How do you divide up the original Generation 1 era?

[GoktimusPrime]

(Following a discussion on yesterday's Skype session (http://www.otca.com.au/boards/showthread.php/27075-Online-Video-Chat-Meets), it's been decided to restart this thread, now with a new option!)

As every TF fan and their dog knows, Generation 1 is an umbrella term that covers EVERYTHING from the Transformers franchise before it was rebranded as "Generation 2" around mid-1993. And before then the term "Generation 1" never existed, it only became an immediate fan term after G2 came out (similar to how The Great War was retroactively named "World War I" after the advent of WWII etc.), and Generation 1 was never an official term until 2000. But because Generation 1 covers such a broad area, I find that it's sometimes useful when talking with other fans to have designated periods of G1 - namely Early, Middle and Late G1. So for example, when talking about finishing off the characters for G1 MPs, I think that most fans would like to see Early G1 completed, and indeed the bulk of interest/demand in G1 MPs seems to draw from Early G1. To simply say that one wants "all of G1" done as MPs means that you literally want everyone from Gulf to Big Daddy to Rapido done as MPs. A few people might like this, but I'd say the majority of demand seems to come from the earlier years of Generation 1.

So how to divide G1? Here are three proposed models:
+ The Mathematical Model
+ The Popularity Model
+ The Age of Distinction Model

1: MATHEMATICAL MODEL
https://i.ibb.co/SvfL3px/G1-periods.jpg
Super simple. We take the years of G1 and divide it by 3, and we tack the first few months of 1993 onto Late G1 since it wasn't even a complete year of production before the G2 rebranding anyway. And so it looks like this:
Early G1 = first 3 years: 1984, 1985, 1986
Middle G1 = middle 3 years: 1987, 1988, 1989
Late G1 = final 3 years: 1990, 1991, 1992, plus early 1993 tacked on the end
There's no other reason behind this. It's just nice, cold, unbiased, logical maths.

2: POPULARITY MODEL
https://i.ibb.co/TkKtgkK/G1-period.jpg
As the name implies, this is based on how popular Transformers was during the different stages of G1, and thus is divided like so...
Early G1 = 1984, 1985, 1986, 1987
This is the "golden age" of Generation 1, when Transformers was everywhere; toys, books, lunchboxes, clothes, stationery, comics etc. and these are also the years when the Sunbow cartoon was in production. We know that by 1987 toy sales had dwindled to the point that Hasbro cancelled the Sunbow cartoon after only 3 episodes of Season Four (The Rebirth). For me, it was also during 1987 that I started seeing fans stop collecting Transformers. <spits drink>
Middle G1 = 1988, 1989, 1990
The cartoon was gone in the West, but the toys and Marvel Comics were still going along well enough. But we know that by 1990 toy sales had dipped even further (not helped by a global recession). Hasbro and Takara both got desperate, with the former giving us Action Masters and the latter making almost all of their toys Autobots. This year also marked the end of the G1 cartoon in Japan with only 1 episode of Zone released directly to video. This would also be the final year that Transformers toys would be released in the U.S. market.
Late G1 = 1991, 1992, Early-1993
These are the years where, while Transformers toys were still being produced and sold in stores, Japan no longer had a cartoon to market them. In the West 1991 was the final year of the Marvel US comics, and 1992 would be the final year of the Marvel UK comics. This period was where we really saw Transformers petering out. In the early months of 1993 we did see new toys, but they had no supporting media. These toys would later be absorbed into the rebranded Generation 2 line (hence the fan nickname, "Generation 1.5").

3: AGE OF DISTINCTION MODEL
https://i.ibb.co/jyskjwg/G1-period-distinction.jpg
Similar to the Popularity Model, but it sub-divides the Early G1 years into two eras. Thus it is divided like so:
Early G1
+ The Golden Age = 1984, 1985
The absolute height of G1 popularity. This includes everything up to the end of the second season of the cartoon.
+ The Silver Age = 1986, 1987
This was when popularity in Transformers was beginning to dwindle, particularly after the release of The Transformers The Movie (Dec '86 for AU). By 1987, slumped toy sales prompted Hasbro to cancel the Sunbow cartoon series. This was the year that I saw people begin to quit Transformers. I never knew anyone who quit Transformers in the Golden Age (84-85).
Middle G1, The Bronze Age = 1988, 1989, 1990
(See description from the Popularity Model)
Late G1, The Dark Age = 1991, 1992, Early-1993
(See description from the Popularity Model)

A reminder that this is not a discussion about "When did G1 end?" - because that factually ended around Mid-1993 when Hasbro launched Generation 2 ('cos if I wanted to debate facts, I'd go join the Flat Earth Society d: ). We're only talking about how we want to divide the original G1 period. (:

[dirge]

Age of Distinction for me. While I have love all for of G1 (and own all of the US G1 toys), there's a distinct "next level" reached by the Diaclone/Microman toys and their associated first two seasons of the cartoon.

