And that's not the only point which was being made.
Never said it was. It is, however, indicative of the remainder of the contents of the video IMO. I mean, come on. Is he complaining because it's somehow magically going to "limit the audience" or is it because having to pay to view it runs counter to his goal of "becoming a professional Trekkie, since it's become abundantly clear that [he is] wholly unsuited for conventional employment...."
I would ask, if you're not going to address the points raised, what is the point in you even responding to the comment I posted, but it's pretty clear that you just needed your daily dose of my attention.
"I fight for the Users!" - Tron
"I was here before you, I will be here after you are gone. I am here, regardless of your acknowledgement or acceptance..." - The Truth
This illustrates both a complete lack of understanding of how TV has worked in the past, as well as a total lack of foresight into how media will be consumed in the future. It also contradicts itself by bringing in Roddenberry, in an attempt to make the sad, tired claim of "I know what Roddenberry would do today." I personally don't know (and, more importantly, don't care) where Gene would have fallen on these topics... but, judging by history, I think he would have leapt at the chance to get out from under network/broadcast restrictions.
Further, p**sing and moaning about a TV-MA rating is, at best, screaming at a brick wall. Western culture, especially in entertainment, is moving in the direction of TV-MA. What's accepted as PG-13 today would not be accepted as PG-13 20 years ago. The rating won't stop younger viewers from watching, as everything from Breaking Bad to Game of Thrones to The Defenders would likely prove. And speaking of GoT, can we all agree to stop comparing everything under the sun to that show??? The rating is TV-MA, not TV-GoT.
I saw another video from this guy, in which he propped up that Midnight's Edge garbage... so, he's just a sad, ill-informed fan that didn't get what he wanted. Boo-freaking-hoo.
TBH, Gene would have done whatever brought him the most dollar.
"I fight for the Users!" - Tron
"I was here before you, I will be here after you are gone. I am here, regardless of your acknowledgement or acceptance..." - The Truth
Just tick the box that asks if you're over 16. Done.
So you condone someone lying about their age to get what they want. Interesting.
Yes, I condone people making their own choices over those of a TV network for the obvious reason that American ratings do not apply to the rest of the world. I also understand they are guidelines and not actual restriction because it's a TV programme and not a box of knives or something actually dangerous.
I also understand that no website in the world cares who views their media for the blindingly simple reason they give you a tick box or a DoB box rather than actually trying to check if you are old enough.
It seems like you like a bit of a good barney with anybody for no reason that isn't obvious after taking a few seconds thought. Now I remember who you are I remember why I started hiding your posts in the first place.
Norway and Yeager dammit... I still want my Typhoon and Jupiter though. JJ Trek The Kelvin Timeline is just Trek and it's fully canon... get over it. But I still prefer TAR.
#TASforSTO
'...I can tell you that we're not in the military and that we intend no harm to the whales.' Kirk: The Voyage Home
'Starfleet is not a military organisation. Its purpose is exploration.' Picard: Peak Performance
'This is clearly a military operation. Is that what we are now? Because I thought we were explorers!' Scotty: Into Darkness
'...The Federation. Starfleet. We're not a military agency.' Scotty: Beyond
'I'm not a soldier anymore. I'm an engineer.' Miles O'Brien: Empok Nor
'...Starfleet could use you... It's a peacekeeping and humanitarian armada...' Admiral Pike: Star Trek
'Lobes, I'd like to step in here for a moment and remind you of three things.
1) The paywall doesn't make it that different from TOS - TVs back in the day were not cheap. (There's a reason why, when our family TV died in '71, my father didn't buy another TV for six years.) And even then, five bucks a month ain't exactly a steep wall.
2) TV-MA matters only to various organizations that want to pretend they're regulating television. For starters, other than the pilot it'll be on the net, where ratings aren't even a thing (that's why I have to check on my son's YouTube subscriptions every so often - Nerf war videos are fine, but the guys at Gun vs Gun like to edit in effect to make it look more like a live-action combat FPS only more so). I know very few parents who have any problem with their children watching TV shows with that rating; for that matter, I know very few parents who even have any idea what the ratings of their favorite programs are.
