Sidious - The Debate

Originally posted by Lightsnake
I can indicate Elvis was seen at a Starbucks yesterday....

Emily Rose was a HIGHLY sensationalized account. Noone knows what was really happening and I hardly consider the Vatican the end all be all authority despite the deep respect I had for John Paul.

You know it's really strange that you said that about Elvis, because yesterday at about 3 I went to Starbucks with some friends, and one of them is named Elvis. Wow, that is so strange.

You have to conceed that it is indeed possible for demonic possesions to have happened. What does this have to do with whether or not that laws of physics exist in SW anyway?

Absolutely nothing.

Absolutely nothing...why'd you bring it up?

Originally posted by Darth_Glentract
You know it's really strange that you said that about Elvis, because yesterday at about 3 I went to Starbucks with some friends, and one of them is named Elvis. Wow, that is so strange.

You have to conceed that it is indeed possible for demonic possesions to have happened. What does this have to do with whether or not that laws of physics exist in SW anyway?

No Glentract, stop bringing religion up. That's not only vastly off topic, but it will turn into a flame war.

Demonic possession is rubbish. Why should we trust what the Vatican says?

...what the hell are we talking about?

Originally posted by Captain REX
...what the hell are we talking about?

Lightsnake is trying to convince people that Sidious is "the most powerful Sith Lord ever" without having proof. Escape81 is supporting him.
Glentract is talking about physic and religion and their impact on the SW universe.
Ush and me are argueing about "canon policies" and "author's intent".
Overlord throws his random useless posts into the debate.
Traya tries to convince Lightsnake and Glentract that they both are basically making useless comments.

So...pick the topic you like the most...

LMAO!!!!

Originally posted by Borbarad
Lightsnake is trying to convince people that Sidious is "the most powerful Sith Lord ever" without having proof. Escape81 is supporting him.
Glentract is talking about physic and religion and their impact on the SW universe.
Ush and me are argueing about "canon policies" and "author's intent".
Overlord throws his random useless posts into the debate.
Traya tries to convince Lightsnake and Glentract that they both are basically making useless comments.

So...pick the topic you like the most...

Let me put it like this: Would you even consider being unable to see logic in arguments that go against your little elite view?

I know it must be tough that all the speculation and theories wich were agreed on might be nothing more than theories but from a neutral point it is still Lightsnakes points that make the most sense and are the most convincing.
Either way; it is still you who throws in useless biased theories that will convince no one but yourself so don't be all upset and make me out for something that you have been doing yourself.

Originally posted by overlord
It's just that are unable to comprehend basic logic in subjects like these and keep twisting everything to suit your flawed view.
You can't even make a damn point without writing a page full of exagurated comparisons and theories. And all comments that try to make you see the point, you just ignore.

Let me put it like this: Would you even consider being unable to see logic in arguments that go against your little elite view?

I know it must be tough that all the speculation and theories wich were agreed on might be nothing more than theories but from a neutral point it is still Lightsnakes points that make the most sense and are the most convincing.
Either way; it is still you who throws in useless biased theories that will convince no one but yourself so don't be all upset and make me out for something that you have been doing yourself.

Oh great. You want to argue "logic" with me. There you go:

There is a little principle in logic called "Occam's Razor". I don't know if you're familar with it but since you happen to be the self-proclaimed God of logical reasoning here nowadays I'll guess you are. Because of the off chance that you aren't I'll just explain it for you.
The basic sentence of that principle is "Numquam ponendo est pluritas sine necessitate." which translates into "Multiples should never be used if not necessary." or - to grant easier use on the subject: If you have two equal logical theories to choose from, choose the simpler one.

Now let's just see the arguments presented. The "The ancient Sith are the most powerful" fraction basically has the following points:
- on panel evidence shows that the ancient Sith Lords have used "greater" force powers than Sidious
- narration of the TOTJ comics descripes the ancient Sith as "godlike"
- a powerful force user (Kreia) said that the ancient Sith Lords would make people (including herself) "look like children".
- overall continuity of the SW universe indicates that the Sith have lost power from Marka Ragnos on (Ragnos who reigned the Sith Empire at his peak for more than a century).

Now arguments of the "Sidious is the most powerful fraction"

"Palpatine has risen from the dead. The most powerful Sith Lord who ever lived had returned."

