[016]
MadCat221
Current Version
Changed line(s) 1 from:
n
Well okay then, I guess I'll be returning the refutation to the original WMG. Because the only person I have EVER seen say that
to:
Well okay then, I guess I\'ll be returning the refutation to the original WMG. Because the only person I have EVER seen say that \"refutation of any kind is natter\" is YOU. Why is listing further support or elaboration not considered natter? That mod is saying that only making another WMG entry in direct contradicion is against the rules.
EDIT: Here\'s a rewording to pose an alternate instead of just straight refutation:
[[WMG: Krall\'s drones are from a previously unknown (in the Kelvin timeline) lost civilization.]]
The usage of \"drones\" and a seemingly nanotech weapon of mass destruction may superficially look like \"Borg\", but the drones do not resemble the mottled cybernetic zombie look that has defined the look of the Borg \"species\" as it were. They are also all uniform and more responsive to surroundings. The ship design is completely alien, even compared to the \"monstrous geometric primitives covered in greeblies\" design paradigm that the Borg use, being instead a massive swarm of small ships. The nanotech weapon also destroys instead of assimilating, and has a name; \"Abronath\", instead of an index number. Borg Drones would have attempted to assimilate the stranded Kelvin crew, but these drones instead were left in an idle state long enough to be repurposed by Krall. The ruins are also not Borg-like, but more along the lines of \"ancient lost civilization\". Possibilities include the Tkon, or Iconians, or possibly an entirely new lost civilization created for the Kelvinverse.
[[/end WMG]]
\"Borg\" is not the \"only clear explanation\". Not by a long shot. And there are more clearer ones that fit the facts we know about the Borg. All I see similar are usage of \"drone\" (and not even decentralized as they fell pathetically to *VHF Radio whitenoise* of all things) and seeming nanotech. They aren\'t even in the right region of space to be \"origin borg\", being halfway across the galaxy from the modern Borg\'s romping grounds. It\'s a case of square drone, round regen alcove.
\"Only clear explanation\" is the crux of what I object to, and why I posted a refutation. It asserts that \"That\'s it, that\'s how it is\". I emphatically showed otherwise with contradictory facts instead of deleting it, because the original WMG was not mine... and then I had my refutation deleted as \"natter\" instead of refuted in kind. Saying \"Only clear explanation\" is in contradiction to the very spirit of WMG, which is guessing. Saying \"Only clear explanation\" asserts the spurious claim that that\'s the established fact. I probably wouldn\'t have cared if it weren\'t for this assertion.
I ask again: Why are refutations \"natter\" but additional supporting facts and expansion upon a WMG added by others not? How could a page full of content that would *fundamentally* be natter anywhere else on TVTropes have such content be labeled \"natter\"?
EDIT: Here\'s a rewording to pose an alternate instead of just straight refutation:
[[WMG: Krall\'s drones are from a previously unknown (in the Kelvin timeline) lost civilization.]]
The usage of \"drones\" and a seemingly nanotech weapon of mass destruction may superficially look like \"Borg\", but the drones do not resemble the mottled cybernetic zombie look that has defined the look of the Borg \"species\" as it were. They are also all uniform and more responsive to surroundings. The ship design is completely alien, even compared to the \"monstrous geometric primitives covered in greeblies\" design paradigm that the Borg use, being instead a massive swarm of small ships. The nanotech weapon also destroys instead of assimilating, and has a name; \"Abronath\", instead of an index number. Borg Drones would have attempted to assimilate the stranded Kelvin crew, but these drones instead were left in an idle state long enough to be repurposed by Krall. The ruins are also not Borg-like, but more along the lines of \"ancient lost civilization\". Possibilities include the Tkon, or Iconians, or possibly an entirely new lost civilization created for the Kelvinverse.
[[/end WMG]]
\"Borg\" is not the \"only clear explanation\". Not by a long shot. And there are more clearer ones that fit the facts we know about the Borg. All I see similar are usage of \"drone\" (and not even decentralized as they fell pathetically to *VHF Radio whitenoise* of all things) and seeming nanotech. They aren\'t even in the right region of space to be \"origin borg\", being halfway across the galaxy from the modern Borg\'s romping grounds. It\'s a case of square drone, round regen alcove.
\"Only clear explanation\" is the crux of what I object to, and why I posted a refutation. It asserts that \"That\'s it, that\'s how it is\". I emphatically showed otherwise with contradictory facts instead of deleting it, because the original WMG was not mine... and then I had my refutation deleted as \"natter\" instead of refuted in kind. Saying \"Only clear explanation\" is in contradiction to the very spirit of WMG, which is guessing. Saying \"Only clear explanation\" asserts the spurious claim that that\'s the established fact. I probably wouldn\'t have cared if it weren\'t for this assertion.
I ask again: Why are refutations \"natter\" but additional supporting facts and expansion upon a WMG added by others not? How could a page full of content that would *fundamentally* be natter anywhere else on TVTropes have such content be labeled \"natter\"?