Much of season 3 of the cartoon wasn't up to the same standard (not so much animation although there is that, but how well the characters were presented), and most of the better characterisations were of "Golden Age" bots such as Blitzwing in FFOD or First Aid & Swindle in The Ultimate Weapon. Rebirth was a giant toy add that barely stopped to tell a story.

The other factor after the Age of Distinction was that many of the alt modes really stopped being robots in DISGUISE. While Hot Rod's vehicle mode looks good... it's clearly not an Earth vehicle. Meanwhile Splashdown turns into a... thingo. It wasn't until the Micromasters in 89/90 that proper earth disguises came back in a big way.

[Lint]

G1 is a dynasty upon itself however it wasn't so long that it needs a breakdown by era. We've been able to have good discourse about G1 by just referring to particular years or toylines.

[GoktimusPrime]

Sometimes I find that I want to refer to a specific period of G1 in a way where referring to G1 as a whole isn't precise enough, but referring to year is too precise. Or sometimes it just helps to remove ambiguity.

e.g. G1 Constructicons
L-R: 1985 Scrapper, 1992 Scrapper, 1993 Scrapper, Encore Scrapper
http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y227/goktimusprime/Transformers/comparisons/Encore%20Constructicons/devastator22.jpg
I sometimes see sales posts for 1992 Constructicons advertised as "G2," even though they are NOT G2 Constructicons. Colour variations aside, the Late G1 Constructicons cannot combine to form Devastator, so let's say I were trying to collect G2 Devastator and I decided to purchase G2 Scavenger. I see an online sale for what's advertised as "G2 Scavenger" and I go ahead and purchase it, only to discover that my Scavenger is missing the connecting piece that attaches it to Hook. And if the Hook I purchased was Late G1, then it would be missing the connecting piece to attach to Bonecrusher. Oops, I now cannot form Devastator! The toys aren't necessarily broken, that's just how they were made. Being so similar in colour and appearance, it's understandable how some people might confuse the Late G1 Constructicons with the G2 Constructicons, but there is a substantial difference between the two sets. Even if you were to purchase the Late G1 Constructicons MOSC as a complete set, they don't come with any of the component accessories for Devastator either - no forearms, no fists, no chest plate, no head.

Other examples: Early G1 Barrage (1985) is an Insecticon, but Middle G1 Barrage (1990) is the front half of a lunar truck. Early or Middle G1 Afterburner (1987) is a motorbike, but Late G1 Afterburner (1991) is a Ferrari F40 sports car. Although both G1 Sky Highs are Middle G1 according to each of these proposed models, as the first was the Pretender released in 1988 and the second was the Micromaster released in 1990, so you're right, there are times when even dividing among these periods won't be precise enough and referring to explicit years of release will be required. It all depends.

At other times, you're right, you don't need to divide it at all.
e.g. I want to see all of G1 eventually done as CHUG toys. And by that I do mean all of G1. Because when some people say that, they don't mean it. But, mate... I don't just want Early G1 stuff like Venom, Chop Shop and Hubcap... I also want every Middle G1 TF done as CHUGs like the Sparkabots and Triggercons! I want the rest of the Autobot Targetmasters done as CHUGs (we've only ever had Hot Rod and Scoop done (also Blurr and Kup if you count TR/LG)). I was stoked to get TR Quake and Siege Spinister! I also want all of Late G1 done as CHUGs too, including the Motorvators, Action Master Elites (maybe not a Titan Class Omega Spreem :p) and Lightformers. I preordered the LGEX Big Powered set, jumped on TR Overlord (only to later replace it with LG Overlord), and if they ever redecoed CW Defensor and Bruticus as CHUG Guard City and Battle Gaia respectively - I'd buy them in a heartbeat! So yeah, when I say that I want all of G1 done as CHUGs, I literally mean all of G1. Bring on CHUG Time Warrior!