DE Sourcebook. Yet notice how the DE comics were released before the TOTJ comics. DE series was released in 1993 and 1994 while the TOTJ comics (all except "Knights of the old Republic" - 1994) were released in 1996, 1997 and 1998. Thus being said the "most powerful Sith Lord who ever lived" statement comes from a time in which the ancient Sith Lords weren't even invented.

Empire's End, one of the Sith spirits: "He gave up everything to the Dark Side long ago. He has become the greatest who ever lived. He is the strongest who ever lived....I say we give what he wishes."

Same as above. By the way you can see here that Lightsnake was lying when saying that "one of the spirits was Ragnos" because Ragnos didn't even exist at that point. But thrust him futher if you like...

Star Wars Insider, Kevin J. Anderson, upon asked if he ever intended his Sith to be stronger than the OT sith: "No. Exar Kun, Naga Sadow and the others are on a firmly lower tier than Emperor Palpatine."

We didn't see the actual quote and as we have seen how Lightsnake handles the "truth" I don't think that the statement even exists. Now if it really does, it doesn't matter because of the following points:

a)
The EU doesn't give a damn about "author's intent" or "creators intent". Lucas intent for Boba Fett was that he died in ROTJ. EU "reality" is that Boba Fett was still alive 25 years past ROTJ.

b)
The author's intent doesn't have to conform with the actual work. My intent writing this post is to show you something and I can fail with it. So Anderson - even if he had the "intent" to create nothing that is more powerful than Sidious could "incidentally" have done what he didn't want to do. So it only matters what Anderson produced and not what he "wanted to produce".

On TFN.net, official response to the strongest Sith: "Palpatine at his peak."

Did the question even include the EU ? And even if it did: Since when do random TFN.net "officials" have any authority over Lucas work or the work of the EU authors ?

Essential Chronology: "the most powerful Sith who had ever lived, Emperor Palpatine had returned from the grave."

This is again quoting the DE comics, which were written before the Ancient Sith Lords were even invented. So that's pointless.

And now back to Occam's Razor before you have to ask yourself why I did explain it to you. Lightsnake's theory only works if the following points are "true":
- everything the ancient Sith Lords did was archieved by using technology (which is not only wrong as we've seen that Kun had frozen the Senate without using technology but is also pointless because the ancient Sith did invent, built and use the technology using force powers which Sidious didn't have shown)
- Sidious could reproduce all feats of the Ancient Sith Lord but for some mysterious reason he didn't like to do it
- Sidious didn't develop any further from TPM on (despite the fact that he gained new knowledge - even IN the DE comics)
- the author of some comics that were written before the ancient Sith Lords were even invented is the definite authority when it comes to the question who's the most powerful Sith Lord ever (on panel evidence).

Now this theory operating with false statements is put against the simple point that the ancient Sith have shown greater powers, are described as "godlike" and their heir in form of "ionized air particles" (Exar Kun's spirit) did nearly kill a person (JA Luke) that is compareable to DE Sidious (the most powerful of Sidious incarnations).

Apparently the "Ancient Sith Lords > Sidious" theory seems to be less complicated than the "Sidious > Ancient Sith Lords" theory and therefore I have to choose the first one according to Occam's Razor.

So much for my "flawed, elite view", Mr OVERLORD. You can come back and argue with me when you have understood that "logic" is not a matter of taste.
And by the way: If sarcasm is just another 7 letter word starting with an "s" for you, I can just suggest not to read my postings - especially the last one was not meant serious but I thought that even you would be able to understand that. 🙄

Oh great. You want to argue "logic" with me. There you go:

There is a little principle in logic called "Occam's Razor". I don't know if you're familar with it but since you happen to be the self-proclaimed God of logical reasoning here nowadays I'll guess you are. Because of the off chance that you aren't I'll just explain it for you.
The basic sentence of that principle is "Numquam ponendo est pluritas sine necessitate." which translates into "Multiples should never be used if not necessary." or - to grant easier use on the subject: If you have two equal logical theories to choose from, choose the simpler one.

Yes, and of course yours is the simplest, isn't it? Well, if it this were true, then you wouldn't have to go through so much trouble to explain your points as they are just illogical theories. You also didn't respond to replies debunking your theories wich doesn't make you very convincing to me.

