Mr. Pizza's Hardy Boys Forum

General Hardy Boys Discussion => General Hardy Boys Discussions => Topic started by: tomswift2002 on August 06, 2008, 03:52:25 PM

Poll
Question: What is your favorite Hardy Boys Agency from the main 2
Option 1: The Network votes: 8
Option 2: American Teens Against Crime (ATAC) votes: 4
Title: Network Vs. ATAC
Post by: tomswift2002 on August 06, 2008, 03:52:25 PM
This is in response to the discussion "Calling All ATAC Fans".  I thought that I'd see which agency, out of the two agencies that the Hardy's have done a lot of work for in the books, do people like better or prefer?


For me, its the Network.
Title: Re: Network Vs. ATAC
Post by: JoeHardyRocks on August 06, 2008, 05:04:52 PM
ATAC
Title: Re: Network Vs. ATAC
Post by: NZone on August 06, 2008, 05:05:14 PM
Network. All right ATAC fans let's go. *Cracks knuckles*
Title: Re: Network Vs. ATAC
Post by: SDLagent on August 06, 2008, 05:17:30 PM
Quote from: tomswift2002 on August 06, 2008, 03:52:25 PM
This is in response to the discussion "Calling All ATAC Fans". 

If you can call it a discussion!

The Network for me! For one thing they don't take over the Hardy life, and for another while both are cheesy, The Network is the least cheesy.
Title: Re: Network Vs. ATAC
Post by: Olivia on August 06, 2008, 05:34:15 PM
The Network!

New Emanciptated Technicians Working On Real Kases. (The last word is suppose to be "cases" if you didn't catch on - hardy ha-ha).

;)

I don't know if that even makes sense.
Title: Re: Network Vs. ATAC
Post by: Sam Spade on August 06, 2008, 08:40:54 PM
I went with The Network.
I haven't read that many books with them in it, but they HAVE to be better then ATAC!
Title: Re: Network Vs. ATAC
Post by: mystery chick 901 on August 06, 2008, 08:46:18 PM
Quote from: negative_zone on August 06, 2008, 05:05:14 PM
Network. All right ATAC fans let's go. *Cracks knuckles*

LOL ;D

Anyways, I'm going with the Network (for obvious reasons) :)
Title: Re: Network Vs. ATAC
Post by: Sam Spade on August 06, 2008, 08:54:34 PM
Quote from: negative_zone on August 06, 2008, 05:05:14 PM
Network. All right ATAC fans let's go. *Cracks knuckles*

LOL! ;D ;D ;D


Careful N_zone, or SkyWarp might kick you off the site! ;D
Title: Re: Network Vs. ATAC
Post by: Olivia on August 07, 2008, 09:45:39 PM
I don't know this for sure (so correct me if I'm wrong) but it seems the Network is more far-reaching, both age-wise and globally.

Sure, ATAC is sometimes sent out of the country, but ultimately it seems to be restricted to young people for field work, and cases related to the U.S.

Yes, I know that's the whole point - young people + U.S. cases, but still!
Title: Re: Network Vs. ATAC
Post by: tomswift2002 on August 08, 2008, 10:17:31 AM
Even in the recent Nancy Drew and Hardy Boys Super Mystery Danger Overseas the Hardy's were wondering why ATAC was sending them overseas when ATAC is, apparently, an American organization only and only has jurisdiction in the US.
Title: Re: Network Vs. ATAC
Post by: Q on August 08, 2008, 10:19:19 AM
Why do you think it is an American organization, Tom?
Title: Re: Network Vs. ATAC
Post by: tomswift2002 on August 08, 2008, 10:36:46 AM
American Teens Against Crime