But there are other times when I feel the need for the division.
e.g. I'm mostly interested in Early G1 for MPs, and also Early G1 seems to be what sells for G1 MPs.
The only Middle G1 MP they've ever done was Star Sabre, and even then, it was the result of a fan's choice poll in 2013. Whereas Early G1 you can more or less release an MP toy and be guaranteed to sell it. Star Sabre is the only Middle G1 MP I own, and even then it was a freebie. :/ They've never made an MP toy of any Late G1 characters, and even I doubt that I'd buy any of them. I love Deftwing, but I wouldn't buy a Masterpiece Deftwing.
"But they made an MP of Targetmaster Hot Rod, and he's Middle G1!"
Well that depends on what you define as "Middle G1," doesn't it? (and thus the purpose of this poll!) If you go by the Mathematical Model, then yes, he's Middle G1. But by the Popularity Model he's Early G1, and by the Age of Distinction Model he's an Early G1 Silver Age character.

And that's the other thing, if you were to say, "I'd buy any of the Early G1 Autobot Cars if they were made as MPs"
By the Mathematical Model this includes all of the Diaclone Cars from the first two years but also includes Hot Rod, Kup and Blurr. As dirge alluded to, they're a different flavour from the Diaclone Cars because they're futuristic/fantasy vehicles rather than being based on licensed real life vehicles. Similarly this model includes Scourge and Cyclonus as part of the Decepticon Jets.
The Popularity Model is the same as above but also includes 1987. So now suddenly your Autobot Cars include the likes of Targetmaster Hot Rod (which has been done), but also Targetmaster Blurr, Pointblank, Sureshot etc., and I'm not sure if people who'd happily buy MP Trailbreaker, Hoist, Mirage, Jazz etc. would be equally enthused to buy MP Targetmaster Kup, Crosshairs etc.
By the Age of Distinction Model you could say, "I only want to collect all of the Early G1 Golden Age Autobot Cars as MPs." This stops at 1985 so it means that you're only interested in the "Diaclone Cars." You want MP Jazz, Trailbreaker, Hoist, Mirage etc., but you wouldn't go so far as to want an MP Kup or Pointblank. You've purchased MP Starscream, Thundercracker, Skywarp and the Coneheads, but you may not want an MP Cyclonus and Scourge.

It all depends - we all have different criteria and the purpose of this poll is to create a general consensus. :)

[Trent]

What happened to the other thread? I can’t find it.

If this is a thing that the board is supporting, then where was the discussion about what the poll options would be? Gok is referring to these as if this will be an accepted system on this site moving forward so what if one doesn’t agree with any of the 3 options presented? Tough luck?

Quite frankly I think this is a solution looking for a problem that doesn’t exist.

[UltraMarginal]

Ditto on 'wheres the original thread'? Do peoples comments on there no longer apply?

If so, I'll reiterate.
Why is this really a discussion, the last thread only had a handful of people interested, once this runs its course in a few days time will you then expect everyone you interact with online, here and elsewhere to adhere, to one of the systems mentioned above? Even if they've never been to this forum? let alone interacted with this thread? Without a significant input from here, Seibertron, TFW2005, all the other forums and myriad of facebook groups even running a poll like this is no more than trivial interest, expecting anyone to adhere to whatever the result turns out to be is pure egotism.

If you really want to create a system to define eras of G1, you should have a thread like this on all the other forums and face book groups but first you should be asking each of those communities for their opinions, getting a feel for what the community as a whole even wants, then put a poll together from the most popular ideas put forward. Otherwise it has no real peer reviewed validity.

[GoktimusPrime]

Ditto on 'wheres the original thread'? Do peoples comments on there no longer apply?
As I said...

"(Following a discussion on yesterday's Skype session (http://www.otca.com.au/boards/showthread.php/27075-Online-Video-Chat-Meets), it's been decided to restart this thread, now with a new option!)
During the Skype session I was asked by people, including a moderator, to redo the thread. There was a fairly lengthy discussion about it and how a new option should be created to better represent people's views. The old options still there, so you are welcome and encouraged to just recast your vote; it's just that a new third option was included following the weekly Saturday Skype meeting.

This was not originally my idea, but others insisted.


If so, I'll reiterate.
Why is this really a discussion, the last thread only had a handful of people interested, once this runs its course in a few days time will you then expect everyone you interact with online, here and elsewhere to adhere, to one of the systems mentioned above? Even if they've never been to this forum? let alone interacted with this thread? Without a significant input from here, Seibertron, TFW2005, all the other forums and myriad of facebook groups even running a poll like this is no more than trivial interest, expecting anyone to adhere to whatever the result turns out to be is pure egotism.

