Look, I know some folks were expecting a show where the entire crew with no exceptions to completely fall to pieces within the first two episodes and spend the entire series hating and plotting to murder one another. At least in their spare time while the rest of it would comprise of them all becoming vicious bloodthirsty space pirates who revel in being free of the Federation and go around ravaging, destroying and stealing everything from every sentient race encountered (especially the nice ones who welcome them) because that's "more true to life" and "better drama" than people who decide to overcome their differences and accept the aid others give them.
But it wasn't going to happen.
Battlestar Galactica pulled it off to some degree. That show was pure excellence, up until the final episode.
Those same producers helped re-introduce Trek to a whole new audience, gave us the second most popular and iconic series Treks since the TOS, the second highest grossing Trek film too date, allowed mass merchendising of Trek product, opened a themed resturant in Las Vegas and had successful careers before and after Trek but because of minor issues one single show, they're screw ups?
Yes. Present accomplishments do not erase past screw ups. Just ask the President's critics.
No, they don't just base it on rating alone but it's been proven to be one of the most direct. Works for every other show on TV, why should Voyager be an exception?
What other way is there to get a better idea of what fans and casual viewers collectively are responding too? It's one of the only ways I know of to calculate the majority of the entire viewing audience.
If you to go by whats online;for everyone like you, there's another viewer like TheBorg, that enjoys the eps. Who's feedback do you consider?
What can I say, not every spin off can please every fan.
Reviews, that's how. Look at what people are actually saying
, instead of only looking at how many digits those ratings are showing. The only thing that's been proven by ratings is that you can get more revenue from advertisers. I don't have a Nielsen box, so they're not including me. I don't know a single person with a Nielsen box. Do you? This "majority" that you speak of is a fantasy. In fact, in 2009 something like 20,000
out of 114,500,000 households actually had those boxes, so these producers are kidding themselves.