Plus, if you look at the chapter where Frank and Joe receive their mission, the author details ATAC a little bit.
Title: Re: Network Vs. ATAC
Post by: NZone on August 08, 2008, 10:37:43 AM
It would make sense, but if it is just a private agency, it wouldn't really have "jurisdiction."
Title: Re: Network Vs. ATAC
Post by: tomswift2002 on August 08, 2008, 10:55:07 AM
Well, considering that the books have mentioned that the FBI have called on ATAC a few times and I believe one book mentions that ATAC is an official government agency, just the cloak and dagger type, I would say that ATAC wasn't a private agency.
Title: Re: Network Vs. ATAC
Post by: NZone on August 08, 2008, 10:58:42 AM
If its cloak and dagger, (black ops?), I don't believe it would have an official jurisdiction either.
Title: Re: Network Vs. ATAC
Post by: Jokerette on August 08, 2008, 11:28:41 AM
so the UB's are only about the Hardys andATAC? >:( Does it have a big sign that says "Stoot Me Down!" on it?! >:(





P.S i am so dissapointed with you!*spanks* ;D
Title: Re: Network Vs. ATAC
Post by: SDLagent on August 08, 2008, 12:36:18 PM
It would be fine if that's how the Hardys always were, but what do you expect long-time Hardy fans to do, when the series their a fan of is almost unrecognizable?
Title: Re: Network Vs. ATAC
Post by: Olivia on August 08, 2008, 11:28:05 PM
Okay, I'll try to give some more insight into why I'm not too keen on ATAC (in addition to what's already been said). If you think about it, the HB:UB series is sort of an insult to the Hardys themselves. They are caricatures of who they used to be (especially in personality).

The Hardys are suppose to be (generally) average people who just happen to have some extraordinary detecting abilities and circumstances to go on such ventures. The HB:UB series seems to do the opposite: they are "superagents" on contrived cases.

I understand how and why some people really like ATAC (I really do), but I think James Bond, Alex Rider, and even the TV series Alias does the agency thing a lot better. It seems forced for the Hardys - it's just not who they are.

We like what we like though. For example, I like the new James Bond franchise, but many long-time fans hate it. So fair is fair, I guess. Although I could argue that the new franchise is better than the previous (except for some of the classics). But whatever.
Title: Re: Network Vs. ATAC
Post by: Jokerette on August 09, 2008, 04:09:47 AM
ha, ha! i sooo :D don't believe u, olivia! anyone who understands would dump the Network ASAP! >:(





no hard feeling, olivia?
Title: Re: Network Vs. ATAC
Post by: Sam Spade on August 09, 2008, 04:11:03 AM
I'm considering starting another poll, called: "Who thinks the world will explode before someone wins this debate?" ;D
Title: Re: Network Vs. ATAC
Post by: Q on August 09, 2008, 05:46:09 AM
I was thinking the same thing earlier, Sam Spade!! Networkfans will never convince ATACfans, and ATACfans will never convince Networkfans. It a neverending battle!!
Title: Re: Network Vs. ATAC
Post by: tomswift2002 on August 09, 2008, 06:52:43 AM
Sometimes I wonder if ATAC even has one single leader or if its just run by multiple different people who know that Fenton Hardy founded the organization, but really have no clue as to how cases are suppose to be solved.  I can't believe that Fenton Hardy would create an organization as lame as ATAC.


Go NETWORK!
Title: Re: Network Vs. ATAC
Post by: mystery chick 901 on August 09, 2008, 11:06:55 AM
Welcome to World War 3 everyone! ;)
Title: Re: Network Vs. ATAC
Post by: SDLagent on August 09, 2008, 01:01:01 PM
Go Network!
Title: Re: Network Vs. ATAC
Post by: Olivia on August 09, 2008, 04:44:05 PM
Quote from: Firefox on August 09, 2008, 04:09:47 AM
ha, ha! i sooo :D don't believe u, olivia! anyone who understands would dump the Network ASAP! >:(





no hard feeling, olivia?

Uh, what do you mean you don't believe me? There's evidence in the hundreds of books out there. I understand people can look at them a bit differently, but until you can prove otherwise (or even give some kind of theory) you don't really have an argument.

