this post was submitted on 05 Mar 2026
173 points (97.8% liked)

TenForward: Where Every Vulcan Knows Your Name

6832 readers
730 users here now

/c/TenForward: Your home-away-from-home for all things Star Trek!

Re-route power to the shields, emit a tachyon pulse through the deflector, and post all the nonsense you want. Within reason of course.

~ 1. No bigotry. This is a Star Trek community. Remember that diversity and coexistence are Star Trek values. Any post/comments that are racist, anti-LGBT, or generally "othering" of a group will result in removal/ban.

~ 2. Keep it civil. Disagreements will happen both on lore and preferences. That's okay! Just don't let it make you forget that the person you are talking to is also a person.

~ 3. Use spoiler tags. Use spoiler tags in comments, and NSFW checkbox for posts.
This applies to any episodes that have dropped within 3 months prior of your posting. After that it's free game.

~ 4. Keep it Trek related. This one is kind of a gimme but keep as on topic as possible.

~ 5. Keep posts to a limit. We all love Star Trek stuff but 3-4 posts in an hour is plenty enough.

~ 6. Try to not repost. Mistakes happen, we get it! But try to not repost anything from within the past 1-2 months.

~ 7. No General AI Art. Posts of simple AI art do not 'inspire jamaharon'

~ 8. No Political Upheaval. Political commentary is allowed, but please keep discussions civil. Read here for our community's expectations.

Fun will now commence.


Sister Communities:

!startrek@lemmy.world

!theorville@lemmy.world

!memes@lemmy.world

!tumblr@lemmy.world

!lemmyshitpost@lemmy.world

Want your community to be added to the sidebar? Just ask one of our mods!


Creator Resources:

Looking for a Star Trek screencap? (TrekCore)

Looking for the right Star Trek typeface/font for your meme? (Thank you @kellyaster for putting this together!)


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Objection@lemmy.ml 1 points 21 hours ago (1 children)

I love how you simultaneously claim I'm strawmanning you and defend the positions I'm criticizing.

No, people don't have to be afraid for it to be terrorism, no, the location isn't relevant to whether it's terrorism (we've been over this, a bomb that goes off on a plane over international waters is still terrorism), no, the perpetrator doesn't have to take credit for it. None of those criteria are included anywhere in either your made up definition or the actual definition.

But again, it doesn't matter because you're a fundamentally unreasonable person. You don't care about logic or evidence or consistency. You'll just respond to this with another meaningless snipe like "oNlY iF yOu DoN't KnOw WhAt A t Is," because that's the highest capacity for thought that you possess.

You said "Terrorism is the use of violence against the general public to change behaviours or policies." Location is not in that definition. Whether people are terrified (which the Romulans were) is not included in that definition. Whether the perpetrator takes credit is not included in that definition. How on earth can you not see how completely full of shit you are when you keep adding new, arbitrary stipulations to exclude this one instance of terrorism??

[–] merc@sh.itjust.works -1 points 21 hours ago (1 children)

I love how you simultaneously claim I'm strawmanning you and defend the positions I'm criticizing.

Are you unable to read, as well as unable to think? I said your strawmanning was when you claimed it was my entire argument:

You:

Your whole argument was "it's not terrorism because they weren't terrified." Now you're admitting that it did, in fact, cause them to be afraid.

[–] Objection@lemmy.ml 0 points 20 hours ago (1 children)

It was the only objection you raised at that point, so yes, it was your entire argument. Whether you had some super-secret argument in your head that you weren't saying isn't relevant to the argument you actually made.

[–] merc@sh.itjust.works 1 points 16 hours ago (1 children)

You have trouble reading huh?

[–] Objection@lemmy.ml 1 points 15 hours ago (1 children)

God, you're so smarmy when you can't think of an actual point. Do you not realize how transparent it is?

[–] merc@sh.itjust.works 0 points 2 hours ago (1 children)
[–] Objection@lemmy.ml 1 points 38 minutes ago (1 children)

Yes. It's obvious that you're acting smarmy to cover the gaps whenever you have nothing, to cover all the holes in your argument. It's like you think if you just act smug, people won't notice when you're cornered and have no actual response.

It doesn't work. It's transparent. You're not actually covering up the holes in your reasoning, you're just demonstrating that you don't care about how many holes there are in your reasoning, because you're intellectually dishonest.

[–] merc@sh.itjust.works -1 points 11 minutes ago (1 children)

I have nothing? I've shown that it wasn't terrorism, including by your definition.

[–] Objection@lemmy.ml 1 points 8 minutes ago* (last edited 2 minutes ago)

No, you haven't. I have shown that it was terrorism, even by your definition though. You don't care and just keep adding on extra stipulations that aren't in your definition.

He never took credit for that violence, in fact, he tried to pretend it wasn’t him

Nowhere in either definition, at all. Complete non sequitor.

He never made any demands

Nowhere in either definition, at all. Complete non sequitor.

Just like the location is irrelevant. Just like every extra stipulation you pull out of your ass is irrelevant.