If you really want to create a system to define eras of G1, you should have a thread like this on all the other forums and face book groups but first you should be asking each of those communities for their opinions, getting a feel for what the community as a whole even wants, then put a poll together from the most popular ideas put forward. Otherwise it has no real peer reviewed validity.
I only interact here, on Facebook and now Skype these days. But you and others are MORE than welcome to replicate this poll on as many other fora as you like. I did the same thing during the UCM polls - posted across multiple fora covering fans from around the world in multiple languages too. But that was in the mid-2000s when I had a wider presence across multiple groups. These days I'm not active on nearly as many fora as I used to be, but I would absolutely love for you or anyone else to create similar polls on the groups that you interact with and share the results with me. Sounds like a great idea! :)

[UltraMarginal]

I was under the impression that threads were never deleted here, as a record of what has happened.

So will you be insisting that the people here and other places you do interact submit to your methodology for labeling eras of G1?

[Paulbot]

I proposed a different breakdown. One that’s been deleted now..?

[Unicran]

Must be a slow, uneventful day...


What happened to the other thread? I can’t find it.

Ditto on 'wheres the original thread'? Do peoples comments on there no longer apply?
Diddly ditto. By all means lock the previous thread & start a new one. But why remove the old thread. Other members have added their comments including myself.

But hey, I’m just a Basic member.

[dirge]

I deleted the old thread.

The reason simply being that the poll options couldn't be edited. Nothing more. As Gok said, we had a discussion about the options being too rigid - more specifically Paulbot made some very good points about the options being offered not being suitable for everyone. So I deleted so Gok could start anew with a wider set of options.

Noone's views were being silenced; rather this new poll was created so that a more flexible (and, hopefully, inclusive) poll could replace the old one. As with anything in life, if this work for you (and hopefully with the wider set of options, it can), feel free to contribute. If not, feel free to disregard this poll and move onto the next thread, people :)

[Trent]

I deleted the old thread.

The reason simply being that the poll options couldn't be edited. Nothing more. As Gok said, we had a discussion about the options being too rigid - more specifically Paulbot made some very good points about the options being offered not being suitable for everyone. So I deleted so Gok could start anew with a wider set of options.

Noone's views were being silenced; rather this new poll was created so that a more flexible (and, hopefully, inclusive) poll could replace the old one. As with anything in life, if this work for you (and hopefully with the wider set of options, it can), feel free to contribute. If not, feel free to disregard this poll and move onto the next thread, people :)

I also disagree with the deleting of the old thread. People had put not-insignificant amounts of time into typing up their replies. Some of which had good thoughts. To have them just deleted is a bit disrespectful. Couldn't it have just been locked with the last post a link to the new thread?

So the poll options can be edited in this one? Why is that not made clear so that we can suggest other options? It seems that a few people had a Skype meeting, came up with 3 options that they liked and then this is now being forced down the rest of our throats with a "Don't like it? then bugger off!!" mentality.

And as Ultra Marginal says, what subset of the fandom does this apply to? Worldwide? Australia-wide? OTCA-wide? Because I can't imagine that this won't be spouted at someone in a facebook group after the final method is decided and lets be honest here, while OTCA is a great place, it's hardly the biggest fandom platform in the country and every TF fan in Australia can't be expected to accept a method that was agreed to by 6 people.

[dirge]

I also disagree with the deleting of the old thread. People had put not-insignificant amounts of time into typing up their replies. Some of which had good thoughts. To have them just deleted is a bit disrespectful. Couldn't it have just been locked with the last post a link to the new thread?


My bad. That was not the intention. I was actually in agreement with the general sentiment of those posts & had encouraged Gok to widen the options he presented.



And as Ultra Marginal says, what subset of the fandom does this apply to? Worldwide? Australia-wide? OTCA-wide? Because I can't imagine that this won't be spouted at someone in a facebook group after the final method is decided and lets be honest here, while OTCA is a great place, it's hardly the biggest fandom platform in the country and every TF fan in Australia can't be expected to accept a method that was agreed to by 6 people.


That's a question for Gok to answer - though my impression is that it's him doing a non-scientific poll anyway to see how "the fandom" as a whole would classify. Where he then uses the results is up to him,

[Krayt]

Easy answer....

DON’T

G1 is G1. But as Kelvin can’t understand, there aren’t 2 Barrages in G1 that need splitting into eras, there are just 2 transformers with the same name. One is an insecticon, one is a micro master. They align themselves with that simple piece of additional knowledge. Same for the constructions. Original, European yellow, European yellow non-combining, G2. It has nothing to do with eras.