So you don't believe that the Hardys are special agents for ATAC? Then what do you think ATAC is? ::)

And you "understand" the Network? So I guess everyone for the Network on this board is out of their minds :o

No hard feelings because I can't take you seriously ;) (Kidding).
Title: Re: Network Vs. ATAC
Post by: NZone on August 09, 2008, 06:15:12 PM
One thing I have noticed, in the Network V. ATAC battleground, we almost never talk about the Network. Its either people bashing ATAC or people going "ATAC Rules"
Title: Re: Network Vs. ATAC
Post by: Sam Spade on August 09, 2008, 08:51:48 PM
Quote from: mystery chick 901 on August 09, 2008, 11:06:55 AM
Welcome to World War 3 everyone! ;)

LOL! ;D
Title: Re: Network Vs. ATAC
Post by: Olivia on August 17, 2008, 10:09:39 PM
Okay, ATAC fans - I am truly interested and curious to know what you like about ATAC. I promise I won't bite! (Anyways, we have a back-and-forth thing going in the other thread, and I've already stated my perspective).

So do you actually like the agency? Or you just like the HB:UB series overall? :)
Title: Re: Network Vs. ATAC
Post by: SDLagent on August 18, 2008, 11:04:28 AM
Well for me I don't mind ATAC but don't like the UB series, so that kind of warps my take on ATAC, so it could be the same for people who like the UB but don't really like ATAC. Maybe?
Title: Re: Network Vs. ATAC
Post by: Olivia on August 18, 2008, 11:14:49 AM
Something like that has crossed my mind too. It seems more like a Casefiles vs. HB:UB argument sometimes. It can be a little difficult to separate the agencies from the series since they are so imbedded in them. Well, the Network isn't as imbedded, but you know what I mean.
Title: Re: Network Vs. ATAC
Post by: SDLagent on August 18, 2008, 11:19:43 AM
Quote from: oliviatocali on August 18, 2008, 11:14:49 AM
Something like that has crossed my mind too. It seems more like a Casefiles vs. HB:UB argument sometimes.

If you remember are discussions were UB vs Casefiles series, but we seem to have drifted a bit.

[quote author=oliviatocali link=topic=892.msg11488#msg11488 date=It can be a little difficult to separate the agencies from the series since they are so imbedded in them. Well, the Network isn't as imbedded, but you know what I mean.
[/quote]
Actually the Network is just as embedded as ATAC, since ATAC actually appears in more series the same amount of series, the Network does
Title: Re: Network Vs. ATAC
Post by: Olivia on August 18, 2008, 11:22:53 AM
Well, what I mean is that ATAC seems more imbedded because the series is "Undercover Brothers" and everything revolves around the cases they give them, I guess.
Title: Re: Network Vs. ATAC
Post by: 003Robin457 on August 18, 2008, 12:55:02 PM
Odd this poll matches Americans Vs Caniadins. 8 americans and 8 network fans & 4 caniadins and 4 ATAC fans.
Title: Re: Network Vs. ATAC
Post by: Bigfootman on September 20, 2008, 07:08:26 AM
Quote from: Arcticfox on August 09, 2008, 04:09:47 AM
anyone who understands would dump the ATAC ASAP! >:(





no hard feeling, olivia?
Title: Re: Network Vs. ATAC
Post by: Jokerette on September 20, 2008, 08:37:09 AM
ATAC 4-EVER!!!
Title: Re: Network Vs. ATAC
Post by: Q on September 20, 2008, 09:51:24 AM
So tell me again, what is wrong with ATAC?
Title: Re: Network Vs. ATAC
Post by: JoeHardyRocks on September 20, 2008, 08:35:41 PM
Nothing! ;D
Title: Re: Network Vs. ATAC
Post by: tomswift2002 on September 21, 2008, 07:46:45 AM
Quote from: Arctic Dragon on September 20, 2008, 08:37:09 AM
ATAC 4-NEVER!!!
Title: Re: Network Vs. ATAC
Post by: Bigfootman on September 25, 2008, 06:14:47 PM
Quote from: JoeHardyRocks on September 20, 2008, 08:35:41 PM
Everything is wrong with the UBs!  >:(
Title: Re: Network Vs. ATAC
Post by: 003Robin457 on September 27, 2008, 08:28:30 AM
Quote from: Bigfootman on September 25, 2008, 06:14:47 PM
I love fake quotes!!!!

