RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 137,867
Posts: 5,328,912
Members: 24,555
Currently online: 536
Newest member: ndjamena

TrekToday headlines

Retro Review: Inquisition
By: Michelle on Jul 12

Cubify Star Trek 3DMe Mini Figurines
By: T'Bonz on Jul 11

Latest Official Starships Collection Ships
By: T'Bonz on Jul 10

Seven of Nine Bobble Head
By: T'Bonz on Jul 9

Pegg The Prankster
By: T'Bonz on Jul 9

More Trek Stars Join Unbelievable!!!!!
By: T'Bonz on Jul 8

Star Trek #35 Preview
By: T'Bonz on Jul 8

New ThinkGeek Trek Apparel
By: T'Bonz on Jul 7

Star Trek Movie Prop Auction
By: T'Bonz on Jul 7

Drexler: NX Engineering Room Construction
By: T'Bonz on Jul 7


Welcome! The Trek BBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans. Please login to see our full range of forums as well as the ability to send and receive private messages, track your favourite topics and of course join in the discussions.

If you are a new visitor, join us for free. If you are an existing member please login below. Note: for members who joined under our old messageboard system, please login with your display name not your login name.


Go Back   The Trek BBS > Star Trek TV Series > Star Trek - Original Series

Star Trek - Original Series The one that started it all...

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old August 10 2013, 11:13 PM   #46
Arik Deylan
Cadet
 
Re: Could stardates make some sense?

Here’s just a thought.
In some military circles, you would enter the date that you have whatever incident had occurred on (Just For Example) say at the top, Or in the case of a computer log the entry date. Then in your written or stated logs you would reference the time of each incident that occurred concurrent. This would allow you to give a more detailed report as a reference. Star dates allow the people to give a basic report for the day in question. You would then reference the incidents as supplemental using the specific time it occurred in the report. There really isn’t any mention of specific time in any of the shows during the logs. That may explain why at some point during the shows, you would hear the captains say “Captains Log Supplemental.” This may have been time stamped during the log for specifics.
Arik Deylan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 10 2013, 11:47 PM   #47
The Old Mixer
Vice Admiral
 
The Old Mixer's Avatar
 
Location: Connecticut
Re: Could stardates make some sense?

Christopher wrote: View Post
It belongs in the same category as all the TNG signage with Dirty Pair and Buckaroo Banzai in-jokes, or the Enterprise-D master systems display with the race car and the rubber ducky.
Just because they never showed us the room with the giant rubber ducky doesn't mean that it didn't exist....
The Old Mixer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 11 2013, 03:34 AM   #48
Harvey
Admiral
 
Harvey's Avatar
 
Re: Could stardates make some sense?

Nerys Myk wrote: View Post
I wasn't referring to the Menagerie in particular, but the idea that "the producers wanted the series to be scientifically as accurate as possible". I think that's a slight exaggeration.
Oh, I totally agree with this sentiment.

My post was in response to Christopher, not you. I was in a hurry this morning, and I didn't use the quote function. Sorry if that was confusing.
__________________
"This begs explanation." - de Forest Research on Star Trek

My blog: Star Trek Fact Check.
Harvey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 11 2013, 03:47 AM   #49
Nerys Myk
Fleet Admiral
 
Nerys Myk's Avatar
 
Location: House of Kang, now with ridges
Re: Could stardates make some sense?

It's cool.

Great blog BTW.
__________________
The boring one, the one with Khan, the one where Spock returns, the one with whales, the dumb one, the last one, the one with Kirk, the one with the Borg, the stupid one, the bad one, the new one, the other one with Khan.
Nerys Myk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 13 2013, 09:29 PM   #50
Boris Skrbic
Commander
 
Re: Could stardates make some sense?

Harvey: by any chance, did you get to see the earliest draft of Star Trek Guide? The stardate entry was written probably around the time of the second pilot, seeing as numbers from its range are listed as examples, but I'm curious if any wording was changed between the earliest and the latest drafts.

(For that matter, revisions to Star Trek Guide might make an interesting blog topic all by themselves, leaving out the full text of that document, of course, but including any interesting changes.)
Boris Skrbic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 13 2013, 10:09 PM   #51
King Daniel Into Darkness
Admiral
 
King Daniel Into Darkness's Avatar
 
Location: England again
Re: Could stardates make some sense?


Forget the "vernal galaxy" and Starfleet's racism, I want to know what a "3XY phagrin level - mass computer" is!
__________________
Star Trek Imponderables, fun mashups of Trek's biggest continuity errors! Ep1, Ep2 and Ep3
King Daniel Into Darkness is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 14 2013, 12:12 AM   #52
Harvey
Admiral
 
Harvey's Avatar
 
Re: Could stardates make some sense?

Boris wrote: View Post
Harvey: by any chance, did you get to see the earliest draft of Star Trek Guide? The stardate entry was written probably around the time of the second pilot, seeing as numbers from its range are listed as examples, but I'm curious if any wording was changed between the earliest and the latest drafts.

(For that matter, revisions to Star Trek Guide might make an interesting blog topic all by themselves, leaving out the full text of that document, of course, but including any interesting changes.)
The UCLA collection has multiple versions of the writer's guide. I have only been able to leaf through them -- at the time, I wanted to know when the 1/3 female, 2/3 male crew claim came in, so I just speed-read them for that information -- but they would be interesting to revisit. When I get back to LA.
__________________
"This begs explanation." - de Forest Research on Star Trek

My blog: Star Trek Fact Check.
Harvey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 14 2013, 10:22 AM   #53
Boris Skrbic
Commander
 
Re: Could stardates make some sense?

