200th worst episode ever!

[ChillinTheMost]

actually, i have read posts where people that like the changes have been accused of liking anything TPTB throw at them. i'm not sure if the term lemmings was used or just alluded to. ...just to set the record straight.

anyway, what i'd really like to know from those that posted just a few times and didn't like this episode: do you generally read the internet? maybe you're a lurker, but just don't post? i ask because i'm wondering if some of the jokes didn't seem funny because you don't know the context. when i first saw Wormhole Xtreme, i wasn't really on Stargate internet sites, so while i was amused, it wasn't until i saw the episode later that i thought it was really funny in how it reflected what was said on the internet. [even the part about falling through the floor was funnier knowing about the internet debates]. this is not an accusation, i really want to know how much more "unfunny" this episode was without knowing about all that goes on through the internet.

if you do read the internet and still didn't like it and and wanted to join to post because you felt that strongly about it, that's fine, i was just wondering if knowing what goes on on the internet affected viewer responses.

[full.infinity]

Because somewhere in those 200 hours of tv, there is something that everyone doesn't like.

I think you mean "something that you don't like". Saying that everyone doesn't like it wouldn't work just like saying that everyone likes it doesn't work.
And it's only 150 hours(actually a bit less because I'm counting the theme each time here). 184 hours 30 minutes if you include Atlantis. But that's just a minor nitpick.

actually, i have read posts where people that like the changes have been accused of liking anything TPTB throw at them. i'm not sure if the term lemmings was used or just alluded to. ...just to set the record straight.

I think Skydiver means on this thread, although I do remember one on the anti thread mentioning stuff in the water.

[Dani347]

Only on this thread, really. I haven't seen anything really nasty outside of a few threads that were pretty much destined to be a flamewar from the start(the title says it all, really, "worst episode ever" --> flamewars

See, there is no reason why "worst episode ever" should equal flamewar. That is, unless people can't accept that someone would consider an episode the worst (and unless all episodes are equally good, one of them has to be the worst) ever, and politely discuss, agree and disagree. It's only when people choose to flame people for their honest opinion about a show that things go into flamewars.

In this thread, people have listed three of my most favorite episodes and said they'd go through all sorts of torture before they watched them again. Are they wrong for listing them? No bloody way. I'd be wrong if I started flaming because they didn't like my episodes.

This entire thread is a troll really. Someone calling the episode "worst ever" is an obvious attempt to bait people into hotheaded reply.

Someone calling the episode the "worst ever" is only obviously someone sharing their view that the episode is the "worst ever" Beyond that, only the person who started it, and those who can read his/her mind can definitively say what it obviously is.

If someone started a "Best Episode Ever" thread, would they be trying to get hotheaded replies from people who disagreed?

*sits on hands before they reach out for that mod cap again*

[ChillinTheMost]

I think Skydiver means on this thread, although I do remember one on the anti thread mentioning stuff in the water.

Ah, then I stand corrected.

[The Engineer]

And it's only 150 hours(actually a bit less because I'm counting the theme each time here). 184 hours 30 minutes if you include Atlantis. But that's just a minor nitpick.

Well..... 44 minutes/ ep (roughly) * 200 eps = 8800 minutes = 146 hrs 40 minutes. But she said tv, and in that case there are 200 hours of Stargate (SG-1).

[full.infinity]

See, there is no reason why "worst episode ever" should equal flamewar. That is, unless people can't accept that someone would consider an episode the worst (and unless all episodes are equally good, one of them has to be the worst) ever, and politely discuss, agree and disagree. It's only when people choose to flame people for their honest opinion about a show that things go into flamewars.

In this thread, people have listed three of my most favorite episodes and said they'd go through all sorts of torture before they watched them again. Are they wrong for listing them? No bloody way. I'd be wrong if I started flaming because they didn't like my episodes.




Someone calling the episode the "worst ever" is only obviously someone sharing their view that the episode is the "worst ever" Beyond that, only the person who started it, and those who can read his/her mind can definitively say what it obviously is.

If someone started a "Best Episode Ever" thread, would they be trying to get hotheaded replies from people who disagreed?

*sits on hands before they reach out for that mod cap again*

Someone just created a whole thread, the day after an episode airs, to discuss that an episode is the worst episode ever. It's overly strong language. I have seen this type of phrasing many times before and it almost never fails as the troll-feeders come out of the woodwork. If they said it on the "Anti Season 10 Thread" where it wouldn't be a statement of great contraversy you would have a point.

[Dani347]

anyway, what i'd really like to know from those that posted just a few times and didn't like this episode: do you generally read the internet? maybe you're a lurker, but just don't post? i ask because i'm wondering if some of the jokes didn't seem funny because you don't know the context. when i first saw Wormhole Xtreme, i wasn't really on Stargate internet sites, so while i was amused, it wasn't until i saw the episode later that i thought it was really funny in how it reflected what was said on the internet. [even the part about falling through the floor was funnier knowing about the internet debates]. this is not an accusation, i really want to know how much more "unfunny" this episode was without knowing about all that goes on through the internet.

if you do read the internet and still didn't like it and and wanted to join to post because you felt that strongly about it, that's fine, i was just wondering if knowing what goes on on the internet affected viewer responses.