Changed line(s) 1 from:
n
Well okay then, I guess I'll be returning the refutation to the original WMG. Because the only person I have EVER seen say that
to:
Well okay then, I guess I\'ll be returning the refutation to the original WMG. Because the only person I have EVER seen say that \"refutation of any kind is natter\" is YOU. Why is listing further support or elaboration not considered natter? That mod is saying that only making another WMG entry in direct contradicion is against the rules.
EDIT: Here\'s a rewording to pose an alternate instead of just straight refutation:
[[WMG: Krall\'s drones are from a previously unknown (in the Kelvin timeline) lost civilization.]]
The usage of \"drones\" and a seemingly nanotech weapon of mass destruction may superficially look like \"Borg\", but the drones do not resemble the mottled cybernetic zombie look that has defined the look of the Borg \"species\" as it were. They are also all uniform and more responsive to surroundings. The ship design is completely alien, even compared to the \"monstrous geometric primitives covered in greeblies\" design paradigm that the Borg use, being instead a massive swarm of small ships. The nanotech weapon also destroys instead of assimilating, and has a name; \"Abronath\", instead of an index number. Borg Drones would have attempted to assimilate the stranded Kelvin crew, but these drones instead were left in an idle state long enough to be repurposed by Krall. The ruins are also not Borg-like, but more along the lines of \"ancient lost civilization\". Possibilities include the Tkon, or Iconians, or possibly an entirely new lost civilization created for the Kelvinverse.
[[/end WMG]]
\"Borg\" is not the \"only clear explanation\". Not by a long shot. And there are more clearer ones that fit the facts we know about the Borg. All I see similar are usage of \"drone\" (and not even decentralized as they fell pathetically to *VHF Radio whitenoise* of all things) and seeming nanotech. They aren\'t even in the right region of space to be \"origin borg\", being halfway across the galaxy from the modern Borg\'s romping grounds. It\'s a case of square drone, round regen alcove.
\"Only clear explanation\" is the crux of what I object to, and why I posted a refutation. It asserts that \"That\'s it, that\'s how it is\". I emphatically showed otherwise with contradictory facts instead of deleting it, because the original WMG was not mine... and then I had my refutation deleted as \"natter\" instead of refuted in kind. Saying \"Only clear explanation\" is in contradiction to the very spirit of WMG, which is guessing. Saying \"Only clear explanation\" asserts the spurious claim that that\'s the established fact. I probably wouldn\'t have cared if it weren\'t for this assertion.
I ask again: Why are refutations \"natter\" but additional supporting facts and expansion upon a WMG added by others not?
EDIT: Here\'s a rewording to pose an alternate instead of just straight refutation:
[[WMG: Krall\'s drones are from a previously unknown (in the Kelvin timeline) lost civilization.]]
The usage of \"drones\" and a seemingly nanotech weapon of mass destruction may superficially look like \"Borg\", but the drones do not resemble the mottled cybernetic zombie look that has defined the look of the Borg \"species\" as it were. They are also all uniform and more responsive to surroundings. The ship design is completely alien, even compared to the \"monstrous geometric primitives covered in greeblies\" design paradigm that the Borg use, being instead a massive swarm of small ships. The nanotech weapon also destroys instead of assimilating, and has a name; \"Abronath\", instead of an index number. Borg Drones would have attempted to assimilate the stranded Kelvin crew, but these drones instead were left in an idle state long enough to be repurposed by Krall. The ruins are also not Borg-like, but more along the lines of \"ancient lost civilization\". Possibilities include the Tkon, or Iconians, or possibly an entirely new lost civilization created for the Kelvinverse.
[[/end WMG]]
\"Borg\" is not the \"only clear explanation\". Not by a long shot. And there are more clearer ones that fit the facts we know about the Borg. All I see similar are usage of \"drone\" (and not even decentralized as they fell pathetically to *VHF Radio whitenoise* of all things) and seeming nanotech. They aren\'t even in the right region of space to be \"origin borg\", being halfway across the galaxy from the modern Borg\'s romping grounds. It\'s a case of square drone, round regen alcove.
\"Only clear explanation\" is the crux of what I object to, and why I posted a refutation. It asserts that \"That\'s it, that\'s how it is\". I emphatically showed otherwise with contradictory facts instead of deleting it, because the original WMG was not mine... and then I had my refutation deleted as \"natter\" instead of refuted in kind. Saying \"Only clear explanation\" is in contradiction to the very spirit of WMG, which is guessing. Saying \"Only clear explanation\" asserts the spurious claim that that\'s the established fact. I probably wouldn\'t have cared if it weren\'t for this assertion.
I ask again: Why are refutations \"natter\" but additional supporting facts and expansion upon a WMG added by others not?
Changed line(s) 1 from:
n
Well okay then, I guess I'll be returning the refutation to the original WMG. Because the only person I have EVER seen say that
to:
Well okay then, I guess I\'ll be returning the refutation to the original WMG. Because the only person I have EVER seen say that \"refutation of any kind is natter\" is YOU. Why is listing further support or elaboration not considered natter? That mod is saying that only making another WMG entry in direct contradicion is against the rules.
