Spoilers Could the altered timeline be the same universe as the one in "Seeds of Dissent"?

[dupersuper]

Because if you just ignore it, then nothing is sacred. It's all meaningless.

The story is sacred, the exact date given is meaningless. If you dub in some one saying 2096 in the episode, does it change anything about the story?

I'm just a bit flummoxed at how blasé everybody seems to have gotten about continuity. Does no one care about keeping things consistent anymore?

Vulcans used to be Vulcanians, Pike used to treat women being on the bridge as new and unusual, the Enterprise in Discovery literally looks different than it did in TOS, prime universe adult Saavik, Spock, Pike, Number One, Maddox, Zial and quite soon Uhura, Chappel, M'Benga and even Kirk have been/will be played by completely different actors. Starfleet officers should by all rights be super fast telekinetics with force field belts and transporter supplied virtual immortality. The Enterprise A can get from Earth orbit to nearly the center of the galaxy in hours, but a century later crossing the galaxy is expected to take Voyager 75 years. What consistency?

It's just more important to me to maintain the conceit that Star Trek takes place in the future of the real world than to maintain die hard fealty to the random year writers who never expected this fictional setting to last so long put in the characters mouths.

 

[Brainsucker]

The story is sacred, the exact date given is meaningless. If you dub in some one saying 2096 in the episode, does it change anything about the story?

Vulcans used to be Vulcanians, Pike used to treat women being on the bridge as new and unusual, the Enterprise in Discovery literally looks different than it did in TOS, prime universe adult Saavik, Spock, Pike, Number One, Maddox, Zial and quite soon Uhura, Chappel, M'Benga and even Kirk have been/will be played by completely different actors. Starfleet officers should by all rights be super fast telekinetics with force field belts and transporter supplied virtual immortality. The Enterprise A can get from Earth orbit to nearly the center of the galaxy in hours, but a century later crossing the galaxy is expected to take Voyager 75 years. What consistency?

It's just more important to me to maintain the conceit that Star Trek takes place in the future of the real world than to maintain die hard fealty to the random year writers who never expected for this fictional setting to last so long put in the characters mouths.

I agree. If Star Trek as a franchise still exist in 23rd Century, and we still landlock on Earth at that day, then they may adjusted the time of Kirk's Enterprise to 26th century. The point is, Star Trek is happened in the future of our real world.