3) You don't have any idea of whether they'll be giving us subversive philosophies in the show. Nor do I. Nor do the people who made that video. I tend to lean toward the idea that they are - but none of us know, because not one episode of the show has aired yet.You seem to have adopted the belief that just because someone can put a video on YouTube, that means they have accurate information and know more than you do. In fact, even I know how to make a YouTube video - I don't, because I don't think any vid I made would be all that interesting, but I could. That doesn't necessarily mean that any such hypothetical vid from me would be accurate.
Just because someone said it, doesn't make it true. The sooner you learn that lesson, the happier your life will be. (Ironically, it's difficult to learn that from someone else, because it's something they said - but I've found it to be true over the past half-century.)
1) That's a false equivalency. The point was not about people not being able to afford to watch.
2) That some parents don't have a problem with the content their kids view, doesn't mean that all parents feel the same. And as for those parents who don't know what their kids are watching, that's hardly a glowing endorsement of their judgement or parenting, but quite the reverse :-\
The point being made about the rating, is that historically, Trek has always been suitable for viewers of all ages, despite the content and themes contained, and which were presented its thought provoking ways
3) No, they just make some reasonable observations about the differences between all the previous series, and what's now coming our way in terms of audience, and content (which, even without specifics, can still be inferred from the rating awarded, and thus observed not to be aiming at such a universal audience)
"I fight for the Users!" - Tron
"I was here before you, I will be here after you are gone. I am here, regardless of your acknowledgement or acceptance..." - The Truth
Just tick the box that asks if you're over 16. Done.
So you condone someone lying about their age to get what they want. Interesting.
Yes, I condone people making their own choices over those of a TV network for the obvious reason that American ratings do not apply to the rest of the world. I also understand they are guidelines and not actual restriction because it's a TV programme and not a box of knives or something actually dangerous.
I also understand that no website in the world cares who views their media for the blindingly simple reason they give you a tick box or a DoB box rather than actually trying to check if you are old enough.
It seems like you like a bit of a good barney with anybody for no reason that isn't obvious after taking a few seconds thought. Now I remember who you are I remember why I started hiding your posts in the first place.
So it's okay to ignore a rule if you don't agree with it? That's the kind of entitled nonsense I've come to expect from Soveriegn Citizens.
Says the person making personal attacks, rather than accepting/defending/refuting a point. By all means, keep proving that you haven't actually got a point, and just commented to be argumentative. Wasn't so long ago that I dared you to prove me wrong (that you weren't being deliberately argumentative) by not posting anything to me, or this thread, till after Discovery was released. But what did you do? Started arguing with others instead. And you dare to insinuate that I'm trying to be argumentative?? That's some weapons-grade disingenuity and projection you've got going on there, fella. :-\
"I fight for the Users!" - Tron
"I was here before you, I will be here after you are gone. I am here, regardless of your acknowledgement or acceptance..." - The Truth
Well, at least we're back to actually talking about Discovery.
Star Trek Online Volunteer Community Moderator and Resident She-Wolf
Community Moderators are Unpaid Volunteers and NOT Employees of Gearbox/Cryptic
Views and Opinions May Not Reflect the Views and Opinions of Gearbox/Cryptic
....The point being made about the rating, is that historically, Trek has always been suitable for viewers of all ages, despite the content and themes contained, and which were presented its thought provoking ways...
Going to go out on a limb here and say Trek wasn't meant for 3 to 5 year old children for sure, so no, it was not meant for viewers of all ages.
Programming and content is a lot different today than it was 50, 20 or even 10 years ago. Times are changing along with audience tastes. Obviously those creating the programming want to keep pace with changing audiences.