EDIT: Here\'s a rewording to pose an alternate instead of just straight refutation:
[[WMG: Krall\'s drones are from a previously unknown (in the Kelvin timeline) lost civilization.]]
The usage of \"drones\" and a seemingly nanotech weapon of mass destruction may superficially look like \"Borg\", but the drones do not resemble the mottled cybernetic zombie look that has defined the look of the Borg \"species\" as it were. They are also all uniform and more responsive to surroundings. The ship design is completely alien, even compared to the \"monstrous geometric primitives covered in greeblies\" design paradigm that the Borg use, being instead a massive swarm of small ships. The nanotech weapon also destroys instead of assimilating, and has a name; \"Abronath\", instead of an index number. Borg Drones would have attempted to assimilate the stranded Kelvin crew, but these drones instead were left in an idle state long enough to be repurposed by Krall. The ruins are also not Borg-like, but more along the lines of \"ancient lost civilization\". Possibilities include the Tkon, or Iconians, or possibly an entirely new lost civilization created for the Kelvinverse.
[[/end WMG]]
\"Borg\" is not the \"only clear explanation\". Not by a long shot. And there are more clearer ones that fit the facts we know about the Borg. All I see similar are usage of \"drone\" (and not even decentralized as they fell pathetically to *VHF Radio whitenoise* of all things) and seeming nanotech. They aren\'t even in the right region of space to be \"origin borg\", being halfway across the galaxy from the modern Borg\'s romping grounds. It\'s a case of square drone, round regen alcove.
\"Only clear explanation\" is the crux of what I object to, and why I posted a refutation. It asserts that \"That\'s it, that\'s how it is\". I emphatically showed otherwise with contradictory facts instead of deleting it, because the original WMG was not mine... and then I had my refutation deleted as \"natter\" instead of refuted in kind. Saying \"Only clear explanation\" is in contradiction to the very spirit of WMG, which is guessing. Saying \"Only clear explanation\" asserts the spurious claim that that\'s the established fact. I probably wouldn\'t have cared if it weren\'t for this assertion.
I ask again: Why are refutations \"natter\" but support and expansion upon a WMG not?
EDIT: Here\'s a rewording to pose an alternate instead of just straight refutation:
[[WMG: Krall\'s drones are from a previously unknown (in the Kelvin timeline) lost civilization.]]
The usage of \"drones\" and a seemingly nanotech weapon of mass destruction may superficially look like \"Borg\", but the drones do not resemble the mottled cybernetic zombie look that has defined the look of the Borg \"species\" as it were. They are also all uniform and more responsive to surroundings. The ship design is completely alien, even compared to the \"monstrous geometric primitives covered in greeblies\" design paradigm that the Borg use, being instead a massive swarm of small ships. The nanotech weapon also destroys instead of assimilating, and has a name; \"Abronath\", instead of an index number. Borg Drones would have attempted to assimilate the stranded Kelvin crew, but these drones instead were left in an idle state long enough to be repurposed by Krall. The ruins are also not Borg-like, but more along the lines of \"ancient lost civilization\". Possibilities include the Tkon, or Iconians, or possibly an entirely new lost civilization created for the Kelvinverse.
[[/end WMG]]
\"Borg\" is not the \"only clear explanation\". Not by a long shot. And there are more clearer ones that fit the facts we know about the Borg. All I see similar are usage of \"drone\" (and not even decentralized as they fell pathetically to *VHF Radio whitenoise* of all things) and seeming nanotech. They aren\'t even in the right region of space to be \"origin borg\", being halfway across the galaxy from the modern Borg\'s romping grounds. It\'s a case of square drone, round regen alcove.
\"Only clear explanation\" is the crux of what I object to, and why I posted a refutation. It asserts that \"That\'s it, that\'s how it is\". I emphatically showed otherwise with contradictory facts instead of deleting it, because the original WMG was not mine... and then I had my refutation deleted as \"natter\" instead of refuted in kind. Saying \"Only clear explanation\" is in contradiction to the very spirit of WMG, which is guessing. Saying \"Only clear explanation\" asserts the spurious claim that that\'s the established fact. I probably wouldn\'t have cared if it weren\'t for this assertion.
I ask again: Why are refutations \"natter\" but support and expansion upon a WMG not?
Changed line(s) 1 from:
n
Well okay then, I guess I'll be returning the refutation to the original WMG. Because the only person I have EVER seen say that
to:
Well okay then, I guess I\'ll be returning the refutation to the original WMG. Because the only person I have EVER seen say that \"refutation of any kind is natter\" is YOU. Why is listing further support or elaboration not considered natter? That mod is saying that only making another WMG entry in direct contradicion is against the rules.
EDIT: Here\'s a rewording to pose an alternate instead of just straight refutation:
[[WMG: Krall\'s drones are from a previously unknown (in the Kelvin timeline) lost civilization.]]