So what’s happening in his school? Many kids likely have the same name, and split up with surnames as a simple piece of additional knowledge. Extra Info made from classes.

Matthew and Matthew. (Oh no same name)
Matthew smith and Matthew smith (well that didn’t work)
Matthew smith grade 1, Matthew smith grade 6. (Oh my god thank Jesus we didn’t have to divide the school.)

[Krayt]

I deleted the old thread.

The reason simply being that the poll options couldn't be edited.

You had better go and delete this thread as well.... missing a DON’T option.

[DaptoDog]

When I said Paulbot's post just ended the thread I didn't anticipate that literally happening lol! No worries Dirge, I'm sure most can understand there wasn't any untoward reason for deleting the thread.

[DELTAprime]

The only way G1 should be divided up is the way it currently is. US G1, JP G1 and Euro G1. Don't try and reinvent the wheel.

[Seraphim Prime]

I think trying to divide G1 up is so full of quandaries that it's a process that can do little but lead to madness. See the attempts by Takara to make everything up until Car Robots one continuity - here (https://tfwiki.net/wiki/Generation_1_cartoon_timeline_(Japan))and here (https://tfwiki.net/wiki/File:Japaneseflowchart.jpg)

What are the defining criteria that you're using to classify? Is it cartoon, comic, origin, toy style? Do we count the Gold Box reissues as early G1 when they were released closer to Action Master times? The western comics appeared to do a decent job of just saying "they all exist" and just get on with story telling so there was no real need to divide the timeline up.

Do we class Headmasters with S3, because that makes sense from a cartoon narrative and alt mode style, but then what do we do about Pretenders and the second round of Targetmasters?

I think the benefits of the subdivision you outline above are less beneficial, because the fan that knows enough about the various releases knows about the confusion between G1 yellow and G2 constructicons so knows the tell tale signs to look for. (Case in point - I know a lot of otherwise useless bits of information about Transformers, and I didn't even know that there were G2 constructicons that combined)

There are just so many ways to slice the cake that everyone is going to have their unique preference that trying to divide it into three neat divisions is not realistic.

Just trying to divide and group myself we have

S1 & S2
S3
HM,TM,PM & Pretenders
Micromasters & Action Masters
Japan G1 - Headmasters, Masterforce & Victory
Euro G1 - Turbomasters/Predators, Motivators, Obliterators, etc
G2 - rereleases, cyberjets (93-95)

The question in the division above is does S3 go with S1 & 2 to make the years work, whereas the style and general consensus is that S3 is more in line with Headmasters/Targetmasters/Powermasters.

If you put Pretenders with Micromasters & Actionmasters as I would, you then get the issue with the second round of Targetmasters, who were released at the same time.

[Unicran]

When I said Paulbot's post just ended the thread I didn't anticipate that literally happening lol!
Nope. No record of it on this board. :p

[Unicran]

The special treatment Goktimus gets from the moderators is transparent.
That's a strong statement Paul. You need to provide instances of special treatment above what is considered appropriate. Or maybe being a Deluxe member affords special treatment?

[UltraMarginal]

I think what Paul is alluding to is the fact that threads never get deleted, they just get locked and allowed to fade into obscurity. the fact that Gok had an 'active' thread with many posts from others deleted is way outside the normal process of the board.

[Paulbot]

Easy answer....

DON’T

G1 is G1. But as Kelvin can’t understand, there aren’t 2 Barrages in G1 that need splitting into eras, there are just 2 transformers with the same name. One is an insecticon, one is a micro master. They align themselves with that simple piece of additional knowledge. Same for the constructions. Original, European yellow, European yellow non-combining, G2. It has nothing to do with eras.



I think trying to divide G1 up is so full of quandaries that it's a process that can do little but lead to madness. See the attempts by Takara to make everything up until Car Robots one continuity - here (https://tfwiki.net/wiki/Generation_1_cartoon_timeline_(Japan))and here (https://tfwiki.net/wiki/File:Japaneseflowchart.jpg)

What are the defining criteria that you're using to classify? Is it cartoon, comic, origin, toy style? Do we count the Gold Box reissues as early G1 when they were released closer to Action Master times? The western comics appeared to do a decent job of just saying "they all exist" and just get on with story telling so there was no real need to divide the timeline up.

Do we class Headmasters with S3, because that makes sense from a cartoon narrative and alt mode style, but then what do we do about Pretenders and the second round of Targetmasters?