Now let's just see the arguments presented. The "The ancient Sith are the most powerful" fraction basically has the following points:
- on panel evidence shows that the ancient Sith Lords have used "greater" force powers than Sidious
- narration of the TOTJ comics descripes the ancient Sith as "godlike"
- a powerful force user (Kreia) said that the ancient Sith Lords would make people (including herself) "look like children".
- overall continuity of the SW universe indicates that the Sith have lost power from Marka Ragnos on (Ragnos who reigned the Sith Empire at his peak for more than a century).
I really wish you would have just discussed this previously instead of starting off using the same mistakes again.
The sad thing is that all those so called evidence is debatable and speculative. What does the word godlike mean and what kind of evidence is some videogame character quote supposed to mean? Should I place that higher than the word of the actual creator of the comics themself? I think not. And if you weren't so biased in this case, then you wouldn't either.

Now arguments of the "Sidious is the most powerful fraction"

Star Wars Insider, Kevin J. Anderson, upon asked if he ever intended his Sith to be stronger than the OT sith: "No. Exar Kun, Naga Sadow and the others are on a firmly lower tier than Emperor Palpatine."

b)
The author's intent doesn't have to conform with the actual work. My intent writing this post is to show you something and I can fail with it. So Anderson - even if he had the "intent" to create nothing that is more powerful than Sidious could "incidentally" have done what he didn't want to do. So it only matters what Anderson produced and not what he "wanted to produce".

Look, this is all little Lightsnake needs to be correct, I suggest you doubt this source instead of going against it if it were a valid one.
Because who are you to fully grasp every variable of power and the meaning of it in this case.. Point is that you can't judge this because you can't compare it with reality and because with subjects like the force and general science fiction, you just can't make an educated judgement on this.
Not that you actually have a point with just because Sidious doesn't pull this crazy stunt and seems like this and that.. Your whole theory is based on shaky points like magic and other uncomprehendable stuff.

If the man who made it stated the gideline that Exar Kun and the other ancients were indeed below Sidious level of power and if Lucas doesn't go against this then we must indeed leave it at that.
The inventors know their stuff better then you and there might be a thousand factors in power in the universe of SW that is left in the dark.

And now back to Occam's Razor before you have to ask yourself why I did explain it to you. Lightsnake's theory only works if the following points are "true":
- everything the ancient Sith Lords did was archieved by using technology (which is not only wrong as we've seen that Kun had frozen the Senate without using technology but is also pointless because the ancient Sith did invent, built and use the technology using force powers which Sidious didn't have shown)
- Sidious could reproduce all feats of the Ancient Sith Lord but for some mysterious reason he didn't like to do it
- Sidious didn't develop any further from TPM on (despite the fact that he gained new knowledge - even IN the DE comics)
- the author of some comics that were written before the ancient Sith Lords were even invented is the definite authority when it comes to the question who's the most powerful Sith Lord ever (on panel evidence).

-arguable speculation on both your parts. You have both fully read the whole series (I presume) and yet you both have different views. This proves that you can't judge precisively in science fiction.
-Oh my god, he doesn't do cool stuff like the ancients.. Who cares? This means absolutely nothing. Period.
-No, the guy who made it himself is the definite authority on this subject. All evidence from the DE series makes no difference but you are mighty glad Lightsnake used it, didn't you?

Now this theory operating with false statements is put against the simple point that the ancient Sith have shown greater powers, are described as "godlike" and their heir in form of "ionized air particles" (Exar Kun's spirit) did nearly kill a person (JA Luke) that is compareable to DE Sidious (the most powerful of Sidious incarnations).

Apparently the "Ancient Sith Lords > Sidious" theory seems to be less complicated than the "Sidious > Ancient Sith Lords" theory and therefore I have to choose the first one according to Occam's Razor.

No, you have gotten it all wrong again and twisted everything to your biased view. C3PO could have almost killed JA Luke as far as I'm concerned. If the man who has the most insight on the ancient sith lord comics and even the authoritive voice in it, says that his own creation is beneath Sidious level of power and if it isn't contradicted by the creator of Sidious then that is the canonical version.
That is the most basic and simplest answer to this subject so you are contradicting yourself no matter how much you over analyse this and speculate about it.