The usage of \"drones\" and a seemingly nanotech weapon of mass destruction may superficially look like \"Borg\", but the drones do not resemble the mottled cybernetic zombie look that has defined the look of the Borg \"species\" as it were. They are also all uniform and more responsive to surroundings. The ship design is completely alien, even compared to the \"monstrous geometric primitives covered in greeblies\" design paradigm that the Borg use, being instead a massive swarm of small ships. The nanotech weapon also destroys instead of assimilating, and has a name; \"Abronath\", instead of an index number. Borg Drones would have attempted to assimilate the stranded Kelvin crew, but these drones instead were left in an idle state long enough to be repurposed by Krall. The ruins are also not Borg-like, but more along the lines of \"ancient lost civilization\". Possibilities include the Tkon, or Iconians, or possibly an entirely new lost civilization created for the Kelvinverse.
[[/end WMG]]
\"Borg\" is not the \"only clear explanation\". Not by a long shot. And there are more clearer ones that fit the facts we know about the Borg. All I see similar are usage of \"drone\" (and not even decentralized as they fell pathetically to *VHF Radio whitenoise* of all things) and seeming nanotech. They aren\'t even in the right region of space to be \"origin borg\", being halfway across the galaxy from the modern Borg\'s romping grounds. It\'s a case of square drone, round regen alcove.
\"Only clear explanation\" is the crux of what I object to, and why I posted a refutation. It asserts that \"That\'s it, that\'s how it is\". I emphatically showed otherwise with contradictory facts instead of deleting it, because the original WMG was not mine... and then I had my refutation deleted as \"natter\" instead of refuted in kind. Saying \"Only clear explanation\" is in contradiction to the very spirit of WMG, which is guessing. Saying \"Only clear explanation\" asserts the spurious claim that that\'s the established fact. I probably wouldn\'t have cared if it weren\'t for this assertion.
EDIT: Here\'s a rewording to pose an alternate instead of just straight refutation:
[[WMG: Krall\'s drones are from a previously unknown (in the Kelvin timeline) lost civilization.]]
The usage of \"drones\" and a seemingly nanotech weapon of mass destruction may superficially look like \"Borg\", but the drones do not resemble the mottled cybernetic zombie look that has defined the look of the Borg \"species\" as it were. They are also all uniform and more responsive to surroundings. The ship design is completely alien, even compared to the \"monstrous geometric primitives covered in greeblies\" design paradigm that the Borg use, being instead a massive swarm of small ships. The nanotech weapon also destroys instead of assimilating, and has a name; \"Abronath\", instead of an index number. Borg Drones would have attempted to assimilate the stranded Kelvin crew, but these drones instead were left in an idle state long enough to be repurposed by Krall. The ruins are also not Borg-like, but more along the lines of \"ancient lost civilization\". Possibilities include the Tkon, or Iconians, or possibly an entirely new lost civilization created for the Kelvinverse.
[[/end WMG]]
\"Borg\" is not the \"only clear explanation\". Not by a long shot. And there are more clearer ones that fit the facts we know about the Borg. All I see similar are usage of \"drone\" (and not even decentralized as they fell pathetically to *VHF Radio whitenoise* of all things) and seeming nanotech. They aren\'t even in the right region of space to be \"origin borg\", being halfway across the galaxy from the modern Borg\'s romping grounds. It\'s a case of square drone, round regen alcove.
\"Only clear explanation\" is the crux of what I object to, and why I posted a refutation. It asserts that \"That\'s it, that\'s how it is\". I emphatically showed otherwise with contradictory facts instead of deleting it, because the original WMG was not mine... and then I had my refutation deleted as \"natter\" instead of refuted in kind. Saying \"Only clear explanation\" is in contradiction to the very spirit of WMG, which is guessing. Saying \"Only clear explanation\" asserts the spurious claim that that\'s the established fact. I probably wouldn\'t have cared if it weren\'t for this assertion.
Changed line(s) 1 from:
n
Well okay then, I guess I'll be returning the refutation to the original WMG. Because the only person I have EVER seen say that
to:
Well okay then, I guess I\'ll be returning the refutation to the original WMG. Because the only person I have EVER seen say that \"refutation of any kind is natter\" is YOU. Why is listing further support or elaboration not considered natter? That mod is saying that only making another WMG entry in direct contradicion is against the rules.
EDIT: Here\'s a rewording to pose an alternate instead of just straight refutation:
[[WMG: Krall\'s drones are from a previously unknown (in the Kelvin timeline) lost civilization.]]
The usage of \"drones\" and a seemingly nanotech weapon of mass destruction may superficially look like \"Borg\", but the drones do not resemble the mottled cybernetic zombie look that has defined the look of the Borg \"species\" as it were. They are also all uniform and more responsive to surroundings. The ship design is completely alien, even compared to the \"monstrous geometric primitives covered in greeblies\" design paradigm that the Borg use, being instead a massive swarm of small ships. The nanotech weapon also destroys instead of assimilating, and has a name; \"Abronath\", instead of an index number. Borg Drones would have attempted to assimilate the stranded Kelvin crew, but these drones instead were left in an idle state long enough to be repurposed by Krall. The ruins are also not Borg-like, but more along the lines of \"ancient lost civilization\". Possibilities include the Tkon, or Iconians, or possibly an entirely new lost civilization created for the Kelvinverse.
