Biggest Plot Hole?

[EliyahuQeoni]

Anwar said:
Because their level of tech and general society is vastly different from ours.

The same could be said of us in comparison to people 300 years ago, or 3,000 years ago. Yet human nature has been pretty much a constant. I don't expect it to change anytime soon. And I certainly don't expect it to change just because our technology advances a bit more.

One of the major problems with the Next Gen era Trek is that the supposed changes in humanity were more unrealistic than Warp Drive.

 

[SFRabid]

Anwar said:...
What's the point of capitalist-driven economies when resource scarcity is non-existant?

To encourage people to be productive and reward those that work harder and longer.

It never made sinse to me that the Federation did away with money, but the crew frequently went shopping when on shore leave.

 

[Anwar]

EliyahuQeoni said:

Anwar said:
Because their level of tech and general society is vastly different from ours.

The same could be said of us in comparison to people 300 years ago, or 3,000 years ago. Yet human nature has been pretty much a constant. I don't expect it to change anytime soon. And I certainly don't expect it to change just because our technology advances a bit more.

One of the major problems with the Next Gen era Trek is that the supposed changes in humanity were more unrealistic than Warp Drive.

The technological advances over those 3000 years don't compare to the advanced made by TNG. Any advances we made still didn't do away with resource scarcity (in fact, 3000 years ago there weren't huge populations using up all the food and resources so that wasn't much of an issue back then) or

Thing is, those advances wouldn't do anything to affect human nature, whilst the advanced made by TNG actually would.

 

[Anwar]

SFRabid said:

Anwar said:...
What's the point of capitalist-driven economies when resource scarcity is non-existant?

To encourage people to be productive and reward those that work harder and longer.

Your saying that no human being would ever put hard work into anything unless there was a reward in it? What about personal pride and dedication?

 

[Just_Bob]

The biggest plot hole? Enterprise!

 

[shatastrophic]

Just_Bob said:
The biggest plot hole? Enterprise!

Amen.

 

[Anwar]

Well, TOS wasn't really made with a prequel in mind so I do think a prequel was a bad idea for Trek, but I can't say that's why I don't like ENT because I DO like it.

 

[Profhig]

Temporal Cold War, not the idea of it but the fact that we never really found anything out! like the future guy that spoke to the sulliban, i know there has been tons of discussion but have we ever really had any answers?

 

[SFRabid]

Anwar said:

SFRabid said:

Anwar said:...
What's the point of capitalist-driven economies when resource scarcity is non-existant?

To encourage people to be productive and reward those that work harder and longer.

Your saying that no human being would ever put hard work into anything unless there was a reward in it? What about personal pride and dedication?

Take a look at the real world and you will find your answer. Too many people are willing to sit and watch while others do the work. People don't wash dishes, clean toilets or work in a mine because of pride in their work. Honestly, how much work would you get done if you did not get paid? The only place this would come close to working is within a military type system such as Starfleet. But even then there has to be some way for the people on a ship to trade goods and services outside of the system. Otherwise shore leave could only happen on Starfleet property. Quark does not give drinks away to people in uniform just because they have no method of commerce.

 

[Guartho]

TeutonicNights said:

7. Khan beaming up the Genesis device without having received the coordinates from Terrell

Star Trek 2 said:

Khan What's the delay?

Terrell All is well, sir. You - you have the coordinates to beam up Genesis...

Khan First thing's first, Captain. Kill Admiral Kirk.

 

[Anwar]

SFRabid said:

Anwar said:

SFRabid said:

Anwar said:...
What's the point of capitalist-driven economies when resource scarcity is non-existant?

To encourage people to be productive and reward those that work harder and longer.

Your saying that no human being would ever put hard work into anything unless there was a reward in it? What about personal pride and dedication?

Take a look at the real world and you will find your answer. Too many people are willing to sit and watch while others do the work. People don't wash dishes, clean toilets or work in a mine because of pride in their work. Honestly, how much work would you get done if you did not get paid? The only place this would come close to working is within a military type system such as Starfleet. But even then there has to be some way for the people on a ship to trade goods and services outside of the system. Otherwise shore leave could only happen on Starfleet property. Quark does not give drinks away to people in uniform just because they have no method of commerce.

That's why there are Federation Credits. They aren't worth much within the Federation but they use them for economies outside the Federation that still do use currency. Then there's also non-replicable items like Gold-pressed Latinum.

Heck, we even had Bashir complaining about how his father kept changing jobs, not because it was giving his dad money troubles (because you don't have those in the Federation) but because he wished his dad would pick an occupation and stick with it!

 

[TremblingBluStar]

Dorothy_Zbornak said:
2nd place: ST VI: They lure Valeris to Sickbay on the pretense the conspirators are still alive and ready to talk, so she goes there to kill them--why would she expect Sickbay to be empty? They had just summoned court reporters to Sickbay!

Who said she expected sickbay to be empty? Maybe she planned to kill everybody in the room.

My biggest beef with any episode of Trek is the TNG episode "Second Chances".

Basically, it explains that Picard got where he did in Starfleet because early on he was a wreckless, arrogant asshat who took unnecessary risk and got himself noticed. When Picard is given a glimpse of what his life would have been like had he always been the thoughtful and reserved Picard we know, he ends up a lackey in the science department.

