Why is the Trek community so negative about Voyager?

[exodus]

There's no exaggeration to any of that.

Yes, there is plenty. I will underline all of your exaggerations:


'It's not my fault if the basic argument against VOY always comes down to "I wanted to see every last little moment of every single repair/resupply action and I wanted every single character on the show, including the 50 million recurring characters I also wanted, to ruminate on every single last little thing that happens to them." As well as "I wanted the Borg to be utterly invincible, unable to be defeated and unable to escape from" which would have ended the show in a nanosecond.'

'He wanted to see constant repairs/resupplying, the characters being weaklings who let every last thing get to them, and for there to be recurring characters coming out of the sets arses just for the sake of being there.'

I never watched Farscape, but I think you're missing the point. I for one don't particularly care about the fact that Voyager's constant repairs, resupplies, etc., were unexplained; the problem is that it happened in the first place.

Well, too bad. That others shows got away with not explaining stuff just shows that VOY was subject to an unfair double standard.

I have to ask: Did you even read what you just replied to? I said the mere fact that it's unexplained isn't the problem, and you just repeated your drivel about "double standards" as if I'd never said anything.

Moreover, the fact that I have never seen Farscape makes it impossible for my opinion to be a double standard, since, naturally, I have no opinion of Farscape. But I guess you'd rather ignore my argument and group me along with those whose opinions you believe have a weakspot that you can focus on.

He's not ignoring you, he's telling you as an individual your opinion doesn't negate that fact that as a whole there has been a double standard within the general sci-fi community in regards to certain shows. He's not mentioned nor implied that you yourself have a double standard. He's generally speaking, not personally.

 

[exodus]

The writers didn't fail that aspect of the show because they already told us such things weren't a priority.

They did fail because they told us early on exactly how many torpedoes they had and that they had no way to replace them. Everyone had "replicator rations" and was cautious with their resources in season 1. They were telling us that this time it is a priority because Voyager's deficiency was meant to be an important part of the premise.

It couldn't be because we had already learned from TNG that as long as the warp drive & replicators work, the ship & it's crew are in good shape? So we should have already known that from day one about Voyager. They showed it the other way around in "YOH", the warp drive & replicators were off line and the ship looked like shit.

Besides, Janeway said that before they found out in "Dreadnaunt" that Be'Lanna knew how to program a warhead. You've got have a crew of ex-terrorists and they can't build a bomb? Knowing that, we shouldn't be questioning why they have torpedos but rather why a ship full of terrorists & Security/Engineers can't build a torpedo?

Tuvok, head of security and professor at the Academy doesn't know how to build a torpedo? What the hell was he teaching?

 

[zar]

He's not mentioned nor implied that you yourself have a double standard. He's generally speaking, not personally.

He's either implying that I have the same opinion as the others, or bypassing my opinion to continue talking about the others' opinion. Since he's replying to my post, and based on his belief that "the basic argument against VOY always comes down to the same thing", I assume the former. Either way, he's ignoring the real argument to focus his attack on the argument that he perceives as weak. A typical tactic of poor debaters and people who don't like to admit they're wrong.

It couldn't be because we had already learned from TNG that as long as the warp drive & replicators work, the ship & it's crew are in good shape? So we should have already known that from day one about Voyager. They showed it the other way around in "YOH", the warp drive & replicators were off line and the ship looked like shit.

Besides, Janeway said that before they found out in "Dreadnaunt" that Be'Lanna knew how to program a warhead. You've got have a crew of ex-terrorists and they can't build a bomb? Knowing that, we shouldn't be questioning why they have torpedos but rather why a ship full of terrorists & Security/Engineers can't build a torpedo?

Tuvok, head of security and professor at the Academy doesn't know how to build a torpedo? What the hell was he teaching?

Aha... now you're the one carrying on the stereotype of knowing the technology better than those on the show.

And yes, all of that does make sense... but it doesn't change the fact that the Voyager writers decided to establish that they couldn't replace their stuff, because if that's how it had actually turned out it would have made their dilemmas more interesting and set it apart from the other shows.

Besides, on all the other shows they still sometimes had to return to starbases and shipyards or whatever, despite all their replicators and talented scientists on board...

 

[Anwar]

Prove it. Quote where he said he wanted nothing but those extremes.

Didn't you read that list You_Will_Fail gave a few pages back?

