Why was voyager so in love with the reset button?

[Kathryn_Janeway]

Well, this Cardassian knew how to get that Indian into bed unlike some women I could mention.

Tuvok had exactly the same job Seska did in the beginning, because you ordered it of him, to infiltrate and prepare the rot from the inside of your unrequited beau's dangerous terrorist cell, and you manipulated Tom Paris into being just as big a traitor to those he used to work alongside to chase down Chakotay, and then you ordered Tom to pretend he was a traitor again so that he could infiltrate poor Seska's cabal of bully boys so you that you could solve a problem so massive that even the hedgehog summed up what was fishy in the state of Voyager with a few probing questions... Now lets talk about what tools your lips are that kashyk almost put aside his space nazi ideals while you blinded him with the throbbing in his pants as you double played him into working as your unwitting mule to jail break dangerous and criminal lifeforms he believed whole heartedly should be thrown into a preheated oven.

And Seska's greatest crime? okay, not her greatest crime, she stole the ship, but her first crime: "Stealing replicator and transpoter technology?" Something you set about facilitating in her footsteps when you let Jetral into the guts of similar tech because he lied to you about the Hedgehog being sick, an insane mad scientist designer of planet wrecking weapons by the way, or just plane handed over to the Hirogen outright because they were too sturdy to take in a fair fight, and then years later you admit that you'd been selling replicator technology at every port of call on your way home since your adventure began without considering that your buyers might be making weapons as well as food as you're reeling from being responsible for the creation of a new slave race.

Black Kettle Syndrome thy name is Kathy, even if Seska is twice the monster you are, at least she's honest about it.

Sending a Starfleet Officer to infiltrate The Maquis was not my idea, infact I was against it from the start, but orders are orders and if the Admiralty asks something of you, you do it.

Every instance of my sharing technology with other races was done so to help. In most of these instances, Voyager was dragged into conflicts, something which my actions helped to resolve, in the majority of cases

I had someone onboard my ship working with Seska to attack and potentially destroy Voyager. If the choice came again, I would do the same. That also applies to traversing Kashyk territory. In the event that these unfairly and poorly treated outcasts were caught, Voyager would have been stripped and her crew executed.

I must also point out that in the cases that our sharing technology has caused conflict, we have worked to put things right, something which a barbarian would never do.

And I would also like to state that I have never had romantic feelings for Chakotay, he is a dear friend, nothing more.

 

[TheGodBen]

You fraked him on that planet in Resolutions while the monkey watched from outside the window and we all know it.

 

[Timewalker]

And I would also like to state that I have never had romantic feelings for Chakotay, he is a dear friend, nothing more.

Thousands of fanfics say otherwise.

 

[Starbreaker]

Because all the new Voyager fans that tuned in every year couldn't be bothered to go on the Internet and find out the current storyline.

 

[Fish1941]

Seriously, did any other series even rival voyagers use of the reset button? Im watching S4 again and just finished Unforgettable. Damn it seems every other episode involves a reset button.

What the hell is wrong with the reset button? And it was done twice - "Year of Hell" and "Endgame".

In my personal opinion, the movie "STAR TREK" could have benefitted from the reset button. Because otherwise, the movie francihise is stuck with a badly written alternate timeline.

 

[Anwar]

Well, also the end of "Killing Game" where the Hirogen utterly trash the ship but by next episode it's all back to normal.

 

[TheGodBen]

What the hell is wrong with the reset button? And it was done twice - "Year of Hell" and "Endgame".

Firstly, Endgame is not an example of a reset button, that episode actually did have consequences we just didn't get to see them because it was the finale.

The reset button isn't tied into time-travel stories where everything is completely reset at the end, the reset button refers to an episode which chooses to ignore consequences so that everything will be back to normal the following week. For example, Basics Part 2 involved a use of the reset button by saying that the baby wasn't Chakotay's, Hunters ended in a reset button because they accidentally destroyed the communication network they were using to contact Starfleet. The worst instances of the reset button wasn't at the end of episodes but during episodes which ignored the consequences of a previous episode, for example, at the end of The Swarm Doctor Shmully seems to have lost his memory yet in subsequent episodes he is back to normal. The reset button was used a lot when it came to characters, Kim hardly grew at all over the course of seven years because every time his character would learn something from an episode he was reset back to naive ensign Kim the next week.

The reset button meant that very little seemed to change on an episode-by-episode basis, and that's the way it had to be because that's the way UPN wanted it. There's nothing intrinsically wrong with the reset button mentality and many popular shows employ it, but in my view they prevent a show from achieving a sense of scale that a show with consequences can. I've said it before and I'll say it again; a quickie can be great fun, but with some foreplay and cuddling afterwards you can achieve something far more memorable.

 

[Falcor5]

Actually UPN was in love with the reset button.

Exactly. What happened on VOY was due to having a network involved again, not just having the show in syndication like TNG and DS9.

Ya I sometimes wonder what the show would have ended up like if it was in syndication instead of on UPN. Does anyone know why they decided to go the Network route for Voyager when Syndication was so successful for TNG and DS9??

 

[Anwar]

UPN was a newly formed network by Paramount and they wanted a Trek show for their new network as it was their premiere cash cow at the time. And since TNG made it a mega-cash cow they figured a TNG style show would work best. So they took a show whose premise was not set for TNG style and made it so, despite the dissonance this would cause.