So much for my "flawed, elite view", Mr OVERLORD. You can come back and argue with me when you have understood that "logic" is not a matter of taste.
And by the way: If sarcasm is just another 7 letter word starting with an "s" for you, I can just suggest not to read my postings - especially the last one was not meant serious but I thought that even you would be able to understand that.

You may leave out the useless comments wich make your points seem even bigger, it makes proper discussing easier.

1. The Ancient Sith may've been intended as 'godlike' but all we see are incompetent screwups....no matter what was intended....wow, your logic is fun.

2. Kreia is also a total liar and manipulator. And she's got all the answers? Last time I checked she thought the Force was tyrannical.

3. Nothing indicates the Sith Lords had greater powers. NOTHING. There is never any HINT of a decline.

4. Actually spoken evidence and on panel evidence shows directly that it's Sadow's SHIP that does those feats. Kun displays more power than any of those jokers and we've never seen Ragnos do a thing. Kun was also decked to the brim in things designed to increase power.

5. And Sidious had REASON to ever do such feats? Hey, does anyone in Star Wars ever have to use the toilet?

6. Kun's soul never TOUCHED Luke=spirits not being 'ionized Air particles now'...Luke let Kyp take him out because he didn't want to hurt Kyp and wanted to face Kun on Kun's own turf.

7. Great the 'Boba Defense'. Ok, now...Lucas gave his firm go-ahead on Boba coming back but he doesn't consider the EU canon. And what new knowledge does Sidious display in DE? I'm curious

Woah. 13 pages does make a difference doesn't it...

Originally posted by Lightsnake
1. The Ancient Sith may've been intended as 'godlike' but all we see are incompetent screwups....no matter what was intended....wow, your logic is fun.

I'd like to see your definition of "incompetence". Ragnos reigned an Empire filled with Sith Lords unquestioned for more than a century. Revan conquered nearly the entire Republic before he was stopped (by betrayal at least). I don't see the "incompetence" here. Of course you need tons of competence to get yourself thrown into a reactor shaft by your apprentice, don't you ? What a pile of fanboyish BS.

2. Kreia is also a total liar and manipulator. And she's got all the answers? Last time I checked she thought the Force was tyrannical.

Last time I checked somebody who lies sometimes doesn't have to lie on every single occassion. Her point of view is the force was tyrannical. She's wrong. The point of view of random Sith Lord X in a comic is "Sidious is the most powerful ever". Maybe he's wrong ?

3. Nothing indicates the Sith Lords had greater powers. NOTHING. There is never any HINT of a decline.

Can you please use a damn little bit of logic ? The Sith kept some of their knowledge for theirselves and didn't pass it on. So can you please tell me were Sidious should have gotten the knowledge of the ancient Sith from ? No ? Thanks.
Have we ever seen Sidious building a mysterious ship including the ability to destroy planets via use of the force ? No.
Have we ever seen him reproducing anything the ancient Sith Lord did ? No.
But he's equally powerful because...ah yes...because you like him to be.

4. Actually spoken evidence and on panel evidence shows directly that it's Sadow's SHIP that does those feats. Kun displays more power than any of those jokers and we've never seen Ragnos do a thing. Kun was also decked to the brim in things designed to increase power.

Again you're missing the point. Sadow used his personal force power and knowledge of the force to construct the ship. It doesn't matter if it does the feat. Kun has only learned things from the ancient Sith - yet he's more powerful than the people who invented everything he used and exersized it personally over centuries ?

5. And Sidious had REASON to ever do such feats? Hey, does anyone in Star Wars ever have to use the toilet?

Oh great. Had Ragnos the reason to annihilate entire star systems with the force ? No. Can he do it ? According to your own logic he can, he just didn't do because he didn't have a reason to do so. So basically all force users are allmighty and if we don't see it they just hadn't any reason to show their true power. OK.

And by the way: I would call getting nearly killed by Mace and Yoda, getting killed by Vader and getting your fleet decimated by rebel scum good reasons to use anything you can.
"Hey. Instead of force pimp slap the little Rebellion, I just built 20,000 star destroyers and 2 Death Star's to deal with them that all get destroyed over time. I watch that going on for 4 years since I've nothing else to do and then I let myself getting pwned by my former apprentice. I just like to waste my time..."