[/quote]
Reductio ad absurdum.
*Additional words because blahblahblah and I don't bother to check my spelling
"I fight for the Users!" - Tron
"I was here before you, I will be here after you are gone. I am here, regardless of your acknowledgement or acceptance..." - The Truth
^To go along with that point, my dad wouldn't let me watch DS9 when it was in its original run. I certainly wouldn't have let my six-year-old self watch such episodes as "Duet" or "In the Pale Moonlight" (forget "The Siege of AR-558"), despite those being two of the best episodes in the franchise. There's episodes of TNG I wouldn't have let myself watch either.
"Family friendliness" is a matter of perspective and something for parents to decide on based on ACTUAL INFORMATION, not some rumormongering twerp with a YouTube channel or marketing BS.
"Great War! / And I cannot take more! / Great tour! / I keep on marching on / I play the great score / There will be no encore / Great War! / The War to End All Wars"
— Sabaton, "Great War"
^To go along with that point, my dad wouldn't let me watch DS9 when it was in its original run. I certainly wouldn't have let my six-year-old self watch such episodes as "Duet" or "In the Pale Moonlight" (forget "The Siege of AR-558"), despite those being two of the best episodes in the franchise. There's episodes of TNG I wouldn't have let myself watch either.
"Family friendliness" is a matter of perspective and something for parents to decide on based on ACTUAL INFORMATION, not some rumormongering twerp with a YouTube channel or marketing BS.
Along those lines, something TV/Ratings/Scheduling related will always stick in my memory. When it was first shown in the UK, Babylon 5 was broadcast at about 6PM. Every episode, except one. The one where G'Kar had his eye cut out. That was broadcast at midnight, well past the 9PM watershed.
For sure, DS9 got pretty dark at times, and even TNG had it's moments. That there were episodes understandably not suitable for infants to watch, doesn't change that the majority of the content, was fit for most viewers. Fine, I shouldn't've said 'all ages' but certainly Most ages, including children old enough to understand the themes under discussion.
When I first watched Plato's Stepchildren as a kid, nothing about it bothered me. I just thought that Uhura was scared because of the situation. When I watched Search for Spock, it never even occured to me, that 'Kirk's boss' wasn't the same color as him. It was just 'Kirk's Boss'.
That is the kind of thinking which Trek helps to engender.
If Discovery having a TRIBBLE crewmember can help give today's growing generation a more positive and inclusive view of TRIBBLE people; Awesome. But they're not going to get to deliver that message to as wide a audience, if their audience is pre-restricted because of the rating their content attracts.
"I fight for the Users!" - Tron
"I was here before you, I will be here after you are gone. I am here, regardless of your acknowledgement or acceptance..." - The Truth
Here's a fun one: Star Wars is traditionally considered a family friendly franchise, right? Oh, wait, the first movie in isolation contains torture, genocide, justifiable homicide by a main cast member, and we haven't even gotten a third of the way through the movie yet.
Hell, this game for that matter. The Klingon storyline has your character torture a prisoner to death ON SCREEN and then blow up his disabled ship with the survivors still aboard. And it's rated T for Teen/PEGI 12.
But go on, keep telling us how Star Trek is always family friendly, I've got popcorn and everything.
"Great War! / And I cannot take more! / Great tour! / I keep on marching on / I play the great score / There will be no encore / Great War! / The War to End All Wars"
— Sabaton, "Great War"
Nope. Sorry, I am not the one making an absurd claim. [/b[ You are. Using the existing TV Parental Guidelines, please do tell us how Star Trek fits into anything below TV-PG.
Not what reductio ad absurdum means (and I suspect you know that)
Like I said above, I shouldn't've used the word 'all'. But. As I also said above, it's by exposing younger viewers to the ideas which Trek promotes, which helps them absorb those examples
*more text blahblahblah
"I fight for the Users!" - Tron
"I was here before you, I will be here after you are gone. I am here, regardless of your acknowledgement or acceptance..." - The Truth
So it's okay to ignore a rule if you don't agree with it? That's the kind of entitled nonsense I've come to expect from Soveriegn Citizens.