Also, they lost money on DS9 and wanted a less serial show to make up for that. Something that could easily be sold into syndication afterwards for more money.

 

[SharkD]

In my personal opinion, the movie "STAR TREK" could have benefitted from the reset button. Because otherwise, the movie francihise is stuck with a badly written alternate timeline.

ST actually featured a reset button. The Romulan guy was unhappy with the original turn of events, and then "reset" things so that Vulcan was destroyed instead.

 

[SharkD]

Also, they lost money on DS9 and wanted a less serial show to make up for that. Something that could easily be sold into syndication afterwards for more money.

Farscape also tried the whole serial drama thing and ultimately was cancelled. BSG somehow is still kicking (a TV movie is in the works). Probably because it has that whole kooky religious and OMG-I-don't-know-who-to-trust aspect to it that people these days love. Whereas Farscape was just about a guy, his gun, his ship and his babe.

 

[SonicRanger]

Also, they lost money on DS9 and wanted a less serial show to make up for that. Something that could easily be sold into syndication afterwards for more money.

Farscape also tried the whole serial drama thing and ultimately was cancelled...

No, what sunk Farscape was network interference -- SciFi execs insisted that Season 4 episodes shouldn't be as serialized so that, supposedly, new viewers could get into it. It didn't work. Then SciFi wanted to cut the budget in half, so the Henson company said "No thanks" and ended the show.

Today you need serialization. Otherwise, what reason to people have to tune in week-to-week? If there is no serialization, then people can just catch an episode here and there, and that's good enough for most people. You need some sort of "must see" hook these days because there is plenty of other entertainment around.

 

[TheGodBen]

Also, they lost money on DS9...

I keep seeing you post that, so I'm curious if you have an evidence for it? Because it seems to me that you don't keep a show on the air for seven years if it loses you money, and if it were true I would imagine they would have cancelled DS9 after the second season, at the very most after season 4 (once they had almost 100 episodes needed for syndication).

 

[Anwar]

Because by then they had money being brought in by VOY to offset the difference, and DS9 still enough of a fanbase to bring in some but not as much as they hoped. VOY made up for that and ultimately made more from the syndication deals afterwards.

 

[TheGodBen]

Except, you know, Voyager had lower ratings than DS9 and therefore was not bringing in as much money.

But you have still failed to provide evidence for the claim that DS9 was losing money, please feel free to post a link to a reference for this.

 

[Anwar]

VOY's ratings weren't much lower, and they were given a smaller audience and reach to begin with so it's not so bad. DS9's drop in ratings was far worse considering it was syndicated and especially when you see the mega drop from the premiere. That's losing money man, especially compared to TNG's ratings as it was also syndicated.

Also take into account the future syndication rights, in that VOY did better in syndication (and still does as it's on more than DS9) afterwards.

 

[TheGodBen]

I've already pointed this out to you in another thread, the drop off from Emissary was almost exactly the same as that for Caretaker, roughly 30%. DS9's just looks bigger because they had more viewers to begin with. I'm sure you can understand simple maths, so I fail to see why you cannot grasp that.

And you've still failed to provide a link to your claim that DS9 was losing money. You don't have to post right away, take time and go look for the evidence and then post a link here once you've found it.

 

[Anwar]

Exactly, DS9's premiere and it being in syndication meant a larger audience and thus the major drop from the premiere onwards (compared to TNG) meant more than whatever drop there was for VOY since VOY was on a smaller network not available to everyone. That much more of a loss of viewers on a syndicated show following TNG means loss of profit compared to VOY (especially since VOY's episodic nature meant it would make up for any losses in syndication later.).

 

[Praetorian]

Nah, not convinced! If DS9 was causing Paramount to lose money you can bet it would have been canceled strait away!

You have said many times that Voyager was created to make up for the money lost on DS9, hence it had less recurring characters and epic battles.
If it were so, Paramount would have canceled DS9 and make even more money!

Really, what would be the point of keeping a non-lucrative show on the air?
I've heard that NuBSG was like that towards the end, and was only kept due to the prestige it brought to Sci-Fi. Even if this is true, DS9 wasn't bringing any prestige, people weren't even aware of it for the most part!

And Voyager's production values seemed to be on the same level as those on DS9 for the most part. The special effects did seemed a little worse before they switched to Cgi, (though I wonder why it would be so, perhaps the best artists were on DS9) and the recurring character issue was probably a choice.
Hell the show still had quite some recurring characters: Seska, Carey, Jonas, Hogan, Culluh, Vorik, Barclay, Icheb, Admiral Paris, Naomi Wildman, Samantha Wildman and even the Borg Queen.

I have no problem believing that Voyager was more lucrative in the sindication market.
But DS9 *loosing* money? No way!

 

[TheGodBen]

Okay Anwar, let me spell this out for you so that you can understand.

Semper necessitas probandi incumbit ei qui agit.

"The burden of proof is upon the one making the claim." It is a maxim so old that the Romans apparently came up with it, it is a part of our culture and it is a major part of the scientific method. You made the claim that Voyager was created in order to make up for money lost on DS9, it is your duty to back that up with evidence.

This is the fourth time in the last few weeks that I have seen you make this claim and this is the fourth time you have failed to provide any evidence at all to back it up. Here's another maxim you're probably familiar with: "Put up or shut up". Show us evidence or desist from spreading misinformation.

In internet parlance: Links or GTFO.