Even though my posts most certainly will not give that impression, as I tend to appear to emit a lot of criticism for the series, I have always liked DS9 very much. It's my 3rd or 2nd favorite series. There's of course a large jump between the 1st and the 2nd & 3rd and even bigger when it comes to the rest. What sometimes causes me to seem to be opposing the series is the attitude and views I've experienced from some (or many) of its more bullheaded fanboys. Like I said, I have always liked the show, but I'm aware that it might appear that I sometimes appear to be denigrating the show, but actually it has nothing to do with criticising but merely defending the other series from the sometimes harsh, unnuanced and eventually baseless criticism it receives from people who only like DS9 and considers everything else to be flies in comparison. Some are simply biased, some are obtuse and some are just astoundingly ignorant. One of the most fundamental elements in those attitutdes is its acclaimed uniqueness. I'm not saying that it isn't very different to TNG, different to TOS. I'm simply asserting that the aberrations tend to be aggrandized. What consternates me the most about the more stubborn DS9:ers is that when they discuss the other shows and how bad they are to DS9, it's very easy to assume that they have not even seen the other shows or perhaps could not comprehend them. I even read an article once about how DS9 was underrated and misunderstood that stated that Odo was the first character to convey a real outsider perspective in Star Trek since "unlike Spock and Data, Odo was quite content to not be a human and sometimes made a good point when rejecting irrational or normative human values". Is this cretinism in agglutination with indoctrination? Everyone knows that Spock rejected human values EVEN more than Odo, if it was much more or little more doesn't matter, it was definitely more. With stubbornness, as I've mentioned several times, I'm referring to the phenomenon of exaggerating and elevating the differences but more importantly; to flimsily make claims such as (paraphrased summary) "DS9 was good because it ignored Gene Roddenberry's utopian society vision and non-conflict approach, it was more realistic because it prestened the existence of consequences to actions". So in TOS and TNG, there was no conflicts between staff or with other cultures because one could avoid it simply because everyone could be dealt with by simply making easy compromises? I believe I lost my thread somewhere, but I'll come back and elaborate on both what I've written, and that which I forgot in the process. Excuse me, but I find it rather repugnant to read about fanboys who are so delusional that they actually believe their own statements about how "DS9 was a complete 180 to the utopian version of TNG".