Learning To Count - Not Abrams Style

[yt]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hl6VpmjKZAs[/yt]

 

Hehe, i remember this one from my son's childhood. I loved how Sesame Street used humor not only for children but also for the adults who watched with their children.

BTW, Patrick Stewart looked mighty hot in that clip.

 

It looks like the zero does come first. If it is on Sesame Street it has to be correct. Who knew? <---Hey look! The Count is a Romulan.--->

 

Sesame Street is not canon. Regardless, the Count is clearly mistaken this clip. It would be in our best interests to ignore him here.

 

....but Patrick Stewart is in this clip... and Number One is also... and it is on screen... therefore it must be canon!

You know I was thinking of you and your avatar the whole time I watched the video. My comment was tongue-in-cheek.

 

Trust me, me and a select few of individuals who I consider the only True Fans besides myself have had heated discussions about this clip around our D&D board. Much Coca-Cola has been consumed during our all-nighter as we consider the implications of Patrick Stewart identifying this muppet as Number One. We are pouring through our the Star Trek Encyclopedia and Chronology, and the guy who brought his laptop with him is consulting Memory Alpha. We will have this canon issue resolved. We will not rest until it is.

Or at least not until our mothers tell us to rest.

Based on the title of this thread, I don't think you were the only one thinking of me and my avatar.

 

At the risk of exposing myself as an idiot...what does Abrams have to do with counting?

 

^ I have been puzzling over that as well. Am I mathematically challenged or pop-culturally challenged?

 

*psst*

Take a look at The Wormhole's signature line. That should give you a clue. If not, PM me.

 

^ Ah! No, even I can figure it out now. Thanks, Alrik.

 

My pleasure.

BTW, loved the video clip. I haven't seen Sesame Street since the 70's.

 

Well der! I hate being an idiot.

ok. i think i get it now......

 

So technically, that's 0,123,456,789.

That'll make a fine Abrams registry number some day.

 

Based on the title of this thread, I don't think you were the only one thinking of me and my avatar.[/QUOTE]
One of those talented Photoshoppers should make you an animated avatar from that clip. I think it would rock! (I would, but have no talent for it whatsoever.)

 

Would have been interesting if he had come on as Captain Picard instead.

And if it's bad enough with Abrams how much worse is it with those James Bond movies!!

 

Rick Berman could have benefited from that clip as well...

 

All registry numbers in the Berman era were proper.

And before anyone mentions NX-01, that's a different matter all together. Leading zeroes are okay for two digit numbers, but not four digit numbers. There's already three digit registry numbers (USS Grisssom) so there's no need to stick a zero in front of a three digit number to make it four.

 

^I still do not understand your reasoning. If it is proper for 2-digit registries, it is proper for 4-, 5-, 6-digit (or more) registries. We have no idea how many ships there are.

 

And here I thought this thread was about not using numbers to designate which Trek movie was which...

 

Precedent had already been established as far back as TMP regarding three digit registry numbers. No precedent for two digit numbers had been established until Voyager had that ship with the registry NX-01-A. So we accept that two digit numbers can start with zero, but nothing more.

Maybe this is a non-issue. Maybe I'm an anal douche for spending over 01 year bitching about this. But there is method to my madness.