Quote from: tomswift2002 on September 21, 2008, 07:46:45 AM
ATAC is rad!!!!!!!!!!!! :P
Title: Re: Network Vs. ATAC
Post by: JoeHardyRocks on September 27, 2008, 09:48:44 PM
Um, you guys? What if we all get kicked off the forum for fake-quoting too much?!?!
Title: Re: Network Vs. ATAC
Post by: SDLagent on September 28, 2008, 01:15:04 AM
Well, this may be the only thread you don't get kicked off for doing it (note the thread name).
Title: Re: Network Vs. ATAC
Post by: JoeHardyRocks on September 28, 2008, 07:34:20 PM
So we can fake-quote all we want here? ;D
Title: Re: Network Vs. ATAC
Post by: SDLagent on September 29, 2008, 12:51:10 AM
Yes, sir.
Title: Re: Network Vs. ATAC
Post by: JoeHardyRocks on September 29, 2008, 08:22:20 PM
Ma'am.
Title: Re: Network Vs. ATAC
Post by: Olivia on September 29, 2008, 09:46:14 PM
Quote from: SDLagent on September 29, 2008, 12:51:10 AM
Yes, princess.

Just had to do it - it's more aimed at JoeHardyRocks though ;) :)

You know, I thought this was my first fake-quote but actually, it's my second. Edward Stratemeyer, anyone?
Title: Re: Network Vs. ATAC
Post by: SDLagent on September 29, 2008, 11:13:35 PM
Yes, ma'am.
Title: Re: Network Vs. ATAC
Post by: Sam Spade on September 30, 2008, 04:56:25 AM
Quote from: SDLagent on September 29, 2008, 11:13:35 PM
Yes, ma'am.

LOL!

Quote from: Iola.Alive on September 29, 2008, 09:46:14 PM
it's my second. Edward Stratemeyer, anyone?

Yeah, the Edward Stratemeyer quote was so funny, I told my brother about it! :D
Title: Re: Network Vs. ATAC
Post by: JoeHardyRocks on September 30, 2008, 08:17:34 PM
Quote from: SDLagent on September 29, 2008, 11:13:35 PM
Yes, ma'am.

Thanks ma'am. I mean sir. ;D
Title: Re: Network Vs. ATAC
Post by: Olivia on September 30, 2008, 10:38:23 PM
Quote from: Sam Spade on September 30, 2008, 04:56:25 AM
LOL!

Yeah, the Edward Stratemeyer quote was so funny, I told my brother about it! :D

We all have our moments.
Title: Re: Network Vs. ATAC
Post by: bozonessinc on October 01, 2008, 02:39:16 PM
Is this a war, Network vs. Atac, I side with ATAC as best, or did you all not know that yet?
Title: Re: Network Vs. ATAC
Post by: 003Robin457 on October 09, 2008, 06:11:14 PM
Go ATAC!!!! ;D Beware more join us daily!!!! ;D
Title: Re: Network Vs. ATAC
Post by: NZone on October 10, 2008, 05:57:44 PM
Uh Bones? That didn't rhyme. Maybe something like I side with ATAC we are so smart/which is why our spelling never is right/we have as much knowledge as there are toys in Wal-Mart/We think ATAC is pretty tight.

