! What total Evil Overlord idiots they were.

[Melyanna]

Yeah, you're right. I was just using hyperbole to show that, as Robert Frost said, "the best laid plans of mice and men often go awry"

Pretty sure it was Robert Burns, not that it's a hugely relevant point. (Though that was "the best-laid schemes o' mice and men gang aft agley," I think...)

I don't think anyone was contending that Weir was going through her high school yearbooks or picking people from her sorority. She was running the Antarctic research site, and was evidently there for some time. Since so many of the people from the research site were present in the SGC gate room when they embarked, it's reasonable to assume that she'd gotten to know quite a lot of them.

Is this showing favoritism? Well... yes and no. For a mission like this, I don't think it would be unreasonable to choose the lesser of two candidates if the more qualified candidate is much more difficult to work with. She's gotten to know these people, so she can choose people on a much more intangible level than just on their paper qualifications.

Is it possible that she and Zelenka dated in college? Sure. But Zelenka is obviously a highly qualified individual anyway. A prior relationship doesn't have to indicate partiality in decision-making.

In the case of the list, Simon's absence from it wasn't the first thing she commented on. First she noticed that Carson's definition of "short list" was decidedly different from hers. After that, she was looking at a list of names which would be relatively meaningless to her without the accompanying applications. It's only natural that she looked for the one name she would recognize. She knew he was highly qualified, so she asked about his absence from the list.

[not so ancient]

Three quick things

(1) I would just like to go on the record to note that if this thread gets shut down, for once, it is absolutely and totally not my fault.

(2) It is indeed, Robert Burns. But if you're going to properly pronounce gang aft agley you need to have been nipping at the usquaebach. I'll leave the Scots to dear Paul McGillion.

(3) I didn't really think there was a difference between the Antartica expedition and the Atlantis expedition. Although I'm sure some of the participants chose not to go off world in a one-way trip, I thought the whole purpose of the Antartica thing was to find Atlantis. Or, am I missing something from some SG-1 episodes that I might have missed?

[Melyanna]

(2) It is indeed, Robert Burns. But if you're going to properly pronounce gang aft agley you need to have been nipping at the usquaebach. I'll leave the Scots to dear Paul McGillion.

Heh, I've never actually heard the line pronounced correctly. I sang a setting of a Burns poem once, though, and I suspect my American choir massacred it appropriately.

(3) I didn't really think there was a difference between the Antartica expedition and the Atlantis expedition. Although I'm sure some of the participants chose not to go off world in a one-way trip, I thought the whole purpose of the Antartica thing was to find Atlantis. Or, am I missing something from some SG-1 episodes that I might have missed?

I saw them as separate entities because I imagine the military contingent of the Atlantis expedition was much larger than what we saw in Antarctica. Antarctica is, after all, demilitarized, so any military personnel would have to be there in very specific capacities, I believe. (I found it odd that Ford was there at all, to be honest.) My sense of it is that all the countries involved sent their own delegation of people to the research base, and it was Weir's job to get them working together. (I think they said as much in New Order.) From that group, she chose her expedition, probably also selecting people who worked for her at the SGC during her tenure there. That's just the impression I got somehow.

So yeah. The Antarctic research base and the Atlantis expedition aren't the same thing, but there's understandably a bit of crossover.