I think the benefits of the subdivision you outline above are less beneficial, because the fan that knows enough about the various releases knows about the confusion between G1 yellow and G2 constructicons so knows the tell tale signs to look for. (Case in point - I know a lot of otherwise useless bits of information about Transformers, and I didn't even know that there were G2 constructicons that combined)

There are just so many ways to slice the cake that everyone is going to have their unique preference that trying to divide it into three neat divisions is not realistic.



My original deleted post was to point out the way that I have heard G1 broken up over my last 25 years interacting with TF fans of all type, so more organic than the approaches suggested above which I feel are over complicated for such as short number of years.

So I would agree with Krayt and vote a DON'T option. It's unnecessary, a form of gatekeeping, would make posts more obtuse, and creates an excuse for pedantry.

You can correct some who misidentifies a G1.5 toy without these terms (and I hate the G1.5 term personally but I understand it!).

You can use existing words like "Insecticon, Micromaster, Pretender, Action Master" to differentiate between characters with the same name. And this is Transformers: having to qualify what you mean when you refer to Starscream, Bumblebee, Inferno, Soundwave, Bonecrusher, Wheelie (and on and on and on) is a constant anyway!*

But this topic has raised something I want to ask others about but I'll start another thread for that at some point in the next few days.



*I once tried to explain to my surely confused Grandmother that I had Classic Pretender Jazz but not Classics Jazz and I would very much like Classic Jazz if that was the toy she saw. She didn't buy me Classics Jazz. I later bought Action Master Jazz and maybe 10 or more toys called Jazz since then

[dirge]

My original deleted post was to point out the way that I have heard G1 broken up over my last 25 years interacting with TF fans of all type, so more organic than the approaches suggested above which I feel are over complicated for such as short number of years.


Yeah I feel the same way, IE there's a clear "before and after the movie" which doesn't neatly split by year.



So I would agree with Krayt and vote a DON'T option. It's unnecessary, a form of gatekeeping, would make posts more obtuse, and creates an excuse for pedantry.


Of course. We all know Gok is a specific sort of guy. So I can see why categorising is something he'd like to do. But of course, Hasbro don't necessarily make sure things are neat and orderly over the years (as personnel change, as the market changes etc). I guess he's trying to sense the "vibe" of how the fandom DO split up G1, given the ambiguity.

For whatever reason, there's a fair chunk of the fandom that cut things off after the movie, or after 1986. And I think Gok was trying to suss that out.

"Don't" is certainly a viable option.



You can correct some who misidentifies a G1.5 toy without these terms (and I hate the G1.5 term personally but I understand it!).


Yeah that term, and "Euro G1" are both misnomers. A cultural artifact of the the US-centric fandom. "Non-US" G1 would actually be most appropriate, if anything.

[Bidoofdude]

I generally divide it in my mind into the US cartoon run years, the JP cartoon (Headmasters to Zone) years, and the tail end proto-G2 years.

Then again, the US cartoon run years also do kind of have their own division, obviously by the movie, but still feel mostly like a unit due to a large amount of shared cast.


I know there's a lot of overlap and broad-ness to it, but those all feel decently distinct to me and are how I subconsciously do it. I don't have any skin in the game with the above discussion I've read, but I guess this as good a place as any to explain your own opinions if you feel those categories don't suit you. Stuff like this is often extremely variable between individuals, so I think rigid categories are mostly not useful, but that's my opinion.

[GoktimusPrime]

I generally divide it in my mind into the US cartoon run years, the JP cartoon (Headmasters to Zone) years, and the tail end proto-G2 years.
* US cartoon years = 1984-87
* JP cartoon years = 1987-90 - so you have an overlap there with 1987, unless you just want to arbitrarily declare 1987 to be a JP cartoon year since The Headmasters was a much longer series than Sunbow Season Four
* Proto-G2 year = Early 1993. It was only the early 1993 G1 Transformers that would be later repackaged as G2.
Your division does not account for 1991 and 1992.


Stuff like this is often extremely variable between individuals, so I think rigid categories are mostly not useful, but that's my opinion.
Meh, this poll is just asking which method you prefer, not method you think is necessarily the best. It's like being on a flight and you're offered a choice of meals between chicken, fish or vegetarian. Neither might be what you actually want to eat, but the flight attendant is asking you to make a choice based on your preference. :) Or you could choose to skip the meal and that's fine too. :) And at the end of the day, this is just an opinion poll. It's not like we're voting in a new government or anything. :p