Anybody think I have a future as a rapper? *crickets* All right then.
Title: Re: Network Vs. ATAC
Post by: bozonessinc on October 10, 2008, 07:40:03 PM
You a career, they could call it annoying me..... With your calling me bones, which I shall remind you does not derive from anything. Also, I wanna say that the whole rhyming was whack. I was not trying to rhyme my statement. It was only in italics because I wanted to stress the point....

We need a site called like the ATAC movement to prove some of our allegience to the UB's and ATAC, it would be awesome, of course we would need a way to keep all hates off of the site. And anyone who wants to call me bones. Anyone else back this idea. I am a website creator, but as I do not specialize in forums, like this great one here, does anyone other ATAC fan specialize in forums who could make one.....

Once again, I want to apoligize to other Forum users for my constant madness at Negative Zone, just sometimes he likes to make me mad. I wonder if he enjoys it, because I sure don't...

Thank you all of you ATAC fans, for your support on this site. Sometimes its hard to fight back against those casefiles folk, but you all are doing a good job... And I am sure that even before I joined the fight was going really good. This war between me and Negative Zone should stop soon and I will be able to get back to concentrate on things that matter.

Those things are defending the UB's to Network fans, and to discuss books with fellow ATAC fans, I really enjoy this forum and all the people on it, and I love to defend the UB's so let us keep this war going, until we have Network fans admit that we have some good  points for the side of ATAC, cause that is one of the only things that I wanna here.

Bozonessinc
Title: Re: Network Vs. ATAC
Post by: SDLagent on October 10, 2008, 10:03:13 PM
ROTFLOL! You take this to seriously!

That made NO sense. For one thing I wouldn't consider ATAC vs. Network "things that matter".

Title: Re: Network Vs. ATAC
Post by: Jokerette on October 11, 2008, 04:42:30 AM
i do!
Title: Re: Network Vs. ATAC
Post by: Bigfootman on October 11, 2008, 09:47:05 AM
ATAC fans if you want Network fans to take you surously ,STOP useing the same agruments. Even I, who is gulty of doing that once or twice STOPS after it has been rebutted, or I find some to prove my argument is right.

I'll take ATAC fans suriously if these read these two books:
-Casefile #10
-Casefile #25

And of course the OP trilogy.

Title: Re: Network Vs. ATAC
Post by: Olivia on October 11, 2008, 03:31:57 PM
This board makes me laugh more and more every day.

Anyways, my $0.02 is that it's hard to take the UBs/ATAC fans seriously because, as Bigfootman said, it's the same arguments and repeating your love for it over and over just hammers into the point that the series is immature and lacking. It's like showing evidence in a court of law, but you just say "He's innocent! He's innocent!"

And there's are a lot of holes in the repeated statements. Honestly, if you just said "Okay, I did notice ________ but I still like the books regardless. I like their gadgets." Just a hypothetical example.

It won't make the UBs look worse, it could actually help you case. It'll give some sense of maturity that you acknowledged one of our points.

For an (exaggerated) example:

Casefiles people: There's no continuity! The mission discs are stupid!

UBs people: Yeah, but I rather just focus on their specific missions instead of keeping track of other things. And I like the mission discs because it's a cool, modern feature that emphasizes their undercover status.

***

Make sense? If not, then I know you're too far gone. Notice I didn't say do you agree, I just said does this make sense and do you understand.

I'm just speaking for the general situation.
Title: Re: Network Vs. ATAC
Post by: Q on October 11, 2008, 03:41:19 PM
If you are neutral,Iola, how come I never see you point out anything about the networkers?
Title: Re: Network Vs. ATAC
Post by: Olivia on October 11, 2008, 03:43:35 PM
I didn't say I was neutral. Sometimes I am, but on this board you almost have to pick sides or lean towards one side. And I find the Casefiles/Network to have a stronger case.

Most of the time when Networkers do say something insulting, it always has strong reason behind it or in other cases, it's because the ATAC side provokes it. And actually, it's not insulting all the time. A lot is fact.

