Very trueNot that being onscreen matters much, either.
Very trueNot that being onscreen matters much, either.
They stopped being considered the bad guys. They still acted like the bad guys much of the time.
I still want to know what happened to The Empire and if the Federation is cool with the Klingons having subject worlds like Organia. (Organia was definitionally not the first.)
How doesn't it? The opposition to this, indicates that it is controversial.Again, how does this qualify as a controversial opinion?
How doesn't it? The opposition to this, indicates that it is controversial.
In other words Gene Roddenberry's attempt at having a proverbial good series, has been overturned. Therefore it is controversial.
What is going on now, with the series is approximately the same as a car going off a cliff and exploding for no apparent reason...other than it looks cool, and is therefore 'proper'.
It is not. Proper. And shouldn't be happening appropriately every season, multiple times.
The opposite argument is approximately "Oh, it Star Trek, who cares?".
This is an invalid argument. It is like in real life that you develop appendicitis, which needs to be removed, and surgeon takes your heart instead.
What are you going on about?How doesn't it? The opposition to this, indicates that it is controversial.
In other words Gene Roddenberry's attempt at having a proverbial good series, has been overturned. Therefore it is controversial.
What is going on now, with the series is approximately the same as a car going off a cliff and exploding for no apparent reason...other than it looks cool, and is therefore 'proper'.
It is not. Proper. And shouldn't be happening appropriately every season, multiple times.
The opposite argument is approximately "Oh, it Star Trek, who cares?".
This is an invalid argument. It is like in real life that you develop appendicitis, which needs to be removed, and surgeon takes your heart instead.
Your metrics for determining whether something is good or controversial, much like your original post, make extremely little sense.In other words Gene Roddenberry's attempt at having a proverbial good series, has been overturned. Therefore it is controversial.
Define proper for Star Trek? Star Trek has variability to it that is baked in.is not. Proper. And shouldn't be happening appropriately every season, multiple times
Assman & Assman have never won a case.I haven't seen a defense this bad mounted since Kramer was Newman's witness in traffic court.
In other words Gene Roddenberry's attempt at having a proverbial good series, has been overturned. Therefore it is controversial.
Like an AI being fed prompts by kittens dancing on a keyboard.
Orville of course. The most proper of all proper Trek.Define proper for Star Trek? Star Trek has variability to it that is baked in.

Speaking of Skynet...how come T1000 didn't morph into something that could run fast like a cheetah instead of remaining bipedal? Or Usain Bolt? Dumb AI wanted to stay Robert Patrick.My eyes played tricks on me. I thought you said AI was being fed kittens. I mean if that was true then AI will have crossed lines even Skynet never went to.
I was with you when it came to defending precious kitties and was all prepared to support you if you'd finished two sentences earlier. Now you just cancelled it out.Orville of course. The most proper of all proper Trek.![]()
Someone once joked he should have morphed into John's redheaded friend from the mall. Boom. Skynet wins.Speaking of Skynet...how come T1000 didn't morph into something that could run fast like a cheetah instead of remaining bipedal? Or Usain Bolt? Dumb AI wanted to stay Robert Patrick.

Got to love the rampant drug use.Orville of course. The most proper of all proper Trek.![]()
Speaking of Skynet...how come T1000 didn't morph into something that could run fast like a cheetah instead of remaining bipedal? Or Usain Bolt? Dumb AI wanted to stay Robert Patrick.
We use essential cookies to make this site work, and optional cookies to enhance your experience.