Many systems of classification are inherently arbitrary. Why are Europe, Africa and Asia classified as separate continents even though it's one big land mass? How are the UK and the Philippines considered part of the continents of Europe and Asia respectively when they're islands unconnected to continental land masses? What counts as a planet and why? Are viruses living or non-living? Why are Bosnian and Croatian considered different languages despite having a high level of mutual intelligibility, but mutually unintelligible Cantonese and Mandarin are classified as dialects of Chinese? Why are North and South Korea recognised as separate sovereign states, but Taiwan is not recognised as being separate from China? Why do we call the 10th month of the year "OCTOber" when it means "Eighth month"? Why are the letters W and Y classified as consonants when they can sometimes be pronounced as vowels? etc etc etc. :confused: Je ne c'est pas. Ultimately we just decide on general consensus to help us make sense of the world and just run with it, even if it doesn't always make sense. :) :confused:

[Krayt]

Why are Europe, Africa and Asia classified as separate continents even though it's one big land mass?

Continents as we understand them are a Geopolitical distinction



How are the UK and the Philippines considered part of the continents of Europe and Asia respectively when they're islands unconnected to continental land masses?

Once again, Continents as we understand them are a Geopolitical distinction



What counts as a planet and why?

A planet is a celestial body that (a) is in orbit around the Sun, (b) has sufficient mass for its self-gravity to overcome rigid body forces so that it assumes a hydrostatic equilibrium (nearly round) shape, and (c) has cleared the neighbourhood around its orbit.


Are viruses living or non-living?

Non-living. They require a "host" to provide the mechanics of replication.



Why are Bosnian and Croatian considered different languages despite having a high level of mutual intelligibility, but mutually unintelligible Cantonese and Mandarin are classified as dialects of Chinese?

They aren't. "Declaration on the common language" was issued in 2017.


Why are North and South Korea recognised as separate sovereign states, but Taiwan is not recognised as being separate from China?

1: The Korean War.
2: Taiwan is seperate... Unless you are Chinese. They are seeking their seat on the UN seperate from China.



Why do we call the 10th month of the year "OCTOber" when it means "Eighth month"?

Becaue January and February were added circa 713BC



Why are the letters W and Y classified as consonants when they can sometimes be pronounced as vowels?

A vowel is a sound, not a letter!

Sometimes, the letter "y" is a consonant, and other times it is a vowel. The rule for telling the two apart is simple: The letter "y" is a consonant when it is the first letter of a syllable that has more than one letter. If "y" is anywhere else in the syllable, it is a vowel.

Sometimes, the letter "w" is a consonant, and other times it is a vowel. The rule for telling the two apart is simple: The letter "w" is vowel when it's part of the second vowel in a double vowel.


Ultimately we just decide on general consensus to help us make sense of the world and just run with it, even if it doesn't always make sense. :) :confused:

We don't "just decide" on anything... these things have facts and proof... not just whatever you want to decide on

[dirge]

Continents as we understand them are a Geopolitical distinction


There is a different, geological, basis for what constitutes a continent. And the scientific basis for that isn't entirely settled. Which is I think the point Gok is making.


Non-living. They require a "host" to provide the mechanics of replication.


This isn't universally accepted, either. The general consensus agrees with you, but Gok is alluding to the grey area here.

I'm not going to argue the merits of either side of these discussions, but yeah I think Gok was pointing to grey areas is all.

[Krayt]

About the virus...



This isn't universally accepted, either. The general consensus agrees with you, but Gok is alluding to the grey area here.


Please show me where people say otherwise, and i'll go take my Science degree in Microbiology (you know... viruses and stuff) back for a refund..... Would only be 20 years of my life ruined if true...

[Unicran]

About the virus...



Please show me where people say otherwise, and i'll go take my Science degree in Microbiology (you know... viruses and stuff) back for a refund..... Would only be 20 years of my life ruined if true...
Hate to be that guy but you come across sounding like Goki-san. ;)

[Trent]

I would also like to note, that despite there being quite a few comments expressing an opinion that there is no need to further divide the G1 era, it has not been added as a poll option, even though the old thread was deleted and this new thread was created so that the poll options could be edited.



Hate to be that guy but you come across sounding like Goki-san. ;)

No, he just sounds like he knows what he’s talking about.

[dirge]

About the virus...
Please show me where people say otherwise, and i'll go take my Science degree in Microbiology (you know... viruses and stuff) back for a refund..... Would only be 20 years of my life ruined if true...

Sigh. Very disingenuous. I too have a science degree in Biology. If you understand microbiology you should know full well about why there's a grey area.

At any rate, and this is not directed at Krayt in particular, it seems too many want to nitpick at Gok's ideas than contribute. I'm no longer going to follow the comments in this thread. If you don't like the premise of the post, ignore it rather than split hairs. I'm not wasting any more of my time here. I'd rather enjoy my Transformers.