6. Kun's soul never TOUCHED Luke=spirits not being 'ionized Air particles now'...Luke let Kyp take him out because he didn't want to hurt Kyp and wanted to face Kun on Kun's own turf.

Again using a little lie ? Kun's spirit and Kyp attacked Luke and Luke couldn't defend himself against it and had his "spirit" (or soul) ripped out of his body. Notice that Kun's spirit toasted one of Luke's students before and sent some nice little animals to kill Luke later (not to mention that he "controlled" one of Luke's students and force choked all of them at once). Yet that was Kun's spirit who's clearly not as powerful as Kun himself.

7. Great the 'Boba Defense'. Ok, now...Lucas gave his firm go-ahead on Boba coming back but he doesn't consider the EU canon. And what new knowledge does Sidious display in DE? I'm curious

Finally he got the point. The EU isn't canon and therefore it doesn't matter what Lucas or some "official at TFN.net" thinks who is the most powerful Sith Lord ever in the canon material. Thus everything you have is a quote from a comic labeling Sidious the "most powerful ever" that was written before the ancient Sith were even invented...

@overlord:
Here you have my flawed, elite comment on your post: *yawn*

1. Incompetent.....y'know, screwing over an empire when you're in charge for a DAY? Trying to take a galaxy when your fleet is wiped out on three worlds? Failing to discover things right under their noses? That a whiny little dope like Ludo Kressh ever gets in any sort of position of power?
2. And Marka Ragnos ever lied...when? Never? Thought so....and yes, Kreia, who knew hearsay of the ancient Sith, being a manipulator of the issue knows so much on it...
3. Please. Didn't pass it on? Than what was Kun using? Where's the HINT they 'kept it to themselves?' And where's the hint Sidious could've gotten it from the ancient ith...only that he was quite the Korriban vacationing enthusiast...Have we seen your precious Sith Lords do anything so galaxy threatening powerful on their own power? With no enchancements, Sidious has torn ships apart, wiped out a small army, sucked the life out of Jedi, destroyed a fleet....nothing the Ancient Sith did ever came close to that. All you've shown is you've gone by hearsay, don't read the source material and can't listen to any reason. You even go so far as to call the CREATOR of this setting wrong saying his 'intention' failed. Well, he's a judge on this, not you.
4. There is never a HINT Sadow constructed the ship. In fact, the ship is described as 'ancient' and Sadow certainly is not.
5. Because we've ever seen Ragnos in action? And nice how you miss the achievments...unlike the ancient Sith he only conqeured the galaxy and destroyed the Jedi Order...Yes, how dare he build up military strength! Unlike the Ancient Sith who got completely in anything having to do with military!
6. Tell it to I, Jedi....and the sorucebook of DE was written AFTER Tales of the Jedi...as were Dark Empire 2 and Empire's End. And hey, if you paid attention, you'd notice it was Gantoris's own inner darkness that was used against him, Yavin 4 was thick with the Dark Side, allowing Kun more power than he'd ever had in life and yeah, Luke knew he had to have his out of body experience to face Kun, just like he did with Kueller.
7. Lucas's word still applies to the EU, though...he almost turned an entire book into infinities for one sentence. And Kevin J. Anderson isn't an 'official..' he's an author who created your beloved ancient Sith

"Finally he got the point. The EU isn't canon and therefore it doesn't matter what Lucas or some "official at TFN.net" thinks who is the most powerful Sith Lord ever in the canon material. Thus everything you have is a quote from a comic labeling Sidious the "most powerful ever" that was written before the ancient Sith were even invented..."

If EU isn't canon than all argument is null. Ancient Sith Lords are null. DE Sids is null. Everything you're arguing over is null. THE ENTIRE ANCIENT SITH LORD ARGUMENT IS OVER SOMETHING OUTSIDE THE MOVIES. Therefore, we have to take into account ALL EU material and analyze that. If EU isn't provable, than neither argument is provable either, and the matter is left undecided.

But, I would have to say that GL is the ultimate authority on this. After all, it IS his franchise, and no one elses. He INVENTED the term "Sith Lord," and therefore only he can say who is the most powerful.