Thanks, I'd appreciate it.

Somewhat back on topic: Pike could've easily used JJ stardates, since according to Orci, the prime and alternate realities are identical up to 2233.04. I know this is hard to reconcile with some onscreen evidence (the huge Kelvin etc.), but I see no issue specifically with stardates.
Boris Skrbic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 14 2013, 10:40 AM   #54
King Daniel Into Darkness
Admiral
 
King Daniel Into Darkness's Avatar
 
Location: England again
Re: Could stardates make some sense?

The Enterprise-D is much bigger than the later Voyager and even the Enterprise-E, volume-wise. The Kelvin and the old Enterprise are no different.
__________________
Star Trek Imponderables, fun mashups of Trek's biggest continuity errors! Ep1, Ep2 and Ep3
King Daniel Into Darkness is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 14 2013, 12:21 PM   #55
Warped9
Admiral
 
Warped9's Avatar
 
Location: Brockville, Ontario, Canada
Re: Could stardates make some sense?

Boris wrote: View Post
...since according to Orci, the prime and alternate realities are identical up to 2233.04. I know this is hard to reconcile with some onscreen evidence (the huge Kelvin etc.), but I see no issue specifically with stardates.
And I now lose interest in this topic.
__________________
STAR TREK: 1964-1991, 2013-?
Warped9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 14 2013, 12:28 PM   #56
Boris Skrbic
Commander
 
Re: Could stardates make some sense?

Why? They'd fit perfectly in that era, and also happen to be canon, unlike Mandel's extrapolation of Kirk's gravestone "birthdate".
Boris Skrbic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 14 2013, 12:32 PM   #57
Warped9
Admiral
 
Warped9's Avatar
 
Location: Brockville, Ontario, Canada
Re: Could stardates make some sense?

Boris wrote: View Post
Why? They'd fit perfectly in the era of United Earthship Enterprise and uniforms of United Earth. They also happen to be canon, unlike Mandel's extrapolation of Kirk's gravestone "birthdate".
I have no tolerance or respect whatsoever for JJ's stuff and simply don't recognize it. I ignore it completely. I find his work offensive and consider it wholly unrelated to the original Star Trek.

If it's dragged into discussions of original Star Trek then I just don't acknowledge it or I move on to another subject.
__________________
STAR TREK: 1964-1991, 2013-?
Warped9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 14 2013, 01:01 PM   #58
Timo
Admiral
 
Re: Could stardates make some sense?

Well, it's an integral part of the discussion of Star Trek. Whether the original Star Trek is that or not, opinions vary... But I guess discussions in this particular sub-forum sort of have to include TOS, too.

Forget the "vernal galaxy" and Starfleet's racism, I want to know what a "3XY phagrin level - mass computer" is!
Considering the context, "3XY", "phagrin" and "level-mass" are likely to be a string of nonsense codewords.

Timo Saloniemi
Timo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 14 2013, 01:02 PM   #59
King Daniel Into Darkness
Admiral
 
King Daniel Into Darkness's Avatar
 
Location: England again
Re: Could stardates make some sense?

^But they sound so cool, and bring to mind the computer in Adam West's Batcave.



While I of course see the merit in sticking only to what the originators of Star Trek intended, I get a lot of enjoyment looking back and seeing classic Trek in the new light of the sequels and spin-offs.
__________________
Star Trek Imponderables, fun mashups of Trek's biggest continuity errors! Ep1, Ep2 and Ep3
King Daniel Into Darkness is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 14 2013, 01:27 PM   #60
Christopher
Writer
 
Christopher's Avatar
 
Re: Could stardates make some sense?

King Daniel Into Darkness wrote: View Post
While I of course see the merit in sticking only to what the originators of Star Trek intended, I get a lot of enjoyment looking back and seeing classic Trek in the new light of the sequels and spin-offs.
And the problem with the purist reverence for what the creators "originally intended" is that what we actually see onscreen is not what the creators intended -- it's just what they had to settle for. It's the best approximation of their intent that they could achieve with the limited time, money, and resources they had available, and within the limits of network censorship, advertiser interference, and other factors that required compromise. I think you'd find that most TV or film creators, given the chance, would gladly rework or replace a great deal of what ended up onscreen in their original works. We know for a fact that Roddenberry would; in his later productions he tried to distance himself from a lot of TOS's content. When he had the Klingons redesigned in ST:TMP, he asked fans to assume they'd always looked that way and TOS had simply gotten it wrong. And when he made TNG, he approached it as a soft reboot of TOS; while it was nominally a continuation, he mostly tried to distance it from TOS and treat it as a second chance to get right what he felt he'd gotten wrong before.

So that kind of fan purism, that slavish devotion to the details of TOS and the kneejerk hostility toward anything that changes them, has nothing to do with creator intent; indeed, it runs in direct opposition to Roddenberry's documented intentions. Creators are not so resistant to innovation -- if they were, they wouldn't be creators.
__________________
Christopher L. Bennett Homepage -- Site update 4/8/14 including annotations for Rise of the Federation: Tower of Babel

Written Worlds -- My blog
Christopher is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:24 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
FireFox 2+ or Internet Explorer 7+ highly recommended.