Crusher? I Hardly Know Her!

Wil Wheaton DOT Net is the SciFiWeekly Sci-Fi Site of the Week and receives a pretty favorable review. Finally…others will learn about the time “Uncle Willy went to Bootytown“. I hate to say I told you so.

7 thoughts on “Crusher? I Hardly Know Her!”

  1. Retching Uncontrollably

    someone please hand me a paper towel to wipe this up…

    WHY are we giving wasting bandwidth on this Star Trek reject?!? As if I don’t already puke each time this freak invades The Screen Savers on TechTV. I don’t know what’s more pathetic, him trying to be on TV still 14yrs after being in TNG, or the fanboys who still cheer him on! He needs to just go the way of the dinosaurs, and the ice age.

    BTW, does anyone know how to contact Quentin Tarantino? Maybe he can make a new movie called “Kill Bills” and devote it entirely to the cinematic dismemberment of Wil Wheaton and William Hung…

    PS: Yes, why do I watch TSS? Because the adorable Sarah Lane is on it…

  2. WW.N isn’t that bad. Whil is an amusing guy (well, writer anyway). Having said that, I don’t troll his site (or RSS feeds) like some people on this site . Weasly Crusher was an annoying character on a TV show. Whil Wheaton is not Weasley. Too bad for him he’s been typecast as WC and now must endure endless invective filled rants from Pete. Of course, we have to deal with that everyday….

    ;)

  3. I agree, JP. He’s a decent writer. He could drop a few of the expletives, but otherwise there are some cool insights into behind-the-scenes of ST. Not that I troll ex-ST-actor blogs or anything. Or subscribe to their newsfeeds.

    BTW, Hate Boy, here’s an interesting read on Quentin.

  4. I guess I am going to take flack for this, but I am really tired of Pete’s attitude here. I understand this is somewhat a forum for our thoughts, but his level of sarcasm (and sometimes it borders on venom) is just too much. Hate is a terribly bad thing and maybe if we focused on the good in people and less about how much they suck – the world in general will be a better place…

  5. let’s put it up for a vote: should i refrain from posting if my views toward a topic is negative?

    1. Yes

    2. No

    3. Tim is just being cranky

    BTW, if i’m only bordering on venomous, then i have not express my self properly.

  6. While the WW site isn’t poorly written, I don’t think he’s all that bright. I honestly don’t know why we care about him one way or another. He was a moderate actor with a terrible part to try to deal with on ST:TNG. Nobody could have made that part work. For some reason I think we dislike most child stars and WW is no exception

    I think that Pete is expressing himself on the blog and it is fine. Yes he does seem to post most often with sarcasm (not that this is a bad thing) and I can see why that comes across as he being only negative – he isn’t, but because it is hard to always know when somebody is being sarcastic or not in writing it may appear that all his posts are that way. My suggestion is – if you don’t like his posts don’t read them – nobody is forcing you to read them – and there’s no need to respond to them.

    Note to Pete though – if people can’t tell if your being sarcastic in writing you need to figure out a way to make that more clear. I’m not saying I know how either – that’s why I avoid it in emails. I suspect that is why somebody invented emoticons – because you needed to be able to get tone from writing and most of us wannabe authors aren’t capable of expressing that well in writing all the time. Honestly, can you think of an author who does manage to convey sarcasm in writing consistently well? Most don’t try it because it is so tricky. Frying-pan-guy got it right though! :)

Comments are closed.