Originally posted by Lightsnake
1. Incompetent.....y'know, screwing over an empire when you're in charge for a DAY? Trying to take a galaxy when your fleet is wiped out on three worlds? Failing to discover things right under their noses? That a whiny little dope like Ludo Kressh ever gets in any sort of position of power?

It's nice how Ludo Kressh and Naga Sadow are Revan and Ragnos nowadays.

2. And Marka Ragnos ever lied...when? Never? Thought so....and yes, Kreia, who knew hearsay of the ancient Sith, being a manipulator of the issue knows so much on it...

Marka Ragnos who didn't even exist at the time the statement was given ? As I said: Blatant lie. Kreia who's old enough to have lived in Kun's time and might have seen the amount of Kun's power can't give comments on ancient Sith ?

3. Please. Didn't pass it on? Than what was Kun using? Where's the HINT they 'kept it to themselves?' And where's the hint Sidious could've gotten it from the ancient ith...only that he was quite the Korriban vacationing enthusiast...Have we seen your precious Sith Lords do anything so galaxy threatening powerful on their own power? With no enchancements, Sidious has torn ships apart, wiped out a small army, sucked the life out of Jedi, destroyed a fleet....nothing the Ancient Sith did ever came close to that. All you've shown is you've gone by hearsay, don't read the source material and can't listen to any reason. You even go so far as to call the CREATOR of this setting wrong saying his 'intention' failed. Well, he's a judge on this, not you.

a)
They didn't pass it all on and this is mentioned as a basic rule (logically developed from the fundaments of the Sith Empire) in KotoR.

b)
Kun could have only used what Sadow had. Sadow was less powerful than Ragnos. Period.

c)
Why Sidious can't have got knowledge from the ancient Siths ? See point a.

d)
I don't call the creator of the setting wrong. I call you a liar and you've lied 2 times on the same point (Ragnos giving a statement about Sidious at a time when Anderson hasn't even created Ragnos). So go on with your lies, fanboy.

4. There is never a HINT Sadow constructed the ship. In fact, the ship is described as 'ancient' and Sadow certainly is not.

Would you call a 100-year-old person "ancient" ? The point is that somebody created that ship and it was somebody who did have greater force powers and force knowledge that allowed him to create it. Therefore Sidious can't be the most powerful Sith Lord ever.

5. Because we've ever seen Ragnos in action? And nice how you miss the achievments...unlike the ancient Sith he only conqeured the galaxy and destroyed the Jedi Order...Yes, how dare he build up military strength! Unlike the Ancient Sith who got completely in anything having to do with military!

You simply say that Sidious had some mysterious reason not to use his powers when it would have been logical for him to use them.

6. Tell it to I, Jedi....and the sorucebook of DE was written AFTER Tales of the Jedi...as were Dark Empire 2 and Empire's End. And hey, if you paid attention, you'd notice it was Gantoris's own inner darkness that was used against him, Yavin 4 was thick with the Dark Side, allowing Kun more power than he'd ever had in life and yeah, Luke knew he had to have his out of body experience to face Kun, just like he did with Kueller.

As you might have noticed "I, Jedi" wasn't written by Kevin J. Anderson. If it contradicts the events shown in the Jedi Academy trilogy it's worthless since Anderson has the authority over his own creations. Period.

And if you unable to figure out release dates you better don't argue them:
Dark Empire - 1993
DE Sourcebook - 1993
Dark Empire 2 - 1994
TOTJ: Knights of the old Republic - 1994
Empire's End - 1995
TOTJ: Dark Lords of the Sith - 1996
TOTJ: The Sith War - 1996
TOTJ: Redemption - 1997
TOTJ: The Freedon Nadd uprising - 1997
TOTJ: The Golden Age of the Sith - 1997
TOTJ: The Fall of the Sith Empire - 1998

So nothing related to the Dark Empire storyline was released beyond 1995 (not even the sourcebook) meaning all you have are quotes from a time when the Ancient Sith Lords didn't even exist. And now stop throwing lies at me - it's getting boring.

