Honor Fan Club

Ot to hammer individuals, but...

It's always bad when people start off with those words, isn't it?

Seriously though. ... I just watched a discussion on the face book page for the honorverse fan club. It centered around the grav lance and why it was listed on ship's descriptions. A few people answered then there was the typical conversation about the weapon which shall not be named.

Putting it on frigates and destroyers, LACs, even missiles.

One poster told them that RFC has already killed this weapon as anything but a plot device for OBS. To just drop it. He got flamed and the conversation devolved back to ridiculousness.

So all that rambling done, the question is: do people not read the tech specs noted in the books? (Covering the part about puttinga grav la ce o. A missile or lac) And why do they hammer the guy who provides them inout from RFC's own words?

Fireflair wrote:Ot to hammer individuals, but...

It's always bad when people start off with those words, isn't it?

Seriously though. ... I just watched a discussion on the face book page for the honorverse fan club. It centered around the grav lance and why it was listed on ship's descriptions. A few people answered then there was the typical conversation about the weapon which shall not be named.

Putting it on frigates and destroyers, LACs, even missiles.

One poster told them that RFC has already killed this weapon as anything but a plot device for OBS. To just drop it. He got flamed and the conversation devolved back to ridiculousness.

So all that rambling done, the question is: do people not read the tech specs noted in the books? (Covering the part about puttinga grav la ce o. A missile or lac) And why do they hammer the guy who provides them inout from RFC's own words?

To answer your last question, it's because people don't like to be told they're wrong, especially when it's about an idea they came up with that makes sense, to *them* anyway. Also, the fact that *they* didn't read it directly from RFC means that they probably don't believe the guy trying to tell them the grav lance is dead in the water.

I've had my own issues very recently dealing with a person who doesn't think my BuNine stuff is legit - if David didn't write it in the books, then it's not canon.

What my experience and your story tells me is that for some people, if it doesn't come directly from the author, then it doesn't exist... or, in the case of the grav lance, since David *hasn't* specifically spelled out that it's a dead thing that will *not* be used on any ship, or any ship smaller than "x" (in the books, anyway), then it's still free to use in any way they can come up with.

Of course, there's also those who think they know more than the author...

Also, and I can't say for certain without said post as reference, but there is a proper, respectful, less condescending way to impart certain information that may be insensitive to one's ego. I use email, when possible. It is sad, but some people seem to take joy out of embarrassing. We must realize that the emotional state varies from person to person, and how one assimilates a post may/can vary greatly. Posting to share information is one thing, but general posting-one-upmanship is rude and inciting.

Maybe that's it, Max. I just don't know. It just struck me as silly. I was almost tempted to think that the guy was dealing with Skimper and Co.!

I don't get heavy into the tech details, myself. I accept the basic premises as they're laid out and agree to the plot using them without questioning the validity. After all, it's RFC's story. I just want to enjoy the story.

cthia, it's on their facebook page. But the gist of it is that one guy who starts the thread, just asks why is the grav-lance listed as a weapon. Some people answer, and the one guy points out that if it is still being included, it's either a forgotten entry or not that important. The discussion quickly devolves (as many do!) to other things. And they went off on a tangent about other grav-lance uses or possible placements. The same guy tries to correct them, and then gets flamed when he points out some basic tech points that are in the books. Things like having to have nodes to use it, the range, etc.

Maybe he could have done it better. Maybe not. I know I don't always take corrections well! Hopefully people will just move on. The thread caught my eye because of the weapon which shall not be named, then I was saddened by how it went.

Fireflair wrote:Maybe that's it, Max. I just don't know. It just struck me as silly. I was almost tempted to think that the guy was dealing with Skimper and Co.!