[[/end WMG]]
\"Borg\" is not the \"only clear explanation\". Not by a long shot. And there are more clearer ones that fit the facts we know about the Borg. All I see similar are usage of \"drone\" (and not even decentralized as they fell pathetically to *VHF Radio whitenoise* of all things) and seeming nanotech. They aren\'t even in the right region of space to be \"origin borg\", being halfway across the galaxy from the modern Borg\'s romping grounds. It\'s a case of square drone, round regen alcove.
EDIT: Here\'s a rewording to pose an alternate instead of just straight refutation:
[[WMG: Krall\'s drones are from a previously unknown (in the Kelvin timeline) lost civilization.]]
The usage of \"drones\" and a seemingly nanotech weapon of mass destruction may superficially look like \"Borg\", but the drones do not resemble the mottled cybernetic zombie look that has defined the look of the Borg \"species\" as it were. They are also all uniform and more responsive to surroundings. The ship design is completely alien, even compared to the \"monstrous geometric primitives covered in greeblies\" design paradigm that the Borg use, being instead a massive swarm of small ships. The nanotech weapon also destroys instead of assimilating, and has a name; \"Abronath\", instead of an index number. Borg Drones would have attempted to assimilate the stranded Kelvin crew, but these drones instead were left in an idle state long enough to be repurposed by Krall. The ruins are also not Borg-like, but more along the lines of \"ancient lost civilization\". Possibilities include the Tkon, or Iconians, or possibly an entirely new lost civilization created for the Kelvinverse.
[[/end WMG]]
\"Borg\" is not the \"only clear explanation\". Not by a long shot. And there are more clearer ones that fit the facts we know about the Borg. All I see similar are usage of \"drone\" (and not even decentralized as they fell pathetically to *VHF Radio whitenoise* of all things) and seeming nanotech. They aren\'t even in the right region of space to be \"origin borg\", being halfway across the galaxy from the modern Borg\'s romping grounds. It\'s a case of square drone, round regen alcove.
Changed line(s) 1 from:
n
Well okay then, I guess I'll be returning the refutation to the original WMG. Because the only person I have EVER seen say that
to:
Well okay then, I guess I\'ll be returning the refutation to the original WMG. Because the only person I have EVER seen say that \"refutation of any kind is natter\" is YOU. Why is listing further support or elaboration not considered natter? That mod is saying that only making another WMG entry in direct contradicion is against the rules.
EDIT: Here\'s a rewording to pose an alternate instead of just straight refutation:
[[WMG: Krall\'s drones are from a previously unknown (in the Kelvin timeline) lost civilization.]]
The usage of \"drones\" and a seemingly nanotech weapon of mass destruction may superficially look like \"Borg\", but the drones do not resemble the mottled cybernetic zombie look that has defined the look of the Borg \"species\" as it were. They are also all uniform and more responsive to surroundings. The ship design is completely alien, even compared to the \"monstrous geometric primitives covered in greeblies\" design paradigm that the Borg use, being instead a massive swarm of small ships. The nanotech weapon also destroys instead of assimilating, and has a name; \"Abronath\", instead of an index number. Borg Drones would have attempted to assimilate the stranded Kelvin crew, but these drones instead were left in an idle state long enough to be repurposed by Krall. The ruins are also not Borg-like, but more along the lines of \"ancient lost civilization\". Possibilities include the Tkon, or Iconians, or possibly an entirely new lost civilization created for the Kelvinverse.
[[/end WMG]]
\"Borg\" is not the \"only clear explanation\". Not by a long shot. And there are more clearer ones that fit the facts we know about the Borg. It\'s a case of square drone, round regen alcove. All I see similar are usage of \"drone\" (and not even decentralized as they fell pathetically to *VHF Radio whitenoise* of all things) and seeming nanotech.
EDIT: Here\'s a rewording to pose an alternate instead of just straight refutation:
[[WMG: Krall\'s drones are from a previously unknown (in the Kelvin timeline) lost civilization.]]
The usage of \"drones\" and a seemingly nanotech weapon of mass destruction may superficially look like \"Borg\", but the drones do not resemble the mottled cybernetic zombie look that has defined the look of the Borg \"species\" as it were. They are also all uniform and more responsive to surroundings. The ship design is completely alien, even compared to the \"monstrous geometric primitives covered in greeblies\" design paradigm that the Borg use, being instead a massive swarm of small ships. The nanotech weapon also destroys instead of assimilating, and has a name; \"Abronath\", instead of an index number. Borg Drones would have attempted to assimilate the stranded Kelvin crew, but these drones instead were left in an idle state long enough to be repurposed by Krall. The ruins are also not Borg-like, but more along the lines of \"ancient lost civilization\". Possibilities include the Tkon, or Iconians, or possibly an entirely new lost civilization created for the Kelvinverse.
