ATTENTION: The Boards will be closed permanently on May 28th, 2014. Posting will be disabled on April 28th, 2014. More Info

Is this the end of great Star Trek?

GalaxyClass14

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 396

Report this Mar. 27 2010, 2:06 pm

Quote (Vger23 @ Mar. 26 2010, 11:45 am)
...this is a narrow-minded, insecure and ignorant thing to do.
personal attack

Guidelines for Using These Message Boards
- If you disagree with a message, respond to the message. Do not attack the individual who posted it.

Vger23

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 6799

Report this Mar. 27 2010, 2:22 pm

Quote (GalaxyClass14 @ Mar. 27 2010, 2:06 pm)
Quote (Vger23 @ Mar. 26 2010, 11:45 am)
...this is a narrow-minded, insecure and ignorant thing to do.
personal attack

Guidelines for Using These Message Boards
- If you disagree with a message, respond to the message. Do not attack the individual who posted it.

Oh, no. You're right. The last thing I'd want to do is go against the "Guidelines for Using the Message Boards."

I'd probably be the only lone offender on this entire board of reasonable and peaceful people.

THE CANCER MUST BE CUT OUT!!!

:eyesroll:

stovokor2000

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 2683

Report this Mar. 27 2010, 2:46 pm

Quote (GalaxyClass14 @ Mar. 27 2010, 2:06 pm)
Quote (Vger23 @ Mar. 26 2010, 11:45 am)
...this is a narrow-minded, insecure and ignorant thing to do.
personal attack

I'm not sure I would agree.

Not speaking specifically about this case but if the action in question is indeed  "narrow-minded, insecure and ignorant" it is not a personal attack to point that out.

GalaxyClass14

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 396

Report this Mar. 27 2010, 3:02 pm

Quote (stovokor2000 @ Mar. 26 2010, 3:46 pm)
if the action in question is indeed ?"narrow-minded, insecure and ignorant" it is not a personal attack to point that out.

interesting
may agree with you
need clarification tho

-are we referring to a
movie, or episode, or character
being the
"narrow-minded, insecure and ignorant"
action?

-or are we referring
the action being
the poster himself is
"narrow-minded, insecure and ignorant"
for having a paticular opinion?

-or are we referring
to the opinion being
"narrow-minded, insecure and ignorant"
as being the action?

stovokor2000

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 2683

Report this Mar. 27 2010, 3:16 pm

Quote (GalaxyClass14 @ Mar. 27 2010, 3:02 pm)
interesting
may agree with you
need clarification tho

-are we referring to a
movie, or episode, or character
being the
"narrow-minded, insecure and ignorant"
action?

-or are we referring
the action being
the poster himself
"narrow-minded, insecure and ignorant"
for having a paticular opinion?

-or are we referring
to the opinion being
"narrow-minded, insecure and ignorant"
as being the action?

It can be all of the above.

Let me try to elaberate.
Quote

-or are we referring
the action being
the poster himself
"narrow-minded, insecure and ignorant"
for having a paticular opinion?


Depends on what was posted.

Lets say I was to post that "all black people smell funny", or that "all white people are spawns of the devil" or if I said "all Arabs are terrorist and should be bombed".

No one would be wrong for say I and my opinion was "narrow-minded, insecure and ignorant".
Quote

-or are we referring
to the opinion being
"narrow-minded, insecure and ignorant"
as being the action?


Again it depends on what was said and the context it was said in.

GalaxyClass14

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 396

Report this Mar. 27 2010, 4:21 pm

> id="QUOTE">It can be all of the above.

Let me try to elaberate.
border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0">>>Quote (stovokor2000 @ Mar. 26 2010, 4:16 pm)> id="QUOTE"> border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0">>>Quote (stovokor2000 @ Mar. 26 2010, 4:16 pm)> id="QUOTE"> border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0">>>Quote> id="QUOTE">-or are we referring
to the opinion being
"narrow-minded, insecure and ignorant"
as being the action?
border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0">>>Quote (stovokor2000 @ Mar. 26 2010, 4:16 pm)

Again it depends on what was said and the context it was said in.
agreed,
with codicil added
only as per my application
to message boards.

to resist going off topic
on thread,
original poster can be
roundly thrashed in pm,
and ignored in thread.

pm thrashing + thread integrity
seems logical to me,
is directed by Guidelines for Using These Message Boards,
(well, i don't know really
regarding pm thrashing)
and could be
great big fun
at the same time.

stovokor2000

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 2683

Report this Mar. 27 2010, 4:33 pm

> id="QUOTE"> border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0">>>Quote (stovokor2000 @ Mar. 26 2010, 4:16 pm)> id="QUOTE">It can be all of the above.