I don't get heavy into the tech details, myself. I accept the basic premises as they're laid out and agree to the plot using them without questioning the validity. After all, it's RFC's story. I just want to enjoy the story.

cthia, it's on their facebook page. But the gist of it is that one guy who starts the thread, just asks why is the grav-lance listed as a weapon. Some people answer, and the one guy points out that if it is still being included, it's either a forgotten entry or not that important. The discussion quickly devolves (as many do!) to other things. And they went off on a tangent about other grav-lance uses or possible placements. The same guy tries to correct them, and then gets flamed when he points out some basic tech points that are in the books. Things like having to have nodes to use it, the range, etc.

Maybe he could have done it better. Maybe not. I know I don't always take corrections well! Hopefully people will just move on. The thread caught my eye because of the weapon which shall not be named, then I was saddened by how it went.

Yah, that is part of the reason that I am not on the Facebook page any more.

Well, there is a reason that it is called TWTSNBN. Even here, where we have seen RFC's posts about it, almost every thread discussing grav lances rehashes the same old stuff, often with vehemence, and to little use. The threads are almost invariably more annoying than interesting. On a site like the Fan Club, where they don't have David's direct wisdom, it's not surprising that it gets that much worse.

Fireflair wrote:Maybe that's it, Max. I just don't know. It just struck me as silly. I was almost tempted to think that the guy was dealing with Skimper and Co.!

I don't get heavy into the tech details, myself. I accept the basic premises as they're laid out and agree to the plot using them without questioning the validity. After all, it's RFC's story. I just want to enjoy the story.

cthia, it's on their facebook page. But the gist of it is that one guy who starts the thread, just asks why is the grav-lance listed as a weapon. Some people answer, and the one guy points out that if it is still being included, it's either a forgotten entry or not that important. The discussion quickly devolves (as many do!) to other things. And they went off on a tangent about other grav-lance uses or possible placements. The same guy tries to correct them, and then gets flamed when he points out some basic tech points that are in the books. Things like having to have nodes to use it, the range, etc.

Maybe he could have done it better. Maybe not. I know I don't always take corrections well! Hopefully people will just move on. The thread caught my eye because of the weapon which shall not be named, then I was saddened by how it went.

When you say Honorverse fan club, are you talking about TRMN? Because I've checked their FB, and I couldn't find any kind of discussion regarding TWTSNBN. Maybe I just don't know my way around FB very well.

Google searching only gets me back to TRMN, no matter what search terms I use.

Could you give me a link to where this discussion is taking/has taken place?

I think this will lead to it...

https://www.facebook.com/groups/TRMN.OR ... tif_t=like

It's a post by Arasin Staubly that starts the thread, @ 1:07pm.

Fireflair wrote:I think this will lead to it...

https://www.facebook.com/groups/TRMN.OR ... tif_t=like

It's a post by Arasin Staubly that starts the thread, @ 1:07pm.

Hmmm... I read it and although there was a bit of snarkiness, I wouldn't really say the guy got flamed. It seems to me that while there were some *asking* about putting the grav lance on LACs, they pretty much accepted it when told that it isn't possible (and the reasons why).

I dunno... it doesn't seem as bad as I thought it would be, and is pretty mild compared to what goes on here. The one person had a point, though... that some people aren't aware of or have access to this forum, the Pearls, or even Baen's Bar, and so they are probably not aware of certain things.

MaxxQ wrote:

Fireflair wrote:I think this will lead to it...

https://www.facebook.com/groups/TRMN.OR ... tif_t=like

It's a post by Arasin Staubly that starts the thread, @ 1:07pm.

Hmmm... I read it and although there was a bit of snarkiness, I wouldn't really say the guy got flamed. It seems to me that while there were some *asking* about putting the grav lance on LACs, they pretty much accepted it when told that it isn't possible (and the reasons why).

I dunno... it doesn't seem as bad as I thought it would be, and is pretty mild compared to what goes on here. The one person had a point, though... that some people aren't aware of or have access to this forum, the Pearls, or even Baen's Bar, and so they are probably not aware of certain things.

I would concur with your analysis, and I've posted an explanation of the grav lance (and the reasons for the controversy) on the page.