What is your personal head canon?

[Lord Garth]

But, anyway, head-canon.

I think the original design for the Ambassador Class, that didn't make it to "Yesterday's Enterprise", is an intermediate design between the Enterprise-C and the Galaxy Class.

If Starfleet hadn't decided to not have an Enterprise for 20 years out of respect for the Enterprise-C being lost with all hands (another piece of head-canon, which I strongly agree with), I think original concept for the Ambassador Class is what the Enterprise-D would've looked like. If it had been launched in the 2345-2349 range.

Designing the Enterprise-C — Forgotten Trek

Rick Sternbach created the 'C' in just a few days, using Andrew Probert's design as a stepping stone.

forgottentrek.com

It just looks like perfect design to come in-between.

 

[F. King Daniel]

There were more main characters than we saw on all the Trek shows, but

Spoiler: Prodigy S2

the Loom got them and now nobody remembers they ever existed

 

[Richard S. Ta]

I think Star Trek fans generally want to like as much Star Trek as possible, and if there are ways that they can just overlook one little obstacle to their entertainment then they will.

This for me. I greatly enjoy DSC, SNW and am looking forward to SFA and other related projects. The little obstacles there are the visual discrepancies and so… they are an alt-timeline to me.

I don’t think everyone should do so and it’s not my intention to discredit or lessen anything. I certainly don’t because I enjoy the shows.

I use to think that.

I don't believe that as much anymore. Haven't seen Abrams and the writers on Enterprise were accused of "heresy" on another board.

By nature, in all pursuits, people who use extreme language tend to be fanatics rather than fans. I’ve read people on this board say that DSC broke their heart or that Abrams movies are a travesty.

If that’s the kind of reaction I was regularly having in regards to something I am supposed to enjoy, I’d step back from it.

Fanatics cannot step back. They can’t let go, even though they clearly should and so the toxicity starts to seep in.

 

[HotRod]

Well, in the case of SNW, the producers have actually admitted that it's a new timeline.

They most certainly have not.

 

[Tiran O'Saurus]

It's a well known fact that Terrence "Terry" "Jesus" Matalas snuck into Paramount headquarters and preemptively Zaslaved Section 31 and Starfleet Academy. When Kurtzman heard about this, he fired himself and broke 84 IMAX screens on the way out.

My source is the same one that brought us the scoop about SNW being in another timeline: Rear End Reporting.

 

[Lord Garth]

It's a well known fact that Terrence "Terry" "Jesus" Matalas snuck into Paramount headquarters and preemptively Zaslaved Section 31 and Starfleet Academy. When Kurtzman heard about this, he fired himself and broke 84 IMAX screens on the way out.

Enough of this shit. I happen to be looking forward to Legacy (if it's greenlit) and Starfleet Academy. Yes, contrary to what you think, it's possible to be interested in both. I'm also looking forward to Section 31 but don't want to talk about it on TrekBBS and deal with all the headaches that happen every time Georgiou is brought up.

Oh, and did I mention I just ended a stretch where I fought for Discovery tooth-and-nail for seven years? Which did not make me very popular with a good number of people here.

So, seriously. This isn't funny or amusing anymore. Can you please knock it the Hell off?

 

[Daedalus]

I'll bet Kurtzman and Matalas get on better than most fans do.

 

[Tiran O'Saurus]

I didn't even mention Legacy. I'm making fun of the misinformation-spewing that the more fantastically minded fans do, not necessarily what they favor or oppose. I'm not massively rooting for Legacy, but I wouldn't mind it. What I would mind is the sort of nonsense you hear vomited out practically every day about shadow wars within Paramount.

 

[1001001]

So, seriously. This isn't funny or amusing anymore. Can you please knock it the Hell off?

Their post was obviously using humor to make a point. And it’s not your place to tell people what they can or cannot post.

Relax.

 

[Lord Garth]

I'll bet Kurtzman and Matalas get on better than most fans do.

I agree.

 

[Tiran O'Saurus]

Oh, almost certainly.

 

[xenotaris]

Timelines are import to keep things consistent. SNWs completely change the encounter with the Gorn and thus make it awkward to watch TOS if SNW is supposed to be part of the same timeline as TOS.