Nice sweeping generalisation there buddy. No, it's acceptable to ignore these rules. not all rules are the same, I'm really surprised somebody with internet fluency needs that explaining to them. As for your little comment at the end...
Because why bother understanding what people are saying when you can just make up their argument in your own head so your replies are easier for you to come up with.
Norway and Yeager dammit... I still want my Typhoon and Jupiter though. JJ Trek The Kelvin Timeline is just Trek and it's fully canon... get over it. But I still prefer TAR.
#TASforSTO
'...I can tell you that we're not in the military and that we intend no harm to the whales.' Kirk: The Voyage Home
'Starfleet is not a military organisation. Its purpose is exploration.' Picard: Peak Performance
'This is clearly a military operation. Is that what we are now? Because I thought we were explorers!' Scotty: Into Darkness
'...The Federation. Starfleet. We're not a military agency.' Scotty: Beyond
'I'm not a soldier anymore. I'm an engineer.' Miles O'Brien: Empok Nor
'...Starfleet could use you... It's a peacekeeping and humanitarian armada...' Admiral Pike: Star Trek
Here's a fun one: Star Wars is traditionally considered a family friendly franchise, right? Oh, wait, the first movie in isolation contains torture, genocide, justifiable homicide by a main cast member, and we haven't even gotten a third of the way through the movie yet.
Hell, this game for that matter. The Klingon storyline has your character torture a prisoner to death ON SCREEN and then blow up his disabled ship with the survivors still aboard. And it's rated T for Teen/PEGI 12.
But go on, keep telling us how Star Trek is always family friendly, I've got popcorn and everything.
Cherry picking for an argument? Not interested...
"I fight for the Users!" - Tron
"I was here before you, I will be here after you are gone. I am here, regardless of your acknowledgement or acceptance..." - The Truth
So it's okay to ignore a rule if you don't agree with it? That's the kind of entitled nonsense I've come to expect from Soveriegn Citizens.
Nice sweeping generalisation there buddy. No, it's acceptable to ignore these rules. not all rules are the same, I'm really surprised somebody with internet fluency needs that explaining to them. As for your little comment at the end...
Oh, are sweeping statements only okay if you make them? Sorry, no one told me.
And regardless which rules are under question, you're saying it's okay to ignore them if you disagree with them. If that's your opinion, and how you want to live your life, then that's cool, by all means go right ahead. But. You openly advocated for people under the age for MA to just 'click the button' regardless so don't try backpeddling beczuse you've been called on it. I should've known better than to think posting that video would bring things back onto topic.
Because why bother understanding what people are saying when you can just make up their argument in your own head so your replies are easier for you to come up with.
"Never confuse lack of agreement, with lack of understanding." - Unknown source
"I fight for the Users!" - Tron
"I was here before you, I will be here after you are gone. I am here, regardless of your acknowledgement or acceptance..." - The Truth
Even if someone was seriously injured (or in the case of Neelix, minus his lungs) what better reason does one need, for the transporter chief, upon hearing the words "emergency beam-out to initiate the Pulaski Protocol, and restore all incoming patterns, to the last outgoing template.
I think the notion was simply that transporters not become a Magic Cure All, because that would kill any kind of plot tension.
Since when has a transporter EVER been seen to store the complete pattern of something that was transported? And well... there are SO many different half-bakes explanations for how they worked. There was one ep where they demonstrated that people remained conscious and aware of their surroundings while transporting. Although time spent in the beam was usually too short to be of much interest. Such as the episode with these things:
Mmm... nightmare fuel..... Wait it needs to wiggle more... Try at 5:40 on this one: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7r7eIOLfisU
Yeah, that was a weird one. But the way the transporter worked in that ep showed that they didn't completely convert the person to data. The transporter O'Brien and Barclay were using didn't scan those wiggly things but was able to transport them back anyways.