Let me try to elaberate.
border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0">>>Quote (stovokor2000 @ Mar. 26 2010, 4:16 pm)> id="QUOTE"> border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0">>>Quote (stovokor2000 @ Mar. 26 2010, 4:16 pm)> id="QUOTE"> border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0">>>Quote> id="QUOTE">-or are we referring
to the opinion being
"narrow-minded, insecure and ignorant"
as being the action?
border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0">>>Quote (GalaxyClass14 @ Mar. 27 2010, 4:21 pm)

Again it depends on what was said and the context it was said in.agreed,
with codicil added
only as per my application
to message boards.

to resist going off topic
on thread,
original poster can be
roundly thrashed in pm,
and ignored in thread.

pm thrashing + thread integrity
seems logical to me,
is directed by Guidelines for Using These Message Boards,
(well, i don't know really
regarding pm thrashing)
and could be
great big fun
at the same time.
Agreed.

GalaxyClass14

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 396

Report this Mar. 27 2010, 4:37 pm

lol
that was fun!
let's do it again sometime.

stovokor2000

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 2683

Report this Mar. 27 2010, 4:39 pm

Quote (GalaxyClass14 @ Mar. 27 2010, 4:37 pm)
lol
that was fun!
let's do it again sometime.

Anytime bud.

PhantasmX

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 87

Report this Mar. 27 2010, 4:55 pm

I think Star Trek television series died after Voyager. The slow death begins after the end of TNG. If I recall correctly, Voyager's rating were nevertheless dismal.

GalaxyClass14

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 396

Report this Mar. 27 2010, 5:10 pm

Quote (PhantasmX @ Mar. 26 2010, 5:55 pm)
I think Star Trek television series died after Voyager. The slow death begins after the end of TNG. If I recall correctly, Voyager's rating were nevertheless dismal.

possible, i guess,
if we are speaking of
supporting numbers of
viewer support.

battlestar galactica
may have begun to
reinterest viewers
outside of genre fans
and begun a turn around

stxi might have added
larger numbers of viewers
outside genre fans
who might support another series.
or who might at the least
tune in for a while and see.

science fiction
tv series and movies
are a 'rocky shoal'
not to be approached lightly,
because of genre interest support
and the cost to sail in those waters.

TheDriver

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 1652

Report this Mar. 28 2010, 12:29 pm

Quote (PhantasmX @ Mar. 27 2010, 7:55 pm)
I think Star Trek television series died after Voyager. The slow death begins after the end of TNG. If I recall correctly, Voyager's rating were nevertheless dismal.

In the mainstream view? Yes, televised Trek pretty much ended with TNG.

That said, DS9 continued to have excellent ratings - in the syndicated market - all the way to the end of the series.

VOY? Yeah, not so much.

And ENT was nearly cancelled after its third season. (The fourth season was a 'gift' from the network.)

spurlicos

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 43

Report this Jul. 31 2010, 11:58 pm

Well... Besides how it all started off, not much in the future should change, so after the next movie, unless something new and unexpected happens, I think they'll be out of ideas. It WAS a good movie, but the problem is always with the sequels. The next one should premier around summer 2012.

Quark64

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 82

Report this Aug. 04 2010, 12:33 pm

I think Star Trek will never die, it'll just change. Granted DS9 and VOY were not as good as TNG, but they are okay. ENT I haven't seen yet, but I'm sure it'll be interesting. And I can almost assure you there's going to be something new and exciting in the sequel.


" If we're going to be damned, let's be damned for what we really are." Jean-Luc Picard (Encounter at Farpoint)

Forum Permissions

You cannot post new topics in this forum

You cannot reply to topics in this forum

You cannot delete posts in this forum