I don't think fans want an excuse to hate nutrek because of timelines. In fact I think Star Trek could better work if it had multiple timelines. Like Transformers and Gundam have multiple timelines and continuities.

Why can't we have the Prime Trek (TOS, TAS, TNG, DS9, VOY, ENT, LD and Movie 1-9), the Kelvin Timeline, and the Discovery Trek (DIS, PIC, SNW)

 

[Ray Hardgrit]

Why can't we have the Prime Trek (TOS, TAS, TNG, DS9, VOY, ENT, LD and Movie 1-9), the Kelvin Timeline, and the Discovery Trek (DIS, PIC, SNW)

It would've simplified things a great deal if the writers of Discovery and SNW were unrestricted by continuity, but I don't think the producers want to make alternate universe Star Trek. They want to tell stories about actual Spock and Kirk that actually happened in their past.

I wouldn't say Picard should be on the 'Discovery Trek' list though, as it's pretty firmly tied to the Prime timeline continuity, in both story and visuals. In fact, so is Discovery once it reaches the halfway point, the occasional Ferengi aside.

 

[Frontis]

"Alternate tmelines" are just other words for "taking characters and other elements of known stories and write any new stories you want with it."
Whether to like it or not is personal and individual opinion and taste.
For me SNW doesn't feel like an alternate timeline with the exception of the mentioned Gorn.

 

[Turtletrekker]

Nah. Let that era rest.

 

[James Cole]

Why can't we have the Prime Trek (TOS, TAS, TNG, DS9, VOY, ENT, LD and Movie 1-9), the Kelvin Timeline, and the Discovery Trek (DIS, PIC, SNW)

This has been a very animating point of contention among the fandom over the years. Raising the theory is banned in one major Star Trek Reddit community, for example. This BBS has many threads focused on this specific topic.

One of the best arguments made for treating DISCOVERY and SNW as a reboot timeline is here at the site Ex Astris Scientia.

 

[Richard S. Ta]

In regards to Ex Astris Scientia… That’s a hard no from me. They stray too far into fanatic territory for me and their dislike of DSC etc. is too agenda-led.

 

[fireproof78]

In regards to Ex Astris Scientia… That’s a hard no from me. They stray too far into fanatic territory for me and their dislike of DSC etc. is too agenda-led.

Same. Spent much too long hours on making arguments against Trek being Trek to be considered good faith for me.

Why can't we have the Prime Trek (TOS, TAS, TNG, DS9, VOY, ENT, LD and Movie 1-9), the Kelvin Timeline, and the Discovery Trek (DIS, PIC, SNW)

Because, in my opinion things don't fit perfectly together in those categories.

 

[HotRod]

SNWs completely change the encounter with the Gorn and thus make it awkward to watch TOS if SNW is supposed to be part of the same timeline as TOS.

Meh, not really. With a little creative thinking, it works perfectly fine.

One of the best arguments made for treating DISCOVERY and SNW as a reboot timeline is here at the site Ex Astris Scientia.

Yeah, no. That idiot has become so fanatical and biased against anything that doesn't fit into his own vision for how Trek should be, that any arguments he puts foward are worthless and best left ignored.

 

[Richard S. Ta]

I was reading through their list of ‘proof’ everything is in a different timeline, some of the points they make are perfectly fine, but then you get stuff, and I’m paraphrasing, but:

In DSC Klingons eat their enemies, which is a contradiction. Even though there is a DS9 episode where Jadzia and some Klingons make a blood oath to eat their enemies hearts… they probably didn’t mean it. So it’s a contradiction.



How can you be a Klingon and swear something to your blood, a literal blood oath, and not mean it?

Then there’s just the general language they use when talking about DSC. Changes aren’t just changes. They are stupid changes or obnoxious changes. Things are arbitrarily labelled as ‘nonsense’, ‘garbage’…

It’s… Well, let’s say at least I like to have a veneer of objective journalism when I’m reading an article. Ex Scientia don’t approach DSC with open arms and anything they write is coloured by that. Unpleasant.