As a matter of fact, I did, and everything in it seems reasonable to me.

That doesn't answer my request. I would like you, specifically, to show what, exactly and in no uncertain terms, proves that You_Will_Fail undeniably and indisputably wanted, and I quote again, "to see constant repairs/resupplying, the characters being weaklings who let every last thing get to them, and for there to be recurring characters coming out of the sets arses just for the sake of being there."

You_Will_Fail said

It was said that the torpedoes were irreplacable, and yet they appear to keep using starfleet torpedoes. Considering the premise of the show was being lost in space with no backup or Starfleet to reply on, it was KINDA important to show us these details.

In other words, every time they used a single torpedo he wanted to see them replace it in some way. Constant resupplying.

Episodes in Voyager don't revolve around "every little thing" in the characters' lives, otherwise they wouldTn't be episodes. Character episodes in VOY deal with important events and emotions- they are the kind of events that change a person.

And I was also referring to events affecting Voyager.
I'd say the entire ship being captured and everyone made to act in scenarios of wars killing each other is a FAIRLY important event. Would it have killed the writers to refer to it, and to show us how the characters dealt with the trauma or with the massive ship damage?
Here are another few immensely important events that are never mentioned again
-B'Ellana is split in two
-Tom Paris and Janeway turn into lizards and mate
-Kes sees the future
-The doctor creates a family
-Voyager finds the Equinox and take in some of their crewmembers

In other words, any time ANY single thing happens to ANYONE he wants that to be some massive life-changing experience that radically alters who they were one episode earlier.

Its true that all Trek writers drop the ball on occassions but the sheer lack of connection between one episode and the next in Voyager was laughable on occassion.

And here's the double standard. He admits that other Trek shows do the same stuff as Voyager but for some reason it's okay to come down on VOY for it but not the other shows.

He didn't say anything about recurring characters, I admit. But it's just so damn irritating to here stuff like that, when it's blatantly clear you DON'T NEED RECURRING CHARACTERS IN EVERY SHOW. Farscape and Blakes Seven don't have any, and no one cared. You can't treat VOY like its in some vacuum or that these don't matter.

Bottom line matter on recurring characters is that other shows with "single ship" concepts didn't need them and did fine without them.

And yet, even if VOY had the best developed main cast of characters in all of history, the audience still will not STFU over f***ing recurring characters. No-win scenario, like so much of VOY.

 

[zar]

In other words, every time they used a single torpedo he wanted to see them replace it in some way. Constant resupplying.

The quote you gave mentions that they were irreplaceable, which is the exact opposite of constant resupplying. Obviously what he meant here was that they shouldn't have been able to use torpedoes so liberally. This is actually perhaps your biggest exaggerated misrepresentation of what someone said.

In other words, any time ANY single thing happens to ANYONE he wants that to be some massive life-changing experience that radically alters who they were one episode earlier.

No, he was specifically talking about, and I quote, "immensely important" events. How you interpreted that as "ANY SINGLE THING THAT HAPPENS TO ANYONE EVER " is beyond me.

He didn't say anything about recurring characters, I admit. But it's just so damn irritating to here stuff like that, when it's blatantly clear you DON'T NEED RECURRING CHARACTERS IN EVERY SHOW.

...It's irritating to hear stuff like what? As you admit, he didn't say anything about recurring characters, yet you criticize him for thinking that "YOU NEED RECURRING CHARACTERS IN EVERY SHOW ". What he was talking about was the "lack of connection between one episode and the next". Like before, this of course refers to "immensely important" events and characters where you would expect a visible connection.


Let me illustrate this with a hypothetical: Let's say you're watching a show where one of the episodes has a character impregnated. You would expect the father to become a recurring character and to see the baby in some future episode. If the writers hadn't planned to do this, then they shouldn't have written the extraordinary event of the impregnation in the first place.

Likewise, when something extraordinarily life-changing happens to the characters in Voyager, we rightfully expect it to be mentioned or seen again later on. It wouldn't have been very difficult to do this, but apparently the writers were lazy. For instance, one of the episodes could have opened with Harry and Tom eating together, and Harry says "Hey Tom, remember that time I wrote that holonovel about you having lizard sex?" and Tom says "I try to forget that ever happened, and you're a sick bastard." I'm not a writer though.

 

[Anwar]

In other words, every time they used a single torpedo he wanted to see them replace it in some way. Constant resupplying.