And sorrrrrrry, I can't control people. I was just talking about the general situation, which everything stems from.

Plus you must have missed some of my posts, because I did say a few times that some things went too far, especially with the insults without anything backing it up. But I already explained all of that.
Title: Re: Network Vs. ATAC
Post by: Q on October 11, 2008, 04:06:23 PM
I like both ATAC and the Network, but I don't care much for the networkers so I sometimes support the ATACers.
Quote from: Iola.Alive on March 17, 2005, 07:58:31 PM
And I find the Casefiles/Network to have a stronger case.

Ha. Their case is looking at ATAC and saying the reasons why they think the network is better. All their arguments stem from ATAC's faults. They don't like the network, they just don't like ATAC.
Title: Re: Network Vs. ATAC
Post by: SDLagent on October 11, 2008, 04:11:47 PM
Your right, I don't like the Network but I like ATAC even less. And we do have a strong case.
Title: Re: Network Vs. ATAC
Post by: Olivia on October 11, 2008, 04:13:22 PM
So what criteria would you use? And there's nothing wrong with doing that, by the way. It's called an argument, and in order to have a strong one you have to refute the other side ::)

Plus it's about why the Casefiles are better in general too (which has been pointed out without UBs interference - solid writing, and so on), and along with that, why some people like them better.

Also, it has been said in other posts that even though we say "Network" and "ATAC" a lot of the time it just means Casefiles and Undercover Brothers.

BTW, the criteria for basis is the same for both, so you kind of have to do it that way too.

And in all those debating threads, I only saw like one person really arguing for the UBs/ATAC so that's kind of questionable.
Title: Re: Network Vs. ATAC
Post by: Q on October 11, 2008, 04:20:34 PM
Sdl, that's you are not your.
I'm tring to get what you said, Iola. Can you reprase that?
Title: Re: Network Vs. ATAC
Post by: Olivia on October 11, 2008, 04:30:38 PM
I phrased that as clear and specific as a I could. I would try again, but I would probably just say the same thing. Maybe do one line or sentence at a time.

But I'll give an example. You said:

"All their arguments stem from ATAC's faults."

And I said, well, what criteria should we use?

Also, there isn't a problem with doing that because in an argument/opinion, at one point you refute the other side and/or compare.

And then I said we do use basic criteria outside of comparing the Casefiles with the UBs. But the criteria is the same for both sides. We have to comment on the same kind of characteristic. For instance, we can talk about the Casefiles in the third person. It doesn't necessarily mean the first person in the UBs is automatically compared unless it goes that way.

My other stuff is even simpler:

"Also, it has been said in other posts that even though we say "Network" and "ATAC" a lot of the time it just means Casefiles and Undercover Brothers."

"And in all those debating threads, I only saw like one person really arguing for the UBs/ATAC so that's kind of questionable."
Title: Re: Network Vs. ATAC
Post by: Q on October 11, 2008, 04:39:21 PM
I get it now. Give me two reasons why the Network is good. Also pretend there is no ATAC.
Title: Re: Network Vs. ATAC
Post by: Olivia on October 11, 2008, 04:43:37 PM
When I talk about the Network, it's 90% of the time referring to the Casefiles. I already said that, as well as several others ::)

Plus this has been discussed in the other debate threads.

And you keep bringing up more things instead of actually acknowledging or even answering more than one of my points.

Why should I have to prove the Network, especially because of the reasons listed above? I think if anything, the UBs/ATAC side should prove themselves as there are barely any arguments and people very rarely answer the Casefiles side.

Examples...most threads, and more importantly, the "WAR" threads. Even when we're talking about individual books.
Title: Re: Network Vs. ATAC
Post by: Q on October 11, 2008, 04:53:28 PM
You are avoiding my question.
You don't exactly like the Network yet you beat up ATAC in the Network's name.
Quote from: Iola.Alive on September 08, 2001, 08:46:40 PM
I think if anything, the UBs/ATAC side should prove themselves as there are barely any arguments and people very rarely answer the Casefiles side.