Ummm... excuse me, but what???

Are we to believe that the egalitarian Starfleet we've come to know only rewards people who act like reckless asshats and get themselves noticed? Hmmmmmm... okay.

Further sullying Starfleet's reputation, while in his alternate future Picard the science lackey approaches commander Riker about a career in command, and is told by Riker - a member of the highly evolved Starfleet, where sexism, racism, ageism, anyism is nonexistent - "sorry, you old fuck! Ain't gonna happen!"

Excuse me? Am I to believe that someone with Picard's knowledge and experience wouldn't cut it in Starfleet simply because he wasn't a brash, young, arrogant lieutenant some 20-odd years ago? Further, that a young lieutenant entering Starfleet with the wisdom and experience of the captain of the Federation flagship would end up in a dead end job?

I'm rather shocked that not only is this flimsy episode not criticized more often, that it's considered one of TNG's finest by many fans!

 

[Anwar]

You mean "Tapestry".

Anywho, it wasn't saying he didn't get anywhere because he was reckless. It was saying that as a result of his near-death experience Picard realized his own mortality and how fragile life was. With this new sense of self he shaped up and finally developed a clear goal in life and where he wanted to be, and was now able to see advantages and opportunities where before he likely would never have seen them.

It wasn't saying he got far by being reckless, it was saying that he got where he is by being smart and driven, although this disciplined and dedicated persona came as a result of what his youthful recklessness nearly did to him.

The point of the episode was "You cannot pick and choose what parts of your life you want to have happened" because we are all the results of all that has happened to us, good and bad. It's a hard, not so heartwarming lesson, but it's a real one.

 

[TremblingBluStar]

^
That certainly wasn't very well explained. Q basically told Picard that his life as a science lackey came about because he didn't take risks and get noticed. I don't remember the exact lines, but I believe I have the gist of that scene pretty good.

It also doesn't explain the Riker being a dick scene and telling Picard he can't move into command. It was uncalled for. I guess it could be hypothesized that not having Picard as a captain changed Riker for the worse - but Picard would no doubt have had some sort of recourse if he felt Riker was discriminating against him.

 

[Anwar]

Riker's only experience with Picard in that reality was the wussy Picard who was a nobody that never did anything to deserve a promotion or to be in command. He was used as a way of explaining to us and to Picard how basically he wasn't much of anything.

Q's exact lines:

"The Jean-Luc Picard you wanted to be, the one who did not fight the Nausicaan, had quite a different career from the one you remember. That Picard never had a brush with death. Never came face to face with his own mortality. Never realized how fragile life is or how important each moment must be. So his life never came into focus. He drifted through much of his career, with no plan or agenda, going from one assignment to the next, never seizing the opportunities that presented themselves. He never led the away-team on Milika III to save the ambassador, or take charge of the Stargazer's bridge, when its captain was killed. And no one ever offered him a command. He learned to play it safe – and he never, ever, got noticed by anyone!"

He was basically saying that without the experience he got from losing his real heart and nearly dying just like that, Picard never would've developed the dedicated disciplined personality he had by TNG because he formed that persona in reaction to how his youthful recklessness nearly got him killed.

"Playing it safe" just basically meant he was lazy, it wasn't meant to be an attack on his current self (who is still a risk-taker).

 

[TremblingBluStar]

^
I see what you are saying, but that only makes the notion silly in another way.

Q is basically saying one of two things here. Either the brash young Picard presented had no ambition or interest in command prior to his brush with death, or the Picard we know today has no ambition or drive.

Either way, IMO, it's silly to assume that there is one single defining moment that completely changes a person's entire personality and track in life.

And it still doesn't make Riker look any less prejudice that the Picard he knew up to that point is a "wussy". Starfleet is supposed to be a fairly accepting organization, where anybody with a will is given a chance. Riker should have, at the very least, encouraged Picard to persue his dreams, even if they seemed to have come out of nowhere.

 

[Frodo Lives]

Are you saying a near-death experience wouldn't change your life? Do you know for certain? When was the last time you were stabbed in the back and almost died?

And Riker's position was totally understandable. Starfleet may be a caring agency but that doesn't mean it doesn't function on merit or prior experience. The alt-Picard had never shown any command qualities, and Riker's suddenly supposed to believe that he's gained skills he's never shown off before and give him the keys to the ship. That's crazy and Riker, like any decent person, was straight up with Picard on that.

Basically he took the track you're taking now, and believed that a person can never change.

 

[Good Will Riker]

TremblingBluStar said:
Either way, IMO, it's silly to assume that there is one single defining moment that completely changes a person's entire personality and track in life.

Wanna bet?

 

[Crewman47]

Something I just of from that episode. Should Riker have been on the Enterprise as if I remember right it was Picard who chose him to be his XO, did he even apply for the position in the first place? Probably same thing about Troi, did she chooese her position on the Enterprise or did Picard select her?

 

[trash80]

Well in "reality" history would be totally changed and the crew might be very different. You could say though that Q created the alternative reality like that to bring it home to Picard.