Another example of transporter inconsistency, would be that Odan couldn't be transported, but Dax could be
As I recall, Odan didn't WANT to be transported. The Trill were apparently secretive about their symbionts at the time, though obviously this is retconned by "Blood Oath" in DS9.
Yeah it was because the biofilter would see the Symbiote as a parasite and remove it. why? Simply because it didn't know what it was.
Yeah, that was a weird one. But the way the transporter worked in that ep showed that they didn't completely convert the person to data. The transporter O'Brien and Barclay were using didn't scan those wiggly things but was able to transport them back anyways.
Didn't that have something to do with the plasma from that star they were investigating mucking up the transporter?
Enh, the plasma streamers had some sort of bacteria-like energy based life form in them. The 4 dudes who got lost in mid-transport were trying to use the transporter to purge it from their bodies when their ship exploded. Yeah, alien life is dangerous like that.
Even if someone was seriously injured (or in the case of Neelix, minus his lungs) what better reason does one need, for the transporter chief, upon hearing the words "emergency beam-out to initiate the Pulaski Protocol, and restore all incoming patterns, to the last outgoing template.
I think the notion was simply that transporters not become a Magic Cure All, because that would kill any kind of plot tension.
Since when has a transporter EVER been seen to store the complete pattern of something that was transported? And well... there are SO many different half-bakes explanations for how they worked.
It's a buffer, and it's easy to extrapolate from how computers work. Like any other memory, what's assigned stays assigned until it's overwritten
I'm gonna cut it off right there because I suspect you didn't pay attention.
But the way the transporter worked in that ep showed that they didn't completely convert the person to data.
As for what it DOES do? If we understood that it wouldn't be science fiction. But the person is no longer solid matter and shifted into some sort of energy state. But NOT digitized. When you use that perspective, suddenly a lot of the restrictions make sense. You can't simply copy the pattern because you never had it digitized.
A lot of the weirder things were apparently part of how the transporter was able to "edit" the energy pattern. The ability to selectively rematerialize things is seen a LOT. But most of them involve either removing parts of the pattern, or modifying how it rematerializes. But yeah, some eps go horribly off the deep end and make you wonder if the writers guide ever had any sort of limits on how they work. Like Tuvix... Dumbest use of the transporter ever, and that's saying something since it split Kirk into his good and evil halves.
Star Trek Online Volunteer Community Moderator and Resident She-Wolf
Community Moderators are Unpaid Volunteers and NOT Employees of Gearbox/Cryptic
Views and Opinions May Not Reflect the Views and Opinions of Gearbox/Cryptic
Yeah, transporters have always had a lot of control over what pops out of the process. Off the top of my head I can recall it being used to filter contagious pathogens, remove or disable weapons, remove clothing from a person, perform as a makeshift stasis method. Those are all when it was operating as intended, when you include glitches it gets even crazier.
Comments
I would ask, if you're not going to address the points raised, what is the point in you even responding to the comment I posted, but it's pretty clear that you just needed your daily dose of my attention.
"I was here before you, I will be here after you are gone. I am here, regardless of your acknowledgement or acceptance..." - The Truth
"I was here before you, I will be here after you are gone. I am here, regardless of your acknowledgement or acceptance..." - The Truth
"I was here before you, I will be here after you are gone. I am here, regardless of your acknowledgement or acceptance..." - The Truth
Yes, I condone people making their own choices over those of a TV network for the obvious reason that American ratings do not apply to the rest of the world. I also understand they are guidelines and not actual restriction because it's a TV programme and not a box of knives or something actually dangerous.
I also understand that no website in the world cares who views their media for the blindingly simple reason they give you a tick box or a DoB box rather than actually trying to check if you are old enough.