[Krayt]

Sigh. Very disingenuous. I too have a science degree in Biology. If you understand microbiology you should know full well about why there's a grey area.

At any rate, and this is not directed at Krayt in particular, it seems too many want to nitpick at Gok's ideas than contribute. I'm no longer going to follow the comments in this thread. If you don't like the premise of the post, ignore it rather than split hairs. I'm not wasting any more of my time here. I'd rather enjoy my Transformers.

Why not do what we want, and go back and add the options we want???

Or is it because Kelvin doesn’t want you too?

[Trent]

At any rate, and this is not directed at Krayt in particular, it seems too many want to nitpick at Gok's ideas than contribute. I'm no longer going to follow the comments in this thread. If you don't like the premise of the post, ignore it rather than split hairs. I'm not wasting any more of my time here. I'd rather enjoy my Transformers.

That is crap. How are we supposed to contribute when the option we are requesting is intentionally not being added to the poll? And once again you tell us that essentially if we don’t like the options, then bugger off? Where’d you learn your polling skills? Russia?

None of what I have said is nitpicking. An idea has been thrown out to be supposedly discussed by all but it appears as though a discussion was not really being sought, rather the validation of one of 3 ideas that a small group of fans have decided they want to impose on the rest of the board. If you need any further evidence, only 4 people have voted. Either the member engagement on OTCA is at an all time low or none of the provided options are proving popular.

[UltraMarginal]

Continents as we understand them are a Geopolitical distinction



Once again, Continents as we understand them are a Geopolitical distinction



A planet is a celestial body that (a) is in orbit around the Sun, (b) has sufficient mass for its self-gravity to overcome rigid body forces so that it assumes a hydrostatic equilibrium (nearly round) shape, and (c) has cleared the neighbourhood around its orbit.


Non-living. They require a "host" to provide the mechanics of replication.



They aren't. "Declaration on the common language" was issued in 2017.


1: The Korean War.
2: Taiwan is seperate... Unless you are Chinese. They are seeking their seat on the UN seperate from China.



Becaue January and February were added circa 713BC



A vowel is a sound, not a letter!

Sometimes, the letter "y" is a consonant, and other times it is a vowel. The rule for telling the two apart is simple: The letter "y" is a consonant when it is the first letter of a syllable that has more than one letter. If "y" is anywhere else in the syllable, it is a vowel.

Sometimes, the letter "w" is a consonant, and other times it is a vowel. The rule for telling the two apart is simple: The letter "w" is vowel when it's part of the second vowel in a double vowel.



We don't "just decide" on anything... these things have facts and proof... not just whatever you want to decide on

You've put a smile on my dial Krayt, mostly because you bothered to respond.




Sigh. Very disingenuous. I too have a science degree in Biology. If you understand microbiology you should know full well about why there's a grey area.

At any rate, and this is not directed at Krayt in particular, it seems too many want to nitpick at Gok's ideas than contribute. I'm no longer going to follow the comments in this thread. If you don't like the premise of the post, ignore it rather than split hairs. I'm not wasting any more of my time here. I'd rather enjoy my Transformers.

Perhaps nitpicking is happening because that's what Gok tends to do everywhere he posts, and people probably don't want to have their noses rubbed in the 'results' of this poll every time a G1 toy or character is mentioned for the foreseeable future in a way that doesn't specifically conform to the 'preferred' of the options presented here, effectively reducing their ability to just enjoy their Transformers. Especially if there is collection counting involved.

[Unicran]

I too have a Science Degree...



*snip*
I too have a science degree in Biology.
*snip*
"The sea was angry that day, my friends. Like an old man trying to send back soup in a deli. I got about fifty feet out and suddenly, the great beast appeared before me. I tell you, he was ten stories high if he was a foot."

[Unicran]

Well, that settles it. The poll has been running for almost 2 months now. The poll unequivocally shows the preference for the Age of Distinction model, three times the vote of any other option on the poll.

[UltraMarginal]

Post removed. Let's me mature & respectful, please.

[dirge]

Well, that settles it. The poll has been running for almost 2 months now. The poll unequivocally shows the preference for the Age of Distinction model, three times the vote of any other option on the poll.

I hope this is a sincere statement. If not, be aware that I will be removing sarcastic & trolling comments (regardless of who they're aimed at). There's too much of happening lately, and frankly, it's ruining my enjoyment of this board seeing some members intent on picking at others they don't like