[[/end WMG]]
\"Borg\" is not the \"only clear explanation\". Not by a long shot. And there are more clearer ones that fit the facts we know about the Borg. It\'s a case of square drone, round regen alcove. All I see similar are usage of \"drone\" (and not even decentralized as they fell pathetically to *VHF Radio whitenoise* of all things) and seeming nanotech.
Changed line(s) 1 from:
n
Well okay then, I guess I'll be returning the refutation to the original WMG. Because the only person I have EVER seen say that
to:
Well okay then, I guess I\'ll be returning the refutation to the original WMG. Because the only person I have EVER seen say that \"refutation of any kind is natter\" is YOU. Why is listing further support or elaboration not considered natter? That mod is saying that only making another WMG entry in direct contradicion is against the rules.
EDIT: Here\'s a rewording to pose an alternate instead of just straight refutation:
[[WMG: Krall\'s drones are from a previously unknown (in the Kelvin timeline) lost civilization.]]
The usage of \"drones\" and a seemingly nanotech weapon of mass destruction may superficially look like \"Borg\", but the drones do not resemble the mottled cybernetic zombie look that has defined the look of the Borg \"species\" as it were. They are also all uniform and more responsive to surroundings. The ship design is completely alien, even compared to the \"monstrous geometric primitives covered in greeblies\" design paradigm that the Borg use, being instead a massive swarm of small ships. The nanotech weapon also destroys instead of assimilating, and has a name; \"Abronath\", instead of an index number. Borg Drones would have attempted to assimilate the stranded Kelvin crew, but these drones instead were left in an idle state long enough to be repurposed by Krall. The ruins are also not Borg-like, but more along the lines of \"ancient lost civilization\". Possibilities include the Tkon, or Iconians, or possibly an entirely new lost civilization created for the Kelvinverse.
[[/end WMG]]
\"Borg\" is not the \"only clear explanation\". Not by a long shot. And there are more clearer ones that fit the facts we know about the Borg. It\'s a case of square drone, round regen alcove. All I see similar are usage of \"drone\" (and not even decentralized as they fell pathetically to *VHF Radio* whitenoise of all things) and seeming nanotech.
EDIT: Here\'s a rewording to pose an alternate instead of just straight refutation:
[[WMG: Krall\'s drones are from a previously unknown (in the Kelvin timeline) lost civilization.]]
The usage of \"drones\" and a seemingly nanotech weapon of mass destruction may superficially look like \"Borg\", but the drones do not resemble the mottled cybernetic zombie look that has defined the look of the Borg \"species\" as it were. They are also all uniform and more responsive to surroundings. The ship design is completely alien, even compared to the \"monstrous geometric primitives covered in greeblies\" design paradigm that the Borg use, being instead a massive swarm of small ships. The nanotech weapon also destroys instead of assimilating, and has a name; \"Abronath\", instead of an index number. Borg Drones would have attempted to assimilate the stranded Kelvin crew, but these drones instead were left in an idle state long enough to be repurposed by Krall. The ruins are also not Borg-like, but more along the lines of \"ancient lost civilization\". Possibilities include the Tkon, or Iconians, or possibly an entirely new lost civilization created for the Kelvinverse.
[[/end WMG]]
\"Borg\" is not the \"only clear explanation\". Not by a long shot. And there are more clearer ones that fit the facts we know about the Borg. It\'s a case of square drone, round regen alcove. All I see similar are usage of \"drone\" (and not even decentralized as they fell pathetically to *VHF Radio* whitenoise of all things) and seeming nanotech.
Changed line(s) 1 from:
n
Well okay then, I guess I'll be returning the refutation to the original WMG. Because the only person I have EVER seen say that
to:
Well okay then, I guess I\'ll be returning the refutation to the original WMG. Because the only person I have EVER seen say that \"refutation of any kind is natter\" is YOU. Why is listing further support or elaboration not considered natter? That mod is saying that only making another WMG entry in direct contradicion is against the rules.
EDIT: Here\'s a rewording to pose an alternate instead of just straight refutation:
[[WMG: Krall\'s drones are from a previously unknown (in the Kelvin timeline) lost civilization.]]
The usage of \"drones\" and a seemingly nanotech weapon of mass destruction may superficially look like \"Borg\", but the drones do not resemble the mottled cybernetic zombie look that has defined the look of the Borg \"species\" as it were. They are also all uniform and more responsive to surroundings. The ship design is completely alien, even compared to the \"monstrous geometric primitives covered in greeblies\" design paradigm that the Borg use, being instead a massive swarm of small ships. The nanotech weapon also destroys instead of assimilating, and has a name; \"Abronath\", instead of an index number. Borg Drones would have attempted to assimilate the stranded Kelvin crew, but these drones instead were left in an idle state long enough to be repurposed by Krall. The ruins are also not Borg-like, but more along the lines of \"ancient lost civilization\". Possibilities include the Tkon, or Iconians, or possibly an entirely new lost civilization created for the Kelvinverse.
[[/end WMG]]
\"Borg\" is not the \"only clear explanation\". Not by a long shot. And there are more clearer ones that fit the facts we know about the Borg. It\'s a case of square drone, round regen alcove.