What do the *casefilers* say other than Network is better. The reasons are "Ubs stink" logically reason 1 and so on.
Title: Re: Network Vs. ATAC
Post by: bozonessinc on October 11, 2008, 07:45:23 PM
My reply to Iola.Alive:

Hi, you know what. I don't use the same comments every time. I read two in a row, and there was none of the same things. In fact it did not even mention A network. In both (foul play and in self defence) the hardys are working for themselves. Is that not just copying the original series.

I thought the casefiles were about the network, unlike the casefiles the UB's of some of the same things in them so you can understand. I also find it hard to believe that there wasn't more then 60 writers of the casefiles, that had only read one or two. And isn't that most of some of you's hatred comes from. Spelling and grammar errors.

Are you neutral Iola, just wondering, cause it seems like you are a huge Network fan. Who just won't admit it, I think if you are a real Iola fan you would want the series that hasn't killed her!!!
Title: Re: Network Vs. ATAC
Post by: Olivia on October 11, 2008, 10:45:44 PM
Quote from: Q on October 11, 2008, 04:53:28 PM
You are avoiding my question.
You don't exactly like the Network yet you beat up ATAC in the Network's name. What do the *casefilers* say other than Network is better. The reasons are "Ubs stink" logically reason 1 and so on.

Just wow. I did not avoid your question, I said that everything's already been said in the debate threads.

And how many times do I have to say this - 90% of the time when people are talking about the Network in comparison to the UBs they are actually referring to the Casefiles.

Anyways, the Casefile people's reasons have been said 1000 times in many threads. Then they just resort to saying they suck. So what. How is that my concern? Am I the leader of the pack? Who appointed me Network defender? Maybe I participated for that side in a debate thread, but what's the big deal?

And I beat up on ATAC? Maybe when we're debating or comparing opinions I point out some facts...or even state my opinion or observations! Am I not allowed to do that? I think I insult the UBs the least, or at least try to. Even when I do insult the UBs, it's mostly jokes occasionally. Why does it have to be taken so seriously and literally?

I think my posts are getting the wrong impression. I didn't start them to attack anyone or provoke another debate. I was just trying to get us back to a place where we could all debate and/or discuss in a healthy manner instead of this tired cycle that keep repeating because some are so defensive.

And actually, I haven't seen people giving much argument for the UBs side at all or even answers to some of mine and other people's posts. I don't even care if I agree or not. If it's a genuine opinion with a little logic then who am I to say anything?

Finally, I am not going to rehash everything. It's all on this board.

So please understand my intent behind my posts. I just wanted people to understand what it looks like sometimes and get back to more meaningful discussion.

Just my $0.02.

Quote from: bozonessinc on October 11, 2008, 07:45:23 PM
My reply to Iola.Alive:

Hi, you know what. I don't use the same comments every time. I read two in a row, and there was none of the same things. In fact it did not even mention A network. In both (foul play and in self defence) the hardys are working for themselves. Is that not just copying the original series.

I thought the casefiles were about the network, unlike the casefiles the UB's of some of the same things in them so you can understand. I also find it hard to believe that there wasn't more then 60 writers of the casefiles, that had only read one or two. And isn't that most of some of you's hatred comes from. Spelling and grammar errors.

Are you neutral Iola, just wondering, cause it seems like you are a huge Network fan. Who just won't admit it, I think if you are a real Iola fan you would want the series that hasn't killed her!!!

Thanks for your reasonable post. Everything I was talking about was just about this board in general over time. There are exceptions, obviously, but I don't think I can point out every specific situation.

I don't hate the UBs, but like I said before, I tend to lean towards the Casefiles. And the spelling/grammer is not even on my list of why I dislike some of them even though it's a good reason. However, what does bother me sometimes is when Frank and/or Joe says the wrong line or they lead the wrong chapter. For example, when it's obviously Joe's chapter, but it's printed as Frank's on the first page of the chapter.