7. Lucas's word still applies to the EU, though...he almost turned an entire book into infinities for one sentence. And Kevin J. Anderson isn't an 'official..' he's an author who created your beloved ancient Sith

You failed to provide the actual source for Anderson's quote and seeing how you keep relying on lies here, I still don't belive that the quote even exists. And even if it exists still the following people could be more powerful than Sidious: all Sith Lords appearing in the KotoR games, all Sith Lords appearing in the pre-Ruusan era ("Jedi vs. Sith" comic). But I'm sure you have several quotes of their creators at hand saying that they all are less powerful than Sidious, right ?

1. Oh, yes, Revan....who's only a complete ego trip and no matter what he supposedly did, it can't be proven.

2. And KReia'd know a damn thing about the Ancient Sith...how?

3. Proof now. Cite sources. And who created Ragnos now? Oh, right, you're a liar. C'mon, who wrote the story of Golden Age of the Sith? Right on Amazon.com, buddy boy.

4. Sadow 100? Where'd you get that number anyways? And....building a ship= power? Wow, you've got twisted logic. Proof it wasn't a collection of Sith Lords doing it together? That's how they tended to do their rituals

5. To destroy half of Coruscant, put up a target on his back to the entire Jedi Order and Republic, isolate everyone who believed in him and pretty much ruin everything? Yep. Mmmhmm.

6. I, Jedi doesn't contradict a thing. I love it when people try to think they know better than the authors AND books. And Empire's End is the CONCLUSION to Dark Empire, buddy boy.

7. Don't have to. Bane denounces the Sith Lords in Ruusan well enough. Your desperation just reflects in your bad mannered posting. I'm done with you until you grow up.

Originally posted by Lightsnake
1. Oh, yes, Revan....who's only a complete ego trip and no matter what he supposedly did, it can't be proven.

Oh...nothing he did can be proven but you can prove he was on a total ego trip. Maybe you're able to discover the illogical point in that statement yourself.

2. And KReia'd know a damn thing about the Ancient Sith...how?

And I hoped you would be able to read. Apparently you aren't.

3. Proof now. Cite sources. And who created Ragnos now? Oh, right, you're a liar. C'mon, who wrote the story of Golden Age of the Sith? Right on Amazon.com, buddy boy.

I'm asking myself what you want to tell us with your statement.

a) StarWars.com > you
http://www.starwars.com/eu/lit/comics/f20000405/indexp2.html

b)
Who created Ragnos ? Anderson did it since Anderson did write the story of Golden Age of the Sith. Does Ragnos name appear somewhere in Empire's End (written by Tom Veitch) ? I didn't see it there. And therefore he wasn't there. Easy isn't it ?

4. Sadow 100? Where'd you get that number anyways? And....building a ship= power? Wow, you've got twisted logic. Proof it wasn't a collection of Sith Lords doing it together? That's how they tended to do their rituals

Oh "buddy boy". Did you realized how the Sith Lords in the Ancient Sith Empire were constantly fighting for power. So why they would gather and created a weapon like that for one of them. And were have you ever seen Sith Lords doing a ritual together, eh ?

5. To destroy half of Coruscant, put up a target on his back to the entire Jedi Order and Republic, isolate everyone who believed in him and pretty much ruin everything? Yep. Mmmhmm.

What about "smash the Rebellion" and "save himself from dying". Ah no...I guess that reason's aren't good enough to do something like travel to Hoth and unleash a little force storm there after having destroyed the Republic, the Senate, killed millions of people (the entire population of Alderaan) and so on... 🙄

6. I, Jedi doesn't contradict a thing. I love it when people try to think they know better than the authors AND books. And Empire's End is the CONCLUSION to Dark Empire, buddy boy.

Any events shown in the JA trilogy are Anderson's creations. If I, Jedi says, hints or suggests something that contradicts the narration of the JA trilogy (and apparently it does) - the book is wrong because Anderson is the "higher authority" in this case.

7. Don't have to. Bane denounces the Sith Lords in Ruusan well enough. Your desperation just reflects in your bad mannered posting. I'm done with you until you grow up.

No. I'm done with you since I don't use to waste my time with arrogant fanboys who only can use lies and nothing else to try force down their opinion other people's throat. Next thing I expect from you is something like "I'm Jonathan Lucas - George's lost son. When I met my dad for the first time yesterday he told me that Sidious is the most powerful Sith Lord ever !!!!1111". Three words for you: The - ra - py. 🙄

I am WAY too lazy to read all of this...