View Single Post
Old February 11 2013, 01:33 AM   #42
Andymator
Lieutenant Commander
 
Andymator's Avatar
 
Location: Ottawa, Canada
Re: 10 Reason ST:DS9 Misjudged

NKemp3 wrote: View Post
I would say don't waste your breath but I don't want to be rude like BillJ who must have rushed over here to spread truth to the rest of us idiots.

As for Andymator...no point in even reading his stuff further ...
Heheheheh, clever. Surely nobody will notice it if you do it this way!

NKemp3 wrote: View Post
All we get I'm afraid are weak arguments that fail to contradict what the writer of the article stated. Thus we are going in circles even by debating him.

You do know how a debate works, right?

I claimed that several of the articles points are false. So far the one that people seem to disagree with me on is this one;

"#1: Serialized, not episodic."

And I belive I have proven my point on how this isn't true, so no need to get into it again.

NKemp3 wrote: View Post
If Andymator had simply stopped at pointing out that DS9 is nowhere near a serialized as some folks make it out to be he would have had a winning case. Instead he himself becomes, respectfully, a tad revisionist by insisting TNG relied just as much on continuity, character development, complexity and risk taking as DS9 (and then denies doing so!).
Please quote the relevant post where I deny doing this.

You are once again confusing serialization with continuity, and now also characterization and complexity and risk taking...

I maintain that both TNG and DS9 have rich continuity / characterization / complexity / risk taking. To claim either is somehow the clear leader in any of these critieria is rediculous. They're overwhelmingly just different flavours of the same damn formula.

I also maintain that one of the differences between the two productions is that TNG did not engage in serialization of it's episode format, and DS9 did on three occassions during it's run.

NKemp3 wrote: View Post
Worse of all the writer of the article that led to this thread listed at least 8 items that Trek and casual fans during the 90s actually complained about or mentioned as reasons why they did not support DS9. These gripes were common knowledge. Yet Andymator insists that the article was nothing more than made up ramblings which suggests that the rest of us were imagining all the whining that went on about Deep Space Nine during its run. Considering Andymator has, as far as I'm concerned, failed to back up his spin on events all he is doing is taking a thread hostage in order to express his singular viewpoint. But that's just my opinion. Nothing personal against the guy.
A small minority of people *always* say these kind of things, that's where the misinformation actually comes from. They did it with the Motion Picture, with the Wrath of Khan, with TNG, etc etc all the way up to the recent 2009 film. That does not equate to having any meaningful impact on the show's success. My contention is not that nobody ever thought these things, it's that most people didn't think these things, and the high DS9 viewing numbers support this.

Can you imagine in 20 years somebody writing an article about how unfairly JJ Abrams "Star Trek" was treated because a tiny vocal fraction of people on the internet had complaints about it? Sure, it didn't get to "Avengers" or "Dark Knight" levels of proliferation or box office numbers, but that had no correlation to the guys and girls on the Trek BBS whining about canon violations and tonal differences with their favorite version of Star Trek. It did great, and should be remembered and celebrated for what it was.

Last edited by Andymator; February 11 2013 at 02:09 AM.
Andymator is offline   Reply With Quote