EDIT: Here\'s a rewording to pose an alternate instead of just straight refutation:
[[WMG: Krall\'s drones are from a previously unknown (in the Kelvin timeline) lost civilization.]]
The usage of \"drones\" and a seemingly nanotech weapon of mass destruction may superficially look like \"Borg\", but the drones do not resemble the mottled cybernetic zombie look that has defined the look of the Borg \"species\" as it were. They are also all uniform and more responsive to surroundings. The ship design is completely alien, even compared to the \"monstrous geometric primitives covered in greeblies\" design paradigm that the Borg use, being instead a massive swarm of small ships. The nanotech weapon also destroys instead of assimilating, and has a name; \"Abronath\", instead of an index number. Borg Drones would have attempted to assimilate the stranded Kelvin crew, but these drones instead were left in an idle state long enough to be repurposed by Krall. The ruins are also not Borg-like, but more along the lines of \"ancient lost civilization\". Possibilities include the Tkon, or Iconians, or possibly an entirely new lost civilization created for the Kelvinverse.
[[/end WMG]]
\"Borg\" is not the \"only clear explanation\". Not by a long shot. And there are more clearer ones that fit the facts we know about the Borg. It\'s a case of square drone, round regen alcove.
Changed line(s) 1 from:
n
Well okay then, I guess I'll be returning the refutation to the original WMG. Because the only person I have EVER seen say that
to:
Well okay then, I guess I\'ll be returning the refutation to the original WMG. Because the only person I have EVER seen say that \"refutation of any kind is natter\" is YOU. Why is listing further support or elaboration not considered natter? That mod is saying that only making another WMG entry in direct contradicion is against the rules.
EDIT: Here\'s a rewording to pose an alternate instead of just straight refutation:
[[WMG: Krall\'s drones are from a previously unknown (in the Kelvin timeline) lost civilization.]]
The usage of \"drones\" and a seemingly nanotech weapon of mass destruction may superficially look like \"Borg\", but the drones do not resemble the mottled cybernetic zombie look that has defined the look of the Borg \"species\" as it were. They are also all uniform and more responsive to surroundings. The ship design is completely alien, even compared to the \"monstrous geometric primitives covered in greeblies\" design paradigm that the Borg use, being instead a massive swarm of small ships. The nanotech weapon also destroys instead of assimilating, and has a name; \"Abronath\", instead of an index number. Borg Drones would have attempted to assimilate the stranded Kelvin crew, but these drones instead were left in an idle state long enough to be repurposed by Krall. The ruins are also not Borg-like, but more along the lines of \"ancient lost civilization\". Possibilities include the Tkon, or Iconians, or possibly an entirely new lost civilization created for the Kelvinverse.
[[/end WMG]]
\"Borg\" is not the \"only clear explanation\". Not by a long shot. And there are more clearer ones that fit the facts we know about the Borg (succinctly that they\'re *not*).
EDIT: Here\'s a rewording to pose an alternate instead of just straight refutation:
[[WMG: Krall\'s drones are from a previously unknown (in the Kelvin timeline) lost civilization.]]
The usage of \"drones\" and a seemingly nanotech weapon of mass destruction may superficially look like \"Borg\", but the drones do not resemble the mottled cybernetic zombie look that has defined the look of the Borg \"species\" as it were. They are also all uniform and more responsive to surroundings. The ship design is completely alien, even compared to the \"monstrous geometric primitives covered in greeblies\" design paradigm that the Borg use, being instead a massive swarm of small ships. The nanotech weapon also destroys instead of assimilating, and has a name; \"Abronath\", instead of an index number. Borg Drones would have attempted to assimilate the stranded Kelvin crew, but these drones instead were left in an idle state long enough to be repurposed by Krall. The ruins are also not Borg-like, but more along the lines of \"ancient lost civilization\". Possibilities include the Tkon, or Iconians, or possibly an entirely new lost civilization created for the Kelvinverse.
[[/end WMG]]
\"Borg\" is not the \"only clear explanation\". Not by a long shot. And there are more clearer ones that fit the facts we know about the Borg (succinctly that they\'re *not*).
Changed line(s) 1 from:
n
Well okay then, I guess I'll be returning the refutation to the original WMG. Because the only person I have EVER seen say that
to:
Well okay then, I guess I\'ll be returning the refutation to the original WMG. Because the only person I have EVER seen say that \"refutation of any kind is natter\" is YOU. Why is listing further support or elaboration not considered natter? That mod is saying that only making another WMG entry in direct contradicion is against the rules.
EDIT: Here\'s a rewording to pose an alternate instead of just straight refutation:
[[WMG: Krall\'s drones are from a previously unknown (in the Kelvin timeline) lost civilization.]]