The quote you gave mentions that they were irreplaceable, which is the exact opposite of constant resupplying. Obviously what he meant here was that they shouldn't have been able to use torpedoes so liberally. This is actually perhaps your biggest exaggerated misrepresentation of what someone said.

What he meant was that he wanted to see just how they replaced every single bit of hardware used in battle. In other words, since torpedoes are supposed to be so "irreplaceable" he wanted to see how they made new ones EVERY TIME they used a torpedo. It has nothing to do with being conservative over weaponry use.

No, he was specifically talking about, and I quote, "immensely important" events. How you interpreted that as "ANY SINGLE THING THAT HAPPENS TO ANYONE EVER " is beyond me.

Those IMMENSELY important events are typical of all Star Trek adventures by all the shows, and they don't radically change those people. Why are the VOY chars supposed to be so weak they allow usual weirdness to change who they are every episode?

Let me illustrate this with a hypothetical: Let's say you're watching a show where one of the episodes has a character impregnated. You would expect the father to become a recurring character and to see the baby in some future episode. If the writers hadn't planned to do this, then they shouldn't have written the extraordinary event of the impregnation in the first place.

I guess you hated how Naomi Wildman's dad wasn't on the show, hm?

Likewise, when something extraordinarily life-changing happens to the characters in Voyager, we rightfully expect it to be mentioned or seen again later on. It wouldn't have been very difficult to do this, but apparently the writers were lazy.

Like I said, all the shows do this to their chars and no one cared when there was little to no followup in THOSE shows. Why are you being so unfair to VOY?

 

[zar]

What he meant was that he wanted to see just how they replaced every single bit of hardware used in battle. In other words, since torpedoes are supposed to be so "irreplaceable" he wanted to see how they made new ones EVERY TIME they used a torpedo. It has nothing to do with being conservative over weaponry use.

First of all, no, that doesn't mean we'd need to see some explanation "EVERY TIME " a torpedo was used; we'd only need to see evidence of an additional source of torpedoes after the first 30 or so "irreplaceable" ones were depleted.

Yes, it has everything to do with being conservative, because that's the whole reason the writers wrote a limit on the number of torpedoes in the first place. It was an important part of the early episodes, but later on the writers just threw it all out the window... and then we see the crew become so carefree that at one point they even fire a torpedo to signal the start of a shuttle race.

CHAKOTAY: We have a complement of thirty eight photon torpedoes at our disposal, Captain.
JANEWAY: And no way to replace them after they're gone.

The Cloud

JANEWAY: Hold your fire, Mister Tuvok. They may have torpedoes to waste. We don't.

Basics

Those IMMENSELY important events are typical of all Star Trek adventures by all the shows, and they don't radically change those people.

You're trying to make it seem like these types of events happen in every episode and since other shows are episodic and not continual then Voyager can be the same, but that just isn't so. Truly life-affecting events only happen to the characters in certain episodes, and those events usually aren't just forgotten. Can you cite some examples of events from other shows, comparative to the examples You_Will_Fail gave (like the Doctor creating a family), that were never followed up on? I'm sure there are some, but they are the exception to the rule. For example the fact that Picard was assimilated is revisited multiple times, not to mention becoming part of the plot of a movie and part of Sisko's backstory in the DS9 pilot.

I guess you hated how Naomi Wildman's dad wasn't on the show, hm?

Obviously you didn't think about this example very thoroughly.

- her mother only appeared in 5 or so episodes
- her mother was already pregnant before the show started
- her dad was 70 thousand light years away

If Ensign Wildman had been a regular cast member and had her own character episode where one of the Delta Quadrant aliens gets her pregnant, then yes, we fans would likely want to hear about that alien again sometime.
edit: I just remembered this very thing happens to Troi and Tucker, and I agree both of those episodes were silly.

Like I said, all the shows do this to their chars and no one cared when there was little to no followup in THOSE shows. Why are you being so unfair to VOY?

I'm not being unfair; see above.

 

[Amaris]

I think it's just that the show was very inconsistent when it came to episode writing quality. For example, I just finished watching "Coda" on SpikeTV, and I rather liked it, but I've had many negative experiences with Voyager, too. Every series makes mistakes and has a dud every now and again, but what snares VOY is the lazy writing at many stages. I always felt that I was watching a first draft instead of a revised script. To be fair, ENT felt the same way it's first 2 1/2 seasons.