To me, most of the jokes seemed pretty self explanatory, and a take on typical tv criticisms and pompous ptb's, not necessarily strictly Stargate. I'd say maybe only Mitchell being the one to mention bringing in a character to replace the lead (since you'd have to know that he was brought in to replace the lead to get the full effect of the joke) and the whole "where was the rest of the team when you were fighting the zombies (criticisms of the rest of the team being sidelined for Mitchell) and the wedding (ship wars) and possibly the Farscape needed prior knowledge. And, that looks like more than it is, really. But, I am on the internet, so I can't speak with any authority for those who don't come online. I just think that a lot of the jokes were self explanatory or explained within the conversations anyway.

[Apophis87]

The thing about opinions is that people feel strongly about them. It's human nature to argue over opinions. It may not be logical, it may not be nice, but it's human nature.

[Iguana775]

Well..... 44 minutes/ ep (roughly) * 200 eps = 8800 minutes = 146 hrs 40 minutes. But she said tv, and in that case there are 200 hours of Stargate (SG-1).

But you're forgetting that there was an episode that was 90 minutes. Threads? lol

[Dani347]

Someone just created a whole thread, the day after an episode airs, to discuss that an episode is the worst episode ever. It's overly strong language. I have seen this type of phrasing many times before and it almost never fails as the troll-feeders come out of the woodwork. If they said it on the "Anti Season 10 Thread" where it wouldn't be a statement of great contraversy you would have a point.

I do have a point. My points are quite ambulatory, they can be made in any area.

And, again, it is the responsibility of the posters as how they respond to an opinion about a tv show. Who cares when they started the thread? I'm personally puzzled as to why the post couldn't have been put in the actual episode thread (but I feel the same way about threads that are basically questions about the episode) but beyond that, I see no reason why someone shouldn't post their honest and valid opinion. Again, if people can't accept that opinion, that says more about them than the creator of the thread.

And, no, a person shouldn't be segregated in an anti thread because they say something about an episode that others just can't seem to accept for some strange reason. The anti threads are for when people want to talk with like minded people and don't feel like defending or debating their feelings (same with pro). They're not so fragile posters on the opposite side of the fence can be protected from hearing the big bad anti opinions.

[full.infinity]

I do have a point. My points are quite ambulatory, they can be made in any area.

And, again, it is the responsibility of the posters as how they respond to an opinion about a tv show. Who cares when they started the thread? I'm personally puzzled as to why the post couldn't have been put in the actual episode thread (but I feel the same way about threads that are basically questions about the episode) but beyond that, I see no reason why someone shouldn't post their honest and valid opinion. Again, if people can't accept that opinion, that says more about them than the creator of the thread.

And, no, a person shouldn't be segregated in an anti thread because they say something about an episode that others just can't seem to accept for some strange reason. The anti threads are for when people want to talk with like minded people and don't feel like defending or debating their feelings (same with pro). They're not so fragile posters on the opposite side of the fence can be protected from hearing the big bad anti opinions.

Go look up "feeding the troll".

[Dani347]

The thing about opinions is that people feel strongly about them. It's human nature to argue over opinions. It may not be logical, it may not be nice, but it's human nature.

It's quite possible to argue over opinions without flaming, attacking, and insulting the people behind the opinions. People manage to overcome their human natures all the time in various situations (I've chosen not to say things in this thread which I feel cross the line) and they can do it here as well. But, they choose not to. They're not victim to their natures. They use their natures as an excuse to be rude and unbending.

[Albion]

I dont see why you wouldnt like it,

How odd. You obviously have no understanding of the simple concept that people's tastes differ and whether you like or dislike something, find it hiliarous or desperately unfunny or many shades inbetween is an entirely subjective thing, dependent on personal taste.

If you expect everyone in the world to always agree with what you personally dislike or like you're going to be terribly disappointed, you know.

For myself, I don't see any great mystery as to why someone wouldn't like this one. Or, for that matter, why they would like it. Different strokes and all that jazz.

Albion

[Dani347]

Go look up "feeding the troll".

Snipped from wikipedia: Often the poster will become defensive when the argument is refuted, and may continue the thread through the use of further flawed arguments; this is referred to as "feeding" the troll.


If posters are doing this, it is again, their choice to behave this way, not the responsibility of the thread starter to censor their opinions because others choose to act that way. No one who dislikes the episode has attacked anyone in this thread (and I haven't read any other threads, but this thread is about this thread) and none of them should be blamed for the bad behavior of some of those who liked the episode. Unless we start blaming everyone else for bad behavior except the ones who are actually behaving badly.

[PG15]

It's quite possible to argue over opinions without flaming, attacking, and insulting the people behind the opinions. People manage to overcome their human natures all the time in various situations (I've chosen not to say things in this thread which I feel cross the line) and they can do it here as well. But, they choose not to. They're not victim to their natures. They use their natures as an excuse to be rude and unbending.

True, but guess what, a lot of people are different from you, and they can't control their feelings.

You're perplexing about why people are going around and harrassing others is no different from me perplexing about why some people hated 200 with a passion.