The usage of \"drones\" and a seemingly nanotech weapon of mass destruction may superficially look like \"Borg\", but the drones do not resemble the mottled cybernetic zombie look that has defined the look of the Borg \"species\" as it were. They are also all uniform and more responsive to surroundings. The ship design is completely alien, even compared to the \"monstrous geometric primitives covered in greeblies\" design paradigm that the Borg use, being instead a massive swarm of small ships. The nanotech weapon also destroys instead of assimilating, and has a name; \"Abronath\", instead of an index number. The ruins are also not Borg-like, but more along the lines of \"ancient lost civilization\". Possibilities include the Tkon, or Iconians, or possibly an entirely new lost civilization.
[[/end WMG]]
\"Borg\" is not the \"only clear explanation\". Not by a long shot. And there are more clearer ones that fit the facts we know about the Borg (succinctly that they\'re *not*).
EDIT: Here\'s a rewording to pose an alternate instead of just straight refutation:
[[WMG: Krall\'s drones are from a previously unknown (in the Kelvin timeline) lost civilization.]]
The usage of \"drones\" and a seemingly nanotech weapon of mass destruction may superficially look like \"Borg\", but the drones do not resemble the mottled cybernetic zombie look that has defined the look of the Borg \"species\" as it were. They are also all uniform and more responsive to surroundings. The ship design is completely alien, even compared to the \"monstrous geometric primitives covered in greeblies\" design paradigm that the Borg use, being instead a massive swarm of small ships. The nanotech weapon also destroys instead of assimilating, and has a name; \"Abronath\", instead of an index number. The ruins are also not Borg-like, but more along the lines of \"ancient lost civilization\". Possibilities include the Tkon, or Iconians, or possibly an entirely new lost civilization.
[[/end WMG]]
\"Borg\" is not the \"only clear explanation\". Not by a long shot. And there are more clearer ones that fit the facts we know about the Borg (succinctly that they\'re *not*).
Changed line(s) 1 from:
n
Well okay then, I guess I'll be returning the refutation to the original WMG. Because the only person I have EVER seen say that
to:
Well okay then, I guess I\'ll be returning the refutation to the original WMG. Because the only person I have EVER seen say that \"refutation of any kind is natter\" is YOU. Why is listing further support or elaboration not considered natter? That mod is saying that only making another WMG entry in direct contradicion is against the rules.
EDIT: Altered it to pose an alternate theory instead of just straight refutation.
It is not the \"only clear explanation\". Not by a long shot. And there are more clearer ones that fit the facts we know about the Borg (namely that they\'re *not*).
EDIT: Altered it to pose an alternate theory instead of just straight refutation.
It is not the \"only clear explanation\". Not by a long shot. And there are more clearer ones that fit the facts we know about the Borg (namely that they\'re *not*).
Changed line(s) 1 from:
n
Well okay then, I guess I'll be returning the refutation to the original WMG. Because the only person I have EVER seen say that
to:
Well okay then, I guess I\'ll be returning the refutation to the original WMG. Because the only person I have EVER seen say that \"refutation of any kind is natter\" is YOU. Why is listing further support or elaboration not considered natter? That mod is saying that only making another WMG entry in direct contradicion is against the rules.
EDIT: Altered it to pose an alternate theory instead of just straight refutation.
It is not the \"only clear explanation\". Not by a long shot. And there are more clearer ones that fit the facts we know about the Borg.
EDIT: Altered it to pose an alternate theory instead of just straight refutation.
It is not the \"only clear explanation\". Not by a long shot. And there are more clearer ones that fit the facts we know about the Borg.
Changed line(s) 1 from:
n
Well okay then, I guess I'll be returning the refutation to the original WMG. Because the only person I have EVER seen say that
to:
Well okay then, I guess I\'ll be returning the refutation to the original WMG. Because the only person I have EVER seen say that \"refutation of any kind is natter\" is YOU. Why is listing further support or elaboration not considered natter? That mod is saying that only making another WMG entry in direct contradicion is against the rules.
EDIT: Altered it to pose an alternate theory instead of just straight refutation.
EDIT: Altered it to pose an alternate theory instead of just straight refutation.
Changed line(s) 1 from:
n
Well okay then, I guess I'll be returning the refutation to the original WMG. Because the only person I have EVER seen say that
to:
Well okay then, I guess I\'ll be returning the refutation to the original WMG. Because the only person I have EVER seen say that \"refutation of any kind is natter\" is YOU. Why is listing further support or elaboration not considered natter? That mod is saying that only making another WMG entry in direct contradicion is against the rules.
Changed line(s) 1 from:
n
Well okay then, I guess I'll be returning the refutation to the original WMG. Because the only person I have EVER seen say that
to:
Well okay then, I guess I\'ll be returning the refutation to the original WMG. Because the only person I have EVER seen say that \"refutation is natter\" is YOU. Why is listing further support or elaboration not considered natter? That mod is saying that only making another WMG entry in direct contradicion is against the rules.
Changed line(s) 1 from:
n
Well okay then, I guess I'll be returning the refutation to the original WMG.
to:
Well okay then, I guess I\'ll be returning the refutation to the original WMG. Because the only person I have EVER seen say that \"refutation is natter\" is YOU. That mod is saying that only making another WMG entry in direct contradicion is against the rules.