 

[Admiral Shran]

Let me illustrate this with a hypothetical: Let's say you're watching a show where one of the episodes has a character impregnated. You would expect the father to become a recurring character and to see the baby in some future episode. If the writers hadn't planned to do this, then they shouldn't have written the extraordinary event of the impregnation in the first place.

I guess you hated how Naomi Wildman's dad wasn't on the show, hm?

It would have been nice to see Naomi having some contact with her father once they started having contact with the Alpha Quadrant, similiar to what happened between Torres and her father in Author, Author.

 

[Anwar]

First of all, no, that doesn't mean we'd need to see some explanation "EVERY TIME " a torpedo was used; we'd only need to see evidence of an additional source of torpedoes after the first 30 or so "irreplaceable" ones were depleted.

Yes, and said "additional source" would have to be continually referenced every single time they used more torpedoes. And they'd keep mentioning how many torpedoes they had left every single time they used a single torpedo before and after said "additional source" was brought up; constant resupplying/referencing.

Can you cite some examples of events from other shows, comparative to the examples You_Will_Fail gave (like the Doctor creating a family), that were never followed up on? I'm sure there are some, but they are the exception to the rule.

Everything Picard went through in "The Inner Light", or the torture in "Chain of Command" or his mind meld with Sarek that was referenced only once after. O'Brien's 30 years of implanted prison time, Kirk getting married under amnesia and then his wirfe and unborn child are stoned to death, Riker and that false future in "Future Imperfect", etc.

edit: I just remembered this very thing happens to Troi and Tucker, and I agree both of those episodes were silly.

But they DID happen, and no one cared.

 

[darkwing_duck1]

Uhhhh... wasn't Janeway going to LEAVE HIM THERE TO BE KILLED? I thought it was only Chakotay stepping in that saved Lessing. That makes Janeway guilty of attempted murder, not just "leaving a guy tied up to a chair for a few minutes."

She believed he was going to talk before that happened. Chakotay knew he wasn't buying the bluff and stepped in. Would Janeway have allowed it to happen? We don't find out for sure so it's a matter of personal opinion. Mine is she would have stopped it at the very last moment. When she tells Chakotay later that she "went too far" it's because she was letting her anger get the better of her instead of following the Starfleet principles she had dedicated her life to.

Those same principles would have required her to turn him, Ransom, and all the other conspirators over to the aliens in any event.

 

[darkwing_duck1]

BSG had its flaws, largely in relation to its mythology and the sloppy motivation of the Cylons, but when it came to the in-fleet drama, the political and social consequences that Voyager didn't address, the show did a very good job.

VOY never had any real political or social issues in the first place TO address. There just weren't any.

I would say that people so opposed to Federation policy that they effectively seceeded and took up arms against the same had political issues with it.

They weren't some mobile civilization constantly being hunted, they were just one small ship with less than 200 people on-board, most of whom were soldiers. They weren't a democracy, they didn't need one, it's a totally different animal.

Not all of them were soldiers, even if we agree that Starfleet officers are soldiers per se.

Saying NuBSG did stuff better when it simply did things that had no place in VOY to begin with isn't saying much. It's like saying that an eagle flies better than a penguin.

Only if one agrees with you that said "stuff" had no place in the show to begin with .

All their shortcuts to go home were destined to fail, it's the Gilligan syndrome. The problem was that they just shouldn't have DONE those stories in the first place.

And if those stories weren't done, there would have been massive complaints to the effect of "why don't they ever encounter possible ways home?"

You_Will_Fail said In other words, every time they used a single torpedo he wanted to see them replace it in some way. Constant resupplying.

No, he said he wanted to see resupplying MENTIONED, given that they went out of their way to make a fuss about limited supplies. There IS a middle ground between constantly mentioning something and never mentioning it.

You don't seem to be able to grasp that concept.

Episodes in Voyager don't revolve around "every little thing" in the characters' lives, otherwise they wouldTn't be episodes. Character episodes in VOY deal with important events and emotions- they are the kind of events that change a person.