It seems like you like a bit of a good barney with anybody for no reason that isn't obvious after taking a few seconds thought. Now I remember who you are I remember why I started hiding your posts in the first place.
Norway and Yeager dammit... I still want my Typhoon and Jupiter though.
JJ Trek The Kelvin Timeline is just Trek and it's fully canon... get over it. But I still prefer TAR.
#TASforSTO
'...I can tell you that we're not in the military and that we intend no harm to the whales.' Kirk: The Voyage Home
'Starfleet is not a military organisation. Its purpose is exploration.' Picard: Peak Performance
'This is clearly a military operation. Is that what we are now? Because I thought we were explorers!' Scotty: Into Darkness
'...The Federation. Starfleet. We're not a military agency.' Scotty: Beyond
'I'm not a soldier anymore. I'm an engineer.' Miles O'Brien: Empok Nor
'...Starfleet could use you... It's a peacekeeping and humanitarian armada...' Admiral Pike: Star Trek
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
1) That's a false equivalency. The point was not about people not being able to afford to watch.
2) That some parents don't have a problem with the content their kids view, doesn't mean that all parents feel the same. And as for those parents who don't know what their kids are watching, that's hardly a glowing endorsement of their judgement or parenting, but quite the reverse :-\
The point being made about the rating, is that historically, Trek has always been suitable for viewers of all ages, despite the content and themes contained, and which were presented its thought provoking ways
3) No, they just make some reasonable observations about the differences between all the previous series, and what's now coming our way in terms of audience, and content (which, even without specifics, can still be inferred from the rating awarded, and thus observed not to be aiming at such a universal audience)
"I was here before you, I will be here after you are gone. I am here, regardless of your acknowledgement or acceptance..." - The Truth
So it's okay to ignore a rule if you don't agree with it? That's the kind of entitled nonsense I've come to expect from Soveriegn Citizens.
Says the person making personal attacks, rather than accepting/defending/refuting a point. By all means, keep proving that you haven't actually got a point, and just commented to be argumentative. Wasn't so long ago that I dared you to prove me wrong (that you weren't being deliberately argumentative) by not posting anything to me, or this thread, till after Discovery was released. But what did you do? Started arguing with others instead. And you dare to insinuate that I'm trying to be argumentative?? That's some weapons-grade disingenuity and projection you've got going on there, fella. :-\
"I was here before you, I will be here after you are gone. I am here, regardless of your acknowledgement or acceptance..." - The Truth
Views and Opinions May Not Reflect the Views and Opinions of Gearbox/Cryptic
Moderation Problems/Issues? Please contact the Community Manager
Terms of Service / Community Rules and Policies / FCT
Facebook / Twitter / Twitch
Reductio ad absurdum.
*Additional words because blahblahblah and I don't bother to check my spelling
"I was here before you, I will be here after you are gone. I am here, regardless of your acknowledgement or acceptance..." - The Truth
"Family friendliness" is a matter of perspective and something for parents to decide on based on ACTUAL INFORMATION, not some rumormongering twerp with a YouTube channel or marketing BS.
— Sabaton, "Great War"
Check out https://unitedfederationofpla.net/s/
For sure, DS9 got pretty dark at times, and even TNG had it's moments. That there were episodes understandably not suitable for infants to watch, doesn't change that the majority of the content, was fit for most viewers. Fine, I shouldn't've said 'all ages' but certainly Most ages, including children old enough to understand the themes under discussion.
When I first watched Plato's Stepchildren as a kid, nothing about it bothered me. I just thought that Uhura was scared because of the situation. When I watched Search for Spock, it never even occured to me, that 'Kirk's boss' wasn't the same color as him. It was just 'Kirk's Boss'.
That is the kind of thinking which Trek helps to engender.
If Discovery having a TRIBBLE crewmember can help give today's growing generation a more positive and inclusive view of TRIBBLE people; Awesome. But they're not going to get to deliver that message to as wide a audience, if their audience is pre-restricted because of the rating their content attracts.