So sometimes I try to be neutral, but it doesn't work. Just look at this thread. So I classify myself as leaning towards the Casefiles but having a neutralish tendency about this so-called war because I try to read the books first and give things a chance.

Anyways, I was just trying to show everyone what it looked like from one perspective when we are discussing things on here. It wasn't meant to offend anyone. I mean, my point was if we approach things a bit differently it could improve things a lot.

I don't know how to explain my username to you. It's half-joking, and I just like Iola for some reason. I don't actually pay a lot of attention to her in the series sometimes.
Title: Re: Network Vs. ATAC
Post by: Q on October 12, 2008, 01:41:59 PM
Iola, can you please look at it from a different perspective before you try to show someone else.
Quote from: Iola.Alive on May 17, 2033, 10:33:19 PM
And how many times do I have to say this - 90% of the time when people are talking about the Network in comparison to the UBs they are actually referring to the Casefiles.
Why?
How is that my concern? Am I the leader of the pack? Who appointed me Network defender?
You kinda did yourself. If I didn't say your name I was not talking to you.
I think my posts are getting the wrong impression.
Definately.
I don't hate the Ubs, but like I said before.
Did I say Ubs or did I say ATAC.
So I classify myself as leaning towards the Casefiles but having a neutralish tendency about this so-called war.

Why do we keep debating a neverending debate. The networkers with their logical reasons have yet to convince a ATACer. And ATACer's loyalty to ATAC won't touch the Networkers. Shall we quit tring to convert each other and fake quote them intead or keep yelling "ATAC rules" and "ATAC stinks"? That is a serious question so do not see a funny side.
I say I won't quit fake quoting.



Hey maybe I could try to become Abe Lincoln 2 :D
My hands are aching. I hate typing!!
Title: Re: Network Vs. ATAC
Post by: Olivia on October 12, 2008, 02:07:27 PM
In some of my very early posts I did look at it from a different perspective, and I even do now. But it's kind of hard when there's nothing to go on from the UBs/ATAC side besides "Oh, they're great!" Just a little bit more description would help, even if it's just, "They're fun books. I like them undercover." You know what I mean? I do give credit where credit is due too if I like something.

And I don't understand...I wasn't trying to convert anyone? Maybe just get some people to understand why some people like the Casefiles better. That's all. Perhaps the debate was confusing people.

At least we can agree it's getting to be a really ridiculous situation ;)

I only did one or two fake quotes. Honest. One was Edward Stratemeyer to tell everyone to stop fake-quoting, the other was SDLagent just as a joke. So yeah.

I hope this cycle can stop. And I hope you can see that I just want to get us all back into a better place. Not to say that some others won't sugar-coat what they think.
Title: Re: Network Vs. ATAC
Post by: Q on October 12, 2008, 02:14:13 PM
You aren't exactly helping by pointing out UB's faults.
Title: Re: Network Vs. ATAC
Post by: Olivia on October 12, 2008, 02:20:09 PM
Fine, if you want to keep going...

I believe it's okay to have some criticism. Otherwise should we compliment every single book and characteristic? And criticism does not necessarily mean negative comments. It could be analyzing, observing, interpreting.

Anyways, I'm just pointing out that it's hard to see the good when there's not much to go on on this board sometimes. That's all. Maybe because the comments about the UBs are overwhelmingly negative so I miss anything specific from people on the UBs side besides the fact that they say them like them. I am not insulting anyone here. I'm just again, pointing out some of the difficulties on this board.

If you are referring to what I say about some of the individual books, I am just pointing out my observations. But there are many positive observations as well. So I don't see how that's a problem.

The only other option would be in a debate thread, but that's a different story because I'm there to debate.

Do you really think I'm the worst insulter of the UBs on here? That surprises me.