And I was also referring to events affecting Voyager.
I'd say the entire ship being captured and everyone made to act in scenarios of wars killing each other is a FAIRLY important event. Would it have killed the writers to refer to it, and to show us how the characters dealt with the trauma or with the massive ship damage?
Here are another few immensely important events that are never mentioned again
-B'Ellana is split in two
-Tom Paris and Janeway turn into lizards and mate
-Kes sees the future
-The doctor creates a family
-Voyager finds the Equinox and take in some of their crewmembers

In other words, any time ANY single thing happens to ANYONE he wants that to be some massive life-changing experience that radically alters who they were one episode earlier.

Again no. He wants events that rightly SHOULD be life-changing experiences that radically alter the status quo of the characters to be referenced where appropriate.

Its true that all Trek writers drop the ball on occassions but the sheer lack of connection between one episode and the next in Voyager was laughable on occassion.

And here's the double standard. He admits that other Trek shows do the same stuff as Voyager but for some reason it's okay to come down on VOY for it but not the other shows.

You still aren't helping yourself. He says they "drop the ball", and he calls them on dropping it. He doesn't like it when the other shows did it, and he really doesn't like it when VOY does it...again...and again...and again...and again.

He didn't say anything about recurring characters, I admit. But it's just so damn irritating to here stuff like that, when it's blatantly clear you DON'T NEED RECURRING CHARACTERS IN EVERY SHOW.

Yet again with the extremes. Anything that is not "none" is "every single show".

And yet, even if VOY had the best developed main cast of characters in all of history,

Virtually none of the 2nd tier characters got anything but minor psuedo-changes. Tuvok was still the "logical security chief", Neelix was Neelix, Harry Kim was still an ensign and a "hailing frequencies open" level extra, and so forth.

 

[darkwing_duck1]

merge post

 

[darkwing_duck1]

What he meant was that he wanted to see just how they replaced every single bit of hardware used in battle. In other words, since torpedoes are supposed to be so "irreplaceable" he wanted to see how they made new ones EVERY TIME they used a torpedo. It has nothing to do with being conservative over weaponry use.

Still haven't shown that at all. Either show us a quote that references "EVERY TIME" or move on.

There just isn't a middle ground with you is there?

Likewise, when something extraordinarily life-changing happens to the characters in Voyager, we rightfully expect it to be mentioned or seen again later on. It wouldn't have been very difficult to do this, but apparently the writers were lazy.

Like I said, all the shows do this to their chars and no one cared when there was little to no followup in THOSE shows. Why are you being so unfair to VOY?

DS9 and Ent did a pretty good job of showing us evolving characters over time. Even TNG had a couple of good character evolvement arcs, esp Worf's.

So, which argument will you fail at next?

 

[darkwing_duck1]

First of all, no, that doesn't mean we'd need to see some explanation "EVERY TIME " a torpedo was used; we'd only need to see evidence of an additional source of torpedoes after the first 30 or so "irreplaceable" ones were depleted.

Yes, and said "additional source" would have to be continually referenced every single time they used more torpedoes. And they'd keep mentioning how many torpedoes they had left every single time they used a single torpedo before and after said "additional source" was brought up; constant resupplying/referencing.

Nope, just an occasional Captains Log voiceover or throwaway line in the teaser showing that they "just concluded negotiations with [source or sources] for a fresh supply of [part or substance]". Not EVERY TIME (to quote your hyperbole) something is used, but once in awhile to re-establish and honor the concept that they DO have such concerns. It makes the characters have to THINK their way out of problems rather than just throwing resources at it.

Can you cite some examples of events from other shows, comparative to the examples You_Will_Fail gave (like the Doctor creating a family), that were never followed up on? I'm sure there are some, but they are the exception to the rule.

Everything Picard went through in "The Inner Light", or the torture in "Chain of Command" or his mind meld with Sarek that was referenced only once after. O'Brien's 30 years of implanted prison time, Kirk getting married under amnesia and then his wirfe and unborn child are stoned to death, Riker and that false future in "Future Imperfect", etc.

edit: I just remembered this very thing happens to Troi and Tucker, and I agree both of those episodes were silly.

But they DID happen, and no one cared.

Once in awhile, a concept like that is tacitly ignored, either because it was a bad idea or for other reasons.

But, as stated, there are plenty of examples from TNG, DS9, and Ent where they DIDN'T ignore life-changing events.

 

[Anwar]

I would say that people so opposed to Federation policy that they effectively seceeded and took up arms against the same had political issues with it.
Not all of them were soldiers, even if we agree that Starfleet officers are soldiers per se.