"I was here before you, I will be here after you are gone. I am here, regardless of your acknowledgement or acceptance..." - The Truth
Hell, this game for that matter. The Klingon storyline has your character torture a prisoner to death ON SCREEN and then blow up his disabled ship with the survivors still aboard. And it's rated T for Teen/PEGI 12.
But go on, keep telling us how Star Trek is always family friendly, I've got popcorn and everything.
— Sabaton, "Great War"
Check out https://unitedfederationofpla.net/s/
I do like GoT; I do like Star Trek. As I do vanilla pudding and hot chilly stew; yet I would not mix that.
Not what reductio ad absurdum means (and I suspect you know that)
Like I said above, I shouldn't've used the word 'all'. But. As I also said above, it's by exposing younger viewers to the ideas which Trek promotes, which helps them absorb those examples
*more text blahblahblah
"I was here before you, I will be here after you are gone. I am here, regardless of your acknowledgement or acceptance..." - The Truth
Nice sweeping generalisation there buddy. No, it's acceptable to ignore these rules. not all rules are the same, I'm really surprised somebody with internet fluency needs that explaining to them. As for your little comment at the end...
Because why bother understanding what people are saying when you can just make up their argument in your own head so your replies are easier for you to come up with.
Norway and Yeager dammit... I still want my Typhoon and Jupiter though.
JJ Trek The Kelvin Timeline is just Trek and it's fully canon... get over it. But I still prefer TAR.
#TASforSTO
'...I can tell you that we're not in the military and that we intend no harm to the whales.' Kirk: The Voyage Home
'Starfleet is not a military organisation. Its purpose is exploration.' Picard: Peak Performance
'This is clearly a military operation. Is that what we are now? Because I thought we were explorers!' Scotty: Into Darkness
'...The Federation. Starfleet. We're not a military agency.' Scotty: Beyond
'I'm not a soldier anymore. I'm an engineer.' Miles O'Brien: Empok Nor
'...Starfleet could use you... It's a peacekeeping and humanitarian armada...' Admiral Pike: Star Trek
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
"I was here before you, I will be here after you are gone. I am here, regardless of your acknowledgement or acceptance..." - The Truth
And regardless which rules are under question, you're saying it's okay to ignore them if you disagree with them. If that's your opinion, and how you want to live your life, then that's cool, by all means go right ahead. But. You openly advocated for people under the age for MA to just 'click the button' regardless so don't try backpeddling beczuse you've been called on it. I should've known better than to think posting that video would bring things back onto topic.
"Never confuse lack of agreement, with lack of understanding." - Unknown source
"I was here before you, I will be here after you are gone. I am here, regardless of your acknowledgement or acceptance..." - The Truth
Mmm... nightmare fuel..... Wait it needs to wiggle more... Try at 5:40 on this one:
Yeah, that was a weird one. But the way the transporter worked in that ep showed that they didn't completely convert the person to data. The transporter O'Brien and Barclay were using didn't scan those wiggly things but was able to transport them back anyways. Yeah it was because the biofilter would see the Symbiote as a parasite and remove it. why? Simply because it didn't know what it was.
My character Tsin'xing
My character Tsin'xing
A lot of the weirder things were apparently part of how the transporter was able to "edit" the energy pattern. The ability to selectively rematerialize things is seen a LOT. But most of them involve either removing parts of the pattern, or modifying how it rematerializes. But yeah, some eps go horribly off the deep end and make you wonder if the writers guide ever had any sort of limits on how they work. Like Tuvix... Dumbest use of the transporter ever, and that's saying something since it split Kirk into his good and evil halves.
My character Tsin'xing
Views and Opinions May Not Reflect the Views and Opinions of Gearbox/Cryptic
Moderation Problems/Issues? Please contact the Community Manager
Terms of Service / Community Rules and Policies / FCT
Facebook / Twitter / Twitch