They weren't opposed to the DMZ agreement, the DMZ colonists all agreed to it when Starfleet let them know what was happening. They took up arms to protect themselves from the illegal Cardassian militia forces. The Cardassians were always the real enemy. I do think they should've stayed out of Fleet uniforms, but I don't have a problem with them working together without plotting against one another.

Now, if the other crew had been Romulans, the REAL enemy of the Feds who possessed their own unique cultural values and differences that set themselves apart, it would've been a different story.

And if those stories weren't done, there would have been massive complaints to the effect of "why don't they ever encounter possible ways home?"

Exactly, for VOY it was damned if you do, damned if you don't. Like a lot of the show.

No, he said he wanted to see resupplying MENTIONED, given that they went out of their way to make a fuss about limited supplies. There IS a middle ground between constantly mentioning something and never mentioning it.

Please, you think the audience would settle for a few lines or one/two scenes? That they complained about it to begin with shows that they would always want it being spoonfed to them.

Again no. He wants events that rightly SHOULD be life-changing experiences that radically alter the status quo of the characters to be referenced where appropriate.
You still aren't helping yourself. He says they "drop the ball", and he calls them on dropping it. He doesn't like it when the other shows did it, and he really doesn't like it when VOY does it...again...and again...and again...and again.

And when you ask around, you'll notice that VOY is the only one that gets abused over this the most when in truth the other shows deserve to be trashed just as much, but they get off scott-free regardless. Either trash the other shows just as much, or cut back on VOY.

Virtually none of the 2nd tier characters got anything but minor psuedo-changes. Tuvok was still the "logical security chief", Neelix was Neelix, Harry Kim was still an ensign and a "hailing frequencies open" level extra, and so forth.

What I mean is that even if they WERE the best developed crew, it still wouldn't mean anything to the audience who would still demand dozens of background characters.

DS9 and Ent did a pretty good job of showing us evolving characters over time. Even TNG had a couple of good character evolvement arcs, esp Worf's.

Seven, the Doctor, Paris, Torres to a lesser extent. I can see why they didn't do much with Chak and Kim since Beltran and Wang were either uncooperative from the start or just lousy actors. Nothing they could do would get anyone to like Neelix, and the whole talk over Janeway shows folks still are unsure over a lady Captain who was the legitimate leader and not some random person put in charge like Roslin.

Once in awhile, a concept like that is tacitly ignored, either because it was a bad idea or for other reasons.

But, as stated, there are plenty of examples from TNG, DS9, and Ent where they DIDN'T ignore life-changing events.

Other reasons or no, they still get glossed over/ignored and no one blinks an eye. But if VOY has some guy get punched in the face, there's hell to pay if the next 5 episodes don't have references to some guy having been punched in the face.

 

[darkwing_duck1]

^Ok, it's obvious there's no debating with you. All you do is repeat the same DISPROVEN claims over and over and over. I'm over and done.

And for the record, I'm a "casual" Voyager fan. I never met Trek I truly HATED, just some that didn't particularly work for me

 

[Anwar]

I know how that is. I found it hard to get into ENT because I don't like prequels, but I still ended up enjoying it when I decided to watch it and didn't let any TOS comparisons get to me.

 

[exodus]

And yes, all of that does make sense... but it doesn't change the fact that the Voyager writers decided to establish that they couldn't replace their stuff, because if that's how it had actually turned out it would have made their dilemmas more interesting and set it apart from the other shows.

Besides, on all the other shows they still sometimes had to return to starbases and shipyards or whatever, despite all their replicators and talented scientists on board...

The writers had also told us in TNG that Trills couldn't use transporters. On DS9 Dax used a transporter and nobody ever took the writers to the mat for it. Picard stated he hated children, in "Generations" his life long dream is to have 3 of them. What? The writers write allot of things that later go through changes as the show plays out. If they wanted such dilemmas they would have written it that way, they didn't. Who's in charge of Voyager, the production staff or us?

All the other shows didn't feature ships that could land and didn't need a starbase to resupply. All the other show didn't continuously bring up how their ships were the most advanced ship to date and how it was a "ship of miracles". How many different ways did they need to tell us not to focus on details about how things were getting done before we finally get it?

 

[Anwar]

Picard said he hated kids? I thought he just felt uncomfortable around them.